After four years “in the works,” the Air Force’s solution to power demands remains a wish.
Innovation collided with fossilized bureaucratic thinking, and a necessary capability was stymied. Over four years ago, Liberty Nation News reported on the Air Force’s ground-breaking program to power installations with small, modular, nuclear microreactors. The Department of Defense and the Air Force collaborated in a process for developing and installing a pilot microreactor at Eielson Air Force Base (AFB), Alaska. The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) held a competition, and selected a winner; losing competitors protested, and the program management went into an apoplectic stupor. What to do? The answer turned out to be nothing.
Little Progress on Microreactors
The Department of Defense has been exploring the value of modular small nuclear power plants and microreactors for some time. According to a Real Clear Defense article in 2021, “The U.S. Department of Defense is taking input on its plan to build an advanced mobile nuclear microreactor prototype at the Idaho National Laboratory in eastern Idaho.” Last year in June, Liberty Nation News provided a progress report (actually, a no-progress report) on the Eielson AFB microreactor project. At that time, it was mired in the Pentagon procurement process and red tape. According to the Air and Space Forces Magazine article “Air Force Still Planning a Nuclear Microreactor in Alaska – and More After That,” little has changed. In its account, Air and Space Forces Magazine explained that:
“By the end of this decade, the Air Force could begin equipping up to nine bases with self-sufficient nuclear microreactors as part of an effort to unplug from local commercial power grids and satisfy a growing demand for secure, reliable power sources that are more protected from cyberattacks and natural disasters. One is set to be at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, as part of a project that was delayed 18 months from bid protests of the service’s selection process.”
Program delays have become a way of life in the Defense Department. Still, the Eielson story is a bureaucratic nightmare. By way of background, the initiative to develop and install a nuclear microreactor on a military installation was mandated by the FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The microreactor was supposed to be up and running by 2027. It would be a five-megawatt energy source that would complement the Eielson AFB 15-megawatt coal-fired power plant. The Air Force was selected as the logical choice for the program because of its energy needs and its remote installations, like Eielson AFB, which was chosen for the pilot project in 2021. The DLA held a competition to select a contractor to develop and install the microreactor and made a selection in August 2023. Two of the other competitors protested the selection, and the program stalled.
In March 2024, Nancy Balkus, an assistant secretary of the Air Force, explained to members of the Alaskan Senate Resources Committee that the protest filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) would be resolved by Jun. 20, 2024, and that the microreactor would be operational in 2028. It was supposed to be operational in 2027. When asked by a committee member about the cost of the program, Balkus answered, “We do not have a cost figure at this time,” according to an Alaskan Public Media report. Unless we’re missing something, the microreactors program had gone through a competition that had cost as a competitive element. Before the competition began, there had to be a cost estimate, but Ms. Balkus could not provide one.
Fast forward a year, and Ms. Balkus, deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for Infrastructure, Energy and Environment, is again at the forefront of explaining what is going on with the Eielson AFB microreactor development and installation. “I’m anticipating that we will be able to make an announcement, perhaps as early as this summer, but maybe later this year,” Balkus told Air and Space Forces Magazine. However, the deputy assistant secretary was not confident that the project could meet the FY2019 NDAA-mandated date of 2027. “I’m hoping that our Eielson reactor will be [completed] before 2030,” Balkus explained. That would be three years late.
Trump’s Executive Order Targets Poor Procurement Performance
When President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order to reform the Defense Department acquisition system and processes, the Air Force’s microreactor program is an example of what the president surely had in mind. Nonetheless, the Air Force views this project as a “pathfinder” in developing, licensing, and operating model for acquiring and installing future microreactors. The latest information explains that the Air Force is coordinating with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for licensing and establishing National Environmental Policy Act compliance. Fortunately, regulatory and compliance speed bumps are exactly what the Trump Executive Order is meant to eliminate. Additionally, the Air Force is “refining” its acquisition strategy for the program. Having a refined acquisition strategy is typically completed before a source selection competition. That way, there are some criteria on which to make the selection of a winning contractor.
The Eielson AFB microreactor program is now in its sixth year since Congress mandated the effort. There is no contractor named. Consequently, no microreactor is being built. The Air Force believes that it will equip up to nine bases with microreactors by 2030. Without more competent and enthusiastic management, that is unlikely. Trump’s procurement reforms cannot come soon enough.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.
Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.
