Attachment 1- Confidentiality template Title, page and paragraph number of document containing confidential information. Description of the confidential information. Topic the confidential information relates to (e.g. capex, opex, WACC etc.) Identify the recognised confidentiality category that the information falls within. Provide a brief explanation of why the information falls into the selected category. If information falls within ‘other’ please provide further details on why the information should be treated as confidential. Specify reasons supporting how and why detriment may be caused from disclosing the identified information. Provide any reasons supporting why the identified detriment is not outweighed by the public benefit (especially public benefits such as the effect on the long term interests of consumers).
Attachment 5 - Summary of submissions Issue Stakeholder Summary Attachment 1 ENA Did not support the AER’s proposed Attachment 1 and proposed a revised Attachment 1. Jemena Supports ENA's proposed Attachment 1. Submitted that this Attachment 1 would provide stakeholders with additional clarity regarding the type of information for which confidentiality claims are normally approved. SP AusNet Supports ENA's proposed Attachment 1. ActewAGL Supports ENA’s proposed Attachment 1. Submitted that the assessment of public benefit versus detriment should not be a prerequisite to compliance. APA Group Submitted they would prefer to follow their existing confidentiality claim procedure. Aurora Supports the AER’s Attachment 1. Submitted that the requirement to use the Attachment 1 for all confidential information would be onerous. NSW DNSPs Supports ENA’s proposed Attachment 1. Concerned that the AER’s Attachment 1 does not align with statutory framework. Energex Supports ENA’s proposed Attachment 1. Did not agree with the AER’s proposal to reject confidentiality claims based on with the Attachment 1. Ergon Energy Supports ENA’s proposed Attachment 1. Did not agree with the AER’s requirement for NSPs to prove detriment against public benefit. Ethnic Communities & MEU Supports the AER’s Attachment 1. Requested that the Attachment 1 summarise the nature of the confidential information and the materiality of the information to the pricing decision SSROC Submitted that the onus should be on the NSP to make a full case for non-disclosure. Requested that the AER’s Attachment 1 summarise the nature of the confidential information and its materiality to the pricing decision. The default position should
confidential information Ergon Energy, Jemena parties should be at the full discretion of NSPs and under a confidentiality agreement with the third party if required. Aurora Supports the AER’s position. Requested the following additional requirements – that NSPs be consulted following a request from a third party for access to confidential information, that NSPs have the discretion to reject the release of confidential information, and that the undertaking must clearly specify the purpose for which the recipient may use the confidential information. COSBOA Supports the AER’s position. Ethnic Communities Submitted that the use of confidentiality undertakings should be viewed as a second best solution to full disclosure. Noted that confidentiality undertakings can severally constrain any subsequent submissions made by consumers to the AER and may unreasonably restrict them from discussing matters with the very constituents who are funding their work. MEU Supports the AER’s position. Requested that there be an option for specified consumer advocates to be allowed access to confidential information. Noted that the guideline should provide rules as to how preferential access is facilitated and how it can be used. SSROC Submitted that confidentiality undertakings are a second-best solution to disclosure. Such undertakings can severely constrain any subsequent submissions made by councils to the AER and may restrict councils from discussing matters with the constituents who are funding the work.