http://www.gazette.com/common/printer/view.php?db=colgazette&id=37369

Lawmakers concerned about NORAD security at Peterson
By PAM ZUBECK
June 16, 2008 - 5:02PM

Two Colorado lawmakers expressed concern Tuesday about security issues
at Peterson Air Force Base, the new home of the nation's premier air
and space defense command that moved last month from Cheyenne Mountain
Air Force Station.

Their comments came in response to The Gazette's report Tuesday that
military officials downplayed security concerns identified in a
classified vulnerability assessment of Peterson that concluded the
North American Aerospace Defense Command's new command center couldn't
withstand a medium or high threat and had only a 6 percent chance of
surviving a low-level threat.

"I continue to be very concerned about the security implications of
moving NORAD from Cheyenne Mountain to Peterson AFB," Rep. Doug
Lamborn, R-Colo., said in a statement. "Although the final draft has
not yet been completed and released, I have requested a full briefing
from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). From the day I took
office, I have questioned the added value and security risks related
to this already scheduled move."

Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., also has questions and had a hand in
mandating the Pentagon report to Congress in March to outline moving
costs and vulnerabilities at Peterson. Congress also mandated the GAO
review the Pentagon report.

The GAO report, like the Pentagon's report, is classified. It's due to
be delivered to Congress July 3.

In a statement, Salazar's communications director Matt Lee-Ashley said
Salazar has "pressed the Pentagon to answer legitimate questions that
have been raised about the cost, operational benefits and security
implications of moving day to day operations from Cheyenne Mountain
Air Station to Peterson AFB."

While Lee-Ashley said Salazar can't comment on classified material, he
is "working closely" with NORAD and Northern Command, which shares a
commander with NORAD, to ensure they address "any shortcomings in
security."

He also noted Salazar has requested funding for 23 acres around the
base as a buffer zone to improve protection of people and assets and
already obtained funding last year to boost redundancy of data
networks at Cheyenne Mountain in case of a failure at Peterson.

He said Salazar will continue his push to "make sure that the Cheyenne
Mountain Air Station remains open and fully capable of supporting
NORAD/NORTHCOM's operations."

NORAD posted a statement on its Web site Tuesday saying, "The new
command center at Peterson AFB significantly enhances our ability to
respond to the full spectrum (air, land, maritime, space and cyber) of
security threats to North America. In fact, the commands have already
implemented and are in the process of implementing appropriate
security and protection measures." The statement didn't explain the
measures.

The Gazette asked NORAD last week to outline what, if any, measures
secure the command center, and officials refused to comment on that
issue.

The statement also called the newspaper's report, based on a Statement
of Facts compiled by the GAO for use in its review of the Pentagon
report, "incomplete and inaccurate" because it didn't report on the
GAO's final analysis.

"The sensationalized accusation that military officials somehow misled
Congress is false," the statement said. "The GAO draft report does not
draw this conclusion ..."

The Gazette reported that based on the Statement of Facts given to the
Defense Department for comments to be included in the GAO's final
report, military leaders understated security issues.

The Pentagon reported to Congress on March 3 that an independent
Systems Effectiveness Assessment of Peterson's Building 2, where the
nation's homeland security nerve center is located, identified
"several physical security problems."

The assessment said, according to the GAO, that "the existing security
system at Peterson AFB supporting Building 2 would fail if attacked by
even a low-level threat."

The Pentagon's report outlined mitigation measures, but those are
either unfunded or in design stages, the Statement of Facts said. The
military report didn't tell lawmakers whether the measures would
enable Peterson to achieve Protection Level 1, which signifies "those
assets whose loss, theft, destruction, misuse or compromise would
result in great harm to the strategic capability of the United
States," the GAO report said.

NORAD is a binational defense agency with Canada that shares its
commander with the nation's homeland security command, Northern
Command.

NORAD's mountain complex was built during the Cold War and sheltered
air and space surveillance and missile and air warning operations. The
move was instigated in 2006 after former NORAD/NorthCom commander Adm.
Timothy Keating identified "unity of effort and command" problems
during a 2005 exercise conducted from both Cheyenne Mountain and
Peterson.

After a GAO study a year ago found NORAD and NorthCom didn't analyze
operational effects and costs of the move and that a security
assessment hadn't been completed or a protection level designated,
Congress ordered the Pentagon report and GAO's review of it.

The move, which NORAD said cost $41 million, was completed May 28, but
Cheyenne Mountain remains an alternate command center that can be
functional within an hour.

Building 2 sits above ground just yards from the base's northern
border. The GAO Statement of Facts, quoting the Systems Effectiveness
Assessment, said the building lacks "sufficient vehicle stand-off" and
"a dedicated response force." The GAO noted the assessment failed to
analyze all security risks, among them acts of terrorism such as the
Sept. 11, 2001, airliner attacks, although Colorado Springs Airport is
adjacent to the base.

One defense policy expert told The Gazette the airport poses a
significant risk, due to the difficulty in identifying hostile
aircraft before it's too late.