Title: U.S. Army Mobilizes $2.2B Janus Program to Deploy More Than 20 Commercial Microreactors

URL Source: https://www.powermag.com/u-s-army-mobilizes-2-2b-janus-program-to-deploy-more-than-20-commercial-microreactors/

Published Time: 2026-08-26T20:32:59+00:00

Markdown Content:
![Image 1: U.S. Army Mobilizes $2.2B Janus Program to Deploy More Than 20 Commercial Microreactors](https://www.powermag.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/bwxt-banr-reactor-300x199.png)

The U.S. Army has mobilized up to $2.2 billion for a five-year effort to build and operate more than 20 commercial nuclear microreactors across military installations, selecting five reactor developers and five initial sites for a program designed to push advanced nuclear systems beyond federal test programs and into sustained operation by a Sept. 30, 2028 deadline.

On[Aug. 26, the Army selected](https://www.army.mil/article/294891/army_reaches_agreement_with_private_industry_for_nuclear_micro_reactors)Antares Nuclear for Fort Bragg in North Carolina, BWXT Advanced Technologies for Fort Campbell in Kentucky, General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems for Fort Hood in Texas, Radiant Industries for Fort Benning in Georgia, and Westinghouse Government Services for Fort Drum in New York.

Radiant disclosed the largest agreement so far—up to $750 million to deploy 15 factory-built, 1-MWe Kaleidos microreactors by 2030, beginning with a three-unit installation at Fort Benning. Antares will also deploy reactors in three-unit groups, beginning with its 100-kWe-to-1-MWe R1 at Fort Bragg. Both companies are advancing reactor designs that use tri-structural isotropic (TRISO) particle fuel and will leverage testing underway at Idaho National Laboratory (INL).

The other three selections involve larger reactor designs, although their deployment scopes and schedules vary. BWXT plans a 20-MWe version of its 75-MWth BWXT Advanced Nuclear Reactor (BANR) at Fort Campbell, where it is targeting construction in late 2028 and operation in the early 2030s. General Atomics will advance its General Atomics Tactical Energy System (GA-TES) through development, testing, and site-planning milestones at Fort Hood “toward potential deployment.” The liquid-metal-cooled design has a baseline net output of approximately 5 MWe and can scale to approximately 20 MWe. Westinghouse Government Services will deploy its eVinci heat-pipe microreactor at Fort Drum, though the company did not disclose the specific output, schedule, or contract value.

The five companies will own, build, and operate the reactors under fixed-price, milestone-based Other Transaction Authority agreements negotiated through the Department of War Innovation Unit (DIU), the Pentagon organization charged with accelerating military adoption of commercial technology. The agreements implement directives from a series of presidential executive orders issued in May 2025, which designated the Army as the Pentagon’s executive agent for installing nuclear energy and required it to have at least one Army-regulated reactor operating at a military installation by Sept. 30, 2028.

A key objective is to use military demand and operating experience to establish reactor products that vendors can later sell to customers beyond the military, said Dr. Jeff Waksman, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment. “What we’re trying to transition is from experiments and prototypes to actual commercial products. That is the transition that we are trying to effect here.”

“To be clear, these companies have negotiated significantly different numbers of reactors. They have different amounts of money,” Waksman explained during an Aug. 26 media roundtable. “We have not divided the money evenly five ways, but again, this is about the flexibility that we have to do what we think is most beneficial to the government. We don’t expect all five of these companies are going to turn on a reactor in 2028. In fact, they definitely will not. But we do believe we have a very practical pathway to delivering at least one of these reactors on by September 30, 2028, which was the date set in the executive orders.”

_Editor’s note: This story has been substantially updated with reporting from an Aug. 26 Army media roundtable, including new detail on contracting structure, licensing, fuel, waste, and grid integration. The expanded vendor-by-vendor breakdown that previously appeared in this article has moved to a companion piece, [The Janus Five: 20+ Commercial Nuclear Microreactors, Starting in 2028](https://www.powermag.com/the-janus-five-20-commercial-nuclear-microreactors-starting-in-2028/)._

The Janus Five

**20+ Commercial Nuclear Microreactors, Starting in 2028**

On Aug. 26, the [Army selected five reactor developers](http://army_reaches_agreement_with_private_industry_for_nuclear_micro_reactors/) for the initial Janus tranche, spanning several reactor, fuel, and heat-removal approaches across five major installations that host the 82nd Airborne Division, 101st Airborne Division, III Armored Corps, and other critical Army commands.

*   **BWXT Advanced Technologies—Fort Campbell, Ky.** BWXT will deploy one 20-MWe BANR high-temperature gas-cooled reactor at Fort Campbell. The reactor uses nitrogen coolant and uranium oxycarbide TRISO fuel enriched to 19.75%. BWXT is targeting construction in late 2028 and operation in the early 2030s. The company will begin fabricating Janus fuel at its NRC-licensed facility in Lynchburg, Va. Fort Campbell straddles the Kentucky-Tennessee border across approximately 105,000 acres and is home to the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), 5th Special Forces Group, and 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment. More than 30,000 military personnel and civilians work at the installation.
*   **Radiant Industries—Fort Benning, Ga.** Radiant secured up to $750 million to deliver 15 factory-built, 1-MWe Kaleidos microreactors by 2030, beginning with a three-unit deployment at Fort Benning, in the largest disclosed Janus agreement. Kaleidos is a helium-cooled, TRISO-fueled high-temperature gas reactor. Fort Benning, the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence, lies along the Georgia-Alabama line and supports more than 120,000 active-duty military personnel, family members, reserve-component soldiers, retirees, and civilian employees each day.
*   **General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems—Fort Hood, Texas.** GA-EMS will advance its GA-TES liquid-metal-cooled reactor through development, testing, and site-planning milestones at Fort Hood toward potential deployment. The design has a baseline net output of approximately 5 MWe and an architecture scalable to approximately 20 MWe. It uses encapsulated uranium-zirconium hydride fuel that draws on General Atomics’ TRIGA reactor heritage, making GA-TES the only publicly identified non-TRISO Janus design. Fort Hood covers approximately 214,000 acres in central Texas and hosts III Armored Corps, the 1st Cavalry Division, and First Army Division West.
*   **Antares Nuclear—Fort Bragg, N.C.** Antares will deploy three R1 sodium heat-pipe microreactors at Fort Bragg. Each TRISO-fueled unit will produce between 100 kWe and 1 MWe. Antares says its combined contracts for Janus, the Air Force’s Advanced Nuclear Power for Installations initiative, and Space Force nuclear work are worth on the order of $1 billion. Fort Bragg, home to the 82nd Airborne Division and U.S. Army Special Operations Command, is the Army’s largest installation by population, with roughly 50,000 active-duty soldiers across approximately 250 square miles.
*   **Westinghouse Government Services—Fort Drum, N.Y.** Westinghouse will deploy its TRISO-fueled eVinci heat-pipe microreactor at Fort Drum, although the company has not disclosed the selected unit’s output or schedule. The reference eVinci design is engineered to operate for eight or more years before refueling. Westinghouse completed zero-power criticality testing at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center at the Nevada National Security Site on Aug. 24, 2026. Fort Drum spans approximately 107,000 acres in northern New York, is home to the 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), and receives electric service from National Grid.

For more, see**: _[The Janus Five: 20+ Commercial Nuclear Microreactors, Starting in 2028.](https://www.powermag.com/the-janus-five-20-commercial-nuclear-microreactors-starting-in-2028/)_**

| Company | Installation | Reactor | Output | Fuel | Heat removal | First unit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| BWXT Advanced Technologies | Fort Campbell, Ky. | BANR | 20 MWe (75 MWth) | UCO TRISO (19.75%) | Nitrogen; passive decay-heat removal | Early 2030s |
| Radiant Industries | Fort Benning, Ga. | Kaleidos (three-unit deployment) | 1 MWe/unit; 15 Janus units total | TRISO | Helium gas | First Janus units targeted for 2028 |
| General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems | Fort Hood, Texas | GA-TES | Approx. 5 MWe baseline; architecture scalable to approx. 20 MWe | Encapsulated UZrH; TRIGA heritage | Liquid metal; natural circulation | Not disclosed |
| Antares Nuclear | Fort Bragg, N.C. | R1 (three-unit deployment) | 100 kWe–1 MWe/unit | TRISO | Sodium heat pipes | Initial military deployments targeted for 2028 |
| Westinghouse Government Services | Fort Drum, N.Y. | eVinci | Fort Drum output not disclosed | TRISO (19.75%) | Heat pipes; passive heat removal | Not disclosed |

## Fixed-Price Milestones and a Deliberate Bet on Multiple Advanced Nuclear Technologies

The Janus selections come less than a year after the Army first[introduced the program in](https://www.army.mil/article/288903/army_announces_janus_program_for_next_generation_nuclear_energy)October 2025 and then[issued a solicitation and vendor guidance](https://www.army.mil/article/289074/army_announces_next_steps_on_janus_program_for_next_generation_nuclear_energy)in November. As officials explained during the media roundtable, the agreements unveiled on Aug. 26 are essentially fixed-price, milestone-based Other Transaction Authority (OTA) contracts that will run collectively from fiscal year 2027 through fiscal year 2031.

Each vendor negotiated a separate portfolio of milestones extending through at least one operating reactor, tailored to that company’s design maturity, manufacturing readiness, and deployment profile. Government payments will be released only when specific technical objectives are met, which will give the Army leverage to manage performance and risk across the portfolio, officials said.

Waksman said the Army weighted those milestones toward demonstrable engineering progress, a decision drawn directly from NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program, which used a similar structure to catalyze commercial space launch. “While some of them are based on design completions or regulatory completions, a lot of these milestones are based on hardware milestones, and that was a deliberate decision based on the learning from NASA COTS,” Waksman said. “Hardware is rock solid. If they are making hardware progress, that means that they are making real progress.”

Significantly, the milestone structure will also allow the Army to continually rebalance the program. Future milestones are not obligated in advance, there are no termination fees if work stops, and the Army can redirect funds toward stronger performers or bring in a new entrant later, Waksman explained. “If a company is not performing, if they are just disappointing, not delivering what we are expecting, we can pull future milestones,” he said. “We have total flexibility, if a company is not performing, to take those dollars away and either inject that to one of the other companies, or even we could potentially inject [that in] a new company at a later date if we felt that that was beneficial to the government.”

Within that framework, DIU’s mandate is to carry each project through first-of-a-kind deployment and early operation, then transition it to more conventional commercial arrangements. “The DIU contract covers these companies for the construction and build of the reactors, and then the first year of operation because you have got to take systems out and make sure that they work,” Waksman said. “Beyond a year, then it would transition to an Army power purchase agreement (PPA) of some sort on those installations,” he said.

While the Army has not imposed a formal cost-share ratio, it expects private financing to dominate total program investment. “There’s no strict percentage of what needs to be private versus what is government, but we are expecting that the majority of the money is to be private,” Waksman said. “And again, the model here is NASA COTS, where the goal is to have companies that can stand up on their own afterwards without government subsidies. We want these to be commercial companies raising commercial dollars to produce commercial products. We’re simply recognizing that no one is going to be able to sell their first reactor or the second reactor and be able to afford it on private dollars alone,” he said. “So these milestone payments can be seen as a form of subsidy to help these companies get there.” Ultimately, however, the developers must become “fully operational organizations that can stand up on their own,” Waksman said. “If we didn’t think that they could do that, we wouldn’t have selected them.”

A crucial Janus objective is to usher the crowded field of emerging microreactor developers through the first-of-a-kind stage. “In the microreactor sphere, there have been a lot of companies that have popped up recently, but we need to get them over the hump,” he said. “There’s always that big first-of-a-kind risk with any new reactor technology, and it’s one thing to see [memorandums of understanding] and [letters of intent] to build things, but this is very real, as you’re seeing from the dollar numbers.”

DIU, meanwhile, described its broader objective as building a competitive industrial base rather than backing a single winner. “One of the great things about this partnership with DIU is that a major goal of DIU and what we do is lower barriers of entry into the department,” said Andrew Higier, deputy director of[DIU’s 10x directorate](https://www.diu.mil/10x). “You will see a range of vendors from startups to big companies that have been around for forever, and we have been able to move quickly to put these vendors on very significant contracts, which is a large goal of what we are doing here at DIU,” Higier said.

## A Distinctive Defense-Only Licensing Pathway With a “Straight-Line” NRC On-Ramp

Perhaps a more significant distinction is that Janus microreactors will be authorized under a defense-only licensing regime run by the Army rather than by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), using longstanding Atomic Energy Act allocations that reserve regulatory authority over defense reactors to the military. “These are Army licensed; they are not NRC licensed,” Waksman said. “The law is clear that reactors that are grid-facing and are providing to commercial customers must be NRC licensed. Reactors that are for DOE purposes must be DOE licensed, and then reactors that are for defense purposes must be defense licensed.”

While DOE provided reactor safety oversight and authorization for[Project Pele](https://www.powermag.com/a-first-for-military-nuclear-power-triso-fuel-arrives-at-project-pele/), the Department of War’s transportable microreactor prototype under construction at INL, that authorization falls under Atomic Energy Act authority for a research, development, and demonstration prototype rather than through the Army or the NRC. The[DOE’s authorization process](https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-doe-reactor-authorization), notably, is newly streamlined in response to President Trump’s May 2025 executive orders, and trims prior guidance from 17 steps to 11 while eliminating more than 900 pages. As POWER has reported, five advanced reactors reached criticality this summer under the DOE Reactor Pilot Program—[Antares’ Mark-0](https://www.powermag.com/antares-mark-0-becomes-first-advanced-nuclear-reactor-to-achieve-criticality-under-doe-pilot-program/),[Valar Atomics’ Ward 250](https://www.powermag.com/valar-atomics-ward-250-becomes-second-reactor-to-go-critical-under-doe-pilot-program/),[Deployable Energy’s Unity](https://www.powermag.com/deployable-energys-unity-nuclear-reactor-achieves-criticality-at-inl-third-under-doe-nuclear-push/),[Aalo Atomics’ test reactor](https://www.powermag.com/aalo-atomics-test-reactor-reaches-criticality-at-inl-fourth-doe-authorized-advanced-reactor-by-july-4/), and[Oklo’s Groves](https://www.powermag.com/oklos-groves-becomes-fifth-doe-pilot-reactor-to-reach-criticality-first-on-private-land/). Under Janus, once the program moves past the defense prototype stage, reactors located inside an installation’s fence and supplying power for that installation will proceed under Army authority through the Army Reactor Regulatory Office (ARRO).

ARRO, currently led by an Army lieutenant colonel, will issue the formal safety authorizations for Janus units. A technical team drawn from recent federal advanced-reactor efforts backs that office. “There has been a tremendous amount of learning that has happened in the government through Project Pele,[Project Draco](https://www.powermag.com/nuclear-cogeneration-gains-momentum-in-wyoming-with-new-microreactor-partnership/)[Defense’s first demonstration of a nuclear thermal rocket engine], the DOE criticality experiments, as well as Project Marvel [INL’s[85-kWth/20-kWe microreactor](https://www.powermag.com/doe-opens-door-to-private-sector-demonstrations-at-marvel-nuclear-microreactor-test-bed/)], and so we have the technical folks who have supported all of those programs supporting us now,” Waksman said. Their task has been to build a common safety-case framework that vendors can use to demonstrate design adequacy, fuel and materials performance, and passive-safety behavior under Army oversight, while commercial teams operate and maintain the plants themselves.

At the same time, “We are working with DOE and NRC to try to do the best that we can to align our regulatory processes as much as possible, to have as similar standards as possible, so that these companies can have a straight line from Army approval to hopefully NRC approval soon after,” Waksman said. The first working example of that coordination is perhaps[Antares Nuclear’s Mark-0 demonstration](https://www.powermag.com/antares-mark-0-becomes-first-advanced-nuclear-reactor-to-achieve-criticality-under-doe-pilot-program/), which reached criticality at INL’s Materials and Fuels Complex—at the site of the[Army’s Cold War-era Mobile Low Power-1 reactor](https://inl.gov/history/reactors/)—and became the first fueled criticality test authorized by DOE under its Reactor Pilot Program. The Army coordinated fuel fabrication timing and provided safety-review expertise. It has said the pilot-program authorizations and lessons learned will inform the permitting and regulatory framework the ARRO builds for Janus.

The intent, he indicated, is that the analytical work and operating experience accumulated at Army posts should form a coherent package for NRC reviewers rather than a set of bespoke defense-only documents. “It’s not saying that the NRC automatically approves whatever the Army approves. That is not how that works,” he emphasized. “The NRC has its own authority to do its own approvals, but we would like it to be a clear, straight line so that there are no curveballs and no lack of clarity to the companies about what is expected of them to get to the NRC.”

Waksman also rejected any suggestion that the internal licensing path would exempt Janus from environmental and safety obligations. Installations will remain subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Air Act, and other statutory reviews. However, he noted that recent NEPA reforms should shorten timelines compared to historical nuclear projects.

## No Weapons-Grade Uranium, Encapsulated Fuels by Design, and a Two-Year Waste Clock

During the media roundtable, officials also noted that while Janus selections are deliberately diverse at the reactor-design level, the program will apply technical standards intended to simplify safety analysis, logistics, and future commercialization. “None of these reactors are using highly enriched uranium, also known as weapons-grade uranium,” Waksman noted. The choice avoids naval-reactor-style safeguards and allows Janus units to be secured under existing Army installation protections rather than bespoke weapons-grade protocols, officials indicated.

The Army has also required that Janus reactors meet an “inherently safe” standard so they do not depend on offsite power or active systems to prevent core damage. “These reactors, this next generation of reactors, these Generation four reactors are what is called inherently safe,” Waksman added. “That means that the physics of the core itself will shut these reactors down safely. They do not rely on any outside external power or anything else to allow them to shut down safely,” he said. Designs must be able to ride through grid failures without diesel-driven emergency cooling, a distinction Waksman drew repeatedly between Janus concepts and legacy gigawatt-scale light-water plants.

And on Janus’s fuel-form side, while the Army did not mandate a single technology, it effectively channeled vendors toward encapsulated, high-integrity fuels such as TRISO by insisting on qualified options and manufacturable supply. “All five companies are using encapsulated fuel,” Waksman noted. “What was important to us is that any fuel that companies use has to be qualified, and they have to be able to manufacture it on the schedule that they have set, so TRISO is the logical fuel because we have a qualified form of TRISO. We have already been making it. We made it for Pele, and we have two companies that currently have commercial lines producing it,” Waksman said. “If some company came to us wanting to do some advanced fuel variant that is not qualified, that was thrown out. We were not interested in that,” he said.

However, waste and decommissioning rules further constrained design and siting choices. The Army has imposed a strict two-year limit on radiological material remaining at any Janus installation after a reactor shuts down. “The plan is that within two years of any reactor shutting down, all that nuclear waste has to be removed off the site. That is one of the program requirements,” Waksman said. Rather than asking each vendor to create its own back-end solution, the Army plans to negotiate a single arrangement under which the DOE would receive the spent fuel at a DOE facility and take title to the material in exchange for payment. “We are not going to stand up an Army-licensed nuclear waste facility. That would not be beneficial or practical,” Waksman stressed.

## Grid Integration, Resilience Use Case, and Site Logic

Army officials also emphasized that Janus microreactors are being designed to reinforce, not replace, existing grids at selected power-projection posts. “These installations are going to remain on the grid,” Waksman noted. “These reactors are not going to provide 100% of the power on any of these installations, but they will be tied into the grid. And the intent is that if the grid fails, then this will provide resilient power to critical infrastructure on those installations.”

That model will make host utilities critical partners in planning, interconnection, and operations. “We are working closely with utilities,” he added. “We expect the utilities to be part of the team here to help us deliver here,” he said. At Fort Drum, where the Army previously relied on a dedicated biomass plant, the presence and interest of the New York Power Authority helped align the site with Westinghouse’s eVinci deployment, officials noted.

Site selection was driven by a combination of mission importance, grid conditions, and physical and environmental constraints, rather than by technology alone. “We had a team that have gone out to all of these nine sites to look at the installations, to look at power grids, to look at land, to look at environmental conditions, to evaluate what is the safe sector, the power grid, what is their maturity, and finding exact locations that not only meet those but they also meet the applications,” said Brandon Cockrell, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Energy and Sustainability. Cockrell said those factors, taken together, tie the initial Janus locations directly to the Army’s mission priorities. “It is really difficult to look across the five and not draw the immediate conclusion that this is a direct link to power projection,” he said.

The Army has also begun systematically testing community support for hosting microreactors at these bases. Cockrell said teams have already conducted “various road shows” at most of the nine candidate installations, including all five now selected for initial deployments, to brief local officials, utilities, and residents on safety, siting, and mission rationale. Waksman said the service is prepared to move reactors away from communities that do not want them. “So far, the responses have been very positive, but we have no desire to push reactors on communities that are not interested in them,” he said. As one example of emerging political backing, Waksman pointed to a letter from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer urging the Army to place a Janus reactor at Fort Drum, which the service knew it could satisfy once that post was formally selected.

## The 2028 Deadline and First-of-a-Kind Economics

Still, during the media roundtable, officials drew a distinct line between physics milestones and the program’s 2028 requirement. “You can just say, ‘Oh, turn a reactor on,’ and then build a little criticality experiment to claim that that is success,” Waksman noted. “That is not success for us. The intent here is that these reactors have to provide useful, reliable power to these installations. So that is what the September 30, 2028 goal is, to have at least one reactor providing useful electricity to that installation.”

He also warned against assuming that all five vendors will meet that date. “We do not expect all five of these companies to turn on a reactor in 2028. In fact, they definitely will not,” Waksman said. Schedules were characterized as “aggressive but plausible,” with the portfolio structure meant to ensure that at least one design reaches sustained operation on time even if others slip.

Finally, discussing costs, Waksman cautioned that the $2.2 billion aggregate should not be treated as a simple per-unit proxy. “One thing you definitely cannot do is divide the dollars by the number of reactors and have that be a relevant number,” he said. “If you are going to try to buy one microreactor and buy a first-of-a-kind microreactor from somebody, it is going to be more expensive than what is on the site,” he added. “We would not ask an installation on its own to try to buy the first-of-a-kind reactor from somebody. That is never going to pencil out.”

The reality, he conceded, is that “nobody knows what these microreactors are going to cost” until more than one has been built, and only nth-of-a-kind units—after fixed development and factory costs are spread across multiple projects—will reveal the true economics of Janus-class systems.

For Waksman, the real test of Janus will be whether it can carry microreactors past one-off demonstrations and into the realm of repeatable commercial products. The program’s name was mindfully chosen to reflect that transition, he noted. “The reason why I named this program Janus is because Janus is the Roman god of transitions. It is the past to the future,” he said. “You often see when Janus is portrayed in ancient Roman art, it is always [a] two-faced god, one face facing the past and one facing forward. That is why the first month of the year, January, is named for Janus. It is the transition to the new year, and for us, what we are trying to transition is from experiments and prototypes to actual commercial products. That is the transition that we are trying to effect here.”

_—_**_Sonal Patel_**_is a POWER senior editor (_[_@sonalcpatel_](https://twitter.com/Sonalcpatel)_,_[_@POWERmagazine_](https://twitter.com/POWERmagazine)_)._

_**Editor’s note: T**his story has been substantially updated with reporting from an Aug. 26 Army media roundtable, including new detail on contracting structure, licensing, fuel, waste, and grid integration. The expanded vendor-by-vendor breakdown that previously appeared in this article has moved to a companion piece, [The Janus Five: 20+ Commercial Nuclear Microreactors, Starting in 2028](https://www.powermag.com/the-janus-five-20-commercial-nuclear-microreactors-starting-in-2028/)._

Tagged in:

*   [advanced nuclear reactors](https://www.powermag.com/tag/advanced-nuclear-reactors/)
*   [Antares Nuclear](https://www.powermag.com/tag/antares-nuclear/)
*   [BWXT](https://www.powermag.com/tag/bwxt/)
*   [general atomics](https://www.powermag.com/tag/general-atomics/)
*   [Janus Program](https://www.powermag.com/tag/janus-program/)
*   [Military energy resilience](https://www.powermag.com/tag/military-energy-resilience/)
*   [Military Microreactors](https://www.powermag.com/tag/military-microreactors/)
*   [Nuclear microreactors](https://www.powermag.com/tag/nuclear-microreactors/)
*   [Radiant Industries](https://www.powermag.com/tag/radiant-industries/)
*   [U.S. Army](https://www.powermag.com/tag/u-s-army/)
*   [Westinghouse](https://www.powermag.com/tag/westinghouse/)