Today, President Donald J. Trump made clear to the world that the days of economic surrender are over. After being sold out by career politicians for generations, President Trump is enacting fair trade policies that will restore our workforce, rebuild our economy, and finally put America First.
The move drew immediate praise:
Coalition for a Prosperous America Chairman Zach Mottl: “A permanent, universal baseline tariff resets the global trade environment and finally addresses the destructive legacy of decades of misguided free-trade policies. President Trump’s decision to implement a baseline tariff is a game-changing shift that prioritizes American manufacturing, protects working-class jobs, and safeguards our economic security from adversaries like China. This is exactly the type of bold action America needs to restore its industrial leadership. Today’s action will deliver lasting benefits to the U.S. economy and working-class Americans, cementing President Trump’s legacy as one that ushered in a new Golden Age of American industrialization and prosperity.”
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association SVP of Government Affairs Ethan Lane: “For too long, America’s family farmers and ranchers have been mistreated by certain trading partners around the world. President Trump is taking action to address numerous trade barriers that prevent consumers overseas from enjoying high-quality, wholesome American beef. NCBA will continue engaging with the White House to ensure fair treatment for America’s cattle producers around the world and optimize opportunities for exports abroad.”
Steel Manufacturers Association President Philip K. Bell: “President Trump is a champion of the domestic steel industry, and his America First Trade Policy is designed to fight the unfair trade that has harmed American workers and weakened manufacturing in the United States. The recently reinvigorated 232 steel tariffs have already started creating American jobs and bolstering the domestic steel industry. President Trump is working to turn America into a manufacturing powerhouse and the steel tariffs are driving that movement. President Trump’s initial 232 steel tariffs and the historic tax cuts led to investments of nearly $20 billion by steel manufacturers in the United States. Since the revised tariffs took effect, Hyundai Steel announced a $5.8 billion steel mill in Louisiana, demonstrating that the tariffs are working to bring more steel investments and production to the United States. The domestic steel market is stronger when other nations are forced to compete on a level playing field. On a level playing field, American workers can outcompete anyone. We look forward to continuing working with President Trump and his administration to ensure a level playing field for Americans and a robust domestic steel industry that strengthens our national, economic and energy security.”
Alliance for American Manufacturing President Scott Paul: “Today’s trade action prioritizes domestic manufacturers and America’s workers. These hardworking men and women have seen unfair trade cut the ground from beneath their feet for decades. They deserve a fighting chance. Our workers can out-compete anyone in the world, but they need a level playing field to do it. This trade reset is a necessary step in the right direction.”
National Electrical Contractors Association CEO David Long: “President Trump has consistently prioritized policies that put the electrical industry as a priority, and we recognize his commitment to strengthening our nation’s economy. As these new tariffs take effect, we look forward to working with the Administration to ensure that electrical contractors and the entire electrical industry can continue powering America efficiently while navigating potential cost and supply chain challenges.”
Bienvenido Empresarios: “As an organization committed to empowering Hispanic Americans and strengthening our nation’s future, Bienvenido supports policies that build a more resilient American economy, safeguard our communities, and reassert U.S. leadership on the global stage. President Trump’s emphasis on using economic leverage — including tariffs — reflects a broader strategy to counter China, confront the deadly fentanyl crisis, and bring critical industries back home. Now is a time for tough, decisive action when national security and American livelihoods are at stake. Our hope is that these measures lead to stronger enforcement, fairer trade, and long-term prosperity for all Americans.”
America First Policy Institute: “Tariffs worked then—and they’ll work again. Under President Trump, tariffs brought back jobs, lowered inflation, and strengthened national security. It’s not just economic policy—it’s America First in action.”
Speaker Mike Johnson: “President Trump is sending a clear message with Liberation Day: America will not be exploited by unfair trade practices anymore. These tariffs restore fair and reciprocal trade and level the playing field for American workers and innovators. The President understands that FREE trade ONLY works when it’s FAIR!”
Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso: “President Trump is acting boldly to put America first. America needs fair and free trade. We can’t allow other countries to keep abusing our workers and job creators. It’s time we had a level playing field. I applaud President Trump’s 100% commitment to Made in America.”
Sen. Jim Banks: “The decision by President Trump today to impose reciprocal tariffs will be so good for Indiana. … Those are the manufacturing jobs that President Trump is bringing back from overseas.”
Sen. Bill Cassidy: “The president’s trade agenda can pave the way for stronger trade deals, fairer rules, and real results. I am excited to work with President Trump to make it happen. Louisiana’s workers and families deserve nothing less.”
Sen. Roger Marshall: “President Donald Trump is fighting for long-term solutions to put America’s farmers and ranchers first.”
Sen. Ashley Moody: “It’s liberation day in America! Today, @POTUS sent a message to the world that the era of America being taken advantage of is over.”
Sen. Markwayne Mullin: “President Trump is going to charge foreign countries roughly half of what they *already* charge us to do business. Literally who can argue with this?”
Sen. Pete Ricketts: “President Trump is delivering on his campaign promises to level the playing field and stand up for the American people. Reciprocal tariffs will ensure equal treatment for American businesses. @POTUS is working to reshore jobs lost overseas and secure our supply chains. He is working to open new markets for our nation’s agriculture products. He is demonstrating to foreign adversaries like China that we will no longer be taken advantage of.”
Sen. Rick Scott: “The days of the U.S. being taken advantage of by other countries are OVER! Pres. Trump is making it clear that he will ALWAYS put American jobs, manufacturing and our economy first. As Americans, let’s stand with him and support one another by buying products MADE IN AMERICA.”
Sen. Eric Schmitt: “President Trump is bringing America back. We won’t be ripped off by other countries anymore. We’re bringing back manufacturing, unleashing energy production, and paving the way for prosperity.”
Sen. Tommy Tuberville: “For too long, other countries have ripped us off with bad trade deals – resulting in American jobs and manufacturing moving overseas. But change is coming. The Golden Age of America’s economy is here. Happy Liberation Day.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise: “The United States and American workers will no longer be ripped off by other countries with unfair trade practices. Thank you President Trump for putting America’s workers and innovators first with reciprocal tariffs that level the playing field and make trade FAIR.”
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer: “For too long, foreign countries have taken advantage of us at the expense of American workers. President @realDonaldTrump says NO MORE.”
House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain: “Tariffs work! @POTUS has proven tariffs are an effective tool in achieving economic and strategic objectives. The President’s long-term strategy will pay off.”
Rep. Elise Stefanik: “I strongly support President Trump’s America First economic policies to strengthen American manufacturing and create millions of American jobs. For too long, Americans have suffered under unfair trade practices putting America Last. We will not allow other countries to take advantage of us and we must put America and the American worker first.”
Rep. Jason Smith: “America shouldn’t reward countries that discriminate against American workers and manufacturers. On Liberation Day, President Trump is correcting this and demanding fair treatment for American producers.”
Rep. Mark Alford: “The days of the United States being taken advantage of are OVER. Republicans are putting American workers FIRST.”
Rep. Jodey Arrington: “For too long, our leaders have allowed other nations to rip us off through numerous unfair trade practices resulting in suppressed wages, lost opportunities, and unrealized economic growth. Just as he did in his first term, President Trump is fighting to ensure an even playing field for our manufacturers, farmers, and workers so we can unleash American prosperity and Make America Great Again.”
Rep. Brian Babin: “Trump’s tariffs aren’t starting a trade war—they’re ending one. For decades, other countries ripped off American workers with unfair tariffs and barriers. Now, we’re finally fighting back.”
Rep. Andy Biggs: “Past administrations have allowed the United States to be ripped off by allies and adversaries alike. President Trump said “NO MORE!” The Art of the Deal.”
Rep. Vern Buchanan: “For too long, unfair trade practices devastated America’s manufacturing base and stole millions of blue-collar jobs. It’s time to level the playing field and bring those jobs back. @POTUS is fighting for American workers.”
Rep. Michael Cloud: “America-First means putting the American people first. We will no longer be taken advantage of as a nation and people.”
Rep. Andrew Clyde: “For far too long, the U.S. has been ripped off by countries across the globe with unfair trade practices. Now, we’re finally leveling the playing field. THANK YOU, President Trump, for putting American workers and manufacturing FIRST.”
Rep. Mike Collins: “This is fair. Whether it’s our military or economy, other countries have taken advantage of the U.S. for far too long. That time is over.”
Rep. Chuck Edwards: “Many countries are taking advantage of the United States by imposing tariffs against us while we don’t have reciprocal tariffs against them. @POTUS has used tariffs to produce successful trade deals for us in his first term, and I support his plan to use them again to create a more level playing field and secure fairer trade deals for America. The quicker other countries agree to fairer trade deals, the quicker the tariffs can end.”
Rep. Scott Franklin:“For years the US handcuffed itself and played nice while other countries imposed massive tariffs and took advantage of us. We’re done putting America last. @POTUS is leveling the playing field, ending trade imbalances and prioritizing American workers and manufacturing again!”
Rep. Russell Fry: “HAPPY LIBERATION DAY. Thanks to @POTUS, America is DONE being taken advantage of. A new era has begun.”
Rep. Lance Gooden: “For decades, Washington allowed Texans to be ripped off by foreign countries. Those days are now over. @POTUS is committed to making America wealthy again!”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene: “If you want to do business in America, you need to play by our rules. For too long, American businesses, big and small, have been ripped off by bad trade deals and unfair competition. President Trump is putting a stop to it. He’s standing up for our workers, our companies, and our consumers.”
Rep. Abe Hamadeh: “The America First Republican party is the party of the working class, the forgotten men and women. On this Liberation Day, we further our commitment to them, that we will reshore our manufacturing, restore fair trade, and rebuild the greatest economy in the world.”
Rep. Pat Harrigan:“If you want access to the most powerful economy in the world, treat us fairly. If not, don’t expect a free ride. That’s real leadership and @POTUS is delivering it!”
Rep. Andy Harris: “President Trump’s reciprocal tariffs will put the American worker first and bring fairness back to international trade. America is being respected again.”
Rep. Diana Harshbarger: “President Trump is bringing back the American Dream. Our taxpayers have been ripped off by foreign countries for far too long, but those days are over. President Trump is right to impose these reciprocal tariffs.”
Rep. Clay Higgins: “@POTUS’ trade agenda puts American industry and America first. I support the President’s action to protect our domestic producers.”
Rep. Wesley Hunt: “Today, President Trump empowered the American middle class. His policies on tariffs will bring automotive manufacturing back to America.”
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis: “Since President Trump has been elected, we’ve attracted $5 trillion in private investment, foreign & domestic companies have announced Made in USA manufacturing, countries have reduced tariffs or changed foreign policies. President Trump is sticking up for American workers & farmers, repatriating our supply chain and protecting our national security.”
Rep. Addison McDowell: “My district was hit hard over the years by unfair trade deals. Finally, we have a President who wants to put the American worker FIRST.”
Rep. Mary Miller: “America will no longer be taken advantage of! This is how you put America First.”
Rep. Riley Moore: “For decades, foreign countries have enjoyed free access to the greatest consumer marketplace on the face of the planet, all while still charging our domestic producers hefty duties or imposing significant barriers to access their markets. Today that ends. President Trump is the only president in my lifetime to acknowledge how unfair trade has gutted the heartland and shipped countless jobs overseas. By finally reciprocating in-kind, we’ll force foreign competitors to the negotiating table, lower trade barriers, and ultimately create real free and fair trade across the board. I’m confident this move will boost our domestic manufacturing industry and fuel demand for American products across the globe.”
Rep. Tim Moore: “President Trump is leveling the playing field for American workers and bringing back MADE IN AMERICA!”
Rep. Troy Nehls: “President Trump’s reciprocal tariffs make it clear that our country will not be ripped off anymore. We are bringing back American manufacturing and putting America First.”
Rep. Ralph Norman: “Happy LIBERATION Day … ✅Protect the American worker ✅Strengthen manufacturing ✅Reduce unfair trade practices … Our economy will be competitive again!!”
Rep. Andy Ogles: “He’s resetting the negotiating table. He’s resetting the deck here to say, ‘You know what? For too long, you’ve taken advantage of our free market and you’ve literally leached jobs away from the American people … Let’s have a serious conversation and let’s do something that’s fair and mutually beneficial for both sides.’”
Rep. Guy Reschenthaler: “I fully support President Trump’s critical efforts to right this generational wrong, bring manufacturing jobs home, and rejuvenate American working families. Made in America is back.”
Rep. John Rutherford: “Tariffs help bring American jobs back home, incentivize buying American, AND put pressure on Canada and Mexico to stop the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigrants from their countries into ours. Even the Biden Admin kept or increased tariffs that President Trump imposed during his first presidency. Under Trump, inflation stayed around 2% and our GDP grew to 3%. Smart tariffs are a long-term investment in the American economy that are worth the short-term cost.”
Rep. Greg Steube: “What many fail to realize: Trump’s reciprocal tariffs are a long-overdue response to years of unfair trade policies against America. For decades, America has been ripped off by other countries who have repeatedly slapped tariffs on our goods, blocked our products, and flooded our markets with theirs. The numbers don’t lie–the rest of the world has profited at the expense of American workers and businesses. President Trump is finally putting America First by taking bold, necessary actions that past leaders wouldn’t take.”
Rep. Marlin Stutzman: “If Australia doesn’t want our beef – WE DON’T WANT THEIRS! Thank you @POTUS for opening the door of fair treatment for America’s Cattlemen”
Rep. Tom Tiffany: “Gone are the days of America being taken advantage of by foreign countries. The American worker comes FIRST.”
Rep. William Timmons: “President Trump’s tariffs are a necessary move to protect American workers and rebuild our economy. We are finally breaking free from decades of unfair trade deals that gutted our industries. These tariffs will bring jobs back to our districts, strengthen manufacturing, and ensure our children inherit a country that is not just a consumer, but a producer. Thank you, @POTUS.”
Rep. Beth Van Duyne: “For far too long, the United States has been taken advantage of by our foreign trade partners. The American people re-elected President Trump to bring back truly fair trade with other countries. Reciprocal tariffs are a first step to have a level playing field for American products and to start bringing back manufacturing to our country!”
Rep. Daniel Webster: “President @realDonaldTrump is delivering on his mandate to restore America’s economic strength. For too long, unfair trade deals have hollowed out our factories and shipped American jobs overseas. By standing up to bad actors like China and Venezuela and enforcing fair trade, President Trump is defending American industries and putting American workers first.”
Rep. Tony Wied: “President Trump has made it clear with these reciprocal tariffs that we will no longer allow other countries to take advantage of us. His goal is simple: to bring jobs and manufacturing back to our country and open up foreign markets to American products. If companies want to avoid these tariffs, they will do business in the United States. I applaud the President for taking a stand against years of unfair trade practices and making sure we put American workers and consumers first. It’s time our foreign trading partners finally live up to their end of the bargain.”
Rep. Roger Williams: “For too long, America Last policies have put the U.S. auto industry at a disadvantage. As a car dealer and small business owner, I support @POTUS’ Executive Order to increase competition, boost revenue, and bring back American jobs.”
U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer: “Today, President Trump is taking urgent action to protect the national security and economy of the United States. The current lack of trade reciprocity, demonstrated by our chronic trade deficit, has weakened our economic and national security. After only 72 days in office, President Trump has prioritized swift action to bring reciprocity to our trade relations and reduce the trade deficit by leveling the playing field for American workers and manufacturers, reshoring American jobs, expanding our domestic manufacturing base, and ensuring our defense-industrial base is not dependent on foreign adversaries—all leading to stronger economic and national security.”
Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent: “President Trump signed the Declaration of Economic Independence for the American people. For decades, the trade status quo has allowed countries to leverage tariffs and unfair trade practices to get ahead at the expense of hardworking Americans. The President’s historic actions will level the playing field for American workers and usher in a new age of economic strength.”
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins: “FARMERS COME FIRST — @POTUS is leveling the playing field, ensuring American farmers and ranchers can compete globally again!”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “Thank you, @POTUS! ‘Made in America’ is not just a tagline — it’s an economic and national security priority.”
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem: “For too long, America has been targeted by unfair trade practices that made our supply chain dependent on foreign adversaries, eroded our industrial base, and hurt American workers. This has gravely impacted our national security. President Trump’s strong action will help make America safe again. @DHS, primarily through @CBP, is ready to collect these new tariffs and put an end to unfair trade practices. Thank you President @realDonaldTrump for putting America FIRST.”
Secretary of Energy Chris Wright: “President Trump is a businessman; he’s a negotiator. The result of that has been and will continue to be improvements for the American people. We are in the midst of a negotiation, and he is fighting every day to make the cost-of-living conditions better for Americans.”
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon: “At the White House this afternoon, we celebrated Liberation Day — setting our economy on the path of future prosperity for our children. Business owners, workers, and taxpayers have been waiting for strong economic leadership. @POTUS’ actions today prove we are done being taken advantage of in international trade.”
Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum: “President Trump’s Liberation Day reciprocity plan is commonsense. If you tariff us, we’ll tariff you. This will strengthen our economy and make America wealthy again!”
Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy: “Today is the day we will liberate ourselves from unfair trade practices and outdated ways of thinking. Tariffs are an important tool in the President’s toolbox to stop foreign countries from ripping us off, protect America’s workers, and restore U.S. manufacturing. I stand with @POTUS as he finally levels the playing field. Happy Liberation Day!”
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner: “For four years, Americans couldn’t afford groceries, let alone a house. This Liberation Day, @POTUS is bringing manufacturing and jobs back. President Trump is making the American Dream achievable again!”
Small Business Administration Administrator Kelly Loeffler: “Small businesses will no longer be crushed by foreign governments and unfair trade deals. Instead, we will put American industry, workers, and strength FIRST. Thank you @POTUS for bringing back Made in America!”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Vicente Gonzalez (15th District of Texas)
Funds will support coastal conservation, hurricane protection, and infrastructure improvements
BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS – Today, Congressman Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34) announced that four counties in the 34th Congressional District of Texas will receive $3,541,595.29 in energy revenues from offshore oil and gas production. This funding comes from the U.S. Department of Interior’s Fiscal Year 2025 energy revenues as directed by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA) of 2006 to support coastal conservation, restoration, hurricane protection programs, infrastructure projects and more.
“GOMESA funds reflect the prosperity of American oil and gas companies and their commitment to meeting market demands through domestic energy supply,” said Congressman Gonzalez. “Thanks to this funding, South Texas communities can utilize funds to further support conservation efforts, invest in hurricane preparedness, and implement marine and coastal resilience management plans.”
The Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA) of 2006 created a revenue-sharing model for oil- and gas-producing Gulf states to receive a portion of the revenue generated from offshore oil and gas leasing in the gulf. The Act also directs a percentage of revenue to the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).
The State of Texas will receive a total of $95,539,986.21 in disbursements, including $76,431,988.96 for the state alone and $3,541,595.29 for counties within the 34th Congressional District of Texas.
The counties and their allocations are as follows:
· Cameron County: $1,087,926.78
· Kenedy County: $1,068,458.89
· Kleberg County: $768,163.51
· Willacy County: $617,046.11
More information on the revenue allocations can be foundhere.
U.S. crude oil refinery inputs averaged 15.6 million barrels per day (b/d) during the week ending March 28, 192,000 b/d less than the previous week’s average, according to a weekly report issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration on Wednesday.
Refineries operated at 86.0 percent of their operable capacity last week, said the Weekly Petroleum Data report.
During the same period, both the gasoline and distillate fuel production went up, averaging 9.3 million b/d and 4.7 million b/d respectively.
U.S. commercial crude oil inventories, excluding those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, surged by 6.2 million barrels from the previous week to 439.8 million barrels, about 4 percent below the five-year average for this time of year.
Total motor gasoline inventories declined by 1.6 million barrels last week, and were 2 percent above the five-year average for this time of year.
Finished gasoline inventories went up while blending components inventories went down last week.
Distillate fuel inventories surged by 0.3 million barrels last week, and were around 6 percent below the five-year average for this time of year.
Propane/propylene inventories rose by 1.0 million barrels, and were 8 percent below the five-year average for this time of year.
Total commercial petroleum inventories increased by 5.4 million barrels last week.
Total products supplied over the last four-week period averaged 20.1 million b/d, down by 1.2 percent from the same period last year.
Over the past four weeks, motor gasoline product supplied averaged 8.8 million b/d, down by 1.9 percent from the same period last year.
Distillate fuel product supplied averaged 3.8 million b/d over the past four weeks, up by 3.7 percent from the same period last year.
Jet fuel product supplied was up 4.2 percent compared with the same four-week period last year.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC), who serves as the Chairman of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, led over 50 of his colleagues in a bipartisan letterto Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr on the need for major reforms to outdated ownership rules that hurt broadcasters across the country.
The lawmakers wrote,“While the FCC has made incremental adjustments over the decades, the fundamental ownership restrictions have remained largely unchanged since the 1990s, imposing undue constraints on broadcasters’ ability to innovate and invest in local content.”
“Today, any one of the largest Big Tech platforms dwarfs the entire broadcast industry – yet they are held to no similar limitations on their reach,”the lawmakers continued.“This imbalance places broadcasters at a severe disadvantage in competing for advertising dollars and audience engagement.”
“Reforming outdated ownership rules is essential to ensuring that broadcasters remain viable, competitive, and capable of fulfilling their essential role in American democracy. By modernizing these regulations, the FCC can empower broadcasters to better serve their communities, promote local journalism, and compete in the modern media marketplace,”the lawmakers concluded.
Read the full letter hereand an exclusive story in Politicohere.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC), who serves as the Chairman of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and U.S. Representative Troy Carter, Sr. (D-LA) introduced theOpen RAN Outreach Act. This bipartisan bill will strengthen U.S. wireless networks and ultimately protect our small and rural communications network providers from being reliant on Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-backed technology companies, such as Huawei.
“By ensuring our small and rural telecom providers have the support needed to deploy technologies, like Open RAN, we can promote innovation and create jobs,” said Chairman Hudson.“This legislation paves the way for greater U.S. competition with China and a more secure, resilient wireless network landscape.”
“This is a pivotal step toward strengthening our nation’s telecommunications infrastructure,” said Rep. Carter.“By providing technical assistance and outreach to small telecom providers, especially in rural areas like Louisiana, this bill opens the door to a more secure, diverse, and competitive wireless network landscape. The shift to Open RAN technology not only enhances national security by reducing reliance on foreign-made equipment but also boosts American manufacturing and fosters innovation in 5G. This bill ensures that rural communities are no longer left behind in the race for cutting-edge technology, driving down costs and empowering smaller carriers to build stronger, more resilient networks.”
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic and recent natural disasters underscored the importance of securing domestic supply chains and telecommunications networks. Huawei and other untrusted companies with the support of government money from China have been able to offer lower costs to entice small and rural providers to use their technology. Promoting a more competitive market of trusted alternative vendors to provide 5G equipment remains an important strategic component to protect U.S. networks.
A closed or proprietary network has one vendor or manufacturer for end-to-end network equipment. Open RAN technology can help diversify communications technology by being an open network infrastructure that can have multiple components from multiple manufacturers. TheOpen RAN Outreach Actrequires technical assistance and outreach to be made available on Open RAN technologies by the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). This will give small and rural providers information and support to deploy Open RAN technologies if providers would like to implement this technology.
As Angola marks 50 years of independence, Angola Oil & Gas returns in 2025 with an expanded multi-track program, a larger exhibition space, a dedicated deal room and a pre-conference technical agenda
LUANDA, Angola, April 2, 2025/ — With a $60 billion upstream investment pipeline, a 2025 licensing round and restructured block opportunities, Angola is positioning itself as the premier destination for upstream investors. Meanwhile, new downstream projects are opening up financing opportunities for technology and capital providers. Against this backdrop, the Angola Oil & Gas (AOG) conference and exhibition returns for its sixth edition from September 3-4 in Luanda, bringing together industry leaders to explore investment opportunities, forge collaborations and drive Angola’s oil and gas sector forward. Here is what to expect from this year’s edition:
Celebrating 50 Years of Angola
Taking place on the eve of Angola’s 50th anniversary of independence, AOG 2025 will celebrate five decades of growth in the country’s oil and gas sector. By reflecting on past successes, challenges and lessons learned, the event will not only highlight Angola’s profitability and potential, but also lay the groundwork for future investment and development.
Multi-Track Agenda
AOG 2025 offers a dynamic multi-track agenda designed to cater to all segments of the oil and gas value chain. Topics range from upstream exploration and production, to downstream refinery and petrochemical advancements, to regulatory and policy frameworks, and more. Keynote presentations and panel discussions will also provide insights into Angola’s latest licensing round and emerging opportunities in the oil and gas sector.
Pre-Conference Program
Leading up to the main event, AOG 2025 introduces an expanded pre-conference program, including specialized technical workshops and training sessions led by global energy experts. Designed for engineers, geologists, project managers and energy financiers, these sessions will explore cutting-edge advancements in drilling technologies, reservoir management, digital transformation and sustainable energy practices. To take part in the pre-conference program, contact sales@energycapitalpower.com
Dedicated Deal Room
A centerpiece of AOG 2025 is the exclusive Deal Room, designed as a high-impact ‘Dragon’s Den’-style platform where companies, service providers, SMEs and technology firms can showcase their solutions to investors, project developers and government representatives. This setup fosters direct engagement, driving collaboration and deal-making.
Expanded Exhibition
AOG 2025 will feature an expanded exhibition space, spotlighting the latest technologies, services and innovations shaping the oil and gas industry. Exhibitors will gain access to unparalleled brand exposure, senior decision-makers, high-value networking and targeted lead generation. The exhibition serves as a vital platform for companies looking to increase visibility and forge new business relationships.
Networking Prospects
As Angola’s largest oil and gas industry event, AOG 2025 welcomes the participation of over 2,500 attendees from 40 countries and 450 organizations. The event unites the entire oil and gas value chain, connecting upstream exploration and production to downstream infrastructure and services to finance, policy and technology. Delegates will have the unique opportunity to strengthen cross-sector collaboration and grow their brand in one of Africa’s most exciting oil and gas markets.
Secure Your Place at AOG 2025
Don’t miss the chance to engage with one of Africa’s largest oil and gas markets. Join the AOG 2025 conference today and be a part of the discussion on turning Angola’s oil and gas industry into a fuel for long-term, sustainable economic development. AOG 2025 offers a range of participating opportunities, including sponsorships, exhibition, speaking slots and delegation prospects. Visit www.AngolaOilandGas.com for more information.
AOG is the largest oil and gas event in Angola. Taking place with the full support of the Ministry of Mineral Resources, Oil and Gas; the National Oil, Gas and Biofuels Agency; the Petroleum Derivatives Regulatory Institute; national oil company Sonangol; and the African Energy Chamber; the event is a platform to sign deals and advance Angola’s oil and gas industry. To sponsor or participate as a delegate, please contact sales@energycapitalpower.com.
Too many households are paying more than they need to for power. With significant energy price increases looming, Consumer NZ calls on New Zealanders to check for cheaper options to help offset higher bills.
With rising energy costs, New Zealanders are facing a challenging winter. Price increases are already being implemented, with major retailer Mercury notifying an average price increase for its customers of 9.7% and others expected to follow suit. Powerswitch encourages consumers to take advantage of its free comparison service to ensure they are not paying more than necessary.
“Analysis of Powerswitch data shows users can save, on average, almost $500 a year by checking for cheaper options. Such a saving would effectively offset upcoming price increases for many households,” says Powerswitch manager Paul Fuge.
“We find most households coming to Powerswitch discover they are paying more than they might need to. For example, 93% of users could find savings of more than $100, 73% could be saving more than $300 and 61% of users could potentially save more than $400.
“Escalating energy prices could make a bad situation even worse, so it’s more important than ever to make sure you’re getting the most bang for your buck.”
Energy costs emerged as one of the top three financial concerns for consumers in Consumer NZs latest quarterly Sentiment Tracker online survey. Such a rating is an indication of how energy affordability is increasingly impacting lives across the country.
Similarly, in Consumer’s last annual energy survey, 20% of households said they struggle to pay their power bills, with 11% reporting living in cold homes after reducing heating to cut costs.
Household concern about increasing power bills is likely contributing to an increase in the use of Powerswitch.
The warmer summer months typically have the lowest household power bills, so summer is traditionally a quieter time of the year for Powerswitch. But not this year. In the past four months (December to March), more than 10,000 customers used Powerswitch to initiate switching to a cheaper power deal. That’s a 48% increase compared with the same period last year and the highest recorded for this four-month period since Powerswitch was set up.
Powerswitch’s comparison tool has been helping New Zealanders save money for over 25 years now. The service’s primary purpose is to help people find the most cost-effective power company and pricing plan for their household. Awareness of Powerswitch has grown substantially during this time to 62% of those surveyed in October 2024.
According to Consumer, cost is a significant reason to switch energy providers, with 45% of people making the change due to price hikes.
Changes in circumstances, such as getting a big bill (25%), and changes in household circumstances, such as moving (22%), also drive switching behaviour. Satisfaction with current providers and the perceived effort required to switch act as barriers to switching.
“Saving $500 or more is meaningful for most households right now. That could look like a large grocery shop, Christmas presents for the kids or more savings”, says Fuge.
A big chunk of the price rise noted by consumers is due to increases in what the electricity lines companies can charge. Lines charges typically make up around 40% of a household’s overall power bill.
The Commerce Commission completed a review of the revenue limits for lines companies and indicated households would see an increase of $10-$25 (excluding GST) a month to pay for higher distribution and transmission costs. Auckland lines company Vector announced an average increase of 21% to its charges.
How to compare and check your plan is cost effective
Powerswitch is a free and independent service that compares 15,000 residential power plans from 16 providers.
The website and call centre service allows people to input some simple information, including their address or details from their last bill to compare prices and click switch in just five minutes.
The tool is funded by the Electricity Authority, which is an independent Crown entity tasked with governing and regulating New Zealand’s electricity industry.
New consumer care obligations took effect on 1 April. These regulations aim to provide further protection for customers by requiring power companies to provide clearer contract terms, easier access to consumer care policies and processes to support customers in financial difficulty.
For more information and to compare power plans, visit powerswitch.org.nz.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Paul Tonko (Capital Region New York)
WASHINGTON, DC — Today, Congressman Paul D. Tonko (NY-20) sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin condemning the Trump administration’s outrageous decision to encourage polluters to apply for exemption from critical Clean Air Act standards by simply sending a template email response to EPA officials. These standards, required pursuant to Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, seek to protect human health and the environment from hazardous air pollutants including asbestos, benzene, hydrogen chloride, and mercury, which are known to cause cancer and other serious health impacts.
Tonko is demanding information about each regulated entity seeking exemption from these lifesaving standards, and promising close public and Congressional scrutiny of the exemptions granted through this unprecedented, slapdash process.
“I was appalled to learn that EPA has invited regulated entities to apply for exemptions in lieu of complying with existing standards for hazardous air pollutants,”Tonko writes.“The invitation for mass-exemptions to these standards flies in the face of Congressional intent and could have serious public health consequences, which appear not to have been given any consideration in your exemption process.”
Standards developed under Section 112 are developed under a robust public process that includes rigorous scientific analysis of the environmental and public health risks associated with air pollution, as well as consideration of new and existing cost-effective technologies that industrial sources can utilize to mitigate those risks. Under this new process, these standards could be completely undone by a simple email from a polluter to the agency responsible for protecting the public from dangerous air pollution.
“While Section 112 standards have been developed through these robust processes, EPA’s public comments indicate that exemptions will be granted based on the arbitrary whims of President Trump, which may include actions to benefit his political supporters, regardless of the potential public health and environmental harms to those that live and work near these exempted facilities,”Tonko continues.“EPA and the regulated community should expect that Congress and the American people will closely scrutinize any exemptions granted through this process.”
Tonko serves as Ranking Member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on the Environment as well as Co-Chair of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition (SEEC) and has been a leader for many years on efforts to limit air pollution and foster healthier, more sustainable communities across the nation.
The full letter can be read HERE and below:
March 28, 2025
The Honorable Lee Zeldin
Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator Zeldin:
I was appalled to learn that EPA has invited regulated entities to apply for exemptions in lieu of complying with existing standards for hazardous air pollutants required pursuant to Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. The invitation for mass-exemptions to these standards flies in the face of Congressional intent and could have serious public health consequences, which appear not to have been given any consideration in your exemption process.
As you know, Section 112 of the Clean Air Act seeks to protect human health and the environment from hazardous air pollutants. This class of emissions includes many dangerous pollutants, including asbestos, benzene, hydrogen chloride, and mercury, which are known to cause cancer and other serious health impacts.
Standards developed pursuant to Section 112 are informed by public processes, which include robust scientific and public health analysis of the risks of air pollution. These processes also consider technologies and techniques that industrial sources can adopt to mitigate those risks, often relying upon existing, cost-effective solutions already in use by regulated entities. It is astonishing that these standards, which often take years to develop, could be undone simply by a polluter sending a template email response to the agency responsible for protecting the public from dangerous air pollution.
While Section 112 standards have been developed through these robust processes, EPA’s public comments indicate that exemptions will be granted based on the arbitrary whims of President Trump, which may include actions to benefit his political supporters, regardless of the potential public health and environmental harms to those that live and work near these exempted facilities. EPA and the regulated community should expect that Congress and the American people will closely scrutinize any exemptions granted through this process.
While Section 112(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act is clear that the President must report to Congress on the issuance of any exemption, the American people have an immediate right to know which entities are pursuing exemptions and how those exemptions may affect the air they breathe.
With that in mind, I request the following for each regulated entity seeking an exemption through this process not later than Monday, April 7, 2025:
the name of each regulated entity requesting an exemption;
the specific emissions standard or limitation subject to the request;
the location of any facility or affected source subject to the request;
the length of time sought to delay compliance for each request; and
an explanation for why—
A. the technology necessary to implement the standard is not available; and
B. the exemption would be in the national security interests of the United States.
I look forward to your response to ensure appropriate transparency of EPA’s Section 112 exemption process.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Paul Tonko (Capital Region New York)
WASHINGTON, DC — Congressman Paul D. Tonko (NY-20) released the following statement lambasting the Trump administration for eliminating the entire staff at the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) as part of the massive and devastating cuts to the Department of Health and Human Services.
“The Home Energy Assistance Program provides relief for millions of American families that struggle to afford their utility bills. Over my years in Congress, I’ve worked to deliver HEAP funding to our Capital Region time and again to ensure our neighbors don’t have to choose between keeping the lights on or paying for food, medicine, and other daily essentials. This latest action from the Trump administration to eliminate the employees who deliver this aid is beyond callous. These cuts will rip away a lifeline for families across our Capital Region, New York State, and the nation. It is clear that Trump, Musk, RFK, and the GOP do not care about whether or not families can keep the power on — their focus remains bankrolling tax breaks for their billionaire friends.
“In the face of this cruelty, I’ll not stop my efforts to combat these cuts and deliver meaningful relief for American families struggling to pay their utilities, as with my bipartisan Weatherization Enhancement and Readiness Act. I encourage all my colleagues to join me in this work to preserve these proven energy affordability programs that support our communities.”
WASHINGTON, DC – Today, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) released the following statement on President Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement imposing broad-based tariffs on other countries, which will lead to higher prices for Americans on everyday essentials.
“Nevada families are already suffering from high costs on everything from housing, to groceries, to gas. Trump’s sweeping tariffs are a slap in the face to hardworking Nevadans who will now have to bear the full brunt of these additional taxes,” said Senator Rosen. “By raising prices of everyday essentials and hurting families’ budgets, these tariffs will also have a devastating effect on Nevada’s tourism economy. I’ll do everything in my power to reverse these blanket tariffs and lower costs for Nevadans.”
ICYMI: Below is coverage of Senator Rosen speaking out against tariff hikes:
ABC: Rosen speaks out against Trump’s price-spiking tariffs, policies
Anchor: “The Senate is expected to vote on Democratic-backed legislation to curtail Trump’s authority to impose tariffs on Canada. Do you think you’ll have the Republican support to pass the measure?”
Senator Rosen: “Well, some Republicans are indicating their support, but let’s be clear—this is a tariff, a blanket tariff on all Americans. This is a national sales tax – Trump’s tariffs. So he’s doing this just so he can justify a national sales tax. That’s wrong. Tariffs should be targeted. They should be strategic. They are a tool we can use, but putting a national sales tax on everyone that’s going to have our heating and cooling costs go up, having our food prices to go up, our housing, everything in between. And I can tell you, I live in Las Vegas. We depend on tourism. Canadian tourism [is] down 70% over last year because of what’s happening with our largest trading partner on the Trump tariffs.”
KLAS Las Vegas: Nevada Sen. Rosen calls for special counsel investigation into Signal chat leak
Senator Rosen: “What’s going to happen [with tariffs] is food prices go up. Like I said, housing goes up. Cars go up. Gas goes up. The cost of everything goes up. And when that happens, tourism goes down. So Nevada is going to be squeezed both ways. Everybody who lives here – prices going up, and people aren’t going to come because […] they’re going to be hitting their other states. So we’re going to lose it in our economy.”
KSNV Las Vegas: Rosen speaks out against Trump’s price-spiking tariffs, policies
Anchor: “Opponents like Senator Jacky Rosen say the tariffs will make everything more expensive for American households and eventually dig into the disposable income that people need to visit Las Vegas.”
Senator Rosen: “So when travel goes down, that means that there’s less money in our economy. These people don’t get those extra shifts. It means then they don’t work at the casino, and they don’t get their shift. They don’t go home and buy a pizza or go out to dinner. So it has a trickle down effect everywhere. So Nevadans are going to get squeezed by Trump’s reckless tariffs. It’s a national sales tax.”
KTVN Reno: Rosen speaks out against Trump’s price-spiking tariffs, policies
Anchor: “We were able to speak with Senator Jacky Rosen today, and she says when you put tariffs across the board, it’s a national sales tax, so whatever you consume, you are paying for. Senator Rosen also told us that she disagrees with these tariffs.”
Senator Rosen: “By the way, in Nevada, when everything goes up, what goes down? Tourism goes down. So we’re going to get hit with that double whammy because I know Canadian tourism is a 70 percent decrease in tourism from Canada over last year, and so we’re going to get squeezed in Nevada, both sides, and Trump said he doesn’t care.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Frank Pallone (6th District of New Jersey)
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06) today led all House Democrats from New Jersey in sending a letter to U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., urging him to reverse the Trump Administration’s decision to rescind $11.4 billion in federal public health funding—including $350 million allocated to New Jersey. Pallone’s letter was signed by NJ Representatives Menendez, Watson Coleman, Sherrill, Conaway, Pou, McIver, Gottheimer, and Norcross.
The lawmakers warned that the cuts would severely weaken New Jersey’s public health infrastructure, including efforts to prevent disease outbreaks, expand access to addiction and mental health treatment, and support a stable health care workforce. The funding, originally authorized during the COVID-19 pandemic, has become a critical lifeline for state and local health departments.
“If these cuts are allowed to proceed, the consequences will be severe and immediate. Health programs will be dismantled, services will be terminated midstream, and the burden of these cuts will fall disproportionately on low-income communities, seniors, and individuals struggling with mental health and substance use disorders. In addition, closing regional HHS offices and laying off thousands of public health professionals will weaken the federal government’s ability to respond to future health crises,” the delegation wrote.
New Jersey is already seeing the consequences of eroded public health protections. On March 28, the state Department of Health issued a warning that a person infected with measles may have exposed others at a Mercer County emergency room—one of hundreds of new cases reported nationwide this year. Measles, once declared eliminated in the U.S., is now back, fueled by anti-vaccine misinformation and public distrust sown by Donald Trump and Secretary Kennedy himself.
Pallone is the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over federal public health programs.
A full copy of Pallone’s letter is availablehereand below:
We write to express our deep concern and strong opposition to the recent decision to revoke $11.4 billion in federal funding for health programs across the United States, including $350 million in critical public health funding for New Jersey.[1]These cuts will have severe consequences for addiction treatment, mental health services, and infectious disease prevention in our state. We urge the Administration to reverse this decision and restore the funding to ensure the health and well-being of our communities.
These federal funds have been instrumental in strengthening our public health infrastructure, which was critically under-resourced before the COVID-19 pandemic.[2]Contrary to the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) assertion that these funds were exclusively for pandemic-related responses, they are used for a wide range of essential health programs in New Jersey, including:
Infectious Disease Monitoring and Prevention: These funds have enabled state and local health departments to track and respond to outbreaks of flu, RSV, measles, tuberculosis, and bird flu. The sudden elimination of this funding will severely weaken our ability to monitor and contain infectious diseases, placing vulnerable populations at significant risk.
Mental Health and Addiction Treatment: At a time when opioid overdoses remain a leading cause of preventable death, New Jersey has used these funds to expand access to counseling, treatment, and harm reduction services. These efforts have contributed to a decrease in overdose deaths from 3,171 in 2022 to 2,816 in 2023[3]. Cutting these funds threatens to reverse this progress and exacerbate the opioid crisis.
Public Health Workforce and Infrastructure: The loss of $350 million in funding will likely lead to job losses within the New Jersey Department of Health, Department of Human Services, local health departments, and contracted health service providers. These cuts will not only impact employment but will also reduce the capacity of health professionals to respond to ongoing and emerging health threats.
These cuts are occurring alongside anticipated reductions in Medicaid funding and medical research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), further compounding the strain on New Jersey’s health care system. Medicaid provides critical health care access to low-income families, seniors, and individuals with disabilities.[4]Any reduction in funding will place an additional financial burden on hospitals and health care providers, forcing them to cut services or shift costs to state and local governments.
The Department of Health and Human Services has justified these cuts by stating that ”the COVID-19 pandemic is over.”[5]However, this funding has long since evolved and has been approved beyond pandemic response and become a cornerstone of public health programs that protect the most vulnerable and ensure public safety. The reality is that infectious disease outbreaks, mental health crises, and addiction epidemics are ongoing public health emergencies that require sustained investment.
If these cuts are allowed to proceed, the consequences will be severe and immediate. Health programs will be dismantled, services will be terminated midstream, and the burden of these cuts will fall disproportionately on low-income communities, seniors, and individuals struggling with mental health and substance use disorders. In addition, closing regional HHS offices and laying off thousands of public health professionals will weaken the federal government’s ability to respond to future health crises.[6]
We strongly urge you to reconsider this decision and reinstate this funding in full. Public health should not be a partisan issue—investments in health infrastructure save lives, reduce long-term health care costs, and ensure that states have the resources necessary to address ongoing and emerging health threats. New Jersey, like many other states, cannot afford to bear the consequences of these ill-advised cuts.
We hope you will recognize the critical need for this funding and take immediate action to reverse this decision. We stand ready to work together to ensure that all Americans have access to the health care services they need and deserve.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Frank Pallone (6th District of New Jersey)
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) today slammed the Trump Administration’s decision to rip away $11 billion in public health funding — including $350 million already promised to New Jersey — calling it a “political stunt” that will endanger lives and destabilize the state’s health system.
“Trump is stealing $350 million in approved funding from New Jersey without warning at the height of a measles outbreak and devasting fentanyl overdoses,” Pallone said. “This isn’t just a political stunt. It’s lawless. These funds were already budgeted and, in many cases, spent by local health departments to keep vaccination clinics running, respond to outbreaks, and support addiction and mental health services. Stripping that money now means doctors go unpaid and critical care stops in its tracks. It’s a dangerous preview of what public health looks like under another Trump term — gutted on a whim, with no regard for the people who will suffer.”
The funding was originally authorized during the COVID-19 pandemic, but states like New Jersey had received federal approval to use the funds for other urgent public health needs. The Trump Administration’s abrupt move to claw the funding back blindsided state officials and puts essential health services at risk just as New Jersey confronts new disease threats and ongoing overdose spikes.
Pallone, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he’s working closely with Governor Phil Murphy and congressional leaders to pursue all available options to block the clawback and restore the funds.
“This fight is not over,” Pallone said. “We’re going to do everything we can to stop Trump from sabotaging New Jersey’s public health system.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Sam Graves (6th District of Missouri)
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Sam Graves (MO-06) and Rep. Tracey Mann (KS-01) have introduced legislation to help provide stable energy rates and a reliable energy grid to states in the Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA), including Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.
“Missouri’s rural electric cooperatives and municipal utilities have worked with the Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) to provide affordable and reliable electricity to Missouri families for over 80 years,” said Rep. Graves. “But the way SWPA is set up, droughts and other disruptions can cause rate spikes that are passed on to co-ops and municipalities that have no choice but to increase electric rates on Missouri families. This common sense legislation creates a revolving fund to fix that problem—giving SWPA the stable funding necessary to avoid costly rate spikes, and lower customer rates.”
“For more than eight decades, the Southwestern Power Administration has allowed rural electric cooperatives and municipal utilities to provide reliable, affordable energy to Kansans,” said Rep. Mann. “Under the current funding structure, SWPA has not had the flexibility to make necessary investments into their infrastructure. As a result, when natural disasters and bad weather limit the Administration’s ability to produce power, replacement power has to be purchased, and that cost is absorbed by everyday Kansans. Establishing a revolving fund for SWPA ensures that they can continue to invest in their infrastructure while providing safe, reliable, and affordable energy to Kansas families and rural communities like those in the Big First.”
The SWPA, part of the Department of Energy, markets power produced by federal hydropower projects, including Clarence Cannon Dam and Harry S. Truman Dam, to electric cooperatives and municipal utilities in Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act would give the SWPA the authority to operate on a self-funding, revolving Treasury fund to help provide long-term stability to SWPA. This would provide the certainty and stable funding SWPA needs to avoid drastic and unnecessary spikes in power rates charged to electric cooperatives and municipal utilities in an extreme or multi-year regional drought.
The Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act is supported by the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives, Missouri Public Utilities Association, Southwestern Power Resources Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and American Public Power Association.
“Missouri’s rural electric cooperatives thank Congressman Graves for leading this effort to provide more reliable and affordable electricity for Missouri families. When no one else would, Missouri’s electric cooperatives answered the call to provide power to every farm and every home in every corner of this state. Now, this bill ensures we can keep providing affordable, reliable electric service to Missouri families for decades to come.” – Caleb Jones, CEO/Executive Vice President of the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives
“MPUA commends Congressman Graves for championing this forward-thinking legislation, which preserves Missouri’s legacy of affordable, renewable energy, while strengthening its future. The Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act is a foundational step in modernizing federal hydropower and ensuring its long-term reliability. This bill will help secure cost-based power for generations to come. We look forward to collaborating with Congressman Graves to advance this important legislation. – Steven Stodden, President & CEO, Missouri Public Utilities Association
“Federal hydropower is a vital, reliable renewable energy source for the state of Missouri and throughout the region. We are grateful for Congressman Graves’ support for this legislation that will help cut unnecessary red tape and keep energy prices affordable for the members we serve.” – Brian Ackermann, SPRA Board President and Vice President of Portfolio Management at Associated Electric Cooperative
“Federal hydropower is a reliably renewable generation resource. This legislation recognizes the value of protecting that resource throughout the six-state region, making sure that these important assets are maintained. This legislation would go a long way toward ensuring grid reliability and affordably throughout the region for millions of homes, farms and small businesses. I thank Congressman Graves for introducing this important bill that represents good business sense.” – Nicki Fuller, Executive Director, Southwestern Power Resources Association
“NRECA supports the Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act. The self-financed revolving loan fund authorized by this bill would allow the Southwestern Power Administration to better manage infrastructure needs while being more responsive to market conditions and electric demands created by extreme weather events.” – National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
“The American Public Power Association applauds the introduction of the Southwestern Power Fund Establishment Act. Since 1943, not-for-profit public power utilities and rural electric cooperatives have successfully partnered with the Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) to bring reliable hydropower produced at Army Corps dams to millions of customers in Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. While SWPA customers pay all costs of generating and transmitting the electricity in their power rates, a complicated funding process has increasingly failed to provide the financial certainty necessary to steady power rates to customers during drought and extreme weather events. The Southwestern Power Fund Establishment Act would streamline this process in a manner that would help avoid rate spikes and economic hardship for communities served by public power utilities and rural electric cooperatives while continuing to ensure that SWPA customers pay all costs associated with generating and transmitting hydropower produced at Corps dams. It is a win-win for the federal government and communities served by not-for-profit electric utilities.” – American Public Power Association
You can find the full text of the legislationhere.
Legislation will empower state and local law enforcement to protect Americans from drone threats
WASHINGTON – Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) today introduced the Stopping Harmful Incidents to Enforce Lawful Drone Use (SHIELD-U) Act and the Drone Integration and Zoning Act to equip state and local law enforcement with the authority needed to protect their citizens and communities from drone threats.
“State and local law enforcement agencies cannot ensure the safety of their communities when the federal government restricts their ability to respond to active drone threats,” said Sen. Lee. “Rather than waiting on the federal government, which often lacks the resources and capital to respond to threats effectively, this bill grants local authorities the latitude to quickly identify and mitigate threats.”
BACKGROUND
These bills equip state and local law enforcement with the authority needed to protect their citizens, communities, and airports from drone threats.
The current regulatory environment stifles state and local governments’ ability to mitigate drone threats. The FAA currently regulates “navigable airspace” which is defined as “above the minimum altitudes of flight” which is typically 500 ft. However, the FAA has taken some liberties in recent years and stated that minimum altitudes of flight for drones is above a blade of grass.
Congress has exclusively granted limited authority to detect and takedown a drone only to the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and Department of Energy. According to a Blue Ribbon Task Force Report commissioned by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) and Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA) one challenge in meeting current drone threats is the federal government’s lack of human resources or capital to invest in and operate counter drone technology at airports. When considered beyond an airport environment, the challenge becomes even greater, because federal law does not permit state or local law enforcement to mitigate a drone threat.
The SHIELD-U and Drone Integration and Zoning Acts provide essential tools for state and local law enforcement to address the growing drone threats that federal regulations have failed to adequately manage. By empowering local authorities, these bills ensure that communities and airports have the resources needed to safeguard their citizens and infrastructure from potential harm. With the increasing prevalence of drone-related incidents, it is vital to enable local enforcement to act swiftly and effectively in protecting public safety.
You can read the text of the SHIELD-U Act HERE.
You can read the text of the Drone Integration and Zoning Act HERE.
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
Murray, Heinrich, and colleagues: “Dissolving contracts, cancelling grants and loans, and reneging on loan guarantees without any intention to execute the laws is not only illegal, but is harmful to the public and energy consumers. Your indiscriminate cancellations of spending will increase energy prices, make our grid less secure, and stop energy innovation”
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Vice Chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, and U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, led 25 Democratic senators in sending a letter to U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Christopher Wright demanding that he uphold his commitment to honor existing legal agreements and deliver funds passed into law by Congress.
The letter comes on the heels of recent reports that the Department of Energy is creating a “hit list” of awards, projects, and contracts—many of which have already began construction—it is considering canceling, which would break existing agreements and lead to job losses and reductions in the growth of new energy resources.
The senators detailed their serious concerns about the reports, telling Secretary Wright: “You assured us during your confirmation hearing that you believe that legal agreements should be honored (including managing the financial commitments you have inherited) and that you will follow the law.”
The senators added: “Indiscriminately canceling program funding and executed contracts, and refusing to execute on the funding directives Congress enacted, neither honors existing agreements nor is consistent with the spending laws that have appropriated funding for specific purposes.”
“Dissolving contracts, cancelling grants and loans, and reneging on loan guarantees without any intention to execute the laws is not only illegal, but is harmful to the public and energy consumers. Your indiscriminate cancellations of spending will increase energy prices, make our grid less secure, and stop energy innovation,” the senators continued. “If the Department has a policy disagreement and does not want to spend money on programs Congress has funded, the lawful response is to ask Congress to rescind that funding. The decision ultimately rests with Congress, not with the President, the Department of Energy, or the Department of Government Efficiency.”
The senators concluded the letter by demanding a detailed list and briefing that identifies which grants, loans, or loan guarantees Secretary Wright believes should be rescinded and why he thinks they should be rescinded.
The full text of the letter can be found HERE and below.
Dear Mr. Secretary:
We are deeply troubled by recent news reports that the Department of Energy (Department) is creating a “hit list of clean energy projects” to “wipe out” for being inconsistent with the President’s priorities. This list reportedly includes hydrogen hubs and carbon capture, critical mineral, and battery storage projects that have already received grant and loan funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and annual appropriations bills.
You assured us during your confirmation hearing that you believe that legal agreements should be honored (including managing the financial commitments you have inherited) and that you will follow the law. Indiscriminately canceling program funding and executed contracts, and refusing to execute on the funding directives Congress enacted, neither honors existing agreements nor is consistent with the spending laws that have appropriated funding for specific purposes.
Our Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse and exclusive power to appropriate funds. Once a law is properly enacted, the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The President cannot substitute his policy preferences for requirements in law, and that includes refusing to spend funds Congress requires the President to spend.
In this instance, where Congress has authorized and appropriated funds for programs that support clean energy projects, the Department must faithfully execute the law and expend the funds for the purposes provided. For example, programs authorized that have received federal appropriations under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law have requirements on timing of expended funds, purposes, and contractual expectations. An internal Office of Management and Budget guidance document cannot hide the Department’s obligation to follow the enacted law.
Dissolving contracts, cancelling grants and loans, and reneging on loan guarantees without any intention to execute the laws is not only illegal, but is harmful to the public and energy consumers. Your indiscriminate cancellations of spending will increase energy prices, make our grid less secure, and stop energy innovation. If the Department has a policy disagreement and does not want to spend money on programs Congress has funded, the lawful response is to ask Congress to rescind that funding. The decision ultimately rests with Congress, not with the President, the Department of Energy, or the Department of Government Efficiency. Please provide us a detailed list and briefing that identifies which grants, loans, or loan guarantees you believe should be rescinded and why you think they should be rescinded.
Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
WASHINGTON – Yesterday, U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) introduced a bill to establish a nonprofit foundation that would support the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) by bolstering public-private collaboration on U.S. technological innovation and competitiveness. This bill was initially introduced in the 118th Congress. Representatives Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) and Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) introduced a companion bill in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The Expanding Partnerships for Innovation and Competitiveness (EPIC) Act would establish a foundation to help NIST achieve its goal of promoting U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness in science and technology. Congress has established similar foundations to support the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Department of Energy, and other federal agencies. In Delaware, NIST supports the National Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals (NIIMBL), a public-private partnership on the University of Delaware’s campus focused on advancing biopharmaceutical production and developing Delaware’s workforce for the future.
“America’s economic strength depends on technological leadership, and NIST has long been an engine of innovation for our country,” said Senator Coons. “The EPIC Act reflects our ongoing commitment to creating a nonprofit foundation that will mobilize resources to support U.S. leadership on emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, biotech, and quantum computing. With strong bipartisan support across both chambers, this legislation represents a critical investment in America’s technological future.”
“Maintaining and encouraging research and development in the U.S. is critical to winning the technological race against China and other adversaries,” said Senator Young. “Our bipartisan legislation will support these efforts by establishing an independent foundation to identify and foster innovative public-private partnerships across the country and strengthen the American economy.”
“Whether it’s AI or quantum computing, the United States is pushing the boundaries of technological innovation on all fronts,” said Senator Hickenlooper. “There are no second chances with technologies this powerful; NIST needs every tool at its disposal to ensure responsible R&D from the start.”
“Our nation’s technological innovation is what keeps us globally competitive,” saidSenator Fischer. “To stay ahead of our rapidly advancing adversaries, we must invest in emerging technologies and the metrics that underpin them. The EPIC Act is an effective, bipartisan way to help us generate more resources to do so without additional taxpayer costs.”
“Now more than ever, our federal science agencies need every tool to drive U.S. technology leadership,” said Representative Stevens. “The reintroduction of the EPIC Act ensures that NIST—a vital agency in emerging technology, standards, and manufacturing—has the resources to secure American leadership in the mid-21st century. By establishing the Foundation for Standards and Metrology, this bill will accelerate technology commercialization, strengthen international collaborations, and support NIST’s world-class workforce. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this bipartisan, bicameral bill and unleash American innovation.”
“It is vital that America maintains its position as the world leader in science and technology,” said Representative Obernolte. “The creation of the Foundation for Standards and Metrology will assist in ensuring industry, non-profits, and academia receive the resources that they need to establish cutting-edge standards that enhances the economic security and prosperity of the U.S., which is why I’m proud to be a Republican co-lead on this critical legislation.”
Specifically, the EPIC Act would establish a nonprofit Foundation for Standards and Metrology, enabling NIST to:
Mobilize private and philanthropic funding to support critical scientific and technical initiatives.
Collaborate more closely with the private sector, nonprofit organizations, and institutions of higher education.
Train the emerging technology workforce of the future and retain top talent at the institute.
The EPIC Act is endorsed by four former directors of NIST, as well as SEMI Americas, the Semiconductor Industry Association, NIST Coalition, SPIE, SeedAI, Institute for Progress, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, Center for AI Policy, Telecommunications Industry Association, Institute for AI Policy and Strategy, Carnegie Mellon University, University of Colorado Boulder, Americans for Responsible Innovation, Chainguard, CJW Quantum Consulting, American Physical Society, ACT | The App Association, CivAI, SandboxAQ, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Google, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, SC Quantum, Software Information Industry Association, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 5 Lakes Institute, and the APA Services, Inc.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham today announced Rahul Varma will serve as the Acting Director of the Division of Market Oversight. “Rahul has ably served the CFTC for more than a decade and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to this new role,” Pham said. “I thank Rahul for his continued leadership in DMO.” Varma joined the CFTC in 2013 as an Associate Director for Market Surveillance in DMO, with responsibility for energy, metals, agricultural, and softs markets. In 2017, he helped start the Market Intelligence Branch in DMO and served as its Acting Deputy Director. In 2024, he took on the role of Deputy Director for the combined Market Intelligence and Product Review branches. Prior to joining CFTC, Varma held risk management and consulting roles in the private sector. He also worked at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in the Office of Market Oversight and Investigations (predecessor of Office of Enforcement). Varma has a BTech from IIT Delhi, a master’s degree from Case Western Reserve University, and an MBA from George Washington University.
Lorna Awo Renner (left) is seen discussing paediatric care as part of the imPACT Review team at work at Primary Health Care Centre Primerio Maio.
“The rising numbers of cancer cases in Mozambique is of great concern,” said Mozambique’s Minister of Health, Armino Tiago, speaking of his decision to invite the IAEA, World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer, to carry out an imPACT review in the country in 2024. “The government is taking action to expand access to diagnosis and treatment,” he added.
Mozambique, in common with many low- income countries (LICs) around the world, is facing a growing cancer challenge. Cancer is now the second leading cause of death globally, and many health systems in LICs are least prepared to manage this burden.
How do ImPACT Reviews Help Countries with Cancer Control?
Each year, the IAEA, together with its partners the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), conducts around ten ImPACT Reviews, designed to support countries in their efforts to improve comprehensive cancer control.
ImPACT Reviews assess a country’s cancer control capacities and needs in order to prioritize interventions and help governments effectively respond to their country’s cancer burden. This response could involve creating a national cancer control plan, producing feasibility documents – often called ‘bankable documents’- that justify the funding of cancer care facilities to donors, or deciding to join WHO cancer initiatives, such as those on cervical, breast and childhood cancer.
“Controlling cancer in Mozambique is a significant challenge, compounded by limitations in infrastructure, human resources, and access to adequate diagnostics and treatments,” said Tiago, Mozambique’s Minister of Health.
“The imPACT Review represents a valuable opportunity to identify critical gaps and outline concrete strategies to strengthen our capacity to address cancer. We are confident that this collaboration will provide essential guidance to improve cancer care in our country,” the Minister of Health added.
What Goes On Behind the Scenes of an ImPACT Review?
Experts participating in the Mozambique mission came from countries in Africa, Europe, North and South America, bringing expertise from fields ranging from palliative care, pathology and public health to oncology and epidemiology. Many were also native speakers of Portuguese, which is widely spoken in Mozambique.
As in other imPACT Reviews, the Mozambique mission experts were nominated by the IAEA, IARC and WHO. IARC recommended experts in cancer registry, an information system that collects, manages and analyses data on people diagnosed with cancer. The IAEA nominated experts in radiation medicine, diagnostic imaging and radiation safety and the WHO nominated experts on all other aspects of cancer control.
The experts met online several times in the run-up to the mission to discuss their findings.
Three months before setting foot in Mozambique, the imPACT Review international experts started meeting online to assess the needs of the country. The experts researched the latest available evidence on public health policies and cancer control, provided by IARC, WHO and IAEA, including experts from the IAEA human health programme. They also gathered reports and data from UN staff, professionals from Mozambique’s Ministry of Health and other national cancer stakeholders to gain a good understanding of the country’s cancer-related infrastructure and capacity. Professionals and stakeholders in cancer control in Mozambique completed questionnaires to help the imPACT Review experts identify needs, challenges and opportunities. A preliminary report was produced ahead of the in-country mission to determine its scope.
Arsen Juric, Mozambique imPACT Review Coordinator said: “These preparatory meetings are part of a strategic process. They help the experts make evidence-based recommendations that aim to strengthen and embed cancer control in Mozambique’s national health system, better serving patient needs across the country.”
The imPACT review is designed to give a broad overview of cancer care in the host country, determining the gaps and needs which are most urgent, to inform decision makers when formulating health policy regarding cancer.
What is Cancer Control?
Prevention includes factors such as diet, smoking cessation and vaccinations against infectious disease. It is estimated it is currently possible to prevent 40 per cent of all cancers.
Detection includes screening and early diagnosis. Early detection means many cancers have a high potential for cure.
Treatment aims to cure disease, prolong life, and improve the quality of remaining life
Palliative care involves addressing the needs of patients and their families from the time of cancer diagnosis to improve quality of life and the ability to cope effectively.
On the Ground in Mozambique
At the beginning of May, the imPACT Review team experts arrived in Maputo, the capital of Mozambique, to visit hospitals and public health centres. They met cancer care experts, policy and decision makers and technical staff from Mozambique’s Ministry of Health, and the staff of the WHO country office, as well as representatives of civil society organizations
In addition to experts from IARC and WHO, the mission also included an expert from MD Anderson Cancer Center, an IAEA nuclear safety expert, an IAEA cancer control expert and the IAEA’s National Liaison Officer for Mozambique.
ImPACT reviews look at every aspect of cancer control, including how data on cancer is managed, and financing, as well as prevention, early detection, diagnosis, treatment and palliative care. During the review, the experts visited hospitals, primary health care facilities, and met with civil society, patient and cancer advocacy groups in Mozambique to obtain as much data as possible on the cancer control situation in the country.
The imPACT Review team visited Primeiro Maio to find out more about the country’s national cervical cancer screening programme
Prioritizing Women and Children’s Cancers
While imPACT Reviews look at all aspects of cancer control, the Mozambique review gave the team to focus on WHO cancer initiatives, such as those on cervical, breast and childhood cancer.
Severin von Xylander from Mozambique’s WHO Country Office said the WHO was also working with the National Cancer Control Programme in Mozambique to prioritize the prevention and early detection of cancers affecting women and children, in line with global cancer control initiatives.
At the Primeiro Maio healthcare centre, the imPACT Review team learned more about the scope of services in primary care, such as prevention and early detection, particularly in terms of cancers that affect women and children.
Speaking of positive outcomes, Celina Mate, of the Mozambique Ministry of Health, said that interactions with the imPACT review team during the in-country mission had helped realize that their cervical cancer screening coverage was more comprehensive than they had previously thought.
“In addition to this aspect, we were able to look at our needs and the need to advocate for financial support to increase screening capacity using a high-standard test such as the HPV DNA test,” said Mate.
Paintings by children at Maputo Central Hospital.
Lorna Awo Renner, an international expert in paediatric oncology from Ghana taking part in the imPACT Review, used her time in Mozambique to observe and make recommendations on how the country is addressing childhood cancer.
“Over 80 per cent of childhood cancers are curable, but at a global level we are at about 30 per cent, you take the low- and middle- income countries, they have even lower rates,” she says.
The WHO’s Global Initiative for Childhood Cancers, aims to improve long term cure outcomes for childhood cancer globally to over 60 per cent by 2030. Renner said she hoped Mozambique would also join the initiative.
At the end of the mission, a report was produced for the Mozambican government, which will support the next national cancer plan to address the growing cancer situation in the country.
The IAEA’s Support to Mozambique
The imPACT Review team are shown imaging equipment by Narciso Sitoe,a radiation oncologist trained under the IAEA technical cooperation programme.
The IAEA has supported Mozambique in providing cancer care at Maputo Central Hospital for over a decade. A Brazilian team of consultants carried out the training and implementation of radiotherapy at Maputo Central Hospital with the support of the IAEA’s technical cooperation programme. Since 2009,14 specialists at Maputo Central Hospital have been trained in radiation oncology and medical physics through the IAEA’s technical cooperation programme, with the aim of strengthening radiotherapy services.
Rays of Hope: Cancer Care for All
While around half of all cancer patients can benefit from some form of radiotherapy, countries such as Mozambique have only limited access to this technology. As just one radiotherapy unit in the capital city of Maputo is available for a population of over 30 million people, many cancer patients in Mozambique are unable to access this life-saving treatment.
Establishing new radiotherapy facilities is a complex project, requiring new infrastructure and equipment (or better use of existing infrastructure and equipment) as well as training to ensure professionals are available to work in the new facilities, and that radiation safety protocols are followed.
In 2023 Mozambique joined the IAEA’s Rays of Hope initiative, which aims to help bridge the gap in cancer care around the world by expanding access to radiotherapy.
“Through Rays of Hope the IAEA will continue to support the expansion of radiation medicine capacities in Mozambique, in diagnosis as well as treatment, including through support for the development and training of the national cancer care workforce,” said Hua Liu, IAEA Deputy Director General and Head of the Department of Technical Cooperation.
ImPACT Reviews are a vital step in helping countries to improve national radiotherapy services, along with cancer control in general, as they allow international teams of cancer control experts to support national counterparts with cancer control planning and investments.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
WASHINGTON – During opening remarks in a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee nomination hearing to consider James Danly for the U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE), and Katharine MacGregor for the U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Department of Interior (DOI), U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the Committee, sought commitments from the nominees to follow the law as enacted by Congress.
VIDEO: Heinrich Delivers Opening Remarks in Hearing to Consider James Danley for Deputy Energy Secretary and Katharine MacGregor for Deputy Interior Secretary, April 2, 2025.
Heinrich began his remarks by sounding off on reports that Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) is considering to illegally rescind funding passed into law and cancel or renegotiate existing funding contracts with companies, some of which fund projects already under construction.
Heinrich then stressed to the nominees the costly consequences to American families of terminating investments passed into law by Congress,
“It is estimated that more than 50,000 energy jobs have already been lost under Trump’s watch. The Administration’s actions are also constricting the fastest-growing and most affordable power sources, just as demand from manufacturing and data center growth is surging, meaning that energy costs will soar. Electricity prices are already on track to be the highest they have been since the 1990s.”
Heinrich continued by highlighting the harm Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s DOGE has inflicted on families, cost of living, and our public lands.
Heinrich concluded by urging the nominees to answer how they will return their departments to a path of public service, securing American leadership and competitiveness, and responsible stewardship of our natural resources.
Senator Heinrich’s full remarks as prepared for delivery are below.
Thank you, Chairman Lee. And welcome Ms. MacGregor and Mr. Danly. Before we get to Commitee business, I do want to address the troubling reports that DOE is considering cancelling or renegotiating existing funding contracts with companies, some of which are under construction.
As I wrote to Secretary Wright in a letter, and I will remind Mr. Danly and Ms. MacGregor today, the decision to rescind these awards rests with Congress, not with the President or Elon Musk.
However, even before these so-called “kill lists” were leaked, we already started seeing the economic impact of the Administration’s reckless actions. It is estimated that more than 50,000 energy jobs have already been lost under Trump’s watch.
The Administration’s actions are also constricting the fastest-growing and most affordable power sources, just as demand from manufacturing and data center growth is surging, meaning that energy prices will soar. Electricity prices are already on track to be the highest they have been since the 1990s. Terminating projects in the name of ‘energy dominance’ is not only ludicrous, it will lead to higher energy costs for households.
All of this is only the newest phase in this administration’s campaign of chaos at federal agencies and actions that are raising energy costs.
Both the Interior and Energy Departments have been subject to whiplash in just the last two months–
–from illegally firing thousand of employees only to be required to rehire them–to announcements that agency buildings would be closed or sold, or maybe not.
— to freezing grant funds and canceling contracts in contravention of federal law, only to see some unfrozen…while others still remain inexplicably frozen
This has got to be the least efficient way to run a government.
For the Department of the Interior, all of this mismanagement has real on-the-ground impacts for people and communities.
We’ve seen closed visitors centers and overflowing trash cans at parks.
Field offices have shorter hours, and it’s harder for people to reach front line staff when they have questions.
Small businesses are worried about if their permits will be processed.
Scientists are struggling to cover expenses because the federal government has backed out of contracts.
Our public lands are the birthright of every American, but if something doesn’t change, and soon, at the agencies that care for them on our behalf, we will lose that birthright.
I have a number of questions today for these two nominees and their plans for the Energy and Interior Departments.
Both departments were created by statute. They were not created at the whim of any President. They do not exist at the President’s pleasure. The laws they execute, the programs they administer, the funds they spend, were enacted, created, and appropriated by law, by Congress.
I will be looking for assurances from both nominees that they are committed to following the law, as enacted by Congress, rather than doing the bidding of Elon Musk.
I hope to hear how they will get these departments returned back to a path of public service, and back on track to securing American leadership and competitiveness, and responsible stewardship of our natural resources.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
WASHINTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Vice Chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, led 25 Democratic senators in sending a letter to U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Christopher Wright demanding that he uphold his commitment to honor existing legal agreements and deliver funds passed into law by Congress.
The letter comes on the heels of recent reports that the Department of Energy is creating a “hit list” of awards, projects, and contracts—many of which have already began construction—it is considering canceling, which would break existing agreements and lead to job losses and reductions in the growth of new energy resources.
The senators detailed their serious concerns about the reports, telling Secretary Wright: “You assured us during your confirmation hearing that you believe that legal agreements should be honored (including managing the financial commitments you have inherited) and that you will follow the law.”
The senators added: “Indiscriminately canceling program funding and executed contracts, and refusing to execute on the funding directives Congress enacted, neither honors existing agreements nor is consistent with the spending laws that have appropriated funding for specific purposes.”
“Dissolving contracts, cancelling grants and loans, and reneging on loan guarantees without any intention to execute the laws is not only illegal, but is harmful to the public and energy consumers. Your indiscriminate cancellations of spending will increase energy prices, make our grid less secure, and stop energy innovation,” the senators continued. “If the Department has a policy disagreement and does not want to spend money on programs Congress has funded, the lawful response is to ask Congress to rescind that funding. The decision ultimately rests with Congress, not with the President, the Department of Energy, or the Department of Government Efficiency.”
The senators concluded the letter by demanding a detailed list and briefing that identifies which grants, loans, or loan guarantees Secretary Wright believes should be rescinded and why he thinks they should be rescinded.
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
Dear Mr. Secretary:
We are deeply troubled by recent news reports that the Department of Energy (Department) is creating a “hit list of clean energy projects” to “wipe out” for being inconsistent with the President’s priorities. This list reportedly includes hydrogen hubs and carbon capture, critical mineral, and battery storage projects that have already received grant and loan funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and annual appropriations bills.
You assured us during your confirmation hearing that you believe that legal agreements should be honored (including managing the financial commitments you have inherited) and that you will follow the law. Indiscriminately canceling program funding and executed contracts, and refusing to execute on the funding directives Congress enacted, neither honors existing agreements nor is consistent with the spending laws that have appropriated funding for specific purposes.
Our Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse and exclusive power to appropriate funds. Once a law is properly enacted, the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The President cannot substitute his policy preferences for requirements in law, and that includes refusing to spend funds Congress requires the President to spend.
In this instance, where Congress has authorized and appropriated funds for programs that support clean energy projects, the Department must faithfully execute the law and expend the funds for the purposes provided. For example, programs authorized that have received federal appropriations under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law have requirements on timing of expended funds, purposes, and contractual expectations. An internal Office of Management and Budget guidance document cannot hide the Department’s obligation to follow the enacted law.
Dissolving contracts, cancelling grants and loans, and reneging on loan guarantees without any intention to execute the laws is not only illegal, but is harmful to the public and energy consumers. Your indiscriminate cancellations of spending will increase energy prices, make our grid less secure, and stop energy innovation. If the Department has a policy disagreement and does not want to spend money on programs Congress has funded, the lawful response is to ask Congress to rescind that funding. The decision ultimately rests with Congress, not with the President, the Department of Energy, or the Department of Government Efficiency. Please provide us a detailed list and briefing that identifies which grants, loans, or loan guarantees you believe should be rescinded and why you think they should be rescinded.
Thank you, Alan, and thank you to the Griswold and Julis-Rabinowitz Centers for the opportunity to speak to you today.1 As someone who has worked in both the public sector and academia, I applaud the common purpose of both centers in connecting researchers, policymakers, and the private sector to pursue policy ideas that serve the public good.
To that end, I can think of few individuals who have done more—as a teacher, researcher, government official, and public figure—than Alan Blinder. That includes educating the public about economic policymaking. In the spring of 2022, as many wondered whether Russia’s war on Ukraine would add to the factors then driving up inflation, Professor Blinder wrote in the Wall Street Journal that a more important factor would probably be the public’s expectations of future inflation.2 As I will relate in these remarks, he was, of course, absolutely correct. As in the past, inflation expectations have played a crucial role in the course of inflation since the spring of 2022, and I expect they will be important in the Federal Reserve’s ongoing effort to achieve sustained inflation of 2 percent. For that reason, I would like to focus on inflation expectations today, before discussing my outlook for the U.S. economy and the implications for appropriate monetary policy. First, I will describe inflation expectations within the conceptual framework that many economists use to connect inflation to broader economic activity, known as the Phillips curve. Second, I will discuss the central importance of the stability of these expectations, which we have come to call the “anchoring” of inflation expectations. Third, I will explain how firms and households form their inflation expectations and how these expectations affect their economic decisionmaking. Throughout, I will make some references to historical experiences with inflation but focus on the period since the pandemic. Economists have long recognized the connection between inflation and overall macroeconomic conditions, but it was in trying to explain this empirical relationship and measure it with some precision that the importance of inflation expectations was revealed. The foundation of this work was laid by New Zealand economist A.W. Phillips, a fascinating figure who was, among other things, a mechanical genius who built an early economic model operated by hydraulics rather than electronics. In contemplating the mechanics of the economy, in 1958 Phillips set about to explain why nominal wage growth was slower when unemployment was high and faster when unemployment was low. His and other subsequent research showed that a crucial factor was the utilization of resources, such as labor and capital.3 Generally, when firms use labor and capital very intensively, production costs tend to rise, and firms have more scope to pass those cost increases along in the form of higher prices for their products and services, which, in turn, may push up inflation across the economy. In contrast, when that level of utilization is low, costs tend to rise more slowly (or even fall), and firms have less scope for raising prices, thus pushing down inflation. This tradeoff has been called the Phillips curve. In this simple form, this tradeoff implies that governments can achieve and maintain very low unemployment only if they allow inflation to rise to a certain level. In the latter 1960s, Milton Friedman and Edmund Phelps asserted that this orderly tradeoff was only temporary and would ultimately break down because of the role of expectations and, in particular, inflation expectations.4 To use an example, while current production costs are important to a factory owner setting prices, that owner will also consider future production costs, future levels of demand, and expectations for inflation throughout the economy. Likewise, workers will factor expectations of future economic conditions into their pay demands, and banks will consider future inflation in deciding loan rates. Consumers, whose purchases constitute some two-thirds of economic activity, make decisions about whether to purchase something today with an idea of what it will cost in the future. All these decisions are influenced by expectations, and this is the way in which expectations may shape inflation now. In turn, when we think about the Phillips curve and its tradeoff nowadays, we account for the important role of expectations of different individuals throughout the economy. There are different measures of inflation expectations, some from surveys polling business owners, others asking consumers, and yet others estimating expectations among bond investors based on the differences in yields between nominal and inflation-indexed securities. While most of my points apply broadly to all measures of expectations, my examples come mostly from surveys of consumers and businesses. While there are questions, which I will address, about how well these surveys measure inflation expectations, I closely monitor them because they complement market-based indicators of future inflation that are affected by dynamics intrinsic to financial markets, such as changes in risk premiums. Let me note that, in addition to the way expectations of future inflation influence prices in the near term, there are economic mechanisms that link current inflation with past inflation, such as those that set wages and the terms of rental contracts. In these cases, adjustments in these terms are often benchmarked on past inflation, as, for instance, when workers and landlords aim to recoup losses from increases in general prices. To cite one example, as the economy reopened after the pandemic, workers sought higher wages to compensate for the early wave of inflation in food and core goods, thus further pushing up inflation, especially in the services sector, where labor accounts for the largest share of this sector’s costs.5 And, because rental agreements typically last for 12 months or more, landlords faced a lag in adjusting rents to reflect the escalation of inflation after the pandemic and sought to recoup those losses when renewing leases. By looking at price changes this way, in a rearview mirror, some decisionmakers in the economy end up making inflation more persistent. That is important to me as an economic policymaker who must pay attention to both expectations of future inflation and the persistence of current inflation. When we speak of expectations of future inflation, it is crucial to define the time horizon, and different surveys conducted by the Federal Reserve and others ask about inflation from 1 year to as many as 10 years in the future. Surveys with a shorter horizon, such as the University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers’ question on inflation 1 year ahead, shown in figure 1, are heavily influenced by current inflation. Near-term inflation expectations tend to be more volatile, moving up when, for example, energy prices increase, or down when energy or some other volatile set of prices decreases. These expectations are important because many economic decisions, such as major consumer purchases and hiring and investment for firms, focus on horizons of only a few years ahead. By contrast, inflation expectations over longer horizons, such as the Michigan survey’s question on inflation during the next 5 to 10 years (the red line in figure 1), say less about current conditions than about the trend for inflation for some time in the future. You can think about these longer-term expectations as much less affected by the forces that push inflation up or down in the short term, what economists call “shocks.” Longer-term inflation expectations tend to be less volatile, affected less, for example, by what oil or food prices have done lately than by the stability of inflation over years or decades. I mention these different time horizons because they matter in my job as a central banker. Expectations a year from now reflect short-term shocks to the economy, as well as ongoing efforts from monetary policymakers to bring the economy back to its longer-run state. Thus, while short-term expectations may indicate whether inflation is expected to move toward its target, they are not the best gauge of monetary policy credibility. Longer-term inflation expectations, however, should be much less influenced by short-term shocks to the economy, and a change in those expectations has implications for the Federal Reserve’s prospects for meeting its price-stability goal. When these longer-term expectations are reasonably low and unresponsive to shorter-term developments, we say they are “anchored.” It is not clear who first defined the term, but Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in 2007 gave a speech on inflation expectations in which he described “anchored” expectations as “relatively insensitive to incoming data.”6 So how should we think about the process of anchoring and de-anchoring of inflation expectations? The dynamics of short- and long-term inflation expectations shed light on this issue. If the public experiences a spell of inflation higher than their shorter-run expectations, they will revise up these shorter-term expectations to ensure that their near-term plans account for the change in the economic environment. That’s what happened after the pandemic, when inflation based on personal consumption expenditures (PCE) rose to a peak of 7.2 percent and one-year expectations rose to more than 5 percent. But longer-term inflation expectations remained anchored, with values within the range seen since 1995. I would contrast this experience with the United States’ previous bout of high inflation from the 1970s to the early 1980s. Among other issues, such as high energy prices and accommodative monetary policy, rising inflation and inflation expectations fed a cycle of escalating inflationary pressures.7 Inflation was high and very volatile over this period, and that is reflected in shorter and longer-term inflation expectations that were high and volatile, too. Another important difference between these two episodes has to do with the performance of the Federal Reserve. As opposed to the late 1960s and most of the 1970s, most recently the Fed acted aggressively to tighten monetary policy, raising the federal funds rate more rapidly than in previous tightenings and lowering inflation more quickly than ever before. This came after 30 years of success in keeping inflation in check, and the credibility earned by the Fed’s inflation discipline surely helped keep longer-term expectations stable. This shows that an important role of the central bank is to convince the public, through actions and communications, about its intention to shape economic conditions and to use its policy tools to bring inflation to its target.8 By committing to keep inflation low in the future, central banks seek to influence expectations of future inflation, which, in turn, influence conditions now and over time. The Fed’s credibility in keeping inflation low and stable, won over decades, kept longer-term inflation expectations stable, and that contributed significantly to the Fed’s success in reducing inflation while keeping the labor market strong. Those are some of the basics about inflation expectations and how they influence the economy and the conduct of monetary policy. Next, I want to note some of the patterns we see in survey measures of inflation expectations, what influences expectations, and how inflation expectations are used by the public in their decisionmaking. Fortunately, there is a rich body of economic research that has shed light on these questions, and I will focus on the evidence for households and firms.9 We can then take some lessons from these empirical patterns for monetary policymaking. One important observation is that both short- and long-term inflation expectations are often notably higher than actual inflation, even after a period of very low inflation. There is evidence that survey respondents often believe the inflation they have experienced is higher than it is. Another pattern is that there is a wide dispersion of views about both shorter and longer-term inflation expectations, reflecting, at least in part, the dispersion of inflation in the consumer baskets of goods and services purchased by different people. Research also finds that some groups, such as women and lower-income households, tend to have systematically higher inflation expectations. In addition to this variation in expectations, there is high uncertainty in forecasts of future inflation. When people are asked to assign probabilities to different forecasts for inflation, surveys report wide distributions in the likelihood of one outcome or another. Finally, short-term inflation expectations tend to be correlated with both recently realized inflation and perceptions about recent inflation.10 These patterns tell policymakers that inflation expectations of households and firms are diffuse and likely harder to influence through monetary policy relative to financial market participants and professional forecasters who follow the news more closely. Still, expectations from business owners and workers ultimately inform firms’ pricing decisions and costs and, thus, may even be more relevant for inflation outcomes; therefore, it is important for policymakers to communicate clearly with the public our intentions to bring inflation back to our target.11 So, because inflation expectations are diffuse and heavily influenced by recent experience, let’s consider the reasons for the dispersion in these expectations. Unsurprisingly, it starts with the considerable variation in the sources that the public uses to collect information about inflation. Households report that their main source of information is their own shopping experiences, making regular purchases such as groceries and gasoline, and the price changes in those goods and services are what affect inflation expectations the most.12 Also, it seems that inflation expectations of homeowners tend to respond to changes in mortgage rates because homeowners have more of an incentive to track changes in rates that might affect, for example, their prospects for loan refinancing.13 Another important source of information is energy bills, with evidence also pointing to households’ inflation expectations being more sensitive to energy prices when inflation is higher.14 More generally, consumers and firms seem to pay more attention to news related to inflation when inflation is high, and this has been found for many countries.15 While the unique experiences of survey respondents matter, this evidence points to inflation expectations being dependent on the state of the economy. Thus, we policymakers should account for different economic conditions when assessing the risks of a de-anchoring of inflation expectations. For instance, with fresh memories of the post-pandemic inflation and with recent surges in prices of some food items regularly purchased, inflation expectations of workers and firms may now be more sensitive to anticipated future price increases relative to the pre-pandemic period. Let me now turn to how households and businesses employ their inflation expectations in their economic decisionmaking, with much of the evidence consistent with what one would expect based on long-standing economic theory. Starting with households, in addition to any influence on wages from past inflation, expectations of future inflation help shape demands for pay raises. Workers care about their inflation-adjusted wages, rather than nominal wages, and (as shown in figure 2) we see a positive correlation between inflation expectations from consumers and wage growth, with a close co-movement during the recent inflationary bout. A complementary decision for the worker is to look for a new job that pays more, especially if the person envisions a low probability of getting a raise in the current job or if the raise will likely not fully cover losses in real incomes from inflation. Indeed, measures of general wage growth are more sluggish relative to those of job switchers. Moreover, researchers also find evidence of higher job-to-job transitions for workers who have higher inflation expectations.16 So inflation expectations of workers are an important influence on nominal wage growth and an important indicator of inflationary pressures for us policymakers. Now let’s consider how these expectations influence firms’ decisions. As I discussed in the context of the Phillips curve, firms with higher inflation expectations would be expected to increase prices more, and, indeed, researchers find causal evidence for this.17 During the recent period of high inflation, the fact that business owners’ short-term expectations about costs or input prices rose only modestly and soon returned to levels close to 2 percent just suggests that firms’ inflation expectations were not a strong source of inflationary pressures (as seen in figure 3). Still, researchers at the Richmond Fed also found that during this period, business leaders incorporated more information about aggregate inflation measures in their own pricing decisions compared with times before the pandemic inflation surge.18 While researchers also find that business leaders paid less attention to inflation as it came down, this evidence points to the inflation expectations of businesses being sensitive to underlying inflationary dynamics, and monetary policymakers should remain attentive to this. Now let me turn to the recent developments in inflation expectations, the current U.S. economic outlook, and the implications for monetary policy. In recent months, we have seen several measures of inflation expectations increase, with both consumers and businesses reporting new and proposed tariffs as an important reason. Among surveys looking one year ahead, there have been notable increases for surveys by the University of Michigan, the Conference Board survey of consumers, the Atlanta Fed’s survey of businesses, the Philadelphia Fed’s Survey of Professional Forecasters, and the New York Fed’s consumer survey. For instance, last Friday’s release of longer-term inflation expectations from the Michigan survey was the highest since February 1993. Additionally, the recent spike in short-term inflation expectations appears to be mostly “anticipatory,” as one can infer from the divergence between falling inflation perceptions—what consumers think price increases have been in the past year—and climbing short-run inflation expectations, both data from the Michigan survey. This anticipatory nature of the recent increase in short-run expectations may allow for price pressures through a second channel: Businesses may feel a greater ability to pass along higher costs to consumers when they come from external factors out of the control of these businesses. Indeed, firms are already reporting not only higher costs, but also expectations of higher costs, according to some surveys, such as the one conducted by the Atlanta Fed, along with other manufacturing surveys. For now, I take some comfort from the much smaller increases in longer-term expectations as measured by the Philadelphia Fed’s Survey of Professional Forecasters, as well as the stability of longer-term measures of what we call inflation compensation, which is based on yields from nominal and inflation-indexed Treasury securities. As in past episodes when inflation expectations increased, uncertainty about future inflation seems to have also gone up, as measured by the disagreement between the 75th and 25th percentiles of the distribution of individual respondents to the Michigan survey. Simultaneously, in recent months, we have also seen measures of economic policy uncertainty increase (seen in figure 4), and there is evidence that policy uncertainty and inflation uncertainty correlate over time.19 One possibility is that policy uncertainty may be contributing to a rise in inflation expectations as well as to uncertainty about future inflation. Still, it is hard to say at this point, and I will keep monitoring these developments. Let me turn from developments on expected inflation to realized inflation. After the substantial decline in inflation from its peak in 2022, recent disinflation has been slower, and the latest data indicate that progress toward the Federal Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) 2 percent goal may have stalled. Core PCE inflation was 2.8 percent in the 12 months ended in February, which puts us back at the same level seen in the last quarter of 2024. The best news for February comes from housing services inflation, which has come down steadily for at least a year to a 12‑month rate of 4.3 percent, even if it is still above the pre-pandemic level of 2.5 percent. For the rest of the inflation categories, the news was less positive. Core goods inflation, which had been negative for a large share of 2024, increased to 0.4 percent relative to a year before. February likely also marked an upward shift in market-based services inflation. While I do not discount price pressures in nonmarket services, which remain elevated, the acceleration in market-based services in February from an estimated 3.1 percent to 3.5 percent is also not welcome, given that this category often provides a better signal of inflationary pressures across all services. On the other side of the FOMC’s dual mandate, employment continues to grow at a moderate pace, and the overall labor market has remained resilient through February. The net 151,000 jobs added last month was not too far from the 177,000 average of the previous six months. The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.1 percent, and labor force participation moved down to 62.4 percent. Other labor market indicators suggest continued moderation in the labor market but not significant weakening. Given the recent lack of progress on inflation, recent increases in inflation expectations, and upside risks associated with announced and prospective policy changes, I strongly supported the FOMC’s decision at our March meeting to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 4-1/4 to 4-1/2 percent. I will support maintaining the current policy rate for as long as these upside risks to inflation continue, while economic activity and employment remain stable. Going forward, I will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and changes in the balance of risks. Thank you.
1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text 2. See Alan S. Blinder (2022), “Wish the Fed Luck as It Seeks a Soft Landing on Inflation,” Wall Street Journal, April 6. Return to text 3. For a literature review on the relationship between inflation and resource utilization, also called the slope of the Phillips curve, see Francesco Furlanetto and Antoine Lepetit (2024), “The Slope of the Phillips Curve (PDF),” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2024-043 (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May). Return to text 4. See Milton Friedman (1968), “The Role of Monetary Policy,” American Economic Review, vol. 58 (March), pp. 1–17; and Edmund S. Phelps (1967), “Phillips Curves, Expectations of Inflation and Optimal Unemployment over Time,” Economica, vol. 34 (135), pp. 254–81. Return to text 5. For a discussion about the timing of the inflation waves of different categories, see Adriana D. Kugler (2025), “Navigating Inflation Waves: A Phillips Curve Perspective,” speech delivered at the Whittington Lecture, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, February 20. Return to text 6. See Ben S. Bernanke (2007), “Inflation Expectations and Inflation Forecasting,” speech delivered at the Monetary Economics Workshop of the National Bureau of Economic Research Summer Institute, Cambridge, Mass., July 10, quoted text in paragraph 7. Return to text 7. For evidence on how longer-run inflation expectations may be driven by short-run inflation surprises, see Carlos Carvalho, Stefano Eusepi, Emanuel Moench, and Bruce Preston (2023), “Anchored Inflation Expectations,” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, vol. 15 (January), pp. 1–47. Return to text 8. For a survey on how central banks communicate with the general public and the effectiveness of such communications, see Alan S. Blinder, Michael Ehrmann, Jakob de Haan, and David-Jan Jansen (2024), “Central Bank Communication with the General Public: Promise or False Hope?” Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 62 (June), pp. 425–57. Return to text 9. For a literature review on this topic, see Michael Weber, Francesco D’Acunto, Yuriy Gorodnichenko, and Olivier Coibion (2022), “The Subjective Inflation Expectations of Households and Firms: Measurement, Determinants, and Implications,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 36 (Summer), pp. 157–84. Return to text 10. See David Lebow and Ekaterina Peneva (2024), “Inflation Perceptions during the Covid Pandemic and Recovery,” FEDS Notes (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 19). Return to text 11. See Ricardo Reis (2023), “Four Mistakes in the Use of Measures of Expected Inflation,” AEA Papers and Proceedings, vol. 113 (May), pp. 47–51. Return to text 12. See Francesco D’Acunto, Ulrike Malmendier, Juan Ospina, and Michael Weber (2021), “Exposure to Grocery Prices and Inflation Expectations,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 129 (May), pp. 1615–39. Return to text 13. See Hie Joo Ahn, Shihan Xie, and Choongryul Yang (2024). “Effects of Monetary Policy on Household Expectations: The Role of Homeownership,” Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 147 (October), 103599. Return to text 14. See Francesco D’Acunto and Michael Weber (2024), “Why Survey-Based Subjective Expectations Are Meaningful and Important,” Annual Review of Economics, vol. 16 (August), pp. 329–57. For evidence on the higher sensitivity of inflation expectations when inflation is higher, see Paula Patzelt and Ricardo Reis (2024), “Estimating the Rise in Expected Inflation from Higher Energy Prices,” CEPR Discussion Paper 18907 (Paris: Centre for Economic Policy Research, March). Return to text 15. See, for instance, Anat Bracha and Jenny Tang (2024), “Inflation Levels and (In)Attention,” Review of Economic Studies; and Michael Weber, Bernardo Candia, Hassan Afrouzi, Tiziano Ropele, Rodrigo Lluberas, Serafin Frache, Brent Meyer, Saten Kumar, Yuriy Gorodnichenko, Dimitris Georgarakos, Olivier Coibion, Geoff Kenny, and Jorge Ponce (2025), “Tell Me Something I Don’t Already Know: Learning in Low‐ and High‐Inflation Settings,” Econometrica, vol. 93 (January), pp. 229–64. Return to text 16. See Ina Hajdini, Edward S. Knotek II, John Leer, Mathieu Pedemonte, Robert W. Rich, and Raphael S. Schoenle (2022), “Low Passthrough from Inflation Expectations to Income Growth Expectations: Why People Dislike Inflation,” Working Paper Series 22-21 (Cleveland: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, June); and Laura Pilossoph and Jane M. Ryngaert (2024), “Job Search, Wages, and Inflation,” NBER Working Paper Series 33042 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, October). Return to text 17. For the relationship between inflation expectations and pricing decisions, see Olivier Coibion, Yuriy Gorodnichenko, and Tiziano Ropele (2020), “Inflation Expectations and Firm Decisions: New Causal Evidence,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 135 (February), pp. 165–219. Return to text 18. For evidence on the recent inflationary episode, see Felipe F. Schwartzman and Sonya Ravindranath Waddell (2024), “Inflation Expectations and Price Setting among Fifth District Firms,” Economic Brief 24‑03 (Richmond: Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, January). Return to text 19. For evidence on how policy uncertainty and inflation uncertainty correlate over time, see Carola C. Binder (2017), “Measuring Uncertainty Based on Rounding: New Method and Application to Inflation Expectations,” Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 90 (October), pp. 1–12. The measure of economic policy uncertainty is from Scott R. Baker, Nicholas Bloom, and Steven J. Davis (2016), “Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 131 (November), pp. 1593–1636. The measure of trade policy uncertainty is from Dario Caldara, Matteo Iacoviello, Patrick Molligo, Andrea Prestipino, and Andrea Raffo (2020), “The Economic Effects of Trade Policy Uncertainty,” Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 109 (January), pp. 38–59. Return to text
TULSA, OK, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Vital Energy, Inc. (NYSE: VTLE) (“Vital Energy” or the “Company”) will report its first-quarter 2025 financial and operating results after market close on Monday, May 12, 2025.
A conference call to discuss results is planned for 7:30 a.m. CT on Tuesday, May 13, 2025. A webcast of the call will be available on the Company’s website at www.vitalenergy.com “Investor Relations | News & Presentations | Upcoming Events.”
About Vital Energy
Vital Energy, Inc. is an independent energy company with headquarters in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Vital Energy’s business strategy is focused on the acquisition, exploration and development of oil and natural gas properties in the Permian Basin of West Texas.
Additional information about Vital Energy may be found on its website at www.vitalenergy.com.
Investor Contact: Ron Hagood 918.858.5504 ir@vitalenergy.com
LONDON, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Appian Capital Advisory LLP (“Appian”), the investment advisor to long-term value-focused private capital funds that invest in companies in metals, mining, and adjacent industries, is pleased to announce the completion of the sale of Mineração Vale Verde (“MVV”) to Baiyin Nonferrous Group Co., Ltd (“Baiyin Nonferrous”) for an all-cash offer of US$420 million.
Highlights
Funds advised by Appian have completed an all-cash transaction for the 100% sale of MVV to Baiyin Nonferrous for US$420 million
Appian has executed its investment thesis and realized significant value for its investors by bringing MVV into production and delivering an attractive mid-scale copper-gold open pit mining operation from greenfield
Acquired in 2018 with ten employees, MVV began production in May 2021, just three years after its initial investment
MVV’s stable operations and strong financial performance have been achieved alongside a leading safety track record with zero Lost Time Incidents (“LTI”) in the last three years, with over 1050 people now working on-site
MVV will continue to deliver copper over multiple decades with its efficient operations that position the mine in the middle of the industry cost curve
Appian’s funds remain well positioned with positive exposure to key trends, including the energy transition
The transaction marks Appian’s 13th successful exit and demonstrates the effectiveness of Appian’s operating model in identifying, acquiring, and optimizing undervalued mining projects using technical arbitrage to create significant value for its investors. This approach is underpinned by Appian’s leading cross-disciplinary team, which includes geologists, engineers, metallurgists, and finance professionals focused on creating value across all aspects of Appian’s portfolio.
Michael W. Scherb, Founder and CEO of Appian, commented: “This transaction further validates Appian’s ability to identify great overlooked assets and use our in-house technical expertise to realize their potential and optimize their value for our investors. It underlines the strategic positioning of Appian’s portfolio to support the growing demand for a reliable supply of high-quality critical minerals.”
Transaction details
The completed transaction encompasses 100% of the equity in MVV owned by the Appian funds. The headline purchase price of US$420 million is on a cash-free, debt-free basis.
Appian is committed to ensuring MVV’s continued success under new ownership and, following the completion, is now providing operational support to Baiyin Nonferrous to assist with the transition and full takeover of the asset.
As part of the Transaction, Baiyin Nonferrous demonstrated its commitment to safety and maintaining MVV’s leading ESG practices, which Appian has implemented in alignment with globally recognized best practices.
Standard Chartered and Citigroup acted as the financial advisors, and Norton Rose Fulbright was the legal advisor to Appian on this Transaction.
MVV acquisition and optimization
The Appian funds acquired MVV, owner of the Serrote greenfield open-pit copper-gold asset located in Alagoas, Brazil, from Aura Minerals in 2018 with ten employees. Appian identified Serrote as a rare standalone, construction-ready, copper project with meaningful precious metal by-product credits that could benefit from its technical arbitrage and asset development strategy.
Following the acquisition, Appian completed a revised Definitive Feasibility Study based on the internal view of a re-scoped project developed during due diligence. This included reducing plant throughput and focusing production on a higher-grade section of the resources with a lower strip ratio. These changes led to a lower initial CAPEX budget of US$243 million vs US$420 million in the original mine plan and reduced operating costs over the life of mine.
Appian actively worked across all aspects of the investment to unlock value. This included building the in-country management team and installing Appian’s best practice operating standards and procedures. Appian also secured a US$140 million financing facility for the project from a syndicate of three international banks and signed favorable offtake contracts with global traders and smelters.
The mine was constructed during the COVID-19 pandemic and brought to production in May 2021. The project was delivered ahead of schedule and under budget by US$48 million, within three years of Appian’s initial acquisition. The ramp-up of commercial operations was completed in Q4 2022. MVV has been in stable operation for two years since and today has over 1050 employees.
MVV has a best-in-class safety record and operates with the highest ESG standards. The project has recorded zero LTIs with over 1.9 million hours worked in the last 12 months, and zero LTIs in the past 36 months. Its Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity per tonne of copper produced was 1.53 t CO2e/t in 2023, less than half the industry average reported by the International Energy Agency.
In 2024, MVV achieved strong operational and financial results with 18.3kt of copper and 8.2koz of gold produced, generating an EBITDA of US$83.9 million from US$184.4 million of revenue. The mine’s average C1 cash cost in 2024 was US$1.74/lb Cu.
MVV will continue to deliver copper over multiple decades with its efficient operations that position the mine in the middle of the industry cost curve. The mine is well located with access to three ports and Maceió airport. The site is connected to the national grid via a 230kV powerline with access to low-cost, renewable energy, with Brazil’s energy mix being 86% renewable.
MVV is the largest regional exporter in the Alagoas state, accounting for 28.2% of the state’s total exports by value. 100% of MVV’s employees are Brazilian, and over 80% are from the local municipalities. MVV has strong support from both the local community and regional authorities. Community initiatives are a core part of the mine’s operations and include providing support for school STEM programs, social projects for female entrepreneurs, and environmental educational courses.
For further information:
Click here to view and download a video detailing the history of MVV.
About Appian Capital Advisory LLP Appian Capital Advisory LLP is the investment advisor to long-term value-focused private capital funds that invest in companies in metals, mining, and adjacent industries.
Appian is a leading investment advisor with global experience across South America, North America, Australia and Africa and a successful track record of supporting companies in metals, mining, and adjacent industries to achieve their development targets, with a global operating portfolio overseeing nearly 5,000 employees.
Appian has a global team of 85 experienced professionals with presences in London, New York, Hong Kong, Toronto, Vancouver, Lima, Belo Horizonte, Montreal, Dubai, Johannesburg and Perth.
For more information, please visit www.appiancapitaladvisory.com, or find us on LinkedIn, Instagram or Twitter/X.
About Baiyin Nonferrous Group Co., Ltd
Baiyin Nonferrous engages in the mining, smelting, processing, and trading of various non-ferrous metals in China. Founded in 1954, Baiyin Nonferrous has operations in China and overseas. In China, they own and operate mines and smelters in Gansu, Shaanxi, Inner Mongolia and other provinces. Their overseas operations include Gold One Group in South Africa and Minera Shouxin in Peru. Globally, Baiyin Nonferrous has a production capacity of 400ktpa copper, 400ktpa lead and zinc, 15tpa gold and 500tpa silver.
Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The forum takes place from April 2 to 4 in Kazan.
Dear friends!
I welcome the participants and guests of the International Energy Forum.
This is a platform where representatives of technology companies and science, experts conduct a constructive dialogue, exchange experiences, interesting ideas, best practices. And now, in the context of unprecedented sanctions, such meetings are becoming even more important.
The fuel and energy complex is an important component of the Russian economy, including the development of production potential. Today, the industry faces strategic challenges, the solution of which determines the well-being of millions of our citizens and the achievement of technological sovereignty. First of all, this concerns ensuring the energy security of our country, developing the domestic energy market, and realizing the export potential.
It is important to continue building and modernizing infrastructure, more actively implement innovations, and expand the use of renewable sources.
I am confident that the forum will provide an opportunity to discuss promising areas of development of the fuel and energy complex, find answers to current challenges, strengthen partnerships, and conclude agreements on mutually beneficial cooperation.
I wish you constructive work, implementation of planned activities, and further success for the benefit of Russia.
M. Mishustin
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
CALGARY, Alberta, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Cielo Waste Solutions Corp. (TSXV:CMC; OTC PINK:CWSFF) (“Cielo” or the “Company”) today announced that it has received a shareholder meeting requisition notice pursuant to Section 167(1) of the Business Corporations Act (British Columbia) (the “Requisition”) from Expander Energy Inc. (“Expander”), the Company’s largest shareholder, which holds in excess of five percent (5%) of the issued common shares of the Company. This follows Cielo’s announcement of April 1, 2025 of its intention to hold an annual general meeting in June 2025 in accordance with applicable corporate laws.
The annual general and special shareholder meeting is being requisitioned by Expander to consider: (a) the fixing of the board of directors of Cielo at five (5); (b) the removal of all of the directors of the Company; (c) the election of five (5) nominees of Expander, namely Larry B. Haggar, Nick Lenstra, P. Eng., John G. F. McLeod P. Eng., James H. Ross, and G. Steven price, P. Eng. (the “Nominees”); (d) the re-appointment of MNP LLP as the auditor of Cielo; (e) the re-approval of the Company’s incentive plan; and (f) to authorize Expander to become a “Control Person” of Cielo within the meaning of the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange. To the Company’s knowledge, the Nominees are all current or former directors, officers and/or significant shareholders of Expander.
The Company is reviewing the Requisition, with the assistance of its professional advisors, and will respond appropriately in due course. The Company intends to comply with its obligations under applicable corporate and securities laws. In the meantime, there is no need for shareholders to take any action.
Cielo’s CEO, Ryan C. Jackson, commented: “The Company appreciates the ongoing support from our shareholders. It is unfortunate that Expander has chosen to escalate its demands in this manner rather than engage in constructive dialogue with the Company, despite our attempts to do so. As we’d disclosed, we have taken steps to initiate the dispute resolution process with Expander and believe that that is the appropriate forum to address the concerns of both Cielo and Expander.”
In Cielo’s view, Expander mistakenly attributes the decline in Cielo’s share price is due solely to the current Board, while ignoring broader market conditions, industry challenges, and the deliberate transformation efforts underway to reposition the Company for sustainable growth. Cielo’s leadership team has been executing a turnaround strategy, and the Board remains confident in the Company’s long-term potential.
As it has in the past, Cielo’s board and management team welcomes the perspectives of its shareholders and endeavours to make itself available for ongoing dialogue about the Company’s governance, performance, and strategic direction. The board and management team will continue to prioritize good governance, perform their duties in the best interest of Cielo, and remain focused on delivering long-term value.
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
About Cielo Waste Solutions Corp.
Cielo Waste Solutions Corp. is a publicly traded company focused on transforming waste materials into renewable diesel, kerosene, and naphtha fuels. Through its proprietary technology, Cielo aims to provide environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional fossil fuels, contributing to a circular economy and a sustainable future.
For Investor and Media Inquiries, Please Contact: Investor Relations Cielo Waste Solutions Corp. Phone: (403) 348-2972 Email: investors@cielows.com Website: www.cielows.com
This news release contains certain forward-looking statements and forward-looking information (collectively referred to herein as “forward-looking statements”) within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. All statements other than statements of present or historical fact are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are often, but not always, identified by the use of words such as “anticipate”, “achieve”, “could”, “believe”, “plan”, “intend”, “objective”, “continuous”, “ongoing”, “estimate”, “outlook”, “expect”, “may”, “will”, “project”, “should” or similar words, including negatives thereof, suggesting future outcomes.
Forward-looking statements are subject to both known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance, or achievements of the Company to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward looking statements. Forward-looking statements and information are based on plans, expectations and estimates of management at the date the information is provided and are subject to certain factors and assumptions. Cielo is making forward-looking statements, including but not limited to with respect to: the Company’s shareholder meeting to be held in June 2025; the Company’s response to the Requisition, to follow, and to comply with applicable corporate and securities laws; the continued priorities of Cielo’s board and management.
Investors should continue to review and consider information disseminated through news releases and filed by the Company on SEDAR+. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended.
Forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties, some of which are described herein. Such forward-looking statements necessarily involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which may cause the Company’s actual performance and results to differ materially from any projections of future performance or results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements are made as of the date hereof and, except as required by law, the Company assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise such statements to reflect new information, subsequent or otherwise.
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
Question for written answer E-001222/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Cristina Guarda (Verts/ALE), Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE)
The directive on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources[1] requires Member States to establish an enabling framework for the development of self-consumption and renewable energy communities (RECs), ensuring that final customers have the right to participate in CERs without unjustified barriers[2].
However, the transposition of the directive into Italian national legislation[3] has many limitations[4], despite the recent extension of the deadline for applying for grants to 30 November 2025 and the enlargement to municipalities of up to 30 000 inhabitants. The complex documentation required[5] and the cumbersome and slow procedures are a heavy burden to bear[6].
As a result, to date, the capacity of installations of energy communities, self-consumer groups and remote self-consumption in Italy is 104.7 MW[7], undermining hope of achieving the incentivised renewable energy target of 5 000 MW by 2027.
In view, further, of the reform of the electricity market[8], to prevent saturation and to ensure short lead times for connection estimates and additions to them, it is also necessary to allow for the unbundling of the share of shared energy in the bill, the adaptation and upgrading of the electricity grid throughout the country.
In the light of the above, does the Commission consider that the Italian legislation complies with the objectives of those directives, with particular reference to promoting and facilitating the development of renewable energy self-consumption and RECs?
[2] Specifically, Article 21(6), Article 22(1) and (2) and Article 22(4)(a).
[3] Legislative Decree No 199 of 8 November 2021 and Decree No 414 of the Minister for the Environment and Energy Security of 7 December 2023.
[4] Firms in financial difficulty, plants with the ‘Scambio sul Posto’ contract, plants built with the 110 % bonus or with contributions of more than 40 %, and those compulsory for new buildings, do not qualify for incentives.
[5] It also includes files containing panels’ serial numbers, which installers rarely keep, as it is not required for any other paperwork. Specialised services are often needed, with additional costs.
[6] Companies have to self-certify that they are free of the many and complex grounds for exclusion, which discourages them from signing up.
Disinfectant Wipes/Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Trials
United States v. Don M. Rynn
No. 2:24-CR-00653 (District of South Carolina)
AUSA Winston Holliday
AUSA Amy Bower
On March 20, 2025, a jury convicted Don M. Rynn of making false statements to federal agents and falsifying fishing records (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 1519).
Rynn managed several commercial fishing vessels in the McClellanville area, including the Maximum Retriever and the Crystal C. The vessels docked at Carolina Seafood, a federally licensed dealer.
On March 21, 2023, the Maximum Retriever embarked on a commercial fishing trip captained by the defendant’s son, who Rynn instructed to catch as many fish as he could (ignoring federally imposed quotas). Rynn told his son he would “take care of things” when he returned.
The Maximum Retriever returned to McClellanville shortly after midnight on March 27, 2023, with almost three times the legal limit of snowy grouper on board, and one and a half times the allowable number of grey tilefish. Rynn was waiting for the boat to arrive. Once the Maximum Retriever was in place, the Crystal C was maneuvered so that the two boats were side-by-side.
Rynn then directed deckhands to move fish from the ice hold of the Maximum Retriever to the Crystal C. They removed additional fish from the Maximum Retriever to Rynn’s truck to take to another seafood dealer in Georgetown.
In the mandatory trip report filed shortly thereafter, Rynn reported his catch only up to the limit, hiding the fact that the Maximum Retriever had vastly overfished. He attributed a substantial portion of the catch to the Crystal C, which had remained moored at the dock.
On March 27, 2023, law enforcement officers received an anonymous tip alerting them to the excessive catch. The Georgetown seafood dealer that had received some of the overage initially lied to cover for Rynn. When he realized the agents were closing in, the dealer threw the fish in the river to get rid of them.
In October 2023, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) agents interviewed Rynn about the incidents in March. Rynn lied, saying the snowy grouper and tilefish had been contaminated by a fuel spill while at sea, and that he had disposed of them in a dumpster. Rynn further implied that a U.S. Coast Guard report addressing an unlawful discharge into Jeremy Creek was inaccurate and should have been attributed to the Crystal C, which would have bolstered his fuel spill story.
In total, the Maximum Retriever caught approximately 560 pounds of snowy grouper and 450 pounds of tilefish. The legal limit for grouper is 200 pounds and 300 for tilefish.
NOAA, the U. S. Coast Guard, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources and the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Saltwater Team conducted the investigation.
Photo from dock surveillance camera showing Rynn on back of boat directing two individuals to carry a tote of federally protected fish to his truck.
On March 14, 2025, a court unsealed a complaint charging the chief executive officer of a Georgia-based heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) company with illegally importing 500 cylinders of potent greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) into the United States from Peru.
William Randolph Hires is charged with violating the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act (AIM Act) by unlawfully importing 500 cylinders of HFCs (42 U.S.C. §§ 7675, 7413).
In April 2022, on behalf of his company, Hires purchased 500 cylinders of HFCs in Peru. Over the next several months, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials explained to Hires’s employees that, under the AIM Act and its implementing regulations, Hires’s company could not lawfully import the HFCs into the United States because it did not have the required EPA-issued allowances. In a July 22, 2022, email to one of Hires’s employees, an EPA official stated “it is not possible to import bulk HFCs without consumption allowances.”
Hires’s employees conveyed this information from the EPA to Hires on several occasions. On one occasion, an employee forwarded an email to Hires that the employee had received from an EPA official which stated, “[t]he HFC you listed (R-410A) is a regulated substance. So, if you do not have allowances, you cannot import those bulk HFC refrigerants.” In another email exchange between Hires and an employee, the employee informed Hires that, based on a video conference the employee had with EPA officials, shipping without the necessary allowances would violate import laws so “[i]t is out of our hands.”
Hires nevertheless instructed his employees to illegally import the HFCs into the United States. In a July 28, 2022 email, Hires stated to his employees: “[y]eah you have to be careful what agencies you’re reaching out to because the EPA . . . can create a hassle and they can hold our stuff up in customs there[.]” In a subsequent email, Hires instructed his employees to “get [the HFCs] on the ship and get it out to sea . . . don’t care what it takes[.]” Hires later instructed his employees via email: “Do not call the EPA please do not.”
The EPA Criminal Investigation Division, Homeland Security Investigations, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection conducted the investigation.
United States v. Leshon E. Johnson
No. 6:25-CR-00012 (Eastern District of Oklahoma)
ECS Senior Trial Attorney Ethan Eddy
ECS Trial Attorney Sarah Brown
AUSA Jordan Howantiz
ECS Law Clerk Amanda Backer
On March 20, 2025, Leshon E. Johnson was arraigned on an indictment charging him with violating the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. § 2156(b) & 18 U.S.C. § 49). Specifically, Johnson possessed 190 pit bull-type dogs for the purpose of having the dogs participate in an animal fighting venture, and for selling, transporting, and delivering a dog for use in an animal fighting venture. Federal authorities seized the 190 dogs from Johnson in October 2024 as authorized under the Animal Welfare Act. This is believed to be the largest number of dogs ever seized from a single person in a federal dog fighting case.
Johnson ran a dog fighting operation known as “Mal Kant Kennels” in both Broken Arrow and Haskell, Oklahoma. He previously ran “Krazyside Kennels,” also out of Oklahoma, which led to his guilty plea on state animal fighting charges in 2004. Johnson selectively bred “champion” and “grand champion” fighting dogs — dogs that have respectively won three or five fights — to produce offspring with fighting traits and abilities desired by him and others for use in dog fights. Johnson marketed and sold stud rights and offspring from winning fighting dogs to other dog fighters looking to incorporate the Mal Kant Kennels “bloodline” into their own dog fighting operations. His trafficking of fighting dogs to other dog fighters across the country contributed to the growth of the dog fighting industry and allowed Johnson to profit financially. Trial is scheduled to begin on May 5, 2025.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted the investigation.
Guilty Pleas
United States v. Terrell Williams
No. 4:23-CR-00692 (Eastern District of Missouri)
AUSA Jillian Anderson
On March 7, 2025, Terrell Williams pleaded guilty to an Animal Fighting Venture violation for hosting dog fights in his home and training dogs to fight (7 U.S.C. § 2156(a)-(c); 18 U.S.C. § 49(a)). Sentencing is scheduled for June 6, 2025.
Between September 2020 through May 2022, Williams hosted fights in a wooden “box” setup in the basement of his home in Riverview, Missouri. He also owned and bred bull terriers and terrier mixes that were used for fights. On June 22, 2022, FBI agents executed a search warrant at Williams’s home and seized eight bull terrier mixes and three Yorkshire terriers. The dogs bore scars consistent with fighting. Agents also removed equipment used to train and condition dogs, including weighted vests and a canine treadmill.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted the investigation.
Dog rescued from defendant’s home during execution of search warrant. Photo included with detention motion filed with the court.
On March 11, 2025, Nicholas Dryden pleaded guilty to creating and distributing videos depicting the torture of monkeys (known as animal “crush” videos) (18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 48(a)(3)). Co-defendant Giancarlo Morelli entered a similar plea in December 2024.
Dryden commissioned videos from a 17-year-old in Indonesia who was willing to commit specified acts of torture on video in exchange for payment. Dryden utilized Telegram, a cross-platform messaging app that includes encrypted group messaging and private chats, to advertise the animal crush videos and solicit funding for additional videos. Within these private groups, Dryden shared snippets of videos that he commissioned and advertised that the full content was for sale. Co-defendants Morelli and Philip Colt Moss each sent money to Dryden more than a dozen times in exchange for monkey torture videos.
Thereafter, they frequently gave feedback on the videos and Morelli sometimes suggested torturous acts he’d like to see in future videos.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement and the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted the investigation.
United States v. Jose Manuel Valenzuela
No. 3:24-CR-01037 (Southern District of California)
ECS Assistant Chief Stephen DaPonte
AUSA Laura Sambataro
On March 18, 2025, Jose Manuel Valenzuela pleaded guilty to intentionally failing to present refrigerant tanks for inspection (19 U.S.C. §§ 1433, 1436). Sentencing is scheduled for June 10, 2025.
On April 22, 2024, Valenzuela (an HVAC technician) attempted to enter the United States from Mexico without declaring four 24-pound tanks of 404A refrigerant (a hydrofluorocarbon refrigerant) in his vehicle.
Customs and Border Protection, Homeland Security Investigations, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation.
United States v. Robert C. Schmid
No. 3:25-mj-00011 (Eastern District of Virginia)
AUSA Carla Jordan-Detamore
On March 25, 2025, Robert C. Schmid pleaded guilty to violating the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. §§ 136j(a)(1)(A), 1361(b)(1)(B)). Sentencing is scheduled for July 22, 2025.
Schmid owned the Atlantic Manufacturing Group, LLC (AMG), which manufactured and sold cleaning and janitorial products. AMG marketed and sold its products via various means, including a website, as well as through outside sales representatives. In September 2017, AMG entered into an agreement with “Company 1” to purchase a product called “Maquat 64-PD” for which Company 1 had obtained a registration from the EPA. AMG entered into this Agreement because it wanted to distribute and sell its liquid ProAmenities Lemon Detergent Disinfectant, made with Company 1’s Maquat 64-PD.
In October 2017, the EPA approved the label for AMG’s ProAmenities Lemon Detergent Disinfectant. The label made clear that the product was hazardous to humans and animals and was not for use on clothing or on skin.
Beginning in May 2020, and acting on behalf of AMG, Schmid began manufacturing and selling AMG “Hygienic Facility Wipes” that purportedly protected users from COVID-19. Schmid sold these wipes to janitorial services that supported government entities, gyms and health clubs, universities, and janitorial product retailers. AMG manufactured these wipes by applying the ProAmenities Lemon Detergent Disinfectant to dry wipes and packaging the wipes in plastic buckets or plastic packages. These wipes, however, were not registered with the EPA pursuant to FIFRA and did not have EPA approved labels or safety guidance. Investigators also determined that Schmid, his employees, and outside sales reps made unauthorized claims about the efficacy and safety of these wipes to potential customers.
After Company 1 issued Schmid a cease-and-desist email in August of 2020 about the unauthorized use of its product, Schmid switched to “Company 2” to use its liquid, which was not registered with the EPA, in its wipes. Schmid, however, continued to claim that his wipes were an EPA-registered product. AMG also generated product labels claiming the wipes eradicated corona viruses, in addition to other falsified information (to include the ingredient list).
Between March and November 2020, AMG sold approximately 5,000 cases of the wipes, taking in close to $415,000 in sales and making approximately $33,000 in gross profit.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation.
United States v. Robert J. Bullock, Sr.
No. 1:24-CR-10056 (District of Massachusetts)
AUSA Benjamin Tolkoff
On March 26, 2025, Robert J. Bullock, Sr., pleaded guilty to violating the Safe Drinking Water Act for tampering with public water systems (42 U.S.C. § 300i-1(a)). Sentencing is scheduled for June 25, 2025.
On the evening of November 29, 2022, Bullock, a former Stoughton Water Department employee, went into one of the Water Department’s pumping stations and turned off the pump that introduces chlorine into drinking water. As a result, water that had not been properly disinfected was introduced into the drinking water system.
When questioned by investigators, Bullock claimed to not have tampered with the water system. Specifically, Bullock said that he had not knowingly turned off the chlorine pump at Goddard Pumping Station 7 on the night of November 29, 2022, when in fact he had; and that he did not set the alarms for the chlorine level to zero that night, when he did.
The Federal Bureau of Investigations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division, and the Stoughton Massachusetts Police Department conducted the investigation.
Sentencings
United States v. National Water Main Cleaning Company
No. 3:25-CR-00002 (District of Connecticut)
AUSA Hal Chen
RCEC Man Chak Ng
On March 4, 2025, a court sentenced the National Water Main Cleaning Company (NWMCC) to pay a $500,000 fine, complete a three-year term of probation, and implement an environmental compliance program. The company will also employ an independent outside consultant to perform a compliance audit and identify an environmental compliance manager for its Connecticut facilities. NWMCC will also make a payment of $500,000 to the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) to fund aquatic ecosystem enhancement projects in the South-Central Coastal Watershed.
The company pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Water Act (CWA) for knowingly discharging a pollutant into Cuff Brook while refurbishing a large culvert pipe in Cheshire, Connecticut, in July 2019 (33 U.S.C. §§ 1319 (c)(2)(A); 1311(a)). The unauthorized discharge of uncured geopolymer mortar killed more than 150 fish and contaminated Cuff Brook.
At the time of the incident, NWMCC was operating under a Code of Conduct as part of a 2014 settlement with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office to resolve civil allegations involving environmental pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation, with assistance from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
United States v. Fidelity Development Group LLC
No. 3:24-CR-00077(Southern District of Ohio)
ECS Senior Trial Attorney Adam Cullman
On March 4, 2024, a court sentenced Fidelity Development Group LLC (Fidelity) to pay a $100,000 fine and complete a two-year term of probation. Fidelity pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Air Act for failing to inspect for the presence of asbestos (42 U.S.C. § 7413(c)(1)).
In 2015 or 2016, Fidelity purchased a building and planned to renovate it into a mixed-use property. Fidelity failed to perform or acquire an asbestos survey for the building prior to renovations. Around April 2020, a certified asbestos company conducted an asbestos survey in the Fidelity Building and identified more than 12,000 linear feet of 80% chrysolite asbestos pipe wrap insulation in friable condition.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation.
United States v. Frock Brothers Trucking, Inc.,et al.
Nos. 1:24-CR-00235, 00250 (Middle District of Pennsylvania)
AUSA William Behe
On March 6, 2025, a court sentenced Frock Brothers Trucking, Inc., to pay an $80,000 fine and complete a two-year term of probation. Mechanic Leon Martin will complete a two-year term of probation, to include three months’ home detention, and pay a $500,000 fine.
Both defendants pleaded guilty to conspiracy and to violating the Clean Air Act (CAA) for tampering with the emission control systems for several heavy-duty diesel trucks (18 U.S.C. § 371; 42 U.S.C. § 7413(c)(2)(C)).
Between 2018 and October 2023, Martin provided “tuning” or “reprogramming” services by modifying the engine control modules (ECMs) on diesel trucks. The ECM is a computerized system that manages and controls the engine’s performance. During that time, Martin tampered with the emissions diagnostic systems on the vehicles for many companies to prevent the diagnostic system software from monitoring the emission control system hardware.
Frock, a long-distance trucking company based in New Oxford, Pennsylvania, transports a variety of goods, including snack foods, refrigerated items, and produce. Ed Frock owned the company until his death in August 2022.
Between November 13, 2018, and December 28, 2018, Frock contracted with co-defendant Martin to disable and/or remove emission control components from eight of their diesel trucks. Frock removed the vehicles’ ECMs from their engines and shipped them to Martin for reprogramming. Once the devices were “tuned,” Martin shipped them back to Frock, where they were reinstalled on the trucks. Martin also tampered with the onboard diagnostic equipment (OBD) to delete factory-installed emission controls from Frock’s heavy duty diesel trucks. Martin’s tunes enabled those deleted trucks to operate without emission control devices, which are required by federal law.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation.
On March 6, 2025, a court sentencedBenjamin Gathercole to complete a one-year term of probation, after he pleaded guilty to violating the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) for illegally transporting hazardous waste without a manifest (42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(5)).
Gathercole lived in Tappahannock, Virginia, and worked at a local brake manufacturing facility. In 2019, a Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) inspector determined that the brake manufacturing facility failed to make an accurate waste determination for 32 55-gallon drums stored on site. Some of the drums displayed labels noting they contained hazardous waste, but not in accordance with RCRA requirements. The DEQ issued a notice of violation to the facility in May 2019.
In September and October 2019, Gathercole removed 31 of the 55-gallon drums from the facility and transported them to his residence. He dug a hole near his property and buried the drums in the ground. He crushed some of them in the process, causing their contents to spill onto the ground.
In December 2020, a citizen tipped off the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about the illegal burial. In November 2021, agents executed a search warrant on the defendant’s property. Gathercole admitted to burying the drums at the request of his employer and directed authorities to where he had buried them. Further testing confirmed the waste was ignitable hazardous waste. The EPA finished excavating the site in November 2022.
The EPA Criminal Investigation Division and the EPA National Enforcement Investigation Center conducted the investigation.
United States v. Keidrick D. Usifo, et al.
No. 24-CR-00040 (Eastern District of Arkansas)
AUSA Edward Walker
On March 6, 2025, a court sentenced Keidrick Usifo to pay a $5,000 fine and complete a five-year term of probation. Co-defendant Deon Johnson will pay a $1,000 fine and complete an 18-month term of probation. Usifo and Johnson previously pleaded guilty to violating the Big Cat Public Safety Act (BCPSA)(16 U.S.C. §§ 3372 (e)(1)(A), 3373 (d)).
Lawmakers enacted the BCPSA in December 2022 to protect the public by prohibiting the private ownership of big cats (such as tigers and lions) as pets and by prohibiting exhibitors from allowing public contact with big cats, including tiger cubs. This law places new restrictions on the commerce, breeding, possession, and use of certain big cat species.
In April 2023, a citizen tipped off local game authorities after seeing a tiger cub in a residential neighborhood in Conway, Arkansas. Further investigation confirmed that Usifo purchased a tiger in March 2023 from a broker in Dallas, Texas, and brought it back to his residence in Arkansas.
After receiving a second complaint about the tiger cub, law enforcement conducted a traffic stop on April 21, 2023, arresting Usifo on a felony state warrant. The Conway Police Department then executed a search warrant at Usifo’s residence. The animal was not there, but they found evidence of its presence, including the fact that rooms in the house matched those in photos of the tiger that Usifo posted on Instagram.
While in the Pulaski County Detention Facility (PCDF), Usifo made several calls to Johnson, asking him to take care of the tiger while Usifo was held in detention. Johnson concealed his knowledge of the tiger when questioned by agents.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement conducted the investigation, with assistance from the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, the Conway Police Department, and the Little Rock Police Department.
Tiger cub, now named Fred, rescued by the Turpentine Creek Wildlife Refuge. Photo taken by case agent June 2024.
United States v. Frankluis Carela De Jesús, et al.
No. 3:24-CR-00174 (District of Puerto Rico)
ECS Senior Trial Attorney Patrick Duggan
AUSA Seth Erbe
On March 6, 2025, a court sentenced the final two Dominican nationals who attempted to smuggle tropical birds from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to the Dominican Republic. Frankluis Carela De Jesús will serve 12 months and one day of incarceration, followed by three years of supervised release. Domingo Heureau Altagracia will complete eight months of incarceration and three years of supervised release. Waner Balbuena and Juan Graviel Ramírez Cedano were each previously sentenced to serve 12 months and one day of incarceration, followed by three years of supervised release. All the defendants pleaded guilty to Lacey Act trafficking and to smuggling wildlife from the United States (18 U.S.C. § 554; 16 U.S.C. §§ 3372(a)(1), (a)(4), 3373(d)(1)(B)).
On May 3, 2024, the four Dominican nationals traveled in a flagless vessel departing from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to the Dominican Republic. They intended to smuggle various species of tropical birds to the Dominican Republic for financial gain. When the vessel was approximately 30 nautical miles north of Puerto Rico, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) approached the vessel and witnessed the crew tossing objects overboard. Following the boarding of the vessel, USCG authorities recovered several of the jettisoned objects, which were wooden cages containing tropical birds. Approximately 113 birds drowned as a result.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement, the U.S. Coast Guard, and Customs and Border Protection conducted the investigation.
On March 10, 2025, a court sentenced Travis Larson to pay a $40,000 fine and complete a five-year term of probation. Larson will also pay $2,400 in restitution, to be divided between the State of Alaska and the Port Graham Authority. Larson will forfeit $150,000 and is prohibited from hunting anywhere in the world or providing any big game commercial services while under supervision. Larsen pleaded guilty to violating the Lacey Act for illegally transporting four black bears and making false records (16 U.S.C. §§ 3372(a)(2)(A), 3373(d)(1)(B); (d)(3)(A)).
Larson worked as a licensed big game transporter since 2010, and provided transport services through his company, Alaska Premier Sportfishing LLC (APS). Larson and APS offered paying clients transportation for multi-day hunting and fishing trips aboard a 65-foot liveaboard vessel, Venturess.
In May 2018, Larson transported eight hunters on a black bear hunt in the Nuka Bay area of the Kenai Peninsula. Each hunter paid $3,500 to participate in the hunt. The group included four Norwegian nationals. Larson knew all four people were not U.S. residents, nor were they accompanied by a licensed hunting guide or assistant guide, as required under state law.
On May 9, 2018, one foreign hunter was transported to a beach adjacent to Surprise Bay to hunt a black bear. The hunter shot and killed a black bear on land belonging to the State of Alaska. On May 10, 2018, Larson transported three foreign hunters to a beach adjacent to Beauty Bay to hunt black bears. Two of the hunters each shot and killed a black bear on land belonging to the Port Graham Corporation, an Alaska Native Corporation, and the other hunter shot and killed a black bear on land belonging to the State of Alaska. On both days, Larson transported the hunters and the illegally harvested black bears back to his vesselvia the smaller motorboat.
On May 11, 2018, Larson transported the four foreign hunters and the four illegally harvested black bears to Homer, Alaska, where he knew the black bears would be transported in interstate and foreign commerce following the hunt. The government dismissed the charges against Larson’s business.
The National Park Service Investigative Services Branch and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement conducted the investigation.
On March 10, 2025, a court sentenced Dugan Paul Daniels to six months’ incarceration, followed by three years’ supervised release, for falsifying fishing records in violation of the Lacey Act and illegally taking a sperm whale in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. §§ 3372(d)(2), 3373(d)(3)(A), 1583(a)(1)(C), 1540(b)(1)). Daniels will also pay a $25,000 fine and perform 80 hours of community service, and is banned from commercial fishing for one year.
Daniels is a commercial fisherman with 20 years of experience. Between October and November 2020, he submitted falsified fishing records to make it appear that he lawfully caught sablefish, aka “black cod,” in federal waters on two separate occasions. In fact, Daniels illegally harvested the fish in State of Alaska waters, specifically, in Chatham Strait and Clarence Strait. The total market value of the illegally harvested fish was $127,528.
In March 2020, Daniels and three crew members were fishing for sablefish southwest of Yakobi Island in the Gulf of Alaska when they came upon a sperm whale. During the encounter, Daniels directed a crewman to shoot the whale multiple times and also tried to ram the whale with his fishing vessel. Daniels documented the encounter in writing and through text messages sent from a GPS communication device. Some of the messages stated he wished he “had a cannon to blow” the whale out of the water and that he hoped “to be reeling in a dead sperm whale.” It is a violation of the ESA to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct involving an endangered species.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Law Enforcement conducted the investigation.
No. 2:23-CR-00177 (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
AUSA Christopher Parisi
On March 11, 2025, a court sentenced Bien King and Khalil King to each complete three-year terms of probation, to include six months’ home confinement. Bien King was also sentenced to pay a $1,000 fine. The defendants pleaded guilty to violating the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act for selling a misbranded pesticide and for violating the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for selling misbranded animal drugs (7 U.S.C. §§ 136j(a)(1)(E); 21 U.S.C. § 331(a)).
Bien King started “Little City Dogs” (LCD) a New York corporation with office space in New York City. Bien King also created a website that sold various products intended to treat diseases or pests in animals. Bien King’s son, Khalil, worked in the New York office. Khalil King was responsible for mixing ingredients and packaging various products for shipment. The defendants obtained the ingredients for these products from various suppliers in China. They knew that these suppliers routinely mislabeled shipments of these products to avoid detection by customs officials.
When LCD received orders from online sales, Khalil King and others shipped the products from the New York office to customers throughout the United States. An undercover agent placed several orders for various products through the LCD website. These purchases included a January 17, 2020, order for fipronil drops and ivermectin. Fipronil is designed to treat external parasites such as fleas and ticks. Ivermectin is designed to control heartworms in dogs and cats.
The defendants shipped the fipronil drops and ivermectin from New York to an address in Springfield, Pennsylvania. The labeling and packaging material accompanying the fipronil drops did not include information required by law. The labeling and packaging material accompanying the ivermectin likewise did not include required information. Furthermore, LCD’s facility in New York City was not registered with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations conducted the investigation.
United States v. Jose V. Fernandez
No. 1:24-CR-00071 (District of Rhode Island)
AUSA John McAdams
On March 11, 2025, a court sentenced Jose V. Fernandez to complete a two-year term of probation. Fernandez pleaded guilty to making false statements for distributing false asbestos abatement training certifications (18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a)(3)).
Fernandez owned the Rhode Island Safety Environment Training Center. The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDH) accredited the facility to provide asbestos abatement training. On multiple occasions between 2021 and 2023, Fernandez submitted false documentation to the RIDH attesting that nearly two dozen individuals paid for, attended, and successfully completed an Environmental Protection Agency-approved abatement training program when, in fact, no one attended any classes.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division and the Rhode Island Department of Health conducted the investigation.
On March 11, 2025, a court sentenced Pedro Luis Bones-Torres to 12 months’ incarceration, followed by one year of supervised release. Bones-Torres pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act for illegally constructing and depositing material into the wetlands and waters of the United States in the Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (the “Jobos Estuarine Reserve”) and Las Mareas community of Salinas, Puerto Rico (33 U.S.C. §§ 1311(a), 403).
Starting in January 2020, Bones-Torres engaged in construction and land clearing activities on a property to the South of Camino de Galileo in the Las Mareas area of Salinas, Puerto Rico (the “Property”). Much of the Property supported mangrove trees with an open area that was occasionally partially submerged by the sea tides. This wetland area was within the Jobos Estuarine Reserve.
Between January 2020 and October 2022, Bones-Torres removed mangroves from the Property, depositing fill material onto the wetland area using excavation and earth moving equipment. After he filled the wetlands, he built a concrete pad, a concrete gazebo with an outdoor kitchen, a wooden gazebo, and a dock extending into Mar Negro. Bones-Torres did not seek or receive approval to fill the wetlands and was at no point permitted to fill wetlands on or near the Property.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division, the Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Law Enforcement, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement conducted the investigation.
United States v. Royce Gillham
No. 2:24-CR-14046 (Southern District of Florida)
ECS Senior Trial Attorney Adam Cullman
AUSA Daniel Funk
On March 13, 2025, a court sentenced Royce Gillham to 37 months’ incarceration, followed by three years of supervised release. Gillham, the former General Manager of a biofuel producer based in Fort Pierce, Florida, pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit wire fraud and conspiring to make false claims (18 U.S.C.§ 371).
This biofuel company produced and sold renewable fuel and fuel credits and claimed to turn various feedstocks into biodiesel. When reporting the number of gallons produced to the Internal Revenue Service and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Gillham and his employer vastly overstated their production volume in an effort to generate more credits. When auditors sought more information from the company, Gillham and his co-conspirators gave them false information about their fuel production and customers.
The scheme generated more than $7 million in fraudulent EPA renewable fuels credits and sought over $6 million in fraudulent tax credits connected to the purported production of biodiesel.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigations conducted the investigation.
No. 2:24-CR-00161 (Central District of California)
ECS Senior Trial Attorney Ryan Connors
ECS Trial Attorney Lauren Steele
AUSA Dennis Mitchell
ECS Law Clerk Maria Wallace
ECS Law Clerk Tonia Sibblies
On March 14, 2025, a court sentenced Sai Keung Tin, also known as Ricky Tin, to 30 months’ incarceration, followed by one year of supervised release. Tin will also pay a $5,000 fine for his role in smuggling protected turtles from the United States to Hong Kong. Tin pleaded guilty to four counts of exporting merchandise contrary to law (18 U.S.C. § 554).
Between February 2018 and June 2023, Tin, a Chinese citizen, assisted turtle smugglers in the United States. During that time, Tin aided and abetted the trafficking of approximately 2,100 turtles to Hong Kong. The turtles were intended to be sold as part of the illegal Asian pet trade. Based on a conservative, contemporary market valuation of $2,000 per turtle, the smuggled reptiles were valued at $4.2 million.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) agents arrested Tin in February 2024 as he arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.
USFWS agents obtained a search warrant to seize Tin’s cell phones, and found evidence that Tin came to the United States to smuggle turtles. He planned to travel to New Jersey, Texas, and Washington — familiarizing himself with tourist locations to present a false story if apprehended. His ultimate plan was to pay for turtles in cash, ship them around the country, and eventually illegally export them to Hong Kong.
Tin was associated with international turtle smuggler Kang Juntao, of Hangzhou City, China, who was extradited from Malaysia in 2019 and later sentenced to prison after pleading guilty to money laundering. Kang caused the shipment of approximately 1,500 turtles (with a market value exceeding $2.25 million) from the United States to Hong Kong, which included shipments to Tin.
The eastern box turtle is a subspecies of the common box turtle and native to the United States. Turtles with colorful markings are highly prized pets, particularly in China and Hong Kong, and are protected by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement conducted the investigation, with assistance from Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations.
On March 19, 2025, Hino Motors, Ltd. (HML) was sentenced to pay a criminal fine of $521.76 million, serve a five-year term of probation, during which it will be prohibited from importing any diesel engines it has manufactured into the United States, and implement a comprehensive compliance and ethics program and reporting structure. Additionally, the court entered a $1.087 billion forfeiture money judgment against the company.
Prosecutors charged HML in a single conspiracy count with five objects: to defraud the Environmental Protection Agency, to defraud the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, to violate the Clean Air Act, to commit wire fraud, and to smuggle goods into the United States, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.
Between 2010 and 2019, HML submitted and caused to be submitted false applications for engine certification approvals. Company engineers regularly altered emission test data, conducted tests improperly, and fabricated data without conducting any underlying tests. HML submitted fraudulent carbon dioxide emissions test data, which resulted in the calculation of false fuel consumption values for its engines. Company engineers also failed to disclose software functions that could adversely affect engines’ emission control systems. As a result of the fraud, HML imported and sold more than 105,000 non-conforming engines between 2010 and 2022.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division and the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted the investigation.
Nos. 1:24-CR-00124, 1:21-CR-00016 (Northern District of New York)
AUSA Benjamin Clark
On March 20, 2025, a court sentenced Kyle Offringa to pay a $100,000 fine for conspiring to violate the Clean Air Act (CAA). His company, Highway and Heavy Parts, LLC (HHP), was sentenced on December 3, 2024, to pay a $25,000 fine. As part of the sentencing, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will monitor the company for ongoing compliance for a two-year period. HHP and Offringa pleaded guilty to conspiring to tamper with a required monitoring device in violation of the CAA (18 U.S.C. § 371).
Between June 2017 and March 2019, HHP and Offringa conspired with a diesel truck operator, and others, including co-conspirators Daim Logistics, Inc., and Patrick Oare, to remove, delete, and tamper with monitoring devices that were required under the CAA to be installed on heavy-duty diesel trucks. Truck operators delete the emissions control hardware on heavy-duty diesel trucks to allow them to run at higher horsepower, with greater fuel efficiency, and with reduced maintenance costs. HHP charged its customers a fee for Offringa to reprogram the vehicles’ on-board detection equipment so regulators would not discover the tampering. Customers paid HHP between $1,000 and $1,500 for each truck Offringa altered.
Oare and Daim Logistics were sentenced in November 2024 for tampering with a monitoring device or method in violation of the CAA (42 U.S.C. § 7413(c)(2)(C)). Oare was sentenced to time served and to pay a $15,000 fine; the company will pay a $13,000 fine. In addition, prior to sentencing, the EPA and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation monitored Daim for approximately 18 months to ensure the company complied with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding the emission control devices installed on diesel vehicles owned or operated by the company.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation, with assistance from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Police.
Rural and remote Albertans play a crucial role in the province’s prosperity, from feeding the world to producing raw materials and adding to Alberta’s vibrant cultural landscape. They also face unique challenges when it comes to accessing affordable utilities and heating costs. By ensuring rural Albertans have affordable access to the utilities they need, Alberta’s government is helping keep lights on, homes warm and businesses in operation, powering both livelihoods and success.
Budget 2025 provides $8.5 million for the Rural Utilities Program – which consists of the Rural Electric Program, Rural Gas Program and Rural Water Program – and the Remote Area Heating Allowance. This will help communities access critical services like gas, power and water, as well as deliver direct financial relief to thousands of rural Albertans facing high utility bills so that they can continue their vital work.
“Farmers, ranchers and rural communities are the backbone of Alberta, working hard to support us all. In return, we must ensure they can keep doing what they do best, and these grants do just that by ensuring they can access the utilities they need – at a reasonable cost.”
“These grants are making a difference for Albertans across the province, ensuring that everyone, no matter where they live, has access to essential utilities. I’m proud of how this government continues to support and stand by the hard-working rural communities that help drive our province forward.”
A total of $700,000 is allocated to the Rural Electric Program, recognizing the increasing role electricity plays in modern farming and ranching. Under this program, grants are administered by the Alberta Federation of Electrification Associations and support the construction of electrical services for farms and ranches.
“Alberta’s Rural Electric Grant Program is helping rural Albertans access the power they need to continue putting food on tables around the world. We’re grateful for the government’s ongoing support and commitment to rural electrification.”
When it comes to home heating, Budget 2025 commits $5.7 million to the Natural Gas Program, to be administered by the Federation of Alberta Gas Co-ops, to expand and update natural gas infrastructure. This funding will help provide more rural Albertans with reliable and affordable home heating options as well as help communities attract new businesses, create jobs and diversify the local economy.
For those who are unable to access the natural gas system, Budget 2025 also commits $1.6 million for the Remote Area Heating Allowance program. Direct financial relief is provided to more than 2,000 households, the majority from Indigenous communities, to help with the high cost of alternative heating fuels, such as heating oil and propane.
“With this funding, gas co-operatives can continue the ongoing expansion of our natural gas distribution system so that we can connect even more rural communities to affordable gas heating.”
Equally as important as electricity and heat is access to safe, abundant water for residential, livestock and irrigation needs. Budget 2025 commits $500,000 for the Rural Water Program, first introduced in 2024, to ensure rural water co-ops across the province have access to modern water treatment and distribution systems. Grants are administered by the Alberta Federation of Rural Water Co-operatives.
“Access to clean water is non-negotiable for any home or farming operation. The Rural Water Program is providing support as we work to ensure rural Albertans have the modern water distribution systems they need. ”
Budget 2025 is meeting the challenge faced by Alberta with continued investments in education and health, lower taxes for families and a focus on the economy.
Quick facts:
The Rural Electric Program was established in 2013 and has provided more than $7 million in grants to rural Albertans who are actively farming and where the services are being used for a farming operation.
The Rural Gas Program was established in 2001 and has distributed more than $70 million to help build the largest rural gas distribution system in the world.
More than 18 per cent of Albertans live in rural and remote communities.
Related information
Farm fuel and rural utility programs
Utilities Consumer Advocate
Financial Assistance Resources (UCA)
Related news
Power up, costs down (March 25, 2025)
Don’t default to the Rate of Last Resort (Feb. 4, 2025)
Keeping Albertans’ lights on and homes warm (Oct. 21, 2024)
Introducing the Rate of Last Resort (Sept. 25, 2024)
Power rates slashed in half by new market rules (Sept. 5, 2024)
Power watchdog supports Alberta’s electricity market reforms (Aug. 6, 2024)
Preventing power price spikes (June 26, 2024)
Affordable and reliable electricity for Albertans (March 11, 2024)
Site Selected and Preparatory Work to Begin for Construction Permit Application as NANO Nuclear Accelerates Toward Microreactor Deployment
NEW YORK, NY, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: NNE) (“NANO Nuclear” or “the Company”), a leading advanced nuclear energy and technology company focused on developing clean energy solutions, is pleased to announce the signing of a strategic collaboration with the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (U. of I.) to construct the first research KRONOS micro modular reactor (MMR) on the university’s campus.
The agreement formally establishes U. of I. as a partner in the licensing, siting, public engagement, and research operation of the KRONOS MMR, while also identifying the university campus as the permanent site for the reactor as a research and demonstration installation. This milestone marks the beginning of site-specific development for NANO Nuclear’s advanced KRONOS MMR technology and represents a defining moment in NANO Nuclear’s path to commercialization of the KRONOS MMR Energy System.
“This is the milestone we’ve been working so diligently towards, transforming design into reality,” said Jay Yu, Founder and Chairman of NANO Nuclear Energy. “With a site now selected and a world-class university as our partner, we are positioned to be among the first companies to deliver advanced reactor systems within the United States. This isn’t just a research reactor, it’s a proving ground for the future of safe, portable, and resilient nuclear energy. Moreover, this agreement will serve as a foundation for our long-term reactor strategy. Every milestone from this point forward brings us closer to delivering the next generation of nuclear energy to communities, campuses, and industries across the world.”
Figure 1 – NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. Signs Strategic Collaboration with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for the KRONOS MMR
Following initial arrangements, NANO Nuclear will begin the process of geological characterization, including subsurface investigations, to support preparation of a Construction Permit Application (CPA) for submission to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This preparatory work is essential to understanding the environmental parameters of the site, including critical inputs to safety analysis, to ensure the utmost reliability and safety of the facility, and support NANO Nuclear’s Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) and Environmental Report (ER).
“The start of geotechnical investigations represents our first physical action toward constructing the KRONOS MMR,” said James Walker, Chief Executive Officer of NANO Nuclear. “This is a powerful signal to the industry, to investors, and to regulators: NANO Nuclear is building. We are not theorizing. We are much beyond conceptualizing. We are moving toward construction, and this is only the first step.”
Figure 2 – Rendering of NANO Nuclear’s KRONOS MMR™ Energy System at the University of Illinois.
Through this strategic collaboration, U. of I. and NANO Nuclear will work together throughout the regulatory licensing process, plant design implementation, public and stakeholder engagement, and workforce development. The collaboration builds on the university’s prior experience and engagement with nuclear regulators, while introducing an advanced and simplified reactor system to lead the next generation of clean energy deployment.
“The KRONOS MMR project can not only be a national first, it can be a first for academia, enabling students, researchers, regulators, and the public to learn directly from a real-world microreactor development effort,” said Illinois Grainger Engineering Professor Caleb Brooks, Principal Investigator for the University of Illinois. “This system can be the most advanced nuclear research platform on any U.S. campus, with the potential to enable a new paradigm of nuclear power through education, research, and at scale demonstration.”
As part of the agreement, U. of I. will lead the regulatory engagement with the NRC as well as public engagement, support licensing activities including the PSAR and Environmental Report, and play a key role in site layout, constructability assessment, and future operator training programs. NANO Nuclear will oversee plant design, construction, system integration, and commercial pathway development.
“This agreement brings NANO Nuclear to the forefront of advanced reactors deployment in the United States,” said Dr. Florent Heidet, Chief Technology Officer and Head of Reactor Development of NANO Nuclear. “This construction project is where KRONOS’ engineering meets execution and demand. It will set a precedent for all future university-led nuclear technology reactor projects.”
The KRONOS MMR Energy System, NANO Nuclear’s flagship micro modular reactor, is designed to redefine what’s possible in nuclear energy and features:
Truly modular, containerized construction.
Highest in class safety margins, creating an inherently safe reactor.
Rapid & flexible deployment capabilities for remote and secure applications.
Seamless integration with local grids, renewable grids and process heat systems.
The KRONOS MMR Energy System leverages proven, state-of-the-art technology solutions, and combines them into a product that is not reliant on new breakthroughs or lengthy and costly research programs.
This announcement reflects NANO Nuclear’s transition from design to deployment, initiating the first physical project work in the Company’s history. As preparations begin for regulatory licensing and construction activities, NANO Nuclear remains focused on delivering clean, safe, scalable energy through its advanced nuclear technologies. About The Grainger College of Engineering
The Grainger College of Engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is one of the world’s top-ranked engineering institutions, and a globally recognized leader in engineering education, research and public engagement. With a diverse, tight-knit community of faculty, students and alumni, Grainger Engineering sets the standard for excellence in engineering, driving innovation in the economy and bringing revolutionary ideas to the world. Through robust research and discovery, our faculty, staff, students and alumni are changing our world and making advances once only dreamed about, including the MRI, LED, ILIAC, Mosaic, YouTube, flexible electronics, electric machinery, miniature batteries, imaging the black hole and flight on Mars. The world’s brightest minds from The Grainger College of Engineering tackle today’s toughest challenges. And they are building a better, cooler, safer tomorrow. Visit https://grainger.illinois.edu for more information.
About NANO Nuclear Energy, Inc.
NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: NNE) is an advanced technology-driven nuclear energy company seeking to become a commercially focused, diversified, and vertically integrated company across five business lines: (i) cutting edge portable and other microreactor technologies, (ii) nuclear fuel fabrication, (iii) nuclear fuel transportation, (iv) nuclear applications for space and (v) nuclear industry consulting services. NANO Nuclear believes it is the first portable nuclear microreactor company to be listed publicly in the U.S.
Led by a world-class nuclear engineering team, NANO Nuclear’s reactor products in development include patented KRONOS MMR™ Energy System, a stationary high-temperature gas-cooled reactor that is in construction permit pre-application engagement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in collaboration with University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (U. of I.), “ZEUS”, a solid core battery reactor,and “ODIN”, a low-pressure coolant reactor, and the space focused, portable LOKI MMR™, each representing advanced developments in clean energy solutions that are portable, on-demand capable, advanced nuclear microreactors.
Advanced Fuel Transportation Inc. (AFT), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is led by former executives from the largest transportation company in the world aiming to build a North American transportation company that will provide commercial quantities of HALEU fuel to small modular reactors, microreactor companies, national laboratories, military, and DOE programs. Through NANO Nuclear, AFT is the exclusive licensee of a patented high-capacity HALEU fuel transportation basket developed by three major U.S. national nuclear laboratories and funded by the Department of Energy. Assuming development and commercialization, AFT is expected to form part of the only vertically integrated nuclear fuel business of its kind in North America.
HALEU Energy Fuel Inc. (HEF), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is focusing on the future development of a domestic source for a High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) fuel fabrication pipeline for NANO Nuclear’s own microreactors as well as the broader advanced nuclear reactor industry.
NANO Nuclear Space Inc. (NNS), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is exploring the potential commercial applications of NANO Nuclear’s developing micronuclear reactor technology in space. NNS is focusing on applications such as the LOKI MMR™ system and other power systems for extraterrestrial projects and human sustaining environments, and potentially propulsion technology for long haul space missions. NNS’ initial focus will be on cis-lunar applications, referring to uses in the space region extending from Earth to the area surrounding the Moon’s surface.
This news release and statements of NANO Nuclear’s management in connection with this news release contain or may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In this context, forward-looking statements mean statements related to future events, which may impact our expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “potential”, “will”, “should”, “could”, “would” or “may” and other words of similar meaning. In this press release, forward-looking statements include, among others, statements regarding the anticipated benefits to NANO Nuclear of its agreement with U. of I., as well as NANO Nuclear’s development plans, each as described herein. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this news release and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve significant known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. For NANO Nuclear, particular risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include but are not limited to the following: (i) risks related to our U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) or related state nuclear fuel licensing submissions, (ii) risks related the development of new or advanced technology and the acquisition of complimentary technology or businesses, including difficulties with design and testing, cost overruns, regulatory delays, integration issues and the development of competitive technology, (iii) our ability to obtain contracts and funding to be able to continue operations, (iv) risks related to uncertainty regarding our ability to technologically develop and commercially deploy a competitive advanced nuclear reactor or other technology in the timelines we anticipate, if ever, (v) risks related to the impact of government regulation and policies including by the DOE and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, including those associated with the recently enacted ADVANCE Act, and (vi) similar risks and uncertainties associated with the operating an early stage business a highly regulated and rapidly evolving industry. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this news release. These factors may not constitute all factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in any forward-looking statement, and NANO Nuclear therefore encourages investors to review other factors that may affect future results in its filings with the SEC, which are available for review at www.sec.gov and at https://ir.nanonuclearenergy.com/financial-information/sec-filings. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a predictor of actual results. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this news release, except as required by law.
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — With the IRS tax filing deadline approaching on April 15, experts say you should file now. You can boost your refund with so many deductions and credits. A surprising number of people are unaware that the tax filing deadline is quickly approaching on April 15th. In fact, a recent survey powered by Harris QuestDIY revealed that more than half of 18–24 year olds and about one in three 25–34 year olds don’t know when the deadline is and there is no reason to wait to file.
If you’d prefer not to handle your taxes on your own, you can have a TurboTax Full Service expert do them for you. TurboTax can help find deductions and credits you might not know about, and are often overlooked. These deductions and credits can boost your tax refund – and result in more money in your pocket!
Here’s a few deductions and credits you don’t want to miss:
The Earned Income Tax Credit, which for a family with 3 kids is a substantial credit of up to $7,830 and can really help families. However, the IRS notes that one out of five people misses this credit when filing!
Credits for your kids: If you’re a parent, don’t forget valuable credits for your kids like the Child Tax Credit up to $2,000, the Child and Dependent Care Credit up to $1,050 for one child and up to $2,100 for two or more kids. Day camps even count.
Credits for college: If you paid for college for you child, yourself or your spouse, you may be able to claim the American Opportunity Tax Credit up to $2,500 for the first four years of college or the Lifetime Learning Credit up to $2,000 for even one college course.
Credits for Energy Efficient Improvements: If you made energy efficient improvements to your home you can claim a credit of up to $1,200 for improvements like energy efficient doors and windows, up to $2,000 for solar water heaters, and up to 30% of the cost for solar panels.
The Standard Deduction has been adjusted for inflation and is now $14,600 for single filers, $29,200 for those filing married filing jointly, and $21,900 for head of household.
The tax deadline is rapidly approaching, so no matter if you want to DIY or have an expert do your taxes for you, don’t wait, file now with TurboTax.
TurboTax is a registered trademark of Intuit Inc. Learn more at: turbotax.com