Matthew Marzano brings valuable education and experience to his potential role as NRC Commissioner

Note: (Added Dec 3, 2024)I have come to the conclusion that Matthew Marzano is not an appropriate choice to be an NRC Commissioner. He should not be confirmed by the Senate, especially in the closing days of a lame duck session. Though he has respectable technical education and significant operational experience, he has largely been in rule-following positions, not in positions where he needs to lead people or make significant organizational or policy decisions. The NRC needs strategic thinkers and doers who are willing to challenge the status quo. Marzano has not displayed those traits.

I am going to leave this post up for historical reasons and to take responsibility for a position that has changed completely since I wrote the post.

Matthew Marzano has been nominated to be the next Commissioner for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). He brings a unique collection of attributes and experience that will make him a valuable contributor to the agency at an important time in its evolution. Based upon analysis that I detail below; Atomic Insights recommends that the Senate Environment and Public Works committee – having already held a hearing on his nomination – vote promptly to bring Mr. Marzano to the full Senate for confirmation.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission plays a foundational role in the United States’ use of nuclear power and radioactive materials. Due to the leading role that the United States has historically played in the world’s nuclear energy and radioactive materials sector, the NRC is still globally important, even though its leadership role has been diminished during the past several decades. 

The five member body of Commissioners that oversee the agency needs to have a breadth of experience and opinion in order to properly function. According to Position Statement #77 from the American Nuclear Society (ANS) important areas of experience and education include technical, management, regulatory orpolicy fields. (Emphasis added in recognition that few, if any individuals will have accumulated experience in all four important areas.)

The ANS policy statement includes the following statement as its number one criteria.

“First and foremost among qualifications for a majority of Commissioners is a strong background in the science and application of nuclear technology, particularly nuclear safety and electrical power generation. The nature of the Commission’s responsibilities makes a technical background a highly desirable trait.”

Only one of the four serving commissioners has a technical education and relevant technical experience. Commissioner Caputo earned a bachelor’s degree in Nuclear Engineering from the University of Wisconsin and worked as an engineer, executive assistant and congressional affairs manager at Exelon before moving to Washington, DC and continuing her career in a variety of Capitol Hill capacities.

In contrast to the policy and politics-heavy commission, Marzano has a resume with a strong technical education and a broad set of experiences that are directly relevant to the NRC’s assigned responsibilities. They are even more relevant to the agency’s newly changed mission (p. 63 line 12 – p. 64 line 12) to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection without unnecessarily limiting the use of nuclear energy or radioactive materials.

He earned a BS and an MS in Nuclear Engineering from the University of Florida. As he stated during his confirmation hearing, he chose that path with inspiration from a grandfather who was an electrical engineer who could “fix anything.” He also knew at a young age that he wanted to learn how to “make practical use of the basic elements of the universe.”

He completed his initial education in 2011 in the immediate aftermath of the Fukushima accident. His undergraduate design project focused on innovative use of nuclear power to generate both electricity and industrial heat for hydrogen production. His graduate school focus was neutron transport and computational fluid dynamics with a view towards improving predictions of reactor transients. 

Marzano’s academic performance must have been well above average; his first employer after earning his master’s degree was the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL). That organization works for the US Navy’s Nuclear Reactor (NR) branch. KAPL is well-respected as a selective employer that only hires the best people it can find to train nuclear propulsion program officers and sailors.

At KAPL, Marzano was assigned to the S8G prototype reactor, a small pressurized water reactor that has some technical features similar to light water SMRs under development and licensing today. Like all other Navy nuclear propulsion plants, the S8G was designed to be manufactured and installed in a factory environment.

Marzano then landed a job at the VC Summer 2 & 3 AP1000 project. That project was one of the first new nuclear plant construction projects in several decades. In addition to supporting construction and design work – which included frequent interactions with NRC inspectors and intensive study of regulations – he was enrolled in the Senior Reactor Operator course and completed all available milestones. 

As a result of the demise of the VC Summer project, he did not obtain an SRO license in that job, but he did in his subsequent job at the Braidwood Nuclear Plant. After earning his license – having completed another 18-month, intensive training program – he served as a shift SRO. 

It’s not easy to explain the education, training and safety culture inculcation that are required to obtain and maintain an SRO license. Candidates must memorize a vast assortment of details, both physical and written. They must pass a battery of written and oral tests. 

They get regularly tested in simulators to develop and prove their ability to properly respond to unusual events. They must also demonstrate their ability to supervise the responses of their operating crews. They learn to make good, timely decisions under significant levels of pressure. They have to balance their direct, personal responsibility for ensuring safety and their responsibility to provide as much reliable power generation as possible. 

Within the current paradigm of operating nuclear power plants, strict regulatory compliance is equated to ensuring safety. In order for SROs to meet their assigned responsibility, they must have complete knowledge of applicable NRC regulations. In addition to the generally applicable rules, they must know their plant’s technical specifications inside and out.

Another factor that outsiders might fail to understand about SROs is that they are fiercely independent thinkers who take their personal responsibility for their power plant seriously, much like the senior pilot of an aircraft. An SRO trained in the US would refuse to obey any order than they believed would compromise plant safety, even if it came directly from their company CEO or the President of the United States.

It was only after spending more than a decade developing his knowledge and skills in nuclear energy that Marzano decided to enter into the policy world. Unlike some of his future colleagues – assuming his confirmation – he has demonstrated that he is interested in practical applications of nuclear technology first and then policy as it relates to his primary interest area.

Marzano’s path into policy passed through a competitive fellowship program funded by the American Nuclear Society and administered by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. His selection to be an ANS Congressional fellow indicates that a board of experienced professionals agreed that he had the best background among other applicants. It also proves that he was an ANS member in good standing at the time of his selection.

While Marzano’s engineering and operating experience isn’t unique, it’s quite rare, even in the small world of nuclear energy professionals. Among the hundreds of people who stand watch as senior reactor operators, only a modest portion have advanced degrees in nuclear engineering. An even smaller portion of those have experience as a civilian engineer and instructor for the US Navy Nuclear Propulsion Program and new construction project experience.

If one was able to find someone else with degrees and experiences that were similar to Marzano’s, they would be unlikely to have developed any policy experience. A more common path for plant operators is to stay in operations for an extended period of time or to broaden experience within the company that owns the plant.

If he is confirmed, Marzano would be the first commissioner to hold an NRC license since 2006, when NRC Chair Nils Diaz—a widely respected commissioner—left the commission. He would be one of the few members of the agency in its history to have had any industry experience. A 2021 Nuclear News article titled “The NRC: Observations on commissioner appointments” noted that just 16% of NRC commissioners have ever worked in the industry that they regulate.

Marzano’s industry experience, especially his service as a shift SRO, will enable him to provide the NRC staff and his fellow commissioners with a first-hand perspective on how their actions and directives affect those who must comply with the resulting rules.

Marzano’s experience can also be uniquely valuable in emergency response. SROs are trained to work under significant stress and to make good decisions in a timely fashion. That’s not an easy skill to master, especially in a complex field like nuclear energy.

Given the current composition of the Commission and its near term tasks, Marzano is an exceptional choice that should be expeditiously confirmed and seated.

Other points of view

Though Marzano’s nomination has received support from the ANS, the Nuclear Innovation Alliance, Third Way, Generation Atomic, the Good Energy Collectiveand the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, it has been sharply criticized by the Breakthrough Institute in two opinion pieces by Ted Nordhaus.

The first piece is titled “Is Matthew Marzano the Most Under Qualified NRC Nominee Ever?” The above information should effectively answer the question in the negative. Especially compared to commissioners like Greg Jaczko, a particle physicist turned Capitol Hill staffer who had no education in nuclear fission energy or radioactive materials use, or Allison Macfarlane, a geologist with the same lack of experience in nuclear energy or radioactive materials use, Marzano has a competitive or superior resume.

Nordhaus calls Marzano’s nomination “straight up patronage” even though that term is more often associated with finding jobs for donors than it is with helping a respected professional staff member advance their career. 

He says that Marzano’s experience on the Hill indicates that he would not help modernize the NRC. He discounts Marzano’s educational interest in advanced reactors, his service with the Navy nuclear propulsion program and his direct experience with NRC oversight of VC Summer, a first-of-a-kind power plant construction project.

Nordhaus is looking for a candidate who would be focused on revamping nuclear regulation and worries that Marzano, with experience in regulatory compliance, would be more likely to support the status quo. The problem with that point of view is that the NRC must successfully reform itself while maintaining its capability to oversee operations of the existing fleet and extend the licenses of operating reactors. Before a commissioner can effectively lead regulatory reform, they should have solid knowledge of the regulations they believe need to be changed.

Nordhaus writes that he would have been happier if the President had nominated a retired health physicist with no experience in nuclear electricity generation or its oversight. He believes that the alternative candidate was “far more qualified and well-vetted.” It’s difficult to find any support in the public record indicating that Nordhaus’s preferred candidate would focus on “revamping US nuclear regulation to account for the technology’s extraordinary record of safe operations.”

He dismisses Marzano’s technical education and experience as “at best, garden variety” within the nuclear industry. Though each of his roles might individually be relatively common in the industry, the combination of so many of them in a single person is unusual and complementary in terms of preparing him to serve as a commissioner. As noted earlier, having any nuclear industry experience would make him a rare NRC commissioner, having been an NRC license holder would make him even less “garden variety.”

Marzano might not have served in a senior management role, but his resume indicates significant daily leadership experience. His roles required independent thinking and personal responsibility. Anyone who knows any SROs will know that Marzano is far more likely to study hard and make his own decisions than to “go along to get along.”

Marzano’s lack of senior experience is partly a result of his age, but his youth and relatively recent education add to his value as a contributor to the five-member commission. Fresh experience and new ways of thinking are important in the face of rapid technological change, so is the ability to effectively use modern tools. Adding a commissioner with these characteristics adds needed perspective diversity to the collegial body of peers.

After the Senate EPW held a confirmation hearing on Matthew Marzano’s NRC nomination, Ted Nordhaus wrote a second opinion piece titled “Matthew Marzano Is Exactly Who I Said He Was: Nuclear Advocates Need to Demand Better.”

During his hearing Marzano provided solid, often nuanced responses that provided a good balance between confidence in his background and recognition that he doesn’t know everything. Though it is easy for a nuclear advocate to make assertive statements about what they would change or how they would have voted on a particular issue if they were on the Commission, it’s not as simple for someone who is actively interviewing for the job in a public, political forum with tight time limits on responses.

One of Nordhaus’s specific objections was that Marzano expressed some confusion about the current status of the Natrium construction permit application. “When asked when he expected TerraPower’s Natrium reactor to begin operation, he told Capito that it already had a construction license, only to be corrected by the Senator and forced to acknowledge that it does not.”

Here is the actual exchange from the hearing transcript:

Senator Capito: I understand the one in Wyoming, they have a construction permit, but they don’t have a permit for the reactor. Is that correct?

Mr. Marzano: That kind of gets into the details of the Part 50 process. It is a two-step process. The construction permit carries that plant all the way to when it is ready to start loading fuel. There is a review that happens in order to certify that the plant is built as designed and is ready to receive the operating license. So, once it does, it can load fuel.

Sen Capito: So, are you telling me that TerraPower can go all the way to construction of the reactor right now? They are permitted to do that? That is not my understanding.

Mr. Marzano: I have to correct it a little bit. The construction permit is currently under review.

Capito’s initial question might have sounded like it was about the two step Part 50 licensing process. She made the statement that the Wyoming project (TerraPower’s Natrium) had a construction permit. Marzano accurately described the activities that would be allowed by a construction permit. When asked a question about TerraPower’s permit, he promptly and accurately stated that the construction permit was under review.

Another area where Nordhaus expresses concern is related to the NRC’s decision to reverse subsequent license renewals for four nuclear reactors (Turkey Point 3 & 4 and Peach Bottom 2 & 3).

That decision caused angst and added costs for the two utilities that had already been issued their renewals. It was viewed as an example of an organization that isn’t following its own “Principles of Good Regulation.” As Nordhaus correctly stated, “the reversal cast doubt upon license renewals for much of the current nuclear fleet.”

Marzano told the committee that he supported the NRC’s decision to reverse the issued renewals and the process that it has now implemented to review and approve subsequent license renewals. He noted that the reversal decisions were implemented well before the current licenses expired and that the NRC expeditiously revised its processes so that the affected facilities could resubmit or revise their applications with little delay in the activities to support continued operation.

Given the fact that the process before revision contained a legal weakness that provided grounds for lawsuits, Marzano had a reasonable basis for believing that it was important for the NRC to make the changes and “get it right,” given the number of expected subsequent license renewals.

The doubt that infused the fleet for a couple of years after the initial decision is fading and subsequently license renewal applications are now being reviewed on an arguably stronger legal foundation. Just this week, the subsequent license renewal for Turkey Point 3 & 4 was reinstated. The units can now operate until July 2052 and April 2053 respectively.

Nordhaus fails to acknowledge a few key items in Marzano’s resume with the following statement. “The entirety of his technical training and relatively brief industry experience has involved the operation of large conventional reactors.”

In fact, Marzano’s education and stated interest areas include advanced reactors and using high temperature reactors as a source of heat for industrial uses, which is where the advanced industry is heading. His three years’ worth of Navy nuclear propulsion prototype support will offer the commission invaluable insights on smaller reactors utilizing unconventional cooling systems. He has had significant professional experience with two different systems of nuclear plant oversight, which might provide insights on improvement paths.

Marzano is an excellent choice for the NRC as currently constituted. He will be a valuable resource for his commission colleagues, but he will not be a “yes man.” It seems unlikely that he would feel pressured to adhere to a party line when his entire career indicates that he was trained to think independently about safety while being focused on nuclear energy and inspired to enhance its practical use.

For those who know me and even those who don’t, I will conclude this by acknowledging my personal bias based on numerous commonalities with Marzano. Like Marzano’s grandfather, my dad was an electrical engineer who could fix stuff. Both of my parents and my brother are University of Florida grads. My early experience with nuclear plant operations was with the US Navy Nuclear Propulsion Program on the same site where Marzano worked. I spent years both studying and practicing reactor operations and so understand how that training impacts one’s judgement and I’m a member of the American Nuclear Society.  

Unlike Marzano or Nordhaus, I’m now a venture capitalist investing my time and capital (through Nucleation Capital) into the success of the coming generation of advanced reactors and thus very invested in seeing the NRC become the high functioning 21^st century regulator which I believe it can be. I’m also a grandfather who hopes to leave this planet in better shape than it is now to my grandchildren through the successful, scaled deployment of next-generation nuclear power around the world.