Texas Lawmakers Ask the PUCT to Delay the 765-kV "STEP" Transmission Plan — What It Means for Your Bill

What the Lawmakers Asked For

In a letter dated July 20, 2026 and filed with the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT), State Sen. Kevin Sparks (R–Midland) and State Rep. Brad Buckley (R–Salado) asked regulators to delay “the final decision” on the 765-kV STEP lines until after the 90th Texas Legislature — the 2027 regular session — has had a chance to weigh in. They framed it as buying time for “a more informed decision,” citing the project's “decades-long” impact and its “permanent impact on thousands of Texas landowners,” according to Texas Scorecard, which first reported the filing.

The two lawmakers asked for two things before any final vote. First, they want ERCOT to complete “a full reappraisal” of the 765-kV lines in its Regional Transmission Plan before December 2026 — using updated inputs, most notably the roughly 71 gigawatts of gas generation now in the development queue (up from about 22 GW when the Permian Basin Reliability Plan was finalized in 2024). Second, they want the PUCT to review market-design changes that could bring more of that gas generation online and potentially reduce the need for the lines. In their words: “Our primary concern with the 765-kV STEP is that it is predicated upon an assumption that future generation in Texas will primarily be wind and solar, and it does not consider any alternative scenarios that involve more gas generation.”

Notably, Sparks and Buckley said they still support “local transmission upgrades in the Permian Basin” that are needed now — it is the sprawling, cross-state 765-kV backbone they want re-examined before it is locked in.

What STEP Is — and Why the Cost Figures Are All Over the Map

STEP is the 765-kilovolt centerpiece of the Permian Basin Reliability Plan (PBRP), which the PUCT approved to shore up power in the fast-growing West Texas oilfield. It proposes three extra-high-voltage import lines running more than 1,200 miles from East Texas across North, Central and South Texas into the Permian Basin, divided into five interconnected segments. If built, they would be the first 765-kV lines in the ERCOT region.

The dollar figures depend heavily on what you count. When it approved the plan, ERCOT estimated the 765-kV import lines plus the necessary local upgrades at about $13.8 billion (to serve 2038 load), compared with roughly $12.95 billion for a lower-voltage 345-kV alternative, per trade reporting on the decision. Opponents — including the Sparks–Buckley letter, as reported by Texas Scorecard — put the project's “lifetime cost” far higher, at nearly $100 billion, once decades of operation, expansion and financing are folded in. We flag both because they are not the same measurement, and no single “the cost” number is settled; treat the $100 billion figure as an opponents' lifetime estimate, not an approved price tag.

The Industry Coalition Pushes Back — and a Senate Hearing Looms

A coalition of transmission companies, utilities and line builders is resisting any delay. As reported by Texas Scorecard and other outlets in the days after the letter, the pro-transmission camp argues that pausing the 765-kV project would drive up construction costs through inflation and supply-chain delays, worsen grid congestion (an inefficiency that shows up in wholesale costs), and jeopardize reliability just as Texas electricity demand keeps shattering records. The state's grid set a preliminary all-time demand record the same week — an event we covered in Texas set an all-time power demand record — which both sides now cite for opposite conclusions.

The dispute is also headed for a public airing. The Texas Senate Business & Commerce Committee scheduled a July 29, 2026 hearing on the state grid and on mitigating the 765-kV lines' impact on private property rights. And there is a legal backdrop: House Bill 5066 (2023) shortened the PUCT's approval window for these projects from 360 to 180 days. Supporters cite that law as the plan's authorization; critics argue the compressed timeline was never meant for a massive cross-state buildout. AEP Texas, for its part, plans to file its formal route application in early 2027.

We take no side on whether the lines should be built. Both the reliability case for building and the cost-and-landowner case for pausing are real. What matters for a residential shopper is narrower and more useful: where does any of this actually land on your bill?

What a Transmission Fight Does — and Doesn't Do — to Your Bill

Here is the part that gets lost in the megawatts and the billions. Your Texas electricity bill has two very different halves:

• The energy charge — the competitive, shoppable part. This is the per-kWh rate on the Electricity Facts Label, set by your retail provider, and the only part you control by switching plans.
• The delivery (TDU) charge — the regulated part. This pays the wires company that owns the poles and transformers in your area (Oncor in Dallas–Fort Worth, CenterPoint in Houston, AEP Texas in south/west Texas, TNMP in scattered areas). Transmission projects like STEP are recovered here.

The crucial fact for shoppers: every retail provider in your territory passes through the exact same TDU delivery charge. So whether the PUCT builds the 765-kV lines, pauses them, or sends them back to ERCOT for a redo, the effect on delivery costs applies equally to every plan on the market in your area. It can raise or lower the floor under everyone — it cannot make one energy plan a better deal than another. That is why a $13.8 billion (or a $100 billion) transmission decision does not reorder which plan is cheapest for you.

It is also why this is a “watch it” story, not a “switch today” story. Even if the lines are ultimately approved, the cost is spread across all ERCOT ratepayers over decades and recovered gradually through delivery rates — not dropped onto next month's bill, and not something you can dodge by changing providers. The honest takeaway is that a growing share of your bill is delivery and transmission you can't shop, which makes it more important, not less, to squeeze the part you can: the energy charge, compared at your real usage. Our guide to reading your Texas electricity bill and our TDU delivery-charge explainer break down exactly which line items are regulated and which are competitive.

The Consumer Takeaway

A multibillion-dollar transmission fight is worth following, but it won't shop your plan for you. Four practical points for Texas households:

• Nothing to do today because of STEP. A transmission decision moves the regulated delivery charge, which is identical across providers — it can't reorder your plan options, so it is not a reason to switch.
• Watch the August decision (and the July 29 hearing) if you care about long-run delivery costs. That is where the money moves — slowly, and for everyone in a territory at once.
• Spend your effort on the shoppable half. Compare the energy charge at the kWh your home actually uses, using the true effective rate. The True Cost Calculator shows your real per-kWh cost at your usage level, not the advertised 1,000 kWh figure.
• Know why the advertised rate misleads. The plan that looks cheapest at exactly 1,000 kWh can quietly become one of the most expensive at a high-usage Texas summer — the 1,000 kWh illusion, where the real overpay for a large home runs to roughly $43 a month on the site's own calculation.

Bottom line: the 765-kV debate will help decide who pays to build the Texas grid of the 2030s. But the bill in your mailbox next month is still decided by your plan type and your usage — not by how the PUCT votes on a transmission line in August.

Related Texas Electricity Resources