FALLS CHURCH, Va. — The Army is taking a deliberate approach to advancing nuclear energy by pairing government investment and technical expertise with private-sector innovation, said Dr. Jeff Waksman, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment, during the Defense Logistics and Energy Summit Sept. 9.
Speaking during a fireside chat titled “Exploring All Things Army (Nuclear) Energy” at the Falls Church Marriott, Waksman discussed the Army’s Janus Program, the challenges facing the advanced nuclear industry and the role resilient energy plays in supporting Army readiness.
Waksman said Janus is structured to help move advanced nuclear technology beyond individual demonstrations and toward reliable, commercially viable energy systems. He compared the approach to the role NASA played in helping develop the commercial space industry.
“Where nuclear is now is where spaceflight was 25, 30 years ago,” Waksman said.
While private companies bring their own technologies and designs, Waksman said the government can help reduce barriers through technical support, testing and milestone-based investment. The Army, in coordination with the Department of War Innovation Unit, selected five companies under the Janus Program and structured milestones around remaining technical risks. The program includes up to $2.2 billion in potential milestone-based funding.
Waksman emphasized that technical demonstrations are only one step toward fielding reliable microreactors. A successful criticality test, for example, does not demonstrate that an entire power-production system can operate continuously under real-world conditions.
“My biggest concern from a design perspective is going to be the reliability of these systems,” Waksman said. “It’s one thing to be able to turn a reactor on for a day. It’s another thing to have a reactor that you have confidence in is going to be on for years at a time.”
The Army is working with participating companies to identify potential technical concerns, validate materials and components, and apply lessons learned from previous nuclear efforts while allowing companies to retain responsibility for their individual designs.
During the discussion, moderator Richard Kidd highlighted several risks commonly associated with nuclear deployment, including capital costs, workforce availability, fuel supply, regulation and supply-chain capacity.
Waksman said those challenges remain significant for the microreactor industry.
Workforce shortages, for example, are affecting both government and industry as a growing number of nuclear companies compete for engineers and skilled technical personnel. At the same time, Waksman said increased interest in advanced nuclear technology is attracting a new generation of engineers as well as experienced professionals from other technology sectors.
Fuel availability presents another challenge, particularly as the United States seeks to rebuild domestic nuclear fuel capabilities.
Waksman said the Army has coordinated with the Department of Energy and other federal partners to support fuel requirements for initial testing and early reactors. However, broader deployment will require increased domestic enrichment and fuel-production capacity.
The challenge extends beyond production alone. Fuel suppliers need sufficient long-term demand to justify major investments in new facilities, while reactor developers need a dependable fuel supply before they can scale production.
“This is one of the issues that we’re currently tackling in the government now,” Waksman said, noting the issue has received attention at the White House level.
Audience questions also addressed what happens to nuclear material after a reactor reaches the end of its operating life.
Waksman said the Army is applying lessons from its earlier nuclear programs and does not intend to leave radioactive material indefinitely at installations. He said the program’s approach is to remove all radioactive material from the site within two years after operation.
The Department of War is also exploring a broader approach to managing nuclear material across military installations, including options that could consolidate waste management, recycling and fuel-cycle activities rather than developing separate long-term solutions at individual installations.
“We haven’t solved the problem, but we have, I think, a clear path to work towards,” Waksman said.
Waksman also addressed the rapidly growing number of companies entering the advanced nuclear market. While government does not direct companies to merge or leave the market, he said concentrating resources on technologies with the greatest potential for success could ultimately drive consolidation across the industry.
Both Waksman and Kidd emphasized the strategic importance of building a competitive domestic nuclear industry. Kidd noted that the United States has historically invested in industries considered essential to national security and economic competitiveness and highlighted China’s sustained investment in energy technologies and associated supply chains.
Although much of the discussion focused on nuclear energy, Waksman emphasized that the Army is pursuing a broader portfolio of technologies to strengthen installation resilience.
The Army is evaluating nuclear power alongside solar energy, battery storage, natural gas and other energy sources based on installation requirements and local conditions. The objective, Waksman said, is not to rely on a single technology but to ensure installations have reliable energy to support critical missions.
For the Army, energy resilience also means reducing exposure to vulnerable external supply chains. Energy delivered by truck, wire or pipeline can be disrupted, making secure on-site generation an important component of mission assurance.
As the Army advances Janus and other energy initiatives, Waksman said the focus remains on identifying practical solutions that provide installations with the reliable power needed to operate through disruptions and support Army readiness.
Social Sharing