Ann: SA Gov grants exclusive right to negotiate rail access, page-31

You say:
"I assume NRZ wil be responsible for the below the rail upfront capital costs, but above the rail would be contracted to a rail operator?"

That seems pretty reasonable, but I would like to take it a bit further. My preferred option would be the Alinta model stated below.

Alinta 2015.
"Transportation
Our facility’s input fuels are mainly transported via infrastructure that is owned and operated by third parties, except for the group’s ownership of the 148km long Braemar 1 gas pipeline in Queensland, a small interest in the 1,380km long Goldfield’s Gas Pipeline in Western Australia and the lease of the 250km long railway connecting the Leigh Creek Coal Mine to the Port Augusta Power Stations. In all cases, the operation and maintenance of transport and transmission infrastructure owned by our company is outsourced to third party contractors, who have an obligation to maintain and operate these assets in accordance with the relevant environmental legislation."

I can see no reason for NRZ wanting full ownership of the railway. If they are forced to have it they will have to have a disposal and rehabilitation programme in place. This will be required some time in the future when carbon based fertilizers are taxed so highly that the company becomes unviable eg Leigh Creek Coal, and is shut down, IMO. Thirty years is a long time.

You also say
"The capital costs of the rail line were part of the original dispute between the owners of the coal mine and the Weatherill state government that resulted in Alinta closing the Northern Power station."

Exactly, this is why I think that both parties will be bargaining hard to reach an agreed value of the rail system so that leasing arrangements can be set. IMO.

As for SA being generous to a fault, forget it, but maybe pigs will fly.

Sorry, CS, for my prognostication, but I can't help myself. I am just about done with being insulted by all an sundry, but that's life I guess. J L.