Reading Time: 2 minutes
Cleanmax Vayu Private Limited, a renewable energy developer, filed a petition before the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) seeking an extension of time to commission a 100 MW renewable energy evacuation line, bays, and metering system at the Kalavad substation. The company attributed the delay to unforeseen factors, including lack of clarity on lead generator status, vendor approval delays for GIS equipment, and delayed approval of common engineering drawings.
Cleanmax was granted Stage II grid connectivity on July 28, 2023, and had until January 27, 2025, to complete the evacuation infrastructure. The project, located in Kalavad Taluka, Jamnagar District, Gujarat, includes wind and solar capacity within the approved 100 MW. The company initially had to share a bay with existing connectivity grantees like Morjar, Opwind, and Suzlon, which created coordination challenges. None of these companies finalized a lead generator agreement with Cleanmax. Following the revocation of Morjar’s connectivity and other delays, GETCO eventually assigned lead generator status and a dedicated bay to Cleanmax in February 2024.
Further delays stemmed from approval issues related to Gas Insulated Substation (GIS) equipment. GETCO did not allow Cleanmax to use an existing vendor due to the central government’s cross-border procurement policies. As a result, Cleanmax had to source GIS equipment from approved vendors like Siemens, which have long manufacturing lead times of 11–15 months. This significantly delayed the project timeline.
Another delay was caused by the requirement for a common drawing approved by all connected developers. Suzlon’s lack of responsiveness forced Cleanmax and others to revise bay allocations and submit new plans. GETCO finally approved the drawings on September 11, 2024.
Cleanmax sought a total extension of 465 days—209 days due to lead generator uncertainty, 256 days for vendor approval delays, and 70 days for drawing approvals. The company argued that these delays were beyond its control and not due to any negligence.
GETCO, in its response, acknowledged the procedural provisions for connectivity and transmission but emphasized that the responsibility to complete the evacuation system lies with the developer. It submitted that any delay must be evaluated carefully and that bank guarantees could be encashed if timelines are not met.
The Commission reviewed the timeline of events, documentation, and correspondence and acknowledged the complex coordination challenges and procurement limitations. Based on the uncontrollable delays and Cleanmax’s proactive approach, the petition for extension was deemed reasonable. The Commission exercised its jurisdiction under Section 86(1)(c) and (f) of the Electricity Act, 2003, to facilitate intra-state transmission and resolve disputes between licensees and generating companies.
The final order approved Cleanmax’s request for an extension in commissioning the evacuation infrastructure. The case highlighted the regulatory and logistical hurdles faced by renewable developers and underscored the need for streamlined coordination and approvals in grid integration.
