NORTH AUGUSTA--About 600 protesters, workers, supporters and politicians took part in a public hearing Monday night about how a proposed $4 billion plutonium pit facility at Savannah River Site would affect the environment.

The meeting, which became contentious at times, was the next step in preparing a final Environmental Impact Statement for the project.

Officials from the federal Energy Department presented their proposal. Then those attending were given three minutes apiece to speak -- and speak loudly at times -- about the project.

The region needs "clean jobs that won't harm the environment and people," said Susan Bloomfield, a 79-year-old resident of nearby Augusta, Ga.

People have until August to submit comment that will go into the completed EIS.

The federal department is expected to decide in April on the pit project. SRS is five sites under consideration.

An initial screening by the Energy Department ranked SRS second, behind the Los Alamos, N.M., National Laboratory. Other sites being weighed are the government's Pantex Plant near Amarillo, Texas; the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M.; and the Nevada Test Site near Las Vegas.

"Savannah River Site has an extensive nuclear infrastructure, a great security work force, can do workers, and general community support," said Jay Rose, document manager for the DOE's Environmental Impact Statement. The new plutonium pit -- critical components of nuclear weapons -- would replace existing pits at SRS by 2020.

The facility could offer as many as 1,800 new jobs for up to 50 years. SRS now employs more than 13,000 people. While SRS workers at the meeting cheered for the project, those opposed held signs of protest. There were about a dozen security guards on hand.

SRS mechanical engineer Steve Sheetz has worked at the nuclear weapons plant for 19 years. He said the meeting wasn't about whether the pit facility should be built, but about Savannah River. "If it is to be built, Savannah River Site is the right place to build it."