During a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Adam Schiff asked NRC Commissioner Matthew Marzano if the Trump administration could fire him for not voting to approve an unsafe nuclear reactor.
00:05Mr. Wright, you acknowledged earlier in the hearing being present when one of the DOGE representatives made a comment about rubber stamping decisions made elsewhere.
00:16Can you tell us exactly what the comment was and who made the comment?
00:21Thank you so much.
00:23So that meeting happened in early June, if I remember correctly, subject to check.
00:30I was contacted by Mike Goff at DOE.
00:36He and Ted Garrish wanted to come over and talk about the executive order for DOE and DOD.
00:42They came on a Friday morning, and we had started our meeting, and there were three people who came in.
00:48Adam Blake, who I mentioned earlier, he had two other people with him.
00:53One was a lady, an attorney.
00:57I don't remember her last name.
00:59I think her first name was Alicia, and then there was another attorney there by the name of Seth Cohen.
01:04And that meeting, it was actually Seth Cohen that used the rubber stamp comment, and it was when they walked in, I stopped the meeting, and I let them introduce, let Mr. Blake introduce the others.
01:18And when I started the meeting back, I told him, I said, we were just talking about the executive order for DOE and DOD, and that's when the comment was made.
01:29He said, oh, well, y'all are basically going to put in a practice that's going to sort of rubber stamp what they do.
01:36And I said, well, we don't know.
01:37And he was referring to rubber stamp the decision made by DOE and DOD?
01:41No, maybe.
01:45I didn't press him on that.
01:47I didn't ask him about that.
01:48All I said was—
01:49But was it a sense that he was suggesting that the NRC was simply going to rubber stamp what the nuclear industry wanted?
01:54No, because I pushed back.
01:55That's what was in the article.
01:56But was that his suggestion, that his expectation was that the NRC was now going to be rubber stamped for the industry?
02:03I think he was thinking the intent of that, whatever the executive order was.
02:08So that's how he was interpreting the executive order?
02:11Yeah, whether he chose the right words or not, I don't know.
02:14But we pushed back and said we don't rubber stamp the meeting that we were having with DOE and DOD.
02:19Commissioner, I'm grateful that you pushed back.
02:22I appreciate that.
02:23I'm just trying to get understanding of how he views your role, which is obviously alarming to everyone who's concerned about nuclear safety.
02:34Let me ask a related question to each of you, and I'll start, Mr. Marzano, with you.
02:41Should you decide that a nuclear design is unsafe, notwithstanding the wishes of DOE or DOD or anyone else?
02:50Do you think you're at risk of being fired from the commission by a president who has demonstrated a willingness to fire commissioners without cause?
02:59Well, I certainly think that we've seen that happen, and I think there's pressure.
03:04But ultimately, the NRC will not license a reactor that is unsafe.
03:09If that does not meet our standards, we will not approve such a design.
03:15But you acknowledge that it's very possible, should you decide that a reactor design is unsafe, and vote that way that you may be fired by the administration?
03:27I think that's a possibility, yes.
03:29Mr. Crowell, is that a possibility in your view?
03:30I think on any given day, I could be fired by the administration for reasons unknown.
03:39Mr. Wright, do you think you'd be fired if you should decide against the administration's desires that a nuclear reactor design is unsafe?
03:47It doesn't matter.
03:49I'm going to make the right decision, and I'll stand by that decision.
03:52But you acknowledge you have to at least be concerned about the possibility you'll be fired for it.
03:58I don't know.
03:59In my mind, it's speculation.
04:01You know, it's talking.
04:02It's not something.
04:04But I'm going to make the right decision, period.
04:06It may be speculation, Chairman.
04:09But if you and the other commissioners have to be concerned that if you make a decision in the interest of public safety,
04:14that runs afoul of the desire of the administration to approve something on a short timetable,
04:20that you'll be fired.
04:21That's not a conducive situation to nuclear safety.
04:25Would you agree?
04:25Do you have to worry about being fired for making the right decision?
04:29Well, I may look at it a little bit differently than how you're saying it.
04:34Well, let me ask you this.
04:36The timetable says now within 12 months or 18 months you have to approve or reject a design.
04:43What if you don't have the information in 12 or 18 months?
04:46Do you have to vote on it regardless?
04:48No, the 12 and 18 months is actually for, you've got 12 months, 18 months on the construction side.
04:55Then you have another 12 or 18 months to do the other part of it.
04:57And if you don't have sufficient information within that timetable?
05:01Again, if you don't have the information to make a safety decision or to approve an application, you don't approve it.
05:09So you can ignore the timetable if you don't believe you have sufficient information?
Be the first to comment