Phrantceena Halres, Keynote Speaker, Women in National Security Luncheon
In this keynote at the Women in National Security Luncheon, Francina Halres (née Tate) shares her unconventional path from a 17‑year career in human resources and academic staffing to leading a $60 million nuclear security firm after 9/11. She describes how a contract with Duke Energy sparked a deep dive into intelligence, resulting in an "algorithm"—a data‑driven security model—that has protected nuclear power plants for over a decade and expanded into international markets (Jordan, the UK, Austria). Halres highlights systemic challenges: an aging nuclear workforce, a fragmented education pipeline, and the under‑representation of women and minorities. She advocates for bridging the communication gap between C‑suite executives and frontline security personnel, and for policy reforms that de‑bundle large defense contracts to give domestic small businesses a foothold. Looking ahead, she stresses the need to integrate human‑machine collaboration, address cyber‑and‑physical threats, and develop a unified curriculum for nuclear security practitioners through partnerships with institutions such as ASU and a historically Black university in Montgomery, Alabama.
Chapters
Thank you, Ms. Doty, for such a kind introduction, and I'm so honored to be here amongst you ladies and, and congratulate you in your own rights for your own accomplishments in the spaces that you are. Francina, the name Francina is The meaning is, it means freedom and liberation. That's the meaning of my name. At birth, my mom signed F-R-A-N-C-I-N-A. That's the birth spelling for French.
Yes.
And Tate, T-A-T-E, is my maiden name. So in 2004, I'm into science and vocabulary and all these things. So, a girlfriend of mine advised on how to balance your name a little better with energy. And I'm sure you've probably heard of this formula.
Yeah.
It's a science. And we chose letters. It was a real project. We had students to choose letters to balance the name, and they came up with Francina. I had a list of 50 names, different spellings of Francina, and I chose that one. So. That is the story. My mom wasn't very happy about it, but and my dad was like, hmm. But we we were able to convince them of the science of the change, and we legally changed it in 2004. So that is the story. So having said that, just being here in this environment is wonderful. National security is certainly a passion of mine. And just to give you guys a Reader's Digest version, I want to hear from you guys as much as you have heard from me. Is prior to 9/11, my background pretty much was human resources. I've taught school, worked in corporate America for presidents, colleges, educator in community colleges, Ivy League law firms, federal judges, civil rights lawyer. I mean, I just have a plethora. of Jesse Helms, Senator Sam, you know, in college. So Western North Carolina gave me a rich background with a variety of Republicans and Democrats. As a kid, I didn't know Senator Sam was Senator Sam. He was Papa Sam to me. And he— I first— he authored me in his book before he died. And so I have research under him. And so, there's a family thing. My great-grandmother raised the family, so that's a whole richness there with the Irvin family, and then the Helms family, and the Spanger family back home. So, those are my roots. And so, when we, in the state, working in staffing, RTP scientists, engineers, just temporary staffing, that's what we have We did for 17 years. Duke Energy called right after 9/11 and asked if I would consider protecting their nuclear power plants. And I'm like, really? I don't think so. But on the news, it was a terrible time, if you recall, during those days. And we sat down at the table with the key stakeholders at Duke Energy and the security team. went round and round for about 6 months to determine whether this was something I could actually do. And we decided we could do that and signed the contract. And boy, did I go to school after that. FBI, NRC agents, CIA agents, and anyone else that could add value to my intelligence— intelligence level came along in private settings and educated me in a number of ways. And so we were able to take that philosophy and that mentoring and put a model together. I call it an algorithm, as we talked about earlier. I believe in algorithms. And so Duke allowed me to create an algorithm that worked for the business. And we had internal stakeholders, that looked at the model and voted, yes, we can do it. And we've established that for 12 years. In the meantime, we have many challenges along the way, as you know, in this space of national security and being a woman and an African American woman.
Right.
You're often discounted in a number of ways until you're able to focus on the facts and show value. And that's what we've been able to do in this space, is create value and build strong relationships. And I'm trained to think business and how do we move the initiative forward. I was called on to— for a job to create— to solve a problem. And I took that very seriously. And so, it doesn't matter whether it's a man or woman or girl or boy, there's a problem on the table and we have to solve it. And that was my training, and we proceeded in that area and have grown this company to over $60 million in revenue, top line, in a third of the market. And single-handedly, just working on relationships, understanding threats, staying involved with the NRC and those guys that are behind the scenes that you don't see every day, to really gain an understanding of what threats are. And so we can create models to prevent the threats and to become better prepared. So, along the journey, we've been able to do that, and that's been quite successful in this space.
Mm-hmm.
And we have also been able to change some mindsets around thinking, dealing with the thought process of our security personnel who are protecting our systems, our programmers, our, officers who are carrying guns. We have Edward Snowdens around stealing our power plants, and we know there's more of that coming. So, we've been able to just— how do I say this— capture a small group of intelligent mindsets behind the scenes that have been able to guide us through. And 12 years later, we have been in the international market. Our model just naturally transcends into the international market. Jordan, the US is building nuclear power there. London, we've been there to meet with the authorities there for France and London, big nuclear providers. And we just came back from Vienna. The World Institute for Nuclear Security, meeting with Roger Housley. So the network is international. And we have put together programs basically for the new practitioner. As you're building robots, we're trying to build the mentality of our human beings who are responsible for these systems and for protecting our infrastructures. So, what we found over the past 12 years, and our relationships have supported us in this, is looking at the next 25 years, who's going to protect our power plants? And we have an aging workforce. We're shipping in engineers from overseas to build. And we sit on a committee with Westinghouse, GE, Areva, Hitachi, those CEOs. Who's going to do it? looking to design the newest reactor based on the populations and the bodies of water that we have around us that are conducive. And at the same time, you're dealing with those that aren't happy about nuclear and its environmental circumstances. So we're having to deal with all of that in a community and the adverseness in order to develop the new practitioner for nuclear security. And nuclear security to me is national security. Because when you a nuclear plant blows up, can you imagine the catastrophic event that it has? So, we're happy to be here in this space. And one of the great opportunities we've also discovered in 12 years is the minority and women community is not represented appropriately across the nation. And we've had great support from our CEOs and the NEI folks in our city. And I think that's a great point. And it's not that they don't want to employ more of this population into these positions. There's an approach and there's a culture that has to be understood, and there's a foundation that has to be laid in order for one to be successful, not a revolving chair where turnover is high. So what we're trying to do is develop that platform and that foundation by education. And so we've partnered with ASU and Montgomery Alabama, which is a historically black college and university, partner with them to— the location is great in Birmingham, there's water there, Mississippi— to begin to educate the new nuclear security practitioner and the new critical protection for the new threats that are out here. That's exciting to me, because now we begin to open up doors. to the greater population in our communities. That includes many of our women and minorities. So, we're excited about that. This hasn't been done before. So, those are some of the opportunities. Challenges are just what they are. You know, just men and women are just different. Men are from Mars and women are from Venus. You see that in business as well. You know, for me, it's, I guess, the greater challenge for me, looking at BENZ and its organization and what you're established to accomplish, and it's the government, our policies. And we talked a little bit about that earlier. What I've done is looked up and around after 12 years and just looked at the blueprint across the globe. And what kind of algorithm can we fix here? We're having shootings. National security now is outside of the power plants. It's more vast into our cyber world and our grids and our schools. It's everywhere. So, but it still gets back to the same core mindset, is dealing right here and understanding our landscape and what we're protecting and what we're not protecting and who's next door, who's sitting next to us in ways that we haven't done so before. That's why we're subject to Snowdens. of the world because we just didn't pay attention. And so these are the things that I'm working on now is how to make it better for the greater populations and continuously improving, adding value to the system that's already developed in critical protection infrastructure and just trying to create more opportunities. The government is huge. Policies have to be readdressed. And I say particularly in nuclear. We have nuclear labs with our government. There's a multi-trillion-dollar spend with G4S, a German-owned company and a Sweden-owned company, which is okay. But for me, that's our space for Americans. And so for me, the next 6 months, we're going to look into delving into some of that government policy. And how are we overlooking some of our American businesses, as we discussed earlier? How do we de-bundle some of those big bundles of contracts that go to Lockheed and Raytheon, some of those, so that some of our smaller businesses are able to participate and realize some of those American dreams? And we're not saying get rid of G-Force or the foreign-owned companies, but certainly let's give our home businesses some leadway. So when I look at bins, that is one of the areas that I've already embarked upon, just calling on stakeholders in these spaces at DOE and administration and making them aware. Because oftentimes, you know, the awareness is not there. It may be there. Until you raise the awareness, no one's going to pay attention. Of course, no one's in the space but me now, so I have to make it— You're the one. known that this is a platform that we need to participate in. And so we have to look for our wonderful government to relax some of those policies. And it's not only for me, but it's for other businesses throughout. So that's my Reader's Digest version of where we are, where we've been, where we are today, and where we're planning to go for the future in this space alone. in developing our people. And robots is in the play, it's in the works. And my thing is, until we get an assembly line of robots, we have to figure out how to mesh technology and humans together for greater productivity. And so I'm excited to hear about what you're doing there. And so we're looking at value-add and creativity right now in the industry. And I'm open to any questions, I really am. It's— I'd be interested in what your perspective is on the greatest threat facing the security— facing US security related to nuclear. So is it the other plants that are being built? Is it the education piece and not having the engineers here? Is it that there's nothing in the pipeline? Like if there's one— not that there's ever one answer, What do you think is the most— that top thing that really needs solved first?
It's people.
So the education piece?
Yes.
Having enough people in your pipeline? Well, not only having enough people, but the right people. And even in the C-suite. We're in Vienna meeting with Roger, and we're members of the WIN group now, the World Nuclear. And his comment, to your point, Laura, was, you know, the C-suite is the greatest thing. There's a communication gap between the CEOs of these utilities, your C-suite, and the end users, your security personnel on the sites. And in the middle, there's a huge vacuum. So what they're beginning to do is— what they've addressed as their most critical is communication gaps between the C-suite and the end users. The C-suite, not— they don't oftentimes understand where a threat really is. Where's the threat coming from? What is the threat? And they're oftentimes in reactive mode. So, they're addressing the C-suite as a critical problem in the industry is they just don't understand the impact. And the only thing is keep me out of the newspaper.
Yeah, yeah.
Don't get me in the newspaper from the C-suite. So, what he's doing, proposing, is bridging that gap by educating that C-suite of the vulnerabilities down here and somehow trying to bridge that communication gap. And we found that as true, because in working in the space, I've often worked with C-suites. That is my relationship and the end user, and there is a vacuum. there, because when it comes to a threat or budgets, these people have the power, the nuclear folks. And oftentimes, the C-suite, they have no clue. They just say, oh, they say we can't do it because of safety reasons. So I think the communication gap, and it's people, and it all evolves around reeducating and redefining what security means and what the threats are, from the C-suite down to the end user, because it's changed tremendously. And that's why we've just taken our— this route is developing the mindset. And once you do that, everything else falls into place. Great question though, thank you.
Congratulations to you. Thanks for the comments there. My question kind of goes to the education piece. When you look across our academic institutions, is there a strategy Is there a common strategy amongst them out there in this area that you're working in, or are you seeing it kind of like ALU, like you mentioned that you're starting to grow one down there, but is there a common goal amongst the academic institutions in this area?
No. That's the problem. I mean, I'm not going to say it's a problem, but it's hodgepodge. We'll put a program here and a program here. And it's pretty much more of the tradition, you get a grant here, give a grant to this school, they're going to develop nuclear research, they're going to do this. But there is not a uniform code, per se. And there may be in regulations, there has to be a uniform code for regulations, but when you get outside of regulations, that's where you have your threats. And it's not there. And so when we met with the Nuclear Institute in Vienna and those guys, NEI, the goal is to develop that, create it where it is a uniform, even if it's basic 101, of what security means at a critical protection infrastructure. And that's where we're attempting to make that happen. We've done that inside for 12 years, so now we've just gotten approval to bring it out where it's been Cleaned up pretty much and scrubbed for the regular civilian to learn and the basic concept of what they're protecting. But education is critical in this space because of the aging workforce.
