This is not an official government website.
© 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a floor statement or debate entry. It mentions legislation such as North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act of 2026, committees such as Committee on Natural Resources, members such as Bruce Westerman.
Issued
May 19, 2026
house side of the record
People
3
Linked members mentioned in this section
Legislation
1
Bills and resolutions linked from this section
Committees
1
Committees connected to this section
Senate Holds
0
No hold activity linked here
Source Document
Connected Data
People mentioned
Bills and resolutions
Committees
Source Control
Reader mode is for comprehension. The linked government PDF is the official published source.
Download official House Record PDFReturn to issue contextMr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2252) to authorize the relinquishment and in lieu selection of land and minerals in the State of North Dakota, to restore land and minerals to Indian Tribes within the State of North Dakota, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2252
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “North Dakota Trust Lands
Completion Act of 2026”.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) North dakota enabling act.—The term “North Dakota
Enabling Act” means the Act of February 22, 1889 (25 Stat.
676, chapter 180).
(2) Reservation.—The term “reservation” means any Indian
reservation located wholly or partially within the State of
North Dakota and recognized under United States treaty,
Executive order, or Act of Congress.
(3) Secretary.—The term “Secretary” means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(4) State.—The term “State” means the State of North
Dakota, acting through the North Dakota Board of University
and School Lands and its agent, the Department of Trust
Lands.
(5) State land grant parcel.—The term “State land grant
parcel” means—
(A) a parcel of land granted to the State of North Dakota
by Congress—
(i) on statehood; or
(ii) through a grant pursuant to the North Dakota Enabling
Act;
(B) a section of land numbered 16 or 36 granted to the
State of North Dakota by Congress for school purposes;
(C) a parcel of land selected by the State of North Dakota
as indemnity for any section of land numbered 16 or 36; and
(D) a parcel of land other than a parcel of land described
in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) obtained by the State after
statehood.
(6) Unappropriated federal land.—
(A) In general.—The term “unappropriated Federal land”
means public land administered by the Bureau of Land
Management located within the State of North Dakota,
including public land that is mineral in character.
(B) Exclusions.—The term “unappropriated Federal land”
does not include—
(i) land (including an interest in land) acquired by the
Bureau of Land Management;
(ii) any area of critical environmental concern established
pursuant to section 202(c)(3) of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712(c)(3)); or
(iii) land that is—
(I) withdrawn from—
(aa) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public
land laws;
(bb) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; or
(cc) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and
geothermal leasing or mineral materials;
(II) located within a component of the National Landscape
Conservation System;
(III) designated as a Research Natural Area;
(IV) located within any reservation;
(V) located within—
(aa) T. 147 N., R. 95 W.;
(bb) T. 148 N., R. 95 W.;
(cc) T. 148 N., R. 96 W.; or
(dd) T. 149 N., R. 95 W.;
(VI) located within a United States military reservation;
or
(VII) designated by Congress or the President for
conservation purposes.
SEC. 3. RELINQUISHMENT AND SELECTION; CONVEYANCE.
(a) Relinquishment and Selection.—
(1) In general.—Subject to valid existing rights, if the
State elects to relinquish all right, title, and interest of
the State in and to a State land grant parcel located wholly
or partially within the boundaries of any reservation, the
Secretary shall authorize the State to select in accordance
with this Act 1 or more parcels of unappropriated Federal
land of substantially equivalent value.
(2) Selection.—
(A) In general.—Subject to a mutual agreement between the
State and the Secretary, the land exchange authorized under
paragraph (1) may be carried out in a single phase or
multiple phases.
(B) List.—For each phase of the land exchange, the State
shall provide to the Secretary a selection list in accordance
with this Act, including all selected parcels of
unappropriated Federal land of substantially equivalent
value.
(C) Adjustments.—Adjustments to parcels included in the
selection list for each phase may be made as necessary, not
later than 120 days of delivery of the list to the Secretary,
to equalize the value of State land grant parcels and the
overall value of the parcels of unappropriated Federal land
selected.
(3) Approval.—Not later than 180 days after the date on
which the State makes a selection for each phase under
paragraph (2), the Secretary shall approve or reject, in
whole or in part, the selection for that phase.
(4) Review.—Nothing in this subsection precludes the
Secretary from conducting an environmental review of any
parcel proposed for relinquishment under paragraph (1) if the
Secretary determines that an environmental review is
appropriate.
(b) Conveyance.—
(1) Conveyance by secretary.—
(A) In general.—Not later than 60 days after the date on
which the Secretary approves a State selection of
unappropriated Federal land under subsection (a)(3), the
Secretary shall initiate the actions necessary to convey to
the State the unappropriated Federal land.
(B) Requirements.—Conveyance of unappropriated Federal
land by the Secretary under this Act—
(i) shall be by patent or deed in a form acceptable to the
State and the Secretary; and
(ii) shall not be considered a sale, exchange, or
conveyance for purposes of section 203, 205, 206, or 209 of
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1713, 1715, 1716, 1719).
(2) Relinquishment and conveyance by state.—
(A) In general.—As consideration for the conveyance of
unappropriated Federal land under paragraph (1), on the date
on which the
unappropriated Federal land is conveyed to the State, the
State shall concurrently relinquish and convey to the
Secretary all right, title, and interest of the State in and
to the State land grant parcel identified for relinquishment
under subsection (a)(1).
(B) Title.—The State shall convey to the Secretary title,
free of any financial claims, liabilities, or other financial
encumbrances, to all parcels relinquished under subparagraph
(A).
(C) Limitation.—Relinquishment and conveyance by the State
of a State land grant parcel under this Act shall not be
considered an exchange or acquisition for purposes of section
205 or 206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976 (43 U.S.C. 1715, 1716).
(c) Succession to Rights and Obligations.—Each party to
which land is conveyed under this Act shall, to the fullest
extent allowable under Federal and State law, succeed to the
rights and obligations of the conveying party with respect to
any lease, right-of-way, permit, or other valid existing
right to which the land is subject.
(d) Management After Relinquishment.—
(1) Reservation.—If a State land grant parcel relinquished
by the State and conveyed to the Secretary under this Act is
located wholly or partially within the boundaries of any
reservation, on request of the applicable Indian Tribe, the
portion of the State land grant parcel located within the
boundaries of the reservation shall be—
(A) taken into trust by the Secretary on behalf of, and for
the benefit of, the Indian Tribe on the date of the
conveyance; and
(B) considered to be a part of the reservation of the
Indian Tribe.
(2) Consultation required.—Prior to the conveyance of a
State land grant parcel located wholly or partially within
the boundaries of any reservation, the State and the
Secretary shall consult with affected Indian Tribes,
including the Indian Tribe the land of which is subject to
conveyance in accordance with Executive Order 13175 (25
U.S.C. 5301 note; relating to consultation and coordination
with Indian tribal governments) and other applicable laws.
(e) Withdrawal.—
(1) In general.—Subject to valid rights in existence on
the date of enactment of this Act, all unappropriated Federal
land selected by the State for conveyance under this Act,
effective beginning on the date on which the State makes the
selection for such Federal land and ending on the date
described in paragraph (2), is withdrawn from all forms of—
(A) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land
laws;
(B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(C) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and
geothermal leasing or mineral materials.
(2) Date described.—The date referred to in paragraph (1)
is the date on which, as applicable—
(A) the unappropriated Federal land is conveyed by the
Secretary to the State;
(B) the Secretary rejects the selection under subsection
(a)(3); or
(C) the State withdraws the selection.
SEC. 4. VALUATION.
(a) Equal Value.—With respect to a State land grant parcel
conveyed under this Act in consideration for a parcel of
unappropriated Federal land selected in accordance with this
Act—
(1) the overall value of the State land grant parcel and
the overall value of the parcel of unappropriated Federal
land shall be substantially equal; or
(2) subject to subsection (c), if the overall value of the
parcels is not equal, the party conveying the parcel of
lesser value shall—
(A) equalize the value by the payment of funds to the other
party; or
(B) enter the imbalance in value on a ledger account in
accordance with subsection (e).
(b) Appraisal Required.—
(1) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (d), the
value of the unappropriated Federal land selected in
accordance with this Act and the value of a State land grant
parcel conveyed under this Act shall be determined by
appraisals conducted by 1 or more independent appraisers
selected jointly by the Secretary and the State.
(2) Requirements.—An appraisal under paragraph (1) shall
be completed in accordance with—
(A) the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions; or
(B) subject to subsection (d)(1), the Uniform Standards for
Professional Appraisal Practice.
(c) Equalization.—With respect to a conveyance to the
Secretary of a State land grant parcel of lesser value than
the parcel of unappropriated Federal land to be conveyed to
the State under this Act, the total value of the equalization
payment described in subsection (a)(2)(A) or the ledger entry
described in subsection (e), as applicable, may not exceed 25
percent of the total value of the parcel of unappropriated
Federal land.
(d) Low Value Parcels.—
(1) In general.—The Secretary, with the consent of the
State, may use mass appraisals, a summary appraisal, or a
statement of value made by a qualified appraiser carried out
in accordance with the Uniform Standards for Professional
Appraisal Practice to determine the value of a State land
grant parcel or a parcel of unappropriated Federal land to be
conveyed under this Act instead of an appraisal that complies
with the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions if the State and the Secretary agree that market
value of the State land grant parcel or parcel of
unappropriated Federal land, as applicable, is—
(A) less than $500,000; and
(B) less than $500 per acre.
(2) Division.—A State land grant parcel or a parcel of
unappropriated Federal land may not be artificially divided
in order to qualify for a summary appraisal, mass appraisal,
or statement of value under paragraph (1).
(e) Ledger Accounts.—
(1) In general.—With respect to a State land grant parcel
conveyed under this Act in consideration for a parcel of
unappropriated Federal land, if the overall value of the
parcels is not equal, the Secretary and the State may agree
to use a ledger account to make equal the value.
(2) Imbalances.—A ledger account described in paragraph
(1) shall reflect imbalances in value to be reconciled in a
subsequent transaction.
(3) Account balancing.—Each ledger account described in
paragraph (1) shall be—
(A) balanced not later than 3 years after the date on which
the ledger account is established; and
(B) closed not later than 5 years after the date of the
last conveyance of land under this Act.
(4) Costs.—
(A) In general.—The Secretary or the State may assume
costs or other responsibilities or requirements for conveying
land under this Act that ordinarily are borne by the other
party.
(B) Adjustment.—If the Secretary or the State assume costs
or other responsibilities under subparagraph (A), the
Secretary or the State shall make adjustments to the value of
the unappropriated Federal land conveyed to the State to
compensate the Secretary or the State, as applicable, for
assuming the costs or other responsibilities.
(5) Mineral land.—If value is attributed to any parcel of
unappropriated Federal land that has been selected by the
State because of the presence of minerals under a lease
entered into under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et
seq.) that is in a producing or producible status, and the
lease is to be conveyed under this Act, the value of the
parcel shall be reduced by the amount that represents the
likely Federal revenue sharing obligation under the Mineral
Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) with the State, but the
adjustment shall not be considered as reflecting a property
right of the State.
(6) Public inspection and notice.—
(A) Public inspection.—Not later than 30 days before the
date of any exchange of Federal land and non-Federal land
under this act, all final appraisals and appraisal reviews
for the land to be exchanged shall be available for public
review at the office of the State Director of the Bureau of
Land Management in the Montana-Dakotas State Office.
(B) Notice.—The Secretary shall make available on the
public website of the Secretary, and the Secretary or the
State, as applicable, shall publish in a newspaper of general
circulation in North Dakota, a notice that the appraisals
conducted under subsection (b) are available for public
inspection.
SEC. 5. MISCELLANEOUS.
(a) In General.—Land or minerals conveyed under this Act
shall be subject to all applicable Federal, State, and Tribal
law.
(b) Protection of Indian Rights.—
(1) Treaty rights.—Nothing in this Act modifies, limits,
expands, or otherwise affects any treaty-reserved right or
other right of any Indian Tribe recognized by any other
means, including treaties or agreements with the United
States, Executive orders, statutes, regulations, or case law.
(2) Land or minerals held in trust.—Nothing in this Act
affects—
(A) land or minerals held in trust by the United States as
of the date of enactment of this Act on behalf of, and for
the benefit of, any Indian Tribe; or
(B) any individual Indian allotment.
(c) Hazardous Materials.—
(1) In general.—The Secretary and the State shall make
available for review and inspection any record relating to
hazardous materials on land to be conveyed under this Act.
(2) Certification.—
(A) In general.—Prior to completing a conveyance of
unappropriated Federal land under this Act, the Secretary
shall complete an inspection and a hazardous materials
certification of the land to be conveyed.
(B) State land grant parcels.—Prior to completing a
conveyance of a State land grant parcel under this Act, the
State shall complete an inspection and a hazardous materials
certification of the land to be conveyed.
(d) Grazing Permits.—
(1) In general.—If land conveyed under this Act is subject
to a lease, permit, or contract for the grazing of domestic
livestock in effect on the date of the conveyance, the
Secretary or the State, as applicable, shall allow the
grazing to continue for the remainder of the term of the
lease, permit, or contract, subject to the related terms and
conditions of the user agreements, including permitted
stocking rates, grazing fee levels, access, and ownership and
use of range improvements.
(2) Cancellation.—
(A) In general.—Nothing in this Act prevents the Secretary
or the State from canceling or modifying a grazing permit,
lease, or contract if the land subject to the permit, lease,
or contract is sold, conveyed, transferred, or leased for
nongrazing purposes.
(B) Base properties.—If land conveyed by the State under
this Act is used by a grazing permittee or lessee to meet the
base property requirements for a Federal grazing permit or
lease, the land shall continue to qualify as a base property
for the remaining term of the lease or permit and the term of
any renewal or extension of the lease or permit.
(C) Range improvements.—Nothing in this Act prohibits a
holder of a grazing lease, permit, or contract from being
compensated for range
improvements pursuant to the terms of the lease, permit, or
contract under existing Federal or State laws.
SEC. 6. SAVINGS CLAUSE.
Nothing in this Act applies to or affects litigation or
disputes pending on the date of enactment of this Act
regarding the ownership of any land or mineral resources
located within the State of North Dakota.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Elfreth) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
General Leave
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2252, the bill now under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
{time} 1540
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2252, the North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act of 2026, introduced by the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak).
Dakota's admission to the Union. At statehood, Congress granted lands to North Dakota to help support public institutions, including schools and universities, through responsible land and resource management. For more than a century, the State has used those lands to generate revenue for education and for other public purposes.
acres of surface estate and millions of acres of mineral estate known as State trust lands. However, approximately 31,000 of these surface acres and roughly 130,000 acres of the State trust minerals are located within the boundaries of Tribal reservations. This has created overlapping jurisdictional challenges and fragmented, checkerboard ownership patterns that are burdensome to all parties. Furthermore, these stranded State trust lands are unable to generate revenue for the benefit of North Dakota's citizens and public schoolchildren.
H.R. 2252 provides a better path forward that is a win-win for everyone involved. The bill allows North Dakota to relinquish certain trust lands located within reservation boundaries and select equal- value Bureau of Land Management lands elsewhere in the State that they can utilize to generate millions of dollars in new revenue.
boundaries will be taken into trust for the benefit of North Dakota's Tribes. Importantly, this legislation protects taxpayers by requiring independent appraisals, equal-value exchanges, and protection for valid existing rights.
provides long-term funding for education, supports Tribes, and consolidates fragmented land ownership to reduce the burden on Federal land management agencies. This is truly a win-win across the board.
this bill. I also commend Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who has supported this legislation since his time as North Dakota's Governor.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2252, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ELFRETH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2252 would allow the State of North Dakota to relinquish parcels of State land within the boundaries of a Tribal reservation in exchange for one or more parcels of unappropriated Bureau of Land Management land of substantially equivalent value.
of the Interior on behalf of the Tribe whose reservation includes those lands.
reservations whole and fulfill obligations made to the State of North Dakota when it was entered into the Union in 1889.
The chair mentioned a win-win, and I want to reemphasize that here. This bill will help fulfill our Tribal treaty responsibilities and will benefit North Dakota schools, with the land acquired managed as school trust lands.
on this bill, which includes updates to ensure that the land exchanges are transparent and fair.
characteristics and other important conservation designations. Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, this bill is supported by the impacted Tribes, including the Spirit Lake Tribe and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak), the lead sponsor of the bill.
Mrs. FEDORCHAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act. I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland and our chairman for his leadership, especially for getting it through the House Natural Resources Committee with unanimous support. I can't thank him enough for that.
for my State and addresses a unique land management challenge that dates back to North Dakota's statehood. They have both expressed it well, but let me reinforce what has already been said.
When North Dakota became a State, the Federal Government granted 2.6 million acres of Federal land to support schools and other public needs. Specifically, the State received sections 16 and 36 of every township. As a result, North Dakota holds more than 31,000 surface acres and 130,000 acres of mineral rights inside Tribal reservation boundaries.
management and development difficult for everyone. The chart beside me shows the patchwork of State trust land on the Standing Rock Reservation. All the green land, green checks, squares, in this are land owned within the Tribal reservation by the State of North Dakota. This is just one of five reservations in our State.
reservation boundaries because of this fragmented ownership, and there is currently no pathway for the State and Federal government to exchange these lands.
My legislation solves this problem. H.R. 2252 authorizes equal-value land exchanges between the State of North Dakota and the Department of the Interior. This allows the State to exchange scattered trust lands within reservation boundaries like this for Federal lands of equivalent values elsewhere in the State.
of land. It simply creates a process that can be used if all parties choose to move forward.
requirements; specifically, consultation with affected Tribal Governments prior to any conveyance, environmental review authority for the Secretary of the Interior, independent appraisals using Federal appraisal standards to ensure substantially equal value, public inspection of final appraisals at least 30 days before any exchange, and public notice online and in North Dakota newspapers before exchanges occur.
immediately transferred to the BIA to be held in trust for the benefit of the Tribe. The State will manage the exchanged Federal acres for North Dakotans and public schools. The result is less fragmentation, clear ownership boundaries, and a greater ability for both Tribal and State governments to manage the land for the benefit of their people.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to be clear about what this bill does not do. This bill does not reduce public access. It does not close hunting land. It does not impact recreation. Existing grazing permits and leases are protected throughout the exchange process, and
conservation lands, public access, and existing land uses. Federal lands specifically excluded include: areas of critical environmental concern, National Landscape Conservation System lands, research natural areas, military reservations, and lands designated for conservation purposes by Congress or the President.
treaty rights. In fact, this bill was shaped in consultation with Tribal leaders. It has strong support from Tribal nations in North Dakota.
Steve Sitting Bear is chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. He has plans to grow beef and bison production for Standing Rock, and what a great opportunity that is. They reside on the rolling prairies along the Missouri River in southwestern North Dakota, perfect for grazing cattle and bison.
that challenges Chairman Sitting Bear's vision. In his words, the current situation has made effective land management difficult for all parties.
nation was glad to help shape the legislation and supports restoring reservation land while preserving treaty rights.
the United States Senate unanimously in the last Congress. It passed unanimously out of the House Committee on Natural Resources earlier this year.
Mr. Speaker, this is a practical, commonsense solution that benefits Tribes, benefits North Dakota, and improves land management for future generations. I urge my colleagues to support the North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
colleagues in the minority for helping us work on something that we could bring to the floor that is a commonsense bill that benefits all those involved. I think this is a good example of Congress doing what we should do, bringing forth commonsense legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to close and reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ELFRETH. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, again, H.R. 2252 is a practical and balanced approach to resolving a longstanding land management challenge in North Dakota. This legislation helps the State better manage trust lands that support schools and public institutions while also creating a pathway for greater Tribal land consolidation within reservation boundaries.
I thank Representative Fedorchak for her leadership on this issue. I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2252, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.