Oklo's Q3 2025 Earnings Call: Contradictions in Regulatory Pathway and Approval Process, Utility Partnerships, and Fuel Supply

Guidance:

• Full-year 2025 cash used in operating activities expected within $65M–$80M.
• Aurora‑INL commercial operations targeted late 2027 to early 2028.
• Atomic Alchemy pilot targeted to be operational by mid‑2026.
• Expect DOE approvals (OTA/NSDA) by year‑end; DOE authorization enables construction under the Reactor Pilot Program.
• Advanced Fuel Center production ramp targeted in the early 2030s.

Business Commentary:

• Regulatory Advancements and DOE Authorization:
• Oklo received 3 of the 11 granted awards under the Department of Energy's new Reactor Pilot Program, which allows for accelerated construction and operation time lines.
• The DOE authorization pathway provides a structured approach to accelerate deployment time lines without compromising safety standards.

• This shift offers significant regulatory derisking and enables faster demonstration of clean power while maintaining safety expectations.

• Fuel Supply Chain and Bridge Fuels:

• Oklo's Advanced Fuel Center, with an investment of up to $1.68 billion, anchors its long-term fuel supply chain, leveraging government plutonium reserves.

• This investment in recycling facilitates the use of plutonium as a bridge fuel source, enabling faster reactor deployments.

• Customer Pipeline and Power Sales:

• Oklo is advancing discussions with both previously announced and new customers across data centers, defense, and utilities, positioning for recurring revenue.

• The company is exploring fuel offtakes with the Tennessee Valley Authority as part of its Tennessee Fuel Center initiative.

• Capital Investment and Financial Strategy:

• Oklo completed major procurement for in-vessel and ex-vessel handling machines and other critical components, ensuring cost and schedule control.
• The company successfully raised $540 million through an at-the-market fundraising program, enhancing its financial flexibility for growth.

Sentiment Analysis:

Overall Tone: Positive

• Management highlighted multiple execution milestones (broke ground at Aurora‑INL; selected for 3 DOE Reactor Pilot Program awards), a strengthened balance sheet (ended Q3 with ~ $1.2B cash and marketable securities; $540M ATM raise) and continued procurement progress, framing these as derisking steps that accelerate deployment and commercial traction.

Q&A:

• Question from Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division): Just want to make sure I'm clear on the DOE authorization. Does the INL plant shifting to the DOE pathway change your requirement to submit a COLA with the NRC for that project? Or is that something you still have to do? And has the government shutdown impacted your ability to do that at all?
  Response: Aurora‑INL will proceed under DOE authorization (so a COLA is not required to build); NRC licensing remains a parallel/subsequent process to convert to full commercial operation after DOE‑authorized operations and the government shutdown hasn’t materially changed that path.

• Question from Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division): Curious if your thinking has changed regarding order conversion from pipeline to more of something firm and if it's starting to make more sense to try to lock in a PPA with a customer as we get closer to '26, '27 and ultimately, that first plant being built.
  Response: Oklo is actively maturing customer discussions and term sheets, favoring customized offtake structures (PPAs, prepayments, fuel/prepayment constructs) rather than rushing standard PPAs; expects to convert pipeline as deals are mutually constructive.

• Question from Tyler Bisset (Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Research Division): Are you guys still targeting commercial operations at INL to commence between late '27 and early '28? Or does shifting to the DOE pathway accelerate that time line? And what are the next milestones beyond January to support that time line?
  Response: Still targeting late‑2027/early‑2028 for Aurora‑INL commercial operations; DOE authorization accelerates construction cadence (excavation, procurements) but fuel fabrication remains a critical milestone to support that timeline.

• Question from Tyler Bisset (Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Research Division): Appreciate the incremental details around the 20 tons of plutonium reserves potentially being made into 180 tons of Aurora fuel. Can you help me understand what underpins that conversion math or your assumptions? And then is this an opportunity for your fuel recycling facility? Or would processing this material require a separate NRC license facility?
  Response: Plutonium can be blended with uranium to form metallic fuel; roughly ~11% plutonium can be equivalent to ~19% HALEU behavior in Oklo's fast reactors (hence the conversion math); DOE pilot programs support initial processing under DOE authorization and later NRC conversion/permits may be needed for commercial scale.

• Question from Unknown Analyst (asked on the Vikram Bagri / Citi queue): I wanted to ask about the Pluto test reactor. So it looks like it's going to be deployed after the first reactor at INL. Is this going to be the template for all the future reactors? And what are the differences to Aurora? Is it only that it's going to be run on plutonium? Should we also assume a 75‑megawatt size for it? And then just lastly, what are the main learnings that you hope to obtain from this test reactor?
  Response: Pluto is a smaller, plutonium‑optimized test reactor focused on fast‑neutron irradiation and R&D (materials, fuel testing, plutonium handling); it’s not the template for all powerhouses but provides critical plutonium fuel fabrication and fast‑neutron data to accelerate broader deployments.

• Question from Unknown Analyst (asked on the Vikram Bagri / Citi queue): On Slide 9, it mentions the breakdown of CapEx by components. Are you able to share just directionally what that is in dollar terms?
  Response: Directionally dollar exposure aligns with component breakdowns, but specific dollar estimates are still being refined with Kiewit and procurement progress; more detail expected into 2026.

• Question from Jonathan Dorsheimer (William Blair & Company L.L.C., Research Division): Could you talk a little bit about backlog? I think it was 14 gigawatts. Has that changed at all? And maybe just a little bit of color on the discussions that you're having. Is it mostly utility? Is it mostly hyperscaler?
  Response: The ~14 GW pipeline remains largely intact and is predominantly data center/hyperscaler demand; commercial discussions are progressing with term sheets and potential prepayments/offtake structures under active negotiation.

• Question from Jonathan Dorsheimer (William Blair & Company L.L.C., Research Division): Has Atomic Alchemy or standing up a fueling/recycling capability moved those discussions along from a supply‑chain risk perspective?
  Response: Yes — Atomic Alchemy and lab‑scale facilities help de‑risk supply chains and may generate modest single‑million dollar revenue next year, supporting customer discussions and feedstock negotiations.

• Question from Jonathan Dorsheimer (William Blair & Company L.L.C., Research Division): On using an EBR for isotope production and isolation, do you need to wait for VIPR or can that be done in between?
  Response: Some isotope work can be done near‑term at lab scale without a reactor; VIPR (prototype mid‑2026) unlocks far broader and fast‑spectrum isotope production capabilities for more advanced products.

• Question from Jeffrey Campbell (Seaport Research Partners): When you get around to trying to do isotope irradiation with an Aurora, are you going to be able to do it in a way that won't interrupt your fuel cycle? Typically reactors have to match refueling with irradiation—how will that work?
  Response: Isotope irradiation will be scheduled to minimize interference with primary power operations; certain test reactors or dedicated units will offer greater operational flexibility for irradiation when needed.

• Question from Jeffrey Campbell (Seaport Research Partners): Any update on the proposed natural gas Aurora partnership with Liberty Energy — has Oklo's appetite diminished as Aurora construction has accelerated?
  Response: Gas‑to‑nuclear combos remain attractive as a bridge solution; Oklo still sees value in such structures and continues to discuss them with customers, though near‑term focus may favor grid‑connected opportunities.

• Question from Derek Soderberg (Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Research Division): Is there a level of prepayments you need to make to secure long lead time items and can you quantify how much capital is required to ensure access to those items as you scale?
  Response: Prepayments may be required but are modest (around ~10% range cited); recent capital raise ($540M ATM) provides flexibility so prepayments won’t be a binding constraint for attractive opportunities.

• Question from Sherif Elmaghrabi (BTIG, LLC, Research Division): Do you have a target online date for the fuel line pilot at INL? If the facility is selected under DOE programs, is there an economic opportunity as soon as it comes online or does that require NRC approval to monetize?
  Response: Fuel pilot will proceed under DOE authorization (timing not specifically stated); DOE authorization can enable DOE‑directed product uses and some early work/revenue, while commercial sales to the broader market would likely require NRC licensing or conversion.

• Question from Craig Shere (Tuohy Brothers Investment Research, Inc.): What are the prospects for rounding up remaining fuel needs to maximize your INL powerhouse to 75 MW? If you don't have it upfront, after NRC approval can you refuel to full capacity?
  Response: Management is increasingly confident diverse sources (including government plutonium bridge material) will enable near‑immediate or quick ramp to full 75 MW; refueling to maximum capacity following NRC conversion is feasible.

• Question from Craig Shere (Tuohy Brothers Investment Research, Inc.): Does employing a plutonium mix to bridge deployments have implications on NRC process or proliferation concerns?
  Response: Plutonium use entails different regulatory/safeguard steps but is manageable; DOE/NRC experience and lab partnerships will address safeguards, and burning plutonium in fast reactors reduces proliferation risk by destroying the material.

Contradiction Point 1

Regulatory Pathway and Timeline

It involves a pivotal shift in regulatory strategy and timeline for Oklo's reactor deployment, which could impact project timelines and operational feasibility.

Does the INL plant's shift to the DOE pathway affect your requirement to submit a COLA with the NRC for that project? Have government shutdowns affected your ability to submit the COLA? - Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division)

2025Q3: Yes, we no longer need to do a COLA as we're going through the DOE authorization process. The DOE pathway accelerates the ability to build and operate, providing flexibility. - Jacob Dewitte(CEO)

Can you provide an update on other supply chain areas and your confidence in starting a short-term construction effort? - Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division)

2025Q1: Our strategy is to leverage existing supply chains, minimizing new development needs. Supply chain challenges are mainly in fuel, with other long lead items at 18-month windows. - Jake DeWitte(CEO)

Contradiction Point 2

Utility Partnerships and Revenue Recognition

It involves expectations surrounding utility partnerships and revenue recognition potential, which are crucial for company growth and financial stability.

Has your order conversion from pipeline to firm orders changed, with PPAs closer to realization? - Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division)

2025Q3: Our view remains focused on finding constructive partnerships and deals. We're building long-term relationships and working on offtake structures. We're not rushing into PPA timing but instead finding mutually beneficial and incentive-aligned deals. We're exploring structures that allow for risk derisking and alignment. - Jacob Dewitte(CEO)

With the Liberty deal, could Oklo start recognizing revenue earlier, such as when projects begin generating gas? - Sherif Ehab Elmaghrabi (BTIG, LLC, Research Division)

2025Q2: It's still early days for how we turn that agreement into actual commercial terms and conditions with our customers. It's not really at liberty to say who we're progressing those discussions with, but if there was a mechanism whereby we participate in early power sales, it could lead to revenue recognition for the company. - Richard Bealmear(CFO)

Contradiction Point 3

Fuel Supply and Pricing

It involves the expected timeline and source of fuel supply, which is crucial for project execution and cost management.

Has there been a shift in how you view order conversion from pipeline to more firm orders, and is PPA closer to finalization? - Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division)

2025Q3: We're not rushing into PPA timing but instead finding mutually beneficial and incentive-aligned deals. We're exploring structures that allow for risk derisking and alignment. - Jacob Dewitte(CEO)

Could you clarify when delivery of fuel from the Centrus MOU will begin and when is the deadline to finalize the agreement? - Sherif Elmaghrabi (BTIG)

2025Q1: Fuel for the first plant is awarded through a competitive process. Current focus is on commercial procurement for subsequent plants, seeking long-term supply agreements. - Jake DeWitte(CEO)

Contradiction Point 4

Regulatory Pathway and Approval Process

It involves a change in the regulatory pathway and approval process for Oklo's reactors, which could impact project timelines and operational feasibility.

Does the INL plant's shift to the DOE pathway alter the need to submit a COLA to the NRC for this project, and have government shutdowns impacted your ability to do so? - Ryan Pfingst (B. Riley Securities, Inc., Research Division)

2025Q3: Yes, we no longer need to do a COLA as we're going through the DOE authorization process. The DOE pathway accelerates the ability to build and operate, providing flexibility. - Jacob Dewitte(CEO)

What does the readiness assessment entail? Does it reduce the risk of your COLA application to ten weeks? - Jeffrey Campbell (Seaport Research Partners)

2024Q4: The readiness assessment is an optional step to pre-review with the NRC, ensuring both content and timeline derisking. This allows for an efficient review process and convergence with NRC expectations, enhancing predictability in the review timeline. - Jacob DeWitte(CEO)