Common use of Contested Train Path Decision-making Process Clause in Contracts

Contested Train Path Decision-making Process. Aurizon Network will determine who is allocated a Contested Train Path, by: (a) firstly, eliminating from consideration any Railway Operator whose request for the Contested Train Path is outside the scope of its Train Service Entitlement. Where this step eliminates all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but Aurizon Network still has spare Existing Capacity available, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path is allocated that path by considering the following three (3) matters. In addition, where this step does not eliminate all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but there is still more than one party seeking the Contested Train Path, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties is allocated the path by considering the following three (3) matters; (b) next, considering whether the parties contesting the Contested Train Path agree amongst themselves who should be allocated the relevant path. Where this is the case, the Contested Train Path will be allocated as agreed by the parties, and Aurizon Network will document the parties’ agreement and keep a record of such; (c) then, considering the number of Train services per week that each Railway Operator has a contractual entitlement to in accordance with their Train Service Entitlement (“Nominated Weekly Entitlement”), subject to Existing Capacity availability, Aurizon Network will prioritise allocation based on: (i) any requirement for giving priority to certain Train services or certain Unloading Facilities identified within the System Rules; (ii) if:  a Railway Operator submits Train Orders for less than its Nominated Weekly Entitlement for one Train Service Entitlement (“First Entitlement”) and the path is not allocated in accordance with paragraph (i); and  that Railway Operator also submits Train Orders for a different Train Service Entitlement in excess of its Nominated Weekly Entitlement, then the path will be allocated to those other Train Orders in the manner requested by the Railway Operator and that allocation will be documented and is deemed to be performance of the First Entitlement by Aurizon Network for the purposes of scheduling the Railway Operator’s future Train Orders; (iii) priority will then be given to allocating the path to a Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing its contracted Train services due to a Aurizon Network Cause (when assessed in terms of Train services not provided due to a Aurizon Network Cause as a percentage of contracted Train services); and (iv) priority will then be given to allocating the path to the Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing with its contracted Train services (when assessed in terms of the percentage of aggregated Train Services as percentage of aggregated contracted Train Services); and (d) finally, where the above considerations do not assist Aurizon Network in making a decision regarding which requested Train service is scheduled, Aurizon Network will unilaterally determine which Train service/s is scheduled, and will keep a record of that decision and the reasoning behind that decision. Aurizon Network will ensure that, over time, no Railway Operator is favoured over another and, where possible, if one Railway Operator is favoured this time, taking into account the Train Service Entitlement held by a Railway Operator, next time they are not favoured. In other words, if one Railway Operator has an entitlement to 10 services per week, and another Railway Operator has an entitlement to 20 services per week, then it could not be said that favouritism was shown to the second Railway Operator if they received priority over the first Railway Operator on two out of three consecutive occasions.

Contested Train Path Decision-making Process. Aurizon Network will determine who is allocated a Contested Train Path, by: (a) firstly, eliminating from consideration any Railway Operator whose request for the Contested Train Path is outside the scope of its Train Service Entitlement. Where this step eliminates all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but Aurizon Network still has spare Existing Capacity available, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path is allocated that path by considering the following three (3) matters. In addition, where this step does not eliminate all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but there is still more than one party seeking the Contested Train Path, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties is allocated the path by considering the following three (3) matters; (b) next, considering whether the parties contesting the Contested Train Path agree amongst themselves who should be allocated the relevant path. Where this is the case, the Contested Train Path will be allocated as agreed by the parties, and Aurizon Network will document the parties’ agreement and keep a record of such; (c) then, considering the number of Train services per week that each Railway Operator has a contractual entitlement to in accordance with their Train Service Entitlement (“Nominated Weekly Entitlement”), subject to Existing Capacity availability, Aurizon Network will prioritise allocation based on: (i) any requirement for giving priority to certain Train services or certain Unloading Facilities identified within the System Rules; (ii) if:  • a Railway Operator submits Train Orders for less than its Nominated Weekly Entitlement for one Train Service Entitlement (“First Entitlement”) and the path is not allocated in accordance with paragraph (i); and  • that Railway Operator also submits Train Orders for a different Train Service Entitlement in excess of its Nominated Weekly Entitlement, then the path will be allocated to those other Train Orders in the manner requested by the Railway Operator and that allocation will be documented and is deemed to be performance of the First Entitlement by Aurizon Network for the purposes of scheduling the Railway Operator’s future Train Orders; (iii) priority will then be given to allocating the path to a Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing its contracted Train services due to a Aurizon Network Cause (when assessed in terms of Train services not provided due to a Aurizon Network Cause as a percentage of contracted Train services); and (iv) priority will then be given to allocating the path to the Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing with its contracted Train services (when assessed in terms of the percentage of aggregated Train Services as percentage of aggregated contracted Train Services); and (d) finally, where the above considerations do not assist Aurizon Network in making a decision regarding which requested Train service is scheduled, Aurizon Network will unilaterally determine which Train service/s is scheduled, and will keep a record of that decision and the reasoning behind that decision. Aurizon Network will ensure that, over time, no Railway Operator is favoured over another and, where possible, if one Railway Operator is favoured this time, taking into account the Train Service Entitlement held by a Railway Operator, next time they are not favoured. In other words, if one Railway Operator has an entitlement to 10 services per week, and another Railway Operator has an entitlement to 20 services per week, then it could not be said that favouritism was shown to the second Railway Operator if they received priority over the first Railway Operator on two out of three consecutive occasions.

Contested Train Path Decision-making Process. Aurizon Network will determine who is allocated a Contested Train Path, by: (a) firstly, eliminating from consideration any Railway Operator whose request for the Contested Train Path is outside the scope of its Train Service Entitlement. Where this step eliminates all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but Aurizon Network still has spare Existing Capacity available, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path is allocated that path by considering the following three (3) matters. In addition, where this step does not eliminate all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but there is still more than one party seeking the Contested Train Path, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties is allocated the path by considering the following three (3) matters; (b) next, considering whether the parties contesting the Contested Train Path agree amongst themselves who should be allocated the relevant path. Where this is the case, the Contested Train Path will be allocated as agreed by the parties, and Aurizon Network will document the parties’ agreement and keep a record of such; (c) then, considering the number of Train services per week that each Railway Operator has a contractual entitlement to in accordance with their Train Service Entitlement (“Nominated Weekly Entitlement”), subject to Existing Capacity availability, Aurizon Network will prioritise allocation based on: (i) any requirement for giving priority to certain Train services or certain Unloading Facilities identified within the System Rules; (ii) if:  a Railway Operator submits Train Orders for less than its Nominated Weekly Entitlement for one Train Service Entitlement (“First Entitlement”) and the path is not allocated in accordance with paragraph (i); and  that Railway Operator also submits Train Orders for a different Train Service Entitlement in excess of its Nominated Weekly Entitlement, then the path will be allocated to those other Train Orders in the manner requested by the Railway Operator and that allocation will be documented and is deemed to be performance of the First Entitlement by Aurizon Network for the purposes of scheduling the Railway Operator’s future Train Orders; (iii) priority will then be given to allocating the path to a Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing its contracted Train services due to a Aurizon Network Cause (when assessed in terms of Train services not provided due to a Aurizon Network Cause as a percentage of contracted Train services); and (iv) priority will then be given to allocating the path to the Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing with its contracted Train services (when assessed in terms of the percentage of aggregated Train Services as percentage of aggregated contracted Train Services); and (d) finally, where the above considerations do not assist Aurizon Network in making a decision regarding which requested Train service is scheduled, Aurizon Network will unilaterally determine which Train service/s is scheduled, and will keep a record of that decision and the reasoning behind that decision. Aurizon Network will ensure that, over time, no Railway Operator is favoured over another and, where possible, if one Railway Operator is favoured this time, taking into account the Train Service Entitlement held by a Railway Operator, next time they are not favoured. In other words, if one Railway Operator has an entitlement to 10 services per week, and another Railway Operator has an entitlement to 20 services per week, then it could not be said that favouritism was shown to the second Railway Operator if they received priority over the first Railway Operator on two out of three consecutive occasions.

Contested Train Path Decision-making Process. Aurizon Network will determine who is allocated a Contested Train Path, by: (a) firstly, eliminating from consideration any Railway Operator whose request for the Contested Train Path is outside the scope of its Train Service Entitlement. Where this step eliminates all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but Aurizon Network still has spare Existing Capacity available, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path is allocated that path by considering the following three (3) matters. In addition, where this step does not eliminate all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but there is still more than one party seeking the Contested Train Path, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties is allocated the path by considering the following three (3) matters; (b) next, considering whether the parties contesting the Contested Train Path agree amongst themselves who should be allocated the relevant path. Where this is the case, the Contested Train Path will be allocated as agreed by the parties, and Aurizon Network will document the parties’ agreement and keep a record of such;. (c) then, considering the number of Train services per week that each Railway Operator has a contractual entitlement to in accordance with their Train Service Entitlement (“Nominated Weekly Entitlement”), subject to Existing Capacity availability, Aurizon Network will prioritise allocation based on: (i) any requirement for giving priority to certain Train services or certain Unloading Facilities identified within the System Rules; (ii) if:  a Railway Operator submits Train Orders for less than its Nominated Weekly Entitlement for one Train Service Entitlement (“First Entitlement”) and the path is not allocated in accordance with paragraph (i); and  that Railway Operator also submits Train Orders for a different Train Service Entitlement in excess of its Nominated Weekly Entitlement, then the path will be allocated to those other Train Orders in the manner requested by the Railway Operator and that allocation will be documented and is deemed to be performance of the First Entitlement by Aurizon Network for the purposes of scheduling the Railway Operator’s future Train Orders; (iii) priority will then be given to allocating the path to a Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing its contracted Train services due to a Aurizon Network Cause (when assessed in terms of Train services not provided due to a Aurizon Network Cause as a percentage of contracted Train services); and (iv) priority will then be given to allocating the path to the Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing with its contracted Train services (when assessed in terms of the percentage of aggregated Train Services as percentage of aggregated contracted Train Services); and (d) finally, where the above considerations do not assist Aurizon Network in making a decision regarding which requested Train service is scheduled, Aurizon Network will unilaterally determine which Train service/s is scheduled, and will keep a record of that decision and the reasoning behind that decision. Aurizon Network will ensure that, over time, no Railway Operator is favoured over another and, where possible, if one Railway Operator is favoured this time, taking into account the Train Service Entitlement held by a Railway Operator, next time they are not favoured. In other words, if one Railway Operator has an entitlement to 10 services per week, and another Railway Operator has an entitlement to 20 services per week, then it could not be said that favouritism was shown to the second Railway Operator if they received priority over the first Railway Operator on two out of three consecutive occasions.

Contested Train Path Decision-making Process. Aurizon Network will determine who is allocated a Contested Train Path, by: (a) firstly, eliminating from consideration any Railway Operator whose request for the Contested Train Path is outside the scope of its Train Service Entitlement. Where this step eliminates all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but Aurizon Network still has spare Existing Capacity available, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path is allocated that path by considering the following three (3) matters. In addition, where this step does not eliminate all of the parties seeking the Contested Train Path, but there is still more than one party seeking the Contested Train Path, Aurizon Network may determine which of the parties is allocated the path by considering the following three (3) matters; (b) next, considering whether the parties contesting the Contested Train Path agree amongst themselves who should be allocated the relevant path. Where this is the case, the Contested Train Path will be allocated as agreed by the parties, and Aurizon Network will document the parties’ agreement and keep a record of such.; (c) then, considering the number of Train services per week that each Railway Operator has a contractual entitlement to in accordance with their Train Service Entitlement (“Nominated Weekly Entitlement”), subject to Existing Capacity availability, Aurizon Network will prioritise allocation based on: (i) any requirement for giving priority to certain Train services or certain Unloading Facilities identified within the System Rules; (ii) if:  • a Railway Operator submits Train Orders for less than its Nominated Weekly Entitlement for one Train Service Entitlement (“First Entitlement”) and the path is not allocated in accordance with paragraph (i); and  • that Railway Operator also submits Train Orders for a different Train Service Entitlement in excess of its Nominated Weekly Entitlement, then the path will be allocated to those other Train Orders in the manner requested by the Railway Operator and that allocation will be documented and is deemed to be performance of the First Entitlement by Aurizon Network for the purposes of scheduling the Railway Operator’s future Train Orders; (iii) priority will then be given to allocating the path to a Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing its contracted Train services due to a Aurizon Network Cause (when assessed in terms of Train services not provided due to a Aurizon Network Cause as a percentage of contracted Train services); and (iv) priority will then be given to allocating the path to the Railway Operator for whom Aurizon Network is most behind (in the contract year to date) in providing with its contracted Train services (when assessed in terms of the percentage of aggregated Train Services as percentage of aggregated contracted Train Services); and (d) finally, where the above considerations do not assist Aurizon Network in making a decision regarding which requested Train service is scheduled, Aurizon Network will unilaterally determine which Train service/s is scheduled, and will keep a record of that decision and the reasoning behind that decision. Aurizon Network will ensure that, over time, no Railway Operator is favoured over another and, where possible, if one Railway Operator is favoured this time, taking into account the Train Service Entitlement held by a Railway Operator, next time they are not favoured. In other words, if one Railway Operator has an entitlement to 10 services per week, and another Railway Operator has an entitlement to 20 services per week, then it could not be said that favouritism was shown to the second Railway Operator if they received priority over the first Railway Operator on two out of three consecutive occasions.