Pictured: The Aalo team preparing for criticality.

The Reactor Pilot Program (RPP) has been a rousing success. As of 12:20 am on July 4, 2026, four novel new reactors have been built and started within one year after the formal initiation of the program. Executive Order 14301, which directed the Department of Energy to create the program included a stimulating, challenging goal of having at least 3 reactors start by July 4, 2026. It can be correctly claimed that the RPP has been an over-achiever. July 4, 2026 was the 250^th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, adding a bit of historic gravitas to the event.

For nuclear energy professionals and supporters, the month-long period between June 4 and July 3, 2026 will be remembered as an exciting time, full of news and celebrations. New reactor starts were achieved in rapid-fire succession on June 4 (Antares Mark-0), June 18 (Valar Ward 250), June 30 (Deployable Energy Unity) and July 3 (Aalo Aalo-CTR). Along the way, several other milestones – including first thermal power and first electricity from a novel reactor (Valar Ward 250) – were achieved and celebrated.

A talented and diverse team of individuals and organizations from both the government and the private sector made it happen. The engineering, equipment and construction costs were paid by the private sector, while the government covered the costs of its employees when performing government functions. It also provided land, security and arranged for use of existing facilities.

The group of reactor criticalities achieved during the early phases of the RPP mark a major step forward in the process of designing, developing, testing, iterating, refining and licensing new types of nuclear fission power plants that have not yet become commercially viable.

Rod Adams with the INL DOME in the background.

Perhaps the most important outcome of the RPP – measured over the long term – is that it provided the Department of Energy several opportunities to refine its processes for reviewing, approving, constructing and operating novel reactor technologies. That full authorization process has now been completed for four separate reactors with reviews continuing for participants in the RPP and Launch Pad that are at different stages of development. With experience and practice the process continues to improve. Exercising with real world projects is a terrific way to refine processes and procedures.

The Nuclear Energy Launch Pad is the combined follow-on for the RPP and the related Fuel Line Pilot Program. It will be able to build on and improve the solid foundation created and tested for the successful RPP.

The existence of a well-supported and improving path between the development stages of ideas and computer models to the stage of constructing and testing physical pilots can unlock access to a vast pool of private risk capital. The refined process retires a significant number of known risks. It lets the review process move at the speed of business. Even though more risks can be mitigated with additional actions, substantial progress should be made in parallel with continuing process improvements.

The pilot reactors that have achieved criticality are not commercial products. They need several iterative steps before they are even complete R&D products. Three of them are not yet ready to produce any fission power because they have not yet installed the heat transfer systems that will remove fission heat. The one that is producing power, the Valar 250, was built with a reduced power reactor and a correspondingly small heat rejection system, not a complete heat conversion or utilization system.

There is a reasonably clear path for installing the needed systems, both in a regulatory and physical sense. Once those steps are completed, an extensive series of tests will be completed. If electricity is produced during testing, it can be supplied to the reactor facilities and the hosting laboratories or it can be dissipated through heat rejection systems. Alternatively, it can be dissipated by producing electricity that is then discarded in added systems like resistor banks.

That’s as far as the pilot reactors can go under their DOE authorizations; those approvals do not allow for the sale of electricity or heat to outside customers. For micro reactors producing a megawatt or so, that limitation isn’t horrible, but the RPP and the Nuclear Energy Launch Pad include participants with much more powerful reactors. A heat rejection system for a few megawatts is reasonably compact and doesn’t have too much local environmental impact; one that needs to reject 225 – 900 MWth is a different story. Throwing away electricity generated during full power testing of a 75 MWe reactor wastes almost $200,000 per day.

It would be more prudent for pilot or demonstration reactors to build fully functional power conversion systems that produce useful electricity or heat and to sell those products when available during portions of the testing program. Some of the tests that help prove commercial viability will include sustained periods of high power operation for reliability and fuel performance evaluation. Selling the electricity produced as a byproduct of the testing won’t turn the test and demonstration reactor into a profitable installation, but the revenues can help reduce the amount of capital required for commercial product development.

Class 104c is the licensing step between DOE authorization as an R&D facility that is not allowed to sell products and NRC licensing as a Class 103 commercial reactor. It’s a licensing step that has not been exercised, but the NRC regulations associated with Class 104(c) licenses were recently updated and re-emphasized.

Reviews and approvals for Class 104(c) are, by law, somewhere between those required for a DOE authorization and those required for a fully commercial license under Class 103. The NRC page titled “Technology, License Class, and Regulatory Approach” includes the below quote:

Section 104(c) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, states that,

The Commission is directed to impose only such minimum amount of regulation of the licensee as the Commission finds will permit the Commission to fulfill its obligations under this Act to promote the common defense and security and to protect the health and safety of the public and will permit the conduct of widespread and diverse research and development.

Under Class 104(c), reactors that are still in the research and development – aka pre-commercial – phase can sell electricity, heat and non-energy services as long as less than 75% of their annual costs are dedicated to providing those activities. They are also allowed to sell training and research and development services without counting against the cost limitation.

For those who are well-versed in developing high tech products, think of Class 104(c) as a regulatory permission structure for beta product releases in high-impact, tightly-controlled markets.

The provision for licensing pre-commercial products under Class 104(c) licenses has been in the rules since 1970, but it hasn’t been exercised. It’s hard to determine the precise  reasons why something hasn’t been done before, but contributing factors include the assumption that all nuclear reactors had to be extra-large before they could be commercial and the financially risk averse nature of monopoly electric utilities and established reactor vendors. It’s hard to imagine a successful financing model for a reactor costing $10 B or more that is restricted in its ability to generate sales revenues.

The rising prominence of smaller, lower-cost reactors, non-traditional electricity customers and the increasing importance of venture capital-backed vendors has changed the decision process. Modern reactor developers know that new and improved products with revolutionary proprietary features need several iterations before they can become competitive products. They know that initial units will produce losses, but they may prefer to minimize those losses by selling output when they can.

Venture capitalists are not like bankers or public service commissions; they understand that there are major risks associated with product development and refinement. History has shown them that there are major rewards when the product finds a fit with the needs of eager customers, making venture capital an increasingly capable source of financing.

Pictured: United States Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, having just signed the DOE approval for Aalo Atomics to load its fuel. 

The RPP has helped to restore the development process originally envisioned by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. That foundational piece of legislation provided a framework for Atomic Energy Commission reactor licenses that established appropriately differentiated rules and process requirements for licensing reactors that were still being developed and refined compared to the rules that govern licensing for reactors that were ready to compete in the commercial energy markets.

The next step is to begin exercising the transition between DOE R&D reactor authorization and NRC pre-commercial licenses under Class 104(c). Adequate rules are in place and do not need any immediate legislation or lengthy rule-making processes.

The RPP showed that the U.S. is capable of moving smoothly when building new nuclear power systems using appropriate levels of cooperation between government, government contractors and private enterprise. Major process steps have been developed and exercised. There is a daunting amount of work ahead but there are clear paths on which to take the next important steps in this rewarding journey.

--

This article was written by Rodney Adams - Managing Partner at Nucleation Capital. You can read more from Rod at Atomic Insights.