Motion for leave to answer and answer of SFPP, LP to motions to intervene and protest of Navajo Refining Co, LP, Chevron Products Co, Valero Marketing and Supply Co, and Tosco Corp under OR02-13.

Jnofflclal FERC-Generated P D F o f 20021106-0026 Received by FERC OSEC 11/05/2002 in D o c k e t # : OR02-13-000 ORIGINAL .., ITED STATES OF AMERICA ~..-.: ~o BEFORE THE "" "" ERAL REGULATORY COMMISSION SFPP, L.P. ) Docket No. OR02-013-000 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ANSWER AND ANSWER OF SFPP, L.P. TO MOTIONS TO INTERVENE AND PROTESTS OF NAVAJO REFINING COMPANY, L.P, CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY, VALERO MARKETING AND SUPPLY COMPANY, AND TOSCO CORPORATION Pursuant to Rules 212 and 213 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("Commission"), 18 C.F.R. 385.212 and 385.213 (2002), SFPP, L.P. ("SFPP") hereby moves for leave to answer and files this answer to the Motions to Intervene and Protests of Navajo Refining Company, L.P. ("Navajo"), Chevron Products Company ("Chevron"), Valero Marketing and Supply Company ("VMSC"), and Tosco Corporation ("Tosco') to SFPP's Petition for Declaratory Order and Request for Expedited Consideration filed in the above-captioned proceeding. I. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ANSWER The Commission permits answers to protests where, as here, the Commission's consideration of matters addressed in the answer will facilitate the decisional process or aid in the explication of issues. Williams Pipe Line Co., 88 FERC 61,014, at 61,038 (1999) (accepting an answer to a protest in an oil pipeline proceeding "in order to develop a more complete record"); Algonquin Gas Transmission Co., 83 FERC 61,200, at 61,893 n.2 (1998) (accepting answer in order to ensure "a complete and accurate record''); Tram'western Pipeline Co., 50 FERC 61,211, at 61,672 n.5 (1990) (citing Buckeye Pipe Line Co., 45 FERC 61,046 (1988)). Indeed, the Commission has stated that it "generally finds that answers to protests provide valuable information relevant to its decision making process." Guardian Pipeline, Jnofflclal FERC-Generated P D F o f 20021106-0026 Received by FERC OSEC 11/05/2002 in D o c k e t # : OR02-13-000 L.L.C., 91 FERC 61,285, at61,961 (2000). Because this answer will facilitate the Commission's decision-making process and ensure a complete and accurate record in this proceeding, SFPP submits that good cause exists to accept this answer. II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 19, 2002, SFPP filed a Petition for Declaratory Order ("the Petition"), regarding the proposed expansion o f its East Line ("East Line Expansion"). In the Petition, SFPP asks the Commission to make the following three declarations: (a) that a substantial divergence, pursuant to Section 342.4(a), can be based on a capital invesUnent, such as SFPP's investment in the East Line Expansion; (b) that, if cost-of-service tariff rates calculated in the ...