QEP MARKETING COMPANY — Warning Letter

520070024W_Warning Letter_11162007_text.pdf, page 1Official PDFWARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED November 16, 2007 Mr. Perry H. Richards General Manager Questar Energy Trading 1050 17th Street Denver, CO 80265 CPF 5-2007-0024W Dear Mr. Richards: On November 6, 2007, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, inspected Questar Energy Trading’s (QET) procedures and records for your Integrity Management Program (IMP) in Evanston, Wyoming. As a result of the inspection, it appears you have committed probable violations of the Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and the probable violations are: 1. §192.947 What records must an operator keep? §192.947 (d) Documents to support any decision, analysis and process developed and used to implement and evaluate each element of the baseline assessment plan and integrity management program. Documents include those developed and used in support of any identification, calculation, amendment, modification, justification, deviation and determination made, and any action taken to implement and evaluate any of the program elements; §192.905 (a) General. To determine which segments of an operator's transmission pipeline system are covered by this subpart, an operator must identify the high consequence areas. An operator must use method (1) or (2) from the definition in § 192.903 to identify a high consequence area. An operator may apply one method to its entire pipeline system, or an operator may apply one method to individual#

520070024W_Warning Letter_11162007_text.pdf, page 2portions of the pipeline system. An operator must describe in its integrity management program which method it is applying to each portion of the operator's pipeline system. The description must include the potential impact radius when utilized to establish a high consequence area. (See appendix E.I. for guidance on identifying high consequence areas.) • Item 1A : §192.947(d) There was no documentation available to verify that a system map was used to determine HCAs as required in their HCA Process. [A.01.d] Evidence: QET did not have any documentation to show that a system map was available to identify the BP facility and verify that the facility is located outside of an HCA per class location study as specified in their operations and maintenance (O&M) procedures. 2. §192.905 How does an operator identify a high consequence area? (a) General. To determine which segments of an operator's transmission pipeline system are covered by this subpart, an operator must identify the high consequence areas. An operator must use method (1) or (2) from the definition in § 192.903 to identify a high consequence area. An operator may apply one method to its entire pipeline system, or an operator may apply one method to individual portions of the pipeline system. An operator must describe in its integrity management program which method it is applying to each portion of the operator's pipeline system. The description must include the potential impact radius when utilized to establish a high consequence area. (See appendix E.I. for guidance on identifying high consequence areas.) (b)(1) Identified sites. An operator must identify an identified site, for purposes of this subpart, from information the operator has obtained from routine operation and maintenance activities and from public officials with safety or emergency response or planning responsibilities who indicate to the operator that they know of locations that meet the identified site criteria. These public officials could include officials on a local emergency planning commission or relevant Native American tribal officials. (2) If a public official with safety or emergency response or planning responsibilities informs an operator that it does not have the information to identify an identified site, the operator must use one of the following sources, as appropriate, to identify these sites. (i) Visible marking (e.g., a sign); or (ii) The site is licensed or registered by a Federal, State, or local government agency; or (iii) The site is on a list (including a list on an internet web site) or map maintained by or available from a Federal, State, or local government agency and available to the general public. 2#

520070024W_Warning Letter_11162007_text.pdf, page 3(c) Newly identified areas. When an operator has information that the area around a pipeline segment not previously identified as a high consequence area could satisfy any of the definitions in § 192.903, the operator must complete the evaluation using method (1) or (2). If the segment is determined to meet the definition as a high consequence area, it must be incorporated into the operator's baseline assessment plan as a high consequence area within one year from the date the area is identified. • Item 2A: §192.905(c) QET did not contact public officials, as required by the Integrity Management Rule, in order to determine identified sites for HCA determination by the December 17, 2004 deadline. [A.03.b] Evidence: QET could not produce any documentation that public officials were contacted prior to December 17, 2004 in order to locate identified sites as required. 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(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Questar Energy Trading 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 5-2007-0024W. 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). Sincerely, Chris Hoidal Director, Western Region Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry PHP-500 J. Gilliam (#120027) 3#