Dive Brief:

  • The U.S. Army is seeking proposals by June 21 for prototype onsite microreactor power plants that can begin operations at an Army installation in the continental United States by the end of 2030, the Defense Innovation Unit said on June 5.
  • The request for information seeks solutions to reduce the Army’s reliance on electricity produced off-base and comply with a Congressional mandate to provide critical missions with 99.9% reliable energy by 2030. 
  • “[The RFI] is a great opportunity to further incentivize deployment of microreactors,” said Jeff Merrifield, chair of the board of directors of the U.S. Nuclear Industry Council, an advocacy group, and partner at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman. “It has the potential, if successful, to be adopted by other branches of the U.S. military or other parts of the U.S. government.”

Dive Insight:

The U.S. Army currently relies on off-site electricity providers to obtain energy, creating “mission risks due to disruptions from extreme weather and cybersecurity attacks,” DIU said in the RFI. 

To address operational challenges posed by intermittent renewables and battery storage installations, the Army seeks “a novel approach using recent advances in the nuclear industry that can provide continuous/reliable power regardless of weather conditions,” DIU said.

“The Army’s RFI program is a great first step toward making the American military more energy resilient,” said Ryan Duncan, director of government relations for Last Energy, an advanced modular reactor technology company. “Like other NATO members, the U.S. Armed Forces is looking for technologies that offer 24/7 energy security and can be delivered quickly and affordably.”

The RFI’s tight response timeline likely won’t stop “a diversity of companies,” possibly six or more, from responding, Merrifield said.

A spokesperson for Last Energy declined to say whether the company would participate in the RFI.

The RFI’s preferred reactor design features include a fuel form enriched to 20% or less of U-235, an isotope of uranium that can sustain a nuclear chain reaction, that can be procured within the project’s schedule. Designs should also have the ability to meet “100% of all critical loads” at deployment sites, a total site footprint of 5 acres or less, local control and dispatchability, the ability to start up with and without a grid power connection, the ability to supply power for at least 20 years and “passive safety features to the extent practical,” DIU said.

Each installation’s critical load requirement is anticipated to amount to 3 MW to 10 MW of electricity output, though “vendors that provide compelling solutions outside the anticipated range may also be considered for further evaluation,” DIU said.

Despite these stipulations, the DIU-led awarding process will likely move faster than typical U.S. government contracting processes, Merrifield said.

Unlike most potential consumers of nuclear power, the U.S. Department of Defense and its military departments are authorized under the Atomic Energy Act to regulate on-base nuclear generation facilities, meaning the Army could choose to regulate a microreactor procured through the June RFI on its own authority, Merrifield said. But the Army has not publicly said whether it will do so, and pursuing initial licensing through an existing Nuclear Regulatory Commission pathway could expedite the commercialization process, he added.

“If the intention is to incentivize deployment, in my personal view it would make sense to license [the microreactor] through the NRC” rather than first stand up a nuclear licensing program within the Army, he said.

The Army’s interest in small-scale nuclear technology highlights its potential benefits for a wide variety of users, including military units, Last Energy’s Duncan said.

“Microreactors provide all the benefits of nuclear power but are packaged in a way to have a smaller footprint, offer siting flexibility [and] ensure a direct power connection,” he said. “Any step the Army takes to embrace microreactors … will go a long way to put the U.S. in a stronger military position.