DATE: Thursday, October 9, 1997             TAG: 9710090509

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B1   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: BY DALE EISMAN, STAFF WRITER 

DATELINE: WASHINGTON                        LENGTH:   62 lines

NAVY STUDY SAYS VETOED PROJECT WOULD SAVE MILLIONS NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD MUST LEASE, NOT BUILD.

A $19.9 million pier refurbishment project at Norfolk Naval Shipyard, vetoed this week by President Clinton in a cost-cutting gesture, would have saved taxpayers $169 million over the next 25 years, according to Navy estimates.

An economic analysis prepared by the shipyard estimated that the project would have paid for itself in just over two years by letting the service avoid the expense of leasing wharf space and equipment elsewhere and transporting workers to the leased facilities.

Once paid for, the analysis said, the refurbished area would have cost the Navy less than $25,000 annually to maintain. The cost of leasing other wharves, which the service will have to do in lieu of the refurbishment, will total almost $9.5 million a year, according to the analysis.

U.S. Rep. Norman Sisisky, whose 4th District includes the yard, released the Navy analysis Wednesday and said it underscores the need for the pier improvements.

``The longer we delay the project, the longer this area of the waterfront will not be able to effectively support (the yard's) ship repair mission . . efficiencies and savings that result from operating modern facilities.''

The project was to include demolition of two dilapidated buildings near Pier 3 at the yard, demolition and filling of two former shipbuilding ways - unused since 1953 - and construction of a berthing space large enough to accommodate two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

The pier refurbishment was the largest of 38 military construction projects vetoed by Clinton on Monday in his most extensive use of the ``line-item'' veto power Congress approved last year. The president approved 417 other projects, valued at $8.9 billion.

Clinton said the vetoed projects were selected because they weren't included in his 1998 budget request, would not improve the lives of U.S. troops and still needed substantial design work before construction could begin.

A spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget, which reviewed the projects for Clinton, could not say Wednesday whether the president considered cost analyses like the one the Navy prepared on the pier project.

But Clinton and the budget office recognize that many of the vetoed projects were worthwhile, the spokesman added.

``The question has to do with timing,'' he said. Projects vetoed this year may well be approved in the future, as officials review the military's needs and the money available, and decide the time is right to proceed.

Two other projects in Hampton Roads were vetoed: a $4 million air operations building at the Norfolk Naval Air Station and a $3.3 million storage magazine for Tomahawk missiles at the Yorktown Naval Weapons Station.

U.S. Rep. Owen B. Pickett, whose 2nd District includes the air station, suggested that that project was driven by safety rather than cost concerns.

Planes will continue to use the airport's facilities, Pickett said, but the operations building and the base radar are ``woefully inadequate and frequently out of service, posing a safety risk both to the military aircraft and crews and civilian houses located in Norfolk in the accident potential zone.'' ILLUSTRATION: [Color Photo]

Rep. Norman Sisisky, who supports the project, released the report.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu