THE ERCOT-ONLY GAP
Abbott’s directive targets projects “advancing through ERCOT’s interconnection process.” Under an intentionally inclusive rule, this map tracks 54 mappable projects that may fall outside that language—or may keep advancing despite the queue action—plus 4 unlocated private-power announcements.
METHODOLOGY
The directive’s operative language covers data centers advancing through ERCOT’s interconnection process. This map applies an intentionally inclusive test: if a reasonable public-record question remains about exclusion, partial coverage, an already-completed interconnection review, or work that the queue action does not itself stop, the project stays visible and its confidence level is labeled.
“Outside ERCOT” describes the directive’s stated queue reach, not exemption from other law. Hybrid facilities retaining an ERCOT point of interconnection may still be covered. Gray “likely covered” markers are not asserted loopholes; they remain because existing construction, completed approvals, or separate onsite power creates doubt. Plant phases and campus records can overlap. 4 announcements without publishable locations remain in the directory without fabricated pins and are excluded from mapped-capacity totals.
A known contrast is the QTS / Lancium Hall County campus: its official page says its 1 GW interconnect is still advancing through ERCOT’s formal review, matching the directive’s stated scope. It is not mapped absent evidence of a separate private-power path.
An ordinary grid-only campus is not included merely because its ERCOT approval is complete. A record needs an additional scope question: private or onsite power, co-location or dedicated supply, inherited infrastructure, non-ERCOT geography, an unclear whole-campus arrangement, or a disclosed project below the announced 75 MW Batch Zero threshold.
Governor’s directive ↗ERCOT on truly islanded facilities ↗EIP inventory and methodology ↗PUCT electric service-area viewer ↗