103
1 INTRODUCTION
Stricter requirements imposed for air emission
reduction have resulted in a growing interest in
nuclear power, in the form of small modular reactors
(SMR), as a means of propulsion in the merchant fleet
(cf. Schøyen & Steger-Jensen, 2017; Emblemsvåg, 2021;
Emblemsvåg et al., 2024; Senemmar et al., 2024; Dixon,
2025). Recent projects concerning the topic include the
US National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC, 2025)
and the Research Council of Norway (RCN)
Propulsion of Merchant Ships1 (NuProShip1) (RCN,
2025). Since there are significant technological and
operational differences between traditional internal
combustion engine (ICE)-equipped merchant ships
(Dokkum, 2024) and merchant nuclear-powered ships
(MNS), it can be implied that the existing education of
seafarers is not sufficient for nuclear ships. For the
shipping industry to meet its future energy transition
challenges, education and training are crucial enablers.
In the case of nuclear propulsion, feasibility depends
on the development of a new education and training
scheme for maritime crew that bridges conventional
naval operations with the rigorous safety culture of the
nuclear industry, rather than relying on extensions of
current training models (Hirdardis et al. 2014).
Similarly, in the context of alternative fuels,
education and training are pivotal for overcoming
adoption barriers and ensuring their successful
integration into practice. Without this uplift in
competence, whether for nuclear-powered vessels or
for ships adopting zero-carbon fuels, the industry risks
Educating Engineer Officers for Merchant Nuclear
Powered Ships – a Literature Review
E. Morland
1
, H. Schøyen
1
& J. Emblemsvåg
2
1
University of South-Eastern Norway, Horten, Norway
2
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Ålesund, Norway
ABSTRACT: Ocean shipping must reduce air emissions and, at the same time, ensure logistical effectiveness.
There is a growing interest in small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) as power source for merchant ships.
Consequently, the maritime sector faces challenges in terms of regulations, education, and training for possible
future merchant nuclear-powered ships (MNS). This study takes into examination the requisite qualifications,
education and training for engineer officers on MNS. Since literature on this subject is scarce, an integrative
literature review approach is adopted to assess the qualification requirements and recommendations proposed
by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as well as the US and UK naval nuclear propulsion programs.
A conceptual framework is proposed for an educational path, combining the maritime industry’s organisation,
bodies and structure with the European Nuclear Education Network certification of the European Master of
Science in Nuclear Engineering. This framework aims to establish the basis for further projects concerning
engineer officer competence, training and education. The research questions are: (1) What is a feasible educational
framework for MNS engineer officers? (2) How should an educational framework for MNS engineer officers be
structured and accomplished?
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 20
Number 1
March 2026
DOI: 10.12716/1001.20.01.12
104
failing to realize the IMO’s 2050 decarbonization goals
(Sheikh et al. 2025).
If nuclear power becomes actual for niches in the
merchant fleet, it will create a new need for the
education and training of seafarers. It has been
suggested that the maritime industry could learn
something from both the US and the UK Navies’
nuclear propulsion programs regarding operational
safety, education and training (NRIC, 2025).
Nevertheless, developers of nuclear power for
merchant shipping must interpret, and comply with,
different rules and regulations, both national and
international; moreover, the regulatory framework for
MNS is intricate and insufficient (ABS, 2018; Wang et
al., 2023).
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s
safety guides and standards regarding qualification
and training of personnel for on-shore-located nuclear
power plants and nuclear safety has been partly
developed in collaboration with The European Union
(EU) and other international and national
organisations (IAEA, 2023a) and is indeed a source of
best practices. However, the International Convention
on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) does not cover
manning and training for MNS, thus supplementary
education and training for the crew of nuclear-
powered vessels is necessary (ABS, 2018; NRIC, 2025).
Moreover, different SMR types require different
education and training (ABS, 2018; Haas, 2014). IAEA
(2023a) provides several publications covering the
education, training and manning of traditional nuclear
power plants and SMRs. Furthermore, there are
international organisations working on developing
higher education and training in nuclear science,
technology and engineering, such as the European
Nuclear Education Network (Safieh et al., 2011).
In this paper, we compile and assess the UK
Maritime and Coastguard Agency, International
Maritime Organisation (IMO), IAEA and ENEN
policies and guidelines linked to nuclear plant
operational competence. In addition, this study
combines insights from some of the education and
training programs of the crews of previous
experimental nuclear-powered civilian ships and the
publicly available contents of the US and UK military
nuclear propulsion programs. The review conducted in
this study constitutes a basis for further research on the
education and training of MNS engineer officers .
The goal of the study is twofold: firstly, to explore
what level of competence should be acquired by
engineer officers on a modern MNS; secondly, to
determine how an appropriate program could be
structured and carried out in the future. The research
questions are:
1. What is a feasible educational framework for MNS
engineer officers?
2. How should an educational framework for MNS
engineer officers be structured and accomplished?
The point of departure to answer the research
questions is to study present applicable rules and
regulations, as well as current US and UK military
nuclear propulsion education and training programs.
The contribution of this study is that it creates a basis
for research projects concerning competence, training
and education for MNS engineer officers.
The remaining of this paper is structured as follows:
Section 2 deals with theory about quality in higher
education; Section 3 documents the research process.
Section 4 presents the findings, while Section 5
discusses and illustrates a conceptual framework for
nuclear education. Section 6 draws a conclusion and
Section 7 contains suggestions further research.
2 QUALITY OF TEACHING AND LEARNING IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
This study applies to the position of engineer officers
on vessels with > 3 MW propulsion power, as described
in STCW (IMO, 2011). Such officers must hold a higher
education or university qualification equal to a BSc.
degree in marine engineering. Since the current
merchant marine officer education is often carried out
by colleges and universities, it is natural to adopt the
perspective of quality in higher education.
The Bologna process (see for example Wihlborg &
Teelken, 2014) led to the introduction of national
qualification frameworks, implying that education
programs must define their learning outcomes in terms
of knowledge, skills and general competence. The
goals of these frameworks include to harmonize the
education within Europe and to ensure that academic
institutions become proactive to the needs of the
labour-market in terms of defining learning outcomes
and qualifications (Strømsø et al., 2016). These
frameworks focus on preparing students for their
professional careers, as well as enabling access to
quality-based higher education (Biggs & Tang, 2011).
In higher education, a qualification framework is a
tool to develop existing and new study programs as
well as to document what the students have learned
and what skills they have acquired through their
course of study (Strømsø et al., 2016). Learning
outcomes are statements and descriptions of the level
of understanding and knowledge the students have
achieved, as well as what they are capable of
performing in terms of the qualifications defined for
Bachelor-, Master- and PhD levels. This implies that
teaching and learning in higher education are
becoming outcome-based and student-oriented (Biggs
& Tang, 2011).
The Bologna Follow-Up Group updated the
framework for qualifications of the European higher
education area. The framework describes the Bachelor-
and Master degree programs in terms of first and
second cycle learning outcomes and European Credit
Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS). The first
cycle, typically a 180 ECTS Bachelor’s degree, describes
what competencies the students have acquired on
completion of the program, e.g. problem solving,
reflection and communication skills as well as the
ability to apply knowledge and understanding in their
professional work. The second cycle, typically a 120
ECTS Master’s degree, is expected to build upon the
first cycle and enhance the level of skills, i.e. handling
higher forms of complexity and applying problem-
solving, as well as employing communicative and
reflective skills in unfamiliar contexts with limited
information (Bologna Follow-Up Group, 2015, 2018).
The ECTS measures both the study load and the
learning outcomes of a course of study. It is essential to
105
produce clear learning outcomes and to teach and
assess in compliance with them (Biggs & Tang, 2011).
In the context of educating for industry needs,
wherever theory is used for analysing and solving
problems as well as planning and designing new
products, it results in functional knowledge.
Functional knowledge differs from purely theoretical -
also called declarative knowledge. To stimulate the
learners to achieve real understanding in line with their
professional needs, the examination and assessment
methods should reflect the concept of functional
knowledge (Biggs & Tang, 2011).
The SOLO taxonomy, i.e., the structure of the
observed learning outcomes, is a systematic model
developed to describe and determine learning
outcomes and their levels, as well as to measure the
level at which the student masters the intended
learning outcome (ILO). Each stage in the model
incorporates the former stages, adding further
concepts as the levels increase in complexity. Figure 1
shows the SOLO taxonomy levels.
Figure 1. SOLO taxonomy in five levels. Adapted from Biggs
& Tang (2011, p. 91, Figure 5.1).
As a student accumulates knowledge, the cognitive
complexity can be reflected in moving from the
quantitative phase to the qualitative phase, cf. Figure 1.
As the qualitative level increases, so does the
complexity of the learning outcomes. The SOLO
taxonomy promotes the use of verbs to describe
learning outcomes: different verbs are used to describe
the different levels of understanding. These are verbs
that the student must be able to master in practice to
prove what level of knowledge they have achieved.
(Biggs & Tang, 2011).
The same model can be used in developing and
accessing skills, i.e. students progress from being
spectators of skills to being skilled themselves. This is
a process that involves practicing skills with some
support to become progressively more and more
independent, and finally manage on their own
(Strømsø et al., 2016). The methodology promoted by
these frameworks is not so much about what the
teacher does but rather focuses on what the student
does. Figure 2 explains the alignment of ILOs, teaching
and assessment tasks.
Figure 2 Aligning intended learning outcomes (ILOs),
teaching and assessment tasks. Adopted from Bigg & Tang
(2011, p. 105, Figure 6.1).
According to Biggs & Tang (2011), for constructive
alignment to take place it is crucial that both the ILOs
and the teaching and learning activities be consistent
with the assessment tasks.
3 RESEARCH METHOD
The topic in this study is an emerging field of research,
and since there are currently no MNS - apart from some
Russian icebreakers (Schøyen & Steger-Jensen, 2017) -
literature is scarce on the subject. Therefore, an
integrative literature review approach was chosen as
method (Green et al., 2006; Torraco, 2005). To
supplement the findings from scientific journal articles
we have included relevant information from other
sources, e.g. conference papers, publications, reports as
well as recommendations from policymakers.
3.1 Literature search strategy and database selections
The following databases were selected for this study:
Scopus, Web of Science, International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) publication databases and Regs4Ships.
See Table 1 for combinations of search strings and key
words.
Table 1 Search strings and key words.
Search
Key Words
A
(nuclear propulsion OR nuclear power* OR reactor* OR
smr*)
AND
B
(ship* OR maritime OR naval OR navy OR marine)
AND
C
(education* OR training)
D
(( ( education* OR training ) ) AND ( ( ship* OR
maritime OR naval OR navy OR marine ) )
AND ( ( nuclear AND propulsion OR nuclear AND
power* OR reactor* OR smr * ) ) )
According to IAEA, Small modular reactors (SMRs) is a generic
term for advanced nuclear reactors with a power ratio up to 300
MW(e) and does not differentiate them any further (IAEA. (2023).
What are Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)? IAEA.
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-
reactors-smrs
106
Table 2 lists the selection criteria concerning search
boundaries, year of publication, language, papers and
publications.
Table 2. Selection criteria.
N
Criteria
Included
Excluded
C.1
Language
English
Other
C.2
Time period
1/1/1970 – 1/1/2023
Other
C.3
Search within
Titles, abstract,
keywords.
Other
C.4
Subject Area
See Table 1.
Healthcare
/Medicine/Aero
Space/ etc.
C.5
Type of publication
Articles, conference
paper, publications,
and reports
Other
C.6
Manually read abstracts
C.7
Relevant to marine
nuclear propulsion,
education and training
of engineer officers.
Relevant to the
research questions
Other
C.8
Duplicates from other
searches
To prevent loss of valuable information, the search
results were reviewed manually before all the search
criteria were used (if there were not too many hits, e.g.
over 100). Results that obviously belonged to other
fields, such as health, medicine and aerospace, were
discarded.
3.2 Literature search process and analysis
The abstracts of the most relevant articles yielded by
the searches were read through, and the most relevant
were chosen for further investigation. Then, the
reference lists in the selected articles were scanned for
relevant papers and publications, before the final
selection of criteria and articles for the review. Table 3
presents the search results from the science databases
Scopus (search N=1) and Web of Science (search N=2)
with the search strings from Table 1.
Table 3. Scientific literature search.
N
Database
Key Words
Results
Date
1
Scopus
( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( education* OR
training ) ) ) AND ( TITLE-ABS-KEY
( ( ship* OR maritime OR naval
OR navy OR marine ) ) ) AND
( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( nuclear AND
propulsion OR nuclear AND
power* OR reactor* OR smr* ) ) )
156
6/2/2023
1.2
Filtered by criteria C1-C7
17
2
Web of
Science
( ( ( education* OR training ) ) )
AND ( ( ship* OR maritime OR
naval OR navy OR navy OR
marine ) ) AND ( ( nuclear AND
propulsion OR nuclear AND
power* OR reactor* OR smr* ) )
13
6/2/2023
2.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C7
2
2.2
Filtered by criteria C8
0
The selected literature from the database searches in
Table 3 were collated in a preliminary literature search
record. The rationale for the selection of these articles
is the assumed relevance after reading their abstracts.
The search performed in Regs4ships (search N=3) is
presented in Table 4. Because the search functions of
the Regs4Ships database are different from those in
Scopus and Web of Science, the search strings had to be
altered to yield relevant results.
Table 4 Literature search Regs4Ships.
N
Database
Key Words
Results
Date
3
Regs4Ships
Nuclear
14
7/2/2023
3.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C7
3
The searches (search N=4,5,6,7) performed in the
IAEA`s scientific and technical publications are
presented in Table 5. The search functions of the
IAEA`s database are different from those in Scopus and
Web of Science, hence search strings were modified
and changed to yield relevant results.
Table 5. Publication search IAEA.
N
Database
Key Words
Results
Date
4
IAEA
Education
82
7/2/2023
4.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C7
1
5
IAEA
Small modular reactors
11
5.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C8
1
6
IAEA
Staffing
12
6.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C8
1
7
IAEA
Training
189
7.1
Filtered by criteria C1-C8
2
Due to the large number of hits, the selected
literature spans from years 2000¬-2023. We presume
that this is the most relevant literature since it
addresses relevant themes, and it is the latest revision
at the time of writing. Additional relevant reports and
articles obtained from other sources than the database
searches in Scopus and Web of Science are listed in
Table 6; these originate from the preliminary search
phase of the study.
Table 6 Additional reports and articles.
Retrieved from
Year
Comments
ScienceDirect
2011
(Safieh et al., 2011)
National Nuclear Security
Administration
2020
Naval Reactors annual
reports
Department of Transportation USA
Coast Guard
1976
Qualification
recommendations
Total reports and articles
3
3.3 Literature selection and description
Table 7 lists the final literature for inclusion in the
review after full-text evaluation and relevance for the
research questions.
The amount of literature included in the literature
review is divided into 16 articles, reports and
publications spanning over a period from 1973 to 2022.
The literature comprises journal articles, conference
papers, publications, rules and regulations as well as
reports.
The main body of the literature deals with
education and training in the U.K and U.S Navies, as
well as guidelines from regulatory bodies, e.g. the
IMO, MCA and IAEA were highlighted. In addition,
literature on the experimental merchant vessels NS
Savannah and Mutsu were reviewed. We decided to
include an article about the European Nuclear
Education Network’s (ENEN) Master degree in nuclear
engineering as studied by Safieh et al. (2011), cf.
Table 7.
107
Table 7 Final literature for inclusion in the review.
Author / Year
Theme
Comments
(Miller et al.,
2017)
Naval nuclear-power
training units in the
Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program
(NNPP)
The study evaluates the
allocation of the students
in the NNPP
(Thunem et al.,
2012)
Safety culture, education,
and training in the
maritime and nuclear
domain
The study compares the
education, culture, and
practice of seafarers and
Nuclear operators
(Safieh et al.,
2011)
Education and training in
nuclear engineering and
science
ENEN`S work and
master program in
nuclear-related activities
(Phil Beeley et
al., 2004)
Education and training of
crew for nuclear vessels
in the British Navy
Training facilities,
teaching aids, and
methods
(Brushwood et
al., 2002)
Education and training of
crew for nuclear vessels
in the British Navy
Training facilities,
teaching aids, and
methods
(Lakeey; et al.,
1986)
Education and training of
crew for nuclear vessels
in the British Navy
Training facilities,
teaching aids, and
methods
(Head; et al.,
1986)
Education and training of
crew for nuclear vessels
in the British Navy
Training facilities,
teaching aids, and
methods
(Sasaki, 1973)
Education and training of
crew for experimental
nuclear-powered
merchant vessels
Training facilities,
teaching aids, and
methods
(UK
Government,
2022)
Regulations for nuclear
ships
Regulations for safety,
survey, operation,
training etc. requirements
(Maritime &
Coastguard
agency, 2022)
Guidance on regulations
for nuclear ships
Marine guidance note on
regulations and
requirements for nuclear
ships
IMO 1981
Regulations for nuclear
ships
Regulations for safety,
survey, operation,
training etc. requirements
(National
Nuclear
Security
Administration,
2022)
The Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program,
Nuclear training in the
US Navy
Naval Reactors annual
report on the NNPP
(Hall et al.,
1976)
Education and training of
crew for experimental
nuclear-powered
merchant vessels
Recommendations on the
education and training of
crew for nuclear ships
IAEA 2022
Education and training in
the nuclear domain
Education, training and
qualifications for Nuclear
staff
IAEA 2021
Education and training in
the nuclear domain
Systematic approach to
education and training
IAEA 2001
SMRs operations
SMR, staffing and
training requirements
Total articles, reports and
publications for full text
review
16
3.4 Limitations of the study
Certain weaknesses emerge when reviewing the
literature, especially when it comes to descriptions. The
study programs are often described in terms of themes
of the courses, subject content and course unit
duration, instead of stating the learning objectives and
learning outcomes for each course of study in the
education and training programs. Further, it is unclear
which cognitive levels the candidates are expected to
achieve in terms of knowledge, skills and
competencies. Finally, there is also a possible
difference between stated learning outcomes and
actual learning outcomes.
Several nations apply military nuclear marine
propulsion power. The scope of this study was limited
to the education and training programs arranged in the
UK and USA. Therefore, although other nations such
as China, Russia and France all have knowledge on
nuclear-powered military vessels, they are excluded
from this study due to the language barrier or
restricted publicly available information about the
subject.
Historical, experimental MNS’s crew training
programs have been published in the past, see for
example Sasaki (1973). Although some of that literature
dates back to 1973 and 1976, we consider it valid since
it records pioneering activities relating to MNS. In
conjunction with those experimental ships, IMO (1981)
adopted Resolution A.491 (XII) Code of Safety for
Nuclear Merchant Ships; our study does not dwell
much into its role and content, for the following
reasons: (1) it was not implemented by any of the
member states at the time, (2) it lists subjects that
should be a part of an operational engineer course
curriculum without specifying the ILOs) regarding
knowledge, skills and competencies to be achieved, (3)
it is based mainly on Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR)
technology, a technology which does not seem to be
relevant for future merchant ships, for example, the
emergency zone around a PWR can prohibit usage in
commercial harbours, and (4) it has not been updated
since 1981, i.e. it is not harmonized with current
international nuclear standards, e.g. IAEA`s safety
standards.
4 FINDINGS
Firstly, the regulations and recommendations from the
MCA and IAEA are reviewed and presented. Secondly,
the education and training from the UK and US Navies
are reviewed and presented, followed by a
comparative study of the maritime and nuclear
domains and a presentation of ENEN's work with
higher education of nuclear personnel.
4.1 The Maritime and Coastguard Agency regulatory
policy and recommendations
These recommendations are substantiated by The
Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) as reflected
in the Marine Guidance Note (MGN 679 (M) Nuclear
Ships, 2022). In addition to IMO`s recommendations,
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency recommends
study of national and international safety requirements
applicable to nuclear ships and their nuclear
propulsion plant. All training courses should be
approved by the administration. MCA also states that
education and training of staff should be in accordance
with the operating manual of the specific reactor to be
installed and operated on board the vessel (MGN 679
(M) Nuclear Ships, 2022).
108
4.2 The International Atomic Energy Agency’s
recommendations on training and education of
nuclear personnel
The IAEA safety standard (IAEA, 2022) reflects
international agreements on safety level for protection
against radiation: in this respect, it recommends a
systematic approach to the training of nuclear facility
personnel, with detailed recommendations for their
education and training. The overall goal is attaining the
safe operation and maintenance of nuclear power
plants through a robust safety culture.
With regards to the technical and engineering
department of a nuclear power plant, the
recommendations for operator personnel, managers
and technical specialists emerge as the most relevant
for this study. These positions manage namely
technical operations, maintenance and repair. The
standard divides the education and training into three
parts: academic qualifications, previous work
experience, preliminary and ongoing training.
Based on the statement of IAEA's safety standard
SSR‑2/2 (Safety of Nuclear Power Plants:
Commissioning and Operation, 2016), "The operating
organisation shall ensure that all activities that may
affect safety are performed by suitably qualified and
competent persons" (IAEA, 2022, p. 3). Competence is
defined by the IAEA as “the ability to apply skills,
knowledge and attitudes in order to perform an
activity or a job to a specified level in an effective and
efficient manner” (IAEA, 2022, p. 9). To prepare for
further training and achieve the desired level of
competence, the education program must ensure that
the individual acquires the requisite knowledge, skills
and attitudes.
The IAEA underlines the importance of recruiting
personnel with the right motivation, attitude and
values in relation to the position to be filled and the
requirements of a robust safety culture. It is essential
that individuals possess the requisite knowledge and
skills to perform security-related tasks. Emphasis is put
on mental and physical health alongside with zero
tolerance for the use of alcohol and other drugs.
Communication skills and the ability to work in a team
under normal/abnormal conditions and emergency
situations, as well as analytic and problem-solving
skills are paramount and should be prioritized (IAEA,
2022).
The IAEA advocates a closer cooperation between
academia, the nuclear industry and the regulatory
bodies, which demonstrates the alignment of the
education program with the needs of industry. In
addition to professionals being able to contribute to the
teaching and learning process, internships should be
established between students and industry partners.
The systematic approach to training (SAT) process
addresses the distinct stages in an education and
training scheme (IAEA, 2021, p. 18). One example of a
general training program for a nuclear power plant is
illustrated in Table 8.
Table 8 Typical content and duration of a generic nuclear
training program.
Department
Position
Induction(
4 weeks)
Nuclear
fundamentals(6
-12 weeks)
Plant
systems
and
processe
s (6-12
weeks)
Role
specific(1
-6 years)
Engineerin
g
Design
engineer
System
engineer
The exact duration of each segment will vary,
depending on the role requirement
Operations
Plant
operator
Reactor
operator
Shift
manage
r
Source: Adapted from IAEA (2021, p. 99).
IAEA provides topics of nuclear fundamentals and
lists the nuclear subjects that provide students with the
basic theoretical understanding required to develop
the right knowledge, skills and competences for further
training in the program (IAEA, 2021, p. 99). IAEA
recommends that also control room operators should
hold a university degree, a college degree in
engineering or have a background from a technical
college (IAEA, 2022). When an organisation is
establishing a new nuclear power plant with
distinctive technological facilities, the IAEA standard
(Recruitment, Qualification and Training of Personnel
for Nuclear Power Plants) advises that employees are
recruited before the plant comes on stream. In this way,
as part of induction training, the operators can gain
knowledge from the contractors involved in the
different stages, from design to commissioning of the
plant. Due to the more modular design and
standardised equipment of new SMRs, the
qualification requirements are predicted to be lower for
some facilities than for the more traditional nuclear
power plants (IAEA, 2001).
4.3 Naval nuclear education and training
As noted earlier we focus only on the naval nuclear
propulsion programs in the UK and the USA.
4.3.1 UK’s naval nuclear propulsion program (UK
NNPP)
In 2001, the Nuclear Department (Royal Navy,
2014) was established at HMS Sultan (Defence School
of Marine Engineering and the Royal Naval Air
Engineering and Survival School). All education,
training and research facilities for the UK`s NNPP,
both for civilian and naval personnel, are based here
(Brushwood et al., 2002; Beeley et al., 2004). Academic
courses in nuclear science and technology based on the
US’ NNPP are offered for junior and existing marine
engineering officers. A marine engineering officer can
enrol on the Nuclear Reactor Course (NRC) that will
provide additional competences of nuclear propulsion
and nuclear reactor technology for further qualification
and training for nuclear submarine support and
operational positions (Beeley et al., 2004).
The academic course lasts six months and awards
the student a postgraduate diploma in nuclear reactor
109
technology. Beeley et al. (2004) provides an overview
of the NRC subjects. In addition to the 26-week NRC,
the cadets take Officer Nuclear Operators Courses
(ONOC) 1 & 2 which last 7 and 10 weeks respectively,
covering instrumentation, operations, safety
philosophy, basic health physics and reactor
operations. The ONOC 2 course focuses on simulator
training and assessment. On completing these courses,
the candidates are scrutinised in all disciplines using
simulator exercises and listening tests. They also
participate in the Initial Sea Qualification (ISQ) on a
nuclear submarine for six months.
After examinations, those who succeed can proceed
to on-job-training (OJT) on a nuclear submarine for
approximately 5 months (Beeley et al., 2004). For a
junior marine engineer with a degree in a relevant
science field or engineering, the training pipeline is
conducted through the Systems Engineering
Management Course (SEMC). This education and
training program usually lasts 130 weeks, including
sailing time and simulator use before the cadet is ready
to hold the position of Engineer Officer of the Watch on
a nuclear-powered submarine.
The facilities of the Nuclear Department include
various simulators and research laboratories. These
facilities enable simulations of both normal and
abnormal conditions, as well as emergency and
accident scenarios that provide the student with
training in situations that would not be possible to
recreate on a real nuclear reactor (Brushwood et al.,
2002; Beeley et al., 2004; Head et al., 1986; Lakeey et al.,
1986).
4.3.2 The United States naval nuclear propulsion
program (US NNPP)
The National Nuclear Security Administration
oversees US NNPP (Miller et al., 2017). The program
includes all civilian and military activities supporting
the nuclear-powered naval fleet, its establishments and
the full-life cycle assessment, from resource extraction
to disposal phase (Miller et al., 2017; National Nuclear
Security Administration, 2022). Parts of the education
of the NNPP are arranged at the Nuclear Field “A”
School and the Nuclear Power School (NPS) in
Charleston, South Carolina. In addition, training is
provided at the moored training ships in Charleston
and the shore-based facilities at Kesselring Site West
Milton, New York (Miller et al., 2017; National Nuclear
Security Administration, 2022).
The students receive comprehensive academic and
practical training as well as on-the-job training (OJT) as
cadets under the supervision of highly qualified
personnel for safe operation of nuclear vessels under
all conditions (Miller et al., 2017; National Nuclear
Security Administration, 2022). In order to sail on
vessels with nuclear power, either as an enlisted sailor
or an officer, there are several paths to take in the
military educational system.
The academic level is known to be top-notch, on a
par with the best educational institutions in nuclear
power. The study program consists of six months’
academic training and 6 months’ practical training
(National Nuclear Security Administration, 2022). The
educational prerequisite for entering the NPS is a
degree from either an accredited college or university
in the United States with a major in science or
engineering (National Nuclear Security
Administration, 2022). The nuclear training starts at the
NPS, which is a 24-week training program. Hall et al.
(1976) and National Nuclear Security Administration
(2022) provide subjects included in that training. The
students spend between 60 – 80 hours a week studying
while attending the program (National Nuclear
Security Administration, 2022).
On completion of the Nuclear Power School, the
students proceed to practical training program at the
Nuclear Power Training Unit (NPTU), a 24-week
training program. After completing an examination,
the student qualifies as a propulsion plant operator
(Miller et al., 2017).
4.4 Comparison of the maritime and nuclear industries
There are several similarities between the maritime
and nuclear domains, concerning both organisational
and operational tasks, technical skills and knowledge
of maintenance, operation and repair of technical
equipment. These domains share the need for
teamwork, communication skills, human factors
regarding more automated processes and new
technologies.
While safety culture and leadership are emphasised
in both domains, both industries being governed by
rules and regulations and supervised by public
authorities (Thunem et al., 2012). There are also
differences between the two domains, especially
cultural ones. Some research points out that the
mariners have a more flexible attitude towards
management documents and procedures, while the
nuclear power plant personnel are more rigid in this
respect (Thunem et al., 2012).
In terms of education and qualifications, nuclear
engineering is recognized as holding higher levels of
theoretical as well as applied science, whereas the
seafarers' educational background is rather more
practical than theoretical (Thunem et al., 2012).
4.5 The European Nuclear Education Network
Recent studies (Safieh et al., 2011) have shown that
Europe is at great risk of losing valuable expertise in
research, development and operation of nuclear
power. It has also been stated that there is a shortfall of
professional personnel and a decrease in the
educational opportunities in the European nuclear
industry.
To counter this development, The European
Nuclear Education Network (ENEN), a non-profit
regulatory agency, was established on a mission to
safeguard existing competence and further develop
new competences in the nuclear field through higher
education and training (Safieh et al., 2011). ENEN aims
include harmonising education within nuclear
engineering and science, as well as supplying qualified
personnel to the nuclear industry. Through the
Euratom Framework Programs and in collaboration
with universities and organisations in the nuclear
power industry - as well as with the IAEA, ENEN has
come to a common understanding of an educational
path in nuclear professions, i.e. the European Master of
110
Science in nuclear Engineering (EMSNE). To ensure
that high quality is attained ENEN has, together with
its members and associates, introduced a course
description containing admission requirements,
curricula and a certification of achievement for its
graduating students. Some of the core objectives of the
EMSNE are to harmonise the safety culture, education
and training in different nuclear technologies and
policies in Europe (Safieh et al., 2011).
For Universities to be able to qualify students for the
certification of European Master of Science in Nuclear
Engineering, the following minimum requirements
must be met: “The total course load leading to the
master degree in nuclear engineering, or equivalent,
must be at least 300 ECTS (European Credit Transfer
System) at university level, of which at least 60 ECTS
credits must be in nuclear sciences and technologies,
preferably engineering.
The master programme must have been a balanced
nuclear engineering programme consisting of at least a
profound coverage of the following subjects: reactor
engineering, reactor physics, nuclear thermal
hydraulics, safety and reliability of nuclear facilities,
nuclear materials, radiology and radiation protection,
nuclear fuel cycle and applied radiochemistry. The
applicant must have successfully defended a nuclear
engineering master thesis project. At least 20 ECTS of
nuclear engineering courses or a master thesis project
must have been taken at an academic ENEN member
institution situated in another country than the home
institution” (Safieh et al., 2011). The Master program
must include the following subjects listed in Table 9:
Compulsory subjects for the EMSNE.
Table 9 Compulsory subjects for the EMSNE.
Subjects
Reactor engineering
Reactor physics
Nuclear thermal hydraulics
Safety and reliability of nuclear facilities
Nuclear materials
Radiology and radiation protection
Nuclear fuel cycle
Applied radiochemistry
Adapted from (Safieh et al., 2011).
5 DISCUSSION
5.1 Education and training of engineer officers on
military nuclear-powered ships
This investigation has revealed several common
features in the US and UK naval forces. Firstly, the
reviewed literature mainly describes the various
subjects that are taught, but not their ILOs. Despite a
lot of descriptive material pointing in the direction of
outcome-based learning and assessment, e.g. safe
operation of the ship and its nuclear power plant under
normal and abnormal conditions, there are few clear
descriptions of the learning outcomes leading up to
this competence, cf. Figure 2.
The means and methods used to achieve the
intended objectives are also quite similar, i.e. the use of
classroom teaching in combination with simulators
and practical training aids. The reviewed programs
also focus on examinations and assessment of the
desired knowledge, skills and competences. There is
material that indicates the courses’ alignment with the
principles of outcome-based learning (Figure 2): The
training is designed specifically to fulfil the job
requirements set for candidates, and there are various
competences that are described with verbs that
correspond to the qualitative phase in the SOLO
taxonomy (cf. Figure 1).
Secondly, the prerequisites for officer training in the
navy and for the chief, first and second engineers in the
merchant fleet showed several similarities. They had
either a degree in science or were already marine
engineers or officers in the navy. The additional
curriculum taught to the mariners in the navy and to
the engineers in the merchant ships also shared the
same fundamental principles.
Thirdly, the naval nuclear propulsion programs of
the US and the UK include both military and civilian
nuclear activities, such as education and training, as
well as research and development. Further, the
education and training are managed by the same
organisation that has the overall responsibility for the
entire nuclear program of the Navy, e.g. the Nuclear
Department and Naval Reactors.
Fourthly, Section 4 reveals that close cooperation is
essential between the operating organisation, the
regulatory bodies, the equipment suppliers and the
education and training providers, regarding the
development of learning objectives, teaching and
learning activities as well as assessment tasks.
5.2 The importance of classification societies and program
revision
The MCA states that recognized organisations and
certifying authorities can act on behalf of the
administration regarding safety assessment and
certification. The administration regards classification
societies to be such an organisation (MGN 679 (M)
Nuclear Ships 2022). The recognized classification
societies, e.g. members of the International Association
of Classification Societies (IACS, 2023) can play an
important role regarding certification and quality
assurance. Classification societies may contribute to:
(1) developing learning outcomes for education and
training requirements for crew operating and
maintaining ships with nuclear propulsion, in addition
to class standards, guidelines and recommended
practice for manning and safe operation of nuclear
seagoing IMO vessels; (2) Acting as a 3rd party
verification partner in accordance with IMO
MSC.1/Circ.1455 guidelines , and (3) consolidating the
process of harmonising nuclear safety management
system standards with the maritime international
safety management (ISM) system requirements .
5.3 Interaction of stakeholders in the maritime industry
Section 4 disclosed that collaboration between research
and development institutions of nuclear technology
and equipment suppliers is important, not only for
keeping up with new technologies but also for
developing teaching aids such as simulators, teaching
models, and laboratory equipment, and on-the-job
training. The exchange of knowledge and experience
among existing nations that already have nuclear
power technology has proven to be invaluable and is a
111
major contribution to supporting new nuclear
activities. For instance, the US navy shared its
technology with the UK navy. Figure 3 illustrates
interested or concerned parties influencing the
performance of the maritime nuclear industry.
Figure 3. Interaction of stakeholders
The stakeholders identified in this study (cf. Annex
1) are national and international regulatory bodies for
the nuclear and the maritime industries. In particular,
international organisations such as the IAEA and IMO
stand out as primary organisations. Regulatory bodies
such as ONR, U.S NRC and NRA cover the nuclear
regulations, whilst U.S. Coast Guard, Japan Coast
Guard and U.K Maritime and Coastguard Agency
cover the maritime domain. The operating
organisations identified in this review are Naval
Reactors (US navy) and the UK Nuclear Department.
In the contemporary industrial paradigm, the
operating organisations for possible future MNS fleet
appear to be –- shipowners or ship managers, since
they will serve the same role of responsibility as
nuclear facilities and nuclear operators (cf. Schøyen &
Steger-Jensen, 2017). Other interested parties identified
as collaboration partners and nuclear-competent actors
are research and development companies of nuclear
technology, equipment suppliers and shipyards, as
well as education and training providers.
The recognized classification societies, e.g. IACS
members, play a vital role in the maritime industry
with respect to the certification and the quality
assurance referred to by the IMO and MCA. To ensure
that graduates of an education and training program
for nuclear-powered vessels acquire the requisite
knowledge, skills and competence, it emerges as vital
that competencies and knowledge are shared when
developing an education and training scheme:
education and training providers need to deliver what
the industry demands in cooperation with the
stakeholders of the industry (ref. Figure 3). It is
imperative to instil a feasible trait of maritime business
organization, competence and safety culture in ship
owning and ship management companies (see. e.g.
Panayides, 2002). Differences in culture regarding
management, communication and safety in the nuclear
and maritime domain need to be addressed.
5.4 Conceptual model for education and training of MNS
engineer officers
To develop an educational path for MNS, the STCW
requirements for engineer officers need to be fulfilled.
Even if the ship is to have nuclear power as its main
propulsion, STCW requirements for engineer officers
on ships powered by main propulsion machinery of >
3 MW will most probably apply. In order to fulfil
STCW requirements for officer certificates in the
merchant marine fleet, several educational institutions
in Europe offer this education as a Bachelor degree in
Marine Engineering, e.g. Chalmers University
(Sweden) and University of South East Norway.
These universities are committed to following the
European qualification framework for higher
education and the standards and guidelines for quality
assurance in the European Higher Education Area as
well as the STCW. In addition, students must complete
relevant safety courses and practical work training
before becoming cadets onboard a ship, where they
will obtain the necessary required sailing time to
achieve a valid certificate. Sasaki (1973) stated that
nuclear propulsion training program for Mutsu could
have been carried out in a more efficient way if, for
instance, the program had been arranged in its entirety
at one university.
Against this background, it becomes clear that all
maritime nuclear power-related education and
training for engineer officers needs to be fulfilled in
addition to the STCW requirements. This is supported
by the training of the engineer officers for the earlier
experimental nuclear merchant ships, Mutsu and the
NS Savannah. For engineer officer positions, crew
members with extensive experience either as chief, first
or second engineer officer certificate or equivalent
competence, were selected for further nuclear
education and training (Hall et al., 1976; Sasaki, 1973).
This is also the practice of the UK Navy, where the
prerequisite for the nuclear reactor course is experience
as marine engineer officer or participation in the
systems engineering management course (Beeley et al.,
2004). Admission in the navy for students wishing to
start the officer education and training at the nuclear
power school requires graduation from college or a
university within the academic technical fields or
specialisation in mathematics, engineering, physics or
chemistry (National Nuclear Security Administration,
2022).
5.5 Additional Nuclear education and training for
engineer officers
When developing a program for additional nuclear
education and training there are several high priority
skills that should be the learning objectives of such a
program: management, leadership and
communication, problem solving, analytic and critical
thinking, engineering, technology as well as safety
skills. The IAEA stresses that comprehensive skills in
problem solving, analyses and communication are
vital. These skills correspond with the qualitative
phase of the SOLO taxonomy (ref. Figure 1).
There is also a large regulatory body for both the
maritime and the nuclear domains - covering
procedures and standards on how various tasks are to
be performed - that needs to be integrated with the
112
program. The ENEN`s European Master of Science in
Nuclear Engineering is in line with international
regulations regarding safety standards for nuclear
operations onshore and covers a wide range of
different nuclear technologies. Hence this program can
be a steppingstone towards achieving compliance with
the needs of the maritime and the nuclear industry
requirements and regulations (cf. Figure 4). It is
expected that program graduates are capable of safely
managing, operating and maintaining a nuclear-
powered ship in normal and abnormal circumstances,
including emergencies in remote areas.
A conceptual educational model that should cover
the maritime and nuclear domain point us in the
direction of a Master of science, e.g. Master of Science
in Maritime Nuclear Operations. In this case, nuclear
and maritime regulatory bodies, operating
organisation and technology makers actively
participate in developing learning outcomes and
assessment tasks to ensure that the learning outcome of
such a program serves its purpose. This can be
achieved through the implementation of IAEA’s
systematic approach to training (SAT) process (IAEA
(2021) in combination with the SOLO taxonomy
presented in Section 2. Thus, the program is developed
within the framework of the qualitative phase of the
SOLO taxonomy and the second cycle qualification of
the Qualifications Framework for the European Higher
Education Area. The program should incorporate
proper methods for assessment ensuring that the
students have achieved the expected level of
knowledge, skills and competencies through
constructive alignment (see Section 2) as illustrated in
Figure 4.
Figure 4 Conceptual educational framework for maritime
nuclear operations.
The model in Figure 4 presupposes the
development of an updated set of rules and regulations
that blends the maritime domain with the nuclear
domain, namely the IMO and the IAEA. The Master of
Science in Maritime Nuclear operations (MSMNO)
program could then cover the necessary additional
requirements for the safe operation of MNS. One
possibility is to harmonise MSMNO with the
recommendations and qualification requirements of
the European Nuclear Education Network`s
framework for the European Master of Science in
Nuclear Engineering (EMSNE), which is already in line
with the IAEA recommendations.
The total courseload leading to the ENEN Master’s
degree in nuclear engineering must be at least 300
ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) at university
level, of which at least 60 ECTS credits must be in
nuclear science and technologies, preferably nuclear
engineering (Safieh et al., 2011). Students of the
European Master of Science in Nuclear Engineering,
who are exchange students at an academic ENEN
member institution, may apply for The European
Master of Science in Nuclear Engineering Certification.
This requires a master's thesis or 20 ECTS in some of
the compulsory subjects. A Master of science program
in maritime nuclear operations incorporating the
European Master of science in nuclear engineering
could take the form shown in Table 10, Master of
Science in Maritime Nuclear Operations, blending the
nuclear and the maritime domains.
Table 10 Master of Science in maritime nuclear operations
60 ECTS Covering:
60 ECTS Covering:
ENEN`s European Master of
science in nuclear
engineering (see Table 9)
Maritime management,
Maritime technology and engineering
Research methods and Master Thesis
On completing academic education, further
training in the form of cadet time must be provided by
the operating organisation, which must ensure
practical training for the cadets on relevant nuclear
propulsion plant under the supervision of qualified
approved instructors. The cadet must then validate the
achievement of proper knowledge, skills and
competencies according to the ILOs to the certifying
authorities, who will in turn attest the fulfilment of the
administration’s requirements in the maritime and the
nuclear domains, as illustrated in Figure 5.
Figure 5. On-the-job training and certification.
The rationale of such a comprehensive educational
model as proposed here is that the marine engineer
officers are responsible for all technical systems related
to the engine department, both nuclear and non-
nuclear main and auxiliary systems. The engineer
113
officers are expected to supervise and operate these
systems and manage the technical crew. The engineer
officers must perform leadership that promotes the
highest standards regarding safety culture and
shipboard team management.
The Nuclear Reactor Course arranged by the Royal
Navy at HMS Sultan awards a post-graduate diploma
in Nuclear Reactor Technology engineering (Beeley et
al., 2004), thus it is aligned with the second cycle
qualification of the qualifications’ framework, as
presented in Section 2. Considering that ocean ships
operate in remote places, the candidates of such a
program must have an in-depth understanding of the
nuclear propulsion system and be competent to
operate it under normal, abnormal and emergency
conditions.
To quote Admiral Rickover, a pioneer in the
development of naval nuclear power who led the
Nuclear Propulsion Program for 33 years, “The nuclear
propulsion plant operators must know more than
simply what to do in any given situation, they must
understand why.” (National Nuclear Security
Administration, 2022, p. 21). Unless modern reactor
designs and support systems can offer a compelling
case for why such understanding is not necessary, we
believe that Rickover’s statement is a good advice.
6 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Since most of the literature found in this study deals
with PWR, it is reasonable to compare PWR technology
with SMR characteristics, with the purpose of revealing
certain differences and similarities that may be decisive
factors when determining a possible educational path.
Further research needs to be done into evaluating
possible feasible reactor technology for MNS. It is
important to ascertain whether future technology
adopted by merchant shipping will have significant
consequences for any seafarer education and training
program. The results of such initiatives may have a
material impact on the design of education and
training programs for engineer officers. There is a need
to elucidate the contrast existing between work
cultures within the maritime industry and the nuclear
power industry, especially regarding safety culture.
Research needs to address the development of detailed
learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities as
well as assessment tasks - with ECTS that fulfil the
needs of the industry and the regulatory bodies of the
maritime and nuclear domains. This initiative assumes
that the preferred reactor technology is in place,
together with the associated regulatory framework.
Research should be conducted into the political and
economic feasibility of implementing such a learning
and training program.
7 CONCLUSION
The research questions were: (1) What is a feasible
educational framework for MNS engineer officers? (2)
How should an educational framework for MNS
engineer officers be structured and accomplished?
Education and training in the UK and US NNPP are
part of one organisation that is responsible for the
entire life cycle of the nuclear propulsion program,
ranging from research and development activities to
construction, commissioning, maintenance, operation
and disposal. There are indications that the education
and training in UK and US NNPPs are offered at a
higher academic level that corresponds with the first
and second cycles of the qualification framework for
the European Higher Education Area.
The literature reviewed does not clarify the specific
learning outcomes and objectives in terms of
knowledge, skills and competence, but rather outlines
the subjects that are taught. Regarding the rules and
regulations for the education and training of MNS
engineer officers, in addition to the STCW, Resolution
A.491 (XII), The Code of Safety for Nuclear Merchant
ships applies. The Maritime & Coastguard Agency has
adopted the IMO`s Code of Safety for nuclear merchant
ships in The Merchant Shipping (Nuclear Ships)
Regulations 2022. IAEA has several updated
publications and safety standards addressing the
education and training of nuclear power plant
personnel.
Should the IMO update its Code of Safety for
Nuclear Merchant ships, the foregoing standards and
publications could have an impact on the education
and training programs. A conceptual model is
developed of a Master of Science in Maritime Nuclear
Operations for the education and training of MSN
engineer officers, proposing a modernised Bachelor
degree in marine engineering incorporating the STCW
requirements for engineer officers alongside with the
prerequisites for Master programs in nuclear
engineering.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper builds upon research conducted as part of the first
author's master's thesis at the University of South-Eastern
Norway. The authors acknowledge the valuable supervision
and guidance provided during the thesis work, which
contributed to the development of this study.
We are grateful for the insightful ideas, comments,
discussions, and suggestions received over the years from
colleagues at our respective institutions and faculties on the
topic of feasible energy sources and energy carriers for
marine propulsion. The authors extend their sincere
appreciation to Professor Ziaul Haque Munim and Professor
James Godbolt for their valuable input and support. The
authors are sincerely thankful to Alice Tonzig for
proofreading of the English language
Erlend Morland and Halvor Schøyen express their gratitude
for the opportunity to partially contribute to the NuProShip
Project, led by Jan Emblemsvåg, and acknowledge support
from the NRC NuProShip Initiative.
Any errors or omissions in this article remain the sole
responsibility of the authors.
REFERENCES
ABS (2018). American Bureau of Shipping. A private
classification company. Document entitled:
Decarbonizing Power Generation and Propulsion
Systems. ww2.eagle.org/content/
Beeley, P.A., Harrop, I. & Lockwood, R. (2004). Provision of
nuclear E&T to the naval nuclear propulsion programme
and beyond. The Nuclear Engineer 45, 105-112.
114
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at
University. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Bologna Follow-Up Group. (2015). ECTS Users’ Guide. The
Bologna Process Secretariat. https://ehea.info/page-tools
Bologna Follow-Up Group. (2018). The framework of
qualifications for the european higher education area. The
Bologna Process Secretariat https://ehea.info/page-tools
Brushwood, J., Beeley, P. A., Beadnell, R., Robertson, J. L., &
Warden, J. M. (2002). Computer assisted learning for
reactor physics education and training of nuclear plant
designers, operators and maintainers ANS Reactor
Physics Topical Meeting, Seoul, Korea.
B. S. Haas, "Strategies for the Success of Nuclear Powered
Commercial Shipping," presented at the Connecticut
Maritime Association, Mar. 2014.
Dixon (2025). Knutsen Tankers and Vard reveal project to
design nuclear-powered ships. Partnership with DNV
and others examining three promising reactor types.
News article in TradeWinds published 7 January 2025.
Available at: www.tradewindsnews.com.
Dokkum, K. (2024). Ship Knowledge. Ship design,
construction and operation. 11th Ed., DOKMAR,
Maritime Publishers BV.
Emblemsvåg, J. (2021). How Thorium-Based Molten Salt
Reactors Can Provide Clean, Safe, and Cost-Effective
Technology for Deep-Sea Shipping. Marine Technology
Society Journal, 55(1), 56-72.
https://doi.org/10.4031/MTSJ.55.1.2
Emblemsvåg, J., Ordóñez, C. H., Tamm, C. G., Strand, T.,
Thoresen, H., Ortigosa, J. S., Pérez, A., Colilles, Y.M., &
Izquierdo, A. E. (2024). Criteria for Selecting Nuclear
Reactors for Merchant Shipping. In Proceedings of the
2024 31st International Conference on Nuclear
Engineering. ICONE31, August, Czech Republic.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews.
Medical writing (Leeds), 24(4), 230-235.
https://doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing
narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals:
secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine,
5(3), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0899-
3467(07)60142-6
Hall, P., Lewis, R. E., Roth, D. R., & Paramore, B. (1976).
Recommendations for Qualifications of Engineering
Personnel of Nuclear-Powered Ships.
Head, J. L., DIC, Lowther, C. A., & Marsh, J. R. W. (1986).
Nuclear training facilities at the Royal Naval College,
Greenwich Training of Technical Staff for Nuclear Power
Stations, London.
Hirdaris, S. E., Cheng, Y. F., Shallcross, P., Bonafoux, J.,
Carlson, D., Prince, B., & Sarris, G. A. (2014).
Considerations on the potential use of Nuclear Small
Modular Reactor (SMR) technology for merchant marine
propulsion. Ocean Engineering, 79, 101–130.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.10.015
IACS (2023). International Association of Classification
Societies and International Association of Classification
Societies. IACS. https://iacs.org.uk/about/members/
IAEA (2001). Staffing Requirements for Future Small and
Medium Reactors (SMRs) Based on Operating Experience
and Projections. International Atomic Energy Agency.
https://www.iaea.org/publications/6067/staffing-
requirements-for-future-small-and-medium-reactors-
smrs-based-on-operating-experience-and-projections
IAEA (2016). Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Commissioning
and Operation.International Atomic Energy Agency.
www.iaea.org/publications/.
IAEA (2021). Systematic Approach to Training for Nuclear
Facility Personnel: Processes, Methodology and Practices.
International atomic energy agency.
https://www.iaea.org/publications/.
IAEA (2022). Recruitment, Qualification and Training of
Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants.
www.iaea.org/publications/.
IAEA (2023a) International Atomic Energy Agency.
www.iaea.org/about/overview
IAEA (2023b) What are Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)?
www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/.
IMO (1981) Code of safety for nuclear merchant ships.
dmr.regs4ships.com.
IMO (2011). International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers.
International Maritime Organization.
IMO (2013). Guidelines for the approval of alternatives and
equivalents as provided for in various IMO instruments,
MSC.1/Circ.1455.
IMO (2019). The International Safety Management (ISM)
Code. www.imo.org/en/ourwork/
Lakeey, J. R. A. (1988). Jason reactor at the Royal Naval
College: Silver jubilee 6th november 1987. The Nuclear
Engineer, 2-7. https://doi.org/info:doi/
Lakeey, J. R. A., Jones, A., & Gibbs, D. (1986). Training at the
Royal Naval College for the Nuclear Propulsion
Programme London.
Lloyd’s Register (2022). Horizons - Thought leadership,
maritime insights and expert advice from Lloyd's
Register. Lloyd’s Register. https://horizons.lr.org/july-
2022/nuclear-desalination
MGN 679 (M) Nuclear Ships (2022). Maritime & Coastguard
Agency. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/.
Miller, M. R., Alexander, R. J., Arbige, V. A., Dell, R. F.,
Kremer, S. R., McClune, B. P., Oppenlander, J. E., &
Tomlin, J. P. (2017). Optimal Allocation of Students to
Naval Nuclear-Power Training Units [320-335].
Providence.
National Nuclear Security Administration (2022). United
States Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.
www.energy.gov/nnsa/articles/.
NRIC (2025). The National Reactor Innovation Center
(NRIC). Maritime Nuclear Application Group.
Introduction to advanced commercial nuclear for
maritime. U.S. Department of Energy - Office of Nuclear
Energy. Available at: www.nric.inl.gov
Panayides, P. M., & Cullinane, K. P. (2002). The vertical
disintegration of ship management: choice criteria for
third party selection and evaluation. Maritime Policy &
Management, 29(1), 45-64.
RCN (2025). The Research Council of Norway’s project bank.
Final Report of the Nuclear Propulsion for Merchant
Ships 1 (NuProShip 1) project. Authors: Emblemsvåg, J.,
Ordonez, C., Tamm, C. G., Ortigosa, J. S., Colilles, Y. M.,
Pérez, A., Thoresen, H.; Ovrum, E.; Jordahl, M. J. F.;
Laanke, L.; Reistad, O. C.; Lien, H. V.; Rødset, A.; Hilland,
S.; Baptista, L.; Trovåg, J. M.; Pareliussen, B. G.; Bjørnevik,
E.; Silva, R.; Rygh, B. M. & Brodin, E. Available at:
ntnuopen.ntnu.no, and
prosjektbanken.forskningsradet.no.
Safieh, J., De Regge, P., & Kusumi, R. (2011). ENEN's
approaches and initiatives for nuclear education and
training. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 241(9), 3530-
3539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.12.029
Sasaki, S. (1973). Seamen training for the nuclear ship Mutsu.
Japan Nuclear Ship Development Agency. Nuclear
Engineering International, 18(204), 409-411.
Schøyen, H., & Steger-Jensen, K. (2017). Nuclear propulsion
in ocean merchant shipping: The role of historical
experiments to gain insight into possible future
applications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 169.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.163
Senemmar, S., Jacob, R. A., Badakhshan, S., Rad, A. M.,
Dowling, M., Mukhi, S., Chow, J., Emblemsvåg, J., &
Zhang, J. (2024). Navigating the Future: Exploring small
modular reactors in the maritime sector. IEEE
Electrification Magazine, 12(4), 30-42. doi:
10.1109/MELE.2024.3473190.
Sheikh, W., Islam, T. M. R., & Hasan, K. R. (2025). Achieving
net-zero emissions in Shipping: The critical role of
environmental awareness and managerial commitment.
115
Ocean Engineering, 337, 121908.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121908
Strømsø, H. I., Lycke, K. H., & Lauvås, P. (2016). Når læring
er det viktigste: undervisning i høyere utdanning.
Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Thunem, A. P.-J., Ferkingstad, J., & Frette, V. (2012). A
comparison between the nuclear and the maritime
domains on challenges related to technological advances.
11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and
Management Conference and the Annual European
Safety and Reliability Conference.
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews:
Guidelines and Examples. Human Resource
Development Review, 4(3), 356-367. doi.org:
10.1177/1534484305278283.
United Kingdom Royal Navy (2014). Nuclear Departement.
Royal Navy. https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/our-
organisation/bases-and-stations/training-
establishments/hms-sultan/nuclear-department.
Wang, Q., Zhang, H., & Zhu, P. (2023). Using nuclear energy
for maritime decarbonization and related environmental
challenges: existing regulatory shortcomings and
improvements. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 20(4), 2993.
doi:10.3390/ijerph20042993.
Wihlborg, M., & Teelken, C. (2014). Striving for Uniformity,
Hoping for Innovation and Diversification: A Critical
Review concerning the Bologna Process – Providing an
Overview and Reflecting on the Criticism. Policy Futures
in Education, 12(8), 1084-1100.
https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2014.12.8.1084
ANNEX 1 ABBREVIATIONS:
ECTS
European Credit Transfer System
EMSNE
European Master of Science in nuclear Engineering
ENEN
European Nuclear Education Network
ECTS
European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System
HTGR
High temperature helium gas cooled reactor
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency
IACS
International Association of Classification Societies
ILO
Intended Learning Outcome
IMO
International Maritime Organization
ISM
International Safety Management
ISQ
Initial Sea Qualification
JAERI
Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute
JNSDA
Japan Nuclear Ship Development Agency
MCA
Maritime and Coastguard Agency
MNAG
Maritime Nuclear Application Group NRIC (2025).
MSMNO
Master of Science of Maritime Nuclear operations
MNS
Merchant nuclear powered ship
NIRS
National Institute of Radiobiological Sciences
NISA
National Nuclear Security Administration
NNPP
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program
NNPTC
Naval Nuclear Power Training Command
NPP
Nuclear propulsion plant
NPTU
Nuclear Power Training Unit
NRA
Nuclear Regulatory Authority
NRC
Nuclear Reactor Course
NRIC
National Reactor Innovation Centre
NSSS
Nuclear steam supply system
NUPOC
Nuclear Propulsion Officer Candidate Program
OJT
On-Job Training
ONOC
Officer Nuclear Operations Course
U.S NRC
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
PWR
Pressurised Water Reactor
SAT
Systematic approach to training
SEMC
Systems Engineering Management Course
SMR
Small modular nuclear reactor
SOLAS
Safety of Life at Sea
SOLO
Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes
STCW
Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers
