GRAND DUTY Some troops are headed home soon. (Photo by Tom Sawyer for ENR)

From the U.S. government’s first requests for proposals to rebuild war-torn Iraq last year, contractors hoping for a piece of the massive reconstruction effort have had one thing made perfectly clear to them: It is each firm’s responsibility to provide security for their personnel and the projects under their domain.

The military and civilian adminstrators in the country share intelligence, coordinate additional protective forces and have the last say about whether work can proceed on any given day in a particular area. But with attacks by insurgents increasing daily, a heightened awareness of security issues is gripping the construction industry. And a new round of rebuilding contracts will soon be awarded as the number of military forces decreases through troop rotation and coalition plans to depart Iraq in July.

As troop numbers decline, the coalition wants newly trained Iraqi security forces to take their place and have more of a stake in the reconstruction effort, says Lt. Gen. Robert B. Flowers, chief of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

That sentiment is echoed by Barrett H. Moore, CEO of Triple Canopy, a Chicago-based security firm that is working in Iraq. It is important to remember that U.S. firms are guests, says Moore. The company, liberally stocked with former military personnel, specializes in convoy security, among other things.

Convoy protection is one of the toughest tasks facing contractors working in Iraq, many admit. "There has to be a complete awareness of where the dangerous spots may be," says Tom Zarges, senior executive vice president for operations at Washington Group International, Boise. The firm’s security forces follow strict protocols when moving people. "We’re conscious of the dangers of being on the road and how vulnerable you are to people who are watching," he says. It is important to alter routine and have the flexibility to adjust to changing situations, he adds. Contractors are "constantly appraising, judging and assessing the best security for our people," says Zarges.

"There is not a thing that security does not impact. It is the number-one thing we deal with," says Jack Scott, president of Parsons Infrastructure and Technology, Pasadena, Calif., which has several contracts in Iraq.

Different types of construction work present different sets of security challenges. Guarding the perimeter of a school or a water treatment facility is easier than securing a long, remote transmission line. Washington Group has a Corps contract to repair two 400 kv transmission lines. On each 230-km line, there is a 2:1 guard-to-worker ratio. Security forces safeguard the workers and protect the lines from sabotage and vandalism.

Contractors meet regularly with military and Coalition Provisional Authority officials to check which areas are permissible to work in, says Howard N. Menaker, spokesman for Bechtel National, San Francisco. The firm has two capital construction contracts from the U.S. Agency for International Development. Occasionally, USAID has suspended operations for a day or two if significant threats are perceived, he says. "Bechtel always reviews its own travel and procedures for our own people," Menaker says.

Intelligence is a valuable commodity. Officials believe that many of the recent attacks are organized and not random acts of opportunity. That makes it even more important to share information about a particular stretch of road that may be targeted or a suspicious vehicle. "It is a no-compromise discipline. There is no cowboying out there when people need to be moved," says Zarges.

As CPA’s Iraq Project Management Office prepares to award about $13 billion in new reconstruction contracts beginning in March, security costs will continue to dominate. One major contractor estimates that its security bill is nearly $1 million a month–$5,000 for each of its 200 employees now in Iraq, with more to be deployed.

"In 25 years of international work, our view is you have to provide your own accommodations and security," says Bob Band, CEO of Perini Corp., Framingham, Mass., which is working in Iraq. "This is an active war zone, that is the difference." But he admits that guarding personnel is the "soft underside of everyone’s planning."

The situation in Iraq is vastly different from other hot spots, such as Bosnia and Kosovo where United Nations forces provided security. "We relied on the U.N. for 90% of security, so we could put most of the cost into the infrastructure," says Parsons’ Scott, whose firm was a major reconstructor there.

Contractors generally hire protection from well-established security firms with experience in war zones. But most firms are mum about which firms they are using and what exactly they are doing. Long Beach, Calif.-based Earth Tech says that DynCorp, a well-known security provider, is part of its team for a $65.4-million Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence task order to rebuild the An Numiniyah military base. Parsons declines to reveal the names of security providers on its contract teams, but says it is using more than one. "No one firm has the capacity to do it all," Scott says.

Security concerns are particularly key in the Corps’ large operation to destroy captured Iraqi ordnance–the Captured Enemy Ammunition (CEA) program. One of the earliest contractor operations under way, it has had its share of tragedy. Two employees of a Parsons subcontractor were fatally shot in November. "We now have 1,600 people in the forward area," says Glenn Earhart, the Corps CEA program manager, based in Huntsville, Ala. He says all contractors had to submit security work plans.

KABOOM Contractors have detonated 37,000 tons of captured enemy ordnance, so far. (Photos above and top right courtesy of Army Corps of Engineers)

Earhart says one big security risk is protecting the sites where ammunition is collected and destroyed, particularly near populated areas. Six sites now are operating, with another one to three possibly to start shortly, he says. An explosion Feb. 1 at an Iraqi weapons dump, likely caused by looters, was not at a Corps-managed site, says Earhart.

Earhart also points to risks to CEA truck convoys from "hostile action and improvised explosive devices." He says that only security providers are allowed to carry weapons. "They have Army authority," he explains. To date, ordnance teams have collected 62,000 tons of Iraqi ammo–from rifles to mortars–and have destroyed 37,000 tons, Earhart says.

Despite the risks, contractors say work force mobilization is well under way and there are few problems getting volunteers. "We haven’t seen any impact on our ability to recruit," says Parsons’ Scott.