GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

40
CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN VOL. 56 ISSUE 10 OCTOBER 2015 • GUAM CONTRACTORSʼ ASSOCIATION VOL. 56 ISSUE 10 OCTOBER 2015 • GUAM CONTRACTORSʼ ASSOCIATION Protecting Your Investment

description

Guam Contractors' Assn. Monthly Construction News Bulletin is Guam's official construction news publication.

Transcript of GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Page 1: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN

VOL.

56 IS

SUE 1

0 OCT

OBER

2015

• G

UAM

CONT

RACT

ORSʼ

ASSO

CIATIO

NVO

L. 56

ISSU

E 10 O

CTOB

ER 20

15 •

GUA

M CO

NTRA

CTOR

Sʼ AS

SOCIA

TION

ProtectingYour Investment

Page 2: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015
Page 3: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

© 2015 Caterpillar. All Rights Reserved. CAT, CATERPILLAR, BUILT FOR IT, their respective logos, “Caterpillar Yellow,” the “Power Edge” trade dress as well as corporate and product identity used herein, are trademarks of Caterpillar and may not be used without permission.

671.649.4249hawthornecat.com

When you choose Cat®, you get what you pay for — durable and reliable equipment, and long-lasting relationships. Discover what we’re built for.

HAWTHORNE CAT NOW OFFERS FUEL DELIVERY SERVICESTogether with South Pacific Petroleum Corporation, we are now offering to our valued customers on-site fuel delivery.

You can count on Hawthorne Cat to be there to provide the service and support you need.

Page 4: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

S.A.M.E.

INSIDER NEWS

CONSTRUCTION HEADLINE

FEATURE STORY

PHOTO HIGHLIGHTS

CONSTRUCTION HEADLINE

REPORTS/INFORMATION

6101618223034

Feature Story

18Construction Headline

16

THEDIRECTORS PRESIDENTJames A. Martinez Guam Constractors Association

PAST CHAIRMANArt Chan Hawaiian Rock Products

CHAIRMANJohn Sage WATTS Constructors

VICE CHAIRMAN William Beery Tutujan Hill Group

SECRETARY/TREASURERConchita Bathan Core Tech International

CONTRACTORS DIRECTORS:Carlo Leon Guerrero M80s Office Systems

Mark Mamczarz Black Construction Corp

Miguel Rangel Maeda Pacific Corporation

John Robertson AmOrient Contracting

Rick Brown Pernix Guam LLC

ASSOCIATE DIRECTORS:Jeffrey Larson TakeCare Asia Pacific

Michael Kikuta Matson Navigation

Patty Lizama Pacific Isla Life

Mark Cruz Mid Pac Far East

TABL

E O

F C

ON

TEN

TS

Guam Contractor’s Association (GCA) in conjunction with AdzTech and Public Relations, Inc. publishes the Construction News Bulletin (CNB) monthly. Reproduc-tion of materials appearing in this publica-tion is strictly forbidden without written permission by GCA. While we always strive for accuracy, we will from time to time overlook mistakes. In order to help us improve the quality and accuracy of this publication, we ask that you take the time to look at the information provided and notify GCA of any corrections as needed. Opinions and editorial content of this publication may not necessarily be those of the publisher, production team, staff, GCA members, GCA Board of Directors and advertisers. For more information about advertising in the GCA Construction News Bulletin contact the advertising department at (671) 477-1239/2239 or email at [email protected]. Distributed to GCA members or can be obtained by stopping by the Guam Contractors’ Association office located at 718 N. Marine Corps Drive,Suite 203, East West Business Center, Upper Tumon, Guam.

To find out more about how you can become a GCA member contact Guam Contractors’ Association at Tel: (671)647-4840/41 Fax: (671) 647-4866 or Email: [email protected]

Postmaster. Send address changes to Guam Contractors’ Association, located at 718 N. Marine Drive Corps Suite 203, East West Business Center, Upper Tumon, Guam.

PUBLISHER:James Martinez

PRODUCTION TEAMGeri Leon Guerrero

AD SALES:Jaceth Duenas

PRODUCTION:Geri Leon GuerreroChristopher “Taco” RowlandJaceth Duenas

PHOTOGRAPHERS:Christopher “Taco” Rowland

EDITOR:Adztech

THETEAMTHEEDITORIALS

Guam ContractorsAssociation

TRADES ACADEMYGCA

B u i l d i n g S k i l l s F o r A L i f e t i m e

Page 5: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Did you know that the International Building Coderequires concrete blocks to have a strength of 1,900 psi?On Guam, HRP Tough Block meets and exceeds this strengthrequirement.

Homeowners and Contractors,have earthquakes caused more cracks on your walls?

Homeowners and Contractors,have earthquakes caused more cracks on your walls?

Poor material? Most likely.

Tel: (671) 632-4442

Fax: (671) 632-1176

Email: [email protected]

www.guamhomecenter.com

Ask for Mr. Mike Wu

Tel: (671) 632-3424

Fax: (671) 632-2842

Email: [email protected]

www.conwoodproducts.com

Ask for Mr. Daniel Min

Call each store for pricing and delivery options.

Tough Blocks are available atthese fine hardware stores:

Building The Marianas Since 19581402 Route 15, Mangilao, Guam 96913 • Tel: (671) 734-2971/8

Fax: (671) 734-0990 • www.hawaiianrock.com

TOUGHBLOCKTOUGHBLOCK

15-HRP-015 GCA- Tough Block Supplier, 7.5” x 10”, FC

Page 6: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Installation BenefitsJobsite Benefits

Available Ready to Install from Pallets

(Tel) (Email)

THE PROVEN SEDIMENT CONTROL CHOICEFOR ALL YOUR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

Page 7: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

WATER TANKS

Environmentally friendly materialPolyethylene minimizes algae growthUV resistant materialNon toxic food grade (FDA approved)Non toxic food grade (FDA approved)Tank fully ribbed and domed for proven strength

Authorized Distributor

Water Filtration and SoftenersCommercial & Residential Application

IMPROVINGYOUR WATER

Page 8: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

General Membership Meeting September 17, 2015

• Scholarship Applications available October 21, 2015.• • Small Business Conference, New Orleans; November 4-6.• Follow SAME Guam Post on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/SAMEguampost?ref=bookmarks

To join SAME Guam Post, log on to SAME.org and click on “Membership” at the top of the home page.

Command Task Force (CTS 75) Spotlight Brief Presented by CAPT Erich “Buzz” Diehl, Commander, Task Force Seventy Five

Main Presentation

�is month’s main presentation was an executive overview of CTF 75 and the Naval Construction Force in the Seventh Fleet area of operations g iven by CAPT Er ich “Buzz”

Diehl, Commander of CTS 75, Navy

�e purpose of the CTF 75 is to serve as the core Navy

coastal riverine, explosive ordnance disposal, construction and salvage operations. �ey also provide expeditionary

intelligence and logistics in and near shore waters, littoral regions and inland areas.

Currently, there are over 800 Seabees Forward deployed in 10-15 countries, including Japan, Korea, the Philippines and Cambodia. Troops there have constructed schools, maternity wards, bridges and have led many other infrastructure projects. In addition to supporting those communities, these projects provide a means to build lasting partnerships, assist in deterring aggression, provide and maintain strategic access and allows the U.S. military to be ready for any possible threatening situations that may arise.

6 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

S.A.

M.E

. UPD

ATE

Page 9: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 7

Main Presentation Cont. - Command Task Force (CTS 75) Spotlight Brief

Page 10: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Janitorial/Sundries

HVAC (Low prices on Refrigerants)

Hardware | Lawn & Garden

Safety

OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

GSA CertifiedPhone: (671) 646-2223

Cell: (671) 487-2256

Locksmith 24 Hour ServiceCommercial, Residential, Auto

Rt. 27

Bank ofGuam

Harmon

Loop MotelMcDonalds

PacificLaundry

To Dededo

Hamburger Road

To M

icro

nesi

a M

all

To B

arrig

ada

CCDistributors

Rt.

16R

t. 16

Cost U Less

Page 11: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015
Page 12: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

During the past month, Russia entered the multi-facetted civil war in Syria on the side of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in direct opposition to policies of the United States and its coalition partners. This move appears to cap a year of international tensions that could spill over into another cold war or military standoff between major world powers. This Russian initiative started as leaders of the 193 member nations were assembled at the United Nations in New York for the 70th session of the General Assembly. If there was ever a time when American leadership was needed, it is again now. Many question the ability of the current administration, under President Barrack Obama, to effectively meet the challenge.

Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed RebelsRussia launched airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday 30 September, catching U.S. and Western officials off guard and drawing new condemnation as evidence suggested Moscow wasn’t targeting extremist group Islamic State, but rather other opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. One of the airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, catapulting the Syrian crisis to a new level of danger and uncertainty. Moscow’s entry means the world’s most powerful militaries—including the U.S., Britain and France—now are flying uncoordinated combat missions, heightening the risk of conflict in the skies over Syria.

U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Russia’s approach to the Syrian war—defending Mr. Assad while ostensibly targeting extremists—was tantamount to “pouring gasoline on the fire.” “I have been dealing with them for a long time. And this is not the kind of behavior that we should expect professionally from the Russian military,” Mr. Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.

Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and said he raised

U.S. concerns about attacks that target regime opponents other than Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. In Syria’s multi-sided war, Mr. Assad’s military—aided by Iran and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah—is fighting both Islamic State and opposition rebel groups, some of which are supported by the U.S. and its allies. Mr. Kerry said the U.S. and Russia need to hold military talks as soon as possible and Mr. Lavrov said he agreed. Speaking alongside Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the United States and Russia have agreed to hold a military meeting as soon as possible to avoid any direct collisions or exchanges of fire in Syria, where

both the U.S. and Russia are now conducting airstrikes.

The U.S. and its allies were angry at the Russians on many scores: that they are supporting Mr. Assad; that they aren’t coordinating their actions with the existing, U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition; that they provided terse notice only an hour before their operations; that they demanded the U.S. coalition stay out of Syrian airspace; and that they struck in areas where anti-Assad rebels—not Islamic State—operate. “It does appear that they were in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces, and that is precisely one of the problems with this whole approach,” said Mr. Carter, the U.S. defense chief.

Putin Turns to Ukraine Playbook in Syria

In Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to take a page from his Ukraine playbook by keeping the West guessing about his plans, employing the military art of deception known in Russia as maskirovka, or camouflage. Last year he surreptitiously sent Russia’s army into Ukraine, reversing the advance of Ukrainian government forces and bringing pro-Russia rebels a more-favorable peace settlement. Now, he’s repeating the gambit in Syria: shoring up his ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and ensuring the Kremlin will have a central role in deciding the country’s future. Russia stepped up its attack on Mr. Assad’s opponents on Wednesday 7 October, firing cruise missiles into Syria from warships in the far-off Caspian Sea. At North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters, the U.S. ambassador said Russia had built up a battalion-sized ground force in Syria, one equipped to take on a bigger mission than just defending Russian military bases there.

The Russian military campaign that began a week earlier was preceded by denials from the Kremlin. A buildup of combat aircraft in Syria, visible on satellite imagery, was merely the continuation of the delivery of military hardware to the Syrian regime, Kremlin officials said. That fits with the template set in Ukraine. When well-armed men in green camouflage without unit insignia appeared last year in the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, the Kremlin insisted the men—who were clearly military professionals—were only local self-defense forces. Mr. Putin subsequently acknowledged the “little green men” were Russian troops. In Syria, Russia now says that it is

carrying out airstrikes against Islamic State and other “terrorist” groups, in coordination with the Assad regime. But the recent buildup raises concern that Russia may be preparing for ground operations—or even expanding into neighboring Iraq. Asked in an interview late last month with U.S. broadcaster Charlie Rose whether his aim was to rescue Mr. al-Assad’s administration, Mr. Putin replied: “That’s right, that’s how it is.”

Following the naval bombardment, Mr. Putin articulated his preferred end-state even more clearly. The conflict in Syria, he said, required the warring parties to come to the negotiating table. “Such type of conflicts should conclude with a resolution of political questions,” he said. It is unclear how, exactly, Russia plans to bring them to the table. Mr. Putin said he supported the idea of trying to combine the efforts of Mr. Assad’s forces and the “healthy opposition” groups against Islamic State—an idea Mr. Putin said had been proposed by French President François Hollande at a meeting in Paris. A French government spokeswoman denied Mr. Hollande had backed any such proposal.

U.S. officials say Russia has deliberately targeted so-called moderate rebel groups backed by the Central Intelligence Agency, sparking worries about a broader confrontation between Washington and Moscow. Russia entered the 4½-year Syrian war as Mr. Assad’s forces were losing territory to a patchwork of opponents. Most of the several dozen airstrikes in the first week of bombing hit areas where Islamic State isn’t present. But Russia hasn’t hit with the kind of overwhelming force that would bring total victory to Mr. Assad, much as Russian conventional weaponry last year helped pro-Russian separatists in eastern

Ukraine even out their front lines, but not advance on Kiev. “Moscow wants to ensure that the situation in Syria will be settled on Russian conditions,” said Nikolay Kozhanov, nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Moscow Center. “Russia wants to shore up the front and undermine the opposition’s capacity to fight. It’s not a priority to take the whole country.” Russia’s intervention is the first time for decades that it has deployed armed forces far from its borders. It is also waging a kind of warfare it hasn’t tried before: targeted airstrikes and over-the-horizon naval attacks.

Chris Harmer, a retired U.S. naval aviator and former airstrike planner, said videos and information released by the Russian military—including the location of strikes—indicated more about the Kremlin’s military aims. Russian aircraft, he said, were serving as a “maneuver element” for Mr. Assad’s besieged forces, who are hunkered down in fortified enclaves and depleted by defections and combat losses. “The Russians are there to push back lines and stabilize Assad’s defense,” he said. “There’s no exit strategy for Russia…As long as Assad is in power now, the Russian air force needs to protect him.”

The U.S. ruled out strategic collaboration with Moscow in the Middle East and said Russia has built up a ground force inside Syria with heavy weaponry that could support a Syrian army offensive. Russia escalated its assault on opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime with its first naval bombardment on Wednesday 7 October. It launched a volley of 26 medium-range cruise missiles from four warships in the Caspian Sea nearly 1,000 miles away. For the first time since Moscow’s direct intervention in the Syrian conflict a week earlier, Russian

warplanes and helicopters appeared to be aiding a ground assault by pro-regime forces and militias against rebel forces focused in the central Syrian province of Hama, according to opposition activists and fighters. The developments add up to a burgeoning Russian military campaign based on land, air and sea that is at odds with U.S. goals, compounding tensions between the two big powers.

NATO Condemns Russian Bombings in Syria

The U.S. warned Moscow that its offensive in Syria could backfire and NATO officials sought to reassure European and Turkish allies nervous over Moscow’s deepening involvement there. As tensions grew, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke for about 30 minutes by phone Thursday 8 October with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, State Department spokesman John Kirby said. Defense ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, meeting in Brussels, had tough words for Russia’s escalation, saying it would only augment the chaos in Syria. “This will have consequences for Russia itself, which is rightfully fearful of attack upon Russia,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said. “And I also expect that in coming days, the Russians will begin to suffer casualties in Syria.” Russia’s

involvement in Syria has further frayed ties between Moscow and NATO, already at odds over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine.

NATO defense ministers announced continued progress at building up the alliance’s response force and forward-positioned headquarters, long-planned efforts they hope will soothe allies who fear Russian aggression in Europe.

NATO officials have repeatedly said many of Russia’s airstrikes

have hit rebels, despite Moscow’s

claims to be targeting Islamic State militants. Russia has lumped the different groups together, labeling them generally as terrorists.

Mr. Carter reiterated that the U.S. and its allies wouldn’t cooperate with Moscow as long as it pursued its current strategy. For now the alliance is pressing for more military-to-military contacts and coordination to try to prevent any inadvertent conflict between planes flying with the U.S.-led coalition and Russian planes over Syria.

The alliance may also have to look at steps to reinforce Turkey’s border with Syria, which NATO says Russian planes have breached on several different occasions. NATO currently has Patriot missile batteries deployed to Turkey to counter ballistic missiles, but they aren’t configured to protect against other threats, officials said.

Turkey wants those deployments extended. Turkish officials have also been talking directly to NATO member France about deploying its missile defense system, which can also defend against fighter planes, NATO officials said.

More broadly, NATO has made efforts to step up its so-called assurance measures. Britain announced a new small deployment of roughly 100 military trainers to the Baltic States, where the U.S. has roughly 450 soldiers. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance was working to increase its deterrence, including taking steps to enlarge its response force and make its spearhead force more ready. Mr. Stoltenberg repeatedly said the new NATO forces could deploy anywhere very quickly. But NATO is walking a fine line, trying to show it is ready to defend allies and deter Russia without taking actions that could heighten tensions, contribute to miscalculation or inadvertently trigger a conflict. “The important thing is that any adversary will know we are able to deploy,” he said.

Obama’s Wishful-Thinking Syria Policy

Syria, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in her recent book “Hard Choices,” is a “wicked problem”—a situation that confounds standard approaches and policies. Nonetheless, she has long advocated greater involvement than President Obama has been willing to endorse. Mr. Obama knows that proposals to further embroil the U.S. in another Middle Eastern conflict are very unpopular—especially with the base of the Democratic Party. Syria may well represent the single least-successful element of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy. His declaration that “Assad must go”

was not backed by serious policy. His famous red line regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons was breached without U.S. retaliation. The effort to identify, train and equip an opposition that would fight against Islamic State but not Syria’s President Bashar Assad turned into a half-billion-dollar fiasco, as the president has finally acknowledged. Nevertheless, he continues to pin his hopes on a political transition, which won’t happen as long as Iran, Russia and Hezbollah remain firmly in support of Mr. Assad.

There is no way of defeating and removing Mr. Assad through a boots-on-the-ground effort that the American people and Congress would support. Nonetheless, successful negotiations require the use of sticks to bring recalcitrant parties to the table. Does anyone believe that Iran would ever have entered nuclear negotiations in the absence of a crippling sanctions regime backed by the international community? If we aren’t willing or able to bring comparable pressure to bear on Mr. Assad, the negotiations the Obama administration craves will remain an exercise in wishful thinking.

Although military force is not the solution, it can help create conditions for an outcome greatly preferable to the status quo. As Mrs. Clinton and others have recommended, we should establish safe zones in suitable parts of Syria, protected by coalition air power. But these zones make sense only as part of a broader strategy with clear objectives. It would be morally unthinkable to leave Syria’s Sunnis, who constitute about 70% of the country’s population, under the control of a ruler who has slaughtered so many of them. At the same time, there is no practical way of removing Mr. Assad from the Alawite and

Christian areas of Syria he still dominates. The logical conclusion, according to Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, is to abandon the “Hail Mary hope” for a comprehensive political deal or military turnaround and instead invest in areas of sanctuary in Syria that would provide security for the people within those zones and help them build a future distant from both the Assad regime and Islamic State, while gradually nurturing a more effective military opposition. The Kurdish areas and those near the Jordanian border are the safest places to start.

This approach would open the door for more-effective humanitarian relief and for the resumption of closer-to-normal daily life, slowing the exodus of refugees. And it is more likely to command the support of regional powers—such as Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia—than would any feasible alternative. While this strategy has risks (such as U.S. pilots falling into the Syrian regime’s hands), the level of U.S. military involvement needed to

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, left, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke to the media about the situation in Syria at the United Nations in New York.

sustain it wouldn’t be significantly greater than current American efforts in Afghanistan.

The foregoing is adapted from recent articles in the Wall Street Journal authored by Dion Nissenbaum, Adam Entous in Washington, Nathan Hodge and Thomas Grove in Moscow, Sam Dagher and Mohammad Nour Alakraa in Beirut, James Marson, Nathan Hodge, Julian E. Barnes, Gordon Lubold, Sam Dagher and Philip Shishkin. Also William A. Galston of the Brookings Institution.

10 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

By John M. Robertson

RUSSIA ENTERS THE MIDDLE EAST MILITARY CONFLICT

INSI

DER

NEW

S

Page 13: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Russia launched airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday 30 September, catching U.S. and Western officials off guard and drawing new condemnation as evidence suggested Moscow wasn’t targeting extremist group Islamic State, but rather other opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. One of the airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, catapulting the Syrian crisis to a new level of danger and uncertainty. Moscow’s entry means the world’s most powerful militaries—including the U.S., Britain and France—now are flying uncoordinated combat missions, heightening the risk of conflict in the skies over Syria.

U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Russia’s approach to the Syrian war—defending Mr. Assad while ostensibly targeting extremists—was tantamount to “pouring gasoline on the fire.” “I have been dealing with them for a long time. And this is not the kind of behavior that we should expect professionally from the Russian military,” Mr. Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and said he raised U.S. concerns about attacks that

target regime opponents other than Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. In Syria’s multi-sided war, Mr. Assad’s military—aided by Iran and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah—is fighting both Islamic State and opposition rebel groups, some of which are supported by the U.S. and its allies. Mr. Kerry said the U.S. and Russia need to hold military talks as soon as possible and Mr. Lavrov said he agreed. Speaking alongside Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the United States and Russia have agreed to hold a military meeting as soon as possible to avoid any direct collisions or exchanges of fire in Syria, where both the U.S. and Russia are now

conducting airstrikes.

The U.S. and its allies were angry at the Russians on many scores: that they are supporting Mr. Assad; that they aren’t coordinating their actions with the existing, U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition; that they provided terse notice only an hour before their operations; that they demanded the U.S. coalition stay out of Syrian airspace; and that they struck in areas where anti-Assad rebels—not Islamic State—operate. “It does appear that they were in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces, and that is precisely one of the problems with this whole approach,” said Mr. Carter, the U.S. defense chief.

Putin Turns to Ukraine Playbook in Syria

In Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to take a page from his Ukraine playbook by keeping the West guessing about his plans, employing the military art of deception known in Russia as maskirovka, or camouflage. Last year he surreptitiously sent Russia’s army into Ukraine, reversing the advance of Ukrainian government forces and bringing pro-Russia rebels a more-favorable peace settlement. Now, he’s repeating the gambit in Syria: shoring up his ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and ensuring the Kremlin will have a central role in deciding the country’s future. Russia stepped up its attack on Mr. Assad’s opponents on Wednesday 7 October, firing cruise missiles into Syria from warships in the far-off Caspian Sea. At North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters, the U.S. ambassador said Russia had built up a battalion-sized ground force in Syria, one equipped to take on a bigger mission than just defending Russian military bases there.

The Russian military campaign that began a week earlier was preceded by denials from the Kremlin. A buildup of combat aircraft in Syria, visible on satellite imagery, was merely the continuation of the delivery of military hardware to the Syrian regime, Kremlin officials said. That fits with the template set in Ukraine. When well-armed men in green camouflage without unit insignia appeared last year in the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, the Kremlin insisted the men—who were clearly military professionals—were only local self-defense forces. Mr. Putin subsequently acknowledged the “little green men” were Russian troops. In Syria, Russia now says that it is

carrying out airstrikes against Islamic State and other “terrorist” groups, in coordination with the Assad regime. But the recent buildup raises concern that Russia may be preparing for ground operations—or even expanding into neighboring Iraq. Asked in an interview late last month with U.S. broadcaster Charlie Rose whether his aim was to rescue Mr. al-Assad’s administration, Mr. Putin replied: “That’s right, that’s how it is.”

Following the naval bombardment, Mr. Putin articulated his preferred end-state even more clearly. The conflict in Syria, he said, required the warring parties to come to the negotiating table. “Such type of conflicts should conclude with a resolution of political questions,” he said. It is unclear how, exactly, Russia plans to bring them to the table. Mr. Putin said he supported the idea of trying to combine the efforts of Mr. Assad’s forces and the “healthy opposition” groups against Islamic State—an idea Mr. Putin said had been proposed by French President François Hollande at a meeting in Paris. A French government spokeswoman denied Mr. Hollande had backed any such proposal.

U.S. officials say Russia has deliberately targeted so-called moderate rebel groups backed by the Central Intelligence Agency, sparking worries about a broader confrontation between Washington and Moscow. Russia entered the 4½-year Syrian war as Mr. Assad’s forces were losing territory to a patchwork of opponents. Most of the several dozen airstrikes in the first week of bombing hit areas where Islamic State isn’t present. But Russia hasn’t hit with the kind of overwhelming force that would bring total victory to Mr. Assad, much as Russian conventional weaponry last year helped pro-Russian separatists in eastern

Ukraine even out their front lines, but not advance on Kiev. “Moscow wants to ensure that the situation in Syria will be settled on Russian conditions,” said Nikolay Kozhanov, nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Moscow Center. “Russia wants to shore up the front and undermine the opposition’s capacity to fight. It’s not a priority to take the whole country.” Russia’s intervention is the first time for decades that it has deployed armed forces far from its borders. It is also waging a kind of warfare it hasn’t tried before: targeted airstrikes and over-the-horizon naval attacks.

Chris Harmer, a retired U.S. naval aviator and former airstrike planner, said videos and information released by the Russian military—including the location of strikes—indicated more about the Kremlin’s military aims. Russian aircraft, he said, were serving as a “maneuver element” for Mr. Assad’s besieged forces, who are hunkered down in fortified enclaves and depleted by defections and combat losses. “The Russians are there to push back lines and stabilize Assad’s defense,” he said. “There’s no exit strategy for Russia…As long as Assad is in power now, the Russian air force needs to protect him.”

The U.S. ruled out strategic collaboration with Moscow in the Middle East and said Russia has built up a ground force inside Syria with heavy weaponry that could support a Syrian army offensive. Russia escalated its assault on opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime with its first naval bombardment on Wednesday 7 October. It launched a volley of 26 medium-range cruise missiles from four warships in the Caspian Sea nearly 1,000 miles away. For the first time since Moscow’s direct intervention in the Syrian conflict a week earlier, Russian

warplanes and helicopters appeared to be aiding a ground assault by pro-regime forces and militias against rebel forces focused in the central Syrian province of Hama, according to opposition activists and fighters. The developments add up to a burgeoning Russian military campaign based on land, air and sea that is at odds with U.S. goals, compounding tensions between the two big powers.

NATO Condemns Russian Bombings in Syria

The U.S. warned Moscow that its offensive in Syria could backfire and NATO officials sought to reassure European and Turkish allies nervous over Moscow’s deepening involvement there. As tensions grew, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke for about 30 minutes by phone Thursday 8 October with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, State Department spokesman John Kirby said. Defense ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, meeting in Brussels, had tough words for Russia’s escalation, saying it would only augment the chaos in Syria. “This will have consequences for Russia itself, which is rightfully fearful of attack upon Russia,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said. “And I also expect that in coming days, the Russians will begin to suffer casualties in Syria.” Russia’s

involvement in Syria has further frayed ties between Moscow and NATO, already at odds over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine.

NATO defense ministers announced continued progress at building up the alliance’s response force and forward-positioned headquarters, long-planned efforts they hope will soothe allies who fear Russian aggression in Europe.

NATO officials have repeatedly said many of Russia’s airstrikes

have hit rebels, despite Moscow’s

claims to be targeting Islamic State militants. Russia has lumped the different groups together, labeling them generally as terrorists.

Mr. Carter reiterated that the U.S. and its allies wouldn’t cooperate with Moscow as long as it pursued its current strategy. For now the alliance is pressing for more military-to-military contacts and coordination to try to prevent any inadvertent conflict between planes flying with the U.S.-led coalition and Russian planes over Syria.

The alliance may also have to look at steps to reinforce Turkey’s border with Syria, which NATO says Russian planes have breached on several different occasions. NATO currently has Patriot missile batteries deployed to Turkey to counter ballistic missiles, but they aren’t configured to protect against other threats, officials said.

Turkey wants those deployments extended. Turkish officials have also been talking directly to NATO member France about deploying its missile defense system, which can also defend against fighter planes, NATO officials said.

More broadly, NATO has made efforts to step up its so-called assurance measures. Britain announced a new small deployment of roughly 100 military trainers to the Baltic States, where the U.S. has roughly 450 soldiers. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance was working to increase its deterrence, including taking steps to enlarge its response force and make its spearhead force more ready. Mr. Stoltenberg repeatedly said the new NATO forces could deploy anywhere very quickly. But NATO is walking a fine line, trying to show it is ready to defend allies and deter Russia without taking actions that could heighten tensions, contribute to miscalculation or inadvertently trigger a conflict. “The important thing is that any adversary will know we are able to deploy,” he said.

Obama’s Wishful-Thinking Syria Policy

Syria, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in her recent book “Hard Choices,” is a “wicked problem”—a situation that confounds standard approaches and policies. Nonetheless, she has long advocated greater involvement than President Obama has been willing to endorse. Mr. Obama knows that proposals to further embroil the U.S. in another Middle Eastern conflict are very unpopular—especially with the base of the Democratic Party. Syria may well represent the single least-successful element of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy. His declaration that “Assad must go”

was not backed by serious policy. His famous red line regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons was breached without U.S. retaliation. The effort to identify, train and equip an opposition that would fight against Islamic State but not Syria’s President Bashar Assad turned into a half-billion-dollar fiasco, as the president has finally acknowledged. Nevertheless, he continues to pin his hopes on a political transition, which won’t happen as long as Iran, Russia and Hezbollah remain firmly in support of Mr. Assad.

There is no way of defeating and removing Mr. Assad through a boots-on-the-ground effort that the American people and Congress would support. Nonetheless, successful negotiations require the use of sticks to bring recalcitrant parties to the table. Does anyone believe that Iran would ever have entered nuclear negotiations in the absence of a crippling sanctions regime backed by the international community? If we aren’t willing or able to bring comparable pressure to bear on Mr. Assad, the negotiations the Obama administration craves will remain an exercise in wishful thinking.

Although military force is not the solution, it can help create conditions for an outcome greatly preferable to the status quo. As Mrs. Clinton and others have recommended, we should establish safe zones in suitable parts of Syria, protected by coalition air power. But these zones make sense only as part of a broader strategy with clear objectives. It would be morally unthinkable to leave Syria’s Sunnis, who constitute about 70% of the country’s population, under the control of a ruler who has slaughtered so many of them. At the same time, there is no practical way of removing Mr. Assad from the Alawite and

Christian areas of Syria he still dominates. The logical conclusion, according to Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, is to abandon the “Hail Mary hope” for a comprehensive political deal or military turnaround and instead invest in areas of sanctuary in Syria that would provide security for the people within those zones and help them build a future distant from both the Assad regime and Islamic State, while gradually nurturing a more effective military opposition. The Kurdish areas and those near the Jordanian border are the safest places to start.

This approach would open the door for more-effective humanitarian relief and for the resumption of closer-to-normal daily life, slowing the exodus of refugees. And it is more likely to command the support of regional powers—such as Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia—than would any feasible alternative. While this strategy has risks (such as U.S. pilots falling into the Syrian regime’s hands), the level of U.S. military involvement needed to

sustain it wouldn’t be significantly greater than current American efforts in Afghanistan.

The foregoing is adapted from recent articles in the Wall Street Journal authored by Dion Nissenbaum, Adam Entous in Washington, Nathan Hodge and Thomas Grove in Moscow, Sam Dagher and Mohammad Nour Alakraa in Beirut, James Marson, Nathan Hodge, Julian E. Barnes, Gordon Lubold, Sam Dagher and Philip Shishkin. Also William A. Galston of the Brookings Institution.

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 11

Page 14: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Russia launched airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday 30 September, catching U.S. and Western officials off guard and drawing new condemnation as evidence suggested Moscow wasn’t targeting extremist group Islamic State, but rather other opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. One of the airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, catapulting the Syrian crisis to a new level of danger and uncertainty. Moscow’s entry means the world’s most powerful militaries—including the U.S., Britain and France—now are flying uncoordinated combat missions, heightening the risk of conflict in the skies over Syria.

U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Russia’s approach to the Syrian war—defending Mr. Assad while ostensibly targeting extremists—was tantamount to “pouring gasoline on the fire.” “I have been dealing with them for a long time. And this is not the kind of behavior that we should expect professionally from the Russian military,” Mr. Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and said he raised U.S. concerns about attacks that

target regime opponents other than Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. In Syria’s multi-sided war, Mr. Assad’s military—aided by Iran and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah—is fighting both Islamic State and opposition rebel groups, some of which are supported by the U.S. and its allies. Mr. Kerry said the U.S. and Russia need to hold military talks as soon as possible and Mr. Lavrov said he agreed. Speaking alongside Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the United States and Russia have agreed to hold a military meeting as soon as possible to avoid any direct collisions or exchanges of fire in Syria, where both the U.S. and Russia are now

conducting airstrikes.

The U.S. and its allies were angry at the Russians on many scores: that they are supporting Mr. Assad; that they aren’t coordinating their actions with the existing, U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition; that they provided terse notice only an hour before their operations; that they demanded the U.S. coalition stay out of Syrian airspace; and that they struck in areas where anti-Assad rebels—not Islamic State—operate. “It does appear that they were in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces, and that is precisely one of the problems with this whole approach,” said Mr. Carter, the U.S. defense chief.

Putin Turns to Ukraine Playbook in Syria

In Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to take a page from his Ukraine playbook by keeping the West guessing about his plans, employing the military art of deception known in Russia as maskirovka, or camouflage. Last year he surreptitiously sent Russia’s army into Ukraine, reversing the advance of Ukrainian government forces and bringing pro-Russia rebels a more-favorable peace settlement. Now, he’s repeating the gambit in Syria: shoring up his ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and ensuring the Kremlin will have a central role in deciding the country’s future. Russia stepped up its attack on Mr. Assad’s opponents on Wednesday 7 October, firing cruise missiles into Syria from warships in the far-off Caspian Sea. At North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters, the U.S. ambassador said Russia had built up a battalion-sized ground force in Syria, one equipped to take on a bigger mission than just defending Russian military bases there.

The Russian military campaign that began a week earlier was preceded by denials from the Kremlin. A buildup of combat aircraft in Syria, visible on satellite imagery, was merely the continuation of the delivery of military hardware to the Syrian regime, Kremlin officials said. That fits with the template set in Ukraine. When well-armed men in green camouflage without unit insignia appeared last year in the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, the Kremlin insisted the men—who were clearly military professionals—were only local self-defense forces. Mr. Putin subsequently acknowledged the “little green men” were Russian troops. In Syria, Russia now says that it is

carrying out airstrikes against Islamic State and other “terrorist” groups, in coordination with the Assad regime. But the recent buildup raises concern that Russia may be preparing for ground operations—or even expanding into neighboring Iraq. Asked in an interview late last month with U.S. broadcaster Charlie Rose whether his aim was to rescue Mr. al-Assad’s administration, Mr. Putin replied: “That’s right, that’s how it is.”

Following the naval bombardment, Mr. Putin articulated his preferred end-state even more clearly. The conflict in Syria, he said, required the warring parties to come to the negotiating table. “Such type of conflicts should conclude with a resolution of political questions,” he said. It is unclear how, exactly, Russia plans to bring them to the table. Mr. Putin said he supported the idea of trying to combine the efforts of Mr. Assad’s forces and the “healthy opposition” groups against Islamic State—an idea Mr. Putin said had been proposed by French President François Hollande at a meeting in Paris. A French government spokeswoman denied Mr. Hollande had backed any such proposal.

U.S. officials say Russia has deliberately targeted so-called moderate rebel groups backed by the Central Intelligence Agency, sparking worries about a broader confrontation between Washington and Moscow. Russia entered the 4½-year Syrian war as Mr. Assad’s forces were losing territory to a patchwork of opponents. Most of the several dozen airstrikes in the first week of bombing hit areas where Islamic State isn’t present. But Russia hasn’t hit with the kind of overwhelming force that would bring total victory to Mr. Assad, much as Russian conventional weaponry last year helped pro-Russian separatists in eastern

Ukraine even out their front lines, but not advance on Kiev. “Moscow wants to ensure that the situation in Syria will be settled on Russian conditions,” said Nikolay Kozhanov, nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Moscow Center. “Russia wants to shore up the front and undermine the opposition’s capacity to fight. It’s not a priority to take the whole country.” Russia’s intervention is the first time for decades that it has deployed armed forces far from its borders. It is also waging a kind of warfare it hasn’t tried before: targeted airstrikes and over-the-horizon naval attacks.

Chris Harmer, a retired U.S. naval aviator and former airstrike planner, said videos and information released by the Russian military—including the location of strikes—indicated more about the Kremlin’s military aims. Russian aircraft, he said, were serving as a “maneuver element” for Mr. Assad’s besieged forces, who are hunkered down in fortified enclaves and depleted by defections and combat losses. “The Russians are there to push back lines and stabilize Assad’s defense,” he said. “There’s no exit strategy for Russia…As long as Assad is in power now, the Russian air force needs to protect him.”

The U.S. ruled out strategic collaboration with Moscow in the Middle East and said Russia has built up a ground force inside Syria with heavy weaponry that could support a Syrian army offensive. Russia escalated its assault on opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime with its first naval bombardment on Wednesday 7 October. It launched a volley of 26 medium-range cruise missiles from four warships in the Caspian Sea nearly 1,000 miles away. For the first time since Moscow’s direct intervention in the Syrian conflict a week earlier, Russian

warplanes and helicopters appeared to be aiding a ground assault by pro-regime forces and militias against rebel forces focused in the central Syrian province of Hama, according to opposition activists and fighters. The developments add up to a burgeoning Russian military campaign based on land, air and sea that is at odds with U.S. goals, compounding tensions between the two big powers.

NATO Condemns Russian Bombings in Syria

The U.S. warned Moscow that its offensive in Syria could backfire and NATO officials sought to reassure European and Turkish allies nervous over Moscow’s deepening involvement there. As tensions grew, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke for about 30 minutes by phone Thursday 8 October with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, State Department spokesman John Kirby said. Defense ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, meeting in Brussels, had tough words for Russia’s escalation, saying it would only augment the chaos in Syria. “This will have consequences for Russia itself, which is rightfully fearful of attack upon Russia,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said. “And I also expect that in coming days, the Russians will begin to suffer casualties in Syria.” Russia’s

involvement in Syria has further frayed ties between Moscow and NATO, already at odds over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine.

NATO defense ministers announced continued progress at building up the alliance’s response force and forward-positioned headquarters, long-planned efforts they hope will soothe allies who fear Russian aggression in Europe.

NATO officials have repeatedly said many of Russia’s airstrikes

have hit rebels, despite Moscow’s

claims to be targeting Islamic State militants. Russia has lumped the different groups together, labeling them generally as terrorists.

Mr. Carter reiterated that the U.S. and its allies wouldn’t cooperate with Moscow as long as it pursued its current strategy. For now the alliance is pressing for more military-to-military contacts and coordination to try to prevent any inadvertent conflict between planes flying with the U.S.-led coalition and Russian planes over Syria.

The alliance may also have to look at steps to reinforce Turkey’s border with Syria, which NATO says Russian planes have breached on several different occasions. NATO currently has Patriot missile batteries deployed to Turkey to counter ballistic missiles, but they aren’t configured to protect against other threats, officials said.

Turkey wants those deployments extended. Turkish officials have also been talking directly to NATO member France about deploying its missile defense system, which can also defend against fighter planes, NATO officials said.

More broadly, NATO has made efforts to step up its so-called assurance measures. Britain announced a new small deployment of roughly 100 military trainers to the Baltic States, where the U.S. has roughly 450 soldiers. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance was working to increase its deterrence, including taking steps to enlarge its response force and make its spearhead force more ready. Mr. Stoltenberg repeatedly said the new NATO forces could deploy anywhere very quickly. But NATO is walking a fine line, trying to show it is ready to defend allies and deter Russia without taking actions that could heighten tensions, contribute to miscalculation or inadvertently trigger a conflict. “The important thing is that any adversary will know we are able to deploy,” he said.

Obama’s Wishful-Thinking Syria Policy

Syria, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in her recent book “Hard Choices,” is a “wicked problem”—a situation that confounds standard approaches and policies. Nonetheless, she has long advocated greater involvement than President Obama has been willing to endorse. Mr. Obama knows that proposals to further embroil the U.S. in another Middle Eastern conflict are very unpopular—especially with the base of the Democratic Party. Syria may well represent the single least-successful element of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy. His declaration that “Assad must go”

was not backed by serious policy. His famous red line regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons was breached without U.S. retaliation. The effort to identify, train and equip an opposition that would fight against Islamic State but not Syria’s President Bashar Assad turned into a half-billion-dollar fiasco, as the president has finally acknowledged. Nevertheless, he continues to pin his hopes on a political transition, which won’t happen as long as Iran, Russia and Hezbollah remain firmly in support of Mr. Assad.

There is no way of defeating and removing Mr. Assad through a boots-on-the-ground effort that the American people and Congress would support. Nonetheless, successful negotiations require the use of sticks to bring recalcitrant parties to the table. Does anyone believe that Iran would ever have entered nuclear negotiations in the absence of a crippling sanctions regime backed by the international community? If we aren’t willing or able to bring comparable pressure to bear on Mr. Assad, the negotiations the Obama administration craves will remain an exercise in wishful thinking.

Although military force is not the solution, it can help create conditions for an outcome greatly preferable to the status quo. As Mrs. Clinton and others have recommended, we should establish safe zones in suitable parts of Syria, protected by coalition air power. But these zones make sense only as part of a broader strategy with clear objectives. It would be morally unthinkable to leave Syria’s Sunnis, who constitute about 70% of the country’s population, under the control of a ruler who has slaughtered so many of them. At the same time, there is no practical way of removing Mr. Assad from the Alawite and

Christian areas of Syria he still dominates. The logical conclusion, according to Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, is to abandon the “Hail Mary hope” for a comprehensive political deal or military turnaround and instead invest in areas of sanctuary in Syria that would provide security for the people within those zones and help them build a future distant from both the Assad regime and Islamic State, while gradually nurturing a more effective military opposition. The Kurdish areas and those near the Jordanian border are the safest places to start.

This approach would open the door for more-effective humanitarian relief and for the resumption of closer-to-normal daily life, slowing the exodus of refugees. And it is more likely to command the support of regional powers—such as Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia—than would any feasible alternative. While this strategy has risks (such as U.S. pilots falling into the Syrian regime’s hands), the level of U.S. military involvement needed to

Civilians on Thursday 1 October stand on the rubble of a damaged site hit on Wednesday by what activists say were cluster bombs dropped by the Russian air force in Maasran town, in the southern countryside of Idlib, Syria.

sustain it wouldn’t be significantly greater than current American efforts in Afghanistan.

The foregoing is adapted from recent articles in the Wall Street Journal authored by Dion Nissenbaum, Adam Entous in Washington, Nathan Hodge and Thomas Grove in Moscow, Sam Dagher and Mohammad Nour Alakraa in Beirut, James Marson, Nathan Hodge, Julian E. Barnes, Gordon Lubold, Sam Dagher and Philip Shishkin. Also William A. Galston of the Brookings Institution.

12 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

Page 15: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Russia launched airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday 30 September, catching U.S. and Western officials off guard and drawing new condemnation as evidence suggested Moscow wasn’t targeting extremist group Islamic State, but rather other opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. One of the airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, catapulting the Syrian crisis to a new level of danger and uncertainty. Moscow’s entry means the world’s most powerful militaries—including the U.S., Britain and France—now are flying uncoordinated combat missions, heightening the risk of conflict in the skies over Syria.

U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Russia’s approach to the Syrian war—defending Mr. Assad while ostensibly targeting extremists—was tantamount to “pouring gasoline on the fire.” “I have been dealing with them for a long time. And this is not the kind of behavior that we should expect professionally from the Russian military,” Mr. Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and said he raised U.S. concerns about attacks that

target regime opponents other than Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. In Syria’s multi-sided war, Mr. Assad’s military—aided by Iran and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah—is fighting both Islamic State and opposition rebel groups, some of which are supported by the U.S. and its allies. Mr. Kerry said the U.S. and Russia need to hold military talks as soon as possible and Mr. Lavrov said he agreed. Speaking alongside Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the United States and Russia have agreed to hold a military meeting as soon as possible to avoid any direct collisions or exchanges of fire in Syria, where both the U.S. and Russia are now

conducting airstrikes.

The U.S. and its allies were angry at the Russians on many scores: that they are supporting Mr. Assad; that they aren’t coordinating their actions with the existing, U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition; that they provided terse notice only an hour before their operations; that they demanded the U.S. coalition stay out of Syrian airspace; and that they struck in areas where anti-Assad rebels—not Islamic State—operate. “It does appear that they were in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces, and that is precisely one of the problems with this whole approach,” said Mr. Carter, the U.S. defense chief.

Putin Turns to Ukraine Playbook in Syria

In Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to take a page from his Ukraine playbook by keeping the West guessing about his plans, employing the military art of deception known in Russia as maskirovka, or camouflage. Last year he surreptitiously sent Russia’s army into Ukraine, reversing the advance of Ukrainian government forces and bringing pro-Russia rebels a more-favorable peace settlement. Now, he’s repeating the gambit in Syria: shoring up his ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and ensuring the Kremlin will have a central role in deciding the country’s future. Russia stepped up its attack on Mr. Assad’s opponents on Wednesday 7 October, firing cruise missiles into Syria from warships in the far-off Caspian Sea. At North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters, the U.S. ambassador said Russia had built up a battalion-sized ground force in Syria, one equipped to take on a bigger mission than just defending Russian military bases there.

The Russian military campaign that began a week earlier was preceded by denials from the Kremlin. A buildup of combat aircraft in Syria, visible on satellite imagery, was merely the continuation of the delivery of military hardware to the Syrian regime, Kremlin officials said. That fits with the template set in Ukraine. When well-armed men in green camouflage without unit insignia appeared last year in the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, the Kremlin insisted the men—who were clearly military professionals—were only local self-defense forces. Mr. Putin subsequently acknowledged the “little green men” were Russian troops. In Syria, Russia now says that it is

carrying out airstrikes against Islamic State and other “terrorist” groups, in coordination with the Assad regime. But the recent buildup raises concern that Russia may be preparing for ground operations—or even expanding into neighboring Iraq. Asked in an interview late last month with U.S. broadcaster Charlie Rose whether his aim was to rescue Mr. al-Assad’s administration, Mr. Putin replied: “That’s right, that’s how it is.”

Following the naval bombardment, Mr. Putin articulated his preferred end-state even more clearly. The conflict in Syria, he said, required the warring parties to come to the negotiating table. “Such type of conflicts should conclude with a resolution of political questions,” he said. It is unclear how, exactly, Russia plans to bring them to the table. Mr. Putin said he supported the idea of trying to combine the efforts of Mr. Assad’s forces and the “healthy opposition” groups against Islamic State—an idea Mr. Putin said had been proposed by French President François Hollande at a meeting in Paris. A French government spokeswoman denied Mr. Hollande had backed any such proposal.

U.S. officials say Russia has deliberately targeted so-called moderate rebel groups backed by the Central Intelligence Agency, sparking worries about a broader confrontation between Washington and Moscow. Russia entered the 4½-year Syrian war as Mr. Assad’s forces were losing territory to a patchwork of opponents. Most of the several dozen airstrikes in the first week of bombing hit areas where Islamic State isn’t present. But Russia hasn’t hit with the kind of overwhelming force that would bring total victory to Mr. Assad, much as Russian conventional weaponry last year helped pro-Russian separatists in eastern

Ukraine even out their front lines, but not advance on Kiev. “Moscow wants to ensure that the situation in Syria will be settled on Russian conditions,” said Nikolay Kozhanov, nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Moscow Center. “Russia wants to shore up the front and undermine the opposition’s capacity to fight. It’s not a priority to take the whole country.” Russia’s intervention is the first time for decades that it has deployed armed forces far from its borders. It is also waging a kind of warfare it hasn’t tried before: targeted airstrikes and over-the-horizon naval attacks.

Chris Harmer, a retired U.S. naval aviator and former airstrike planner, said videos and information released by the Russian military—including the location of strikes—indicated more about the Kremlin’s military aims. Russian aircraft, he said, were serving as a “maneuver element” for Mr. Assad’s besieged forces, who are hunkered down in fortified enclaves and depleted by defections and combat losses. “The Russians are there to push back lines and stabilize Assad’s defense,” he said. “There’s no exit strategy for Russia…As long as Assad is in power now, the Russian air force needs to protect him.”

The U.S. ruled out strategic collaboration with Moscow in the Middle East and said Russia has built up a ground force inside Syria with heavy weaponry that could support a Syrian army offensive. Russia escalated its assault on opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime with its first naval bombardment on Wednesday 7 October. It launched a volley of 26 medium-range cruise missiles from four warships in the Caspian Sea nearly 1,000 miles away. For the first time since Moscow’s direct intervention in the Syrian conflict a week earlier, Russian

warplanes and helicopters appeared to be aiding a ground assault by pro-regime forces and militias against rebel forces focused in the central Syrian province of Hama, according to opposition activists and fighters. The developments add up to a burgeoning Russian military campaign based on land, air and sea that is at odds with U.S. goals, compounding tensions between the two big powers.

NATO Condemns Russian Bombings in Syria

The U.S. warned Moscow that its offensive in Syria could backfire and NATO officials sought to reassure European and Turkish allies nervous over Moscow’s deepening involvement there. As tensions grew, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke for about 30 minutes by phone Thursday 8 October with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, State Department spokesman John Kirby said. Defense ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, meeting in Brussels, had tough words for Russia’s escalation, saying it would only augment the chaos in Syria. “This will have consequences for Russia itself, which is rightfully fearful of attack upon Russia,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said. “And I also expect that in coming days, the Russians will begin to suffer casualties in Syria.” Russia’s

involvement in Syria has further frayed ties between Moscow and NATO, already at odds over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine.

NATO defense ministers announced continued progress at building up the alliance’s response force and forward-positioned headquarters, long-planned efforts they hope will soothe allies who fear Russian aggression in Europe.

NATO officials have repeatedly said many of Russia’s airstrikes

have hit rebels, despite Moscow’s

claims to be targeting Islamic State militants. Russia has lumped the different groups together, labeling them generally as terrorists.

Mr. Carter reiterated that the U.S. and its allies wouldn’t cooperate with Moscow as long as it pursued its current strategy. For now the alliance is pressing for more military-to-military contacts and coordination to try to prevent any inadvertent conflict between planes flying with the U.S.-led coalition and Russian planes over Syria.

The alliance may also have to look at steps to reinforce Turkey’s border with Syria, which NATO says Russian planes have breached on several different occasions. NATO currently has Patriot missile batteries deployed to Turkey to counter ballistic missiles, but they aren’t configured to protect against other threats, officials said.

Turkey wants those deployments extended. Turkish officials have also been talking directly to NATO member France about deploying its missile defense system, which can also defend against fighter planes, NATO officials said.

More broadly, NATO has made efforts to step up its so-called assurance measures. Britain announced a new small deployment of roughly 100 military trainers to the Baltic States, where the U.S. has roughly 450 soldiers. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance was working to increase its deterrence, including taking steps to enlarge its response force and make its spearhead force more ready. Mr. Stoltenberg repeatedly said the new NATO forces could deploy anywhere very quickly. But NATO is walking a fine line, trying to show it is ready to defend allies and deter Russia without taking actions that could heighten tensions, contribute to miscalculation or inadvertently trigger a conflict. “The important thing is that any adversary will know we are able to deploy,” he said.

Obama’s Wishful-Thinking Syria Policy

Syria, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in her recent book “Hard Choices,” is a “wicked problem”—a situation that confounds standard approaches and policies. Nonetheless, she has long advocated greater involvement than President Obama has been willing to endorse. Mr. Obama knows that proposals to further embroil the U.S. in another Middle Eastern conflict are very unpopular—especially with the base of the Democratic Party. Syria may well represent the single least-successful element of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy. His declaration that “Assad must go”

was not backed by serious policy. His famous red line regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons was breached without U.S. retaliation. The effort to identify, train and equip an opposition that would fight against Islamic State but not Syria’s President Bashar Assad turned into a half-billion-dollar fiasco, as the president has finally acknowledged. Nevertheless, he continues to pin his hopes on a political transition, which won’t happen as long as Iran, Russia and Hezbollah remain firmly in support of Mr. Assad.

There is no way of defeating and removing Mr. Assad through a boots-on-the-ground effort that the American people and Congress would support. Nonetheless, successful negotiations require the use of sticks to bring recalcitrant parties to the table. Does anyone believe that Iran would ever have entered nuclear negotiations in the absence of a crippling sanctions regime backed by the international community? If we aren’t willing or able to bring comparable pressure to bear on Mr. Assad, the negotiations the Obama administration craves will remain an exercise in wishful thinking.

Although military force is not the solution, it can help create conditions for an outcome greatly preferable to the status quo. As Mrs. Clinton and others have recommended, we should establish safe zones in suitable parts of Syria, protected by coalition air power. But these zones make sense only as part of a broader strategy with clear objectives. It would be morally unthinkable to leave Syria’s Sunnis, who constitute about 70% of the country’s population, under the control of a ruler who has slaughtered so many of them. At the same time, there is no practical way of removing Mr. Assad from the Alawite and

Christian areas of Syria he still dominates. The logical conclusion, according to Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, is to abandon the “Hail Mary hope” for a comprehensive political deal or military turnaround and instead invest in areas of sanctuary in Syria that would provide security for the people within those zones and help them build a future distant from both the Assad regime and Islamic State, while gradually nurturing a more effective military opposition. The Kurdish areas and those near the Jordanian border are the safest places to start.

This approach would open the door for more-effective humanitarian relief and for the resumption of closer-to-normal daily life, slowing the exodus of refugees. And it is more likely to command the support of regional powers—such as Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia—than would any feasible alternative. While this strategy has risks (such as U.S. pilots falling into the Syrian regime’s hands), the level of U.S. military involvement needed to

sustain it wouldn’t be significantly greater than current American efforts in Afghanistan.

The foregoing is adapted from recent articles in the Wall Street Journal authored by Dion Nissenbaum, Adam Entous in Washington, Nathan Hodge and Thomas Grove in Moscow, Sam Dagher and Mohammad Nour Alakraa in Beirut, James Marson, Nathan Hodge, Julian E. Barnes, Gordon Lubold, Sam Dagher and Philip Shishkin. Also William A. Galston of the Brookings Institution.

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 13

Page 16: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Scissor Lifts, Boom Lifts and Aerial Lifts • 19 feet to 135 feet

Your Exclusive Guam Dealer

Page 17: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015
Page 18: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

After serving as Commanding Officer of NAVFAC Marianas and Regional Engineer for the past two years, CAPT Glenn A. Shephard PE departed Guam for the second time on 29 August 2015. At a Change of Command ceremony the previous day, he turned over command to CAPT Stephanie M. Jones PE.

He stated that he enjoyed both tours of duty in Guam, first as Ensign Shephard then as Commanding Officer Shephard. He learned to appreciate the Guam culture, the focus on family, the legendary hospitality and the tropi-cal environment. There are great beaches here and diving in clean 80� seawater is exhilarating compared to California where a wet suit is now a must.

Captain Shephard was raised in the California Bay Area and is a 1984 graduate of Granada High School in Livermore, and holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineer (1989) from San Jose State University. He earned a Master of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Florida in 1999, and completed the Strategy and Organization Executive Management Program at Stanford University in 2011. He was commissioned in October 1989 after completing Naval Officer Candidate School in Newport, RI. His first assignment, in January 1990, was to OICC Marianas where he was engaged in Construction Management for projects throughout the island. It included projects at the Ship Repair Facility, Nimitz Hill Housing and the Naval Air Station which is now Guam International Airport. At that time, the Navy operated facilities at South side of the runway which were later handed over to the Government of Guam. That tour ended in April 1992.

Captain Shephard’s operational tours include assignments as Alfa Company Commander, Naval Mobile Construction Battalion (NMCB), FOUR at Port Hueneme, CA; deploying twice to Okinawa and once to Puerto Rico. His shore tours include assignments as Assistant Resident Officer in Charge of Construction, Officer in

Charge of Construction Marinas, Guam; Public Works Officer, Naval Security Group Activity Skaggs Island, Sonoma, CA; Acquisition Director for Sealift (N42), Civil Engineer Support Office, Port Hueneme, CA; Public Works Officer, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock, MD; Flag Aide and Deputy Executive Assistant to the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Fleet Readiness and Logistics (OPNAV N4), Washing-ton, D.C; Director, Facilities Engineering and Acquisition Division, Public Works Department, Naval Base Ventura County, CA; Public Works Officer, Naval Base Coronado, CA; Assistant Operations Officer, Central Integrated Product Team (Marine Corps) at NAVFAC Southwest; Assistant Regional Engineer for Navy Region Southwest; and Executive Officer, NAVFAC Southwest. Captain Shephard also served as the Executive Officer for NAVFAC Northwest.

During Calendar Year 2008, CAPT Shephard was Director, Infrastructure and Logistics Division, Directorate of Defense Affairs, Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq. This required special training at Fort Riley before being embedded with the Army in Iraq. It was a hostile environment for the military and he remained within coalition facilities on single status. He was not involved in military operations, serving only as advisor to the Iraq Ministry of Defense. Some of the projects were alterations and upgrades to existing facilities while others were new green field military bases. Some of the older facilities had been built by the British in an earlier era. The planning for the facilities took into account the ability of local technicians to operate and maintain them so he steered the thinking away from overly sophisticated designs. For example, wastewater treatment plants were designed simply and for primary treatment only with provision for secondary treatment to be added at later date. He said that the assignment was professionally rewarding and required a lot of patience.

CAPT Shephard stated that he was proud to have served with the NAVFAC team on Guam

for the past two years in support of the DoD mission. There is a wide variety of military commands on Guam representing Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Army and their mission success is of paramount importance. Support is also provided to the Coast Guard and the local Government. They completed the new Navy Hospital and executed those projects authorized for the Marine Corps build-up which became a start for the larger program that has been waiting for the Record of Decision. There have been challenges including sequestration, environmental issues and program changes. Guam, in the middle of the Western Pacific is gaining in strategic importance to the military and this will carry over to the civilian side to some extent. The Guam Governor has said he wants Guam to become a 1st world destination. For that to happen, buildings and utilities have to perform the same as other desirable destinations. Guam is isolated and people trav-

elling here have to want to come to this island because it is not on the way to anywhere else. Long haul flights East-West and North-South overfly Guam to their final destinations.

He was particularly pleased with his involve-ment with SAME Guam Post where he was president from 1 July 2014 through 30 June 2015. There were a number of initiatives that made that happen. During that time the orga-nization has matured and is a well-respected entity. The ACI training workshop was good for the association and the industry at large. The financial portfolio of the Charlie Corn Scholar-ship Committee is especially remarkable. The change in philosophy of using those funds for Junior Officer Training by sending some to leadership conferences such as JETC has brought a broader perspective to education and training.

From Guam, CAPT Shephard returns to the Navy Yard in Washington DC to serve under Vice Admiral Smith in the CNIC (Commander Naval Installations Command) within the N4 Directorate. He will take over the Public Works post currently occupied by CAPT Peter Lynch who was NAVFAC Marianas

Commanding Officer several years ago. He and Sandra will be 2,000 miles from family as compared to 9,000 miles while in Guam.

His personal awards include a Legion of Merit, Bronze Star, four Meritorious Ser-vice Medals, three Navy Commendation Medals, three Navy Achievement Medals, various campaign and unit awards, and the 2008 Society of American Military Engineers, Moreell Medal. He earned warfare qualification as a Seabee Combat Warfare Specialist with NMCB FOUR. He is a Professional Engineer licensed in Califor-nia, a member of the Defense Acquisition Corps (Level III), and holds a Contracting Officer Warrant (Level III).

CAPT Shephard is married to the former Sandra Mailander of Livermore, CA. Their daughter, Katelyn, is attending U.C. San Diego majoring in Human Biology; and son, Ryan is studying History at U.C. Davis. They have been able to visit Guam only during Christmas break.

CAPTAIN GLENN A. SHEPHARDBids Farewell To Guam

16 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

CO

NST

RUC

TIO

NH

EAD

LIN

E

Page 19: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

After serving as Commanding Officer of NAVFAC Marianas and Regional Engineer for the past two years, CAPT Glenn A. Shephard PE departed Guam for the second time on 29 August 2015. At a Change of Command ceremony the previous day, he turned over command to CAPT Stephanie M. Jones PE.

He stated that he enjoyed both tours of duty in Guam, first as Ensign Shephard then as Commanding Officer Shephard. He learned to appreciate the Guam culture, the focus on family, the legendary hospitality and the tropi-cal environment. There are great beaches here and diving in clean 80� seawater is exhilarating compared to California where a wet suit is now a must.

Captain Shephard was raised in the California Bay Area and is a 1984 graduate of Granada High School in Livermore, and holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineer (1989) from San Jose State University. He earned a Master of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Florida in 1999, and completed the Strategy and Organization Executive Management Program at Stanford University in 2011. He was commissioned in October 1989 after completing Naval Officer Candidate School in Newport, RI. His first assignment, in January 1990, was to OICC Marianas where he was engaged in Construction Management for projects throughout the island. It included projects at the Ship Repair Facility, Nimitz Hill Housing and the Naval Air Station which is now Guam International Airport. At that time, the Navy operated facilities at South side of the runway which were later handed over to the Government of Guam. That tour ended in April 1992.

Captain Shephard’s operational tours include assignments as Alfa Company Commander, Naval Mobile Construction Battalion (NMCB), FOUR at Port Hueneme, CA; deploying twice to Okinawa and once to Puerto Rico. His shore tours include assignments as Assistant Resident Officer in Charge of Construction, Officer in

Charge of Construction Marinas, Guam; Public Works Officer, Naval Security Group Activity Skaggs Island, Sonoma, CA; Acquisition Director for Sealift (N42), Civil Engineer Support Office, Port Hueneme, CA; Public Works Officer, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock, MD; Flag Aide and Deputy Executive Assistant to the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Fleet Readiness and Logistics (OPNAV N4), Washing-ton, D.C; Director, Facilities Engineering and Acquisition Division, Public Works Department, Naval Base Ventura County, CA; Public Works Officer, Naval Base Coronado, CA; Assistant Operations Officer, Central Integrated Product Team (Marine Corps) at NAVFAC Southwest; Assistant Regional Engineer for Navy Region Southwest; and Executive Officer, NAVFAC Southwest. Captain Shephard also served as the Executive Officer for NAVFAC Northwest.

During Calendar Year 2008, CAPT Shephard was Director, Infrastructure and Logistics Division, Directorate of Defense Affairs, Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq. This required special training at Fort Riley before being embedded with the Army in Iraq. It was a hostile environment for the military and he remained within coalition facilities on single status. He was not involved in military operations, serving only as advisor to the Iraq Ministry of Defense. Some of the projects were alterations and upgrades to existing facilities while others were new green field military bases. Some of the older facilities had been built by the British in an earlier era. The planning for the facilities took into account the ability of local technicians to operate and maintain them so he steered the thinking away from overly sophisticated designs. For example, wastewater treatment plants were designed simply and for primary treatment only with provision for secondary treatment to be added at later date. He said that the assignment was professionally rewarding and required a lot of patience.

CAPT Shephard stated that he was proud to have served with the NAVFAC team on Guam

for the past two years in support of the DoD mission. There is a wide variety of military commands on Guam representing Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Army and their mission success is of paramount importance. Support is also provided to the Coast Guard and the local Government. They completed the new Navy Hospital and executed those projects authorized for the Marine Corps build-up which became a start for the larger program that has been waiting for the Record of Decision. There have been challenges including sequestration, environmental issues and program changes. Guam, in the middle of the Western Pacific is gaining in strategic importance to the military and this will carry over to the civilian side to some extent. The Guam Governor has said he wants Guam to become a 1st world destination. For that to happen, buildings and utilities have to perform the same as other desirable destinations. Guam is isolated and people trav-

elling here have to want to come to this island because it is not on the way to anywhere else. Long haul flights East-West and North-South overfly Guam to their final destinations.

He was particularly pleased with his involve-ment with SAME Guam Post where he was president from 1 July 2014 through 30 June 2015. There were a number of initiatives that made that happen. During that time the orga-nization has matured and is a well-respected entity. The ACI training workshop was good for the association and the industry at large. The financial portfolio of the Charlie Corn Scholar-ship Committee is especially remarkable. The change in philosophy of using those funds for Junior Officer Training by sending some to leadership conferences such as JETC has brought a broader perspective to education and training.

From Guam, CAPT Shephard returns to the Navy Yard in Washington DC to serve under Vice Admiral Smith in the CNIC (Commander Naval Installations Command) within the N4 Directorate. He will take over the Public Works post currently occupied by CAPT Peter Lynch who was NAVFAC Marianas

Commanding Officer several years ago. He and Sandra will be 2,000 miles from family as compared to 9,000 miles while in Guam.

His personal awards include a Legion of Merit, Bronze Star, four Meritorious Ser-vice Medals, three Navy Commendation Medals, three Navy Achievement Medals, various campaign and unit awards, and the 2008 Society of American Military Engineers, Moreell Medal. He earned warfare qualification as a Seabee Combat Warfare Specialist with NMCB FOUR. He is a Professional Engineer licensed in Califor-nia, a member of the Defense Acquisition Corps (Level III), and holds a Contracting Officer Warrant (Level III).

CAPT Shephard is married to the former Sandra Mailander of Livermore, CA. Their daughter, Katelyn, is attending U.C. San Diego majoring in Human Biology; and son, Ryan is studying History at U.C. Davis. They have been able to visit Guam only during Christmas break.

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 17

Page 20: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

by John S. Aguon

G4SIn a Word:Security

FEAT

URE

STO

RY

Page 21: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Small. Large. Local. Global. Low tech. High tech. Residential. Commercial. Aside from all these descriptives of G4S, the one word that umbrellas it is: security. That is, essentially, what G4S is known as for providing. Surely, this makes it easy to capsulize its service and function in documents and promo-tional literature. However, to truly appreciate the magnitude of G4S's goings on, one must "explode" the view of "security"--with all its tentacles and attendant functions and capabilities. It is massive.

Generally, G4S categorizes its services under 7 spheres. They are: Guarding Solutions, Integrated Security Solutions, Electronic Security Solutions, Water Safety and Aquatic Recreation, Document Management and Business Solutions, Cash Solutions, and Fire and Life Safety Solutions.

Leading its services groups, Guarding Solutions can be seen virtually throughout Guam and Micronesia at large and small businesses, and residential locales. As the world's largest and most pervasive security enterprise protecting its clients property and assets, G4S's training is at the core of their success. Teresa Kasperbauer Sakazaki-G4S Marianas Director of Sales & Marketing, speaks to this key component. "We are very focused on our staff's professional development. We work very hard at training our people, and monitoring their progress." And, there are core values espoused by the security giant: teamwork and collaboration; best people and integrity; and, expertise, customer focus and performance.

AND, PUNCTUATING THESE ATTRIBUTES...

(1) LOCALLY--Guam-Saipan operations, staged in Harmon-Dededo, employs over 1,100 staff, led by some of Guam’s security and law enforcement luminaries; some names you should recognize-Former Police Chief, Paul Suba; FBI-Retired, Former Guam Senator, Chief of Police, and Director of Corrections, Frank Ishizaki; and, retired U.S. Marine Officer and former Guam Corrections Director, Eduardo Bitinga. They, and others of the G4S Guam-Saipan management team, are led by Divisional Country Manager, Christopher Garde, who completed their company’s distinguished Global Leadership Training Program in the United Kingdom.

(2) GLOBALLY--G4S represents one of the most prolific global corporations worldwide, operating

in over 124 countries, on 6 continents, employing over 624,000 people, and listed on the London Stock Exchange. It is, quite notably, a gargantuan operation, regarded as one of the largest security operations in the world.

Sakazaki, summarizes the practical reality of G4S local and global security services in this way, “We have local staff with local managers. But, if we have a problem or security requirement that is new to us, we have the global reach within G4S to take on virtually anything that may arise. And, we can realize that solution in a very short timeframe." There is no hesitation in her proclamation, just the energy of confidence of having fulfilled many like situations.

Another of the service groups, Integrated Security Solutions, is a stock G4S recommendation; which basically brings together a customer-unique designed program of 3 areas of Physical Security, Electronic Security, and Manned Security. “Every situation is different, and over time, the needs change, so we use or integrate a combination of these areas to properly safeguard client property and assets,” says Sakazaki. Illustrating that time continuum, she notes, “A contractor starts projects. Initially, he may have just materials staged at a job site, then, there’s heavy equipment introduced, then windows and other utility aspects are installed; all of these stages will require different integration along that process.”

In its own service group, Electronic Security Solutions, covers technology aspect of security, including video surveillance, access/entry control, personal emergency reporting, alarm monitoring and response and equipment maintenance. As in all its services, this is a fully serviced area, with equipment

sourcing and installation, monitoring and response, equipment servicing. Acknowledging the mobile nature of households, even here, “We have a portable system, which is completely portable, so it can be easily installed or uninstalled and go with the client—wherever they reside. It’s very practical.” Says, Sakazaki.

Turning the corner in a less-expected service area, is Water Safety and Aquatic Recreation. These services are provided mainly to augment or support hotels and water recreational operations. Utilizing certified lifeguards properly equipped with life-saving, first-aid, and CPR training and skills; it is a well-used service in Guam and Saipan resort businesses. Although, used primarily by hospitality properties with water recreation activities, G4S, can be hired to support private party situations—further safeguarding participants.

To help businesses comply with legislative mandates such as HIPAA which safeguard personal informa-tion, G4S Document Management and Business Solutions is that answer. They provide professional document management such as document imaging, secure document destruction and secure courier services. Regarding document destruction service, Sakazaki said, “The whole process from pickup to delivery to our secured destruction point is documented; with the actual video of the destroy-ing of the documents delivered to the client; all this detail is to verify that their important information were handled properly and securely disposed.”

G4S, adding to what seems still another technically demanding service for occupant safety is Fire and

Life Safety Solutions. Fire threatens all. And, G4S has the proven know-how and technical expertise to engineer, install and service fire detection, fire suppression and other necessary equipment. And, as with their other services, G4S provides the atten-dant checks and recurring documentation to satisfy OSHA fire safety requirements on equipment and installed systems.

Also, as an expanding effort, G4S has established Facilities Maintenance, providing grounds and jani-torial services for residents and business customers. With properly screened and trained staff—having gone through a host of pre-employment and drug-testing; you have the peace of mind knowing that this work is being done by a security-minded outfit.

CONTRACTORS TAKE NOTE…

Speaking to a subject of some import to contractors, Sakazaki says, “If companies are looking for partner-ing and teaming, we are capable of securing bond-ing, even U.S. Treasury Listed bonds, so we are open to providing those arrangements to help fill gaps in the construction process."

“We are capable of supporting contractors in many different areas—Government, Private Energy & Utili-ties, Oil & Gas, Transport & Logistics, Ports & Airports, Leisure & Tourism, Financial Institutions, Retail and Industry—and welcome their inquiries. We have trained staff, global resources, to satisfy virtually any construction requirement.”

It is what it is…G4S.

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 19

Page 22: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Small. Large. Local. Global. Low tech. High tech. Residential. Commercial. Aside from all these descriptives of G4S, the one word that umbrellas it is: security. That is, essentially, what G4S is known as for providing. Surely, this makes it easy to capsulize its service and function in documents and promo-tional literature. However, to truly appreciate the magnitude of G4S's goings on, one must "explode" the view of "security"--with all its tentacles and attendant functions and capabilities. It is massive.

Generally, G4S categorizes its services under 7 spheres. They are: Guarding Solutions, Integrated Security Solutions, Electronic Security Solutions, Water Safety and Aquatic Recreation, Document Management and Business Solutions, Cash Solutions, and Fire and Life Safety Solutions.

Leading its services groups, Guarding Solutions can be seen virtually throughout Guam and Micronesia at large and small businesses, and residential locales. As the world's largest and most pervasive security enterprise protecting its clients property and assets, G4S's training is at the core of their success. Teresa Kasperbauer Sakazaki-G4S Marianas Director of Sales & Marketing, speaks to this key component. "We are very focused on our staff's professional development. We work very hard at training our people, and monitoring their progress." And, there are core values espoused by the security giant: teamwork and collaboration; best people and integrity; and, expertise, customer focus and performance.

AND, PUNCTUATING THESE ATTRIBUTES...

(1) LOCALLY--Guam-Saipan operations, staged in Harmon-Dededo, employs over 1,100 staff, led by some of Guam’s security and law enforcement luminaries; some names you should recognize-Former Police Chief, Paul Suba; FBI-Retired, Former Guam Senator, Chief of Police, and Director of Corrections, Frank Ishizaki; and, retired U.S. Marine Officer and former Guam Corrections Director, Eduardo Bitinga. They, and others of the G4S Guam-Saipan management team, are led by Divisional Country Manager, Christopher Garde, who completed their company’s distinguished Global Leadership Training Program in the United Kingdom.

(2) GLOBALLY--G4S represents one of the most prolific global corporations worldwide, operating

in over 124 countries, on 6 continents, employing over 624,000 people, and listed on the London Stock Exchange. It is, quite notably, a gargantuan operation, regarded as one of the largest security operations in the world.

Sakazaki, summarizes the practical reality of G4S local and global security services in this way, “We have local staff with local managers. But, if we have a problem or security requirement that is new to us, we have the global reach within G4S to take on virtually anything that may arise. And, we can realize that solution in a very short timeframe." There is no hesitation in her proclamation, just the energy of confidence of having fulfilled many like situations.

Another of the service groups, Integrated Security Solutions, is a stock G4S recommendation; which basically brings together a customer-unique designed program of 3 areas of Physical Security, Electronic Security, and Manned Security. “Every situation is different, and over time, the needs change, so we use or integrate a combination of these areas to properly safeguard client property and assets,” says Sakazaki. Illustrating that time continuum, she notes, “A contractor starts projects. Initially, he may have just materials staged at a job site, then, there’s heavy equipment introduced, then windows and other utility aspects are installed; all of these stages will require different integration along that process.”

In its own service group, Electronic Security Solutions, covers technology aspect of security, including video surveillance, access/entry control, personal emergency reporting, alarm monitoring and response and equipment maintenance. As in all its services, this is a fully serviced area, with equipment

sourcing and installation, monitoring and response, equipment servicing. Acknowledging the mobile nature of households, even here, “We have a portable system, which is completely portable, so it can be easily installed or uninstalled and go with the client—wherever they reside. It’s very practical.” Says, Sakazaki.

Turning the corner in a less-expected service area, is Water Safety and Aquatic Recreation. These services are provided mainly to augment or support hotels and water recreational operations. Utilizing certified lifeguards properly equipped with life-saving, first-aid, and CPR training and skills; it is a well-used service in Guam and Saipan resort businesses. Although, used primarily by hospitality properties with water recreation activities, G4S, can be hired to support private party situations—further safeguarding participants.

To help businesses comply with legislative mandates such as HIPAA which safeguard personal informa-tion, G4S Document Management and Business Solutions is that answer. They provide professional document management such as document imaging, secure document destruction and secure courier services. Regarding document destruction service, Sakazaki said, “The whole process from pickup to delivery to our secured destruction point is documented; with the actual video of the destroy-ing of the documents delivered to the client; all this detail is to verify that their important information were handled properly and securely disposed.”

G4S, adding to what seems still another technically demanding service for occupant safety is Fire and

Life Safety Solutions. Fire threatens all. And, G4S has the proven know-how and technical expertise to engineer, install and service fire detection, fire suppression and other necessary equipment. And, as with their other services, G4S provides the atten-dant checks and recurring documentation to satisfy OSHA fire safety requirements on equipment and installed systems.

Also, as an expanding effort, G4S has established Facilities Maintenance, providing grounds and jani-torial services for residents and business customers. With properly screened and trained staff—having gone through a host of pre-employment and drug-testing; you have the peace of mind knowing that this work is being done by a security-minded outfit.

CONTRACTORS TAKE NOTE…

Speaking to a subject of some import to contractors, Sakazaki says, “If companies are looking for partner-ing and teaming, we are capable of securing bond-ing, even U.S. Treasury Listed bonds, so we are open to providing those arrangements to help fill gaps in the construction process."

“We are capable of supporting contractors in many different areas—Government, Private Energy & Utili-ties, Oil & Gas, Transport & Logistics, Ports & Airports, Leisure & Tourism, Financial Institutions, Retail and Industry—and welcome their inquiries. We have trained staff, global resources, to satisfy virtually any construction requirement.”

It is what it is…G4S.

20 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

Page 23: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Size Range:20KW (Kilowatt)

to 3.2MW (Megawatt)

www.morricoequipment.comTel: (671) 649-1946

TOTAL SYSTEM INTEGRATIONGENERATORS I TRANSFER SWITCHES I SWITCHGEAR I CONTROLS

Specializing in new and used Shipping Containers,Modified Containers, Modular Container Field Offices,

Cube Containers, and Galvalume Steel Buildings.See our models at our showroom across Crown Bakery in Mangilao.

20’ and 40’ New and UsedShipping Containers

20’ and 40’ ModularContainer Field Offices

20’ and 40’ ModifiedContainer Offices

Mini Cube Containers Available In:

Tel: E-mail: [email protected] | Web: www.jrsguam.com

Brand new steelcube containers

They are going to make the call.But is it you, that they are going to call?

Advertise2016 GCA Membership Directory

in the

For more info contact Adztech at 477-1239/2239or email [email protected] [email protected]

Page 24: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

September 16, 2015Hilton Resort & Spa

Guest Speakers

Monica Guzman

Matt Sgro

22 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

PHO

TO H

IGH

LIG

HTS

Page 25: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

Don’t wait for a typhoon to hit!

CALL NOW 649-1966

Our convenient service saves you time and money!

• Diesel at Pump Prices• Reliable Four-Truck Fleet• Professional Drivers• 24-Hour Delivery (After Typhoons)

ON-SITE DIESEL DELIVERY

www.morricoequipment.com

Onsite Diesel Ad GCA 25yrs.qxp_Layout 1 14/08/2015 1:50 pm Page 1

Tel: 653-4701 | E-mail: [email protected]

I’VE BEEN DEIONIZED!

“I was so amazed when I got my vehicle back. Besides, the vehicle looking practically new (I'm embarrassed to say it was pretty grungy) I was amazed at how the musty, smoky smells were gone. The Ozone treatment worked really well. I would definitely go back when needed.”

- Jovi Ady

989-ASPA (2772) | [email protected]

Page 26: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

September 10, 2015Auto Spot

24 | OCTOBERR2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

PHO

TO H

IGH

LIG

HTS

Page 27: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 25

Page 28: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

October 11, 2015Ypao Beach

26 | OCTOBERR2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

PHO

TO H

IGH

LIG

HTS

Page 29: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 27

Page 30: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

28 | OCTOBERR2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

Page 31: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

On behalf of the GCA Board of Directors & The GCA Staf f, we would like to thank the following companies that helped to make our Annual Family Day Picnic a successful

and en joyable event!

MAIN SPONSOR

Page 32: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

LOMBARD, IL — September 29, 2015 — Pernix Group, Inc. (OTCQB: PRXG) proudly announces Abhyash Chand as the Chief Financial Officer of Pernix Pacific. Mr. Chand has been with Pernix since 2006, where he started as the Regional Financial Controller for Pernix Fiji Limited. In his new role, he will be responsible to provide the financial leadership for Pernix’s subsidiary companies in the Pacific Rim and enhance stakeholder value. Pernix currently operates on Fiji, Vanuatu, Guam and Papua New Guinea within the Pacific Rim and has been working in the region for nearly twenty years.

Mr. Nidal Zayed, President and CEO stated, “Abhyash has been a loyal employee in our Fiji office for nearly ten years. He knows Pernix and he knows the Region. We are committed to growing our operations in the Pacific Rim, and Abhyash has an important role in that process.” He went on to say, “I have complete faith in him in this role as the CFO of Pernix Pacific.”

Mr. Chand said, “I am excited for the opportunity to have this important role with Pernix as we continue to grow our operations in the Pacific Rim.”

Mr. Chand is a graduate of the University of the South Pacific where he holds a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting & Financial Management and Banking & Finance.

About Pernix Group, Inc.

Pernix Group, Inc. is a construction company recognized by Engineering News Record for being one of the Top 50 American Contractors Working Abroad for the last four years in a row. Headquartered in Lombard, Illinois, Pernix has operations in the United States, Africa, the Middle East, and the Pacific Rim. Pernix has full-scale construction and management capabilities, in three primary markets: Federal Government, Commercial & Industrial, and Power. Recently, Pernix Group expanded its domestic Commercial & Industrial operations by acquiring KBR Building Group, now known as BE&K Building Group. Pernix also expanded its Pacific operations this year by acquiring assets of DCK Pacific Guam, now operating as Pernix Guam LLC.

Pernix Group, Inc. common stock is traded on the over-the-counter quotation board (OTCQB) under the symbol PRXG. Additional information is available at www.pernixgroup.com.

Forward-Looking Statement

Certain of the statements made in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Potential risks and other factors that could cause or contrib-ute to actual results differing materially from such forward-looking statements are discussed in greater detail in the Company’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Contact Investor Relations:

[email protected]

Pernix AppointsAbhyash Chandas Chief Financial Officerof Pernix Pacific

30 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

CO

NST

RUC

TIO

NH

EAD

LIN

E

Page 33: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

LOMBARD, IL — September 30, 2015 — Pernix Group, Inc. (OTCQB: PRXG), a construction company recognized by Engineering News Record for being one of the Top 50 American Contractors working abroad for the last four years in a row, announced their new subsidiary company in Papua New Guinea, Pernix (PNG) Limited. The establishment of Pernix (PNG) Limited is another step Pernix Group is taking to strengthen their presence in the Pacific Rim. Pernix Group has operated in the Pacific Rim since 1995 and currently has operations in Fiji, Guam, Vanuatu, and now in Papua New Guinea.

Pernix Group President and CEO, Nidal Zayed said, “We are excited for the opportunities available in PNG. Pernix recognizes that there are active and growing construction and power markets in Papua New Guinea, and we want to be a part of that. We have operations in place in the region already and want to use those resources to develop our presence in PNG. As always, our plan when we enter a new location is to partner with the local community so we will all benefit.”

Papua New Guinea will be the host for 2018 APEC Meeting which will see 21 leaders of member countries including the United States President attending this forum. APEC will create several opportunities in infrastructure development, construction and power generation. Pernix will proactively pursue these opportunities. The second phase of the ExxonMobil LNG Gas project will commence in 2016 and this will also create several high value opportunities for Pernix.

Because of its global presence and experience, Pernix will bring to PNG, and the Pacific region, cutting edge technology, expertise and leader-ship in construction, infrastructure development and power generation that will greatly benefit PNG and other Pacific Island economies.

Pernix has appointed Leonard Louma as the Local Director of Pernix (PNG) Limited. Mr. Louma has Bachelor's Degree in Education from the University of Papua New Guinea, a Post-Graduate Diploma in Diplomatic Relations from the International Institute of Public Administration in Paris (France), has studied in the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in Boston (U.S.) and has undertaken specialist training for Senior Executives in National and International Security from the John F. Kennedy School of Administration at Harvard University (U.S.). Mr. Louma has served in the Papua New Guinea Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York and the Papua New Guinea Embassies in Paris (France) and Beijing (China). He was also Papua New Guinea's Roving Ambassador to APEC, ASEAN and ESCAP. He was the Chairman of the 46th PIF Steering Committee, charged with the responsibility of organizing the PIF Leaders Meeting which took place earlier this month.

Pernix (PNG) Limited is currently in the process of setting up an office in the Port Moresby area.

About Pernix Group, Inc.

Pernix Group, Inc. is a construction company recognized by Engineering News Record for being one of the Top 50 American Contractors Working Abroad for the last four years in a row. Headquartered in Lombard, Illinois, Pernix has operations in the United States, Africa, the Middle East, and the Pacific Rim. Pernix has full-scale construction and management capabilities, in three primary markets: Federal Govern-ment, Commercial & Industrial, and Power. Recently, Pernix Group expanded its domestic Commercial & Industrial operations by acquiring KBR Building Group, now known as BE&K Building Group. Pernix also expanded its Pacific operations this year by acquiring assets of DCK Pacific Guam, now operating as Pernix Guam LLC.

Pernix Group, Inc. common stock is traded on the over-the-counter quotation board (OTCQB) under the symbol PRXG. Additional information is available at www.pernixgroup.com.

Forward-Looking Statement

Certain of the statements made in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Potential risks and other factors that could cause or contribute to actual results differing materially from such forward-looking statements are discussed in greater detail in the Company’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Contact Investor Relations:

[email protected]

Pernix Group Expands its Pacific Rim Operationsto Papua New Guinea

CO

NST

RUC

TIO

NH

EAD

LIN

E

www.guamcontractors.org CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN OCTOBER2015 | 31

Page 34: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

RIM Architects appoints new Managing Principal and expands Professional Services

September 24, 2015, Hagåtña, GU – RIM Architects, LLC is pleased to announce the transition of two leaders within the company. Brent L. Wiese, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C was appointed as Managing Principal of its Guam operations effective September 14, 2015. The Board considered this change carefully and made the unanimous decision that Mr. Wiese was the right fit for the job. “We’re confident Brent will do great things in this critical leadership role--bringing new energy and a fresh outlook,” said Larry Cash, AIA, NCARB, President /CEO of RIM Architects.

Brent Wiese is a licensed architect in Guam, CNMI and California, and brings over 30 years of design and project management experience. As a key member of RIM Architects’ management team, he was responsible for project scheduling, building code expertise, negotiating contracts, and budget and resource management. His attention to detail and high standards, make him a well-respected member of RIM’s management team. Mr. Wiese works well with clients, contractors, and consultants to build teamwork to ensure projects are completed with excel-lence, on time and within budget. “This is an exciting time for RIM as we see opportunities to grow and continue to deliver outstanding design. I look forward to serving RIM Architects in this important capacity,” said Mr. Wiese.

To expand the firm’s professional capabilities beyond core architectural services, specifically in Construction Contract Administration/Project Management (CA/PM), RIM Principal, Tim

Armour, CDT, LEED AP, will be responsible for leading an expanded team focused on serving clients specific to construc-tion contract administration. In addition to Mr. Armour’s new role as Principal CA/PM Manager, he will also be respon-sible for developing new business-- working closely with existing and potential clients. “These are exciting times for RIM as our industry experiences big activity in Guam and the Asia Pacific region with the military buildup, a renewed focus on hospitality, and an overall revitalization of all market sectors. We want to continue that upward movement and move with the time to expand our capabilities in Guam,” said Mr. Armour.

Tim Armour brings over 40 years of experience in the AEC professional services field--architecture, construction and construction management. Prior to relocating to Guam in 1991, he worked on the East Coast for ten years as a construction supervisor, from 1973 to 1983. Tim joined RIM Architects in 1999 to provide construction contract administration services, transi-tioning from his own construction consulting firm, Tim Armour Construction Services. A talented artist in addition to his attention to technical detail, he remains active in both the arts community, as well as the construction industry. In 2006, he was appointed Managing Principal for RIM Architects (Guam), LLC.

RIM Architects has served the local community in Guam and the Marianas for over 28 years providing excellence in comprehensive architectural design and client service. The firm’s philosophy brings ‘Results with IMagination’ to every project and translates the client’s

program, functional objectives and aesthetic aspirations into an appropriate and creative design solution. In addition to its Hagåtña Guam office, RIM Architects has offices in Anchorage and Palmer, Alaska; San Francisco and Tustin, California; and Honolulu Hawai`i.

####

For immediate release

Contact: Angelica PaulinoMarketing Coordinator (671) [email protected]

32 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

CO

NST

RUC

TIO

NH

EAD

LIN

E

Page 35: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

your small business.

William “Bill” Beery, P.E.General Manager, Tutujan Hills Group Ltd.Immediate Past Chairman, GCA

“For some time our group had been asking for a 401(k) benefit. My first impression was that providing this type of program for a group as small as ours might be on the expensive side. Not only did ASC Trust Corporation break this

misconception, they surpassed my expectations. We were able to start a plan that was both fairly priced and made sense with what we were looking for. In the end, the tailored-solution was exactly what our team needed.” - Bill Beery

Schedule to meet with our team today e: [email protected] w: asctrust.com p: (671)-477-2724

Retirement solutions for

Finding a tailor-made solution is just the beginning. ASC offers a level of service that sets us apart from other retirement plan providers in the region.

Let us help you save for a successful retirement, one paycheck at a time.

Page 36: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

GU

AM

DEP

ART

MEN

T O

F LA

BOR

Alie

n La

bor P

roce

ssin

g Ce

rti�

cati

on D

ivis

ion

Empl

oyer

s W

orkp

lace

Mon

thly

Rep

ort S

tati

stic

sM

ON

TH E

ND

ING

: Aug

ust 2

015

19 0Sp

ecia

lty C

ook

4A

uto

Repa

irer

Cem

ent M

ason

468

Ship

wrig

ht /

Carp

ente

r11

Bake

rCa

rpen

ter

533

1 3 4

Ultr

asou

nd T

echn

icia

nBa

ker M

echa

nic

Rein

forc

ing

Met

alw

orke

r17

1

Wed

ding

Ser

vice

Att

enda

nts

Stru

ctur

al S

teel

wor

ker

9

Wel

der

Wel

der -

Fitt

er1 1 11

0 0 0 0 9

1 0 1 0 0 0

Conc

ierg

e

2Ch

ef

Plum

ber

33 1 34 3

Elec

tric

Mot

or R

epai

rer

Shee

tmet

al W

orke

r

412

NIC

U O

B Re

gist

ered

Nur

seCT

Tec

hH

eavy

Equ

ip. O

pera

tor

1Ba

ker M

aste

r1

Gol

dsm

ith79

Elec

tric

ian

0 2 0

Mec

hani

c

Mai

nten

ance

Ele

ctric

ian

Elev

ator

Inst

alle

r

1 7 4

Chem

othe

rapy

Reg

iste

red

Nur

seCa

mp

Cook

Hea

vy E

quip

men

t Mec

hani

cTo

tal C

omm

on C

onst

.13

31O

R Re

gist

ered

Nur

se1

Inve

ntor

y Co

ntro

l Man

ager

004 0

1 0 0 1 1

Spec

ialty

Che

f Tha

iSp

a Su

perv

isor

- Tr

aine

r

Aut

omot

ive

Mec

hani

cIn

vent

ory

Cont

rol M

anag

er1

Aut

o Bo

dy R

epai

rer T

ech.

1O

SH In

stru

ctor

0Bu

yer

3H

VAC

Mec

hani

c6

AC

Mai

nten

ance

Tec

h

1El

ec./

Elec

tron

ic S

ervi

ce T

ech

5N

ICU

Reg

iste

red

Nur

se

8ER

Reg

iste

red

Nur

se12

Med

-Sur

g O

R Re

gist

ered

Nur

se

14IC

U R

egis

tere

d N

urse

1 6 3 1

Birt

hing

Reg

iste

red

Nur

se

Card

iac

Cath

Reg

iste

red

Nur

sePe

diat

rics

Regi

ster

ed N

urse

Exec

utiv

e Ch

ef

0Pa

inte

r/Bl

aste

r6

Med

/Tel

e Re

gist

ered

Nur

se4

Surg

ical

Reg

iste

red

Nur

se

6M

aint

enan

ce W

orke

r, M

achi

nery

Biom

edic

al E

quip

men

t Spe

cial

ist

Japa

nese

Spe

cial

ty C

ook

Phili

ppin

esLa

ndsc

ape

Gar

dene

rs5

1602

Kore

aO

BGYN

Reg

iste

red

Nur

se2222

6Ja

pan

Kirib

ati

Uni

ted

King

dom

6Le

s M

ills

Cert

i�ed

Inst

ruct

or2

Mac

hini

st0

Aus

tral

ia0

Italy

1Pe

ru1

Thai

land

3O

ther

0

Mar

ine

Mai

nt. M

achi

nist

Tota

l by

Nat

iona

lity

1615

Mar

ine

Mai

nt. M

echa

nic

MRI

Tec

hnic

ian

Mas

sage

The

rapi

st17

Ass

ista

nt S

olar

(PV)

Inst

alle

r

Figa

ro C

o�ee

Sho

p Sp

vr5

Pain

ter,T

rans

port

er E

quip

men

t

426771

Pipe

�tte

r3

Qua

lity

Insp

ecto

rs

Radi

olog

ic T

echn

icia

n0

Rest

aura

nt M

anag

er

52110

Refr

iger

atio

n &

AC

Mec

hani

c

Scub

a D

ive

Inst

ruct

or1

Ship

�tte

rSo

us C

hef

1Ex

ecut

ive

Ass

t. M

gr. F

&B

1Sp

ecia

lty C

ook

Italia

n Cu

isin

e

226

64

1395

Tota

l Non

-Con

stru

ctio

n H

2-B

Wor

kers

Hea

vy E

quip

men

t Mec

hani

c

Tota

l OTH

ER C

onst

ruct

ion

Tow

er C

rane

Ope

rato

r1

Qua

lity

Cont

rol I

nspe

ctor

Wor

kers

by

Nat

iona

lity

TOTA

L Co

nstr

ucti

on H

-2B

Wor

kers

Wel

der

Proj

ect S

uper

viso

r

1Pr

ojec

t Man

ager

Gen

eral

Mai

nten

ance

& R

epai

rer

Fiel

d Su

perv

isor

Plas

tere

r

Elec

tric

al P

ower

Lin

eman

Estim

ator

HVA

C M

echa

nic

Fore

man

AC&

Ref

riger

atio

n M

echa

nic

17A

C& R

efrig

erat

ion

Tech

nici

an

Com

mon

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ccup

atio

ns

Land

scap

er

Oth

er N

on-C

onst

ruct

ion

Occ

upat

ions

Oth

er C

onst

ruct

ion

Occ

upat

ions

Arc

hite

ctur

al D

raft

er

Civi

l Eng

inee

r

Cons

truc

tion

47 39N

on-C

onst

ruct

ion

Tota

l H-2

B Em

ploy

ers

86

Empl

oyer

s By

Indu

stry

4131

Gra

nd T

otal

H-2

B W

orke

rs16

21

Tota

l U.S

. Wor

kers

Com

mon

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ccup

atio

ns 35.1

6%

40.0

5%

12.8

5%

0.68

%

2.48

%

0.08

%2.

55%

5.94

%0.

23%

Cem

ent M

ason

Carp

ente

r

Rein

forc

ing

Met

alw

orke

rSt

ruct

ural

Stee

lwor

ker

Plum

ber

Shee

tmet

al W

orke

r

Hea

vy E

quip

.O

pera

tor

Elec

tric

ian

Cam

p Co

ok

US

Wor

kers

vs.

H-2

B

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Tota

l U.S

.W

orke

rsG

rand

Tot

al H

-2B

Wor

kers

Prep

ared

By:

She

rine

Espi

nosa

Cont

act i

nfor

mat

ion:

Gre

g M

asse

y, A

LPCD

Adm

inis

trat

orP.

O. B

ox 9

970

Tam

unin

g, G

uam

969

31(6

71)4

75-8

005/

8003

H-2

B Po

pula

tion

by N

atio

nalit

y

Phili

ppin

es98

.89%

Kore

a0.

31%

Japa

n0.

37%

Kirib

ati

0.12

%

Uni

ted

King

dom

0.00

%

Aus

tral

ia0.

00%Ita

ly0.

06%

Peru

0.06

%

Thai

land

0.19

%

Oth

er0.

00%

Phili

ppin

es

Kore

a

Japa

n

Kirib

ati

Uni

ted

King

dom

Aus

tral

ia

Italy

Peru

Thai

land

Oth

er

34 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

REPO

RTS/

IN

FORM

ATIO

N

Page 37: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015
Page 38: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015

GCA Construction IndexGCA Construction Index

Statistics provided by Guam Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Guam Contractors Association; and the GCA Trades Academy, as of September 30, 2015.

!

"#!!!

$#!!!

%#!!!

&#!!!

!' !" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$

Construction Employment

,!,'!!#!!!#!!!,"!!#!!!#!!!,(!!#!!!#!!!,$!!#!!!#!!!,)!!#!!!#!!!

!" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

!"#$%#&'()*+,#-./((

,!

,'!!#!!!#!!!

,"!!#!!!#!!!

,(!!#!!!#!!!

,$!!#!!!#!!!

!'!"!(!$!)!%!*!&!+'!'''"'('$')

DOD Contracts*

!

)!!

'!!!

')!!

"!!!

!' !" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

H2 Labor*

!

)

'!

')

"!

")

(!

()

$!

!) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

GCA Apprenticeship Registrations

GCA Construction Index

Statistics provided by Guam Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Guam Contractors Association; and the GCA Trades Academy, as of September 30, 2015.

!

"#!!!

$#!!!

%#!!!

&#!!!

!' !" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$

Construction Employment

,!,'!!#!!!#!!!,"!!#!!!#!!!,(!!#!!!#!!!,$!!#!!!#!!!,)!!#!!!#!!!

!" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

!"#$%#&'()*+,#-./((

,!

,'!!#!!!#!!!

,"!!#!!!#!!!

,(!!#!!!#!!!

,$!!#!!!#!!!

!'!"!(!$!)!%!*!&!+'!'''"'('$')

DOD Contracts*

!

)!!

'!!!

')!!

"!!!

!' !" !( !$ !) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

H2 Labor*

!

)

'!

')

"!

")

(!

()

$!

!) !% !* !& !+ '! '' '" '( '$ ')

GCA Apprenticeship Registrations

36 | OCTOBER2015 CONSTRUCTION NEWS BULLETIN www.guamcontractors.org

REPO

RTS/

IN

FORM

ATIO

N

Page 39: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015
Page 40: GCA Construction News Bulletin October 2015