Montreux Document Questionnaire

1. Provide examples, if any, of how you have determined which services may or may not be
contracted out to PMSCs. If you have done so, please specify what and how services are
limited, and how you take into account factors such as whether those services could cause
PMSC personnel to become involved in direct participation in hostilities. Please indicate
by what means you do this (e.g., national legislation, regulation, policy, etc.). [GP 1, 24, 53]

As a matter of U.S. law and policy, an “inherently governmental function” (IG function)
cannot be contracted out. The Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act of 1998 defines
an IG function as “a function so intimately related to the public interest as to require performance
by Federal Government employees.” A number of U.S. statutory, regulatory, and agency
provisions provide additional guidance regarding what constitutes an IG function and designate
specific functions as IG or commercial.

Under policy guidance applicable to all executive branch departments and agencies, see
Office of Management and Budget, Policy Letter 11-01, Performance of Inherently
Governmental and Critical Functions (September 12, 2011), IG functions that may not be
contracted out include the command of military forces, combat, security operations performed in
direct support of combat as part of a larger integrated armed force, security that entails
augmenting or reinforcing others that have become engaged in combat, and security operations
performed in environments where, in the judgment of the responsible Federal official, there is
significant potential for the security operations to evolve into combat. Where the U.S. military is
present, the judgment of the military commander should be sought regarding the potential for the
operations to evolve into combat.

Department of Defense Instruction 1100.22, Policies and Procedures for Workforce Mix,
April 12, 2010, defines combat operations and provides further guidance on when the provision
of security services would be IG. The instruction defines combat operations as the deliberate
destructive and/or disruptive action against the armed forces or other military objectives of
another sovereign government or against other armed actors on behalf of the United States. This
entails the authority to plan, prepare, and execute operations to actively seek out, close with, and
destroy a hostile force or other military objective by means of, among other things, the
employment of firepower and other destructive and disruptive capabilities. These functions may
not be performed by contractor personnel.

Security provided for the protection of resources (people, information, equipment, supplies,
facilities, etc.) and operations in uncontrolled, unpredictable, unstable, high risk, or hostile
environments inside or outside the United States entail a wide range of capabilities, some of
which are IG and others of which are commercial. Security is IG if it is performed in

Page 1 of 25
environments where there is such a high likelihood of hostile fire, bombings, or biological or
chemical attacks by groups using sophisticated weapons and devices that, in the judgment of the
military commander, the situation could evolve into combat. Security performed in such high-
risk environments is designated for military performance, and private security contracts are not a
force structure substitute for these requirements.

Security is also IG if, in the commander’s judgment, decisions on the appropriate course of
action would require substantial discretion, the outcome of which could significantly affect U.S.
objectives with regard to the life, liberty, or property of private persons, a military mission, or
international relations. Such actions typically require high-risk, on-the-spot judgments regarding
the appropriate level of force, the acceptable level of collateral damage, and whether the target is
friend or foe in situations pivotal to U.S. interests. This type of security requires command
decisions, military training, and operational control, and it is reserved for military personnel.
Combatant Commander Orders implement these instructions and forbid private security
contractors (PSCs) from taking a direct part in combat operations, combat-like operations,
offensive operations, quick reaction force missions, cordon and search operations, or other
uniquely military functions.

PSCs under the Department of State’s Worldwide Protective Services (WPS) contract do not
perform IG functions, as the security services they provide are solely protective and defensive in
nature. The WPS contract provides the State Department with movement security, specialized
emergency services, and guard services for U.S. diplomatic missions overseas. Although not all
WPS task orders are carried out in areas of armed conflict, the provisions and practices under the
WPS contract are cited herein to demonstrate how the legal obligations and good practices set
forth in the Montreux Document are being implemented where WPS contractors are providing
services in areas of armed conflict.

2. Indicate if you require PMSCs to obtain an authorization to provide any one or more
private military and security services. This may include whether PMSCs and/or individuals
are required to obtain licenses. [GP 25, 26, 54]

Pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), as implemented through the International
Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (available at: <http://pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/
itar_official.html>), the United States controls the export and import of defense articles,
including technology, and defense services. Any person wishing to export these items must
register with the Department of State prior to exporting any item. A license or other
authorization is required for the export of “defense articles,” which includes weapons, other
military material, and items or technology with specific military applications. Further, a license
or other authorization is required for the export of “defense services,” which is defined as the
furnishing of assistance, including training to foreign persons whether in the United States or
Page 2 of 25
abroad in the development, design, engineering, manufacture, production, assembly, testing,
repair, maintenance, modification, operation, demilitarization, destruction, processing, or use of a
defense article. Accordingly, the export of the training in the maintenance and operation of
weapons systems and advice to, or training of, local forces and security personnel, as described
in the definition of PMSCs in paragraph nine of the Preface of the Montreux Document,
constitute a “defense service” under ITAR. Specific weapons, material, technology, and defense
services covered by ITAR are found on the United States Munitions List (USML) and set forth in
Part 121 of the ITAR.

3. Is a central authority designated for authorizations? [GP 26] If so, please provide details.

GP 26 does not apply to the United States, as the United States is not a Territorial State as
defined in the Montreux Document.

4. Provide details of procedures for the authorization and/or selection and contracting of
PMSCs and their personnel [GP 2, 28, 57]. Please include details of how you ensure
adequate resources are applied to this function [GP 3, 27, 58] and examples of how such
procedures are transparent and supervised. [GP 4, 29, 59]

The U.S. Government has extensive experience in selecting and contracting for private
security services. The Federal acquisition process is governed by the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) found at Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The FAR
provides standardized contract clauses, and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) indicate the elements
upon which contract award decisions will be based.

The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and the Department of
State Acquisition Regulation (DOSAR) provide acquisition procedures specific to the
Departments of Defense and State, respectively. In addition, procedures for soliciting and
awarding contracts in armed conflict and comparable situations can be found in the Defense
Contingency Contracting (DCC) Handbook, available at:
<http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/ccap/cc/jcchb/index.html>. Solicitations for contracts are
publicly available and can be accessed through a number of sources, including:
<https://www.fbo.gov/index?cck=1&au=&ck=> and < http://www.defense.gov/landing/contract
_resources.aspx>. Contract awards are published on a publicly available website at:
<http://www.defense.gov/Contracts/default.aspx>.

DFARS Part 225.74 addresses the requirements for contractor personnel authorized to
accompany U.S. Armed Forces deployed outside the United States. The supporting Procedures,
Guidance, and Information (PGI) 225-7401(a) requires potential DoD contractors to be informed
that they must be in compliance with ANSI/ASIS PSC.1-2012, American National Standard,
Page 3 of 25
Management System for Quality of Private Security Operations—Requirements with Guidance
(hereafter “the PSC Standard”). Successful offerors will include evidence that the company is in
compliance with that standard.

The Department of State anticipates that conformance with the PSC Standard will be a
requirement in the bidding process for the successor WPS contract, which provides the
Department with movement security, specialized emergency services, and guard services for U.S.
diplomatic missions overseas. The Department also plans to make membership in the
International Code of Conduct Association (ICoCA) a requirement in the bidding process for the
successor WPS contract, so long as the process moves forward as expected and the association
attracts significant industry participation.

The Department of Defense has more than 20,000 warranted Contracting Officers (COs) and
more than twice as many trained and certified Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs) to
assist in the selection and contracting of DoD contracted support, including services provided by
PSCs and other services as described in paragraph 9(a) of the Preface to the Montreux
Document. Duties and performance expectations of CORs can be found in the Defense
Contingency Contracting Officer Representative (COR) Handbook, available at:
<http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/ccap/cc/corhb/index.html>.

5. To what degree have you sought to harmonize any authorization system with those of
other States. [GP 56]

The United States has worked closely with other Contracting States and Home States to
secure wide acceptance of the PSC Standard. The United Kingdom has adopted the PSC
Standard for use in its overseas contracts for private security services, and the International
Organization for Standardization has accepted the PSC Standard for development as an
international standard. The Department of Defense also provides staff and faculty assistance for
international education and outreach on PMSC-related issues.

The United States has actively participated in other international harmonization efforts, such
as the ICoC and the establishment of the ICoCA. The United States is also a founding member
of the Advisory Forum of Montreux Document Participants. The forum will provide an informal
venue for Montreux Document participating states to share information to promote the
implementation of the legal obligations and good practices set forth in the Montreux Document.

Page 4 of 25
6. Provide details on criteria that have been adopted that include quality indicators to
ensure respect of relevant national law, international humanitarian law and human rights
law. Indicate how you have ensured that such criteria are then fulfilled by the PMSC. [GP
5, 30] If relevant, please indicate if lowest price is not the only criterion for the selection of
PMSCs. [GP 5]

Through contracting requirements and rigorous oversight, the Departments of Defense and
State have implemented measures to help ensure the high quality performance of government-
contracted PSCs in conformance with applicable national and international laws. COs within the
Departments of Defense and State provide contract management and oversight of government
contracts, including those for PSC services, to ensure compliance with applicable contract
requirements and standards. The CO possesses the sole authority to enter into or modify a
contract on behalf of the U.S. Government. The CO may delegate authority to a COR and other
government contract administration personnel to assist in the administration of the contract or
task order.

The Security Branch, within the Department of State’s Office of Acquisitions Management,
administers and oversees all PSC contracts utilizing consistent best practices in accordance with
the FAR. The specific duties and authorities of Department of State contract administration
personnel are detailed in the delegation letter issued by the CO. Contract administration
personnel must be familiar with the base contract and any task orders for which they are
responsible and must maintain official written records to document contractor performance.
These records are used to substantiate contractor performance assessments documented in
periodic reports by the COR to the CO.

Lowest price is not the only criterion for the selection of PMSCs. In both Departments,
contracts and task orders under existing contracts are negotiated and awarded on a “best value”
basis when the expected outcome of the acquisition in the Government’s estimation provides the
greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. 48 CFR 15.302, Contracting by
Negotiation, provides that “[t]he objective of source selection is to select the proposal that
represents the best value.” By contrast, lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source
selection is appropriate when the expectation is that best value will result from selection of the
technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

One means of determining minimal technically acceptable performance is through the use of
performance standards. Using this process, the emphasis that cost is given in an evaluation of
proposals will not carry significant weight if the offeror cannot demonstrate the ability to meet
applicable performance standards. As noted above, PGI 225.7401(a) requires DoD acquisitions
involving the performance of security services, as defined in 48 CFR 252.225-7039, in areas of
combat operations, contingency operations, or other military operations or exercises, to
Page 5 of 25
incorporate, and require compliance with, the PSC Standard. The Department of State
anticipates requiring Contractors to demonstrate conformance with the PSC Standard in order to
bid on the successor WPS contract. The PSC Standard provides quality indicators for the
performance of PSC-related services, and is supported by ANSI/ASIS PSC.2-2012, Conformity
Assessment and Auditing Management Systems for Quality of Private Security Company
Operations, and ANSI/ASIS PSC.3-2013, Maturity Model for the Phased Implementation of a
Quality Assurance Management System for Private Security Service Providers, which provides
requirements and guidance for assessing a contractor’s conformity with the PSC Standard.

The Defense Contract Auditing Agency (DCAA) audits contractor performance on all
Department of Defense contracts, as well as the Department of State’s WPS task orders, and the
Defense Contract Management Agency and the State Department’s Office of Acquisitions
Management assess contractor performance on DoD contracts and the WPS contract,
respectively. Contractor performance is also subject to audit by Special Inspector Generals and
the Offices of Inspector General (OIG) at the Departments of Defense and State.

7. Describe how the following elements, if any, are considered in authorization or selection
procedures and criteria. Please also indicate to what degree they are included in terms of
contract with, or terms of authorization of, PMSCs or their personnel [GP 14, 39, 40, 67]:

Section 862 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), as
amended, mandated that the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State,
prescribe regulations on the selection, training, equipping, and conduct of personnel performing
private security functions in designated areas of combat operations, including certain
contingency operations and other significant military operations as appropriately designated
(hereinafter “designated areas”). The final rule, entitled Private Security Contractors (PSCs)
Operating in Contingency Operations, Combat Operations, or Other Significant Military
Operations (32 CFR 159), implements this statutory requirement. Section 862 also required
revision of the FAR to require contractors to comply with the policies established in 32 CFR 159.
The FAR was revised accordingly by adding sections 25.302 through 25.302-6 to subpart 25.3.
48 CFR 25.302-6 requires all covered contracts to include the clause contained at 52.225-26,
Contractors Performing Private Security Functions Outside the United States, which, in turn,
requires PSCs under covered contracts to ensure that their personnel comply with the policies set
forth in 32 CFR 159. In addition, the WPS contract incorporates the requirements of 48 CFR
52.225-19, Contractor Personnel in a Designated Operational Area or Supporting a Diplomatic
or Consular Mission Outside the United States.

During the acquisition process, PSCs are evaluated on their ability to comply with these
regulations and the solicitation requirements, which address elements (a)-(h), below. Offerors

Page 6 of 25
whose proposals do not meet these requirements are deemed technically unacceptable or
nonresponsible and are ineligible for contract award.

a. past conduct [GP 6, 32, 60].

48 CFR 25.302-6 requires contracts for private security functions in designated areas to
specify that “the Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of this clause [the clause at
48 CFR 52.225-26] will be included in appropriate databases of past performance and considered
in any responsibility determination or evaluation of past performance.” The database used to
track this information is the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).
Reports in CPARS assess contractor performance and provide a record, both positive and
negative, of the contractor during a specified period of time. Each assessment is based upon
objective facts and supported by program and contract management data, such as cost
performance reports, customer comments, quality reviews, technical interchange meetings,
financial solvency assessments, construction/production management reviews, contractor
operations reviews, functional performance evaluations, and earned contract incentives. Past
performance documented in CPARS is used to evaluate contractor proposals for future contracts
in support of contingency operations with the U.S. Government, anywhere in the world.

The Department of State requires prospective contractors to submit for review prior to award
three past performance references from prior clients. In addition, in both Departments, the CO
uses the periodic reports, as well as the recommendations in the annual performance review, to
support the decision to exercise another option year or terminate the contract. The Department
retains all incident reports, terminations, and dismissals of PSC personnel and tracks eligibility
for employment under the contract.

b. financial and economic capacity [GP 7, 33, 61].

48 CFR 9.104-1 requires a prospective contractor to demonstrate adequate financial

resources (or the ability to obtain the resources) needed to perform the contract work. The CO is
required to review evidence of economic capacity when considering contract award.

The Department of State reviews prospective contractors’ Dun and Bradstreet reports prior to
award to validate financial and economic capacity. In addition, the Department requires
prospective contractors to submit three years of audited financial performance data, including
income statements, balance sheets, and cash-flow statements for consideration and evaluation
prior to award.

Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance is required under all DoD contracts for services to be
performed outside the United States, as well as under the Department of State’s WPS contract.
Page 7 of 25
In addition, 48 CFR 52.228-5 and 428.310 require Federal contractors, at their own expense, to
provide and maintain during the entire performance of the contract, at least the kinds and
minimum amounts of insurance required in the schedule or elsewhere in the contract.

c. possession of required registration, licenses or authorizations (if relevant) [GP 8].

32 CFR 159.6 requires PSCs to develop procedures to ensure that their personnel meet all the
legal, training, and qualification requirements for authorization to carry a weapon in accordance
with the terms and conditions of their contract and host country law. 48 CFR 52.225-26
implements 32 CFR 159 by requiring PSCs under covered contracts to ensure that their
personnel performing private security functions under the contract comply with any instructions
for authorizing and accounting for weapons to be used by those personnel and for registering and
identifying armored vehicles, helicopters, and other military vehicles operated by those
personnel.

The WPS contract provides that armed contractor personnel are subject to host country laws
regarding the licensure, carrying, and proper use of firearms. The contractor is responsible for
ensuring that all armed contractor personnel are properly licensed in accordance with local law
for the duration of time such personnel are in-country and must maintain all permits, licenses,
and appointments required for work under the contract.

d. personnel and property records [GP 9, 34, 62].

Section 862 of Public Law 110-181 (with amendments) and 48 CFR 52.225-26 require PSCs
under covered contracts to ensure that their personnel performing private security functions
under the contract comply with any instructions for: registering, processing, accounting for, and
keeping appropriate records of personnel performing private security functions; authorizing and
accounting for weapons to be used by personnel performing private security functions; and
registering and identifying armored vehicles, helicopters, and other military vehicles operated by
contractors performing private security functions. The Departments of Defense and State use the
Synchronized Pre-deployment Operations Tracking (SPOT) system to enter this information and
maintain situational awareness.

e. training [GP 10, 35, 63].

Section 862 of Public Law 110-181 (with amendments) and 32 CFR 159 require the
development of procedures to implement pre-deployment training requirements for personnel
performing private security functions in designated areas, including, but not limited to, the
identification of resources and assistance available to PSC personnel, country information and
cultural training, guidance on working with host country nationals and military personnel, rules
Page 8 of 25
on the use of force and graduated force procedures, and requirements and procedures for
direction, control and the maintenance of communications with regard to the movement and
coordination of PSCs and PSC personnel, including specifying interoperability requirements. 48
CFR 52.225-26 implements 32 CFR 159 by requiring PSCs under covered contracts to ensure
that their personnel performing private security functions under the contract understand their
obligation to comply with qualification and training requirements, as well as any instructions
related to weapons, equipment, force protection, security, health, safety, or relations and
interaction with locals, and rules on the use of force.

Department of Defense contracts include 48 CFR 252.225-7040, which additionally requires

all contractors accompanying the U.S. Armed Forces to receive pre-deployment training on
applicable provisions of the laws of war and any other applicable treaties and international
agreements. Section 9.3 of the PSC Standard includes requirements for training PSC personnel
in measures against bribery, corruption, and in handling complaints by the local population. As
cited elsewhere in this response, conformance with the PSC Standard is mandatory in all DoD
contracts for security functions performed overseas.

Under the WPS contract, PSCs must successfully complete all required pre-deployment
training before beginning work on any WPS contract or task order. Proof of successful training
completion must be kept on file by the contractor and provided to the Department at any time
upon request. WPS pre-deployment training includes familiarization with the Department of
State, operating in a contingency environment, and cultural familiarization with the area of
deployment, as well as labor category-specific firearms and operational training. The State
Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) performs periodic program management
reviews (PMRs) of contractor training and training facilities (domestic and overseas) to ensure
compliance with program, contract, and task order requirements.

f. lawful acquisition and use of equipment, in particular weapons [GP 11, 36, 64].

See response to question 2, above. Section 862 of Public Law 110-181 (with amendments)
requires contractors and all employees of the contractor or of any subcontractor, who are
responsible for performing private security functions under such contract, to comply with
applicable laws and regulations of the United States and the host country, and applicable treaties
and international agreements. 48 CFR 52.225-26 provides the specific contract clauses requiring
PSCs under covered contracts to ensure that their personnel performing private security functions
under the contract are briefed on, and understand their obligation to comply with, applicable laws
and regulations of the United States and the host country, applicable treaties and international
agreements, and any instructions issued by the applicable commander or relevant Chief of
Mission (COM) related to weapons and equipment. Similarly, 48 CFR 252.225-7040(d) requires
DoD-contracted PSCs to comply with, and to ensure that their personnel authorized to
Page 9 of 25
accompany U.S. Armed Forces deployed outside the United States are familiar with and comply
with, all applicable U.S., host country, and third country laws; provisions of the law of war, and
any other applicable treaties and international agreements; U.S. regulations, directives,
instructions, policies, and procedures; and orders, directives, and instructions issued by the
Combatant Commander. These encompass laws, regulations, and directives applicable to the
acquisition and use of weapons and other equipment.

Combatant Commander Orders specify weapons authorization policies, including types of

weapons, ammunition, and procurement. These orders typically provide restrictions regarding
weapons and ammunition types that exceed those permitted by the law of the host nation. For
example, Combatant Commander Orders typically prohibit the use of anything other than full-
jacketed ball ammunition, even where other types of ammunition would be allowable for civilian
personal defense under host nation law. Lawful acquisition of weapons is also required by
Section 9.2.5 of the PSC Standard.

All WPS Contractors utilize government furnished vehicles and weapons when deployed,
and all equipment utilized by WPS PSCs must be approved in advance by DS.

g. internal organization and regulation and accountability [GP 12, 37, 65].

Title 48 CFR 9-103(a) requires that purchases shall be made from, and contracts shall be
awarded to, responsible prospective contractors only. To be determined responsible, 48 CFR
9.104-1 provides that a contractor must “have the necessary organization, experience, accounting
and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them (including, as
appropriate, such elements as production control procedures, property control systems, quality
assurance measures, and safety programs applicable to materials to be produced or services to be
performed by the prospective contractor and subcontractors).”

 With regard to GP 12 a), 32 CFR 159.6 requires that all requests for permission to arm
PSC personnel include documentation of individual training, covering weapons
familiarization and qualification, rules for the use of force (RUFs), limits on the use of
force, including whether defense of others is consistent with host nation Status of Forces
Agreements (SOFAs) or local law, the distinction between the rules of engagement
applicable to military forces and the prescribed RUFs that control the use of weapons by
civilians, and the Law of Armed Conflict. These requirements also exist in the PSC
Standard. Specifically, requirements for company policies promoting compliance with
international humanitarian law, human rights law, and RUFs are set forth in sections 9.5.1
and 9.5.2. Implementing guidance for these sections is provided in sections A.2, on

Page 10 of 25
 Human Rights and International Law; A.9.5.1, on Respect for Human Rights; and
A.9.5.3, on RUFs and Use of Force Training.

 With regard to GP 12 b), 48 CFR 52.225-26 requires PSCs under covered contracts to
ensure that their personnel performing private security functions under the contract
comply with directives in the contract for specified incident reporting and cooperate with
any government-authorized investigations of incidents reported. The WPS contract
requires that contractors notify the government of all serious incidents and incidents
involving misconduct. For DoD contracts, complaints and grievance mechanisms are set
forth in Section 9.4.3 of the PSC Standard, with implementing guidance provided in
A.9.5.10. Whistleblower protections are covered in Section 9.4.4, with additional
guidance in A.9.4.3. Incident monitoring, reporting, and internal investigations are
covered in Section 9.5.6, with implementing guidance in A.9.5.10.

h. welfare of personnel [GP 13, 38, 66].

In 2003, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) was amended (Pub. L. 108-193) to
require that Federal government contracts with private entities include a provision authorizing
the government to terminate the contract, or take other remedial action, without penalty, if the
contractor or subcontractor engages in severe forms of trafficking in persons, procuring
commercial sex acts, and using forced labor during the performance of the contract. This
requirement has been implemented in all Federal government contracts through 48 CFR 22.1700,
which provides that all Federal government contracts shall prohibit contractors, subcontractors,
and their employees from engaging in such activities. The scope of these prohibited activities
was expanded by Executive Order 13627, Strengthening Protections Against Trafficking in
Persons in Federal Contracts (Sept. 25, 2012) and by 2013 amendments to the TVPA contained
in Title XVII of the National Defense Authorization Act, Pub. L. 112-239, the End Trafficking in
Government Contracting Act (ETGCA) to also address the unscrupulous recruitment practices
widely known to facilitate human trafficking. Although their provisions are not identical, the
Executive Order and ETGCA authorize termination and other remedial action for activities that
directly support or promote trafficking in persons, such as using fraud to recruit employees,
confiscating employee identity or immigration documents, and charging employees recruitment
fees that can lead to debt bondage. Among other things, they both also require contractors to
apply new, tailored compliance measures for larger contracts performed overseas to prevent such
activities from occurring, to ensure their subcontractors do the same, and also to certify that such
plans and procedures are in place prior to being awarded the contract. The process of
incorporating these more extensive and precise restrictions into the FAR is underway; proposed
amendments have been published for public comment in the Federal Register (78 F.R. 59317
(Sept. 26, 2013)) but are not yet in effect.

Page 11 of 25
 Consistent with GPs 13 and 66, 48 CFR 252.222-7002 requires DoD contractors working
overseas to comply with all local laws, regulations, and labor union agreements governing work
hours. These requirements are implemented through specific contract language, including Joint
Theater Support Contracting Command (JTSCC) Special Clause 952.222-0001, Prohibition
Against Human Trafficking, Inhumane Living Conditions, and Withholding of Employee
Passports, which is included in PSC contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. This clause requires
contractors to provide all employees with a signed copy of their employment contract, in English
as well as the employee’s native language, defining the terms of employment or compensation.

 Pay. The proposed amendments to the FAR include a provision for all Federal
government contracts allowing the government to terminate the contract, without penalty,
if the contractor or subcontractor charges recruited employees recruitment fees

 Section 9.2.1 of the PSC Standard also addresses adequate compensation, providing that
“[p]ersonnel shall be provided with adequate pay and remuneration arrangements,
including insurance, commensurate to their responsibilities.” Additional guidance
implementing this requirement is found in A.9.2.1.

 Safety. Under the TVPA and implementing regulation 48 CFR 22.1700, all Federal
government contracts include a provision allowing the government to terminate the
contract, without penalty, if the contractor or subcontractor engages in trafficking in
persons, the procurement of a commercial sex act, or the use of forced labor in the
performance of the contract. Under the proposed amendments to the FAR, arranging or
providing housing that fails to meet host country housing and safety standards would be
an act allowing for such termination. In addition, JTSCC Special Clause 952.222-0001
requires DoD contractors to provide adequate living conditions (sanitation, health, safety,
living space) for their employees and specifies what those conditions are. The clause
further requires contracting officers and their representatives to conduct random checks to
ensure that contractors and subcontractors at all tiers are adhering to the TVPA. Under
the WPS contract, CORs and Government Technical Monitors (GTMs) conduct regular
Trafficking in Persons (TIP) inspections, as well as inspections of meal services and
health and welfare inspections of PSC personnel living quarters and common areas.

 Travel docs. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1592 prohibits knowingly destroying, concealing, removing,

confiscating, or possessing any actual or purported passport or other immigration
document, or any other actual or purported government identification document, of
another person, to prevent or restrict or to attempt to prevent or restrict, without lawful
authority, the person’s liberty to move or travel, in order to maintain the labor or services
of that person. This prohibition is included in Federal government contracts pursuant to
48 CFR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons. Under the proposed amendments
Page 12 of 25
 to the FAR, all Federal government contracts will include a provision allowing the
government to terminate the contract, without penalty, if the contractor or subcontractor
destroys, conceals, removes, confiscates, or otherwise denies an employee access to
his/her identity or immigration documents. In addition, JTSCC Special Clause 952.222-
0001 provides specific contract language requiring contractors to hold employee
passports and other identification documents discussed above for the shortest period of
time reasonable for administrative processing purposes.

 Unlawful discrimination. Unless otherwise exempted, 48 CFR 22.810(e) specifies that

Federal contracts must include a clause stating that the contractor shall not discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex,
or national origin. Also, the contractor shall take affirmative steps to ensure that
applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without
regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor shall also take
positive action to ensure that employees are aware of these non-discrimination
requirements and the means to process complaints.

GP 13 and all subordinate elements are also required under the PSC Standard, sections 9.2.1 and
A.9.2.1.

8. To what extent is the conduct of any subcontracted PMSC required to be in conformity

with relevant law? Please include requirements relating to liability and any notification
required. [GP 15, 31]

The requirement under 32 CFR 159 and 48 CFR 52.225-26 to conform to relevant law (see
response to question 6(f), above) applies to subcontractors providing private security services.
Specifically, section 52.225-26 requires PSCs to include the requirements of that clause in all
subcontracts to be performed in the designated areas. Section 52.225-26 further provides that the
duty of the PSC to comply with the requirements of the clause shall not be reduced or diminished
by the failure of a higher- or lower-tier contractor or subcontractor to comply with the clause
requirements or by a failure of the contracting activity to provide required oversight. As noted
above, 48 CFR 252.225-7040(d) and clauses of PSC contracts specify that the contractor shall
comply with, and shall ensure that its personnel authorized to accompany U.S. Armed Forces
deployed outside the United States are familiar with and comply with all applicable U.S., host
country, and third country national laws; provisions of the law of war, as well as any other
applicable treaties and international agreements; U.S. regulations, directives, instructions,
policies, and procedures; and orders, directives, and instructions issued by the Combatant
Commander, including those relating to force protection, security, health, safety, or relations and
interaction with local nationals.

Page 13 of 25
9. Do you use financial or pricing mechanisms as a way to promote compliance? These may
include requiring a PMSC to post a financial bond against non-compliance. [GP 17, 41]

Section 862 of Public Law 110-181 (with amendments), as implemented in FAR 52.225-26 and
DFARS 225.370-5(a)(2), requires that the failure of a contractor under a covered contract to
comply with the requirements of the regulations governing private security contractors as
implemented in contract clauses in an award fee contract shall be considered in any evaluation of
contract performance by the contractor for the relevant award fee period. Such failure may be a
basis for reducing or denying award fees for such period, or for recovering all or part of award
fees previously paid for such period. In the case of a failure to comply that is severe, prolonged,
or repeated, such failure will be referred to the suspension or debarment official for the
appropriate agency and may be a basis for suspension or debarment of the contractor. In
addition, standard contract clauses in the FAR provide for possible remediation measures,
including, but not limited to, the withholding of payment, reduction of award fees, and
reimbursement of U.S. Government expenses. The WPS contract does not require contractors to
post bonds but contains financial incentives for compliance.

10. When granting an operating license to PMSCs, do you impose any limitations on the
number of PMSC personnel and/or the amount/kinds of equipment employed when
performing PMSC services? [GP 42] If so, please provide details.

GP 42 does not apply to the United States, as the United States is not a Territorial State as
defined in the Montreux Document.

11. Please describe any rules/limitations on the use of force and firearms. For example,
these may include use of force "only when necessary and proportionate in self-defence or
defence of third persons", and "immediately reporting to competent authorities" after
force is used. [GP18, 43]

Department of Defense Directive 5210.56, Carrying of Firearms and the Use of Force by
DoD Personnel Engaged in Security, Law and Order, or Counterintelligence Activities, April 1,
2011, provides specific guidance for the use of force and firearms by DoD military and DoD
civilians and DoD contractor personnel. This Directive is supplemented and implemented by
combatant commander orders (or fragmentary orders (FRAGOs)), violations of which may
subject a person to punitive or administrative action. These orders apply the requirements found
in DoDD 5210.56, tailoring them for the specific terms of the contract and the political, legal,
and operational context of the area in which the contract is being performed. These FRAGO’s
include, but are not limited to, specific procedures for requesting arming authorization, the types
of weapons authorized, training requirements, registration requirements for personnel and
weapons, procedures for incident reporting, as well as specific RUFs. These FRAGOs direct the
use of weapons consistent with the civilian status of PSC personnel and exclude PSC personnel
Page 14 of 25
from participating in combat operations. 48 CFR 252.225-7039, Contractors Performing Private
Security Functions, requires DoD contractor personnel performing private security functions to
follow the RUFs issued by the applicable Combatant Commander.

Additionally, 48 CFR 252.225-7040, Contractor Personnel Authorized to Accompany U.S.

Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States, is included in DoD contracts for PSC
services and states that the contractor shall ensure that the contractor and all contractor personnel
performing security functions under the contract comply with any orders, directives, and
instructions to contractors performing private security functions that are identified in the
contract. Contractor personnel are only authorized to use deadly force in self-defense and when
such force reasonably appears necessary to execute their security mission to protect
assets/persons consistent with the regulations and orders cited above. The clause also provides
that, unless immune from host nation jurisdiction by virtue of an international agreement or
international law, inappropriate use of force by contractor personnel authorized to accompany the
U.S. Armed Forces can subject such personnel to U.S. or host nation prosecution and civil
liability.

Title 48 CFR 252.225-7039 also implements requirements in Section 862 of Public Law
110-181, by requiring DoD contractors to report incidents in which: a weapon is discharged by
PSC personnel; personnel performing private security functions are attacked, killed, or injured;
persons are killed or injured or property is destroyed as a result of conduct by contractor
personnel; a weapon is discharged against personnel performing private security functions or
personnel performing such functions believe a weapon was so discharged; or specific active,
non-lethal countermeasures are employed by PSC personnel in response to a perceived,
immediate threat.

WPS contractors and their personnel are required to abide by the applicable mission firearms
policy, the prescribed RUFs and the Deadly Force Policy in the WPS base contract, and
Department policy guidance. In the event of a conflict, the mission firearms policy takes
precedence. The WPS contract incorporates 48 CFR 52.225-19, which states that contractor
personnel are authorized to use deadly force only in self-defense or when the use of such force
reasonably appears necessary to execute their security mission to protect assets/persons,
consistent with the terms and conditions contained in the contract or with their job description
and terms of employment.

12. Please provide information on any rules in place regulating the possession of weapons
by PMSCs and their personnel. [GP 44, 55]

GP 44 does not apply to the United States, as the United States is not a Territorial State as
defined in the Montreux Document.
Page 15 of 25
 GP 55, the requirement to have appropriate rules on the accountability, export, and return of
weapons and ammunition by PMSCs, is controlled pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act
(AECA), as implemented by the International Trade in Arms Regulation (ITAR). The specific
requirements for the export or import of weapons and ammunition are described in the answer to
question 2, above. Accountability of such weapons and ammunition is maintained through end-
use monitoring pursuant to section 40A of the AECA and non-transfer and use assurances
required under section 123.9 of the ITAR. For certain defense articles, a separate non-transfer
and end-use certificate must be signed by the license applicant, foreign consignee, and foreign
end-user that stipulates the defense article will not be re-exported, resold, or otherwise disposed
of without the prior written approval of the Department of State.

In addition, 32 CFR 159 provides that PSC personnel under covered contracts may be armed
only upon obtaining the appropriate authorization. Requests for such authorization must include,
among other things, documentation of individual training covering weapons familiarization and
qualification, RUFs, limits on the use of force, the distinction between the rules of engagement
and the prescribed RUFs, and the Law of Armed Conflict, as well as written verification that
PSC personnel are not prohibited under U.S. law from possessing firearms. Such requests must
also include written acknowledgment by the PSC and its personnel that: (i) potential civil and
criminal liability exists under U.S. and local law or host nation SOFAs for the use of weapons;
(ii) proof of authorization to be armed must be carried by each PSC personnel; (iii) PSC
personnel may possess only U.S. Government-issued and/or -approved weapons and ammunition
for which they have been qualified according to specified standards; (iv) PSC personnel were
briefed and understand limitations on the use of force; (v) authorization to possess weapons and
ammunition may be revoked for non-compliance with established RUFs; and (vi) PSC personnel
are prohibited from consuming alcoholic beverages or being under the influence of alcohol while
armed.

13. To what degree are personnel of a PMSC, including all means of their transport,
required to be personally identifiable whenever they are carrying-out activities under a
contract? [GP 16, 45]

The WPS contract incorporates 48 CFR 52.225-19, Contractor Personnel in a Designated

Operational Area or Supporting a Diplomatic or Consular Mission Outside the United States,
which prohibits covered PSC personnel from wearing military clothing unless specifically
authorized by the Combatant Commander. If authorized to wear military clothing, PSC
personnel must wear distinctive patches, armbands, nametags, or headgear, in order to be
distinguishable from military personnel, consistent with force protection measures. WPS
contractors in uniform (i.e., static guards) wear distinctive patches identifying their company,
while plain clothes contractors wear such patches if directed by the RSO. All WPS contractor
personnel are required to carry personal identification cards, providing the individual’s name, the
labor categories they are authorized to fill, and the retest dates of any firearms qualifications and
physical fitness testing.

Similarly, 48 CFR 252.225-7039 requires DoD PSC personnel to have issued to them and
carry with them Personal Identity Verification credentials described in 48 CFR 52.204-19,
Page 16 of 25
Personnel Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel. FRAGOs routinely specify uniforms
and markings for PSC personnel and vehicles, tailored for the specific requirements of the area in
which the PSCs are operating. In Afghanistan, these orders require all armed contractors to use
uniforms and markings, which clearly distinguish PSC personnel from military or police forces,
consistent with the regulations issued by the Afghan Government and approved by the
appropriate DoD CO. The PSC Standard, Section 9.2.1.1, also provides that PSCs shall use
uniforms and markings to identify their personnel and means of transportation.

14. Please indicate to what degree contracts with PMSCs provide for the following:

a. the ability to terminate the contract for failure to comply with contractual
provisions.

All Federal government contracts may be terminated in whole or in part for default if a
contractor fails to perform any provision of a contract. 48 CFR 49.4. In contracts for private
security functions outside the United States, 48 CFR 25.302-5 and 252.225-7039(c)(4) further
specify that if the performance failures are significant, severe, prolonged, or repeated, the CO
shall refer the matter to the appropriate suspension and debarment official.

b. specifying the weapons required.

48 CFR 252.225-7040(j) specifies that any requests from the contractor that its personnel in the
designated operational area be authorized to carry weapons shall be made through the contracting
officer’s Combatant Commander, who will determine whether to authorize in-theater contractor
personnel to carry weapons and what weapons and ammunition, in accordance with DoDI 3020-
41. These determinations are detailed in FRAGOs addressing the arming of DoD civilians and
contractor personnel and are specified in contract clauses where contractor personnel are
authorized to carry weapons. JTSCC clause 5152.225-5900 is current for such contracts in
Afghanistan.

Under the WPS contract, PSC personnel may use only Department of State issued or
approved handguns, holsters, support weapons, magazines, optics, other vision enhancement
devices, or ammunition, with specific weapon training and qualification requirements established
based on the role of the individual and specific carry authority granted by the RSO and any
applicable host country authority. Specific weapons requirements are listed in task orders only
when they deviate from the weapons requirements in the base contract.

Page 17 of 25
 c. that PMSCs obtain appropriate authorizations from the Territorial State.

32 CFR 159 provides for the development of procedures for PSC verification that their
personnel meet all the legal, training, and qualification requirements for authorization to carry a
weapon in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract and host country law. 48
CFR 52.225-26 and 252.225-7039(b)(2) implement 32 CFR 159 by requiring covered PSCs to
ensure that they and all of their personnel responsible for performing private security functions
under the contract are briefed on, and understand their obligation to comply with, applicable laws
and regulations of the host country.

The PSC Standard, section A.10.2, provides that contractors should be able to demonstrate
compliance with legal requirements, including applicable permits or licenses. Specific
requirements to obtain and maintain current business licenses and licenses to operate as a PSC
are contained in standard clauses in DoD contracts for these services. Similarly, the WPS
contract requires each contractor to have a valid operating license and to operate in accordance
with all host country laws.

d. that appropriate reparation be provided for those harmed by misconduct. [GP 14]

32 CFR 159 provides that all requests to arm PSC personnel shall include a written
acknowledgment by the PSC and its personnel that potential civil and criminal liability exists
under U.S. and local law or host nation SOFAs for the use of weapons. That section also notes
that the written acknowledgment does not limit civil and criminal liability to conduct arising
from the use of weapons. For further information on PSC criminal and civil liability, please see
responses to questions 15 and 16, below.

15. Provide details of how you provide for criminal jurisdiction in your national legislation
over crimes under national and international law committed by PMSCs and their
personnel. This may include details on if you have considered establishing corporate
criminal responsibility and/or jurisdiction over serious crimes committed abroad. [GP 19,
49, 71]

In recent years, the United States has amended both its Federal criminal code and its Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to provide greater accountability for civilian employees,
contractors, and other civilians supporting and accompanying our armed forces outside the
United States who have engaged in criminal misconduct. Under U.S. law, criminal jurisdiction is
limited to the territory of the United States absent a provision in a statute that explicitly or
implicitly makes it extraterritorial in scope.

Page 18 of 25
 The Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction Act (SMTJ) provides jurisdiction for U.S.
courts wherever “American citizens and property need protection, yet no other government
effectively safeguards those interests.” In 2001, the SMTJ was expanded to provide jurisdiction
over certain listed offenses committed by or against a U.S. national on certain physical spaces in
a foreign State.

The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA) provides criminal jurisdiction over
PSCs to the extent their employment relates to supporting the mission of the Department of
Defense overseas. MEJA provides jurisdiction over these individuals if they commit an offense
outside the United States that would be punishable if committed within the SMTJ of the United
States, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 7. A number of sections in the U.S. criminal code declare
certain conduct, such as murder and other felonies, to be a crime if committed within the SMTJ
of the United States.

The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441) provides criminal jurisdiction over conduct overseas
that is determined to constitute a war crime when committed by or against a U.S. national or U.S.
military member. The Federal Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-2340B) provides criminal
jurisdiction over U.S. nationals who commit torture anywhere in the world.

Finally, PSC personnel may be subject to the jurisdiction of the UCMJ (10 U.S.C. §§ 801-
946). Under the UCMJ, a person serving with or accompanying the U.S. Armed Forces in the
field during a declared war or contingency operation may be disciplined for a criminal offense,
including by referral of charges to a General Court-Martial. PSC personnel may be ordered into
confinement or placed under conditions that restrict movement in the area of operations or
administratively attached to a military command pending resolution of a criminal investigation.

The Executive Branch has also supported legislation, introduced during the 112th Congress,
which would clarify and expand extraterritorial jurisdiction over Federal contractor personnel
operating overseas by providing analogue jurisdiction to MEJA for serious overseas crimes
committed by personnel who are not currently covered by MEJA. The Executive Branch
continues to support such legislation, and efforts are ongoing to secure its reintroduction in
Congress and eventual enactment into law.

Page 19 of 25
16. Provide details of how you provide for non-criminal accountability mechanisms for
improper or unlawful conduct of PMSCs and their personnel. This may include contractual
sanctions, referral to competent investigative authorities, providing for civil liability and
otherwise requiring PMSCs, or their clients to provide reparation to those harmed by
PMSCs. [GP 20, 50, 72]

The U.S. Government is fully committed to ensuring that PSCs respect applicable national
and international laws and are held accountable when they engage in misconduct. Contractual
sanctions and civil liability, in U.S. courts and abroad, exist to ensure that PSCs are held
accountable for such misconduct. 48 CFR 52.225-26 and 252.225-7039(c) provide that, in
addition to other remedies available to the Government, the CO may direct the contractor, at its
own expense, to remove and replace any contractor personnel who fail to comply with or violate
applicable requirements of the contract. Such action may be taken at the Government’s
discretion without prejudice to its rights under any other provision of the contract, including
termination for default.

Furthermore, PSCs are typically subject to civil litigation in the courts of the territorial State
in which they operate. It is not the practice of the United States to accredit as members of the
diplomatic mission PSC personnel or to grant such requests submitted by other countries for such
personnel working in the United States. Most U.S. Government security contractors operating
around the world are not immune from the laws of the host government and may be subject to
host government civil jurisdiction.

Finally, those harmed by PSCs may have a number of avenues available for pursuing
remedies under U.S. law. For example, the common law of the individual States of the United
States may provide for tort liability in certain circumstances. Other cases have been brought
under various Federal statutes. In some cases, a cause of action may be available under the Alien
Tort Statute (ATS), pursuant to which U.S. Federal courts may hear civil actions by an alien for
tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1350; see also Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petro. Co., 133 S. Ct. 1659 (2013). PSCs that engage in
fraud on a U.S. Government contract can also be held accountable by whistleblowers through qui
tam actions under the False Claims Act.

17. In addition to the criminal and non-criminal mechanisms referred to above, do you
have other administrative and other monitoring mechanisms to ensure proper execution of
the contract and/or accountability of the PMSC and their personnel for improper conduct?
[GP 21]

As introduced in the response to question 4, above, contracts for private military companies
and private security companies are subject to oversight and monitoring through several different
means and levels of accountability. Each contract is managed by a warranted CO, who is
assisted by CORs responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the contract and contractor
performance. Private security contracts are required to have a COR and a Deputy COR to
provide periodic and specified reports to the CO.

Page 20 of 25
 The DoD Standard for Certification of Contracting Officer's Representatives (CORs) for
Service Acquisitions defines minimum COR competencies, experience, and training based on the
nature and complexity of the requirement and contract performance risk. COR reports feed the
CPARS system, as required by law (described above). The WPS contract has an overall COR for
the base contract, a dedicated CONUS and OCONUS COR for each task order, and GTMs for
most task orders, as well as GTMs for specific operational areas of concern, such as logistics.

Serious incident reports are required by 32 CFR 159 and 48 CFR 52.225-26 and 252.225-
7039. A serious incident involving a DoD contractor is reviewed by responsible officers and, as
appropriate, may be the cause for initiation of a Commander’s Inquiry under the Rules for Court
Martial, Article 303. Similarly, DS may initiate an investigation in the case of an incident
involving firearms or violations of U.S. or international law by a WPS contractor. Allegations of
misconduct are subject to investigation by military law enforcement agencies, in the case of DoD
contractors, and by DS in the case of WPS contractors. Under the WPS contract, PSC personnel
may be removed from the task order for incidents of misconduct or other breaches of the
standards of conduct contained in the WPS contract and may be deemed ineligible to work on
other WPS task orders.

18. Provide details of how you monitor compliance with the terms of any authorization
given to a PMSC. These may include establishing an adequately resourced monitoring
authority, ensuring that the civilian population is informed about the rules by which
PMSCs have to abide and available complaint mechanisms, requesting local authorities to
report on PMSC misconduct and investigating reports of wrongdoing. It may also include
establishing close links between your State's authorization-granting authorities and your
State's representatives abroad and/or with other States. [GP 46, 68]

See responses to questions 4 and 17, above. In addition, the WPS contract requires
contractors to cooperate fully with DS and local law enforcement authorities. In Iraq and
Afghanistan, an Armed Contractor Oversight Directorate (ACOD) was established to operate as
a single point for tracking all DoD civilians and contractors and for processing their weapons
authorizations. The ACOD has also received and processed serious incident reports regarding
DoD contractors. It is anticipated that this function will be replicated in future contingencies.
For DoD personnel (including contractors), military commanders are responsible for initiating
inquiries and investigations in response to reports of possible misconduct of personnel under
their authority.

19. Provide details of how you impose administrative measures or sanctions if it is

determined that a PMSC has operated without or in violation of an authorization. This
may include revoking or suspending a license, removing specific PMSC personnel,
prohibiting a re-application for authorization, forfeiting bonds or securities, and/or
financial penalties. [GP 48, 69]

See response to questions 7, 9, and 16, above. As stated in response to question 9, above, if a
failure to comply with the terms of the contract is severe, prolonged, or repeated, such failure

Page 21 of 25
will be referred to the suspension or debarment official for the appropriate agency and may be a
basis for suspension or debarment of the PSC. Under 48 CFR 9.4, a Federal government
contractor may be debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, or declared ineligible for a
period of time for committing certain violations of State and Federal law and other offenses
indicating a lack of business integrity or honesty. Contractors debarred, suspended, or proposed
for debarment are excluded from receiving contracts, and agencies shall not solicit offers from,
award contracts to, or consent to subcontracts with these contractors, unless the agency head
determines that there is a compelling reason for such action.

20. Provide details of how you provide a fair opportunity for PMSCs to respond to
allegations that they have operated without or in violation of an authorization. [GP 47]

GP 47 does not apply to the United States, as the United States is not a Territorial State as
defined in the Montreux Document.

21. Provide details of how you support other States in their efforts to establish effective
monitoring of PMSCs. [GP 70]

Where the U.S. Government has used private military companies and private security
companies in areas of armed conflict, it has worked with other concerned governments to enable
a common perspective on the use of PMSCs to enhance the stability of conflict and post-conflict
regions. Most notable is the U.S. Government’s early and consistent support of the Montreux
Document initiative, the ICoC, and the ICoCA. A partial list of other examples includes:

 Establishment of the Private Security Company Association of Iraq (PSCAI), which

enabled Iraq’s Ministry of Interior to access a single point of contact for exchange of
information and interaction with PSCs operating in its territory. The PSCAI was
disestablished on December 31, 2011.

 Establishment of the Contractor Operations Center in Iraq, which maintained situational

awareness of PSCs operating in Iraq and a central repository for incident reports and
complaints. Information was shared with the Government of Iraq and included the
presence of Liaison officers from Iraq in the operations center. This center was closed in
January 2012 with the end of military operations, with residual functions transitioned to
the Office of Security Cooperation – Iraq.

 Establishment of Task Force Spotlight in Afghanistan to address issues relating to the

compliance of PSCs with U.S. and Afghan regulatory requirements. Work was quickly
expanded to assist in implementation of Presidential Decree (PD) 62, which initiated the
transition of all PSCs to the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF). (The APPF is a
state-owned enterprise that provides security services to domestic and international
customers on a pay-for-service basis.) PD62 provides that diplomatic entities may
continue to utilize private security. This work included biometric registration of all PSC
personnel in Afghanistan and assistance in screening/vetting of PSC and APPF personnel.
Page 22 of 25
  Continued assistance to the Afghan Government in its efforts to meet its Territorial and
Home State responsibilities for oversight and regulation of PSCs. In addition to the
biometric enrollment mentioned above, this includes:

o Developing and executing an eight-step vetting process, which meets all

requirements of GPs 32 and 60. Noteworthy is the inclusion of references from
Tribal Elders attesting to, and guaranteeing, the good conduct and background of
PSC and APPF personnel.

o Assisting the Afghan Government with the introduction of transparent licensing

regimes to ensure better supervision and accountability so that only PSCs and
other contractors likely to respect international humanitarian law and human
rights law, through appropriate training, internal procedures, and supervision, can
provide services in areas of armed conflict. (GP 25, 26, 30, 63)

o Increasing accountability of superiors of PSC personnel, including government

officials and PSC managers consistent with Legal Obligation 27.

o Establishing standardized criteria for PSC personnel training in relevant Afghan

law, including law of armed conflict and applicable human rights law consistent
with GP 35 and 63.

22. In negotiating with other States agreements which contain rules affecting the legal
status of and jurisdiction over PMSCs and their personnel (e.g. Status of Forces
agreements). Please provide details on how you take into consideration the impact of the
agreement on the compliance with national laws and regulations, and how you address the
issue of jurisdiction and immunities. [GP 22, 51]

See response to question 16, above. The U.S. Government is fully committed to ensuring
that U.S. contractors who are accused of committing crimes abroad are investigated and, when
warranted, fully prosecuted. It is not the common practice of the United States to seek immunity
from host government criminal jurisdiction for PSCs contracting with the U.S. Government.
Most PSCs operating around the world under contract with the U.S. Government are subject to
the criminal jurisdiction of the host government.

In any event, PSCs and other contractors operating under contract with the U.S. Government
are instructed to follow the laws of the host government. There are also means to prosecute
contractor personnel in U.S. courts when they are not held accountable under the host
government’s legal system for criminal activity, including the Military Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction Act (MEJA), which provides for U.S. jurisdiction over contractors if they are
working abroad on a Department of Defense contract or a contract of any other Federal agency to
the extent that their employment relates to supporting the mission of the Department of Defense.

Page 23 of 25
23. Please provide details of your cooperation with the investigating or regulatory
authorities of other States in matters of common concern regarding PMSCs. [GP 23, 52, 73]

Currently, our work with the Government of Afghanistan provides the best example of such
activities. The authorities currently being worked in Afghanistan involve the establishment and
the assessment aspects of the APPF and the transition away from the use of PSCs. In August
2010, President Karzai issued PD62, directing dissolution of PSCs and expansion of the APPF.
Shortly after PD62 was released, the Government of Afghanistan requested NATO assistance
with the stand-up of the APPF. The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), Ministry of
Interior (MoI), and U.S. Embassy Kabul conducted a six-month assessment completed in
September 2011 that baselined the status of the APPF’s capability to conduct two core functions:
execute business functions and generate/employ a force. Based on this assessment, ISAF formed
a Joint Planning Team (JPT) to create a deliberate plan to build the APPF’s capacity to manage
the transition from the use of PSCs. The result of this plan was the September 2011 creation of
the APPF Advisory Group (AAG) assigned to NATO Training Mission – Afghanistan (NTM-
A/CSTC). From the time the AAG was created, the AAG has conducted assessments every 3-6
months. The focus of these efforts is to complete the establishment of the APPF and to provide
another security pillar in Afghanistan. The AAG is currently overseeing the transition of security
for ISAF bases and convoys to the APPF.

24. Please list any other measures you have in place for overseeing and/or contracting with
PMSCs, and briefly describe how they are implemented or enforced.

The U.S. Government has several oversight, policy, and contracting offices and bureaus that
are, or have been, dedicated to evaluating the U.S. Government’s use of PSCs and our broader
national interests in this area. These include:

 The Government Accountability Office: Independent, nonpartisan U.S. agency within the
legislative branch that investigates how the Federal government spends money and
provides advice on ways to make government more efficient and effective. The GAO has
published reports on the U.S. Government’s use of PSCs.

 Commission on Wartime Contracting: Independent, bipartisan commission established

by Congress to study wartime contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Commission
issued a publically available final report to Congress in August 2011, which included
recommendations to Congress on the use of PSCs.

 Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security: The Department bureau that

manages the oversight of, and provides operational guidance to, PSCs providing security
at U.S. diplomatic and consular facilities abroad.

 Contractor Operations Center: This center operated in Iraq from 2004 through 2012 to
maintain situational awareness of PSCs operating in Iraq, including their licensing,
movements, incident responses, and incident reporting.

Page 24 of 25
 Armed Contractor Oversight Directorates: Directors in Iraq and Afghanistan responsible
for monitoring PSCs under DoD contracts and for processing arming authorization
requests, maintaining PSC personnel census data, verifying the accuracy of PSC
information in the SPOT database, and conducting or coordinating biometric enrollment
of PSC personnel.

 Contingency Contractor Standards and Compliance: Department of Defense office

responsible for maintaining, developing, and promoting policy and operational guidance
for all armed contractors operating in support of U.S. operations in armed conflict and
similar environments. Works closely with the Director, Defense Procurement and
Acquisition Policy, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Procurement,
and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council to provide current and effective
contracting procedures, policies, and regulations that implement U.S. national policy
regarding PSCs and PMCs.

Page 25 of 25