Savannah —- Nearly a decade ago, Congress blessed the deepening of the Savannah River by as much as 6 feet. It hasn't happened.

Instead, the river has been studied, sampled, surveyed, mapped, modeled, monitored, even oxygenated. But it hasn't been dredged, to the annoyance of state officials who fear further delays will harm the port's $15 billion annual economic impact on Georgia.

If the next generation of super-sized container ships can't glide upriver from the Atlantic Ocean 26 miles away, they may head instead to Charleston, Norfolk or other East Coast ports. Billions of dollars —- and Savannah's reputation as the nation's fastest-growing container port —- are at stake.

"This project is absolutely critical," said Steve Green, chairman of the Georgia Ports Authority. "It may be the single-most critical public works project to the state's overall economy for the foreseeable future."

Deepening the river faces environmental obstacles. The Sierra Club and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service question whether the impact on fish and birds can be mitigated.

The Sierra Club and others threaten lawsuits if U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' plans don't protect the river and its environs. Critics also question the need for dredging 26 miles of river when a proposed port at nearby Jasper, S.C., is 10 miles closer to the ocean.

"If you build Jasper, you can avoid the mitigation disasters of a harbor deepening," said Steve Willis, chairman of the Sierra Club of Georgia's coastal group. "And you'd end up with a cleaner, better, safer port."

Dredged since 1800s

At least five times since the late 1800s, the Savannah River has been deepened. Ships scuttled by Confederates were plucked from the river in 1896 when the Savannah was first dredged.

In 1945, the river reached 34 feet so ships hauling pulp and paper could reach the sea. The Savannah dropped to 42 feet in 1992, yet many of the world's biggest container ships must wait for high tide, or reduce their loads at other ports, before they can safely navigate the river.

Seven years later, Congress authorized $232 million to dredge the river to 48 feet. Georgia taxpayers would cover $85 million.

Jeffrey Humphreys, a University of Georgia economist, said the Savannah and Brunswick ports brought $15 billion to Georgia in fiscal 2006.

Nearly 120,000 direct jobs —- stevedores, truckers, warehouse managers and paper mill workers —- depend on the ports. The state also reaped $1.6 billion in port-related taxes, according to a Ports Authority funded study.

Savannah's recent shipping success —- it's the second-busiest port on the East Coast after New York-New Jersey —- was built upon the surge in steel boxes filled with toys, clothes and electronics from Asia. Containers carry about 80 percent of the trade in and out of the port. Container traffic grew 72 percent at Savannah between 2002 and 2007.

Ships calling at Savannah can carry as many as 6,700 TEUs, an industry measurement for a container. Fully loaded ships can't reach the main terminals at Garden City, a few miles above downtown Savannah.

Roughly three-fourths of the container ships are constrained by the tides. Either the low tides keep them from running the river, or they inch upstream with lighter-than-preferred loads.

A deeper Savannah River would allow heavier, and more lucrative, cargo loads into port. Restrictions cost time and money and give shipping lines reason to consider deeper ports.

Ports Authority Executive Director Doug Marchand worries the next wave of super-sized container ships to hit the East Coast, able to carry up to 8,000 TEUs, will avoid Savannah without the deepening. The Panama Canal, the main transit point for Asia-bound vessels, is upgrading its channels and locks to handle the mega-ships. Work should be completed by 2014, when port traffic is expected to double.

"We have seen a tremendous amount of change in global trade since we got the authorization to move this project forward," Marchand said. "It's even more critical now that we get the 48 feet."

Corps officials said last week no decision has been made on how deep the river should go. The deeper the channel, the better for shipping but the steeper the cost to Georgia taxpayers. Daniel Parrott, a Corps civil engineer in Savannah, said the overall price tag has doubled to roughly $500 million. The federal government would shoulder 65 percent if the river is dredged no deeper than 45 feet. Georgians would pay half —- $250 million —- if the river is deepened further.

Study holds up OK'd work

The Ports Authority had hoped to begin dredging within a few years of the congressional OK. The Corps, the agency responsible for evaluating the project, deepening the river and mitigating any damage, began a lengthy review. Three dozen studies have been undertaken to determine whether the port should be dredged, to what depth and how the re-engineered river would affect tidal marshes, short-nosed sturgeons and other natural resources.

Nearly $40 million has been spent analyzing the river. A long-awaited environmental impact study should be released for public review in October.

A decision could come next summer with construction possibly beginning the following summer.

Judy Jennings, the Sierra Club's point person for harbor deepening, will welcome the ships if environmental problems have been mitigated. Jennings isn't convinced the Corps will adequately safeguard the endangered sturgeon, the striped bass or the freshwater tidal marshes in the Savannah River Wildlife Refuge if the river is deepened to 48 feet.

"If the [Corps] can convince me that they can mitigate to 48 feet, then I have no problem with it," Jennings said. "But if we do this and it turns out to be a dumb idea, I'm not sure how we get it fixed."

The deeper the river, the harder it is for oxygen to reach the lower depths. Fish and other aquatic life suffer. The Ports Authority paid an engineering firm $3 million last year to pump oxygen into the river to determine if fish, particularly the sturgeon, would receive ample oxygen.

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting said fish wouldn't be unduly harmed at 48 feet with the added oxygen.

The Fish and Wildlife Service wasn't convinced. After an outside analysis of the data, the agency reported June 18 "a high degree of uncertainty as to how effective oxygen injection would be." The Corps asked for further study.

Fish and Wildlife also fears a 48-foot deepening would ruin a freshwater swath of the nearby Wildlife Refuge, one of the most important preserves on the East Coast.

The Corps agrees that salt water would surge further upriver if the Savannah were dredged to that depth. Even with mitigation efforts, 330 acres of freshwater marsh would turn brackish, the agency said.

The Corps recommends purchasing 2,000 acres along Georgia's side of the Savannah River to mitigate the freshwater loss of the 330 acres in South Carolina.

"We can minimize the impacts at 44 or 45 feet," said Russ Webb, a biologist with Fish and Wildlife, which manages the refuge. "At 48 feet, the impact would be a lot more significant."

The wildlife refuge, as well as the river alongside the port, would be much less affected if the river were dredged only as far as the planned Jasper port site about 10 miles below Garden City. Georgia and South Carolina agreed last year to jointly develop the port, but probably not until 2018 at the earliest.

"Do you dredge to a port that doesn't exist?" questioned Green, the Ports Authority chairman. "It completely ignores [the] need for Garden City and all of its container capacity for the next 12 years. Opponents are using Jasper as a smokescreen to stop the dredging, period."

PRO/CON

Georgia hopes to deepen Savannah's port to 48 feet.

Pros

> Super-sized container ships could more readily reach the port.

> Savannah would likely maintain its ranking as the East Coast's second busiest port.

> Thousands of new jobs statewide could be created.

Cons

> It could cost at least $500 million, with state taxpayers covering half.

> Freshwater marsh could be destroyed in the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge.

> Short-nosed sturgeon and striped bass could suffer oxygen loss.