The Department of Defense (DOD) needs a fast lane to the deployment of small modular reactors for powering stations, and the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) offers a road forward. A single five-megawatt micro-reactor would erase more than 3.5 million gallons of diesel fuel every year when replacing diesel generators, reducing emissions on installations and vulnerable fuel convoys, and deliver 24/7 power immune to weather, cyberattacks, or convoy disruptions. 

The Fiscal Year 2026 NDAA is currently being marked up in a closed session of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the House is scheduled to take up the legislation next week. The choice for powering bases is between diesel convoys and a safe, secure, and mobile nuclear reactor. 

Three actions would help drive the fast development of SMRs on DOD land for DOD use. First, signalling continued Congressional support for Project Pele is a starting point for expanding the development and deployment of SMRs within the DOD. Second, the deployment of these reactors should receive a categorical exemption from additional environmental review. Third, reactors that are located entirely on DOD land, even if they supply power to other consumers, should be regulated by Naval Reactors instead of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Finally, funding should be authorized to identify and prepare sites for SMRs on DOD installations in the United States. 

Last year, during consideration of the 2025 NDAA, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) offered an amendment to express the sense of Congress of support for Project Pele, the DOD’s SMR test program currently under assembly in Virginia which will be transported to and tested at Idaho National Lab, a crucial test-bed for nuclear reactors. Donalds’ amendment was agreed to by voice vote in the House but was removed from the bill during the conference process. While an amendment like this would not create new authorizations or appropriations for nuclear power, it offers clarity of congressional support for SMRs and nuclear energy at DOD installations. It is an important signal of confidence in the technology. Whether from Rep. Donalds or another member, this amendment should be reprised in the 2026 NDAA, making clear that Congress supports DOD advancing reliable, firm power for its installations. 

The NDAA should also include a categorical exclusion from environmental permitting for SMRs on DOD lands. Under categorical exclusions, new projects are subjected to a streamlined environmental review instead of the much longer and arduous traditional process. There are already categorical exclusions for certain activities on DOD land, but additional categorical exclusions should be mandated for nuclear reactors that are located entirely on DOD land. This should be in addition to expanded categorical exclusions for energy infrastructure on DOD land. Energy is essential to national security, and our regulatory framework should reflect this, prioritizing energy security and reliability at DOD installations. By creating a streamlined permitting system for energy infrastructure, Congress can enable DOD installations to be assets to the local grid and drive additional improvements to regional energy security. 

While DOD’s SMR test reactor, Project Pele, is still being assembled for delivery to Idaho National Lab, Congress should authorize a small amount of funding to begin a study to identify possible sites where SMRs could be sited on military installations to power the base and to provide additional grid security. By identifying sites where reactors can both power bases and shore up grid security, DOD can help address the widespread problem of increasing electricity demand without sufficient reliable generation capacity.  

Finally, Congress should consider defining a DOD “utilization facility” under Section 110b of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2140) to include reactors which are sited on DOD land, chiefly used for defense purposes, and operated by DOD employees or contractors, regardless of owner. This would move regulation and licensing of these reactors away from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has a reputation for being slow moving and overly cautious to implement innovative technology, to Naval Reactors. Since 1955, Naval Reactors (NR) has been the office that has regulated and operated hundreds of reactors for decades without a single radiological incident and would be perfectly capable of regulating these reactors. 

>>> READ: Defense + Energy = Trump’s National Energy Emergency

Additionally, under Section 273 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), any government owned reactor which is used to sell power to the grid must be regulated by the NRC according to Section 103 of AEA. By additionally clarifying that reactors which are on DOD land and chiefly used for defense purposes under AEA Section 110b are exempt from Section 273, Congress would ensure that DOD reactors could, when necessary or appropriate, sell power back to the grid and serve as sources of additional power in times of high demand. This clarification would also allow DOD reactors to power non-defense uses as well, such as commercial data centers which have some but not exclusively defense purposes. 

The 2026 NDAA presents Congress with the opportunity to provide clear support for advanced forms of power generation and ensure that our military can utilize and advance the best technologies available. The proposals outlined here—categorical exemption from additional environmental reviews, explicit congressional backing for SMRs, and regulatory alignment under Naval Reactors—offer a pragmatic and achievable pathway toward secure, reliable, and resilient energy at military installations. 

Congress should act, signaling to allies and adversaries that America’s bases will leave behind vulnerable supply lines and fragile grids. With thoughtful action now, lawmakers can ensure military bases remain secure, self-sufficient, and powered by reliable, emissions-free energy for decades to come.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.