Modeling the change: Commissioner Wright leads by example as the NRC faces its future

As the nuclear industry continues to pick up steam, its regulatory body can’t slacken the pace—indeed, to meet energy demands, hit net-zero deadlines, and keep abreast of developing technology, it needs to move faster than ever. Wright gives due praise to staff: “We’re challenging them . . . and they’re accepting the challenge,” he said. “There are a number of people who are new in the agency to leadership roles. They’re thinking outside the box, which is what’s needed right now.”

That, too, is something Wright knows a thing or two about. He had a limited background in nuclear before he was sworn in in May 2018. Prior to his appointment, he ran his own business, Wright Directions LLC, a strategic consulting, policy development, and communications firm with an emphasis on energy and water. He also had experience in local and state politics and served on the South Carolina Public Service Commission in different roles.

In October, American Nuclear Society Executive Director/CEO Craig Piercy sat down with Wright at NRC headquarters for an exclusive one-on-one discussion. The full interview is available for ANS members to watch at ans.org/webinars. Below are a few excerpts in which the commissioner discusses his unique journey in the nuclear industry, the challenges facing the NRC today, and what the future holds for nuclear regulation and innovation.

Given your nonnuclear background, how did you approach your transition to the NRC?

When I got here, I didn’t know anybody. I’m a small business guy who just got active in politics, had the opportunity to work at a public utilities commission, and got involved in the nuclear side of things. When I was asked to go through the process to get here, I had to figure out how to become a part of the fabric.

The first thing you have to do is hire good people. That was easy because people here are brilliant. So you have to rely on them and trust them and empower them to do things for me.

And then I just started walking the building. I walked every floor, every cubicle, every office, every guard gate, every supply room. You name it, I stopped and said, “Hi, I’m David. Tell me about yourself.” And people didn’t know who I was. Seriously, people said, “Who let you in the building?”

At first they thought it was a gimmick. And after a while they realized I didn’t want anything . . . and so I could have a dialogue with them as a real person. Once you gain their trust and they have yours, they’re willing to help you. And they know that I’m approachable.

The second part was, how do I learn? I think I was the only commissioner who took the back-fit training offered here, because I wanted to learn what that was all about. Then a couple of years ago, I started what I called a resident inspector for a day program, where I will actually go to a plant. I start at around 6:00 a.m. and spend the whole day with the residents. I go through every meeting, if they’re doing procedures, walk downs, whatever, and I learned exactly how our inspectors work with the licensee and how important that relationship is.

What has surprised you the most in your time here? There must be something that you didn’t expect coming in.

The initial thing I found [on my walkarounds around the agency] was that people were in silos. They lived in their little worlds. They didn’t really communicate like they would in the private sector.

And I thought, well, they’re very smart and they know what they’re doing. But there’s a connection that needs to happen. If you’re going to change the culture . . . it takes a lot of communication to do this. So, I saw that as a challenge that the NRC had to overcome. You have to model what you want: you have to be the change, you have to model the change.

The ADVANCE Act includes a number of different provisions designed to make the NRC more proactive. How do you see the legislation’s implementation playing out?

Congress made it abundantly clear that they wanted the NRC to be an agent of change . . . we could no longer do things the same old way. They want us to become more efficient, and “efficient” doesn’t mean doing things with less or doing more with less. It’s okay to think outside the box and be bold. Sometimes if there’s a novel issue, it might take a heartbeat longer to get there. But knowing what we know and how we’ve done things over the last 50 or 60 years, we should be able to be more efficient and more effective in how we go about our business. We have to use the resources that we’ve been given—not just by the licensee through fees but through Congress as well.

Wright (center) and fellow commissioner Bradley Crowell (right) visited the advanced reactor vendor TerraPower in August 2023, where they got a practical introduction into the physical properties of sodium, which would cool a TerraPower reactor’s core. (Photo: NRC)

Early engagement is critical to all of this. The more we can get done on the front end, like topical reports on novel things, the better. If we need to hire experts to do something, that gives us time to do that. It helps us identify weaknesses and shortfalls, and it allows us to work with the applicant or the licensee to build a safety case.

You’ve seen this broad arc within the NRC as it moves away from deterministic regulation to a risk-informed or risk-based approach. Everybody has their own opinion as to what that means. How do you confront that?

This may be oversimplifying, but really, it’s focusing on the most safety-significant areas, and once you’ve reached a conclusion, you move on to something else. We have a lot of data, and we have a lot of history of operation and those areas where we are potentially weak. We have time to fill that void.

A prepublication rule has been released for 10 CFR Part 53. Can you tell me a bit about what’s happened so far and where you see this going?

The flexibility part falls short, in my opinion. It’s out to be published, so there will be a lot of comments, probably on that area. It seems to be very [probabilistic risk assessment] focused, and that can be part of it, but we need to have the flexibility for pathways for other technologies.

I want the applicant, the vendor, whomever, to come in and be able to bring their design, their risk metrics, their safety case, and prove that. I don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all here. I think that’s what’s lacking right now, and hopefully we’ve got time to work through that.

In November of 2023, Wright traveled to Ghana for the U.S.-Africa Nuclear Energy Summit, where he met Ghana’s president, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo. (Photo: NRC)

How do you see the international role of the NRC in harmonizing regulations, especially with other countries that might be developing the same technologies we’re planning to deploy here?

It’s a big role, and it’s wide ranging. The NRC is the gold standard—that’s how we’re viewed around the world. I think that it’s important for us to work with other countries, but they’re not all at the same maturity level. We’re learning that through our relationships with Canada and now the U.K. In the end, what you’re really developing is a package of information that could be used by any country to go through a licensing process. I don’t want to say—and I don’t want other countries to say—“we’re going to accept what you say and we’re going to license it.” I think that’s taking away some of our sovereign right. That line should be drawn, but to work with other countries in a multilateral situation on designs or programs is very smart, because this is a global need, and these are global technologies.

These days, it’s hard to find new talent. How do you see the NRC’s path forward for ensuring that it has the capability it needs to discharge its duties?

This issue started showing its head a few years ago in the area of certified health physicists. There’s a shortage, and it’s not just in the U.S.—it’s worldwide. So how do you refill that pipeline? The ADVANCE Act did give us some tools for recruitment and retention, as well as some direct-hire authority that we’re trying to take a look at now and how we would apply that. But we have to be sure that we know what we need.

We did a plan on milestones and markers, and we’ve got a new human resources person who is already putting a working group together to try to look at the workforce plan, what we might need in the future. I think it comes down to making sure we know what we need. Don’t just go hire.

With employees, you can either bring them in with experience, targeted for what you need, or you can build them, meaning you bring in a new person and train them up, but that takes several years to get them to where they need to be. So we’re doing our best to get in front of that.

Looking a little further down the road, I want to talk a bit about fusion. The commission made an arguably momentous decision to regulate fusion energy generation through 10 CFR Part 30. Can you walk me through the thought process there and what you think needs to happen at the state level in order to be ready for it?

One thing about fusion that was different than anything else that we’ve done was the early interaction with the fusion people. They came early—even before they had an association—and the states are ahead of us in this already. So it made sense for us to partner with the states. We knew we had to regulate it through some part, and Part 30 was where it landed. There was conversation on different ways to go, and I think in the end we made a smart decision there.

Another topic is the whole issue of mobile microreactors and how the NRC will license those.

This is another situation where early engagement has happened and is happening. It’s going to require us to be a different type of regulator. The big plants aren’t going away—they’re going to still be there, and we’re still going to be that NRC, too. But now the NRC has to put on another hat and develop a process for inspecting, doing quality assurance, maybe manufacturing in a plant somewhere, transportation, getting it to a place, getting it hooked up. It’s a really exciting time, and the technologies that are out there are just as exciting. We’ve got to be ready to put the program together: How do you pay for it? How do you inspect it? Those are things we have to be thinking on as well.

If you were to fast-forward five years, where do you think the NRC will be?

Should I have the good fortune to look back from where I am right now, and stay in the NRC, I’m hopeful that we’re going to see some of these technologies actually working—built and running. In five years, maybe we’ll have 6, 10, 12 different designs out there or actively being built. I’m looking forward to seeing that and watching the NRC as an agency. It’s a very close-knit family, very specialized in what they do. This is an opportunity for us to grow and to provide opportunities for people who have invested so much time and education into this agency. The future for them is very bright, and the new people coming on are going to be the ones building that future. I’m excited to be here during this time. I’ve got great colleagues, the staff is very open, and they’re trying to make the changes that need to be made. They are going to be those agents of change who will help drive the message and meet the moment that is right here before us. I think it’s an exciting time, and I’ve got to model and support that—and that is what I plan on doing.

The interview presented here has been edited for length. Visit ans.org/ webinars/view-nrcwrightinterview/ for the full transcript.