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

Fact safe-015

newofficial statementreported State lab director, quoted by local news, said firms must show 'no dose' at the fence; Valar's analysis shows some
2025-10-10 · safe-015 · Jaron Wallace, Utah San Rafael Energy Lab, Valar Atomics

ETV News (10 October 2025) quoted Jaron Wallace, identified as director of the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab (a state office), saying any nuclear company must show no dose at the site boundary in an accident, that in the worst case the public 'will never see a dose of radiation above background', and that Valar must prove radiation cannot pass the fence line of its 11 acres. Valar's own NSDA, dated the same month, does not claim zero: its worst-case analysis gives up to 0.1 or 0.5 rem at a 400 m boundary and up to 5 rem at 100 m (safe-013), and its standard is the 25 rem evaluation guideline, and it also cites a 1 rem figure labelled 'USNRC NPUF', which matches the NRC's test for sizing an emergency planning zone (1 rem over 96 hours, 10 CFR 50.33(g)(2)); neither is zero. As reported, the director's description (no dose at the boundary) differs from both the figures the NSDA measures against and the company's own analysis.

In plain termsAs ETV reported it, the state lab's director described the requirement as 'no dose' at the site boundary, even in the worst accident. Valar's own worst-case analysis gives a small non-zero dose at the property line and a larger one closer in, judged against a 25 rem evaluation guideline and a 1 rem figure the paper labels USNRC NPUF (the NRC's emergency-planning-zone test for research reactors it licenses), not against zero.
verified 2026-09-29: Re-read ETV (10 Oct 2025) and NSDA on 2026-09-29. Quote exact. Downgraded to 'reported': the statement rests on one news report. Removed 'then director' (no source read says he left) and 'told residents' (it was a news interview). The ANS 'former USREL director' in safe-022 is a different person. Correction 2026-09-29 (calculation audit): 1 rem now labelled 'USNRC NPUF' and matched to the NRC EPZ test (10 CFR 50.33(g)(2)); 'neither is zero'. Correction 2026-09-29 (wording review): the director's reported words and the paper's numbers are set side by side; the 25 rem and 1 rem figures are no longer called limits.

In tabs: safety, local, people · file safety