Strength in Numbers

Nicholai “Nick” Kolesnikoff is a corporate vice president with Jacobs Engineering Inc., where he serves as the vice president of Defense Programs and Homeland Security. He also is the Society of Military Engineers’ steering committee representative for The Infrastructure Security Partnership.

Joe De Patta: Can you tell us about The Infrastructure Security Partnership (TISP)?

Nick Kolesnikoff: After the events of September 11, the Corps of Engineers began receiving a lot of calls from individuals, corporations, and trade associations offering to help in any way they could. The corps realized there was no method for taking advantage of or organizing these offers of help, so they called a meeting with a number of trade associations and other agencies to talk about creating a clearinghouse. The original participants were associations like the American Institute of Architects, the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the Society of American Military Engineers. We also had representatives of FEMA, the Federal Facilities Council, and other organizations. There were 11 founding members.

What they agreed to do was form an association of associations. What they agreed not to do was form another membership-driven association around homeland security. Instead, they wanted to create a place and a method where they could reach into the industry and bring out the best practices and the best ways of dealing with a terrorist threat.

When The Infrastructure Security Partnership was created, we collectively put out the word for any organization; university; college, and agency-either at the federal, state, or local levels-to join TISP, and they have to be based here in the United States. We were not looking for foreign participation. Nor were we looking for individuals or corporations to become direct members. We wanted individuals and corporations to participate as members of a professional or trade association. We now have more than 100 organizations agreeing to be part of TISP.

TISP is an asymmetrical response to an asymmetrical threat. If you think about what the terrorists have done, they’ve put together this asymmetrical organization, it’s not even an organization, it’s an asymmetrical threat. They are not all members of one organization; they’re not even all citizens of the same country. They are people with similar causes who come together around a particular mission. When the mission is completed, they morph back into whatever they were before they engaged in the mission. That’s what makes it so difficult to get our hands around them, to protect ourselves.

Now, this industry of ours has never been organized in any real fashion. It’s been a series of subordinated interests that often work at odds with one another. For example, architects are looking out for the architects’ best interests, constructors are looking or for their best interests, owners may be off on a totally different track. We’ve created a vehicle that brings these disparate parties together around a common cause. They are just as asymmetrical in nature as are terrorists.

We will not let TISP develop into an enterprise that takes on too much of a life of its own. It’s not going to be staffed, it’s not going to have a telephone number, and it’s not going to have a budget. It won’t have people in it who will try to guess which organization should address which issue. Instead, we’ll let the issues float to the members, and they will determine which ones have value to add to each issue. We’re not pulling for responses-we put the issues out there and organizations step up.

We’ve seen a great example of that in the last several weeks. When the Society of American Value Engineers joined TISP, they weren’t really clear on how they could participate in homeland security. As they began hearing the sort of things we were grappling with, it occurred to one of their officers that their organization, in it entirety, has many of the finest facilitators in the world. They are accustomed to facilitating activities and helping people resolve issues. They stepped up and said they could facilitate many different kinds of issues.

JD: Do you think this organization would have been formed had the events of September 11 not happened?

NK: I doubt if it would. It took a patriotic issue that requires significant volunteerism to make something like this work, otherwise everybody runs to his or her traditional corners and they work their issues from that platform.

JD: What is your role in TISP?

NK: I’m a member of the steering committee, and the steering committee has an interesting role. In order to keep an idea like TISP active and in the consciousness of its members, there has to be people fueling it on a regular basis. It can’t handle itself and sustain itself without some attention.

The steering committee is creating events that exercise the partnership. For example, we held a tabletop exercise in July where we brought in a facilitator and invited two representatives of each of the member organizations. The facilitator created a couple of scenarios that identified a multileveled terrorist attack that would occur five years from now. The attacks were described in detail. All the representatives then dealt with the question of what each of them could do, and what we could we do collectively, to prevent the terrorist attack or at least mitigate the terrorists’ success. That exercise helped people understand how they could work together to make a difference.

We also are committed to holding a national congress on homeland security each year. Our first one is in November and it will be attached to ASCE’s 150th anniversary convention, which will be held in Washington, D.C. The three-day event is sponsored by TISP and we will have speakers dealing with homeland security issues from a number of perspectives, such as the life-cycle perspective of understanding a threat and measuring vulnerability risk assessments. We also are going to look at issues from the perspective of different kinds of threats; chemical and biological, structural and blast, fire, and so on. We’ve invited both President George W. Bush and U.S. Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge to attend. This national congress could be the premier event in the United States each year, in terms of homeland security.

JD: What is your background and how did you become part of TISP?

NK: The Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) was one of the founding members and I’m a member of the industry liaison committee of SAME. I raised my hand at the right time and they asked me to go ahead and represent SAME on the steering committee.

JD: What is the relationship between TISP and Tom Ridge’s Office of Homeland Security?

NK: The Office of Homeland Security has had a representative who attended our steering committee meetings. You have to understand that the Office of Homeland Security is part of the White House, and the White House cannot join associations or organizations. That would be an improper role for them, but we have had an observer. He has reported back to Tom Ridge-and others-about our activities. Our intent is to be a resource for the Office of Homeland Security, when it stands up to congress or the White House. We want to be available when they need to access our industry in an organized fashion.

JD: Who can utilize the TISP services?

NK: There really is no limitation. Whoever might have an issue or a need for help can push it through TISP and then it sort of takes care of itself. If it’s an issue of merit or importance, there will be a response. It it’s deemed frivolous or meaningless, it will die a silent death. TISP is self-regulating, in that effect.

JD: How do parties interested in your services contact TISP?

NK: If an individual or corporation has an issue and is trying to protect assets, the best way to contact TISP is through a member organization. They also could communicate directly through the TISP Web site.

JD: How does TISP work once a question is posed to it? What are the methods of operation?

NK: There are points of contact inside each of the member organizations and we will push questions and issues out to them and simply allow them to respond and react. We also review some issues on the steering committee level where they’re given a bit more formal action.

JD: What kinds of results can be expected and how are they delivered? What’s the timeframe?

NK: The results will be gradual. The timeframe may not have an end date, as the efforts are very long-term in focus. For example, we’ve put in place a formula for the leadership of TISP for the next six years. Different organizations will move up to the chairmanship.

Response will vary depending on the issue. Some of the feedback may come immediately. We’ve had organizations stand up and say they need methodology for threat and vulnerability assessment and one of the other members will stand up and say, “We have such a tool and we’re declassifying it now and it will be in your hands in 30 days.” There can be that kind of immediate response. Other responses are much more measured and will be beneficial over time.

JD: What are some of the concerns submitted to TISP? Are you seeing any commonalties or themes?

NK: Topics are very broad. One group we’ve had come to us is called “ER1,” an emergency room concept. They needed help finding experts in areas such as structures and landscape architecture and architecture in general to help them design a prototype for the emergency room of the future. That’s one kind of issue.

Several organizations brought to us questions about the creation of models that states could use to organize volunteers from our industry in response to an attack. One of the beauties of TISP is that it’s ready to deal with such asymmetrical questions. Questions don’t need to be categorized.

JD: What specific projects has TISP worked on or consulted on for the corrections market?

NK: Nothing specific, but correctional institutions, in the future, may have to be designed to house terrorists. These facilities are pretty much built to keep people from getting out. That may now turn to keeping the facilities safe from terrorist threats. I think it’s just a matter of time until we see this consciousness affect every industry in the United States.

JD: Are any changes being implemented as a result of the work of TISP?

NK: Right now we know the Corps of Engineers is actively engaged in deciding what information it can release that, in the past, had been considered confidential. Information about force protection and the use of materials they’ve studied in their labs. They are deciding what they can divulge without compromising national security. I think the answer is that they can divulge a lot of it. Some information, of course, may have to be protected, but they are working on that.

JD: What kinds of projects would you like to see TISP involved with?

NK: Ones that make a difference. I know that can sound trite, but I want every member of TISP to get up every morning saying, “What have I done to help foil terrorism today?” If we can harness the weight of this industry and all of its participants to help protect our built environment, we are going to make it tougher and tougher for terrorists to come in and sucker punch us again. I would like to see TISP take on any and all projects that advance that purpose.

JD: How do you see TISP evolving over time?

NK: I’ll tell you, on September 10, I couldn’t have predicted there even would be TISP. I think that it would be presumptuous of me to guess where it could go. The threat will determine the intensity with which TISP operates.

It also is a model that might apply to other things. If, in the future, we have a water crisis in this county, we might use the techniques we’ve developed to address that.