MIL-OSI USA: Statement by Rep. Dan Goldman on DOJ’s Announcement That It Would Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell

Source: US Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10)

“In a further effort to conceal the Epstein Files to protect President Trump, the Department of Justice is yet again using the criminal justice system for political purposes by belatedly and improperly seeking cooperation from Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence on convictions for conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse minors.

“As Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche well knows from his lengthy tenure as a prosecutor and supervisor in the Southern District of New York, this is almost certainly not the first time the DOJ has inquired about cooperation from Ghislaine Maxwell, who, as a matter of course, would have been offered the opportunity to reduce her sentence in return for truthful and forthright information about Epstein and all others involved in the scheme.

“DAG Blanche is now doing an end-run around the SDNY and its institutional policies by acting as a political agent of President Trump to forestall the release of the full Epstein files by tacitly floating a pardon for Maxwell in return for information that politically benefits President Trump.

“Maxwell’s information is only as credible as any corroboration found in the Epstein files, including recordings, witness interviews, electronic communications, and photographs and videos. Neither the grand jury testimony nor Maxwell’s compromised information will expose the full extent of the conspiracy, including all those who may be included in the files.

“Do not be fooled: this latest delay tactic is yet another effort to conceal the Epstein files. Full transparency will only occur when DOJ releases the full and complete Epstein files, as they promised.”

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: New operational partnership with delivery giants to combat illegal working

Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

News story

New operational partnership with delivery giants to combat illegal working

New agreement between Home Office and top food delivery firms will help stop illegal working in the delivery sector

More delivery riders caught sharing their accounts with migrants who have no right to work in the UK will be suspended, as part of the government’s UK-wide crackdown on illegal working under the Plan for Change.

A new agreement between the Home Office and Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats will ensure delivery firms receive new information concerning the locations of asylum hotels to help tackle illegal working.

Under existing security measures, any delivery riders caught sharing their accounts with migrants who have no right to work in the UK will be suspended. This new agreement goes further to ensure more people who are breaking the rules can be caught.

Efforts by the companies to crack down on illegal account sharing through real-time identity and Right to Work checks have been successful and have led to thousands being offboarded from platforms. Despite this, there continues to be abuse in the system. Under the new agreement, the firms will be empowered to go further in detecting patterns of misuse, identify unauthorised account sharing and quickly suspend accounts.

The move comes after a commitment made by the firms during a roundtable last month, chaired by Ministers, to implement new security measures. This includes increased facial verification checks and fraud detection tools meaning only verified users can access their platforms. The Home Office will continue to collaborate closely with the three companies, with meetings taking place in the coming weeks to update on progress and delivery.

Today’s announcement is part of the government’s work to step up enforcement across the UK targeting illegal working hotspots, with a focus on the gig economy and migrants working illegally as delivery riders. It forms a key part of a whole system approach to tackle illegal migration from every angle, by ending the false promise of jobs used by smuggling gangs to sell spaces on small boats.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, said:

Illegal working undermines honest business, exploits vulnerable individuals and fuels organised immigration crime.

By enhancing our data sharing with delivery companies, we are taking decisive action to close loopholes and increase enforcement.

The changes come alongside a 50% increase in raids and arrests for illegal working under the Plan for Change, greater security measures and tough new legislation.

Eddy Montgomery, Director of Enforcement, Compliance and Crime at the Home Office, said:

This next step of co-ordinated working with delivery firms will help us target those who seek to work illegally in the gig economy and exploit their status in the UK.

My teams will continue to carry out increased enforcement activity across the UK and I welcome this additional tool to disrupt and stop the abuse of our immigration system.

A Deliveroo spokesperson said:

Deliveroo has led the sector in introducing security measures to prevent the abuse of our platform and tackle the sophisticated criminals seeking new ways to exploit all delivery platforms’ systems. We are fully committed to working with the government as we continue to collectively combat illegal working.

A Just Eat spokesperson said:

Just Eat is committed to tackling any illegal working via our platform. We continue to invest significant resources to strengthen our systems against abuse by individuals and organised criminal groups seeking to evade right to work rules. We are working closely with the Home Office and our industry partners to address any loopholes in the industry’s checks, as well as collaborating on data sharing and enforcement.

An Uber Eats spokesperson said:

Uber Eats is fully committed to tackling illegal work and will continue to work with the Home Office and industry. We have introduced a range of state of the art detection tools to find and remove fraudulent accounts. We are constantly reviewing our tools and finding new ways to detect and take action on people who are trying to work illegally.

Since the government came into power one year ago, there have been more than 10,000 illegal working visits across multiple sectors, leading to 7,130 arrests, up around 50% compared to the year before. This marks the first time in a 12-month period where more than 10,000 visits have taken place.

Almost 750 illegal working civil penalty notices were also handed to businesses caught violating immigration rules in the first quarter of the year, marking the highest level since 2016 – and an 80% increase compared to the same time last year.

The government is tightening the law by making it a legal requirement for all companies, including the gig economy, to check that anyone working for them has the legal right to do so. This will end the abuse of flexible working arrangements. The new measures will be introduced through the landmark Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.

The fight against illegal working forms just one part of government’s work to bolster border security across the system.

Since coming into power one year ago, the government has returned 35,000 people with no right to be in the UK including failed asylum seekers, immigration and foreign national offenders. There are now fewer asylum hotels open than since the election, saving millions of taxpayers’ money.

This is on top of a new groundbreaking deal with the French which will mean that, for the very first time, illegal migrants will be sent back to France. This targets the heart of the criminal smuggling gangs’ business model and sends a clear message that these life-threatening journeys are pointless and a waste of thousands of pounds. 

The deal seeks to detain and return migrants who arrive via small boat, and an equal number of migrants will be able to come to the UK from France through a new legal route – fully documented and subject to strict security checks.

Published 22 July 2025

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Luján Secures Nearly $190 Million in Federal Investments for New Mexico in Committee-Passed Appropriations Bills

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) announced funding secured for New Mexico communities through the Appropriations Committee’s bipartisan passage of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies (MilCon-VA) Appropriations Bill and Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations Bill.

From both appropriations bills, Senator Luján secured $189,820,000 for key local projects that will strengthen our national security, boost violence intervention programs, and equip law enforcement with the resources needed to keep New Mexico communities safe.

“Across New Mexico, these vital investments will deliver resources to enhance public safety in our communities and upgrade infrastructure at our military bases to boost our military’s readiness and safety,” said Senator Luján. “This funding will equip our brave law enforcement officers with the tools they need to protect New Mexicans, support programs aimed at reducing youth violence and violence in Tribal communities, and reinforce critical infrastructure at our military bases. I’m proud to have fought to secure these investments for our communities, and I’ll continue working to deliver the federal support our families and communities need and deserve.”

The Committee process is the first step, and the appropriations bills will next be considered by the full U.S. Senate.

Senator Luján Secured Nearly $190 Million for the Following Local Projects:

Strengthening New Mexico’s Air Force Bases:

$90,000,000 for Cannon Air Force Base to construct a 192-bed dormitory. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

$83,000,000 for Kirtland Air Force Base to construct a Space Rapid Capabilities Office. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

$8,100,000 for infrastructure upgrades at Cannon Air Force Base, specifically for ADAL Security Forces Facility. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

$2,000,000 for infrastructure upgrades at Kirtland Air Force Base, specifically for the design for the Wyoming Gate Project. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

$700,000 for infrastructure upgrades at Holloman Air Force Base, specifically for the design for the Holloman High Speed Test Track. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

Boosting Public Safety Throughout New Mexico:

$1,069,000 for the City of Albuquerque’s Real Time Crime Center for the purchase of law enforcement technology.

$1,042,000 for Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office to purchase a new fleet of vehicles.

$1,031,000 for the New Mexico Department of Public Safety Police to provide 5G technology in fleet vehicles. Secured by Senator Luján, Senator Heinrich, and Representative Stansbury in the House-companion bill.

$1,000,000 for UNM Office of the Medical Investigator DNA processing laboratory to allow for the purchase of equipment for DNA identification. Secured by Senator Luján and Senator Heinrich.

$500,000 for Bernalillo County public safety technology upgrades to address high rates of crime in the Albuquerque metro area. Secured by Senator Luján, Senator Heinrich, and Representative Vasquez in the House-companion bill.

$250,000 for the San Juan County Partnership’s Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program to assist in mitigating individuals with substance use disorder or mental/behavioral health challenges from continuously interacting with law enforcement.

Funding Violence Intervention and Prevention Programs:

$1,0350,000 for the City of Albuquerque’s expansion of school-based violence intervention program to assist at risk students by improving grades and reducing youth violence.

$93,000 for the Coalition to Stop Violence Against Native women to address challenges in domestic violence and sexual violence in Tribal communities.

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: 155th Joint Mekong River Patrol Begins

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

KUNMING, July 22 (Xinhua) — Law enforcement agencies from China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand on Tuesday launched the 155th joint patrol of the Mekong River to combat cross-border crime.

The patrol officially began at around 9 a.m. Tuesday, when three Chinese vessels left Jingha Port in southwest China’s Yunnan Province. Patrol vessels from Laos and Myanmar also set out from ports in Laos and Myanmar at the same time, heading to a pre-designated area.

The four-day, three-night joint patrol involves more than 100 law enforcement officers from China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand, as well as seven patrol vessels from those countries, excluding Thailand. The mission will include combined water-land inspections and training in some key waters on the Mekong River, aimed at combating drug trafficking, fraud, smuggling and illegal migration.

During the patrol, the relevant law enforcement agencies of the four countries will also hold an information-sharing meeting in Chiang Saen, Thailand, to review the security situation in the Lancang-Mekong basin and identify priority areas for further cooperation.

The previous joint patrol ended at the end of June this year. During it, representatives of the joint patrol group organized various preventive actions in villages, schools and enterprises in the coastal zone, distributing more than 1,000 anti-drug leaflets and 4,000 educational materials.

The Mekong River, known in China as the Lancangjiang, is one of the most important waterways for transboundary shipping in Southeast Asia. Joint patrols of the Mekong involving China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand have been conducted since December 2011. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Canada: Update 15: Alberta wildfire update (July 22, 3 p.m.)

Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)

Current situation (as of 3 p.m., July 22)

There are 61 wildfires currently burning across Alberta in the Forest Protection Area, and three mutual aid fires.
- 16 are classified as out of control, 12 are being held and 33 are under control.
- There have been 10 new wildfires since yesterday.
Since Jan. 1, there have been 816 wildfires in the Forest Protection Area, burning more than 670,000 hectares.
More than 1,400 Alberta firefighters, contract firefighters and imported firefighters are currently battling wildfires across the province.
Resources currently being used include heavy equipment, air tankers, helicopters and night vision helicopters.
Alberta has imported firefighters and support staff from Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Australia and Chile.
Information about wildfires can be found by visiting the Alberta Wildfire Status Dashboard.

Orders and alerts

Updates on evacuation orders are available on www.alberta.ca/emergency.
On July 20, the Town of Slave Lake and the Municipal District of Lesser Slave River No. 124 issued an evacuation alert for a wildfire burning northeast of the town and east of Highway 88. Everyone on the east side of the lake must be prepared to evacuate on short notice if needed, including the Town of Slave Lake, properties along Devonshire Road North, the Hamlet of Marten Beach, Summerwood, Township Road 740 and Gilwood Golf and Country Club.
The Municipal District of Opportunity No. 17’s evacuation order for Chipewyan Lake remains in effect.
- Reception centre at Lakeview Sports Centre, 102 Opportunity Drive, Wabasca-Desmarais.
The Kee Tas Kee Now Tribal Council’s evacuation alerts for the communities of Loon Lake, Trout Lake and Peerless Lake remain in effect.
The Municipal District of Opportunity No. 17’s evacuation alert for Red Earth Creek remains in effect.
Alberta Emergency Alerts are issued by local authorities and are updated at their discretion. For the best source of information on the status of evacuation orders and alerts, residents are encouraged to follow their local authorities’ preferred communication channels for updates.
People living in Alberta are encouraged to download the Alberta Emergency Alert mobile app, which immediately pushes all alerts out to subscribers.

Fire bans

Fire advisories are in place for the Grande Prairie, Lac La Biche, High Level, Slave Lake and Peace River Forest Areas.
- Under the advisory, fire permits will only be considered on a case-by-case basis.
- Safe campfires are still permitted.
Please confirm advisories, restrictions or bans for your area at alberta.ca/fire-bans.
Fire bans outside the Forest Protection Area are the responsibility of municipalities and counties.
Everyone has a role to play in wildfire prevention. Follow all fire bans and restrictions to avoid new fire starts. If you see smoke or flames in the forest, call 310-FIRE to report it.
Applying FireSmart principles to homes and property can mitigate the risk of wildfire damage. Removing flammable materials and vegetation around the property and preventing embers from accumulating can help protect your home from wildfires. To learn more, visit FireSmart Alberta.

Air quality

Visit Wildfire Smoke Information for air quality monitoring information to make informed decisions about outdoor activities to protect your health. While wildfire smoke is affecting air quality in parts of Alberta, the presence of smoke does not necessarily mean there is fire near your community. Find information about the status of active wildfires and wildfire updates at Alberta Wildfire.

Roads and highways

There are no road closures from wildfires.
511 Alberta is the best source of real time information as conditions change on our highways. Follow on X (formerly known as Twitter) @511alberta.
Alberta highways that are affected by the wildfires will open and close frequently depending on safety and weather conditions. Be patient and respect the staff at the closure/detour sites – they are there with your safety in mind.

Health

For information about wildfire resources, including mental health, visit Wildfire Resources | Alberta Health Services.

Child care

Opportunity Childcare in Red Earth Creek has reopened.
Licensed child-care programs are required to notify Child Care Connect if they close unexpectedly.
Parents and guardians should reach out to their child-care provider for information on closures.

Justice and court services

The Red Earth Creek courthouse is closed until further notice.
Visit the Alberta Courts website for the most current information regarding court scheduling.

Related information

Active emergency updates
Alberta Emergency Alerts
Download the Alberta Emergency Alerts app
Download the Alberta Wildfire app
How to prepare for an emergency
Wildfire smoke information
Emergency evacuation payments
Free admission to provincial museums and historic sites

MIL OSI Canada News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI: First Bank Announces Second Quarter 2025 Net Income of $10.2 Million

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

HAMILTON, N.J. , July 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Bank (Nasdaq Global Market: FRBA) (“the Bank”) today announced results for the second quarter of 2025. Net income for the second quarter of 2025 was $10.2 million, or $0.41 per diluted share, compared to $11.1 million, or $0.44 per diluted share, for the second quarter of 2024. Return on average assets, return on average equity and return on average tangible equityⁱ for the second quarter of 2025 were 1.04%, 9.77% and 11.16%, respectively, compared to 1.23%, 11.52% and 13.40%, respectively, for the second quarter of 2024.

Second Quarter 2025 Performance Highlights:

Total loans of $3.33 billion at June 30, 2025 grew $91.2 million, or 11.3%, annualized, from the linked quarter ended March 31, 2025.
Total deposits were $3.17 billion at June 30, 2025, increasing $48.4 million, or 6.2% annualized, from the linked quarter ended March 31, 2025.
Net interest margin measured 3.65% for the second quarter of 2025, remaining stable compared to the first quarter of 2025.
Tangible book value per shareⁱⁱ grew to $14.87 at June 30, 2025, increasing 11.1%, annualized, from $14.47 at March 31, 2025.
Strong asset quality continued, with nonperforming assets decreasing to 0.40% of total assets at June 30, 2025, compared to 0.42% at March 31, 2025 and 0.56% at June 30, 2024.

“We are pleased to report growth in high-quality loans and deposits that continues to enhance our core earnings profile,” said Patrick L. Ryan, President and CEO of First Bank. “Our team’s robust performance in expanding commercial and industrial (“C&I”) loans and non-interest bearing deposits during the first half of 2025 demonstrates effective execution of our strategy to grow deep middle market commercial relationships. We have achieved substantial organic growth in our primary areas of focus while maintaining a stable net interest margin, solid asset quality, and an efficiency ratio that remained below 60% for the 24th consecutive quarter. These successes positioned First Bank to deliver an 11.1% annualized increase in tangible book value per share during the second quarter.”

Mr. Ryan added, “We anticipate our pace of loan growth will likely moderate in the second half of 2025 as we continue to prioritize relationship-building and profitability over volume amid continued competition in the deposit market. With a focus on continuing to maximize our risk-adjusted returns on shareholders’ equity, we expect to realize additional benefits from the prudent management of our capital, such as the reduced debt costs afforded by our recent subordinated debt issuance, and by delivering enhanced returns to our shareholders through share buybacks. Furthermore, we remain committed to proactive investments designed to scale our business and achieve top quartile profitability relative to our peers.”

Income Statement

In the second quarter of 2025, the Bank’s net interest income increased to $34.0 million, growing $3.5 million, or 11.4%, compared to the same period in 2024. The increase was primarily driven by an increase of $3.6 million in interest income, reflecting higher average loan balances, which outpaced the $140,000 increase in interest expense. Net interest income increased $1.9 million, or 6.0%, over the linked quarter of 2025. This increase was primarily driven by a $3.4 million increase in interest income, primarily due to higher average loan balances and yields, partially offset by an increase of $1.5 million in interest expense, primarily resulting from higher average borrowings during the second quarter of 2025.

The Bank’s tax equivalent net interest margin measured 3.65% for the second quarter of 2025, increasing by three basis points from 3.62% for the prior year quarter, and remaining stable as compared to the linked quarter ended March 31, 2025. The modest improvement from the prior year quarter was driven by an improved interest rate spread, reflecting declines in average rates on deposits and borrowings which outpaced the reduction in average rates on earning assets. The Bank’s net interest margin remained stable as compared to the linked quarter primarily due to a slight increase in average rates on loans and a slight decrease in average rate on deposits, offset by the increased cost on subordinated debt. The Bank’s tax equivalent net interest margin includes the impact of amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts from fair value measurements of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in acquisitions. The net impact of amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts from fair value measurements of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in acquisitions was a $2.7 million increase in net interest income during the second quarter of 2025, compared to $2.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

The Bank recorded a credit loss expense totaling $2.6 million during the second quarter of 2025, compared to credit loss expense totaling $1.5 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $63,000 for the second quarter of 2024. The increased credit loss expense for the second quarter of 2025 is primarily due to the Bank’s loan growth during the quarter, and to a lesser extent, slight increases in net charge-offs and specific reserves. The Bank’s credit loss expense for the second quarter of 2024 reflected the Bank’s strong and stable asset quality and modest loan growth during the quarter.

In the second quarter of 2025, the Bank recorded non-interest income totaling $2.7 million, compared to $689,000 during the same period in 2024 and $2.0 million during the first quarter of 2025. Non-interest income increased from both periods primarily due to higher loan fee income and a $397,000 gain on the sale of a corporate facility acquired through Malvern acquisition. Additionally, during the second quarter of 2024, the Bank recorded approximately $900,000 in net realized losses on the sale of certain loans as part of its balance sheet repositioning initiatives taken following its acquisition of Malvern Bank in 2023.

Non-interest expense for the second quarter of 2025 was $20.9 million, an increase of $2.9 million, or 16.2%, compared to $18.0 million for the prior year quarter. Higher non-interest expense was largely due to an increase of $1.1 million in salaries and employee benefits related to a larger employee base and $863,000 in one-time executive severance payments, a $429,000 increase in other expense primarily due to a settlement loss of $220,000 relating to a letter of credit commitment acquired through the Malvern Bank acquisition and other miscellaneous increases related to the Bank’s significant growth over the last twelve months, and $268,000 in higher occupancy and equipment costs due to ongoing branch network optimization initiatives and new branch locations added over the past year.

On a linked quarter basis, non-interest expense increased $483,000 from $20.4 million for the first quarter of 2025. The linked quarter growth primarily reflects increases of $841,000 in salaries and employee benefits costs primarily related to the aforementioned executive severance payments and settlement loss during the second quarter. This was partially offset by a decrease in other real estate owned (“OREO”) expense due to an $815,000 impairment of an OREO asset recorded during the linked quarter and the subsequent $34,000 gain on the sale of that property during second quarter 2025.

Income tax expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $3.0 million with an effective tax rate of 22.9%, compared to $2.1 million with an effective tax rate of 16.2% for the second quarter of 2024. The effective tax rate for the second quarter of 2024 was lower due to the recognition of a $1.1 million tax benefit associated with the enactment of the New Jersey Corporate Transit Fee during that period and the related revaluation of the Bank’s deferred tax assets. Income tax expense for the six months ended June 30, 2025 was $5.8 million with an effective tax rate of 22.8%. We anticipate our future effective tax rate will be relatively stable and should not be significantly impacted by any recent legislative tax changes.

On July 4, 2025, subsequent to the end of the Company’s second fiscal quarter, the one big beautiful bill (“OBBB”) was enacted into law. The legislation includes a number of significant tax-related provisions, including changes affecting corporate tax incentives, international tax provisions, and various business credits and deductions. Pursuant to ASC 740, Income Taxes, the Company will recognize the effects of the OBBB in the third fiscal quarter of 2025, the period in which the legislation was enacted. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of the OBBB on its financial statements and, based on its preliminary assessment, does not expect the legislation to have a material impact.

Balance Sheet

The Bank reported total assets of $4.02 billion as of June 30, 2025, an increase of $403.6 million, or 11.2%, from $3.62 billion at June 30, 2024. Total loans increased $329.3 million, or 11.0%, to $3.33 billion at June 30, 2025 compared to $3.00 billion at June 30, 2024. The increase reflects strong organic loan growth, particularly in the C&I and owner-occupied commercial real estate portfolios.

Total assets increased $239.0 million, or 6.3%, from December 31, 2024 to June 30, 2025. Total loans as of June 30, 2025 increased $183.0 million, or 5.8%, from $3.14 billion at December 31, 2024, reflecting strong organic loan growth, particularly in the C&I and owner-occupied commercial real estate portfolios. The Bank’s cash and cash equivalents increased by $73.0 million, or 26.8%, compared to December 31, 2024, as management continued to maintain adequate on-balance sheet liquidity.

The Bank reported total deposits of $3.17 billion as of June 30, 2025, an increase of $200.6 million, or 6.8%, from $2.97 billion at June 30, 2024. Deposit growth was primarily due to our team’s success in attracting new deposit relationships while also maintaining existing balances amid heightened industry-wide pricing competition. Total deposits as of June 30, 2025 increased by $112.3 million, or 3.7%, from $3.06 billion at December 31, 2024, due to a combination of in-market commercial and consumer balances, offset somewhat by a decline in government related deposit balances. Compared to December 31, 2024, non-interest bearing demand deposits increased by $70.9 million to comprise 18.6% of total deposits, up from 17.0%. Over the same period, interest-bearing demand deposits decreased by $75.2 million to comprise 17.5% of total deposits at June 30, 2025, down from 20.6% at December 31, 2024. Time deposits expanded by $73.4 million, or 10.3%, during the first half of 2025.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, stockholders’ equity increased by $13.2 million, or 3.2%, primarily due to net income, partially offset by dividends and share repurchases.

As of June 30, 2025, the Bank continued to exceed all regulatory capital requirements to be considered well-capitalized. The tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets ratioⁱⁱⁱ measured 9.34% as of June 30, 2025 compared to 9.56% at December 31, 2024. The decline from December 31, 2024, was primarily due to the asset growth during the period.

Asset Quality

First Bank’s asset quality metrics remained favorable during the second quarter of 2025. Total nonperforming assets declined from $17.3 million at December 31, 2024 to $16.0 million at June 30, 2025, primarily due to the sale of the Bank’s OREO asset during the second quarter of 2025, partially offset by the addition of nonperforming loans. Total nonperforming loans increased from $11.7 million at December 31, 2024 to $16.0 million at June 30, 2025.

The Bank recorded net charge-offs of $796,000 during the second quarter of 2025, compared to net recoveries of $15,000 in the first quarter of 2025 and net charge-offs of $175,000 in the second quarter of 2024. The allowance for credit losses on loans as a percentage of total loans measured 1.23% at June 30, 2025, compared to 1.21% at both March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024.

Liquidity and Borrowings

Management believes the Bank’s current liquidity position, coupled with our various contingent funding sources, provides the Bank with a strong liquidity base and a diverse source of funding options. The Bank’s cash and cash equivalents increased by $56.8 million, or 19.7%, compared to March 31, 2025, ensuring adequate on-balance sheet liquidity. Borrowings increased by $44.9 million compared to March 31, 2025, as the Bank utilized Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances to support loan growth, while continuing to maintain adequate available borrowing capacity at the FHLB.

Subordinated Debt Issuance

On June 18, 2025, the Bank announced the closing of a $35.0 million private placement of fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes with a maturity date of June 30, 2035 and a fixed rate of interest of 7.125% per annum for the first five years. Thereafter, the notes will pay interest at a floating rate, reset quarterly, equal to the then current three-month Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) plus 343 basis points. The notes may be redeemed at the option of the Bank, without penalty, on or after June 30, 2030. The Bank intends to use the proceeds of this issuance to redeem the Bank’s $30.0 million fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes due June 1, 2030 (the “2020 notes”) on September 1, 2025, as well as for general corporate purposes. Previously, the 2020 notes carried a fixed rate of 5.50% per annum. On June 1, 2025, the 2020 notes began repricing quarterly at a rate equal to the current three-month term SOFR rate plus 538 basis points. The 2020 notes repriced to a rate of 9.704% per annum on June 1, 2025. The notes have been structured to qualify as Tier 2 capital for regulatory purposes.

Cash Dividend Declared

On July 15, 2025, the Bank’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.06 per share to common stockholders of record at the close of business on August 8, 2025, payable on August 22, 2025.

Share Repurchase Program

During the second quarter of 2025 the Bank repurchased 193,185 shares of common stock at an average price of $14.71 per share, under the share repurchase program authorized in October 2024. Through June 30, 2025, 543,185 shares have been repurchased from the current share repurchase plan with a total cost of $8.0 million or $14.81 per share on average. The share repurchase program provides for the repurchase of up to 1.0 million shares of First Bank common stock with an aggregate repurchase amount of up to $16.0 million. The share repurchase program will expire on September 30, 2025.

Conference Call and Earnings Release Supplement

Additional details on the quarterly results and the Bank are included in the attached earnings release supplement. http://ml.globenewswire.com/Resource/Download/5917a538-bdcd-4a25-b364-99fd7d36addb

First Bank will host its earnings call on Wednesday, July 23, 2025 at 9:00 AM Eastern Time. The direct dial toll free number for the live call is 1-800-715-9871 and the access code is 3909613. For those unable to participate in the call, a replay will be available by dialing 1-800-770-2030 (access code 3909613) from one hour after the end of the conference call until October 21, 2025. Replay information will also be available on First Bank’s website at www.firstbanknj.com under the “About Us” tab. Click on “Investor Relations” to access the replay of the conference call.

About First Bank

First Bank is a New Jersey state-chartered bank with 27 full-service branches in Cinnaminson, Delanco, Denville, Ewing, Fairfield, Flemington, Hamilton, Lawrence, Monroe, Morristown, Pennington, Randolph, Somerset, Summit, Trenton and Williamstown, New Jersey; Coventry, Devon, Doylestown, Lionville, Malvern, Media, Paoli, Trevose, Warminster and West Chester, Pennsylvania; and Palm Beach, Florida. With $4.02 billion in assets as of June 30, 2025, First Bank offers a full range of deposit and loan products to individuals and businesses throughout the New York City to Philadelphia corridor. First Bank’s common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “FRBA.”

Forward Looking Statements

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements, either express or implied, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include information regarding First Bank’s future financial performance, business and growth strategy, projected plans and objectives, and related transactions, integration of acquired businesses, ability to recognize anticipated operational efficiencies, and other projections based on macroeconomic and industry trends, which are inherently unreliable due to the multiple factors that impact economic trends, and any such variations may be material. Such forward-looking statements are based on various facts and derived utilizing important assumptions, current expectations, estimates and projections about First Bank, any of which may change over time and some of which may be beyond First Bank’s control. Statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “projects,” “estimates,” “plans” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may” and “could” are generally forward-looking in nature and not historical facts, although not all forward-looking statements include the foregoing. Further, certain factors that could affect our future results and cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: whether First Bank can: successfully implement its growth strategy, including identifying acquisition targets and consummating suitable acquisitions, integrate acquired entities and realize anticipated efficiencies, sustain its internal growth rate, and provide competitive products and services that appeal to its customers and target markets; difficult market conditions and unfavorable economic trends in the United States generally, and particularly in the market areas in which First Bank operates and in which its loans are concentrated, including the effects of declines in housing market values; the impact of public health emergencies, on First Bank, its operations and its customers and employees; an increase in unemployment levels and slowdowns in economic growth; First Bank’s level of nonperforming assets and the costs associated with resolving any problem loans including litigation and other costs; changes in market interest rates may increase funding costs and reduce earning asset yields thus reducing margin; the impact of changes in interest rates and the credit quality and strength of underlying collateral and the effect of such changes on the market value of First Bank’s investment securities portfolio; the extensive federal and state regulation, supervision and examination governing almost every aspect of First Bank’s operations, including changes in regulations affecting financial institutions and expenses associated with complying with such regulations; uncertainties in tax estimates and valuations, including due to changes in state and federal tax law; First Bank’s ability to comply with applicable capital and liquidity requirements, including First Bank’s ability to generate liquidity internally or raise capital on favorable terms, including continued access to the debt and equity capital markets; and possible changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies, laws and regulations and other activities of governments, agencies, and similar organizations. For discussion of these and other risks that may cause actual results to differ from expectations, please refer to “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in First Bank’s Annual Report on Form 10-K and any updates to those risk factors set forth in First Bank’s proxy statement, subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Current Reports on Form 8-K. If one or more events related to these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if First Bank’s underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may differ materially from what First Bank anticipates. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and First Bank does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise. All forward-looking statements expressed or implied, included in this communication are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. This cautionary statement should also be considered in connection with any subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements that First Bank or persons acting on First Bank’s behalf may issue.

This press release contains “non-GAAP” financial measures, which management uses in its analysis of First Bank’s performance. Management believes these non-GAAP financial measures allow for better comparability of period to period operating performance. Additionally, First Bank believes this information is utilized by regulators and market analysts to evaluate a company’s financial condition and therefore, such information is useful to investors. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. A reconciliation of the non-GAAP measures used in this presentation to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is provided in the accompanying financial tables.

ⁱ Return on average tangible equity is a non-GAAP financial measure and is calculated by dividing net income by average tangible equity (average equity minus average goodwill and other intangible assets). For a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial measure, along with the other non-GAAP financial measures in this press release, to their comparable GAAP measures, see the financial reconciliations at the end of this press release.

ⁱⁱ Tangible book value per share is a non-GAAP financial measure and is calculated by dividing common shares outstanding by tangible equity (equity minus goodwill and other intangible assets). For a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial measure, along with the other non-GAAP financial measures in this press release, to their comparable GAAP measures, see the financial reconciliations at the end of this press release.

ⁱⁱⁱ Tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets ratio is a non-GAAP financial measure and is calculated by dividing tangible equity (equity minus goodwill and other intangible assets) by tangible assets (total assets minus goodwill and other intangible assets). For a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial measure, along with the other non-GAAP financial measures in this press release, to their comparable GAAP measures, see the financial reconciliations at the end of this press release.

FIRST BANK CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (in thousands, except for share data, unaudited)

	June 30, 2025		December 31, 2024
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	35,860	$	18,252
Restricted cash		9,900		14,270
Interest bearing deposits with banks		299,131		239,392
Cash and cash equivalents		344,891		271,914
Interest bearing time deposits with banks		747		743
Investment securities available for sale, at fair value (amortized cost of $86,666 and $84,083, respectively)		81,891		77,413
Equity securities, at fair value		1,904		1,870
Investment securities held to maturity, net of allowance for credit losses of $203 and $206, respectively (fair value of $41,941 and $42,770, respectively)		45,749		47,123
Restricted investment in bank stocks		18,009		14,333
Other investments		13,556		11,612
Loans held for sale		2,127		–
Loans, net of deferred fees and costs		3,327,288		3,144,266
Less: Allowance for credit losses		(40,877)		(37,773)
Net loans		3,286,411		3,106,493
Premises and equipment, net		17,987		21,351
Other real estate owned, net		–		5,637
Accrued interest receivable		14,505		14,267
Bank-owned life insurance		86,980		85,553
Goodwill		44,166		44,166
Other intangible assets, net		7,860		8,827
Deferred income taxes, net		25,032		25,528
Other assets		27,520		43,516
Total assets	$	4,019,335	$	3,780,346

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Liabilities:
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	590,209	$	519,320
Interest bearing deposits		2,578,004		2,536,576
Total deposits		3,168,213		3,055,896
Borrowings		326,802		246,933
Subordinated debentures		64,343		29,954
Accrued interest payable		4,443		3,820
Other liabilities		33,155		34,587
Total liabilities		3,596,956		3,371,190
Stockholders’ Equity:
Preferred stock, par value $2 per share; 10,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued and outstanding		–		–
Common stock, par value $5 per share; 40,000,000 shares authorized; 27,630,039 shares issued and 24,905,790 shares outstanding and 27,375,439 shares issued and 25,100,829 shares outstanding, respectively		136,640		135,495
Additional paid-in capital		125,290		124,524
Retained earnings		193,395		176,779
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(3,525)		(4,925)
Treasury stock, 2,724,249 and 2,274,610 shares, respectively		(29,421)		(22,717)
Total stockholders’ equity		422,379		409,156
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	4,019,335	$	3,780,346

FIRST BANK CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (in thousands, except for share data, unaudited)

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025		2024		2025		2024
Interest and Dividend Income
Investment securities—taxable	$	1,246	$	1,278	$	2,434	$	2,460
Investment securities—tax-exempt		41		36		92		74
Interest bearing deposits with banks, Federal funds sold and other		3,487		3,482		6,484		6,507
Loans, including fees		54,394		50,763		105,946		100,082
Total interest and dividend income		59,168		55,559		114,956		109,123

Interest Expense
Deposits		21,276		22,386		42,120		43,172
Borrowings		3,256		2,193		5,668		4,309
Subordinated debentures		627		440		1,067		784
Total interest expense		25,159		25,019		48,855		48,265
Net interest income		34,009		30,540		66,101		60,858
Credit loss expense (benefit)		2,558		63		4,102		(635)
Net interest income after credit loss expense (benefit)		31,451		30,477		61,999		61,493

Non-Interest Income
Service fees on deposit accounts		382		350		738		694
Loan fees		568		117		894		219
Income from bank-owned life insurance		723		609		1,516		1,394
Gains on sale of loans, net		75		(900)		104		(671)
Gains on recovery of acquired loans		100		56		124		174
Gain on sale of other assets		397		–		397		–
Other non-interest income		457		457		900		843
Total non-interest income		2,702		689		4,673		2,653

Non-Interest Expense
Salaries and employee benefits		11,959		9,968		23,077		20,006
Occupancy and equipment		2,350		2,082		4,814		4,108
Legal fees		279		240		647		556
Other professional fees		924		929		1,650		1,685
Regulatory fees		684		640		1,368		1,242
Directors’ fees		260		270		542		512
Data processing		893		749		1,698		1,555
Marketing and advertising		503		377		902		673
Travel and entertainment		251		285		487		529
Insurance		233		251		447		495
Other real estate owned expense, net		69		129		989		217
Other expense		2,462		2,033		4,630		4,185
Total non-interest expense		20,867		17,953		41,251		35,763
Income Before Income Taxes		13,286		13,213		25,421		28,383
Income tax expense		3,047		2,140		5,801		4,798
Net Income	$	10,239	$	11,073	$	19,620	$	23,585

Basic earnings per common share	$	0.41	$	0.44	$	0.78	$	0.94
Diluted earnings per common share	$	0.41	$	0.44	$	0.77	$	0.93

Basic weighted average common shares outstanding		25,029,164		25,129,199		25,073,368		25,084,558
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding		25,234,120		25,258,785		25,335,743		25,228,888

FIRST BANK AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS WITH INTEREST AND AVERAGE RATES (dollars in thousands, unaudited)

	Three Months Ended June 30,
	2025							2024
	Average				Average			Average				Average
	Balance		Interest		Rate (5)			Balance		Interest		Rate (5)
Interest earning assets
Investment securities ^{(1) (2)}	$	135,094	$	1,295		3.84	%	$	146,289	$	1,321		3.63	%
Loans ⁽³⁾		3,296,031		54,394		6.62	%		2,997,892		50,763		6.81	%
Interest bearing deposits with banks,
Federal funds sold and other		276,488		3,079		4.47	%		224,503		3,101		5.56	%
Restricted investment in bank stocks		17,960		276		6.16	%		11,178		243		8.74	%
Other investments		15,402		132		3.44	%		12,136		138		4.57	%
Total interest earning assets ⁽²⁾		3,740,975		59,176		6.34	%		3,391,998		55,566		6.59	%
Allowance for credit losses		(39,507)							(36,784)
Non-interest earning assets		251,475							263,698
Total assets	$	3,952,943						$	3,618,912

Interest bearing liabilities
Interest bearing demand deposits	$	606,838	$	3,701		2.45	%	$	591,222	$	3,813		2.59	%
Money market deposits		1,064,363		8,917		3.36	%		1,061,593		10,559		4.00	%
Savings deposits		140,301		694		1.98	%		158,158		619		1.57	%
Time deposits		781,299		7,964		4.09	%		678,197		7,395		4.39	%
Total interest bearing deposits		2,592,801		21,276		3.29	%		2,489,170		22,386		3.62	%
Borrowings		319,494		3,256		4.09	%		171,533		2,193		5.14	%
Subordinated debentures		34,966		627		7.17	%		29,880		440		5.89	%
Total interest bearing liabilities		2,947,261		25,159		3.42	%		2,690,583		25,019		3.74	%
Non-interest bearing deposits		548,279							497,205
Other liabilities		36,960							44,480
Stockholders’ equity		420,443							386,644
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	3,952,943						$	3,618,912
Net interest income/interest rate spread ⁽²⁾				34,017		2.92	%				30,547		2.85	%
Net interest margin ^{(2) (4)}						3.65	%						3.62	%
Tax equivalent adjustment ⁽²⁾				(8)							(7)
Net interest income			$	34,009						$	30,540

(1) Average balance of investment securities available for sale is based on amortized cost.

(2) Interest and average rates are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a federal income tax rate of 21%.

(3) Average balances of loans include loans on nonaccrual status.

(4) Net interest income divided by average total interest earning assets.

(5) Annualized.

FIRST BANK AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS WITH INTEREST AND AVERAGE RATES (dollars in thousands, unaudited)

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025							2024
	Average				Average			Average				Average
	Balance		Interest		Rate (5)			Balance		Interest		Rate (5)
Interest earning assets
Investment securities^{(1) (2)}	$	134,686	$	2,545		3.81	%	$	146,719	$	2,549		3.49	%
Loans⁽³⁾		3,233,747		105,946		6.61	%		2,988,707		100,082		6.73	%
Interest bearing deposits with banks,
Federal funds sold and other		255,378		5,654		4.46	%		213,831		5,811		5.46	%
Restricted investment in bank stocks		16,059		576		7.23	%		10,800		442		8.23	%
Other investments		14,731		254		3.48	%		12,003		254		4.26	%
Total interest earning assets⁽²⁾		3,654,601		114,975		6.34	%		3,372,060		109,138		6.51	%
Allowance for credit losses		(38,847)							(37,196)
Non-interest earning assets		256,261							262,465
Total assets	$	3,872,015						$	3,597,329

Interest bearing liabilities
Interest bearing demand deposits	$	625,682	$	7,728		2.49	%	$	605,081	$	7,479		2.49	%
Money market deposits		1,054,742		17,548		3.36	%		1,038,250		20,348		3.94	%
Savings deposits		141,395		1,344		1.92	%		160,135		1,193		1.50	%
Time deposits		749,765		15,500		4.17	%		674,872		14,152		4.22	%
Total interest bearing deposits		2,571,584		42,120		3.30	%		2,478,338		43,172		3.50	%
Borrowings		277,245		5,668		4.12	%		169,337		4,309		5.12	%
Subordinated debentures		32,478		1,067		6.57	%		36,175		784		4.33	%
Total interest bearing liabilities		2,881,307		48,855		3.42	%		2,683,850		48,265		3.62	%
Non-interest bearing deposits		534,877							489,353
Other liabilities		38,755							42,534
Stockholders’ equity		417,076							381,592
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	3,872,015						$	3,597,329
Net interest income/interest rate spread⁽²⁾				66,120		2.92	%				60,873		2.89	%
Net interest margin^{(2) (4)}						3.65	%						3.63	%
Tax equivalent adjustment⁽²⁾				(19)							(15)
Net interest income			$	66,101						$	60,858

(1) Average balance of investment securities available for sale is based on amortized cost.
(2) Interest and average rates are presented on a tax equivalent basis using a federal income tax rate of 21%.
(3) Average balances of loans include loans on nonaccrual status.
(4) Net interest income divided by average total interest earning assets.
(5) Annualized.

FIRST BANK QUARTERLY FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (in thousands, except for share and employee data, unaudited)

	As of or For the Quarter Ended
	6/30/2025		3/31/2025		12/31/2024		9/30/2024		6/30/2024
EARNINGS
Net interest income	$	34,009	$	32,092	$	31,594	$	30,094	$	30,540
Credit loss expense		2,558		1,544		234		1,579		63
Non-interest income		2,702		1,971		2,176		2,479		689
Non-interest expense		20,867		20,384		19,124		18,644		17,953
Income tax expense		3,047		2,754		3,915		4,188		2,140
Net income		10,239		9,381		10,497		8,162		11,073

PERFORMANCE RATIOS
Return on average assets⁽¹⁾		1.04%		1.00%		1.10%		0.88%		1.23%
Return on average equity⁽¹⁾		9.77%		9.20%		10.27%		8.15%		11.52%
Return on average tangible equity^{(1) (2)}		11.16%		10.54%		11.82%		9.42%		13.40%
Net interest margin^{(1) (3)}		3.65%		3.65%		3.54%		3.48%		3.62%
Yield on loans⁽¹⁾		6.62%		6.59%		6.62%		6.73%		6.81%
Total cost of deposits⁽¹⁾		2.72%		2.75%		2.89%		3.06%		3.01%
Efficiency ratio⁽²⁾		56.24%		57.65%		56.98%		58.49%		55.88%

SHARE DATA
Common shares outstanding		24,905,790		25,045,612		25,100,829		25,186,920		25,144,983
Basic earnings per share	$	0.41	$	0.37	$	0.42	$	0.32	$	0.44
Diluted earnings per share		0.41		0.37		0.41		0.32		0.44
Book value per share		16.96		16.57		16.30		15.96		15.61
Tangible book value per share⁽²⁾		14.87		14.47		14.19		13.84		13.46

MARKET DATA
Market value per share	$	15.47	$	14.81	$	14.07	$	15.20	$	12.74
Market value / Tangible book value⁽²⁾		104.03%		102.35%		99.16%		109.83%		94.65%
Market capitalization	$	385,293	$	370,926	$	353,169	$	382,841	$	320,347

CAPITAL & LIQUIDITY
Stockholders’ equity / assets		10.51%		10.69%		10.82%		10.70%		10.86%
Tangible stockholders’ equity / tangible assets⁽²⁾		9.34%		9.47%		9.56%		9.41%		9.50%
Loans / deposits		105.02%		103.73%		102.89%		101.23%		101.02%

ASSET QUALITY
Net charge-offs (recoveries)	$	796	$	(15)	$	(155)	$	386	$	175
Nonperforming loans		15,978		11,584		11,677		12,014		14,227
Nonperforming assets		15,978		16,406		17,314		17,651		20,226
Net charge offs (recoveries)/ average loans⁽¹⁾		0.10%		(0.00%)		(0.02%)		0.05%		0.02%
Nonperforming loans / total loans		0.48%		0.36%		0.37%		0.39%		0.47%
Nonperforming assets / total assets		0.40%		0.42%		0.46%		0.47%		0.56%
Allowance for credit losses on loans / total loans		1.23%		1.21%		1.20%		1.21%		1.21%
Allowance for credit losses on loans / nonperforming loans		255.83%		338.60%		323.48%		311.59%		254.81%

OTHER DATA
Total assets	$	4,019,335	$	3,880,759	$	3,780,346	$	3,757,653	$	3,615,731
Total loans		3,327,288		3,236,039		3,144,266		3,087,488		2,998,029
Total deposits		3,168,213		3,119,794		3,055,896		3,050,070		2,967,634
Total stockholders’ equity		422,379		414,915		409,156		402,070		392,489
Number of full-time equivalent employees		335		315		318		313		294

(1) Annualized.
(2) Non-U.S. GAAP financial measure that we believe provides management and investors with information that is useful in understanding our financial performance and condition. See accompanying table, “Non-U.S. GAAP Financial Measures,” for calculation and reconciliation.
(3) Tax equivalent using a federal income tax rate of 21%.

FIRST BANK QUARTERLY FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (dollars in thousands, unaudited)

	As of the Quarter Ended
	6/30/2025		3/31/2025		12/31/2024		9/30/2024		6/30/2024
LOAN COMPOSITION
Commercial and industrial	$	706,849	$	651,690	$	576,625	$	546,541	$	530,996
Commercial real estate:
Owner-occupied		707,766		694,113		671,357		688,988		647,625
Investor		1,192,716		1,160,549		1,181,684		1,170,508		1,143,954
Construction and development		161,361		200,262		205,096		193,460		190,108
Multi-family		309,189		308,217		287,843		267,861		270,238
Total commercial real estate		2,371,032		2,363,141		2,345,980		2,320,817		2,251,925
Residential real estate:
Residential mortgage and first lien home equity loans		160,935		142,298		142,769		144,081		144,978
Home equity–second lien loans and revolving lines of credit		62,738		52,438		51,020		49,763		46,882
Total residential real estate		223,673		194,736		193,789		193,844		191,860
Consumer and other		29,248		29,760		31,324		29,518		26,321
Total loans prior to deferred loan fees and costs		3,330,802		3,239,327		3,147,718		3,090,720		3,001,102
Net deferred loan fees and costs		(3,514)		(3,288)		(3,452)		(3,232)		(3,073)
Total loans	$	3,327,288	$	3,236,039	$	3,144,266	$	3,087,488	$	2,998,029

LOAN MIX
Commercial and industrial		21.2%		20.1%		18.3%		17.7%		17.7%
Commercial real estate:
Owner-occupied		21.3%		21.5%		21.4%		22.3%		22.3%
Investor		35.8%		35.9%		37.6%		37.9%		37.9%
Construction and development		4.8%		6.2%		6.5%		6.3%		6.3%
Multi-family		9.3%		9.5%		9.1%		8.7%		8.7%
Total commercial real estate		71.3%		73.1%		74.6%		75.2%		75.2%
Residential real estate:
Residential mortgage and first lien home equity loans		4.8%		4.4%		4.6%		4.7%		4.7%
Home equity–second lien loans and revolving lines of credit		1.9%		1.6%		1.6%		1.6%		1.6%
Total residential real estate		6.7%		6.0%		6.2%		6.3%		6.3%
Consumer and other		0.9%		0.9%		1.0%		0.9%		0.9%
Net deferred loan fees and costs		(0.1%)		(0.1%)		(0.1%)		(0.1%)		(0.1%)
Total loans		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%

FIRST BANK QUARTERLY FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (dollars in thousands, unaudited)

	As of the Quarter Ended
	6/30/2025		3/31/2025		12/31/2024		9/30/2024		6/30/2024
DEPOSIT COMPOSITION
Non-interest bearing demand deposits	$	590,209	$	535,584	$	519,320	$	519,079	$	499,765
Interest bearing demand deposits		553,909		629,974		629,099		597,802		574,515
Money market and savings deposits		1,241,277		1,197,517		1,198,039		1,235,637		1,199,382
Time deposits		782,818		756,719		709,438		697,552		693,972
Total Deposits	$	3,168,213	$	3,119,794	$	3,055,896	$	3,050,070	$	2,967,634

DEPOSIT MIX
Non-interest bearing demand deposits		18.6%		17.2%		17.0%		17.0%		16.8%
Interest bearing demand deposits		17.5%		20.2%		20.6%		19.6%		19.4%
Money market and savings deposits		39.2%		38.4%		39.2%		40.5%		40.4%
Time deposits		24.7%		24.2%		23.2%		22.9%		23.4%
Total Deposits		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%		100.0%

FIRST BANK NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (in thousands, except for share data, unaudited)

	As of or For the Quarter Ended
	6/30/2025		3/31/2025		12/31/2024		9/30/2024		6/30/2024
Return on Average Tangible Equity
Net income (numerator)	$	10,239	$	9,381	$	10,497	$	8,162	$	11,073

Average stockholders’ equity	$	420,443	$	413,672	$	406,579	$	398,535	$	386,644
Less: Average Goodwill and other intangible assets, net		52,301		52,805		53,278		53,823		54,347
Average Tangible stockholders’ equity (denominator)	$	368,142	$	360,867	$	353,301	$	344,712	$	332,297

Return on average tangible equity⁽¹⁾		11.16%		10.54%		11.82%		9.42%		13.40%

Tangible Book Value Per Share
Stockholders’ equity	$	422,379	$	414,915	$	409,156	$	402,070	$	392,489
Less: Goodwill and other intangible assets, net		52,026		52,507		52,993		53,484		54,026
Tangible stockholders’ equity (numerator)	$	370,353	$	362,408	$	356,163	$	348,586	$	338,463

Common shares outstanding (denominator)		24,905,790		25,045,612		25,100,829		25,186,920		25,144,983

Tangible book value per share	$	14.87	$	14.47	$	14.19	$	13.84	$	13.46

Tangible Equity / Tangible Assets
Stockholders’ equity	$	422,379	$	414,915	$	409,156	$	402,070	$	392,489
Less: Goodwill and other intangible assets, net		52,026		52,507		52,993		53,484		54,026
Tangible stockholders’ equity (numerator)	$	370,353	$	362,408	$	356,163	$	348,586	$	338,463

Total assets	$	4,019,335	$	3,880,759	$	3,780,346	$	3,757,653	$	3,615,731
Less: Goodwill and other intangible assets, net		52,026		52,507		52,993		53,484		54,026
Tangible total assets (denominator)	$	3,967,309	$	3,828,252	$	3,727,353	$	3,704,169	$	3,561,705

Tangible stockholders’ equity / tangible assets		9.34%		9.47%		9.56%		9.41%		9.50%

Efficiency Ratio
Non-interest expense	$	20,867	$	20,384	$	19,124	$	18,644	$	17,953
Less: Other real estate owned write-down		–		815		–		362		–
Adjusted non-interest expense (numerator)	$	20,867	$	19,569	$	19,124	$	18,282	$	17,953

Net interest income	$	34,009	$	32,092	$	31,594	$	30,094	$	30,540
Non-interest income		2,702		1,971		2,176		2,479		689
Total revenue		36,711		34,063		33,770		32,573		31,229
Add: Losses on sale of investment securities, net		–		–		–		555		–
(Subtract) Add: (Gains) losses on sale of loans, net		(75)		(29)		(38)		(135)		900
(Subtract): Gain on sale of other assets		(397)		–		–		–		–
Less: Bank Owned Life Insurance Incentive		–		(88)		(168)		(1,116)		–
Add: Executive Officer Severance Benefits		863		–		–		–		–
Adjusted total revenue (denominator)	$	37,102	$	33,946	$	33,564	$	31,877	$	32,129

Efficiency ratio		56.24%		57.65%		56.98%		57.35%		55.88%

(1) Annualized.

The MIL Network –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Newhouse Votes for Responsible Land Management, Unleashing Natural Resources

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Dan Newhouse (4th District of Washington)

Headline: Newhouse Votes for Responsible Land Management, Unleashing Natural Resources

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Rep. Dan Newhouse (WA-04) released the following statement upon committee passage of the Fiscal Year 2026 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

“In my four years as Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, I worked hard to counter the Biden administration’s top-down regulations that threatened our public lands and natural resources across the West. This legislation is a course correction from the previous administration to unleash the resources we have under our feet, protect public lands for all who enjoy their benefits, and prioritize conservation over preservation across the United States. I also secured critical funding for three water infrastructure projects in Othello, Winthrop, and Oroville to address the water supply and distribution challenges these communities face,” said Rep. Newhouse.

Newhouse added, “I thank Subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson and Full Committee Chairman Tom Cole for their leadership and commitment to funding priorities that support our rural way of life.”

The Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill provides a total discretionary allocation of $37.971 billion, which is $2.54 billion (6%) below the Fiscal Year 2025 enacted level.

The bill fully funds the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program, estimated at $550 million, and prioritizes funding for Tribes and Wildland Fire Management.

Champions American energy dominance and reduces regulatory burdens by:

Providing the OMB requested increase of $13.6 million for offshore oil and gas development at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the OMB requested increase of $15 million for onshore oil and gas development at the Bureau of Land Management.
Requiring the Secretary of the Interior to conduct onshore and offshore oil and gas lease sales.
Prohibiting the use of the social cost of carbon, which has stymied new development.
Prohibiting the EPA from imposing the methane fee on oil and gas producers created by the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act.
Prohibiting multiple U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rulings used to weaponize the Endangered Species Act against land users and energy producers.

Protects access to public lands by:

Blocking restrictions on hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting on federal lands.
Preventing additional regulations on ammunition, ammunition components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act or any other law.
Prohibiting restrictions on where standard lead ammunition and fishing tackle can be used on certain federal lands or waters unless conditions are met.
Stopping the Bureau of Land Management’s Conservation and Landscape Health rule to ensure continued access to public lands for grazing, recreation, and energy development.

Bolsters U.S. national security and border protections by:

Reducing our reliance on foreign countries for critical minerals by promoting access to resources here at home through blocking certain lease withdrawals in Minnesota and reinstating mineral leases in the Superior National Forest.
Promoting domestic mining by ensuring ancillary mining activities can be approved, which is a fix to the Rosemont decision that created additional red tape and regulatory uncertainty for mining operations.
Ensuring chemical and pesticide manufacturers are not overburdened with requirements that would drive businesses overseas and threaten American competitiveness.
Prohibiting funds for the National Park Service to provide housing to an alien without lawful status.
Providing $771.84 million for Tribal Public Safety and Justice programs, which is a 39% increase over the FY25 enacted level.

Newhouse secured funding for the following projects in Washington’s Fourth District in this legislation:

City of Othello

Amount Secured: $1,000,000

The City of Othello is 100 percent reliant on a rapidly depleting groundwater supply and after several years of data collection, study completions, and pilot test studies, the City of Othello has developed an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) strategy to mitigate declining water levels in the Wanapum Basalt aquifer. The ASR method has proven to be effective, and the City has progressed to the stage of predesign. The City is requesting funding assistance with the next phase of “design” to build a permanent solution that will result in a sustainable, reliable, environmentally responsible water supply plan for the Othello region.

City of Winthrop

Amount Secured: $1,500,000

The proposed project will improve the reliability of the Town of Winthrop’s water source and distribution system. The town only has one functioning well (Well #1). If that well goes down, the town only has a day or two of water available in its three reservoirs. Well #2 has been approved as an emergency water source by Department of Health, but it needs to be rehabilitated to be in regular use.

Scope of work includes:

Rehabilitation of Well #2, including new pump, motor, piping, electrical/controls, generator backup, and a new well house.
Repairs to the Town’s East Reservoir, including waterproofing, concrete repairs, and altitude valve replacement.

Community benefits include public health and safety, fire protection, and water conservation. Winthrop is ranked #6 on the Washington DNR’s burn probability list. Given the community’s vulnerability to wildfire, ensuring a resilient and redundant water supply system with reliable fire flow capacity is critical for public safety.

City of Oroville

Amount Secured: $1,400,000

The project will result in new, upgraded water pipes that ensure safe and reliable drinking water to Oroville’s north end area. The City of Oroville requests $1,750,000 for construction of the first phase of the project which consists of approximately 3,500 lineal feet of aging and undersized water transmission main piping serving the “North End” of the City’s water system. The existing water t-mains consist of 4-inch and 6-inch deteriorated PVC pipe, which cannot provide adequate fire flow or service pressure and are prone to leaking. The project will replace these existing, undersized transmission mains with 12-inch transmission mains along 20th from Main St to Juniper St, and along Juniper St and Main St from 20th St to 23rd St. The project will also replace existing, undersized water transmission mains with 8-inch transmission mains along Deerpath Dr from 21st St to 23rd St, and along 23rd St from Deerpath Dr to Westlake Ave.

Bill text before amendments can be found here.

###

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Raleigh County Woman Pleads Guilty to Federal Drug Crime

Source: Office of United States Attorneys

BECKLEY, W.Va. – Carey Ann Trotter, also known as “Carey Ann Metz-Wood,” 41, of Crab Orchard, pleaded guilty today to aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute 5 grams or more of methamphetamine.

According to court documents and statements made in court, on July 1, 2024, Trotter possessed approximately 10.51 grams of methamphetamine and a total of 25.95 grams of para-fluorofentanyl, a synthetic opioid, in several packages. As part of her guilty plea, Trotter admitted that she intended to use some of the controlled substances and aid and abet another individual in the possession and distribution of controlled substances.

Trotter further admitted to possessing a Glock model 21 .45-caliber pistol, a CBC model 817 .17-caliber rifle, and a 26-round high-capacity magazine for .45-caliber ammunition. Federal law prohibits a person with a prior felony conviction from possessing a firearm or ammunition. Trotter knew she was prohibited from possessing a firearm because of her prior felony conviction for delivery of oxycodone in Raleigh County Circuit Court on January 3, 2017.

Trotter is scheduled to be sentenced on November 7, 2025, and faces a mandatory minimum of five years and up to 40 years in prison, at least four years of supervised release, and a $5 million fine.

Trotter’s co-defendant, Joshua Mason Trotter, 44, of Crab Orchard, pleaded guilty on May 27, 2025, to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Joshua Mason Trotter admitted to possessing the Glock model 21 .45-caliber pistol and CBC model 817 .17-caliber rifle on July 1, 2024. He is scheduled to be sentenced on September 26, 2025.

Acting United States Attorney Lisa G. Johnston made the announcement and commended the investigative work of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the Raleigh County Sheriff’s Office.

United States Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn presided over the hearing. Assistant United States Attorney JC MacCallum is prosecuting the case.

This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) and Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN).

A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. Related court documents and information can be found on PACER by searching for Case No. 5:25-cr-22.

###

MIL Security OSI –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI: Range Announces Second Quarter 2025 Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

FORT WORTH, Texas, July 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION (NYSE: RRC) today announced its second quarter 2025 financial results.

Second Quarter 2025 Highlights –

Cash flow from operating activities of $336 million
Cash flow from operations, before working capital changes, of $301 million
Repurchased $53 million of shares, paid $21 million in dividends, and reduced net debt to $1.2 billion
Capital spending was $154 million, approximately 23% of the annual 2025 budget
Realized price, including hedges, was $3.49 per mcfe
Natural gas differential, including basis hedging, of ($0.50) per mcf to NYMEX
Pre-hedge NGL realizations of $23.73 per barrel – a premium of $0.61 over Mont Belvieu equivalent
Production averaged 2.20 Bcfe per day, approximately 68% natural gas
Improved 2025 production guidance and increased expected lateral footage in year-end inventory, while lowering 2025 capital due to operational efficiencies.

Commenting on the results, Dennis Degner, the Company’s CEO said, “This year is off to a great start with another quarter of efficiency gains and consistent well performance driving strong free cash flow and building operational momentum. Our strong financial results supported $74 million in share repurchases and dividends, while lowering net debt to $1.2 billion. We believe Range is well positioned to benefit as in-basin demand opportunities materialize alongside a global call on natural gas. Range is one of the few producers in Appalachia with sufficient high-quality inventory to support the required growth in baseload supply. Further, Range’s continued efficiencies are supported by our countercyclical investments in drilled inventory over the last 18 months and consistent well results. Importantly, we intend to help meet future demand increases while also returning significant capital to shareholders.”

Financial Discussion

Except for generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) reported amounts, specific expense categories exclude non-cash impairments, unrealized mark-to-market adjustment on derivatives, non-cash stock compensation and other items shown separately on the attached tables. “Unit costs” as used in this release are composed of direct operating, transportation, gathering, processing and compression, taxes other than income, general and administrative, interest and depletion, depreciation and amortization costs divided by production. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a definition of non-GAAP financial measures and the accompanying tables that reconcile each non-GAAP measure to its most directly comparable GAAP financial measure.

Second Quarter 2025 Results

GAAP revenues and other income for second quarter 2025 totaled $856 million, GAAP net cash provided from operating activities (including changes in working capital) was $336 million, and GAAP net income was $238 million ($0.99 per diluted share). Second quarter earnings results include a $155 million mark-to-market derivative gain due to decreases in commodity prices.

Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital, a non-GAAP measure, was $301 million. Adjusted net income comparable to analysts’ estimates, a non-GAAP measure, was $158 million ($0.66 per diluted share) in second quarter 2025.

The following table details Range’s second quarter 2025 unit costs per mcfe^(a):

Expenses	2Q 2025 (per mcfe)		2Q 2024 (per mcfe)		Increase (Decrease)

Direct operating^(a)	$	0.11	$	0.11	0	%
Transportation, gathering, processing and compression^(a)		1.52		1.44	6	%
Taxes other than income		0.04		0.03	33	%
General and administrative^(a)		0.16		0.16	0	%
Interest expense^(a)		0.13		0.14	(7	%)
Total cash unit costs^(b)		1.97		1.88	5	%
Depletion, depreciation and amortization (DD&A)		0.46		0.45	2	%
Total unit costs plus DD&A^(b)	$	2.43	$	2.33	4	%

(a) Excludes stock-based compensation, one-time settlements, and amortization of deferred financing costs.
(b) Totals may not be exact due to rounding.

The following table details Range’s average production and realized pricing for second quarter 2025^(a):

	2Q25 Production & Realized Pricing
		Natural Gas (mcf)			Oil (bbl)			NGLs (bbl)		Natural Gas Equivalent (mcfe)
		Natural Gas (mcf)			Oil (bbl)			NGLs (bbl)		Natural Gas Equivalent (mcfe)

Net production per day			1,497,771			6,382			110,209		2,197,321

Average NYMEX price		$	3.44		$	63.72		$	23.12
Differential, including basis hedging			(0.50	)		(10.95	)		0.61
Realized prices before NYMEX hedges			2.94			52.77			23.73		3.35
Settled NYMEX hedges			0.19			1.45			0.15		0.14
Average realized prices after hedges		$	3.13		$	54.22		$	23.88	$	3.49

(a) Totals may not be exact due to rounding

Second quarter 2025 natural gas, NGLs and oil price realizations (including the impact of cash-settled hedges and derivative settlements) averaged $3.49 per mcfe.

The average natural gas price, including the impact of basis hedging, was $2.94 per mcf, or a ($0.50) per mcf differential to NYMEX. Range continues to expect its 2025 natural gas differential to average ($0.40) to ($0.48) relative to NYMEX.
Range’s pre-hedge NGL price during the quarter was $23.73 per barrel, approximately $0.61 above the Mont Belvieu weighted equivalent. Range is improving its expected 2025 NGL differential to average +$0.40 to +$1.25 relative to a Mont Belvieu equivalent barrel.
Crude oil and condensate price realizations, before realized hedges, averaged $52.77 per barrel, or $10.95 below WTI (West Texas Intermediate). Range continues to expect its 2025 condensate differential to average ($10.00) to ($15.00) relative to NYMEX.

Repurchase Activity and Financial Position

During the second quarter, Range repurchased 1,453,438 shares at an average price of approximately $36.35 per share. As of June 30, 2025, the Company had approximately $900 million of availability under the share repurchase program.

In May 2025, Range paid off the remaining principal balance of its 4.875% senior notes due 2025 at par by utilizing cash on hand and by borrowing on the bank credit facility. As of June 30, 2025, Range had net debt outstanding of approximately $1.22 billion, consisting of $1.1 billion of senior notes, $125 million on the facility, and $0.1 million in cash.

Capital Expenditures and Operational Activity

Second quarter 2025 drilling and completion expenditures were $136 million. In addition, during the quarter, approximately $11 million was invested in acreage, and $7 million was invested in infrastructure, pneumatic devices, and other investments. Year-to-date capital investments of $301 million are approximately $10 million below plan as a result of operational efficiencies. As a result, Range is lowering the high-end of its 2025 capital guide to $680 million.

During the quarter, Range drilled ~285,000 lateral feet across 20 wells, while turning to sales ~156,000 lateral feet across 12 wells. The added inventory of drilled but not completed laterals places Range on track to exit 2025 with greater than 400,000 lateral feet of growth inventory to support future development.

The table below summarizes expected 2025 activity plans regarding the number of wells to sales in each area.

	Wells TIL 1H 2025	Remaining 2025	2025 Planned TIL
SW PA Super-Rich	5	3	8
SW PA Wet	17	12	29
SW PA Dry	0	5	5
NE PA Dry	0	4	4
Total Wells	22	24	46

Guidance – 2025

Updated Capital & Production Guidance

Range’s 2025 all-in capital budget is now $650 million – $680 million, improved from prior guidance of $650 million – $690 million. Annual production is now expected to be approximately 2.225 Bcfe per day in 2025, updated from prior guidance of ~2.2 Bcfe per day. Liquids are expected to be over 30% of production.

Updated Full Year 2025 Expense Guidance

	Updated Guidance	Prior Guidance
Direct operating expense:	$0.12 – $0.13 per mcfe	$0.12 – $0.14 per mcfe
Transportation, gathering, processing and compression expense:	$1.50 – $1.55 per mcfe	$1.50 – $1.55 per mcfe
Taxes other than income:	$0.03 – $0.04 per mcfe	$0.03 – $0.04 per mcfe
Exploration expense:	$24 – $28 million	$24 – $28 million
G&A expense:	$0.17 – $0.18 per mcfe	$0.17 – $0.19 per mcfe
Net Interest expense:	$0.12 – $0.13 per mcfe	$0.12 – $0.13 per mcfe
DD&A expense:	$0.45 – $0.46 per mcfe	$0.45 – $0.46 per mcfe
Net brokered gas marketing expense:	$8 – $12 million	$8 – $12 million

Updated Full Year 2025 Price Guidance

Based on recent market indications, Range expects to average the following price differentials for its production in 2025.

	Updated Guidance	Prior Guidance
FY 2025 Natural Gas:⁽¹⁾	NYMEX minus $0.40 to $0.48	NYMEX minus $0.40 to $0.48
FY 2025 Natural Gas Liquids:⁽²⁾	MB plus $0.40 to $1.25 per barrel	MB plus $0.25 to $1.25 per barrel
FY 2025 Oil/Condensate:	WTI minus $10.00 to $15.00	WTI minus $10.00 to $15.00

(1) Including basis hedging
(2) Mont Belvieu-equivalent pricing based on weighting of 53% ethane, 27% propane, 8% normal butane, 4% iso-butane and 8% natural gasoline.

Hedging Status

Range hedges portions of its expected future production volumes to increase the predictability of cash flow and maintain a strong, flexible financial position. Please see the detailed hedging schedule posted on the Range website under Investor Relations – Financial Information.

Range has also hedged basis across the Company’s numerous natural gas sales points to limit volatility between benchmark and regional prices. The combined fair value of natural gas basis hedges as of June 30, 2025, was a net gain of $19.9 million.

Conference Call Information

A conference call to review the financial results is scheduled on Wednesday, July 23 at 8:00 AM Central Time (9:00 AM Eastern Time). Please click here to pre-register for the conference call and obtain a dial in number with passcode.

A simultaneous webcast of the call may be accessed at www.rangeresources.com. The webcast will be archived for replay on the Company’s website until August 23^rd.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

To supplement the presentation of its financial results prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), the Company’s earnings press release contains certain financial measures that are not presented in accordance with GAAP. Management believes certain non-GAAP measures may provide financial statement users with meaningful supplemental information for comparisons within the industry. These non-GAAP financial measures may include, but are not limited to Net Income, excluding certain items, Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital, realized prices, Net debt and Cash margin.

Adjusted net income comparable to analysts’ estimates as set forth in this release represents income or loss from operations before income taxes adjusted for certain non-cash items (detailed in the accompanying table) less income taxes. We believe adjusted net income comparable to analysts’ estimates is calculated on the same basis as analysts’ estimates and that many investors use this published research in making investment decisions and evaluating operational trends of the Company and its performance relative to other oil and gas producing companies. Diluted earnings per share (adjusted) as set forth in this release represents adjusted net income comparable to analysts’ estimates on a diluted per share basis. A table is included which reconciles income or loss from operations to adjusted net income comparable to analysts’ estimates and diluted earnings per share (adjusted). On its website, the Company provides additional comparative information on prior periods.

Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital represents net cash provided by operations before changes in working capital and exploration expense adjusted for certain non-cash compensation items. Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital (sometimes referred to as “adjusted cash flow”) is widely accepted by the investment community as a financial indicator of an oil and gas company’s ability to generate cash to internally fund exploration and development activities and to service debt. Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital is also useful because it is widely used by professional research analysts in valuing, comparing, rating and providing investment recommendations of companies in the oil and gas exploration and production industry. In turn, many investors use this published research in making investment decisions. Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital is not a measure of financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to cash flows from operations, investing, or financing activities as an indicator of cash flows, or as a measure of liquidity. A table is included which reconciles net cash provided by operations to cash flow from operations before changes in working capital as used in this release. On its website, the Company provides additional comparative information on prior periods for cash flow, cash margins and non-GAAP earnings as used in this release.

The cash prices realized for oil and natural gas production, including the amounts realized on cash-settled derivatives and net of transportation, gathering, processing and compression expense, is a critical component in the Company’s performance tracked by investors and professional research analysts in valuing, comparing, rating and providing investment recommendations and forecasts of companies in the oil and gas exploration and production industry. In turn, many investors use this published research in making investment decisions. Due to the GAAP disclosures of various derivative transactions and third-party transportation, gathering, processing and compression expense, such information is now reported in various lines of the income statement. The Company believes that it is important to furnish a table reflecting the details of the various components of each income statement line to better inform the reader of the details of each amount and provide a summary of the realized cash-settled amounts and third-party transportation, gathering, processing and compression expense, which were historically reported as natural gas, NGLs and oil sales. This information is intended to bridge the gap between various readers’ understanding and fully disclose the information needed.

Net debt is calculated as total debt less cash and cash equivalents. The Company believes this measure is helpful to investors and industry analysts who utilize Net debt for comparative purposes across the industry.

The Company discloses in this release the detailed components of many of the single line items shown in the GAAP financial statements included in the Company’s Annual or Quarterly Reports on Form 10-K or 10-Q. The Company believes that it is important to furnish this detail of the various components comprising each line of the Statements of Operations to better inform the reader of the details of each amount, the changes between periods and the effect on its financial results.

We believe that the presentation of PV₁₀ value of our proved reserves is a relevant and useful metric for our investors as supplemental disclosure to the standardized measure, or after-tax amount, because it presents the discounted future net cash flows attributable to our proved reserves before taking into account future corporate income taxes and our current tax structure. While the standardized measure is dependent on the unique tax situation of each company, PV₁₀ is based on prices and discount factors that are consistent for all companies. Because of this, PV₁₀ can be used within the industry and by credit and security analysts to evaluate estimated net cash flows from proved reserves on a more comparable basis.

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION (NYSE: RRC) is a leading U.S. independent natural gas and NGL producer with operations focused in the Appalachian Basin. The Company is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. More information about Range can be found at www.rangeresources.com.

Included within this release are certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws, including the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are not limited to historical facts, but reflect Range’s current beliefs, expectations or intentions regarding future events. Words such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “project,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “outlook”, “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “pursue,” “target,” “continue,” and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements.

All statements, except for statements of historical fact, made within regarding activities, events or developments the Company expects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future, such as those regarding future well costs, expected asset sales, well productivity, future liquidity and financial resilience, anticipated exports and related financial impact, NGL market supply and demand, future commodity fundamentals and pricing, future capital efficiencies, future shareholder value, emerging plays, capital spending, anticipated drilling and completion activity, acreage prospectivity, expected pipeline utilization and future guidance information, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are based on assumptions and estimates that management believes are reasonable based on currently available information; however, management’s assumptions and Range’s future performance are subject to a wide range of business risks and uncertainties and there is no assurance that these goals and projections can or will be met. Any number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Further information on risks and uncertainties is available in Range’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. Unless required by law, Range undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events after the date they are made.

The SEC permits oil and gas companies, in filings made with the SEC, to disclose proved reserves, which are estimates that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions as well as the option to disclose probable and possible reserves. Range has elected not to disclose its probable and possible reserves in its filings with the SEC. Range uses certain broader terms such as “resource potential,” “unrisked resource potential,” “unproved resource potential” or “upside” or other descriptions of volumes of resources potentially recoverable through additional drilling or recovery techniques that may include probable and possible reserves as defined by the SEC’s guidelines. Range has not attempted to distinguish probable and possible reserves from these broader classifications. The SEC’s rules prohibit us from including in filings with the SEC these broader classifications of reserves. These estimates are by their nature more speculative than estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves and accordingly are subject to substantially greater risk of actually being realized. Unproved resource potential refers to Range’s internal estimates of hydrocarbon quantities that may be potentially discovered through exploratory drilling or recovered with additional drilling or recovery techniques and have not been reviewed by independent engineers. Unproved resource potential does not constitute reserves within the meaning of the Society of Petroleum Engineer’s Petroleum Resource Management System and does not include proved reserves. Area wide unproven resource potential has not been fully risked by Range’s management. “EUR”, or estimated ultimate recovery, refers to our management’s estimates of hydrocarbon quantities that may be recovered from a well completed as a producer in the area. These quantities may not necessarily constitute or represent reserves within the meaning of the Society of Petroleum Engineer’s Petroleum Resource Management System or the SEC’s oil and natural gas disclosure rules. Actual quantities that may be recovered from Range’s interests could differ substantially. Factors affecting ultimate recovery include the scope of Range’s drilling program, which will be directly affected by the availability of capital, drilling and production costs, commodity prices, availability of drilling services and equipment, drilling results, lease expirations, transportation constraints, regulatory approvals, field spacing rules, recoveries of gas in place, length of horizontal laterals, actual drilling results, including geological and mechanical factors affecting recovery rates and other factors. Estimates of resource potential may change significantly as development of our resource plays provides additional data.

In addition, our production forecasts and expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rates from existing wells and the undertaking and outcome of future drilling activity, which may be affected by significant commodity price or drilling cost changes. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, available from our website at www.rangeresources.com or by written request to 100 Throckmorton Street, Suite 1200, Fort Worth, Texas 76102. You can also obtain this Form 10-K on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

SOURCE: Range Resources Corporation

Range Investor Contacts:

Laith Sando
817-869-4267

Matt Schmid
817-869-1538

Range Media Contact:

Mark Windle
724-873-3223

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION


STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
Based on GAAP reported earnings with additional
details of items included in each line in Form 10-Q
(Unaudited, In thousands, except per share data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			%			2025			2024			%
Revenues and other income:
Natural gas, NGLs and oil sales (a)	$	666,638		$	478,450					$	1,458,558		$	1,045,451
Derivative fair value income (loss)		154,747			16,808						(4,210	)		63,406
Brokered natural gas and marketing		33,009			31,393						87,417			60,224
ARO settlement gain (loss) (b)		1			–						1			(26	)
Interest income (b)		1,762			3,376						4,815			6,319
Gain on sale of assets (b)		102			66						164			153
Other (b)		16			16						84			38
Total revenues and other income		856,275			530,109			62	%		1,546,829			1,175,565			32	%

Costs and expenses:
Direct operating		22,616			22,281						47,452			43,945
Direct operating – stock-based compensation (c)		504			471						1,041			968
Transportation, gathering, processing and compression		304,714			281,495						610,823			572,370
Taxes other than income		7,835			4,974						14,822			10,342
Brokered natural gas and marketing		34,183			33,513						91,544			64,408
Brokered natural gas and marketing – stock-based compensation (c)		802			583						1,642			1,291
Exploration		7,562			6,316						13,606			10,518
Exploration – stock-based compensation (c)		366			335						713			659
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		6,781			1,524						11,355			3,895
General and administrative		32,757			31,372						64,310			65,144
General and administrative – stock-based compensation (c)		9,326			8,482						19,437			18,460
General and administrative – lawsuit settlements		63			287						90			478
Exit costs		8,502			10,094						17,399			20,409
Deferred compensation plan (d)		(88	)		1,240						2,791			7,645
Interest expense		25,630			28,356						53,415			57,472
Interest expense – amortization of deferred financing costs (e)		1,166			1,357						2,542			2,717
Gain on early extinguishment of debt		–			(179	)					(3	)		(243	)
Depletion, depreciation and amortization		91,514			87,598						182,073			174,735
Total costs and expenses		554,233			520,099			7	%		1,135,052			1,055,213			8	%

Income before income taxes		302,042			10,010			2917	%		411,777			120,352			242	%

Income tax expense (benefit)
Current		4,645			2,399						6,645			3,981
Deferred		59,819			(21,093	)					70,502			(4,471	)
		64,464			(18,694	)					77,147			(490	)

Net income	$	237,578		$	28,704			728	%	$	334,630		$	120,842			177	%


Net income Per Common Share
Basic	$	0.99		$	0.12					$	1.40		$	0.50
Diluted	$	0.99		$	0.12					$	1.39		$	0.49

Weighted average common shares outstanding, as reported
Basic		238,187			241,125			-1	%		239,106			240,815			-1	%
Diluted		239,717			242,983			-1	%		240,772			242,766			-1	%


(a) See separate natural gas, NGLs and oil sales information table.
(b) Included in Other income in the 10-Q.
(c) Costs associated with stock compensation and restricted stock amortization, which have been reflected
in the categories associated with the direct personnel costs, which are combined with the cash costs in the 10-Q.
(d) Reflects the change in market value of the vested Company stock held in the deferred compensation plan.
(e) Included in interest expense in the 10-Q.

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION


BALANCE SHEET
(In thousands)	June 30,			December 31,
	2025			2024
	(Unaudited)			(Audited)
Assets
Current assets	$	272,616		$	636,982
Derivative assets		51,115			87,098
Natural gas and oil properties, net (successful efforts method)		6,535,097			6,421,700
Other property and equipment, net		2,736			2,465
Operating lease right-of-use assets		170,159			119,838
Other		73,388			79,592
	$	7,105,111		$	7,347,675

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities	$	580,744		$	1,263,247
Asset retirement obligations		1,189			1,189
Derivative liabilities		1,201			9,634

Bank debt		121,092			–
Senior notes, excluding current maturities		1,090,607			1,089,614
Deferred tax liabilities		611,873			541,378
Derivative liabilities		23,187			10,488
Deferred compensation liabilities		64,262			65,233
Operating lease liabilities		109,026			35,737
Asset retirement obligations and other liabilities		143,174			137,181
Divestiture contract obligation		232,062			257,317
		2,978,417			3,411,018

Common stock and retained deficit		4,761,293			4,449,987
Other comprehensive income		582			611
Common stock held in treasury		(635,181	)		(513,941	)
Total stockholders’ equity		4,126,694			3,936,657
	$	7,105,111		$	7,347,675

RECONCILIATION OF TOTAL DEBT AS REPORTED
TO NET DEBT, a non-GAAP measure
(Unaudited, in thousands)
	June 30,			December 31,
	2025			2024			%

Total debt, net of deferred financing costs, as reported	$	1,211,699		$	1,697,883			-29	%
Unamortized debt issuance costs, as reported		13,301			10,819
Less cash and cash equivalents, as reported		(134	)		(304,490	)
Net debt, a non-GAAP measure	$	1,224,866		$	1,404,212			-13	%

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION



CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
(Unaudited, in thousands)

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024

Net income	$	237,578		$	28,704		$	334,630		$	120,842
Adjustments to reconcile net cash provided from continuing operations:
Deferred income tax expense (benefit)		59,819			(21,093	)		70,502			(4,471	)
Depletion, depreciation and amortization		91,514			87,598			182,073			174,735
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		6,781			1,524			11,355			3,895
Derivative fair value (income) loss		(154,747	)		(16,808	)		4,210			(63,406	)
Cash settlements on derivative financial instruments		31,466			128,057			36,039			250,430
Divestiture contract obligation, including accretion		8,502			10,062			17,399			20,329
Amortization of deferred financing costs and other		962			1,193			2,144			2,425
Deferred and stock-based compensation		11,047			11,122			26,130			29,337
Gain on sale of assets		(102	)		(66	)		(164	)		(153	)
Loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt		–			(179	)		(3	)		(243	)

Changes in working capital:
Accounts receivable		96,785			(30,541	)		68,064			76,913
Other current assets		518			(13,461	)		(8,510	)		(22,405	)
Accounts payable		(27,023	)		(17,906	)		9,158			(5,718	)
Accrued liabilities and other		(26,912	)		(19,431	)		(86,754	)		(101,805	)
Net changes in working capital		43,368			(81,339	)		(18,042	)		(53,015	)
Net cash provided from operating activities	$	336,188		$	148,775		$	666,273		$	480,705



RECONCILIATION OF NET CASH PROVIDED FROM OPERATING
ACTIVITIES, AS REPORTED, TO CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS
BEFORE CHANGES IN WORKING CAPITAL, a non-GAAP measure
(Unaudited, in thousands)
	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024
Net cash provided from operating activities, as reported	$	336,188		$	148,775		$	666,273		$	480,705
Net changes in working capital		(43,368	)		81,339			18,042			53,015
Exploration expense		7,562			6,316			13,606			10,518
Lawsuit settlements		63			287			90			478
Non-cash compensation adjustment and other		66			185			(109	)		84
Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital – non-GAAP measure	$	300,511		$	236,902		$	697,902		$	544,800



ADJUSTED WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING
(Unaudited, in thousands)
	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024
Basic:
Weighted average shares outstanding		238,804			242,647			239,785			242,365
Stock held by deferred compensation plan		(617	)		(1,522	)		(679	)		(1,550	)
Adjusted basic		238,187			241,125			239,106			240,815

Dilutive:
Weighted average shares outstanding		238,804			242,647			239,785			242,365
Dilutive stock options under treasury method		913			336			987			401
Adjusted dilutive		239,717			242,983			240,772			242,766

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION


RECONCILIATION OF NATURAL GAS, NGLs AND OIL SALES
AND DERIVATIVE FAIR VALUE INCOME (LOSS) TO
CALCULATED CASH REALIZED NATURAL GAS, NGLs AND
OIL PRICES WITH AND WITHOUT THIRD-PARTY
TRANSPORTATION, GATHERING, PROCESSING AND
COMPRESSION COSTS, a non-GAAP measure
(Unaudited, In thousands, except per unit data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			%			2025			2024			%
Natural gas, NGLs and Oil Sales components:
Natural gas sales	$	397,955		$	209,652					$	888,332		$	481,127
NGLs sales		238,034			228,285						513,688			484,361
Oil sales		30,649			40,513						56,538			79,963
Total Natural Gas, NGLs and Oil Sales, as reported	$	666,638		$	478,450			39	%	$	1,458,558		$	1,045,451			40	%

Derivative Fair Value Income (Loss), as reported	$	154,747		$	16,808					$	(4,210	)	$	63,406
Cash settlements on derivative financial instruments – (gain) loss:
Natural gas		(29,114	)		(126,194	)					(33,843	)		(247,107	)
NGLs		(1,508	)		(1,978	)					(1,096	)		(1,901	)
Oil		(844	)		115						(1,100	)		(1,422	)
Total change in fair value related to commodity derivatives prior to
settlement, a non-GAAP measure	$	123,281		$	(111,249	)				$	(40,249	)	$	(187,024	)

Transportation, gathering, processing and compression components:
Natural Gas	$	154,704		$	153,040					$	312,223		$	303,152
NGLs		149,209			128,077						297,047			268,351
Oil		801			378						1,553			867
Total transportation, gathering, processing and compression, as reported	$	304,714		$	281,495					$	610,823		$	572,370

Natural gas, NGL and Oil sales, including cash-settled derivatives: (c)
Natural gas sales	$	427,069		$	335,846					$	922,175		$	728,234
NGLs sales		239,542			230,263						514,784			486,262
Oil Sales		31,493			40,398						57,638			81,385
Total	$	698,104		$	606,507			15	%	$	1,494,597		$	1,295,881			15	%

Production of natural gas, NGLs and oil during the periods (a):
Natural Gas (mcf)		136,297,159			136,099,063			0	%		272,260,589			268,749,303			1	%
NGLs (bbls)		10,029,051			9,376,810			7	%		19,949,040			19,137,533			4	%
Oil (bbls)		580,791			593,020			-2	%		1,004,370			1,203,299			-17	%
Gas equivalent (mcfe) (b)		199,956,211			195,918,043			2	%		397,981,049			390,794,295			2	%

Production of natural gas, NGLs and oil – average per day (a):
Natural Gas (mcf)		1,497,771			1,495,594			0	%		1,504,202			1,476,645			2	%
NGLs (bbls)		110,209			103,042			7	%		110,216			105,151			5	%
Oil (bbls)		6,382			6,517			-2	%		5,549			6,612			-16	%
Gas equivalent (mcfe) (b)		2,197,321			2,152,946			2	%		2,198,790			2,147,221			2	%

Average prices, excluding derivative settlements and before third-party
transportation costs:
Natural Gas (per mcf)	$	2.92		$	1.54			90	%	$	3.26		$	1.79			82	%
NGLs (per bbl)	$	23.73		$	24.35			-3	%	$	25.75		$	25.31			2	%
Oil (per bbl)	$	52.77		$	68.32			-23	%	$	56.29		$	66.45			-15	%
Gas equivalent (per mcfe) (b)	$	3.33		$	2.44			36	%	$	3.66		$	2.68			37	%

Average prices, including derivative settlements before third-party
transportation costs: (c)
Natural Gas (per mcf)	$	3.13		$	2.47			27	%	$	3.39		$	2.71			25	%
NGLs (per bbl)	$	23.88		$	24.56			-3	%	$	25.80		$	25.41			2	%
Oil (per bbl)	$	54.22		$	68.12			-20	%	$	57.39		$	67.63			-15	%
Gas equivalent (per mcfe) (b)	$	3.49		$	3.10			13	%	$	3.75		$	3.32			13	%

Average prices, including derivative settlements and after third-party
transportation costs: (d)
Natural Gas (per mcf)	$	2.00		$	1.34			49	%	$	2.24		$	1.58			42	%
NGLs (per bbl)	$	9.01		$	10.90			-17	%	$	10.91		$	11.39			-4	%
Oil (per bbl)	$	52.84		$	67.48			-22	%	$	55.84		$	66.91			-17	%
Gas equivalent (per mcfe) (b)	$	1.97		$	1.66			19	%	$	2.22		$	1.85			20	%

Transportation, gathering and compression expense per mcfe	$	1.52		$	1.44			6	%	$	1.53		$	1.47			4	%

(a) Represents volumes sold regardless of when produced.
(b) Oil and NGLs are converted at the rate of one barrel equals six mcfe based upon the approximate relative energy content of oil to natural gas, which is not necessarily
indicative of the relationship of oil and natural gas prices.
(c) Excluding third-party transportation, gathering, processing and compression costs.
(d) Net of transportation, gathering, processing and compression costs.

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION



RECONCILIATION OF INCOME BEFORE INCOME
TAXES AS REPORTED TO INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES
EXCLUDING CERTAIN ITEMS, a non-GAAP measure
(Unaudited, In thousands, except per share data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			%			2025			2024			%

Income from operations before income taxes, as reported	$	302,042		$	10,010			2917	%	$	411,777		$	120,352			242	%
Adjustment for certain special items:
Gain on the sale of assets		(102	)		(66	)					(164	)		(153	)
ARO settlement (gain) loss		(1	)		–						(1	)		26
Change in fair value related to derivatives prior to settlement		(123,281	)		111,249						40,249			187,024
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		6,781			1,524						11,355			3,895
Loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt		–			(179	)					(3	)		(243	)
Lawsuit settlements		63			287						90			478
Exit costs		8,502			10,094						17,399			20,409
Brokered natural gas and marketing – stock-based compensation		802			583						1,642			1,291
Direct operating – stock-based compensation		504			471						1,041			968
Exploration expenses – stock-based compensation		366			335						713			659
General & administrative – stock-based compensation		9,326			8,482						19,437			18,460
Deferred compensation plan – non-cash adjustment		(88	)		1,240						2,791			7,645

Income before income taxes, as adjusted		204,914			144,030			42	%		506,326			360,811			40	%

Income tax expense, as adjusted
Current		4,645			2,399						6,645			3,981
Deferred (a)		42,485			30,728						109,810			79,006

Net income, excluding certain items, a non-GAAP measure	$	157,784		$	110,903			42	%	$	389,871		$	277,824			40	%

Non-GAAP income per common share
Basic	$	0.66		$	0.46			43	%	$	1.63		$	1.15			42	%
Diluted	$	0.66		$	0.46			43	%	$	1.62		$	1.14			42	%

Non-GAAP diluted shares outstanding, if dilutive		239,717			242,983						240,772			242,766



(a) Taxes are estimated to be approximately 23% for 2024 and 2025

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION



RECONCILIATION OF NET INCOME, EXCLUDING
CERTAIN ITEMS AND ADJUSTED EARNINGS PER
SHARE, non-GAAP measures
(In thousands, except per share data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024

Net income, as reported	$	237,578		$	28,704		$	334,630		$	120,842
Adjustments for certain special items:
Gain on the sale of assets		(102	)		(66	)		(164	)		(153	)
ARO settlement (gain) loss		(1	)		–			(1	)		26
Gain on early extinguishment of debt		–			(179	)		(3	)		(243	)
Change in fair value related to derivatives prior to settlement		(123,281	)		111,249			40,249			187,024
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		6,781			1,524			11,355			3,895
Lawsuit settlements		63			287			90			478
Exit costs		8,502			10,094			17,399			20,409
Stock-based compensation		10,998			9,871			22,833			21,378
Deferred compensation plan		(88	)		1,240			2,791			7,645
Tax impact		17,334			(51,821	)		(39,308	)		(83,477	)

Net income, excluding certain items, a non-GAAP measure	$	157,784		$	110,903		$	389,871		$	277,824

Net income per diluted share, as reported	$	0.99		$	0.12		$	1.39		$	0.49
Adjustments for certain special items per diluted share:
Gain on the sale of assets		–			–			–			–
ARO settlement (gain) loss		–			–			–			–
Gain on early extinguishment of debt		–			–			–			–
Change in fair value related to derivatives prior to settlement		(0.51	)		0.46			0.17			0.77
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		0.03			0.01			0.05			0.02
Lawsuit settlements		–			–			–			–
Exit costs		0.04			0.04			0.07			0.08
Stock-based compensation		0.05			0.04			0.09			0.09
Deferred compensation plan		–			0.01			0.01			0.03
Adjustment for rounding differences		(0.01	)		(0.01	)		–			–
Tax impact		0.07			(0.21	)		(0.16	)		(0.34	)
Dilutive share impact (rabbi trust and other)		–			–			–			–

Net income per diluted share, excluding certain items, a non-GAAP measure	$	0.66		$	0.46		$	1.62		$	1.14

Adjusted earnings per share, a non-GAAP measure:
Basic	$	0.66		$	0.46		$	1.63		$	1.15
Diluted	$	0.66		$	0.46		$	1.62		$	1.14

RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION


RECONCILIATION OF CASH MARGIN PER MCFE, a non-
GAAP measure
(Unaudited, In thousands, except per unit data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024

Revenues
Natural gas, NGLs and oil sales, as reported	$	666,638		$	478,450		$	1,458,558		$	1,045,451
Derivative fair value income (loss), as reported		154,747			16,808			(4,210	)		63,406
Less non-cash fair value (gain) loss		(123,281	)		111,249			40,249			187,024
Brokered natural gas and marketing, as reported		33,009			31,393			87,417			60,224
Other income, as reported		1,881			3,458			5,064			6,484
Less gain on sale of assets		(102	)		(66	)		(164	)		(153	)
Less ARO settlement		(1	)		–			(1	)		26
Cash revenues		732,891			641,292			1,586,913			1,362,462

Expenses
Direct operating, as reported		23,120			22,752			48,493			44,913
Less direct operating stock-based compensation		(504	)		(471	)		(1,041	)		(968	)
Transportation, gathering and compression, as reported		304,714			281,495			610,823			572,370
Taxes other than income, as reported		7,835			4,974			14,822			10,342
Brokered natural gas and marketing, as reported		34,985			34,096			93,186			65,699
Less brokered natural gas and marketing stock-based compensation		(802	)		(583	)		(1,642	)		(1,291	)
General and administrative, as reported		42,146			40,141			83,837			84,082
Less G&A stock-based compensation		(9,326	)		(8,482	)		(19,437	)		(18,460	)
Less lawsuit settlements		(63	)		(287	)		(90	)		(478	)
Interest expense, as reported		26,796			29,713			55,957			60,189
Less amortization of deferred financing costs		(1,166	)		(1,357	)		(2,542	)		(2,717	)
Cash expenses		427,735			401,991			882,366			813,681

Cash margin, a non-GAAP measure	$	305,156		$	239,301		$	704,547		$	548,781

Mmcfe produced during period		199,956			195,918			397,981			390,794

Cash margin per mcfe	$	1.53		$	1.22		$	1.77		$	1.40

RECONCILIATION OF INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES
TO CASH MARGIN, a non-GAAP measure
(Unaudited, in thousands, except per unit data)
	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2025			2024			2025			2024

Income before income taxes, as reported	$	302,042		$	10,010		$	411,777		$	120,352
Adjustments to reconcile income before income taxes
to cash margin:
ARO settlements		(1	)		–			(1	)		26
Derivative fair value (income) loss		(154,747	)		(16,808	)		4,210			(63,406	)
Net cash receipts on derivative settlements		31,466			128,057			36,039			250,430
Exploration expense		7,562			6,316			13,606			10,518
Lawsuit settlements		63			287			90			478
Exit costs		8,502			10,094			17,399			20,409
Deferred compensation plan		(88	)		1,240			2,791			7,645
Stock-based compensation (direct operating, brokered natural gas and		10,998			9,871			22,833			21,378
marketing and general and administrative)
Bad debt expense		–			–			–			–
Interest – amortization of deferred financing costs		1,166			1,357			2,542			2,717
Depletion, depreciation and amortization		91,514			87,598			182,073			174,735
Gain on sale of assets		(102	)		(66	)		(164	)		(153	)
Gain on early extinguishment of debt		–			(179	)		(3	)		(243	)
Abandonment and impairment of unproved properties		6,781			1,524			11,355			3,895
Cash margin, a non-GAAP measure	$	305,156		$	239,301		$	704,547		$	548,781

The MIL Network –

July 23, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: Ultra fast fashion could be taxed to oblivion in France. Could Australia follow suit?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rowena Maguire, Professor of Law and Director of the Centre of Justice, Queensland University of Technology

Ryan McVay/Getty

For centuries, clothes were hard to produce and expensive. People wore them as long as possible. But manufacturing advances have steadily driven down the cost of production. These days, clothing can be produced very cheaply. In the 1990s, companies began churning out fast fashion: low cost versions of high end trends. In the 2010s came ultra fast fashion, where clothes are produced extremely rapidly and intended to be almost disposable.

Ultra fast fashion is deeply unsustainable. Producing it is energy intensive and many low quality items go rapidly to landfill.

In response, France is planning to add a A$16 tax to each item of ultra-fast fashion, require mandatory environmental disclosures and ban advertising and influencer promotions.

To date, Australia has done little about the problem – even though every Australian bought an average of 53 new pieces of clothing as of 2023 and we send 220,000 tonnes of clothes to the dump annually. Responses so far have focused on voluntary schemes, which have done little to help. Policymakers should look overseas.

Ultra-fast fashion companies such as Shein and Temu would be targeted by new French laws, if they are passed.
Arnaud Finistre/Getty

Why is ultra fast fashion such a problem?

About 117 billion pieces of clothing were purchased worldwide in 2023 – about 14 pieces per person. That’s well beyond the limit of five new garments per year experts recommend if we’re to live within our planetary boundaries.

There are many problems with buying too many cheap clothes. Textile manufacturing is surprisingly energy intensive. At present, the industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions and this is expected to rise steadily. Millions of barrels of oil are used each year to make synthetic fibres such as polyester.

Ultra fast fashion items rely heavily on synthetic fibres. When washed, they produce large volumes of microplastics which go into rivers and oceans. The European Union estimates textiles account for about 20% of freshwater pollution annually. Many ultra cheap clothing items have question marks over how ethically they were produced. Nearly all of these cheap clothes only have one owner before going to the dump.

Australia’s response is minimal

Australia has no national policy on clothing. Circular economy policies and strategies at both federal and state levels don’t tend to focus on textiles.

Australian consumer laws regulate greenwashing of products. In 2023, Australia’s peak competition regulator flagged the textile industry as one with a high rate of concerning claims.

Similarly, Australia’s modern slavery laws require large corporations to identify and address risks of slave labour in their operations. Fashion brands often source materials and labour from regions with high exploitation risks Unfortunately, these laws don’t have penalties attached.

These laws are positive, but still far from the EU’s large-scale efforts to regulate the textile industry.

One promising effort is the voluntary Seamless textile scheme. Voluntary schemes like these are often used as a way to introduce reforms to a previously unregulated sector or industry.

The goal of this scheme is to help brands take responsibility for the entire lifespan of the garments they make or sell. Participating brands and retailers pay a levy which is used to promote clothing repair and rental, expand recycling and run information campaigns. Seamless is meant to help the industry prepare for a potential mandatory scheme in the future. Former Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek said she was “not afraid to regulate” last year, but nothing has happened since.

To date, participation has been very limited. Around 60 brands and retailers have signed up. Ultra-fast fashion brands such as Temu and Shein aren’t covered by the scheme, as they’re based overseas.

Ultra-fast fashion rapidly turns into rubbish.
Ernest Rose/Shutterstock

Time for laws with teeth?

France’s planned ultra fashion laws are directly aimed at high-volume, low-cost clothing producers with binding measures such as taxes and advertising bans. If the laws come into effect, France would likely see a substantial drop in the flows of these clothes and the textile waste produced.

By contrast, Australia’s efforts so far aren’t changing things. The Seamless scheme is voluntary, while greenwashing and modern slavery laws rely on disclosures and lack enforcement powers and penalties.

It wouldn’t be easy. At present, Australia lacks laws focused on textiles, while responsibility for clothing imports is split between different government departments and levels of government. The issue of fast fashion often hits local governments hardest in the form of increased waste volumes, for instance, but local governments have no power over the problem. If policymakers did introduce a French-style tax, they would face resistance from the industry and from some consumers.

The upside? France’s approach is far more likely to actually curb the damage done by ultra-fast fashion.

Rowena Maguire receives funding from United Nations Environment Program – Legal Division.

– ref. Ultra fast fashion could be taxed to oblivion in France. Could Australia follow suit? – https://theconversation.com/ultra-fast-fashion-could-be-taxed-to-oblivion-in-france-could-australia-follow-suit-259559

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

July 23, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, The University of Melbourne

HRAUN/Getty

A young woman needs an abortion and the reasons, while urgent, are not medical. A United States Navy nurse at Guantánamo Bay is ordered to force-feed a defiant detainee on hunger strike.

These very different real-life cases have one connecting thread: the question of whether a health professional can conscientiously object to carrying out a patient’s request.

Freedom of conscience is often held up as a purely noble principle. But when it’s used to deny health care, it means a single person’s beliefs are dictating what is best for another person’s physical and mental health – which can have devastating, even fatal, results.

In our recent book, Rethinking Conscientious Objection in Healthcare, colleagues and I conclude doctors should not be free to make medical decisions based on their personal beliefs.

It’s not noble to refuse care

Freedom of conscience is strongly – but not absolutely – protected under international human rights law. It is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

This principle has often been used for moral purposes: for example, to resist orders to torture or kill.

But after researching use of conscientious objection by health professionals, I have concluded it is seriously flawed when used to deny patients health services. This is especially so when particular doctors have a monopoly on service provision, as is the case with abortion and assisted dying in many rural and regional areas of Australia.

In Australia, doctors are allowed to conscientiously object to abortion, although nearly all states require referral to other service providers or information about how to access the relevant service.

In practice, these laws are not enforced and sometimes disregarded.

A doctor’s refusal can mean patients can be denied the standard of care they need, or indeed, any care at all.

Health-care professionals are not like pacifists refusing conscription into the military, opposing something forced upon them. They freely choose health-care careers that come with obligations and with ethical stances already established by professional codes of conduct.

People are free to hold whatever beliefs they choose, but those beliefs will inevitably close off some options for them. For example, a vegetarian will not be able to work in an abattoir. That is true for every one of us. But what shouldn’t happen is a doctor’s personal beliefs closing off legitimate options for their patient.

4 guiding questions

Instead of personal values, there are four key secular principles we propose that doctors should rely on when deciding how to advise patients about sensitive procedures:

is it legal?
is it a just and fair use of any resources that might be limited?
is it in the interests of the patient’s wellbeing?
is it what the patient has themselves decided they want?

Of course, there will be times when some of these principles are in conflict – that is when it is important to apply the most crucial ones, the wellbeing of the patient and the patient’s own wishes.

In Ireland in 2012, a young woman named Savita Halappanavar went to an Irish hospital for treatment for her miscarriage. Doctors knew there was no hope of the pregnancy surviving but refused to evacuate her uterus while there was still a fetal heartbeat, for fear of breaching Ireland’s anti-abortion laws. The result: Savita died of septicaemia at 31.

If doctors had put the patient’s wellbeing first, they would have given her that termination, despite the law, and it would have saved her life.

These are the principles that should have been applied to the examples above: the woman seeking an abortion for career reasons or the nurse refusing to force-feed prisoners.

The doctor (or nurse) should ask: Is it what the patient has autonomously decided they want? Will it lead to the best outcome for both their physical and their mental health?

If abortion will promote a woman’s wellbeing, it is in her interests. Hunger strikers should not be force-fed because it violates their autonomy.

An unfair burden

While doctors’ personal values are important, they should not dictate care at the bedside. Not only can this disadvantage the patient, but it places an unfair burden on colleagues who do accept such work, and must carry a disproportionate load of procedures they might find unpleasant and financially unrewarding.

It also creates injustice. Patients who are educated, wealthy and well-connected already find it easier to access health care. Conscientious objection intensifies that unfairness in large swathes of the country because it further limits options.

Two countries with excellent health-care systems, Sweden and Finland, do not permit conscientious objection by medical professionals.

In Australia, it is time we do the same and strongly limit conscientious objection as a legal right for health professionals. We should also ensure those entering the discipline are prepared to take on all procedures relevant to their specialty.

And lastly, but most importantly, we should educate them that the patient’s interests and values must always come first. An individual doctor’s sense of moral authority should not be permitted to morph into medical and moral authoritarianism.

Julian Savulescu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients – https://theconversation.com/doctors-shouldnt-be-allowed-to-object-to-medical-care-if-it-harms-their-patients-260003

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: S. 237, Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act of 2025

Source: US Congressional Budget Office

Bill Summary

S. 237 would expand eligibility for death, disability, and education benefits provided by the Public Safety Officer’s Benefit (PSOB) program to public safety officers and their beneficiaries if an officer dies or becomes permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of a cancer covered under the bill. S. 237 would apply retroactively to officers who die or become disabled on or after January 1, 2020. The bill would require the Department of Justice (DOJ) to review the list of cancers covered by the bill at least once every three years.

S. 237 also would extend the deadline to file a claim for benefits under the PSOB program for officers and their beneficiaries for officers who die or become permanently and totally disabled from COVID-19. Under current law, the deadline to file such a claim was May 11, 2023, when the public health emergency declared during the coronavirus pandemic ended.

Estimated Federal Cost

The estimated budgetary effect of S. 237 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice).

Table 1. Estimated Budgetary Effects of S. 237
	By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars
	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2025-2030	2025-2035
	Increases in Direct Spending
Estimated Budget Authority	0	22	50	43	30	26	23	18	17	18	18	171	265
Estimated Outlays	0	15	40	45	34	27	23	19	17	17	18	161	255
	Increases in Spending Subject to Appropriation
Estimated Authorization	*	6	15	16	13	11	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	61	n.e.
Estimated Outlays	*	5	14	16	13	11	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	n.e.	59	n.e.

Basis of Estimate

CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2025. The estimate is based on CBO’s analysis of cancer incidence and mortality among the general population of the United States and a review of the medical literature related to cancer incidence and mortality among public safety officers, including firefighters. The estimate is also based on CBO’s projections of the number of deaths among public safety officers that are likely to be related to cancer and the number of officers or their beneficiaries who apply for and receive benefits under the PSOB program.

Background

The PSOB program is administered by DOJ to provide cash benefits to federal, state, and local public safety officers and their beneficiaries in the event of death or permanent and total disability resulting from physical injuries and certain mental health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder. Education benefits are also available to eligible spouses and children of officers who die or become disabled in the line of duty. Public safety officers include those working in law enforcement, firefighters, emergency management, and emergency medical services.

The program already provides benefits to World Trade Center responders and their beneficiaries who die or become disabled from cancer from exposure to a carcinogen after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. CBO is unaware of the program approving any death or disability claim related to cancer that does not stem from attacks on September 11, 2001.

Eligibility Under the Bill

Under S. 237, an exposure to a carcinogen would qualify as an injury in the line of duty if an officer later dies or becomes permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of cancer. The bill would direct DOJ to presume that a qualifying injury caused the death or disability if the officer:

Was exposed to a carcinogen while in the line of duty;
Served for at least five years before being diagnosed with cancer; and
Received a diagnosis of cancer within 15 years of leaving service.

The presumption would not apply if DOJ determines, based on competent medical evidence, that the exposure to a carcinogen was not a substantial factor in an officer’s death or disability.

Direct Spending

The PSOB program pays a one-time death benefit to spouses and children or other designated beneficiaries of officers who die in the line of duty. The cost of those benefits is classified in the budget as direct spending. In 2025, the one-time benefit is $448,575; under current law, that amount increases each year to account for inflation.

Cancer Claims. CBO expects that most relatives of potentially eligible officers would apply for benefits. Based on information from DOJ and other similar programs, such as the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, CBO estimates that about 75 percent of claims for cancer-related deaths among public safety officers would ultimately result in benefits being paid to family members or designated beneficiaries. CBO expects that firefighters would account for most claims under the bill.

Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on cancer mortality among the general population and a review of medical literature regarding cancer incidence and mortality among firefighters, CBO estimates that, on average, about 40 claims would be filed annually over the 2025-2035 period.

S. 237 also would require benefits to be awarded for cancer deaths occurring between January 1, 2020, and the date of enactment. CBO estimates that about 200 claims would be submitted for officers who died from cancer during that period and that those claims would be filed within three years of enactment.

COVID-19 Claims. Additionally, the bill would extend by three years the deadline to file a claim for death benefits for spouses, children, or other beneficiaries of officers who die from COVID-19. Under current law, an officer is presumed to be eligible by DOJ if the officer was diagnosed with COVID-19 within 45 days of the last day of duty and medical evidence indicates that the officer had the virus or complications from the virus at the time of death. Under current law, the deadline to file such a claim was May 11, 2023, when the public health emergency related to the coronavirus pandemic was lifted. Using information from DOJ about the number of those claims it received between 2020 and 2023 and data from the CDC on COVID-19 mortality, CBO estimates that about 150 claims would be submitted for officers who die from COVID-19.

In total, CBO estimates that under the bill, about 765 claims would be filed over the 2025-2035 period. Based on the amount of time CBO estimates that it would take DOJ to process each eligible claim, CBO estimates that about 530 claims would be approved for benefits over the next decade under S. 237. (About 30 claims filed during that period would be approved after 2035.) Accounting for expected increases in inflation, CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would increase direct spending by $255 million over the 2025-2035 period.

Spending Subject to Appropriation

By expanding the scope of qualifying deaths and injuries, S. 237 also would increase the number of claimants eligible for disability and education benefits under the PSOB program. Spending for those benefits is subject to the availability of appropriated funds. DOJ also would incur administrative costs to implement the bill. In total, CBO estimates that implanting S. 237 would cost $59 million over the 2025-2030 period (see Table 2). That spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.

Disability Benefits. Under current law, the PSOB program pays benefits for permanent and total disability resulting from injuries suffered in the line of duty. Under current law, claimants receive a one-time benefit that is the same amount as the death benefit ($448,575 in 2025), which increases each year to account for inflation. In total, CBO estimates that the cost of disability benefits under S. 237 would be $24 million over the 2025-2030 period.

Table 2. Estimated Increases in Spending Subject to Appropriation Under S. 237
	By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars
	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	2025-2030
Disability Benefits
Estimated Authorization	0	1	5	7	6	5	24
Estimated Outlays	0	1	5	7	6	5	24
Education Benefits
Estimated Authorization	0	4	9	8	6	5	32
Estimated Outlays	0	3	8	8	6	5	30
Administrative Costs
Estimated Authorization	*	1	1	1	1	1	5
Estimated Outlays	*	1	1	1	1	1	5
Total Changes
Estimated Authorization	*	6	15	16	13	11	61
Estimated Outlays	*	5	14	16	13	11	59

Cancer Claims. S. 237 would designate an exposure to a carcinogen as an injury in the line of duty if an officer later becomes permanently disabled as a direct result of cancer. Using information from DOJ about the historical number of claims, CBO expects that fewer claims for disability benefits would be filed under the bill than claims for death benefits. On that basis, CBO estimates that one claim for disability benefits would be filed for every three claims for death benefits. Additionally, based on conversations with DOJ and subject matter experts, CBO expects that most officers affected by cancer would not meet the permanently and totally disabled threshold. Based on historical approval rates for disability-related claims, CBO estimates that about 50 percent of claims for disability claims would ultimately be approved.

Under the bill, CBO estimates that about 120 claims for disability benefits related to cancer would be filed over the 2025-2030 period. Using information from DOJ about the time it takes to process each claim, CBO estimates that about 50 claims would be approved over the same period. (About 10 additional claims filed during the period would be approved after 2030.)

COVID-19 Claims. S. 237 also would extend by three years the deadline to file a claim for benefits under the PSOB program for officers who become permanently and totally disabled from COVID-19. Using data from DOJ about the number of those claims filed and approved over the 2020-2023 period, CBO estimates that under S. 237 fewer than five claims would be approved for officers who become disabled from COVID-19.

Education Benefits. Under current law, the spouse or children of a public safety officer who dies or becomes permanently disabled from physical injuries and certain mental health conditions may also be eligible for education benefits to cover tuition, fees, books, supplies and room and board. The monthly benefit for a full-time student in 2025 is $1,536; that amount is adjusted each year for inflation. Under current law, the maximum duration of benefits is 45 months of full-time education or a proportionate duration of part-time education.

Historical data from the PSOB program indicate that about three claims for education benefits have been approved for every two claims that have been approved for death and disability benefits. On that basis, CBO estimates that about 360 claims stemming from death benefits and about 50 claims stemming from disability benefits will be approved over the 2025-2030 period under S. 237. Using information about the time it takes to process claims for education benefits, CBO estimates that about 650 people will receive benefits over the 2025-2030 period under the bill. In total, CBO estimates that those benefits would cost $30 million over the 2025-2030 period. Those outlays reflect the historical spending patterns for such claims.

Administrative Costs. As discussed above, implementing S. 237 would require DOJ to review more than 150 additional claims annually under the bill. Using information from the agency about the number of staff required to process claims under current law, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would require an additional five people each year to process claims and review the list of eligible cancers at a cost of $1 million annually. In total, CBO estimates that DOJ would incur $5 million in administrative costs over the 2025-2030 period.

Uncertainty

CBO’s cost estimate for S. 237 is subject to significant uncertainty in several areas:

Identifying public safety officers’ rate of incidence and deaths from cancer and COVID-19;
Estimating the number of people who would be eligible to file claims for benefits under the bill;
Calculating the proportion of claims that DOJ would determine to be eligible, which is affected by the latency periods for different cancers and other circumstances specific to each officer’s medical history and lifestyle; and
Anticipating the timing of submissions and the amount of time required to review applications and process claims.

CBO strives for estimates that are in the middle of possible outcomes and each factor in the estimate could be higher or lower than CBO estimates. As a result, enacting the bill could result in higher or lower costs than CBO estimates.

Pay-As-You-Go Considerations

The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. CBO’s Estimate of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Effects of S. 237, the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act of 2025, as Reported by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on May 20, 2025
	By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars
	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030	2031	2032	2033	2034	2035	2025-2030	2025-2035
	Net Increase in the Deficit
Pay-As-You-Go Effect	0	15	40	45	34	27	23	19	17	17	18	161	255

Increase in Long-Term Net Direct Spending and Deficits

CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would not increase net direct spending by more than $2.5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would not increase on‑budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

Mandates

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Federal Costs: Jeremy Crimm

Mandates: Erich Dvorak

Estimate Reviewed By

Justin Humphrey
Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

Kathleen FitzGerald
Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

H. Samuel Papenfuss
Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

Phillip L. Swagel

Director, Congressional Budget Office

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Passenger Pleads Guilty to Sexual Assault Charges During Flight From Montana to Texas

Source: US FBI

MISSOULA – A New Jersey man accused of sexual assault while flying from Bozeman, Montana to Dallas, Texas admitted to charges today, U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme said.

The defendant, Bhaveshkumar Dahyabhai Shukla, 37, pleaded guilty to one count of abusive sexual contact in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States. Shukla faces up to 2 years of imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, and at least 5 years of supervised release.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Kathleen L. DeSoto presided. U.S. District Court Judge Dana L. Christensen will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Sentencing is set for November 19, 2025. Shukla was detained pending further proceedings.

The government alleged in court documents that on January 26, 2025, Shukla was flying from Bozeman to Dallas on American Airlines. He was seated next to Jane Doe and Doe’s daughter. Jane Doe had a coat on her lap because she was cold. Shukla also placed his coat on his lap and initially acted as if he was sleeping but began using his right hand to rub Jane Doe’s left leg near her pocket on her hip. Jane Doe initially thought Shukla was trying to pick her pocket, so she and her daughter got up and went to the restroom to diffuse the situation.

Shukla continued rubbing Jane Doe’s inner and outer thigh throughout the flight. Doe was scared and firmly told him to “stop touching me.” Shukla said he was sorry and attempted to offer her something out of his bag. He also tried to talk to Jane Doe’s daughter, and Doe responded, “she’s fine. Don’t talk to my daughter.” As the flight continued, the plane hit some turbulence and the flight crew remained seated. Shukla continued to rub Jane Doe’s thigh and, frightened, she turned her back to him, at which point he started rubbing her lower back and buttocks.

A witness seated in the row behind Shukla and Jane Doe confirmed that Shukla inappropriately touched Jane Doe for a large portion of the flight.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Zeno Baucus and Brian Lowney prosecuted the case. The FBI, ICE and Dallas Fort Worth International Airport Police conducted the investigation.

XXX

MIL Security OSI –

July 23, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: Do countries have a duty to prevent climate harm? The world’s highest court is about to answer this crucial question

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Cooper, Associate Professor of Law, University of Waikato

Getty Images

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will issue a highly anticipated advisory opinion overnight to clarify state obligations related to climate change.

It will answer two urgent questions: what are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions, and what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to Earth’s atmosphere and environment?

ICJ advisory opinions are not legally binding. But coming from the world’s highest court, they provide an authoritative opinion on serious issues that can be highly persuasive.

This advisory opinion marks the culmination of a campaign that began in 2019 when students and youth organisations in Vanuatu – one of the most vulnerable nations to climate-related impacts – persuaded their government to seek clarification on what states should be doing to protect them.

Led by Vanuatu and co-sponsored by 132 member states, including New Zealand and Australia, the United Nations General Assembly formally requested the advisory opinion in March 2023.

More than two years of public consultation and deliberation ensued, leading to this week’s announcement.

What to expect

Looking at the specific questions to be addressed, at least three aspects stand out.

First, the sources and areas of international law under scrutiny are not confined to the UN’s climate change framework. This invites the ICJ to consider a broad range of law – including trans-boundary environmental law, human rights law, international investment law, humanitarian law, trade law and beyond – and to draw on both treaty-related obligations and customary international law.

Such an encyclopaedic examination could produce a complex and integrated opinion on states’ obligations to protect the environment and climate system.

Second, the opinion will address what obligations exist, not just to those present today, but to future generations. This follows acknowledgement of the so-called “intertemporal characteristics” of climate change in recent climate-related court decisions and the need to respond effectively to both the current climate crisis and its likely ongoing consequences.

Third, the opinion won’t just address what obligations states have, but also what the consequences should be for nations:

where they, by their acts and omissions have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment.

Addressing consequences as well as obligations should cause states to pay closer attention and make the ICJ’s advisory more relevant to domestic climate litigation and policy discussions.

Representatives from Pacific island nations gathered outside the International Court of Justice during the hearings.
Michel Porro/Getty Images

Global judicial direction

Two recent court findings may offer clues as to the potential scope of the ICJ’s findings.

Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights published its own advisory opinion on state obligations in response to climate change.

Explicitly connecting fundamental human rights with a healthy ecosystem, this opinion affirmed states have an imperative duty to prevent irreversible harm to the climate system. Moreover, the duty to safeguard the common ecosystem must be understood as a fundamental principle of international law to which states must adhere.

Meanwhile last week, an Australian federal court dismissed a landmark climate case, determining that the Australian government does not owe a duty of care to Torres Strait Islanders to protect them from the consequences of climate change.

The court accepted the claimants face significant loss and damage from climate impacts and that previous Australian government policies on greenhouse gas emissions were not aligned with the best science to limit climate change. But it nevertheless determined that “matters of high or core government policy” are not subject to common law duties of care.

Whether the ICJ will complement the Inter-American court’s bold approach or opt for a more constrained and conservative response is not certain. But now is the time for clear and ambitious judicial direction with global scope.

Implications for New Zealand

Aotearoa New Zealand aspires to climate leadership through its Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019. This set 2050 targets of reducing emissions of long-lived greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) to net zero, and biogenic methane by 25-47%.

However, actions to date are likely insufficient to meet this target. Transport emissions continue to rise and agriculture – responsible for nearly half of the country’s emissions – is lightly regulated.

Although the government plans to double renewable energy by 2050, it is also in the process of lifting a 2018 ban on offshore gas exploration and has pledged $200 million to co-invest in the development of new fields.

Critics also point out the government has made little progress towards its promise to install 10,000 EV charging stations by 2030 while axing a clean-investment fund.

Although a final decision is yet to be made, the government is also considering to lower the target for cuts to methane emissions from livestock, against advice from the Climate Change Commission.

With the next global climate summit coming up in November, the ICJ opinion may offer timely encouragement for states to reconsider their emissions targets and the ambition of climate policies.

Most countries have yet to submit their latest emissions reduction pledges (known as nationally determined contributions) under the Paris Agreement. New Zealand has made its pledge, but it has been described as “underwhelming”. This may present a chance to adjust ambition upwards.

If the ICJ affirms that states have binding obligations to prevent climate harm, including trans-boundary impacts, New Zealand’s climate change policies and progress to date could face increased legal scrutiny.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Do countries have a duty to prevent climate harm? The world’s highest court is about to answer this crucial question – https://theconversation.com/do-countries-have-a-duty-to-prevent-climate-harm-the-worlds-highest-court-is-about-to-answer-this-crucial-question-261396

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Indianapolis CPA Sentenced for Participation in Illegal Tax Shelter

Source: US State of North Dakota

Defendant Helped Clients in Mississippi and Elsewhere File Returns Claiming False Business Deductions

An Indiana CPA was sentenced yesterday to three years in prison for assisting in the preparation of false tax returns on behalf of clients who participated in an illegal tax shelter.

The following is according to court documents and statements made in court: between 2013 and 2022, Jason L. Crace prepared income tax returns for clients that claimed millions of dollars in false deductions for so-called “royalty payments.” However, as Crace knew, these “royalty payments” were merely circular flows of money designed to give the appearance of genuine business expenses. Typically, a client would send money to bank accounts controlled by scheme promoters who then sent the money — minus a fee — back to a different bank account controlled by the client. In this way, tax shelter participants retained control of the money they transferred, while falsely deducting the transfers as business expenses on their tax returns. One of the scheme’s promoters, Stephen T. Mellinger III, previously pleaded guilty and was sentenced to eight years in prison for his role promoting the scheme.

In total, Crace’s preparation of false tax returns claiming fraudulent “royalty” deductions caused a loss to the IRS of more than $2.5 million.

In addition to his prison sentence, the court sentenced Crace to serve one year of supervised release and to pay restitution of $2,532,936.

Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and Acting U.S. Attorney Patrick Lemon for the Southern District of Mississippi made the announcement.

IRS Criminal Investigation is investigating the case.

Trial Attorneys Richard J. Hagerman, William M. Montague, and Matthew C. Hicks of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles W. Kirkham for the Southern District of Mississippi are prosecuting the case.

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Five Defendants Sentenced in Connection with Operating One of the Largest Illegal Television Show Streaming Services in the United States

Source: US State of North Dakota

Yesterday, the final judgments were issued for five Nevada men, including a citizen of Germany, who were sentenced on May 29 and 30 to terms of up to 84 months in prison for running Jetflicks, one of the largest illegal television streaming services in the United States.

“The defendants operated Jetflicks, an illegal paid streaming service that made available more television episodes than any licensed streaming service on the market,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This scheme generated millions of dollars in criminal profits, and hurt thousands of U.S. companies and individuals who owned the copyrights to these shows but never received a penny in compensation from Jetflicks. The sentences issued in this case demonstrate the Criminal Division’s commitment to protect American creativity and to ensure that large-scale infringers are brought to justice and punished for their crimes.”

“Digital crimes are not victimless crimes,” said U.S. Attorney Sigal Chattah for the District of Nevada. “The copyright owners lost millions of dollars as a result of the illegal paid streaming service. These sentences underscore our joint commitment with the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and FBI to deter and disrupt intellectual property crime via thorough investigation and prosecution of those who violate federal intellectual property laws.”

“By building and running one of the largest unauthorized streaming services in the U.S., these individuals not only stole from content creators and legitimate streaming services, they undermined the integrity of our economy and the rule of law,” said Assistant Director Jose A. Perez of the FBI Criminal Investigative Division. “These sentencings are a reminder that illegal actions have consequences. The FBI and our partners are unwavering in our commitment to protect intellectual property rights and hold criminals accountable.”

After a 14-day trial that ended in June 2024, a federal jury in the District of Nevada convicted Kristopher Lee Dallmann, 42; Peter H. Huber, 67; Jared Edward Jaurequi, also known as Jared Edwards, 44; Felipe Garcia, 43; and Douglas M. Courson, 65, all of Las Vegas, of conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. The jury also convicted Dallmann of criminal copyright infringement by distribution, criminal copyright infringement by public performance, and money laundering. Subsequently, the court sentenced Dallmann to 84 months in prison; Huber to 18 months in prison; Jaurequi to time served (almost 5 months in prison), 180 days of home confinement, and 500 hours of community service; Garcia to three years probation with 49 days in prison and 1000 hours of community service; and Courson to three years probation with 48 days in prison.

According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, the defendants ran a site called Jetflicks, an online subscription-based service headquartered in Las Vegas, that permitted users to stream and at times download copyrighted television programs without the permission of the relevant copyright owners. At one point, Jetflicks claimed to have 183,285 different television episodes, significantly more than Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, Amazon Prime, or any other licensed streaming service. This was the largest internet piracy case — as measured by the estimated total infringement amount and total number of infringements — ever to go to trial as well as the first illegal streaming case ever to go to trial. The defendants’ conduct harmed every major copyright owner of a television program in the United States. Copyright owners lost millions of dollars from the operation.

Evidence presented at trial showed that the defendants used automated software and computer scripts that ran constantly to scour sites around the world hosting pirated content. The software and scripts would download, process, and store illegal content, and then make it immediately available on servers in the United States and Canada to tens of thousands of paid subscribers located throughout the United States for streaming and/or downloading. The defendants often delivered episodes to subscribers the day after the shows originally aired on television. The service was not only available to subscribers over the internet but specifically designed to work on many different types of devices, platforms, and software.

Each defendant performed at least one and often multiple roles at Jetflicks including management, computer programming and coding, design of the website, applications, and customer interface, technical assistance, content acquisition, subscriptions and revenue, and customer support.

Dallmann reaped millions of dollars in profit from the operation. The government conservatively estimated the value of the copyright infringement in the case at $37.5 million. This included the approximate retail value of the defendants’ reproduction of infringing works to create the Jetflicks inventory as well as the approximate retail value of the streams of pirated television episodes that the defendants provided to subscribers.

The five defendants sentenced were among eight defendants originally indicted in the Eastern District of Virginia in connection with operating Jetflicks. In addition to the defendants just sentenced in Nevada, defendant Darryl Polo previously pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Virginia to four counts of criminal copyright infringement and one count of money laundering for his involvement with Jetflicks as well as an equally large illegal streaming site he ran called iStreamItAll. Similarly, defendant Luis Villarino also previously pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Virginia to conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement. In May 2021, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Virginia sentenced Polo and Villarino to, respectively, 57 months in prison and 12 months and a day in prison.

After the case was transferred to the District of Nevada for trial, defendant Yoany Vaillant was tried separately from the other five remaining defendants. In November 2024, after an eight-day trial, a federal jury convicted Vaillant of conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement. Vaillant is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 4.

The FBI Washington Field Office investigated the case, with assistance from the FBI Las Vegas Field Office.

Senior Counsel Matthew A. Lamberti, Trial Attorney Michael Christin, and Acting Deputy Chief Christopher S. Merriam of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jessica Oliva and Edward G. Veronda for the District of Nevada are prosecuting the case. The CCIPS Cybercrime Lab, the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Canada provided significant assistance.

MIL OSI USA News –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Oklahoma City Duo Plead Guilty to Illegal Possession of Firearms Following Shooting at Apartment Complex

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

OKLAHOMA CITY – LARRY WELCH, 29, and JACOB MADISON, 24, both of Oklahoma City, have each pleaded guilty to illegal possession of a firearm after a previous felony conviction, announced U.S. Attorney Robert J. Troester.

On May 6, 2025, a federal Grand Jury returned a two-count Indictment, charging both Welch and Madison with being a felon in possession of a firearm. According to public record, on April 7, 2025, officers with the Oklahoma City Police Department responded to a reported shooting at an apartment complex. Witnesses told police that prior to the shooting, they had been involved in a dispute with the shooting suspects, later identified as Welch and Madison. Nobody was injured as a result of the shooting. Officers reviewed nearby surveillance video which showed Welch and Madison opening fire on the unarmed witnesses and then fleeing the complex. Officers canvassed the area, and shortly thereafter arrested Welch and Madison, who were found hiding in a residential backyard shed on a nearby property. Law enforcement also recovered two firearms, which Welch and Madison used during the shooting.

Public records show that both Welch and Madison have lengthy criminal histories. Welch has previous felony convictions that include:

possession of a firearm after felony conviction in Cherokee County District Court case number CF-2015-629;
injuring or burning a public building in Mayes County District Court case number CF-2015-0228; and
feloniously pointing a firearm in Cleveland County District Court case number CF-2019-1389.

Madison has previous felony convictions that include:

second-degree burglary in Oklahoma County District Court case number CF-2020-1275;
knowingly receiving or concealing stolen property in Canadian County District Court case number CF-2022-437; and
possession of a firearm after a previous felony conviction, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, committing a felony with a firearm with a defaced ID number, possession of a controlled dangerous substance, and unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia in McClain County District Court case number CF-2023-0072.

On July 16, 2025, both Welch and Madison pleaded guilty, and both admitted they possessed a firearm despite their previous felony convictions.

At sentencing, the defendants face up to 15 years in federal prison each, and fines of up to $250,000.

This case is the result of an investigation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Oklahoma City Police Department. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Laney Ellis (SAUSA) is prosecuting the case. SAUSA Ellis is an attorney with City of Oklahoma City whose position is funded by a federal Project Safe Neighborhoods grant awarded to the City of Oklahoma City to enhance efforts to address and reduce violent crime.

Reference is made to public filings for additional information.

MIL Security OSI –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Former Real Estate Podcaster Sentenced to More Than Five Years in Prison for Orchestrating $7 Million Ponzi Scheme

Source: US FBI

CLEVELAND – A popular former podcaster was sentenced to 70 months in federal prison for orchestrating a real estate Ponzi scheme that took in over $7.3 million from at least 63 victims from across the United States, involving a wide range of income levels and ages.

According to court documents, from October 2017 to March 2022, Matthew Motil, 45, of North Olmsted, was a licensed real estate agent in Ohio who owned and operated several companies. He devised a scheme to defraud investors by using his podcast and other marketing tools to position himself as an expert in the field. Branding himself as the “Cash Flow King,” Motil produced and hosted programs which he promoted through social media and his websites. He also authored a book, “Man on Fire,” to further his credibility with investors. Using a combination of marketing tactics, he solicited prospective investors to invest their money with him and his real estate companies as a lucrative way to generate passive income. Motil provided the victim investors with promissory notes he said were secured by mortgages on properties located throughout Northeast Ohio. Unbeknownst to them, he used the same properties over and over to obtain money from one victim after another, each time providing them with a promissory note purportedly secured by a mortgage. Each victim believed that they were the sole mortgage holder of the investment property and that they would be able to recover their investment through foreclosure if Motil failed to make the payments he promised.

Motil deflected mortgage questions from investors by saying that there were long processing times. As he convinced more people to invest with him, he used those new funds to pay earlier investors to keep the scheme going.

“These victims were deceived and manipulated into handing over their hard-earned money to a shameless and selfish individual for his own benefit,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Carol M. Skutnik for the Northern District of Ohio. “Our office will take action to prosecute anyone who preys on the trusting nature of others.”

Motil also used the victim investors’ money to fund his lifestyle. He funded personal expenses such as leasing a large home on Lake Erie and securing courtside seats to Cleveland Cavaliers home games. He also used the funds to pay his credit cards and financially sustain his fitness businesses.

“The 63 victims of this investment/Ponzi scheme are at the forefront of our work, and this conviction reflects our steadfast commitment to justice on their behalf,” said U.S. Secret Service Special Agent in Charge Blaine M. Forschen for the Cleveland Field Office. “Together with our federal, state, and local partners on the Secret Service Money Laundering Task Force, we will continue to protect our communities from those who exploit trust and inflict financial harm.”

Motil pleaded guilty to securities fraud and wire fraud on Sept. 5, 2024. U.S. District Court Judge Donald C. Nugent imposed the sentence July 18, 2025. Motil was also sentenced to serve three years of supervised release after imprisonment and pay $5,085,247.08 in restitution.

The investigation was conducted by the United States Secret Service Money Laundering Task Force* with significant assistance from the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office and the former Major Crime Task Force hosted by the Cuyahoga County Sheriff’s Department. The Office of the United States Trustee for Region 9 – Cleveland, Ohio, also significantly contributed to the case.

This case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Erica D. Barnhill for the Northern District of Ohio.

*The United Secret Service Task Force consists of the following agencies: Social Security-OIG, US Postal-OIG, US Postal Inspection Service, USDA-OIG, HUD-OIG, FBI, TIGTA-OIG, IRS-CI, Ohio BCI, Westlake PD, Parma PD, Amherst PD, North Olmsted PD, Cuyahoga County Sheriff’s Department, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office, Ohio Investigative Unit, Lorain County Sheriff’s Department, Stark County Prosecutor’s Office, Geauga County Prosecutor’s Office, Lorain County Prosecutor’s Office, Ohio Casino Commission, Richfield PD and North Ridgeville PD.

MIL Security OSI –

July 23, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Five Defendants Sentenced in Connection with Operating One of the Largest Illegal Television Show Streaming Services in the United States

Source: United States Attorneys General