Tetra Tech, Inc.

10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340

Fairfax, VA 22030

phone 703-385-6000

fax 703-385-6007

DATE: December 5, 2008

TO: Paul Shriner and Jan Matuszko, EPA

FROM: John Sunda, SAIC and Kelly Meadows, Tetra Tech

SUBJECT: Estimation of 316(b) Phase II Facility Intake Screen Type Usage

This memorandum summarizes the distribution of Phase II facilities by cooling water 

intake technology type and waterbody type.

of Phase II facilities with Ristroph and Ristroph

as well as a summary of the type of screen used by facilities located on the Mississippi 

and Missouri Rivers and associated tributaries.

technical survey and the detailed technical survey. 

Table 1 presents the distribution

by waterbody type. The number

the short technical survey and detailed technical survey which are then extrapolated to a 

total of 536 Phase II facilities using facility

 

1

In the industry survey, some facilities responded that they employ Ristroph screens. Other facilities 

modified screens that incorporate several of the elements of a Ristroph screen (as determined by their 

response to Question 20 in the industry surve

assigning technology costs. These screens are assumed to be roughly equivalent to Ristroph screens.

MEMORANDUM

10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340

December 5, 2008

Paul Shriner and Jan Matuszko, EPA

John Sunda, SAIC and Kelly Meadows, Tetra Tech

Estimation of 316(b) Phase II Facility Intake Screen Type Usage

This memorandum summarizes the distribution of Phase II facilities by cooling water 

intake technology type and waterbody type. It also provides a breakdown of the number 

es with Ristroph and Ristroph-type1traveling screens by EPA 

as well as a summary of the type of screen used by facilities located on the Mississippi 

and Missouri Rivers and associated tributaries. This data is derived from both the short 

survey and the detailed technical survey. 

distribution of Phase II facilities using specific intake technologies 

by waterbody type. The number of facilities are estimated based on data provided in both 

the short technical survey and detailed technical survey which are then extrapolated to a 

total of 536 Phase II facilities using facility-specific sample-weighting factors.

 

In the industry survey, some facilities responded that they employ Ristroph screens. Other facilities 

modified screens that incorporate several of the elements of a Ristroph screen (as determined by their 

response to Question 20 in the industry survey) were categorized as “Ristroph-type” for the purposes of 

assigning technology costs. These screens are assumed to be roughly equivalent to Ristroph screens.

1

Estimation of 316(b) Phase II Facility Intake Screen Type Usage

This memorandum summarizes the distribution of Phase II facilities by cooling water 

It also provides a breakdown of the number 

traveling screens by EPA Region 

as well as a summary of the type of screen used by facilities located on the Mississippi 

This data is derived from both the short 

of Phase II facilities using specific intake technologies 

based on data provided in both 

the short technical survey and detailed technical survey which are then extrapolated to a 

weighting factors.

In the industry survey, some facilities responded that they employ Ristroph screens. Other facilities with 

modified screens that incorporate several of the elements of a Ristroph screen (as determined by their 

type” for the purposes of 

assigning technology costs. These screens are assumed to be roughly equivalent to Ristroph screens.
2

Table 1. Distribution of Phase II Facilities by Intake Technology and Waterbody Type

Source: EPA 2000.

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Number of 

Facilities

Percent of 

Water 

Body Total

Bar Rack/trash 

Rack*

- - - - - - - - - - - 95%

Screening 

Technology

247 97% 108 96% 40 92% 100 96% 19 90% 515 96%

Passive Intake 

Systems

42 17% 23 20% 10 23% 14 13% 2 10% 91 17%

Fish Diversion 

or Avoidance 

System

5 2% 8 7% 9 20% 7 7% 9 42% 38 7%

Fish Handling or 

Return

60 24% 10 9% 12 27% 48 46% 4 21% 134 25%

Submerged 

Offshore Intake

25 10% 17 15% 17 39% 5 5% 9 42% 73 14%

Total Waterbody

Facilities

254 100% 113 100% 44 100% 104 100% 21 100% 536 100%

Major 

Technology 

Category

All Facilities

Facilities Withdrawing 

From Freshwater 

Rivers/Streams

Facilities Withdrawing 

From

Lakes/Reservoirs

Facilities Withdrawing 

From Great Lakes

Facilities Withdrawing 

From Estuaries/Tidal 

Rivers

Facilities Withdrawing 

From Oceans

Total
3

Data regarding the use of specific types of screening technology is only available for the 

227 facilities that completed the detailed technical survey. Since the survey was 

conducted, 7 of these facilities have ceased operation and therefore are not included in 

these data summaries. Of the 220 currently operating Phase II facilities that completed 

the detailed questionnaire:

 7 facilities reported using wedgewire screens

 6 facilities specifically reported “Ristroph” traveling screens; 7 additional 

facilities may qualify as having “Ristroph-type” traveling screens

 22 facilities reported having “Fish Buckets, Baskets, or Trays”

 22 facilities have a through-screen screen velocity of ≤ 0.5 fps

The above facility counts include facilities with at least one intake that met the criteria 

described. Data may not apply to all intakes at a facility.

Table 2 presents a geographical distribution by state and EPA Region of the 13 facilities 

with Ristroph and Ristroph-type screens.

Table 2. Geographical Distribution of Facilities with Ristroph-Type Traveling Screens

EPA Region Screen Type State

1 Ristroph CT

Ristroph-type CT

Ristroph-type MA

Ristroph-type MA

Ristroph RI

2 Ristroph NJ

Ristroph-type NY

3 Ristroph VA

6 Ristroph-type LA

Ristroph NM

Ristroph-type TX

7 Ristroph-type IA

9 Ristroph HI

Source: EPA 2000

Table 3 presents a summary of the type of screen technology used by facilities that 

withdraw water from the Mississippi River, Missouri River, and major tributaries that 

completed the detailed technical survey. The list does not include intakes that use 

recirculating cooling systems.
4

Table 3. Summary of Screen Type Used by Facilities on the Mississippi and Missouri 

Rivers and Major Tributaries

River

Screen Technology Type

Horizontal Traveling Vertical Traveling Dual Flow

Intakes Facilities Intakes Facilities Intakes Facilities

Mississippi 15 6 8 6 0 0

Missouri 1 1 8 5 1 1

Ohio 0 0 16 9 0 0

Wabash 0 0 2 2 0 0

Arkansas 0 0 1 1 0 0

Illinois 0 0 1 1 0 0

Total 16 7 36 24 1 1

Source: EPA 2000

References

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2000. Section 316(b) Industry

Survey. Detailed Industry Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water Intake Structures and 

Industry Short Technical Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water Intake Structures, 

January, 2000 (OMB Control Number 2040-0213). Industry Screener Questionnaire: 

Phase I Cooling Water Intake Structures, January, 1999 (OMB Control Number 2040-

0203).