I'm not sure why you're focusing on PUCT having “final say”. This Texas Tribune article shows ERCOT kept market prices too high for nearly two days after outages ended when their own market monitor said they should have reset prices the following day. It was clearly within ERCOT's control to fix.
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/03/04/ercot-texas-electric...
You keep editing your responses heavily, so it's hard for me to respond correctly. I assume the changes to your post mean that you have found this article:
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/03/05/texas-ercot-electric...
I'm not sure how you decided what I'm "focused" on. Read the first two sentences of my previous post again.
ERCOT also didn't have the authority to implement winterization recommendations from the 2011 report outside of the already existing NERC standards. You can blame the PUCT for that or blame FERC for not actually updating those standards until 2023.
However, you still seem to have missed (and demonstrated) my point by referencing Energy Transfer -- they are a midstream company who made 99% of their profits off of NG not power. Conflating their profit with ERCOT's power prices is the problem. People refuse to educate themselves on the difference between gas and power markets, so the TRC and its massively influential O&G lobbyists have made zero changes to the intrastate gas network since the winter storm. Why? Because every layman who has read a few articles and thinks they're an expert is solely focused on ERCOT.