(The Center Square) − Stopping regulation of oil terminal operator Rosefield Fourchon Operating as a common carrier has been requested by Louisiana’s attorney general.
Last week in a brief filing, Attorney General Liz Murrill urged the state’s 19th Judicial District Court in Baton Rouge to stop the action by the Louisiana Public Service Commission. Murrill seeks an expedited stay of a June 2025 commission order that affirmed an administrative law judge’s finding that Rosefield’s Fourchon Terminal falls under the commission’s jurisdiction.
Murrill says the ruling misreads state law, particularly changes lawmakers passed this spring, and sweeps a self-contained storage facility into a regulatory framework designed for pipeline transportation.
“In the 2025 legislative session, the Louisiana Legislature amended La. R.S. 45:251…to make clear that certain de minimis movement of oil wholly within a tank facility or storage terminal does not rise to the level of ‘the transportation of petroleum,’” the attorney general’s brief states, calling the commission’s order “error warranting this Court’s correction.”
The case started when Cantium, another producer using Port Fourchon infrastructure, accused Rosefield of overcharging at the Fourchon Terminal without a legally required commission-approved tariff.
In December, an administrative law judge sided with Cantium, concluding that Rosefield’s operations constituted pipeline activity subject to the commission’s common-carrier statutes. The commission affirmed that decision in May.
Rosefield rejects that premise, saying it provides storage and metering and not pipeline transportation. Therefore, it says, it falls outside of the commission jurisdiction.
Federal regulators have said the same about their authority. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission concluded Rosefield’s Fourchon services “do not provide pipeline services,” that crude moves intrastate after leaving the facility, and that the chain of interstate transportation is broken.
Before the commission voted in May, Murrill wrote the commission on April 16 urging it to reverse the administrative law judge’s “erroneous jurisdictional ruling.”
“The ruling reasons that, because oil flows to and from Rosefield’s storage tanks through Rosefield’s terminal transfer lines, that renders Rosefield a ‘common carrier’ like airlines, phone companies, trucking companies, and railroads,” Murrill wrote. “Never mind that this activity occurs wholly within Port Fourchon and results in actual common carriers transporting the oil … to America and the world.”
Murrill says the 2025 amendments “cement” the commission “reached the wrong result.” Rosefield and the attorney general say the 2025 amendments clarified that minimal, on-site movement of oil inside a storage terminal is not “transportation of petroleum,” and therefore does not trigger commission jurisdiction.
They also note the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission conclusion that Rosefield’s services are not part of interstate pipeline transportation.
Rates approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission were 67 cents per barrell in September 2023. In testimony before the commission, Cantium says Rosefield increased the Fourchon charge to $2.50 that month without commission approval and in July this year to $4.87 per barrell.
Commission staff rejected the increase and notified Rosefield. Commissioners were told the $4.87 charge was still in place in August.
At $2.50 since September 2023, Cantium said the overage is more than $10 million – roughly $472,000 per month for the company’s volumes. Rosefield says the commission has no jurisdiction on the rates, and is making unlawful intrusion to contracts “at market rates.”
The Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association and the International Liquid Terminals Association told commissioners that treating terminal operators as common carriers would impose new registration and tariff requirements, commission approval of fees, and additional supervision fees paid to the Department of Revenue. They say this could discourage investment and slow modernization projects.
“Increased regulatory oversight would place Louisiana at a distinct disadvantage, making it more challenging for businesses to justify investing in the state,” one letter cautioned.
Murrill says, in the brief, state Supreme Court precedent puts questions of statutory interpretation within District Court’s original jurisdiction.
The commission on Oct. 23 has the matter on its docket. Rosefield’s appeal and request for a stay is awaiting action Murrill is requesting to quickly happen.
