Our Ref:	M:\GAS\MAPAccessArrgt\ACCC Revised Terms Ltr 0203.doc
Your Ref:	

2 March 2000

Mr Peter Le Mesurier
Project Manager
Australian Competition & Consumer Commission
PO Box 1199
DICKSON  ACT  2602

FACSIMILE (02) 6243 1205

Dear Peter

Re: Moomba to Adelaide Pipeline Access Arrangement – Revised Terms

We have now completed a review of the access arrangement terms, and a marked copy is attached. The document is marked to identify the changes that we have made to the document that was filed on 1 April 1999.

The changes that we have made comprise:

1.	those identified in the response to submissions document that we submitted to you in January 2000; and

2.	other changes (primarily of a drafting nature) that we have considered as necessary.

I also attach a table which cross references the clauses to which changes have been made to our comments in the response document. While we have attempted to be comprehensive we may not have picked up every point.

Can you also please note the following:

a)	with 2 matters we have modified our position from that put forward in the response document.  

These matters are:

(i)	minimum term for FT Service – we  seek a minimum term of 2 years rather than 1 year;

(ii)	nominations to zones – we have decided not to change the nomination arrangements and to stay with nominations to delivery points.

b)	we have clarified the calculation of capital contribution to be made for new facility investment as follows:

(i)	in clause 10.4(l) we have made it clear that the revenue for which the present value is to be calculated is that which is attributable to the capacity that is developed by the new facility investment, and is not the total revenue under the contract (which may include revenue attributable to use of existing capacity); and

(ii)	in clause 10.3 (g), we have made it clear that the capital contribution for an IT Service is the total capital incurred; the reason being that there is no fixed revenue attributable to that service, and thus no relevant present value number.

c)	We wish to revise the Imposts clause to better deal with the application of GST (clause 30.4).  We are developing a “standard” clause for this (standard to apply across all of the Epic Energy  owned  pipelines). This clause still needs some refinement and we are not currently in a position to put it forward to you as a requested change to these terms. We are aiming to do this in the near term.  Can you please therefore treat the current clause as preliminary only.

Can you please advise at your convenience if it would be useful to meet or to have a telephone link to discuss the document and the changes.

Yours sincerely

Ashley L Kellett
State Manager South Australia

Attach

MOOMBA TO ADELAIDE PIPELINE
CROSS REFERENCE OF CHANGES TO ACCESS ARRANGEMENT TERMS TO COMMENTS IN THE EPIC RESPONSE DOCUMENT

Section & subject matter comment (on specific issues) made in Epic response document 	
Clause reference in access arrangement terms	

2.2.1 Secondary capacity	
18 and definition 	

2.2.2 Queuing policy	
FT Service – 6.3(d) & 6.7 – 6.9  
IT Service -  7.5 – 7.6	

2.2.3 Minimum term for FT Service	
11.2 and 10.4(l)	

2.2.4 Expansions & Extensions Policy:

(a) Capital contribution	

FT Service - 10.4(l) and IT Service - 10.3(g) 	

(c) treatment of capital contribution 	
10.6 and 10.5(d)	

(e) construction risks	
10.3(a)(vi) and 10.4(g)(iii)	

(f) funding of capital contribution	
10.3(a)(vii)(A) and 10.4(i)(i)	

(g) limit on funding by Service Provider	
10.5(a)	

2.2.5 Imbalance	
19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 19.6, 19.7 & 20.2(b)	

2.2.6 Nominations	
18.3, 18.4, 18.5, & 21.2	

2.2.7 Definition of IT Service	
4.3	

2.2.8 Incentive Mechanism - rebate	
5.3	

2.2.9 Retention Allowance	
17	

4  Specific issues/clauses	
As referenced in that section