Summary of this file as of 29 September 2026. Authority: Ward 250 runs on a DOE authorization under EO 14301 and DOE-STD-1271, with Valar as its own design authority and no public hearing step (safe-001, safe-002, safe-019); no public copy was found of the documents that define what it may do (DSA, TSRs, DOE's safety evaluation, startup approval) (safe-007); DOE says federal reviewers checked contractor safety submittals for the pilot reactors and took part in Ward 250's readiness review before startup (dir-031); and every approval date comes from Valar (safe-006, safe-027). Where the record disagrees with itself or with Valar: DOE's shipping review describes HALEU fuel for Ward 250, while the only public safety agreement lists 4.95% fuel (safe-010, disc-001); power at 250 kWt is allowed for one hour per run in the NSDA and up to one day, possibly a total, in a later Valar draft (safe-008); the accident inventory assumes 3 MWd against a 30 MWd limit (safe-009); outlet temperature 650 C limit versus 750 C goal (disc-002); worst-case boundary dose stated as under 0.5 rem and under 0.1 rem (safe-013); a 400 m public boundary that cannot fit inside the 20.6-acre lab (safe-014); the NSDA's 400 m dispersion factor is 3.1 to 12.3 times lower than standard rural methods give for its own stated weather (safe-014); it cites 18 criteria of a QA rule that lists 10 (safe-018); its 18-month lifecycle is shorter than its own schedule plus 12 months of operation (safe-009); a state lab director's 'no dose' assurance versus the analysis (safe-015); '72 hours' versus 'indefinitely' of walk-away cooling (safe-020); and DOE's environmental review naming only a fault 150 km away when the state maps one about 15 km away, and saying no major emission source lies within 10 miles when a coal plant is about 6 miles away (safe-021, safe-022). Company claims tested against independent sources: 'unmatched' and 'impossible to melt' go beyond Valar's own limits and UCS's assessment (safe-025); the spent-fuel 'CT scan' claim is disputed by engineers, and no correction was found (safe-026). Public records not found: emergency plan, exercises and any DOE decision on on-site-only planning (safe-016), monitoring data (safe-024), incident reports (safe-033), spent-fuel destination and state permit (safe-023), the fuel line's authorization (safe-031), and the Utah-DOE agreements the NSDA cites (safe-034). Claims that hold are in safe-039. None of this shows the reactor is unsafe; it shows the public cannot check that it is safe.

• Safety Evaluation Report, Letter Amendment of Certificate of Compliance No. 9979 for the Model 9979 Package, Docket 26-35-9979 (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Packaging and Transportation (Packaging Certification Program), 2026-05-20) primary government
• Ward250 Nuclear Safety Design Agreement, No. 100403, Rev 02 (status: Draft; issued for Public Release) (Valar Atomics, 2025-10) primary company
• NEPA Determination DOE-ID-26-005: Valar Ward250 Research Reactor (categorical exclusion B5.26) (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (Idaho), 2026-04-22) primary government
• DOE-STD-1271-2025, Authorization Pathway for Nuclear Facilities (August 2025; DOE standard, copy posted by the Nuclear Innovation Alliance) (U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, 2025-08) primary government