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

Fact plan-004

newanalysisreported Valar's own milestone table vs what happened: safety papers about 2 months late; criticality at least 12 days early
2025-10 · plan-004 · Valar Atomics, U.S. Department of Energy

Table 7 of Valar's Nuclear Safety Design Agreement (October 2025, page 53) set these targets: NSDA submittal 22 Sept 2025 (status 'In Review'), preliminary safety analysis (PDSA) 1 Nov 2025, final safety analysis (DSA) 6 Jan 2026, each with a 45-day DOE review; construction complete 13 April 2026; phased readiness review; initial criticality 30 June 2026. The record: DOE's PDSA approval is known only from POWER's report linking to Valar's own posts, as February 2026, and final DSA approval as 23 April 2026 (safe-006); set against the table's submittal dates plus the 45-day reviews (about mid-December 2025 and about 20 February 2026), each came roughly two months later; the reactor was flown in unfueled on 15 February 2026 (orig-030); DOE's environmental determination was signed 22 April 2026 and speaks of construction in the past tense; DOE approved the fuel-shipping package on 20 May 2026 (safe-010); Valar told the state lab board in May that DOE's readiness team had reviewed it (gov-037); DOE announced criticality on 18 June 2026 (orig-010), 12 days before the table's 30 June target (plan-005 on the exact date). The promise that mattered most publicly, criticality before 4 July 2026, holds (fund-020). None of the DOE approvals themselves (PDSA, DSA, safety requirements, readiness report, startup approval) has been published (safe-007).

In plain termsIn October 2025 Valar published its own schedule. The paperwork steps took about two months longer than planned, but the reactor still reached its first chain reaction on time, even a little early. That part of the promise was kept. What cannot be checked is the paperwork itself: DOE has not released the approvals, so the public knows them mostly from Valar's own posts.
verified 2026-09-29: Verify pass 2026-09-29: Table 7 re-read (dates are SUBMITTAL targets with 45-day reviews). 'About three months late' overstated the gap: measured against submittal plus review it is about two months. Downgraded to 'reported' because the approval dates rest on one report (POWER, citing Valar's LinkedIn posts).

In tabs: plans, operations, timeline, government · file plans_ops