The Pentagon’s nuclear pivot toward safe and clean microreactors will enable it to gain a silent but critical strategic edge.

Eight firms have been selected as potential suppliers to demonstrate microreactors at Army pilot sites—one of America’s boldest nuclear energy experiments in decades.

The US Army has launched one of its boldest energy bets in decades: a plan to seed bases with microreactors—normally generating less than 20 megawatts of electricity—with first power targeted by 2028. The scheme, unveiled at the Army’s annual gathering in Washington by Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Energy Secretary Chris Wright on October 14, aims to cut diesel dependence while hardening installations against blackouts and attacks.

Behind the program is a pool of eight qualified firms competing for milestone-based awards in a potential multi-gigawatt market, estimated in one analysis at up to ~20 GWe across thousands of installations. Yet the question looms: in a field where no company has yet secured full NRC licensing, who stands the best chance of winning, and how will the Army navigate the regulatory, technical, and geopolitical bottlenecks to deliver by 2028?

A Nascent Market for Nuclear Microgrids

The Janus Program’s selection of eight microreactor developers—Antares, BWXT, General Atomics, Kairos Power, Oklo, Radiant, Westinghouse, and X-Energy—reflects a deliberate strategy by the Defense Innovation Unit and DoD to tap the most promising contenders in advanced nuclear. These firms bring a mix of experimental designs, modular architectures, and fuel innovations.

From the Army’s perspective, the aggregate demand is compelling. In a sample of 3,701 sites, nearly 97.9 percent fall into the smallest capacity tier (assuming one to 10 MWe), labeled as First Quartile in the analysis; combined peak load estimates reach ~20.3 GWe. The Janus logic is that a distributed fleet of microreactors can satisfy most of the curve, leaving only a handful of large sites to require medium reactors.

Credit to the United States Department of War.

But the supply side is still immature. None of these eight companies currently operate a full NRC-licensed commercial microreactor, though some, like Westinghouse and BWXT, have extensive experience with NRC-licensed conventional reactors. Their prototypes, designs, and technical claims must still be stress-tested. The Janus Program must therefore walk a tightrope: accelerate deployment, guard safety and oversight, and hedge bets across multiple technology paths.

Lessons From Project Pele

The precursor to Janus is Project Pele, a DoD-led microreactor demonstration program intended to validate portable, modular nuclear power for forward bases. The firms that were selected —BWXT and X-Energy —were charged to mature designs for mobile reactors.

BWXT is leading Project Pele fabrication work and targeting power generation by 2028; specific packaging and testing details remain subject to program milestones.

Pele is not without criticism. Some analysts argue that engaging in design trade-offs for transportability limits its output and responsiveness. Still, Pele’s real value lies in providing a regulatory, contractual, and technical template that Janus can scale.

Betting Strategies: Who Might Win?

Among the eight contestants, a few stand out:

• BWXT has a head start as the lead contractor for Project Pele, advancing prototype development and leveraging its TRISO fuel production capabilities.
• X-energy was awarded a contract modification to develop a complementary Project Pele microreactor design for both military and commercial applications, positioning it to leverage that experience in Janus.
• Radiant has advanced its compact Kaleidos design through the DOE’s design review process and is targeting prototype testing at Idaho National Laboratory by 2026.
• Kairos Power has developed fluoride salt–cooled reactors across multiple scales, including both SMR and microreactor designs.
• Oklo, selected by the Air Force for its Eielson Base microreactor project in Alaska, could leverage that parallel experience to accelerate its Janus deployments.
• Westinghouse brings deep nuclear pedigree through its eVinci microreactor, which is advancing through DOE-supported development programs.
• General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems brings decades of defense technology and advanced reactor development experience to Janus.
• Antares Nuclear is developing a compact heat-pipe microreactor with DOE support, targeting power solutions for remote military and potentially space applications.

The Janus Program’s contracting model also matters. It will use milestone-based, performance-oriented awards (modeled after NASA’s COTS program) to steer companies through successive readiness gates—design, safety review, prototype manufacture, and field deployment.

In effect, the Army is not picking a single winner but hedging across several bets—some companies may fall off midway through the process, others may pivot to refine their designs, and several may reach deployment in parallel.

The Regulatory Shortcut: Inside the Army’s Advantage

One striking factor is that Janus does not depend on the full NRC licensing process. Military reactors operated by the Department of Defense fall outside NRC jurisdiction under Section 91(b) of the Atomic Energy Act, which grants the president authority to authorize DoD nuclear facilities with safety oversight conducted through DoD’s internal authorization and oversight system, coordinated with DOE technical standards and reviews. This carve‑out allows Janus to target 2028 for limited prototype deployments, rather than full commercial operation.

Janus will require safety reviews, environmental assessments, and operational oversight, but these steps will be compressed through the DoD-DOE partnership.

Yet regulatory aggressiveness is not without risk. If a serious flaw emerges in one design, it will cast suspicion over the entire cohort, potentially delaying all deployments. The Army must balance speed and caution, especially in global forward bases where public and allied trust are essential.

Risks, Geopolitical Stakes, and Scalability

Even with eight contractors and regulatory flexibility, Janus faces daunting challenges:

• Fuel and supply chain constraints: Many microreactors rely on HALEU (high-assay low-enriched uranium) and advanced modular components that are in limited production globally.
• Site acceptance and public pushback: Some bases are near civilian communities; local objections or political resistance could derail placements.
• Cost pressures: The Army has said safety is first, cost is second. But in practice, reactors must compete against diesel and renewable energy logistics.
• Performance uncertainty: Designs are still unproven under stress, especially under cyberattack, maintenance stresses, extreme climates, or military operations.
• Export/alliances implications: Placing reactors in overseas US bases could provoke host-nation scrutiny, nonproliferation concerns, and diplomatic friction.

Still, if even a subset of the eight succeed, the payoff is enormous: greater energy autonomy, resilience against grid disruptions or attack, and long-term logistical economies in forward deployments.

Outlook: Who Might Cross the Finish Line?

By 2028, Janus is planning to target Army-regulated first power at select US bases, contingent on safety reviews and contractor performance. BWXT and X-Energy, drawing on Pele’s progress, are frontrunners—but others like Radiant may surprise analysts. The Army’s milestone model ensures that the highest performers advance, and weaker ones will end up dropping off before large amounts of capital are committed.

Beyond 2028, scalability will depend on the production of nth-of-a-kind reactors, standardization across bases, global fuel and maintenance logistics, and alignment with US strategic posture overseas. If Janus is more than a pilot program—if it becomes a template for allied bases and inter-service energy strategy—then the nuclear pivot will be more than symbolic. It will be structural.

Either way, the race is not between reactor designs alone — but between speed, regulatory agility, and industrial mobilization. The army that can field safe microreactors first may gain a silent but critical strategic edge.

About the Author: Stella Kim

Stella (SuHee) Kim is an investment and nuclear strategy expert with over a decade of experience bridging global finance and deep-tech, with a particular focus on small modular reactors (SMRs). She is the CEO of Pandia Bridge, a Singapore-based advisory firm that connects global investors and leading Korean conglomerates with top SMR developers, including NuScale Power, to facilitate cross-border investments and strategic partnerships. Her work centers on the intersection of energy security, technology innovation, and strategic finance on a global scale.

Image: Shutterstock/Ivan Cholakov

The post Evaluating the Pentagon’s Nuclear Pivot appeared first on The National Interest.