Federal prosecutors investigated whether NovaGrid Energy improperly coordinated with regulators before a pipeline permit vote. Lobbyist Daniel Price testified before a grand jury that he "never met privately with Commissioner Hale about the permit before the vote." Hotel records and text messages show Price and Hale met in a private dining room 6 days before the vote. Price says the meeting concerned a charity board and that the permit was not substantively discussed. He is charged with perjury under 18 U.S.C. §1623.
Grand jury transcript
The prosecutor asked: "Before the vote, did you meet privately with Commissioner Hale about the pipeline permit?" Price answered: "No, I never met privately with Commissioner Hale about the permit before the vote." Defense argues the answer denied a permit-focused meeting, not every private meeting. Trial use: Contains the charged sworn denial, making wording and literal truth central to falsity and materiality arguments. Foundation: A custodian, author, recipient, or investigator should authenticate when it was made, how it was preserved, and how it connects to the disputed event. Cross-examination focus: Ambiguity.
Hotel private dining room records
Reservation records show a private dining room booked under Price name for two guests on March 4, 2024. Security logs show Hale entering at 7:12 PM and leaving at 8:03 PM. Trial use: Shows a private meeting occurred, but the defense can dispute whether it concerned the pipeline permit named in the question. Foundation: A custodian, author, recipient, or investigator should authenticate when it was made, how it was preserved, and how it connects to the disputed event. Cross-examination focus: Foundation Issue FRE 803.
Text message thread
Price texted Hale: "Need to clear the last permit concern before Thursday. Can explain over dinner." Hale replied: "Keep it short. No paper trail." Defense says "permit concern" referred to charity board concerns about land access, not official vote strategy. Trial use: Supports intent and subject matter through permit-related texts, while defense context can recast the dinner as charity-board business. Foundation: A custodian, author, recipient, or investigator should authenticate when it was made, how it was preserved, and how it connects to the disputed event. Cross-examination focus: Context Dispute FRE 106.
Charity board agenda
A charity board agenda for March 5 includes a land-access item involving property near the pipeline route. Price says this was the purpose of dinner. Prosecutors note the agenda was created after the dinner. Trial use: Provides an alternative topic for the dinner, but its creation after the meeting lets prosecutors attack it as cover. Foundation: A custodian, author, recipient, or investigator should authenticate when it was made, how it was preserved, and how it connects to the disputed event. Cross-examination focus: Authentication FRE 901.
Regulatory vote timeline
Hale changed from undecided to yes on March 7. The pipeline permit passed 3-2. Prosecutors argue Price statement was material because the grand jury was investigating private influence before that vote. Trial use: Shows why the alleged lie mattered to the grand jury, linking the denial to a close regulatory vote and influence investigation. Foundation: A custodian, author, recipient, or investigator should authenticate when it was made, how it was preserved, and how it connects to the disputed event. Cross-examination focus: Prejudicial Impact FRE 403.
FBI Special Agent Karen Liu (prosecution)
Public corruption investigator assigned to NovaGrid inquiry
Price denied a private permit meeting, but records and texts show he arranged dinner to clear a permit concern. The lie mattered because the grand jury was investigating undisclosed influence on the vote.
Daniel Price (defendant)
NovaGrid lobbyist charged with perjury
I answered the question truthfully as I understood it. I did not have a private meeting about the official permit vote. We discussed charity land-access concerns and community donations. The prosecutor wording was broad and confusing.
Commissioner Hale (regulator)
State energy commissioner who voted for the pipeline permit
I met Price for dinner, but I do not recall discussing the merits of the permit vote. We talked about charity board land access and community concerns. My vote changed after staff briefings.
Grand Jury Perjury — Federal
Choose a role to start
