Protect revenue by enforcing availability commitments and converting underperformance into recoveries and fixes. Downtime tracking, evidence discipline, and SLA/warranty workflows built to reduce leakage and avoid disputes.
Availability shortfalls, recurring faults, and weak documentation quietly erode cashflows then become expensive disputes when SLAs and warranties are triggered. MetRenew helps owners and operators run a claims-ready operating discipline: downtime classification, evidence trails, root-cause alignment, and structured workflows across OEMs and O&M vendors. The result is clearer accountability, faster corrective actions, and commercially defensible recoveries so performance issues don’t compound into long-term revenue leakage.
We establish a consistent availability methodology: what counts as outage, how exclusions apply, how events are time-stamped, and how causes are coded. This creates defensible SLA reporting, prevents “argument by spreadsheet,” and keeps vendor accountability tied to measurable, auditable availability outcomes.
We map warranty scope, exclusions, notification requirements, and evidence standards across major equipment and balance-of-plant. Then we build a claim strategy what to pursue, when to escalate, and how to package evidence so recoveries are maximized without derailing operations.
Claims fail when data is inconsistent. We structure the evidence stack: SCADA event logs, work orders, ticket timelines, test reports, photos (where permitted), and approvals aligned to cause coding and contractual definitions so claims are fast to assemble and hard to dispute.
We convert underperformance into an executable path: fault → classification → root cause → responsibility → remedy or recovery. This includes escalation gates, timelines, and decision rights, so teams move from “issue tracking” to measurable outcomes repairs completed, losses quantified, and recovery pursued.
We implement governance that reduces disputes: clear reporting cadence, exception handling, cure periods, and a structured approach to negotiations. When disputes do arise, you already have the paper trail, quantified loss logic, and contractual alignment needed to resolve quickly.
Repeated faults trigger SLA penalties, but vendors dispute responsibility. Outcome: standardized cause coding, clean evidence trail, and escalation gates that drive corrective action and improve recoverability without operational chaos.
Availability reporting is inconsistent site-to-site, masking true leakage. Outcome: a single availability standard, auditable downtime taxonomy, and portfolio-level reporting that exposes repeat offenders and accelerates fixes.
OEM rejects claims citing missed notices or incomplete evidence. Outcome: entitlement mapping, notice discipline, and claims packaging that meets warranty requirements and reduces rejection risk.
Responsibility blurs across EMS, PCS, OEM, and O&M. Outcome: clarified interface accountability, structured incident timelines, and commercially defensible attribution so disputes don’t stall recovery.
We focus on availability, yield, and recoveries the operational levers that protect cashflows.
Loss-tree thinking, clear KPIs, and reporting that drives action not noise.
Operating cadence, vendor controls, and escalation playbooks that prevent repeat incidents.
Protect availability. Recover value. Improve performance
Availability is the contractual measure of time an asset is capable of operating as required often defined by SLA, exclusions, and event classification. It’s a commercial obligation that impacts liquidated damages, service credits, and vendor accountability.
Late notification, unclear evidence, mismatched event logs, and failure to align the issue with warranty definitions/exclusions. Claims succeed when entitlement, notice discipline, and documentation are built into daily operations not created after the fact.
By using a consistent downtime taxonomy (planned/unplanned, force majeure, grid, owner, OEM, O&M), time-stamped event logs, and cause coding linked to contractual definitions so reporting is auditable and disputes reduce.
Yes. We align workflows across OEM warranties, EPC/commissioning obligations (where relevant), and O&M SLAs so accountability doesn’t fall through gaps and recoveries are not lost due to interface ambiguity.
SCADA/event logs, alarms, maintenance tickets, CMMS/work orders, test reports, spares and repair records, and approval trails. The key is consistency and traceability from incident to resolution.
Yes through structured outage timelines, generation loss estimation aligned to contract definitions, and a documented basis for calculation so recoveries are defensible and repeatable.
APM improves detection and diagnosis; remote monitoring improves response and escalation. Claims management turns those operational insights into commercial outcomes repairs, accountability, and recoveries.
An availability methodology, downtime taxonomy, claims playbook (entitlements + notices), evidence trail structure, portfolio reporting templates, escalation gates, and a prioritized recovery pipeline to move issues to closure.
Let’s Connect
Whether you’re evaluating a new project, strengthening feasibility, preparing for EPC execution, or building ESG readiness, we’ll help you clarify the next steps and structure the path forward with measurable delivery milestones.
Insights and analysis from across renewable energy technologies, digital transformation, ESG, policy, and project finance.