Role-Play Exercise: Nuclear Nuclear power is not the preferred method of energy production in the United States. Due to a relative abundance of fossil fuels, as well as considerable public apprehension about potential dangers and risks, nuclear power accounts for less than 20% of total energy production in the United States. Nuclear disasters at Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011, and to a lesser extent Three Mile island in 1979. have resulted in increased regulation of nuclear power plants, which has inflated operational costs and led to hard economic fimes for companies involved in nuclear energy production. In addition, there have been severe cutbacks in funding for nuclear energy research since the mid-1980s. All of these factors have led to a general disillusionment, both on the part of investors and of the public, with nuclear power as a viable energy source. NuclearTech, a division of a large multinational corporation involved in energy production as well as high technology manufacturing, design and research, hopes that its new type of reactor design will revitalize the nuclear power industry. Central to their design is a new type of fuel rod which they believe will alleviate many of the concerns and potential problems associated with nuclear energy. Early last year, NuclearTech secured a large contact to construct a power plant using their new technology, as well as a new breeder reactor and a fuel storage site. The planned breeder reactor and storage facility would allow for production of the new fuel rods, giving NuclearTech a significant advantage if and when such fuel rods become the new standard for nuclear power generation (which they firmly believe will happen). NuclearTech has already hired two main subcontractors to do the bulk of the work on this project; BR Solutions, and SL. Inc. Both are highly reputable companies in the nuclear construction business, and NuclearTech has used them as contractors in the past. Work on this project has already begun, with prefiminary sub-contracts issued last year to BR Solutions and SL Inc, who both very much would like to be the primary sub-contractor on this project. Both firms are also very interested in securing additional specialized sub-contracts that NuclearTech has not awarded yet. Another company in the nuclear business is NucRes, who has claimed that NuclearTech (and indirectly their sub-contractors) are using designs and technology that infringe on patents and intellectual property belonging to them. They have threatened lawsuits as well as comptaints to the Nuclear Regutatory Commission (NRC), but are willing to sit down and talk about alternative solutions before taking those steps. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is very interested in the construction of new nuclear facilities. and want to be absolutely sure that everything is done according to existing rules and regulations. Given the satety potential of NuclearTech's new design, the NRC is open to the possibility of relaxing some regulatory constraints, which is ultimately what would allow this technology to make nuclear energy much more profitable. At the same time, however, they are also quite concerned that BR Solutions and SL Inc apparently did not fully comply with existing regulations in the work they have already done for NuclearTech, which will result in fines against either them or NuclearTech, or both. Out of a desire to resolve these issues, including the questions of who will be the main subcontractor, what can be done to resolve the dispute with NucRes, how to reassure the NRC and detemine possible fines as well as other issues - NoclearTech has requested a meeting of all the involved parties. This meeting will be between representatives from NuclearTech, BR Solutions, SL Inc, and NucRes as well as the NRC. Hopefully, by having all five parties meet together, a comprehensive agreement can be found that will allow the project to move forward quickly and smoothly 2. Is there a necessity for, and ability to, form any coalitions in this case? If so, how will it help to resolve any of the identified issues? If not, why do you regard coalition forming not viable in this case? (4 Points)