House Leaders Question NORAD Move

07/04/2008

July 03, 2008
The Gazette, Colorado Springs,Colo.


House leaders took the Pentagon to task July 2 for moving the nation's air and space defense command headquarters from the Cold-War era Cheyenne Mountain bunker to Peterson Air Force Base, Colo., without ensuring its new home could fend off "a wide range of threats."

In a strongly worded letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., and ranking Republican Duncan Hunter of California noted that the move hasn't saved money as predicted by a previous commander and could jeopardize the nation's ability to respond to threats and attacks.

"We are concerned that a comprehensive plan for mitigating security threats and vulnerabilities associated with the relocation has not been developed, implemented or adequately programmed," Skelton and Hunter wrote.

The House was so concerned last year about moving the North American Aerospace Defense Command's control center to Peterson's Building 2 that it tried to block funding for it. The Senate, however refused to block the move, which was initiated in 2006 by then-commander Adm. Timothy Keating.

The military completed the move May 28.

"In a June 13, 2008, letter to this committee, 16 days after the combined command post became operational," Skelton's and Hunter's letter said, "this committee received notice that an additional $9 million of security improvements would be required and that NORAD/NorthCom had elected to defer an additional $14 million of identified security improvements.

"Most importantly," they added, "the identified security improvements did not, and perhaps still do not, reflect a comprehensive deterrence against a broad range of threats."

Skelton and Hunter said the failure to plan and consider costs, benefits and risk compelled the committee to again attempt to block funding for further relocation of functions from Cheyenne Mountain "until proper analysis and certification is provided to the Congress."

The letter calls for a review of additional costs and vulnerabilities and notes the nation shouldn't have to rely on alternate command and control when viable primary capabilities are available.

Colorado's two members of the House Armed Services Committee also expressed concern.

Rep. Mark Udall, D-El Dorado Springs, said he's tried for two years to get a convincing explanation for how Peterson's protection matches that of the mountain.

"I don't think it's too late to consider shifting air and space surveillance missions back to the mountain if Peterson's security vulnerabilities can't be overcome," Udall said in a statement.

He also urged the military to speed up its clearance of an unclassified version of the GAO report.

"Everyone has a right to know about the concerns GAO has laid out," he said.

Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs, expressed concern about the GAO document's being leaked to the public as well as the report's contents.

He called for a closed session with Pentagon and NORAD leaders.

Neither Colorado senator, Republican Wayne Allard or Democrat Ken Salazar, serves on the Armed Services Committee. Salazar asked NORAD/NorthCom Commander Gen. Gene Renuart to brief him next week.

After The Gazette reported on a preliminary Government Accountability Office report on June 17, NORAD issued a statement saying the move enhances the agencies' response.

On July 2, NORAD issued a similar statement and added that Cheyenne Mountain "will remain our primary alternate command facility with all capabilities."

The committee's letter was triggered by the GAO's final report, given to Congress Tuesday, which analyzed the military's March 3 classified report that outlined costs and security issues associated with the move.

The GAO's report is classified, as is the preliminary GAO document which The Gazette reported last month suggested the Pentagon misled Congress about security of the above-ground Building 2, which NORAD shares with Northern Command, the nation's homeland security command.