About 205 GW Are Eligible for Batch Zero. Launch Slipped Toward December.

About 205 gigawatts of large load are potentially eligible for ERCOT's Batch Zero, ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas told the House Committee on State Affairs on August 19. Roughly 65 GW sit in what he called the baseload segment with a clearer five-year energization path. Verification of security, site control, and equipment orders will pull non-compliant projects, so published totals are likely maxima. The governor-directed audit pushed launch from about September toward the end of the year, with results communication framed around April.

Watch the data-centers portion: youtube.com/watch?v=5BLa1cBKDsM

Full House video (data centers plus the separate 765-kV charge later that day): house.texas.gov/videos/22746.

Chair Ken King gavels the data-centers window at about six hours of invited and public testimony, with the public comment portal open through Friday, August 21 at 5pm. The room covered SB 6 cost allocation, water surveys, air permits, county tools, and operator practice. Moratorium asks showed up. They weren't the committee's center of gravity.

Open the Texas map → HyperscaleNews.com/map · Claim a free issue →

Batch Zero replaces the restudy doom loop

Vegas said Batch Zero replaces a "doom loop" of restudies as new large loads stacked on unfinished studies. The batch is meant to allocate available transmission, lock financial commitments, and plan additional wires if needed. The last gate before tickets punch is the verification audit the governor directed.

Rep. Rafael Anchía pressed the delay: original launch versus revised launch, completion timing, and dropout risk while projects wait. Vegas put launch off September and toward year-end, with formal results communication around April. Rep. Will Metcalf asked what share of the batch is advanced manufacturing. Vegas put that under 10 percent, which means a schedule slip lands hardest on the digital load that dominates the queue.

Developers aren't captive to Texas. Red Oak Economic Development's John Knight told the committee three campuses are adding $11B in tax base with $30B in the pipeline, while Red Oak ISD is shifting from receiving $42M from the state fund to paying $450M in. Same witness: Red Oak lost $7B in projects last year because they couldn't get energized. On that record, Batch Zero delay is an economic risk.

4 CP to 12 CP, and the bill share that still climbs

PUC Chair Thomas Gleeson said transmission cost allocation is moving from 4 CP to 12 CP, with 15-to-30-minute intervals and annual class updates so the large-load share can rise with load growth. Net-metering co-location approvals are proceeding with reliability conditions. Large-load interconnection standards already require site control, financial security, and long-lead equipment evidence. Bankruptcy and walk-away recovery beyond posted security is still being worked.

OPUC's Benjamin Barkley supports 12 CP and would prefer 52 CP or energy-only. He also supports a minimum billing demand charge at 100 percent of requested capacity for 20 years. That design cuts the residential share. Any haircut below 100 percent shifts cost back onto residentials. After year 20, residual costs socialize onto the full system while the wires amortize 40 to 50 years. There's no clear exit payment if a large load leaves early.

Barkley's line is the one residential advocates need on a slide: the share of total transmission cost for residential consumers is going to go down; the total amount of transmission cost is going to go up. Absolute bills can still rise as total TCOS rises. Rep. Senfronia Thompson made the same distinction from the dais and pressed fairness when residentials fund wires for loads they didn't choose.

Vice Chair Ana Hernandez asked for stranded-cost and early-exit tools now, not after the first walk-away. That question sits next to Gleeson's unfinished bankruptcy work. The design fight for the 90th is whether the minimum demand charge stays at full requested capacity and whether an exit payment closes the year-21 and early-exit gaps.

Water accountability is fragmented

TWDB Water Supply Planning Director Temple McKinnon said annual operational surveys go out only after facilities operate. TWDB surveyed 341 identified data-center facilities for 2025. Responsive information is up to about 29 percent as of the hearing week, higher than the first public figure. TWDB doesn't allocate, regulate, or permit water. The 2032 State Water Plan work is meant to improve high-load digital demand projections.

TCEQ Water Quality Deputy Director Robert Sadler said TPDES, TLAP, and reuse authorizations are site-specific and protect receiving-water quality. Applications don't require proof of secured supply. Reuse interest is up and the path is simpler than it was, but optional. No single agency overlays facility use against statewide availability.

TCEQ Air Permits Deputy Director Sam Short walked permit-by-rule, standard permits, and case-by-case NSR. Modifications need new or amended permits. Air permitting has no statutory light or noise authority. Non-attainment areas face lower thresholds. Rep. Yvonne Davis pressed the fragmented water oversight and whether developers will disclose water and power expectations upfront. Chair Ken King asked who owns aggregate water-use accountability. The panel left that ownership with no single agency.

Mark Friesenhan, a Comal County pecan farmer and PE, asked for water-availability certification for commercial life-of-project and treated closed-loop as a best practice that can cut demand 80 to 90 percent. His ask is life-of-project certification.

Operators put deposits, closed loops, and jobs on the record

Lancium CEO Michael McNamara cited GW-scale campuses in Abilene, Childress, and Turkey; closed-loop everywhere; a Panhandle produced- and gypsum-water system targeting 1 million gallons a day for Greenbelt Water Authority; nearly $1.5B in utility deposits and contributions; no tax abatements; and support for the audit and book-opening.

Skybox CDO Haynes Strater put $5B+ of Texas real-estate investment on the record and said the firm's largest building uses about 600,000 gallons a year of water versus about 11.8M for a smaller office. Data Center Coalition's Jess Heck, citing PwC-based figures for 53 members (13 Texas HQ), claimed nearly 429,000 Texas jobs supported in 2024, $65.8B in GDP contribution (+16 percent year over year), and $4.5B in state and local taxes paid, exceeding incentives received. QTS Operations Lead Ryan Keithy said closed-loop on all builds since 2019, building water use on the order of five single-family homes, no local incentives sought, and a Briscoe County town hall with 150 residents.

Rep. Rafael Anchía told the industry panel he hadn't heard anyone claim to be the speculator or the bad actor, and invited a list if they wanted to name names. Childress County Judge Kimberly Jones backed Iron and Lancium on jobs, school and nonprofit support, and collaborative water work in a scarce-water region.

Public witnesses brought the other edge of the same map. Susan Tatro described a 665-acre Mustang / Big Watt project across from her 4-acre place, notice on August 3, and a third data center within five miles. Myra Alaniz put a project 100 feet from a school on 550 acres. Leon County Pct. 3 Commissioner Kyle Workman said counties lack meaningful tools in unincorporated areas. Gary Oldham, citing a Round Rock BESS fire, put costs above $11M, 44 firefighters, and rural VFD water-tender limits on the record. Rita Beving cited a July 2026 Bloomberg poll of 400+ executives in which 68 percent expect more distress in 12 to 18 months and 30 to 50 percent of 2026 projects canceled or delayed.

Counties want guardrails. A few speakers want a freeze.

Rick Thompson of the County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas put the local-government ask cleanly: counties aren't against data centers; they want good neighbors, guardrails, and authority. The package on that panel was mandatory developer-held hearings, buffers from sensitive uses, water studies, and operational requirements. Rick Ramirez of the Texas Municipal League asked to keep zoning and planning tools and to put cities in statewide working groups. San Marcos Council Member Amanda Rodriguez described defeating a 380 MW project on 200 acres after a year of packed meetings and writing protections into a land-development code rewrite.

A minority of public speakers, and Rep. Richard Peña Raymond citing his own July letter, asked for a moratorium and a special session. That track is separate from CJCAT's guardrails package. Categorical pauses on entitled projects run through regulatory-takings analysis under Penn Central and Texas Article I, Section 17. The committee's working center stayed on audit verification, cost allocation, water disclosure, and county tools.

Chair Ken King asked developers how they pick rural sites and whether they avoid schools and neighborhoods. He also flagged post-construction sustainability, man camps, and long-run tax base. Vice Chair Ana Hernandez tied man-camp permitting to construction headcounts of 3,000 to 5,000 against towns near 300. Those stay operational design problems for permitting and local infrastructure.

What the 90th will fight over

Open hooks for the 90th:

1. Codify Batch Zero verification gates and what happens to projects pulled from the batch; clarify ERCOT versus non-ERCOT coverage.
2. Keep the minimum demand charge at 100 percent of requested capacity; add an exit payment so year-21 socialization and early exits don't strand residentials.
3. Finish 4 CP to 12 CP with annual class updates and watch whether absolute residential bills still climb with TCOS.
4. Raise TWDB survey response above ~29 percent and close the TCEQ supply-proof gap with life-of-project availability certification.
5. Turn voluntary closed-loop and non-potable practice into a clearer BMP path, including produced-water feedstock where the 89th already opened beneficial use.
6. Give counties notice, buffer, and operational tools in unincorporated areas without writing a statewide freeze.
7. Separate backup permit-by-rule paths from continuous on-site generation NSR, and fund rural fire capacity for BESS events.
8. Expect a live fight on the sales-tax exemption; Rep. Will Metcalf previewed session heat.

Nancy White pressed Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act enforcement beyond self-attestation. Rep. Richard Peña Raymond asked for Department of Defense and national-security witnesses at a future hearing so the China-race framing has a federal record behind it.

Follow the queue into the 90th

Batch Zero is real, large, and late. Cost allocation is moving in a direction that can cut residential share while absolute bills still rise with total transmission spend. Water data still arrives after facilities operate, and no single agency owns the statewide overlay. Operators who pay interconnection costs, post deposits, and run closed loops have a clearer path through the audit than speculative placeholders. Counties that want hearings and buffers are asking for tools the legislature can write without freezing entitled projects.

Open the Texas map → HyperscaleNews.com/map · Claim a free issue of Hyperscale News → · Subscribe →

Sources

1. Texas House Committee on State Affairs, interim hearing, data-centers charge, August 19, 2026. Per-charge YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BLa1cBKDsM. Full House video: https://www.house.texas.gov/videos/22746.
2. Invited witnesses (grid / cost): PUC Chair Thomas Gleeson; ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas; OPUC Benjamin Barkley.
3. Invited witnesses (water / air): TWDB Temple McKinnon; TCEQ Water Quality Robert Sadler; TCEQ Air Permits Sam Short.
4. Industry and local-government panels: Lancium Michael McNamara; Skybox Haynes Strater; Data Center Coalition Jess Heck; QTS Ryan Keithy; Childress County Judge Kimberly Jones; CJCAT Rick Thompson; TML Rick Ramirez; San Marcos Council Member Amanda Rodriguez; Red Oak Economic Development John Knight.
5. Hearing notice: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/schedules/html/C4502026081908001.htm.
6. Public comments portal (open through 2026-08-21 5pm per Chair): https://comments.house.texas.gov/home?c=c450.

Numbers above are from the hearing record and analysis note. Don't treat Batch Zero published totals as final energization.

Not legal advice. Confirm statutes and agency filings against primary sources.