Behind-the-meter generation is often proposed as the answer to a delayed grid connection, a rising bill or a tenant's resilience requirement. It may address one of those problems while leaving the others open. Behind the meter describes an electrical location. A workable campus solution also needs an authorized customer model, supported operating modes and contracts that match the service promised to tenants.
The campus problem
Illustrative scenario, not a claimed client result.
An illustrative campus has an anchor tenant but the expected utility date has slipped. A generation partner proposes locating the load behind a nearby grid-connected asset. A second option is on-site gas generation with a future utility connection. The owner has received attractive energy pricing but has no agreed interconnection classification, no confirmed outage operating envelope and no allocation of curtailment between tenants. The project is blocked on the structure, not just the equipment purchase.
Start with the operating mode rather than the equipment package
A system designed to reduce imports while grid-connected has a different job from one intended to run an isolated campus. A proposal to export adds another operating condition. The provider and qualified technical teams need to establish the permitted configurations, protection and interconnection requirements. Equipment capable of several modes should not be treated as permission to use every mode, or as evidence that the entire campus can sustain an outage.
The commercial boundary can be just as restrictive. A generation company may own the equipment and sell output under a power purchase agreement. The landlord may own the network while different tenants have different service rights. A utility may require a continuing standby or facilities obligation. The proposed savings should include the payments that remain even when grid imports fall. Otherwise, the business case compares a complete grid bill with an incomplete on-site cost.
Texas context: existing grid-connected generation has a specific constraint
ERCOT’s current large-load page includes a notice route under PURA 39.169 for proposed net-metering arrangements involving a new large load and an applicable standalone generation resource registered as of September 1, 2025. Its resource guidance requires PUCT approval following an ERCOT study before implementing the arrangement. The same page separately describes withdrawal-limited private use network documentation. These routes demonstrate why netting load with generation is not simply an internal property decision, and why one route must not be represented as automatic approval for another.
ERCOT Large Load Integration: net metering, existing resources and private use network documentation
The test that changes the investment case
An owner may model generation as both a bridge to energization and unrestricted capacity during a grid outage. Those are different duties. Our proposed analysis asks what the campus may import or export in each operating mode, what happens if generation trips, whether fuel is actually available, and which tenant can be curtailed. Electrical studies, utility conditions, fuel arrangements, air authorization and tenant service terms have to support the same operating story.
Design a route that survives a generator outage and a tenant change
Suppose a campus wants on-site generation to advance the first tenant while keeping a permanent grid connection. The owner should define which load the plant supports, what happens during maintenance and what service is available if the plant trips. If the same asset is also expected to export or support demand response, those uses must fit the tenant reserve obligation. One megawatt cannot satisfy two conflicting commitments at the same time.
Sitebraid would coordinate the provider discussions, site requirements, ownership structure and tenant acceptance before major procurement. The financial comparison should include fuel, maintenance, replacement exposure, network costs and the transition if a later tenant changes the load. Where the system cannot support the intended first phase, the decision may be a smaller opening configuration or a different supply route. Calling the equipment a microgrid should not prevent the team from recognizing that the proposed operating boundary is incomplete.
Solutions and their tradeoffs
A utility-coordinated on-site system
Develop a specific grid-parallel or transition arrangement with the serving provider and qualified generation, technical and legal teams.
Conditions to resolve: Establish the permitted import/export envelope, protection, operating authority and capacity needed when the plant is unavailable.
A load arrangement with an existing registered generator
Investigate the applicable existing-resource route and the effect of the new load on grid commitments and the resource’s operation.
Conditions to resolve: Resolve required studies and approvals, tenant supply legality and the consequences if the proposed arrangement is rejected or delayed.
An independently viable first phase
Test a smaller phase, different energization sequence or technically and legally supportable temporary solution that does not depend on the unapproved structure.
Conditions to resolve: The owner and tenant must accept the revised capacity, operating conditions and transition cost before committing.
A generator trip can expose an import limit hidden by net load
Hypothetical steady-state MW balance, not a protection design or ride-through study. Engineers must also evaluate transitions, ramp rates, reserves, equipment limits and all authorized operating modes.
Swipe or scroll to compare all columns.
| Operating state | MW balance | Unresolved requirement |
|---|---|---|
| Normal operation | 60 MW campus - 40 MW generation = 20 MW import | A normal 20 MW import does not establish 60 MW backup import rights. |
| Generation trips; accepted import limit is 30 MW | 60 - 30 = 30 MW shortfall | Requires validated alternate supply or tenant-authorized load reduction, not only an automatic transfer switch. |
| Ten-minute bridge for the 30 MW gap | 30 x 10/60 = 5 MWh delivered | Storage must also meet at least the required power, usable energy, transition and reserve conditions; nameplate energy is insufficient. |
| Grid unavailable with 40 MW generation | 60 - 40 = 20 MW shortfall before reserve | Islanding is not a full-load promise without an accepted operating envelope. |
This is the development problem behind our grid connected generation challenge. Our Power & energization capability explains the scope Sitebraid can take on.
Putting the analysis to work
Obtain the existing resource registration and interconnection records, proposed point of interconnection, load ramp and electrical one-line. Define grid-parallel, islanded, restart and transition modes with the project engineers and operator. Ask counsel and the relevant market participants to determine the applicable retail, registration and approval routes. Add fuel delivery, air-permit operating limits, land corridors and tenant continuity obligations to the comparison. Do not treat standby generator permits as proof of permission for routine generation.
How Sitebraid would support this decision
Classify the proposed operating model
Have the relevant specialists distinguish the physical network, market registration and customer-service arrangements. Make the remaining legal and utility determinations explicit.
Compare complete routes
For each option, show first usable capacity, development cost, fuel and operating exposure, studies, permits and exit conditions. Include the case where the preferred grid connection is late rather than assuming the bridge ends on schedule.
Structure the partnership around real authority
Allocate site rights, connection works, ownership, dispatch, fuel, metering and maintenance to parties able to perform them. A public utility partnership needs appropriate public authority and process; a private generation agreement is not made into a PPP by its title.
Commission the agreed modes and transition
Coordinate construction interfaces with the project teams and require evidence that the permitted operating modes meet the tenant’s accepted requirements. Preserve the permanent corridors and an executable path out of the temporary arrangement.
How we protect the decision
Do not present a MUD, SUD or PUD as a shortcut to electric utility authority. The district or zoning instrument may solve another campus dependency while electricity follows its own route. Tie investment releases to specific determinations, not to a partner’s assurance that everything is behind the meter. Maintain a budget and schedule for the rejected-route case.
The result the owner should require
Completion is a legally and technically supportable operating structure, provider and regulatory approvals where required, funded delivery obligations and accepted capacity under defined operating modes. The owner can explain what happens during a plant trip, grid outage, tenant change and transition to the permanent system. Installed megawatts alone do not close the scope.
How to measure progress
- Permitted versus assumed import/export capacity
- Approvals on the opening critical path
- Tenant load exposed to a generation trip
- Funded transition cost and remaining temporary obligations
The decision to take forward
Define the service and permitted modes first, then select equipment and contracts to deliver them. Connect legal feasibility, technical design and lifecycle cost in the same decision. Behind-the-meter supply becomes useful when it closes a specific campus constraint without creating an unpriced operating or tenant-service gap.
If you are planning behind-the-meter supply, our Power & energization work sets the regulatory and operating structure it will actually need.
Continue with A campus can support the grid without promising to power the town. to examine the connected decision.