[{"_1":2,"_109":-5,"_110":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,85,97],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6359965,"mediaKeyId","2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e","parentId",2175461,"title","Bill would let land board cancel trust leases that block intended mineral development; department and industry support amendments","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",11102000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e&start=11102&end=11102","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e/thumbnail_11102000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6359965/North-Dakota/Bill-would-let-land-board-cancel-trust-leases-that-block-intended-mineral-development-department-and-industry-support-amendments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359965-d4e62846add6d87479217ab942f08bd8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197620&Signature=g0UNNPif9-4vh1Ri3fVr6zWP1eyQxTBBDbHy6lWKkNZoXzbx5eXD~8ToOoTWE8xSfweLixAovQiLidWbEYabkaHhQMdsFN3VvAv1EKGc7HiID1j0sE-eDD6v5N4yChtmjdZjbyfo8RP~sWxYokqvW~8oPDDKtY6dh05GTBokcH9jkOhQ3nXza3BUpcvoka~VB12GygtGfyG3Ytw4A5P7cr-jYHwoAzSgHQSA4Q2Ahb23wEQGZHNT~WgOOQaJuvUg31bd1ORNywrzijtYTnAO1ns3oTlvlnakv4J2q3QzAP4KFzIaJxmQViXYu4FN2SN7Og7D5KvT1iNDtysde0Yl8A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate Energy and Natural Resources, ND","date","2025-01-30T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 2302, as amended, would authorize the State Land Board to review and, where warranted after an open hearing, cancel a lease of state trust land when the board finds evidence the lessee is acting in bad faith — for example by leasing parcels to block mineral development rather than to develop minerals.

Chris Selsley (Minerals Director, Department of Trust Lands) outlined the department’s rationale and described the amendment that routes contested cases to the Land Board for an open hearing and vote. \"We would bring it to the board, in an open hearing, and give them the power to exercise that authority if they wanted to,\" Selsley said, describing the board as the governor, attorney general and other appointed officials who comprise that body.

Ron Ness, president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council, told the committee the council supports the bill with the department’s amendments. Ness said the measure provides the state a statutory tool to respond to attempts to use leases to thwart development and noted similar actions in other states.

No opposition testimony was offered at the hearing. The committee closed the record after receiving the department’s explanation and industry support.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Energy and Natural Resources Jan 30, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 2302 would give the state land board authority to cancel trust‑land leases if the board finds a party is holding a lease in bad faith to block development; the Department of Trust Lands and petroleum interests supported the measure and an amendment that clarifies board-level review.","taxTitle","Energy and Natural Resources, Senate, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28903,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":42,"_43":78,"_45":78,"_46":79,"_48":80,"_50":81,"_52":82,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6359969,"Hearing on bill to require pre-construction soil reservation for oil and gas sites draws debate over costs and enforcement",8541000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e&start=8541&end=8541","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e/thumbnail_8541000.jpg","/articles/6359969/North-Dakota/Hearing-on-bill-to-require-pre-construction-soil-reservation-for-oil-and-gas-sites-draws-debate-over-costs-and-enforcement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359969-ba221ea1ff475bffa770844a367a88d9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197620&Signature=SwaOS55iMRiKZ~gXx-LWuW8ynlNL6DHZH8V8ZPJMYeJ6IfTrsJzVTTHHIOZZfTJNisEC8BUa05D5w5650INkwO6Op7E5orJ9O2-qK5RZdPMSjHOVOHlaa1l7lEGDDVaXbQ0m7hVvPZoHYWSXT6nPVnSJeFGaEuI3ti~vP0yydP65x4kdqtpYiKxuby4suW4-iYpE4goZ00aIPBowinNjfFx-0H6n17ZKcLa5yqgasAokLBF247dE9Cd4KSbOMNJ0Tk-zIIPK0fw6TTdNxZRNj0xvUXC~TlyLgbk7OUbS6ckmo6KAw5FIEFqM7R2UNGFh6z4Hqbs2cv~C7Nv4rJrycg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The committee considered Senate Bill 2313, introduced by Sen. Jeff Magrum, which would require that operators preserve and document suitable plant growth material (SPGM) — commonly called topsoil — when constructing oil and gas facilities, and that preservation be tracked to support final reclamation.

Supporters, including Troy (Chairman, Northwest Landowners Association) and retired trust-land official Michael Haupt, urged the committee to adopt a more prescriptive, documented process. Haupt said the Department of Trust Lands used on-site meetings and a volume-based approach to calculate required SPGM, and that the presence of visible stockpiles \"ensures final reclamation will happen.\" He urged explicit, pre-construction reservation and monitoring so landowners know how much soil is set aside for reuse.

The Department of Mineral Resources (Oil and Gas Division) opposed the bill as written, saying current administrative rules already require removal, stockpiling and stabilization of topsoil and specify limits (\"in no event shall this be deemed ... more than the top 12 inches\") under North Dakota Administrative Code. Assistant director Mark Boor told the committee the division processes roughly 700 permit sites annually and currently employs two reclamation staffers; he warned the bill’s pre-construction on-site meeting and monitoring requirements would require additional trained staff and could slow permitting.

Industry groups including the North Dakota Petroleum Council and Western Dakota Energy Association said the industry has improved its reclamation practices over time and urged funding or staffing solutions for the agency rather than a prescriptive statutory change. North Dakota Petroleum Council representatives also distributed examples of industry reclamation plans and said the typical permit process already shows anticipated topsoil pile locations and estimated cubic yardage in pre‑permit plats and in as-built plats after construction.

Committee members pressed both sides on technical details — how volumes would be calculated, whether digital soil-survey data could be integrated into GIS and machine-control systems for contractors, and how to reconcile estimates with as-built quantities. The Oil and Gas Division said the current regulatory framework already: requires topsoil reservation, requires an as-built report after pad construction identifying topsoil stockpile location and estimated volumes, and requires a reclamation plan and notice before final reclamation.

No vote was recorded; the committee received neutral written testimony from an NDSU soil scientist and closed the hearing on SB 2313.","Senate Bill 2313 would require documentation and reservation of suitable plant growth material (topsoil and subsoil) for well pads and other oil and gas sites; landowner advocates urged statutory minimums and monitoring, while the Oil and Gas Division said rules already address topsoil and warned of staffing and workload impacts.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_46":91,"_48":92,"_50":93,"_52":94,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":95,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":96,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6359974,"Committee hears bill to clarify recovery of expert-witness fees in oil and gas suits",970,3947000,4917000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e&start=3947&end=4917","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e/thumbnail_3947000.jpg","/articles/6359974/North-Dakota/Committee-hears-bill-to-clarify-recovery-of-expert-witness-fees-in-oil-and-gas-suits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359974-933717fb7bbdc34750a356d1c2cd539b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197620&Signature=E6Yi45FDFinaxCQWe7gsdv5oT146VA8DhrEGFdQXq0EKaHENG5QrPxfI5Juobj4EvtJ1Vti-bDzfuiC-uf58HZblOeilA9Og8ye5LCkqCgzBJ5wj-CW8GcUyRY~rlxmSSXNcxHtlw6l64jGuJCDXfvXeeMgvfNp5N9gmWGuhS1NkKDPy-N5q2CXbOhGV~2lDI~UYrtpbwRI-thIMm7mw5~HqE8BiJmBl09wZBVTFhT89JBne7l71dmOLaxdM~PwbFAYyhDvdxPfhOLoSUMxsoY0qQaV9zdion7ZSL4Zwhz-MFRJ3Sy~2wzjSJCyMPuAFJ-B8jvNwfHl-oHL9nD7vxA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 2335, introduced by Sen. Jeff Magrum, would authorize courts to award costs, disbursements and \"reasonable expert witness fees\" to prevailing surface owners in litigation tied to oil and gas surface damage claims when the owner obtains more in compensation than the developer offered.

Supporters told the committee the bill clarifies an area of confusion created when similar cases proceed in federal court. Troy (Chairman, Northwest Landowners Association) described instances in which federal courts, applying federal rules, declined to award expert witness fees even when state law and intent supported them. He said the result makes it economically unrealistic for a landowner to hire the appraisers and experts necessary to contest low offers.

Jackie Hall, appearing for the North Dakota Association for Justice, asked the committee to amend the bill to add explicit language for recoverable \"costs and fees,\" arguing the change would better align the statute with existing practice and court expectations.

The North Dakota Petroleum Council opposed the bill as presented, saying North Dakota already has statutes addressing costs and that federal courts operate under federal rules which do not always permit recovery of expert fees. Todd Kranda, attorney and lobbyist for the Petroleum Council, urged additional work between proponents and industry to develop a process that encourages early appraisal and settlement instead of addressing the issue solely through statutory fee-shifting.

Committee discussion acknowledged the federal/state interplay in these cases and several legislators and counsel signaled interest in additional negotiations. The committee set the bill aside pending further talks and possible amendment; no committee vote was taken during the hearing.","Senate Bill 2335 would clarify that landowners may recover reasonable expert witness fees and other costs in surface-damage litigation; proponents said the change restores a long‑standing intent, while industry asked for additional discussion and proposed alternative remedies.",{"_33":98,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":99,"_41":100,"_43":101,"_45":102,"_46":103,"_48":104,"_50":105,"_52":106,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":107,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":108,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6359979,"Committee hears bill to bar eminent domain for carbon, wind and solar infrastructure",3086,449000,3535000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e&start=449&end=3535","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175461-b9b43f7709a56b8ef4fd63186436c68e/thumbnail_449000.jpg","/articles/6359979/North-Dakota/Committee-hears-bill-to-bar-eminent-domain-for-carbon-wind-and-solar-infrastructure","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359979-d7f0c6eeff0a7633bbd530b3b57e24a0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197620&Signature=bphUdJ01UuB-WAja2t0aSiTCVnscr7IX7o0kIFCPmZSaWrGL1JDdjLbmlzf6DLEmhDwdK8kFlo8KeqNErbGIvwjq9PSXBl72y63jGqsp5aeScnDjrLSSfomSV0-u~QCOVsMA3hYcaRP5klM6DBDSad6MmSavr7YuUrbRe11oupmy6wT4qFLVpIoyNLN4KWy-xYcjfJguP5h8ujKC6xoQ4MwgISd4oR3fuKilsJHSUqUDwaLK1-ER80K9U~ld0ywWRCjnDG6Q92mlYC6Nry79iwy7OVYqUc9yd8EhG0-T22pxcAzovAV1ouWscu5vhhb7o9tBJlnopvahErv9S9smzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Energy and Natural Resources held a hearing on Senate Bill 2322, introduced by Sen. Jeff Magrum, which would prevent entities from exercising eminent domain to build infrastructure associated with carbon capture, carbon dioxide transport and geological storage, wind and solar energy, hydrogen energy and projects that claim federal tax credits such as the 45Q credit.

The bill’s sponsor, Senator Jeff Magrum, told the committee the measure is intended to protect private property rights. \"The goal of 2322 is to prevent the use of eminent domain for green new deal projects in North Dakota,\" Magrum said, adding that landowners should not have to \"fear negotiations with industry representatives.\" Magrum cited filings by companies that claim common-carrier status under state law and a recent South Dakota Supreme Court decision that he said limits the companies’ ability to use eminent domain there.

Supporters said common-carrier claims and the threat of condemnation have pressured landowners into easements and sown community conflict. Troy (Chairman, Northwest Landowners Association) said landowners \"should not be forced to host private development on their property,\" and Dakota Resource Council organizer Zachary Cassidy testified he has spoken with multiple landowners who “feel and regret” easements signed under pressure. Cassidy said the tool of eminent domain has \"turned neighbor against neighbor,\" and urged the committee to remove statutory authority that allows carbon projects to claim condemnation power.

Industry and agricultural representatives opposed the bill, saying it would stall existing projects and discourage future investment. Jeff Zuger, CEO of Harvest Stone Low Carbon Partners, told the committee he opposes SB 2322 and that carbon capture and storage is \"the single most important and biggest tool that we have to lower the carbon intensity of the products that we produce at our facilities today.\" He said his company operates an active capture-and-storage facility in North Dakota and relies on predictable state rules and federal incentives to finance projects.

Charlie Adams, manager of agriculture and stakeholder relations for Summit Carbon Solutions, said the bill \"carves out CO2 from state statute as not eligible as a common carrier and strips CO2 projects from the use of eminent domain if the project has been the recipient of specific federal tax incentives,\" and warned the change would disqualify current projects in development and stop investment.

Other opponents included the North Dakota Petroleum Council, Lignite Energy Council and the Greater North Dakota Chamber, which argued the bill would jeopardize economic activity, hamper plans for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and undermine a regulatory and market framework the state has developed for carbon-management infrastructure.

The hearing included repeated references to legal tests for common-carrier status and to filings with the North Dakota Public Service Commission that some witnesses said have been used to claim condemnation power. Sponsor Magrum pointed to the August 22, 2024 South Dakota Supreme Court decision finding that Summit Carbon Solutions had not shown it was a common carrier under that state’s record; he offered that as precedent supporting removal of eminent-domain authority for pipelines moving CO2.

The committee received both substantial pro- and anti‑testimony and left the record open to additional written submissions. No committee vote occurred during the hearing.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing on SB 2322 and moved to subsequent bills; senators were directed to the committee app for further written testimony on both sides.","The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 2322, which would prohibit the use of eminent domain to build infrastructure tied to carbon capture, carbon transport and several renewable energy projects; supporters said the bill protects landowners, while industry groups warned it would halt investment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would let land board cancel trust leases that block intended mineral development; department and industry support amendments

Hearing on bill to require pre-construction soil reservation for oil and gas sites draws debate over costs and enforcement

Committee hears bill to clarify recovery of expert-witness fees in oil and gas suits

Committee hears bill to bar eminent domain for carbon, wind and solar infrastructure