The State Ports Authority's call for help in building two new shipping terminals has generated interest from private companies around the world, including one that already has pledged support for a competing project.

SSA Marine said it would consider working with the SPA to build and operate a $600 million terminal in North Charleston, but the company is standing firm on plans to partner with Jasper County on another new terminal in the southern part of the state.

The company has a key role in a battle playing out in South Carolina's courts over whether the SPA or Jasper County should develop a new terminal on the South Carolina side of the Savannah River.

SSA is one of 18 shipping lines and terminal operators that have expressed interest in working with the SPA on the multimillion-dollar projects, lauded as the most promising way for the state's ports to stay competitive.

"Expressing an interest and getting something accomplished are two different things," said Jake Coakley, a spokesman for SSA Marine. "We have an interest in both projects, but we already have a current partner on the Jasper County terminal. Until we sit down and find out what the parameters are, we won't know what's (possible with the SPA)."

The firm has made a deal with Jasper County to pay for, design and run a $500 million terminal there, but the SPA is vying to build a public terminal on the same site.

The authority has argued that property in Jasper County, often called the best remaining site in the Southeast for a deepwater port, should not be turned over to a private developer but should instead remain in the state's hands.

The SPA sent out requests last month to more than 30 private firms around the world asking for financial help to design and develop the new terminals in Jasper County and at the former Charleston Naval Base. The authority has said it intends to keep the terminals public and maintain state control over the facilities whether or not it has private investment in the projects.

But building the terminals, both of which could also require hundreds of million dollars in new access roads, is an expensive proposition for the SPA to undertake alone."We need the flexibility to look at how we can take the model of what we have now and change it or modify it to make it beneficial for everybody," SPA chief Bernie Groseclose said Thursday. "This type of (public-private) arrangement leaves a lot of potential for long-term working agreements and for private interests to be involved anywhere from the permitting process to the design and construction of the terminal."

Companies including APM Terminals, Ceres Terminals, Hanjin Shipping, Evergreen America and Maersk Inc. have said they would consider collaborating on one or both of the projects, according to the SPA's list of potential partners. Port officials now are setting up meetings with all the firms to determine which groups might have viable proposals.

An SSA Marine official said the company will see what the options are for a partnership on the North Charleston terminal. He said a similar attempt several years ago by the SPA to recruit financial support for a terminal on Daniel Island -- a project that later failed in the face of residents' opposition -- was not what SSA Marine had in mind.

"We expressed an interest in Daniel Island, but the port authority wanted people to put up money but then they would still control the whole thing," Coakley said.

Private port developers and operators often say they have more experience and resources than public ports authorities to run terminals more efficiently.

SPA officials, who boast of the Port of Charleston's status as the second-most-efficient port in the world, said state-run terminals are more likely to put public interests above the push for increased revenue.

"The issue is what level of control," Groseclose said Thursday. "There is a level of control (by the SPA) that allows for coordination and for a centralized approach to the state's economic development and trade development."