Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response Clause Samples

Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a Form of Aurizon Network’s obligations for the inclusion of the Trust’s capital costs in the RAB Aurizon Network does not support this position b Aurizon Network’s insurance obligation for ‘Landholder Infrastructure’ Aurizon Network does not support this position c Aurizon Network required to negotiate a process to address early termination of a SUFA transaction, even if that process would result in a ‘non-material’ disadvantage to Aurizon Network Aurizon Network does not support this position Rental Method The acceptance of the rental calculation methodology under current regulation practices as reasonable Aurizon Network supports this position The development of worked examples of rental calculation and their inclusion in the SUFA documentation Aurizon Network supports this position with a qualification Aurizon Network’s proposed post- regulatory rent objective does not provide certainty over rental cash flows following deregulation Aurizon Network does not support this position SUFA should allow for parties to remain, following deregulation, under the ‘regulated contract’ Aurizon Network supports this position SUFA should allow for linked access agreements to include a schedule setting out access charges in the event that an asset is no longer declared Aurizon Network does not support this position Construction of SUFA Infrastructure The construction process should be based on the principles that SUFA is a financing tool and Aurizon Network should control that process Aurizon Network supports this position As a consequence of these principles, Aurizon Network should provide up-front commitments with respect to scope, standard, cost, time to complete and capacity outcomes Aurizon Network supports this position in respect of scope, standard, cost and time to complete, and does not support it in respect of capacity outcomes Project delivery should be addressed not under the PMA but under the CA and the RCA in the forms that are part of the DD Aurizon Network supports this position, subject to three CA qualifications The CA should adopt a lump-sum price for the delivery of commitments in relation to scope, standard and time-to-complete Aurizon Network supports this position The CA should provide for specified variations and adjustment events as detailed by the QCA Aurizon Network supports this position The Independent Certifier under the CA should undertake many, but not all, of the functions of the superintendent under the pro forma construction contract ...
View SourceView Similar (3)
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a Aurizon Network’s obligation to fund is not a 2013 SUFA DAAU matter Aurizon Network supports this position b Aurizon Network should submit a DAAU and related reference tariff at a time to be determined Aurizon Network partially supports this position c Capacity shortfalls are to be addressed as set out elsewhere in the DD See Section 5.2(k) d Potential PUHs should decide whether a project is of a size suitable for SUFA Aurizon Network supports this position e The QCA should retain its power to develop its own SUFA and Investment Framework Amendments Aurizon Network does not support this position f The recovery of SUFA development costs should be considered if and when Aurizon Network seeks to recover them Aurizon Network supports this position g If an Access Seeker and Aurizon Network are in dispute regarding the proposed terms of a user funding agreement, either party may pursue the dispute under UT3 Aurizon Network partially supports this position h If an Access Seeker and Aurizon Network are in dispute regarding issues arising under an existing user funding agreement, either party may pursue the dispute under UT3 Aurizon Network does not support this position i The QCA is open to discussing ways of improving the dispute resolution process Aurizon Network supports this position j The QCA considers it prudent to focus on the expansion process under the 2014 DAU process Aurizon Network supports this position k The inclusion of a ‘direction to pay’ feature in the standard access agreement should be considered as part of the 2014 DAU process Aurizon Network supports this position
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a The effectiveness of the SUFA documents to enable the Trust to claim tax Aurizon Network supports this position QCA Position Aurizon Network Response depreciation must be tested b Statutory severance is required Aurizon Network supports this position c Aurizon Network, the QCA and interested parties (are) to work on a joint submission for an ABA Aurizon Network supports this position, subject to it not being required to share commercially sensitive information d Efficiently incurred costs by Aurizon Network in seeking an ABA will be included in its operating costs Aurizon Network supports this position e Each party to the SUFA agreements (is to) seek its own PBR Aurizon Network supports this position, subject to its efficiently incurred costs in obtaining its PBR being refunded by the Trust f Need for tax indemnity of Aurizon Network is queried Aurizon Network considers a tax indemnity is needed to address its residual tax risks
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a The redacted Infrastructure Lease should be disclosed during negotiation of the SUFA agreements subject to conditions Aurizon Network supports this position b The security should apply to compensation cashflows and detriment amounts due to the Trustee Aurizon Network supports this position c Aurizon Network should have uncapped liability for actions in respect of the Infrastructure Lease and the Trustee’s liability is to be limited as detailed by the QCA Aurizon Network does not support this position d ‘for breach of the EISL or the EIHL (Infrastructure Lease remains), the party that caused the breach must pay the detriment amount to the other party’, subject to two exceptions Aurizon Network supports this position, subject to clarification of the QCA’s intent
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a The acceptance of the rental calculation methodology under current regulation practices as reasonable Aurizon Network supports this position b The development of worked examples of rental calculation and their inclusion in the SUFA documentation Aurizon Network supports this position with a qualification c Aurizon Network’s proposed post-regulatory rent objective does not provide certainty over rental cash flows following deregulation Aurizon Network does not support this position d SUFA should allow for parties to remain, following deregulation, under the ‘regulated contract’ Aurizon Network supports this position e SUFA should allow for linked access agreements to include a schedule setting out access charges in the event that an asset is no longer declared Aurizon Network does not support this position
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a Consideration for discrimination in respect of asset maintenance (is) to be considered as part of the 2014 DAU process Aurizon Network supports this position. b The 2013 SUFA DAAU should not place restrictions on who can participate in funding a SUFA arrangement Aurizon Network supports this position, subject to full set-off being adopted c Cost-shifting and other discriminatory behaviour (are) to be considered as part of the 2014 DAU process Aurizon Network supports this position.
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a QCA’s risk allocation approach Aurizon Network notes this position b Treatment of limitation of liability Aurizon Network supports this position c Treatment of consequential loss Aurizon Network partially supports the QCA’s position d Exclusion of OPRA from rental calculation methodology Aurizon Network does not support this position This Section 14 addresses issues that arise from the SUFA documents that form part of the DD and fall outside the scope of Sections 4 to 13 inclusive.
View Source
Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response a The form of the template TD and the SUHD should be able to be amended to permit third-party finance by negotiation Aurizon Network supports this position b The form of the template TD and the SUHD should be able to be amended to permit third-party finance by binding dispute resolution Aurizon Network does not support this position c The 2013 SUFA DAAU arrangements should allow for third party financing Aurizon Network conditionally supports this position d A Financing Side Deed should be included as one of the SUFA documents Aurizon Network supports this position 58DD, section 11.4.2, pages 80 - 81
View Source

Related to Summary QCA Position Aurizon Network Response

  • Primary Frequency Response Developer shall ensure the primary frequency response capability of its Large Generating Facility by installing, maintaining, and operating a functioning governor or equivalent controls. The term “functioning governor or equivalent controls” as used herein shall mean the required hardware and/or software that provides frequency responsive real power control with the ability to sense changes in system frequency and autonomously adjust the Large Generating Facility’s real power output in accordance with the droop and deadband parameters and in the direction needed to correct frequency deviations. Developer is required to install a governor or equivalent controls with the capability of operating: (1) with a maximum 5 percent droop ± 0.036 Hz deadband; or (2) in accordance with the relevant droop, deadband, and timely and sustained response settings from an approved Applicable Reliability Standard providing for equivalent or more stringent parameters. The droop characteristic shall be: (1) based on the nameplate capacity of the Large Generating Facility, and shall be linear in the range of frequencies between 59 and 61 Hz that are outside of the deadband parameter; or (2) based on an approved Applicable Reliability Standard providing for an equivalent or more stringent parameter. The deadband parameter shall be: the range of frequencies above and below nominal (60 Hz) in which the governor or equivalent controls is not expected to adjust the Large Generating Facility’s real power output in response to frequency deviations. The deadband shall be implemented: (1) without a step to the droop curve, that is, once the frequency deviation exceeds the deadband parameter, the expected change in the Large Generating Facility’s real power output in response to frequency deviations shall start from zero and then increase (for under-frequency deviations) or decrease (for over-frequency deviations) linearly in proportion to the magnitude of the frequency deviation; or (2) in accordance with an approved Applicable Reliability Standard providing for an equivalent or more stringent parameter. Developer shall notify NYISO that the primary frequency response capability of the Large Generating Facility has been tested and confirmed during commissioning. Once Developer has synchronized the Large Generating Facility with the New York State Transmission System, Developer shall operate the Large Generating Facility consistent with the provisions specified in Articles 9.5.5.1 and 9.5.5.2 of this Agreement. The primary frequency response requirements contained herein shall apply to both synchronous and non-synchronous Large Generating Facilities.

  • Real and Reactive Power Control and Primary Frequency Response 9.5.1 Power Factor Design Criteria.

  • Service Description 2.1 General

  • Reactive Power and Primary Frequency Response 9.6.1 Power Factor Design Criteria

  • Optional Xactimate Response Attachment (Part 2)