INSIGHTi

Federal Actions to Address Offensive or
Derogatory Geographical Names
Updated September 12, 2022
Some stakeholders have brought renewed attention to names of geographical features in the United States
that they identify as offensive or derogatory and have called for accelerated processes to rename these
features. Generally, the process for federal renaming of geographical features involves public petition to
the U.S. Board on Geographical Names (BGN) for consideration on an individual basis, although
Congress may enact legislation establishing or changing geographical names. On November 19, 2021, the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) signed two secretarial orders (SOs) to establish processes to remove
derogatory names from federal geographic features and land units.
 SO 3404 formally identified the term squaw as derogatory and directed the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) to find federal geographic names bearing the term and to
chair a Derogatory Geographic Names Task Force to recommend replacement names to
the BGN.
 SO 3405 directed the National Park Service (NPS) to form a discretionary Advisory
Committee on Reconciliation in Place Names to broadly solicit, review, and recommend
changes to derogatory federal geographic and land unit names.
This Insight describes the BGN process for renaming federal geographic features, the Department of the
Interior’s (DOI’s) progress on executing the SOs, and potential issues for Congress.
U.S. Board on Geographical Names
In 1947, P.L. 80-242 (43 U.S.C. §§364-364f) formally authorized the BGN, composed of representatives
of federal agencies, to establish and maintain uniform geographic name usage throughout the federal
government. The BGN, along with the Secretary, is tasked with solving name discrepancies; approving
new names; validating and recording existing names; and promulgating all official names in accordance
with its principles, policies, and procedures. By law, the BGN is responsible for all domestic federally
recognized geographic names except those applying to offices or establishments of federal agencies. In
practice, the BGN focuses on the names of natural features and certain water resource features (e.g.,
canals, reservoirs) and does not rule on the names of cultural or man-made features (e.g., roads, trails,
buildings).
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12000
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

---

Congressional Research Service
2
The BGN meets monthly to decide on geographic names issues, and its official decisions are recorded in
the Geographic Names Information System—the official federal repository for place-names maintained
by the USGS and BGN. The BGN’s Action List provides BGN decisions over the past year and the status
of pending proposals, with generally hundreds of proposals pending at any time.
BGN Process for Derogatory or Offensive Names
The BGN recognizes two classes of name changes: (1) those made to bring official federal usage into
agreement with local usage and/or support and (2) those made to eliminate particular name problems
(e.g., names asserted to be offensive). Any individual or agency may submit a proposal to the BGN to
change an existing name that they consider offensive; the proposal must include reasons why and a
proposed replacement name. With some exceptions, BGN considers name changes on a case-by-case
basis.
Progress of the Derogatory Geographic Names Task
Force
In response to SO 3404, the USGS identified more than 660 geographic features with the term squaw in
the name and developed a list of five candidate names for each feature based on nearby named
geographical features. In February 2022, the USGS published two Federal Register notices in response to
SO 3404:
 Requesting public comment on candidate replacement names for geographic feature
names and
 Providing notice of tribal consultation sessions and comment.
The task force received over 6,600 public comments by the comment deadline and approximately 300
comments through tribal consultation. On September 8, 2022, the BGN voted on the final replacement
names following receipt of the task force’s recommendations in July 2022. Although some have argued
this accelerated process may have renamed features out of line with local interests, the BGN has noted
that any interested party can propose a subsequent name change through the standard BGN process.
Advisory Committee on Reconciliation in Place Names
In January 2022, pursuant to SO 3405, NPS published a request for nominations to the Advisory
Committee on Reconciliation in Place Names. The committee is charged with developing a process to
solicit, encourage, and assist proposals to the Secretary to change derogatory geographic names. In
February 2022, NPS filed a committee charter, which specified that the committee is to report to the
Secretary through the Director of NPS and is to receive administrative and funding support from NPS. In
addition to the 17 discretionary members, the charter specifies that 4 ex officio members representing the
Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, Defense, and Commerce also are to serve on the committee. On
August 9, 2022, Secretary Haaland announced the members appointed to the committee.
Issues for Congress
In certain instances, recommendations for geographic name changes submitted to the BGN would require
an act of Congress to effectuate such a change. In particular, the BGN generally does not have the
authority to change geographic names of federal land units named and established by Congress. As a

---

Congressional Research Service
3
result, the newly established task force and committee may refer some of their recommendations to
Congress for legislative consideration.
In addition, Congress may have a broader interest in how the BGN and SO processes are executed and
may want to provide direction to the processes, whether through oversight or legislation. For example,
Congress might consider the extent to which name changes consider various stakeholder perspectives,
particularly when such changes deviate from present local usage. There may be interest in expanding or
limiting the scope of what terms and names are considered under the SO 3405 or in providing alternative
administrative direction to the process. For example, the Reconciliation in Place Names Act (S. 2400/H.R.
4454), introduced in July 2021, would direct the Secretary to establish a similar committee to that
established under SO 3405 to advise the BGN for renaming geographic features with names considered
offensive or derogatory. The legislation also would define what constitutes an “offensive place name” and
would establish various timelines and reporting requirements for consideration of potential geographic
name changes.




Author Information

Anna E. Normand
Mark K. DeSantis
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy





Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN12000 · VERSION 2 · UPDATED

---