Oklo achieved their next milestone with the Department of Energy, with the approval of the Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis (PDSA) for the Aurora Fuel Fabrication Facility at Idaho National Laboratory.

We previously discussed the break-neck speed at which the DoE is reviewing and approving reactor plant and fuel facility designs under the department’s Reactor Pilot Program (RPP) and Fuel Line Pilot Program (FLPP), and now the regulatory are pouring in:

Radiant submitted their DARK, satisfying the intent of a PDSA, for the Kaleidos reactor
Oklo received approval for their Nuclear Safety Design Agreement (NSDA) for the A3F
Valar Atomics went critical on a pilot reactor core with DoE coordination
Antares’s NSDA for their Mark-0 reactor was highlighted during their $96 million Series B

This latest achievement from Oklo represents the roughly 50% completion mark of the A3F design, and is first of its kind under the FLPP. The DoE is coordinating with Oklo to use existing facilities at INL to construct the fabrication plant for producing the unique metallic fuel that will be used in the first Aurora reactor.

Oklo has been working with the DoE and INL since 2019 and has leveraged the coordination over the past six years to progress as rapidly as possible through the novel DoE licensing path.  The sodium-cooled reactor development company will now be focused on the physical construction of the A3F while they prepare their Documented Safety Analysis, which will be submitted near the end of the construction process.

The assertions are still popping up everywhere that the DoE is simply rubber stamping everything that comes across their desk, in contrast to what would be a thorough and detailed review of the safety aspects of reactor plant and fuel facility designs by the NRC. However, this train of thought fails to hold for two major reasons.

The endless headaches that come with NRC regulation are not present under the DoE, such as town hall meetings, lawfare from environmental activists, and political-ideology-based state laws and regulations. The lack of these problems alone reduces the timeline for regulatory review by years.
Neither the DoE nor the reactor developer has any incentive to develop and progress a product that would not eventually meet the requirements of the NRC. As we thoroughly detailed in our coverage of the new addendum between the DoE and the NRC, there is no path to the commercialization of a reactor or fuel fabrication facility that does not travel through the NRC review process. The NRC is intimately involved with the DoE’s reviews conducted under the RPP and FLPP so concerns can be addressed early and commercialization can happen as rapidly as possible when that stage is reached.

Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The state of California filed suit against the Trump administration on Dec. 12 for withholding federal funds over truck driver English-proficiency requirements.

Trucks in Phoenix on Nov. 19, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times

The suit centered on a decision by the Department of Transportation (DOT) to hold back $33 million in federal funding for commercial vehicle safety programs because of the state’s decision not to comply with the federal requirements.

The English language requirement was reinstated by the DOT in May of this year.

California responded to the withholding of funds by saying the decision was “arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and contrary to law; imperils the safety of all persons driving in California; and threatens to wreak significant economic damage.”

According to the state’s suit, California enforces the English-language rule for commercial drivers and is in compliance with federal laws.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, the Transportation Department, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration were named in the suit.

This isn’t the only action taken by the administration related to alien truck drivers’ presence on the road. In August of this year, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the United States would pause the issuance of worker visas for commercial truck drivers.

The Department of Transportation did not immediately respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.

The day before the suit, on Dec. 11, Duffy announced that more than 9,500 commercial truckers were taken out of service for failing English-language proficiency checks.

“We’ve now knocked 9,500 truck drivers out of service for failing to speak our national language—ENGLISH!” Duffy wrote in a Dec. 10 post on X. “This administration will always put you and your family’s safety first.”

The total consists of actions taken since May of this year, when the policy was reinstated.

“America First means safety first,” Duffy said in May. “Americans are a lot safer on roads alongside truckers who can understand and interpret our traffic signs. This common-sense change ensures the penalty for failure to comply is more than a slap on the wrist.”

Late in November, the DOT warned that Pennsylvania could lose up to $75 million if the state does not immediately revoke the commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) issued to foreign nationals and “correct dangerous failures” identified in its CDL program.

Duffy warned that the DOT found that the state had violated safety regulations by issuing CDLs to foreigners.

The California suit comes about two weeks after a review by the DOT found that almost half of the truck driving schools in the United States were found to be noncompliant with federal guidelines.

Around 44 percent of the roughly 16,000 truck driving schools in the country could be forced to close.

Duffy said in a Dec. 1 statement that the Trump administration is “cracking down on every link in the illegal trucking chain.”

“Under [President] Joe Biden and [former Transportation Secretary] Pete Buttigieg, bad actors were able to game the system and let unqualified drivers flood our roadways,“ Duffy said. ”Their negligence endangered every family on America’s roadways, and it ends today.”

At the time, 3,000 commercial driver license training providers had been removed from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Training Provider Registry because of violations, and an additional 4,500 training providers were put on notice for possible noncompliance.

The centers were closed for falsifying or manipulating training data; failing to meet requirements for curricula, facility conditions, or instructor qualifications; and failing to maintain accurate documentation or refusing to provide those records during the federal audit.

The Trump administration gave the state of New York 30 days to comply with federal rules for nonresidents, saying it could lose approximately $73 million in funding.

“Fifty-three percent of New York’s non-domiciled CDLs were issued unlawfully or illegally,” Duffy said in a news conference on Dec. 12.

We’ve heard this all before, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and American officials are hailing progress after deep discussions on a peace deal to end the nearly four-year war with Russia. During the couple days of meetings in Berlin, US officials have said there’s consensus from Ukraine and Europe on about 90% of the Trump-proposedd peace plan.

It could be finalized within days in order to present to the Kremlin, which is unlikely to go for any scheme which doesn’t feature serious territorial concessions. Zelensky late Monday said the draft is “very workable” but that key questions remain unresolved.

Still, the land issue remains a front and central problem. “The Americans are trying to find a compromise,” Zelensky said just ahead of visiting the Netherlands on Tuesday. “They are proposing a ‘free economic zone’ (in the Donbas). And I want to stress once again: a ‘free economic zone’ does not mean under the control of the Russian Federation.”

One big breakthrough, from Kiev’s point of view, is being reported, however. The NY Times writes that “The United States, Ukraine and Europe have agreed on a NATO-like guarantee for the future security of Ukraine, two U.S. officials said on Monday, as they tried to come up with a revised peace proposal that would deter future aggression and still satisfy Russia.”

Via AFP

And a senior US official was cited in Politico as saying, “The basis of that agreement is basically to have really, really strong guarantees, Article 5-like.” This has sparked optimism in Berlin (though again, we’ve seen this all before):

“We now have the chance for a real peace process,” Merz said.

Zelensky concurred: “We have progress there. I have seen the details from the military that they have been working on, and they look very good, even though it is only the first draft.”

Zelensky and his backers have only very belatedly agreed that future NATO membership is not on the table, but now they are focused on something that’s sure to receive massive pushback from Moscow: ‘Article 5′-style’ guarantees. So the idea is that Ukraine would never become a formal member of NATO, but would still in the end receive the benefits of such an alliance in a de facto way. 

Article 5 says that an attack on one country is an attack on all. But this is why Russia is sure to see in this simply a recipe that sets up future direct war with the West over Ukraine. The precise language of what such a security guarantee will look like has yet to be disclosed.

The NY Times presents things as being somewhat up in the air on the issue and subject to future negotiatons:

Most of the conversations over the past two days, the officials said, focused on the security guarantee, which is intended to deter Russia from invading Ukrainian territory again in coming years. The two officials were vague about the specifics, though they said that Mr. Trump was willing to submit any final agreement on American commitments to Ukraine to the Senate for approval. They did not say whether the guarantee would become a formal treaty — akin to what the United States has with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and other allies — or whether any vote would simply be intended to show a bipartisan commitment.

Mr. Trump has said the United States will not contribute ground troops to a security force. But last summer he offered to patrol the skies and enforce a no-fly zone, in addition to continuing to provide Ukraine with intelligence from U.S. satellites and signals intercepts. Senior officials say that offer still stands.

Again, at least some of these scenarios would be seen by the Kremlin as merely a precursor to bigger war. As such “robust” security guarantees would put Moscow and the NATO alliance a significant step closer to direct war, instead of the current state of things which remain more on a proxy war basis.

Meanwhile there is indeed plenty of cause for skepticism:

Another ruse, the “security guarantees” Zelensky is demanding is de facto NATO status. Besides, Zelensky and the Eurocrats will not recognize the Donbass oblasts as “de jure” permanent Russian territory. The deal is… there’s no deal. The war will be decided on the battlefield. pic.twitter.com/w4S519irQ6

— Alan Watson (@DietHeartNews) December 15, 2025

Moscow has recently warned that Zelensky’s sudden vocalization of willingness to make all kinds of concessions, such as preparations to hold elections, are but a ploy in order to buy time on and take off the immediate pressure from Trump.

For example, he’s said he would be willing to prepare to hold elections in 60 days, but only if international backers could guarantee the freedom, fairness, and safety of such a vote. Likely this would mean demanding of Russia’s military some kind of short-term ceasefire for Ukrainians to go to the polls. As we featured earlier, geopolitical analyst and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer has a pessimistic take on the ‘progress’ being reported out of Berlin.

With ‘soft’ survey data slumping during (and after) the government shutdown…

…this morning’s preliminary December PMIs are not helping as both S&P Global’s Manufacturing and Services surveys disappointed.

US Manufacturing PMI fell from 52.2 to 51.8 (worse than the 52.1 expected) – 5 month low

US Services PMI fell from 54.1 to 52.9 (worse than the 54.0 expected) – 6 month low

And all that in spite of ‘solid’ hard data…

Source: Bloomberg

The headline S&P Global US PMI Composite Output Index fell to 53.0 in December from 54.2 in November, according to the ‘flash’ reading (based on about 85% of usual survey responses).

“The flash PMI data for December suggest that the recent economic growth spurt is losing momentum,” says Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence.

“Although the survey data point to annualized GDP expansion of about 2.5% over the fourth quarter, growth has now slowed for two months.”

The latest reading was the lowest since June, though continues to indicate robust economic growth. Output has now risen continually for 35 months.

Despite the decline, US PMIs remain well above the rest of the world…

With new sales growth waning especially sharply in the lead up to the holiday season, Williamson notes that “economic activity may soften further as we head into 2026.”

The signs of weakness are also broad-based, with a nearstalling of inflows of work into the vast services economy accompanied by the first fall in factory orders for a year.

“While manufacturers continue to report higher output, lower sales point to unsustainable production levels which will need to be lowered unless demand revives in the new year.

Service providers reported one of the slowest months for sales growth since 2023. “

Firms have also lost some confidence in the outlook and have restricted their hiring in December in accordance with the more challenging business environment.

“A key concern is rising costs, with inflation jumping sharply to its highest since November 2022, which fed through to one of the steepest increases in selling charges for the past three years. “

Higher prices are again being widely blamed on tariffs, according to Williamson, with an initial impact on manufacturing now increasingly spilling over to services to broaden the affordability problem.