Air Transport Executed on Feb 15 C‑17 aircraft moved the 5‑MW Ward250 microreactor from March Air Reserve Base in California to Hill Air Force Base in Utah on Feb 15, covering roughly 700 miles without nuclear fuel onboard [1][2]. The operation, dubbed “Operation Windlord,” marked the first time a fuel‑free, minivan‑sized reactor was air‑lifted for rapid deployment testing [1][2]. Both articles note the flight demonstrated the logistical feasibility of transporting advanced reactors to remote sites.

Key Officials Accompanied the Flight Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Defense Undersecretary Michael Duffey traveled on the C‑17, praising the mission as a licensing breakthrough and a step toward faster warfighting power [1][2]. Wright highlighted the move as part of a broader strategy to meet AI‑driven electricity demand and to accelerate commercial licensing [1]. Duffey framed the airlift as essential for ensuring military energy independence and outpacing adversaries [2].

Reactor Selected Under DOE Pilot Program The Ward250 unit was chosen under the Department of Energy’s Nuclear Reactor Pilot Program, announced in June 2025 to fast‑track three advanced reactors to criticality by July 4 2026 [2]. Valar Atomics broke ground at the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab in September, following a successful non‑nuclear prototype called Ward Zero [2]. The program places the Utah test alongside other pilots from Terrestrial Energy, TRISO‑X, and Oklo, aiming to demonstrate rapid construction and operation outside national labs [2].

Fuel and Testing Plans Detailed Nuclear fuel will be shipped separately from the Nevada National Security site to the San Rafael facility, where the reactor will undergo evaluation before fuel loading [1][2]. Wright announced that at least three reactors, including this unit, should achieve self‑sustaining reactions by Independence Day, providing up to 5 MW—enough electricity for roughly 5,000 homes [1]. The testing phase will assess performance, safety, and integration with military and civilian power grids [1][2].

Critics Question Safety and Economics Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists called the airlift a “dog‑and‑pony show,” arguing the administration has yet to prove the reactor’s feasibility, cost‑effectiveness, or waste‑management plan [1]. Concerns focus on the lack of a clear strategy for secure fuel transport, long‑term disposal, and the economic case for microreactors versus conventional sources [1]. The criticism underscores ongoing debate over the promised “nuclear renaissance” despite the rapid deployment demonstration.