VALAR WATCH
Key findingsTheir claims, annotatedEvidenceTake action
374 facts · 512 sources · updated 2026-09-30

Fact gov-032

newanalysisreported The pilot's rules, per a law-firm summary: OTAs not grants, DOE bears its review costs, no local-government role
2025-06-18 · gov-032 · U.S. Department of Energy, Hogan Lovells, Valar Atomics

The Reactor Pilot Program's Request for Application (DE-FOA-0003569, issued 18 June 2025) is posted only on the FedConnect portal, which was not read. Hogan Lovells' summary of it (1 July 2025) says: it is 'not a funding opportunity' and applicants bear all costs, including spent-fuel storage and fuel procurement, but 'Applicants will not be responsible for DOE costs incurred reviewing documents' during authorization; applicants must have a mature design, 'established fuel plans' with a fabrication and disposition pathway, adequate money and qualified staff; they must secure their own site 'on public or private lands'; applicants needing HALEU must be in DOE's HALEU allocation process; DOE would use Other Transaction Agreements, not contracts or grants; the level of NEPA review was not yet set; and there are nine selection criteria, including site status and foreign-ownership risk. The summary mentions no requirement for state or local government consent, support letters or public engagement. Set beside the record: Valar's OTA is recorded at $0 (gov-003); NRC applicants, by contrast, pay the NRC's hourly review fees (EO 14300 refers to 'the NRC's recovery of hourly fees', gov-009); Valar's spent fuel is to go to an unnamed 'DOE-approved facility' (safe-023); Valar is not in any announced HALEU allocation (gov-008).

In plain termsUnder DOE's fast-track program the companies pay to build and run their reactors, but the government's safety review is free to them, while companies licensed by the NRC pay the regulator by the hour. So '$0 federal money' is true for cash but not for government effort. The program's rules, as a law firm summarized them, did not require any local government's consent or any public meeting. Under those rules, as summarized, the county and residents had no formal role.
verified 2026-09-29: Re-read Hogan Lovells (fetched after a first timeout), the DOE program page and EO 14300 2026-09-29; quotes exact; nine criteria counted. Holds; plain no longer states a cause the summary does not show. Stays 'reported' (one secondary summary; the RFA itself sits behind FedConnect).

In tabs: government, funding, process · file government