The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Tuesday released documents critical to plans to deepen the Savannah harbor.
As expected, the long-awaited study recommends a depth of 47 feet as most economically beneficial for the nation. It lays out the plans of the local sponsor Georgia Department of Transportation to take on the additional cost of digging to 48 feet, the depth preferred by the Georgia Ports Authority.
The 30-pound, double-sided document also details the environmental impacts of these depths and strategies for lessening those impacts. Called a draft General Re-Evaluation Report, the study contains an Environmental Impact Statement.
Currently the river is dredged to 42 feet. That depth means some ships, particularly larger vessels that are heavily loaded, must wait for high tide to sail upriver to Garden City.
When the Panama Canal expansion is complete in 2014, more of the larger ships are expected to be in use. Georgia Ports Authority has pushed for Savannah to be ready for those so-called post-Panamax behemoths with a harbor that's 48 feet deep.
This go-round is a draft. The public, including business and environmental groups long involved in these analyses, has at least 45 days from Nov. 26 to comment on it. The comment period is likely to extend at least another 15 days to Jan. 25 if already-filed requests for an extension are granted.
The corps will hold a public meeting in the middle of the comment period - scheduled for Dec. 15 - to present the plan.
After that, a final version will be prepared. After another round of public comment, the final version must be approved by the Secretary of the Army; the Secretary of the Interior; the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; and the Secretary of Commerce.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Savannah District took the lead in preparing the document. It was assisted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Georgia Ports Authority.
Deepening will affect the river and the surrounding environment in multiple ways.
Using complicated computer models that will themselves be subject to scrutiny, the study details the expected effects and recommends ways to either lessen them or make up for them.
For example, after deepening, saltwater will flow farther upriver than ever before, killing swaths of tidal freshwater marsh that make the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge a valuable habitat for migrating birds. Replumbing the river with cuts and fills is expected to divert fresh water where it's most needed and save some of that freshwater marsh.
Another major concern about deepening is its effects on water quality. Less oxygen can make it through a deeper water column, necessitating the artificial injection of oxygen with giant bubblers stationed along the river bank.
The draft study also describes in detail research on fish habitat, endangered species, dredged material, possible saltwater intrusion on the Upper Floridan Aquifer and beach erosion.
The latter two issues remain high on the list of local concerns, but corps studies show they are considered unlikely consequences of deepening to 48 feet.
Across state lines
Deepening the channel is "absolutely essential" to plans for the Jasper Ocean Terminal downstream from Savannah, said Jim Balloun, the chairman of the $500 million project. South Carolina and Georgia are working on developing the terminal projected to open in 2025.
The Savannah Maritime Commission plans to meet Dec. 7 to pour over the corps' hefty findings, according to Rep. Bill Herbkersman, R-Bluffton, and Commission member.
"It'll be a fact-gathering mission," he said. "This undoubtedly effects everyone in the Beaufort, Jasper and surrounding areas and runs the whole gamut, quality of life, economically and environmentally, just really everything."
Herbkersman cited concerns about South Carolina's fresh water supply too and pointed to recent saltwater intrusion and closure of several water supplies on Hilton Head Island.
"I want to be very cautious," he said. "We're dealing with just a few inches at this point ... and we cannot afford another breach at this point."
On the flip side, bigger ships mean bigger commerce.
"We have got to get the big ships coming in ... the trade will be positive for the whole Southeast."
Up the coast, Gov.-elect Nikki Haley said Tuesday that Georgia has had its way too long in the port competition between the states.
Haley told maritime leaders she doesn't have the patience to let it continue. Savannah has surpassed Charleston in port volume in recent years.
Haley spoke at a Charleston dinner where State Ports Authority president and CEO Jim Newsome gave his annual State of the Port address. Newsome said Charleston already serves four mega-ships a week. He said deepening the Charleston channel to 50 feet would cost less than at competing ports.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
The Savannah District plans to hold a public workshop from 4 to 8 p.m. Dec. 15 at the Savannah Civic Center, 301 W. Oglethorpe Ave., to provide the public an opportunity to ask questions and provide comments on the project.
The Corps will provide details related to the engineering, economics and environmental aspects of the studies.
ON THE WEB
The public can read and comment on the GRR and EIS online at www.sas.usace.army.mil
Savannah River Deepening Timeline
1987: The Corps of Engineers holds a public hearing in Savannah on the impact of the proposed dredging of the Savannah River shipping channel to a depth of 40 feet. U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials stated that the increased depth would increase the salinity of the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge. The Georgia Conservancy also expressed concern especially about the method used to determine the potential invasion of salt water.
1988: The Corps recommends delaying the dredging until the environmental impact of increased saltwater in the harbor can be examined.
In the meantime, several South Carolina agencies make a pitch for a deepwater port on their side of the river. They clam it would cause fewer environmental problems. Concern is also expressed that the additional dredging would fill spoil areas faster that projected.
March 1991: Dredging of the river's far banks was to begin but takes a hiatus from March 15 to June 1 to accommodate the striped bass spawning season. The pause came at the request of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
April 1988: An environmental impact statement released by the Corps states that no additional damage would be caused by deepening the harbor to 42 feet.
The Fish and Wildlife Service issued a dissenting report that channel deepening would exacerbate the presently unacceptable fish and wildlife impacts created by operation of the tide gate.
Channel Bar tests are ordered to make sure the deepening of the channel will not contaminate the underlying aquifer that supplies Savannah's drinking water. The test involves taking core borings for scientist to analyze the layers to determine the susceptibility of the aquifer's upper layer.
May 1988: Then-U.S. Rep. Lindsay Thomas says he will block federal funding for deepening unless the Back River tide gate is permanently idled and the New Cut canal filled in. Wildlife officials from the Carolinas and Georgia endorse the closing of the tide gates and the canal.
The Coastal Heritage Society expresses concern that the dredging may harm Old Fort Jackson and the shipwreck of the CSS Georgia. They later demand the Corps build specific protections for the two historic assets.
June 1988: The Corps recommends the closing of the New Cut Canal and idling the Back River tide gate.
August 1988: Shrimp trawlers are brought in to sweep the waters near the Savannah River Shipping channel's entrance to scoop up endangered sea turtles to prevent deaths of the creatures during harbor deepening.
September 1988: Gov. Zell Miller asks the Georgia Ports Authority to set aside $980,000 as their part in funding the filling in of the New Cut Canal.
November 1988: The Corps decides to permanently idle the tide gates and fill in the New Cut Canal. Striped bass are stocked in the river in hopes of establishing a new population. The fish will reach maturity in five years.
December 1988: The Metropolitan Planning Commission urges the Corps of Engineers to extend agitation dredging permits temporarily. It had been practiced since the 1930s. An environmental study of agitation dredging was commissioned to decide whether it should be eliminated. The Corps allowed companies with permits to continue until the end of the study.
January 1992: South Carolina officials, long concerned about toxic-metals runoff from Savannah harbor dredging spoils, threaten to block the proposed deepening unless federal officials redirect the runoff.
The officials were protecting the pristine Wright River. The Corps disputes the charges saying no indication that the outfall pipes had an environmental impact.
Testing of the outfalls had shown them to be in compliance with state and federal water quality standards. However, they were to develop a comprehensive testing and monitoring program for the discharges and river sediments. South Carolina wanted a written guarantee that the Wright River would be protected.
February 1992: The New Cut Canal is dammed. The wildlife refuge is beginning to benefit from the closing of the tide gates in March 1991. The Corps also authorized a privately funded study on the impact of agitation dredging. The study gets underway in March.
March 1992: The widening work is granted a one-month waiver to allowed dredging through the strip bass spawning season. The waiver is given in hopes of having the job finished by April 15. The work was finished one day before the start of the moratorium would have begun without the waiver.
April 1992: The South Carolina Coastal Council withdraws its opposition to the deepening of the harbor after the Corps of Engineers promised a three-year study into the environmental effects of runoff from its dredging spoils disposal areas.
December 1992: Geological test show that deepening the harbor should not cause any problems with the aquifer.
October 1993: The Corps of Engineers decides to allow agitation dredging to continue after two environmental studies determine that the method causes no serious pollution problems
1994: Dredging is not completed until April. The Corps had hoped to complete the project by March 16 in an effort to protect the striped bass. The completed project deepens the river 4 feet. Previously, the river was widen to 500 feet.
1997: Plans to deepen the river channel again to at least 45 feet causes environmentalists and historians concerns. The Georgia Port Authority plans an environmental impact study to address those concerns. The deepening could start in July 1999.
August 1998: The planned dredging gains narrow support from the Chatham County Commission.
December 1998: GPA forms stakeholders group.
August 1999: Congress passes the Water Resources Development Act that includes the river deepening project.
October 1999: The GPA hires ATM-Applied Technology and Management Inc. to create a computer model that will help predict 'what-if' scenarios concerning the deepening.
December 1999: Marine biologist Mark Collins begins a one-year study of the shortnose sturgeon to assess the deepening's impact on this rare fish.
March 2000: A coalition of environmental groups sues the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in federal court over what they say is the agency's premature approval of the Savannah harbor deepening project.
July 2000: A study conducted by geologist Fred Rich of GSU says that deepening the River might widen cracks in the rock shielding drinking water.
September 2000: Discussions begin of building a port in Jasper County.
June 2001: The Georgia Ports Authority and Stevedoring Services hire public relations firms to do battle over whether the Savannah River should be dredged/widen or a private port placed in Jasper County, S.C.
February 2005: A bi-state committee is formed to study addition of the Jasper County port.
September 2005: GPA announces the most recent study of the potential deepening is complete and hopes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "record of decision" will be released by July 2007.
October 2005: The Stakeholders Evaluation Group meets to discuss a computer model of the proposed deepening as presented by Chuck Watson of Kinetic Analysis Corp.
October 2006: The proposed expansion of the Panama Canal is approved. The decision impacts the planned deepening from 42 feet to 48 feet to accommodate the expected larger ships.
Early 2008: President George W. Bush drops the propose $76 million needed from the proposed federal budget. The decision in turn affects the proposed funds in the state budget.
October 2008: The harbor report is delayed. A briefing in August raised questions causing the delay.
September 2009: Gov. Sonny Perdue visits the Panama Canal. He stresses the importance of deepening Savannah's port by 2014 to accommodate the larger ships.
May 2010: The Georgia state budget includes bond funding of $68.4 million for harbor deepening.
Source: Savannah Morning News files ; compiled by Julia C. Muller