Public records · September 23, 2026
ERCOT launches a data-center inquiry. Cedar Creek coverage remains unconfirmed.
Developers covered by ERCOT’s new request for information must submit notarized responses by October 12 about grid demand, on-site generation, water, incentives, community impacts and ownership. The request is limited to specified Batch Zero and medium-load projects; no public record located so far confirms that the Cedar Creek campus received it.
The short version
- ERCOT issued the inquiry September 14. Covered developers must submit complete responses through ERCOT's RIOO portal by 5:00 p.m. Central on October 12.
- The answers require a notarized attestation. An authorized representative must certify that the response is true and accurate to the best of that person's knowledge and includes all materially responsive information.
- This is not a blanket request to every 25+ MW project.The respondent rules depend on Batch Zero or ERCOT's medium-load process, not project size alone.
- Cedar Creek's inclusion is not public. No official record located so far confirms that Pacifico, Black Chamber or the BCG Cedar Creek Campus received the RFI.
- Project-level answers may remain confidential. ERCOT says public reporting may be aggregated or anonymized. Its report is scheduled for publication by December 10.
Official records: ERCOT's RFI page, 31-page question reference and attestation form.
Who must respond—and who may fall outside this RFI
ERCOT's question guide defines two respondent groups. Both concern data-center facilities that have not yet energized:
- A developer in ERCOT's Batch Zero process whose 75-MW-or-larger load was provisionally classified as base load or studied load and has not energized at transmission voltage.
- A developer with a requested peak load of at least 25 MW but less than 75 MW that a transmission or distribution provider reported in ERCOT's August 19 medium-load inquiry as a substantiated load and that has not energized at any voltage.
ERCOT sends the RFI through the transmission or distribution provider that reported the load. A project described publicly as larger than 75 MW is not automatically proven to be covered: it must also be in the relevant ERCOT interconnection category. A wholly islanded project with no proposed ERCOT connection would not fit the RFI's stated developer definition.
Important distinction: this RFI gathers state and community-impact information. It is separate from ERCOT's Batch Zero verification and interconnection study requirements.
The questions reach the project's operating model
For covered projects, the RFI requests information that could clarify several issues central to the Cedar Creek record:
| Subject | What the RFI requests |
|---|---|
| Grid demand | Requested interconnection capacity, initial energization, annual gross demand, net ERCOT demand after on-site generation, commissioning increments and full-load date. |
| On-site generation | Fuel, technology, capacity, construction status, commissioning date, maximum fuel consumption, expected annual run hours, emissions controls and restricted-emission limits. |
| Grid relationship | Whether generation can operate in parallel with ERCOT even without export, whether generation and load share a connection point, and whether the facility will use a Withdrawal-Limited Private Use Network. |
| Permitting | Whether a TCEQ or other legal authorization is required and whether its status is approved, pending, applied or not applied. |
| Other impacts | Public financial assistance, water sources and consumption, cooling, noise, light, traffic, emergency coordination, ownership and controlling interests. |
The official question guide controls only as a public reference; ERCOT says the version inside RIOO is the controlling document for respondents.
What this establishes—and does not establish—for Cedar Creek
Confirmed
Earlier public Cedar Creek filings describe approximately 490 MW of associated IT load and extensive on-site generation. If that load is pursuing an ERCOT interconnection through a transmission or distribution provider and meets the stated respondent rules, the RFI's power questions would apply directly to the project's grid and generation arrangement.
Not confirmed
Lost Pines Watch has not located a public ERCOT, PUCT or Bluebonnet record identifying Pacifico, Black Chamber or the BCG Cedar Creek Campus as a Batch Zero project, a substantiated medium load or an RFI recipient. The RFI therefore does not prove that Cedar Creek is grid-connected, grid-parallel, islanded or covered by this inquiry.
Records that would resolve the question
- Confirmation from ERCOT or the responsible utility that Cedar Creek was reported in Batch Zero or the August medium-load process.
- The project name, responsible transmission or distribution provider, requested grid capacity and reported energization schedule.
- Confirmation from Pacifico or Black Chamber that it received and responded to the RFI.
- A public description of whether the final design is islanded, grid-parallel, behind the meter, a WLPUN or capable of multiple modes.
Questions about the RFI may be sent to DataCenterImpact@ercot.com. Because ERCOT says project responses will be confidential to the greatest extent permitted by law, confirmation of coverage and a project's substantive answers are separate transparency questions.
Official sources
- ERCOT Data Center State and Community Impact RFI
- ERCOT question reference guide, published September 18
- ERCOT notarized attestation form
- TCEQ Project 413471 / Registration 185019
This is a dated review of the public record. ERCOT's recipient list and individual responses are not published on the RFI page and may not become public in project-identifiable form.