For Immediate Release August 2, 2007	CONTACT: Stephanie Valencia (Salazar) – 202-228-3630 Steve Wymer (Allard) – 202-224-6207
Senators Salazar and Allard Urge Air Force to Take Action on Encroachment Issues WASHINGTON, D.C. – Many of our Nation’s military installations, including several in Colorado, are facing accelerating development and population growth, otherwise referred to as ‘encroachment,’ near and around their lands. Unfortunately, encroachment has an impact on our military’s training and preparedness. Colorado’s Senators, today, wrote a letter to Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne regarding the Department of Defense’s Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI) which has proven successful in protecting key military installations, ranges, and airspace from encroaching development. Unlike the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, the Air Force has not taken full advantage of the authority provided by Congress through REPI to create its own encroachment mitigation program. In their letter, Senators Salazar and Allard wrote: “…the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps all have well- established, centrally managed and funded encroachment partnering programs to allow those services to take full advantage of the authorities that Congress provided and of the DoD-wide REPI program. It appears to us that the Air Force, while acknowledging the availability of the REPI program as another “tool in the toolbox”, has not as yet taken equivalent action to establish an encroachment partnering program with efficient and effective policies and procedures in order to allow local commanders to take full advantage of the REPI program.” The Senators also requested that, “…if the Air Force does not intend to apply for REPI funds for FY 2008, we respectfully ask that you provide us with a justification for that decision.” Background on key Colorado military installations facing encroachment issues: Fort Carson: The area around Fort Carson is experiencing rapid development that is approaching its eastern and southern boundaries, near some of the post’s primary training ranges. Continued residential development near the fence line could lead to growing safety concerns, complaints of dust, noise, and light, and limitations on the quantity and type of training at Fort Carson. To address these concerns, the command staff at Fort Carson drafted a strategic plan in 2002 to create a buffer around the base perimeter using partnerships with local ranchers, conservation groups, and local stakeholders. To date, the military has spent $9.8 million through the Army Compatible Use Buffer program, the Army’s encroachment mitigation program, on conservation easements and to curb development on more than 7,800 acres. Peterson AFB: Colorado Springs’ growth is placing pressure on four sides of Peterson AFB at a moment when Peterson is planning to expand the base. Senators Salazar and Allard are fighting to secure funding for acquisition of 23 acres near the headquarters of Northern Command, to provide a larger stand-off between the fence line and vital national security networks. Schriever AFB: As Colorado Springs expands to the east, development is approaching the western and northern fence line from Highway 94. Without planning and early action, encroachment could pose force protection issues near the fence line and could block communications with satellites while they are close to the horizon. Buckley AFB: Encroaching residential development near the runways at Buckley AFB could limit the military mission of the base if complaints of noise affect what types of training could occur. Currently, Colorado Air National Guard F-16’s operate out of Buckley and the base may be considered for stationing louder F-35’s in the near future. # # #