ERCOT Interconnection Queue Near Data Centers: West Texas

The Census Bureau’s Texas place gazetteer identifies the Town of Pecos city as GEOID 4873493. The map uses its representative point and Census county boundaries for Reeves and Pecos counties. It is a geography check, not a parcel locator for a campus.

Microsoft’s June 22 campus announcement names Pecos and Reeves County. It describes roughly 2 GW of planned data-center capacity, dedicated on-site supply, behind-the-meter natural gas at launch and a broader grid connection later.

That is Microsoft’s announced plan. It does not turn every generation proposal in neighboring Pecos County into supply contracted to the campus, and county names, facility identity and electrical arrangement all have to match before records can be joined.

The source is ERCOT document 1245185620, which covers generator-interconnection activity from June 1 through June 30, 2026. Ask the Grid’s snapshot timestamp is July 1 at 00:00 UTC; that is when the monthly report was captured, not when every project changed.

The table keeps only records with status Active and sums requested capacity once per queue record. Completed and inactive projects are excluded.

These are proposed generation and storage megawatts, not operating generation, expected construction, accredited capacity, utility headroom or data-center service requests.

The Giant Arc-II is a 1,300 MW gas-generation queue record. Its point of interconnection and dates describe that supply proposal. A 1,300 MW computing campus would be a different load object, even if both share a round number.

Start from the queue identifier and read the fuel, requested capacity, study stage, proposed connection and publication history. Match a developer announcement to a record only when project identity or a primary document supports it.

A county-centroid symbol is not project geometry, and it cannot show a shared parcel, substation, transmission path or bilateral supply arrangement.

Data-center pins that look alike can carry very different exposure to the public grid, and the statements below should not be added together as one class of new ERCOT demand.

Pacifico’s GW Ranch page describes an off-grid, private-power development. Project Horizon’s site describes a 559-acre Pecos County campus with on-property gas generation for daily operation and a public-grid connection for backup. Both are developer descriptions, not verified energization findings.

Riot’s Rockdale announcement is a different case, an existing site-level grid interconnection with a phased critical-IT lease. The Rockdale dossier follows its capacity and delivery claims through later filings.

A weather-zone demand curve describes a regional operating regime, not one campus’s consumption. A hub price describes market exposure without proving a data center caused a spike or that its site is deliverable.

The September 17 congestion reconstruction shows how to work a price event through matched records and estimated constraint exposure. A campus’s load still needs its own load record, and the next useful request is specific: the exact computing phase, parcel and serving arrangement, then the load-service and generation records that connect them. A county total is where that work starts.

The queue analysis stays fixed to the June reporting period, and the company pages were read on October 19, 2026. Their completion dates are prospective and should be treated as claims.