Change Request 2025-CRF-015

Participants would benefit from a mechanism to reflect capacity reductions associated with WRAP participation in their resource adequacy and capacity expansion planning. WRAP maintains proprietary, non-public data for each participant, which appropriately cannot be shared. However, the presence of a proxy forecast of liquidity would greatly help incorporate WRAP benefits into reliability models.

To address this, forecasting liquidity assumptions—backed by WRAP’s adequacy design assurances—would enable participants to make reasonable, defensible assumptions about the level of support available from WRAP neighbors. This approach would:

• Improve representation of regional coordination in planning models.
• Reduce reliance on conservative margins currently used to meet adequacy targets.
• Align planning with evolving risk profiles as RA concerns shift from peak capacity to long-duration energy adequacy.

Open to various solutions.  Current suggestion is a study that would provide a liquidity assumption from WRAP to each participant that could support independent capacity expansion modeling. Proposal is to set a working group to navigate a variety of options and select what would be most impactful to allow the incorporation of WRAP benefits in PRM planning and continue to protect confidentiality of participant data.

BPM 101 - Advance Assessment

TBD

Significant customer savings from avoided capacity development.

WRAP capacity requirements have traditionally been lower than independent planning. The amount varies by entity.