WESTERN REFINING LOGISTICS, LP — Warning Letter

420085017w_warning letter_07012008_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFU, 5, DepoItmerIr of TranspoItalioiI Pipeline ond Hozor'clous iftoterlots Sofety Aamlnisirotion 8701 South Gcssher, SuIIC 1110 Hausian, TX 77074 WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT RE VESTED July 1, 2008 Mr. Leroy Crow Senior Vice President Western Refining Pipeline Company 123 W. Mills Avenue El Paso, TX 79901 CPF 4-2008-5017W Dear Mr. Crow: On November 27 — December 1, 2006, January 9 — 12, 2007, August 20 — 24, 2007, and November 13— 16, 2007, representatives of the Pipeline ahd Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code inspected your 424 mile 16-inch pipeline in New Mexico. The operator at the time of the inspections was Giant Industries, Inc (Giant). We were contacted by you and made aware that Western Refining (Western) acquired Giant effective November 14, 2007. As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed a probable violation of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The item inspected and the probable violation Is: 1. 5195A02 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and emergencies. (a) General. Each operator shall prepare and follow for each pipeline system a manual of written procedures for conducting normal operations and maintenance activities and handling abnormal operations and emergencies. This manual shall be reviewed at intervals not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each calendar year, and appropriate changes made as necessary to insure that the manual is effective. This manual shall be prepared before initial operations of a pipeline commence, and appropdiate parts shall be kept at locations where operations and maintenance activities are conducted. (c) Maintenance and normal operations. The manual required by paragraph (a) of this section must include procedures for the following to provide safety during maintenance and normal operations: (13) Periodically reviewing the work done by operator to determine the effectiveness of the procedures used in normal operation and maintenance and taking corrective action where deficiencies are found.#

420085017w_warning letter_07012008_text.pdf, page 2At the time of the inspection, Giant was unable to show records of periodic review of the work done by the operator to determine the effectiveness of the procedures used in normal operation and maintenance and taking corrective action where deficiencies are found. Inspector notes taken during the inspection indicate that Section 1. 3. 5 and Form OM-105 address this requirement, but records of the reviews could not be shown. 2. 5195. 420 Valve maintenance. (c) Each operator shall provide protection for each valve from unauthorized operation and from vandalism. Numerous valves were found without locks during the course of the field inspections. These were corrected as found by the operator before leaving each location. It is noted that these were on newly installed valves and site security was being addressed as part of the start up activities. Under 49 United States Code, () 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100, 000 for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of $1, 000, 000 for any related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct the item identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Western being subject to additional enforcement action. No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer to CPF 4- 2008-5017W, Be advised that all material you submit in response to this enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U. S. C. 552(b), along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U. S. C. 552(b). R. M. Seeley Director, Southwest Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration#