Document ID: EPA-HQ-TRI-2007-0355-0016
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-12-18T05:00Z

TOXICS RELEASE INVENTORY

TRI FORM R TOXIC CHEMICAL RELEASE REPORTING

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

OMB CONTROL NO. 2070-0093

EPA ICR #1363.15

December 10, 2007

IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 	3

Title of the Information Collection 	3

Short Characterization/Abstract 	3

NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 	6

Need/Authority for the Collection 	6

Practical Utility/Users of the Data 	7

NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 	7

3(a) Nonduplication 	7

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB	11

3(c) Consultations 	11

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection 	11

3(e) General Guidelines 	12

3(f) Confidentiality 	12

3(g) Sensitive Questions 	13

THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 	13

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes 	13

4(b) Information Requested 	13

THE INFORMATION COLLECTED—AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 	16

5(a) Agency Activities 	16

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management 	22

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility 	22

5(d) Collection Schedule 	23

ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 	23

Estimating Respondent Burden 	24

Estimating Respondent Costs 	33

Estimating Agency Burden and Cost 	37

Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs 	40

Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs Tables 	46

Reasons for Change in Burden 	47

Burden Statement 	50

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Blank Form R

Appendix B: Reporting Form Instructions Associated with Form Changes

Appendix C: Examples of How TRI Data Are Used

Appendix D: Information Sources Containing Data Subsets, but not
Comprehensively Comparable Alternatives to TRI 

Appendix E: Lists of Organizations with Which EPA Has Consulted 

Appendix F: Facilities Required to Report to TRI (NAICS)

IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

Title of the Information Collection

TITLE:	Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Form R Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting, Recordkeeping, Supplier Notification and Petitions under
Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

EPA ICR No.:	1363.15

OMB Control No.:	2070-0093

Short Characterization/Abstract

This Information Collection Request (ICR) is for the information
collection requirements for toxic chemical release reporting under §313
of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (42
U.S.C. 11001 et seq.) and the information collection requirements in
§6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 11071 to 11079).
In short, EPCRA §313 requires certain owners or operators of certain
facilities in covered industries that manufacture, process, or otherwise
use any of nearly 650 listed toxic chemicals and chemical categories
(hereafter "toxic chemicals") in excess of the applicable threshold
quantities to report their environmental releases and transfers of and
waste management activities for such chemicals annually. Under §6607 of
the PPA, facilities must provide information on the quantities of the
toxic chemicals in waste streams and the efforts made to reduce or
eliminate those quantities. 

Currently, facilities subject to the TRI reporting requirements may use
either the EPA Toxics Release Inventory Form R (EPA Form #9350-1), or,
if they meet lower threshold requirements, the EPA Toxics Release
Inventory Form A Certification Statement (EPA Form #9350-2), which is
approved under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Number 2070-0143
(see the Form A ICR Supporting Statement for more information on these
reporting requirements). With Form R, one chemical is reported per form;
with Form A, multiple chemicals may be reported per form. Due to the TRI
Burden Reduction Rule promulgated December 22, 2006, Form A eligibility
is expanded to allow, for the first time, limited use of Form A for
persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic (PBT) chemicals. (71 FR 76932,
December 22, 2006). 

EPA is proposing changes to the Form R and Form A Certification
Statement to standardize responses and enhance the utility of the data.
More specifically, the changes to the forms and TRI Reporting Forms and
Instructions (RFI) described below allow facilities to provide more
detailed information on how they estimate their data, facilitate
efficient contact with the appropriate facility personnel, and improve
understanding of the reasons behind form revisions or withdrawals. The
changes are presented below:

1)	Provide more specific "basis of estimate" codes (Form R only).
Facilities may currently select among four codes to indicate how they
calculate their release quantities: the use of monitoring data (code M),
mass balance calculations (C), emission factors (E), and other
approaches (O). The modification in the RFI to provide more specific
codes will allow reporting facilities to provide more detailed
information Collecting this detailed information—more specific
“basis of estimate” data—will help the TRI Program determine which
methods are most often used and/or appropriate for use by particular
industries for certain chemicals, as well as when new TRI guidance may
be needed. Therefore, EPA will provide a more extensive list of codes
for "basis of estimate" in the RFI, including (M1) and (M2) for
continuous and periodic/random monitoring, respectively; and (E1) and
(E2) for published and site-specific emission factors, respectively.
(Note: codes (C) and (O) remain unchanged). Via these codes, facilities
will indicate the principal method used to determine the quantities
reported to TRI. 

2)	Enhance Public Contact information (Form R and/or Form A, as noted
below). These changes provide efficiency gains for the Agency and the
reporting facilities. Adding a "Public Contact" field to the Form A will
provide the name of a person who can respond to questions from the
public about the Form A Certification Statement in the same way that a
person currently responds for Form R submissions. In addition, providing
an e-mail address for the public contact on both Form R and Form A will
make it easier to contact and follow-up with the Public Contact if
necessary. 

3)	Add boxes for entering revision codes (Form R and A). The TRI Program
currently receives many form revisions each year, but does not
systematically collect information on the reasons for the revisions. The
new revision codes will allow both the public and the TRI Program staff
to better understand why a facility resubmitted a form. In addition, by
analyzing the reasons for revisions, the TRI Program may be better able
to address recurring reporting issues or problems that facilities may be
facing, ultimately reducing errors and saving time for both the Agency
and the reporting facilities. Therefore, facilities will now report up
to two codes (listed and defined in the RFIs) indicating the main
reason(s) that a form is being revised.

4)	Provide a field for withdrawing a form; and add boxes for entering
withdrawal codes (Form R and A). Currently, a facility that wishes to
withdraw a previously submitted form must submit its request, including
the rationale, as a hard copy memorandum to the TRI Data Processing
Center via regular mail, certified mail, or overnight delivery. Adding a
"Withdrawal" field and associated code boxes for reasons for withdrawal
to Form R and Form A will (1) streamline the withdrawal process for
facilities, (2) make it easier for EPA to automate the withdrawal
process, and (3) improve the Agency’s ability to analyze the reasons
for withdrawals.

Pursuant to EPCRA §313 (and PPA §6607 because of its linkage to
EPCRA), EPA's Office of Environmental Information (OEI) collects,
processes, and makes available to the public all of the information
collected. The information gathered under these authorities is stored in
a database maintained at EPA and is available through the Internet. EPA;
other federal, state, and local government agencies; industry; and the
public use TRI extensively. Program offices within EPA and other
government agencies have used TRI, along with other sources of data, to
establish priorities, evaluate potential exposure scenarios, and conduct
enforcement activities. Industries use TRI data to identify pollution
prevention opportunities and set goals for emissions reductions.
Environmental and public interest groups use TRI data to make the public
more aware of releases of chemicals in their communities, as well as to
initiate direct negotiation and risk reduction with facilities.

EPA has developed EPA Information Quality Guidelines to ensure the
utility, objectivity, and integrity of information that is disseminated
by the Agency. The information supporting this ICR is consistent with
all appropriate EPA policies, including EPA's Information Quality
Guidelines. In particular, the EPA Agency-wide quality system helps
ensure that EPA organizations maximize the quality of information
disseminated by the Agency. The quality system is documented in EPA
Order 5360.1 A2, Policy and Program Requirements for the Mandatory
Agency-wide Quality System and the EPA Quality Manual for Environmental
Programs 5360 A1, May 2000. The information supporting this action is
also consistent with EPA's Guide to Writing Information Collection
Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, revised November
2005. It is EPA's intention that collection of information under this
ICR will result in information that will be collected, maintained, and
used in ways consistent with both EPA's Information Quality Guidelines
and the OMB Information Quality Guidelines.

TRI has produced real gains in understanding. Communities and
governments now know the identities and quantities of listed toxic
chemicals that many industrial facilities in their area release,
transfer, or otherwise manage as waste. In addition, TRI provides
industries with an additional tool for evaluating efficiency and
progress on their pollution prevention goals.

OMB last approved this ICR on March 3, 2006, with an expiration date of
January 31, 2008. The approved ICR reflected a reporting burden of
3,746,590 hours and $170.5 million for Form R respondents. In this ICR
Renewal, the effect of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule is expected to
sustain the reduced overall burden due to increased Form A eligibility
(i.e., number of Form Rs decreased and number of Form As increased,
yielding a net burden decrease) with total responses, burden, and cost
of Form R reporting projected at 66,751 responses, 3,215,715 hours and
$160.73 million. Further, the TRI program is proposing to add data
elements and revise instructions on the reporting forms. The added data
elements and revised instructions are estimated to minimally increase
the total respondent burden and cost for Form R reporting to 3,217,280
hours and $160.79 million. 

The time required for Form R calculations, form completion, and
recordkeeping is estimated to average 29.66 hours per form for a Non-PBT
chemical and 51.34 hours for a PBT chemical. By comparison, the burden
is estimated to average 20.52 hours  for facilities submitting a Form A
Certification Statement for a single listed Non-PBT chemical and 35.89
hours  for facilities submitting a Form A Certification Statement for a
single listed PBT chemical under EPCRA §313 (all estimates incorporate
proposed changes).

2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

This information collection activity is a statutory requirement pursuant
to EPCRA §313 (42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq.) and §6607 of the PPA (42
U.S.C. 11071 to 11079). According to EPCRA §313(h), the data submitted
in the forms are intended to "inform persons about releases of toxic
chemicals to the environment; to assist governmental agencies,
researchers, and other persons in the conduct of research and data
gathering; to aid in the development of appropriate regulations,
guidelines, and standards; and for other similar purposes."

Section 6602 of the PPA establishes a national policy that pollution
should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible. To
further this goal, EPA is to establish a source reduction program that
collects and disseminates information, among other responsibilities. The
information collected under §6607 is intended to fulfill that
responsibility in part and to provide a basis for measuring progress in
pollution prevention in certain industrial groups.

Annual reporting under EPCRA §313 of toxic chemical releases and other
waste management information on Form R provides citizens with an
extensive picture of the total disposition of chemicals in their
communities and helps focus industries' attention on pollution
prevention and source reduction opportunities. EPA believes that the
public has a right to know about the disposition of chemicals within
communities and the management of such chemicals by facilities in
covered industries subject to EPCRA §313 reporting.

	2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

According to many, the TRI Program is one of the most effective
environmental programs ever legislated by Congress and administered by
EPA. Its success is due, in large part, to the right-to-know provisions
contained in the legislation itself. By requiring that the resulting
data be made publicly available "by electronic and other means,"
Congress ensured that citizens, the media, environmental advocates,
researchers, the business community, and others could influence and
evaluate industry's efforts to manage toxic emissions. Consequently,
data collected under EPCRA §313 and §6607 of the PPA are made
available through EPA's Envirofacts and TRI Explorer databases. In
addition, the public may also obtain TRI information through other
sources such as OMB Watch's Right-to-Know Network (RTK NET) at
http://www.rtk.net. RTK NET provides free public access to numerous
databases, text files, and conferences on the environment, housing, and
sustainable development.

In addition to providing information to the public via electronic means,
EPA also conducts outreach activities to make key groups and the public
aware of TRI. Journalists; educators; public interest, labor, and
environmental groups; trade associations; and state governments continue
to be key targets in these outreach efforts. In addition, libraries in
communities all across the United States (in particular, members of the
Federal Depository Library Program) are committed to providing public
access to TRI data in a variety of formats. Educators are using the data
to conduct studies and courses on the environment. Labor unions are
using the TRI data to improve conditions for workers. Businesses are
using the data in many ways—as a basis for reducing emissions, to cut
costs, to improve operations, and for a variety of other reasons.
Concerned citizens are a growing user group. These individuals, on their
own and through organized groups, are using TRI to address concerns
about the management and release of chemicals in their communities.
Finally, states use the national data to compare chemical management and
releases within industries and to set environmental priorities at the
state level.

Because the value of TRI increases the more it is used, EPA encourages
current users to acquaint new users with TRI; help people who already
know about TRI to better use and understand the data; and, whenever
possible, to provide feedback on ways to improve TRI products and
services. Appendix C summarizes some examples of how the TRI data are
used, both by EPA and others. The examples in Appendix C are not
intended to be all-inclusive.

3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3(a) Nonduplication

The basic information requested on Form R is required to be reported by
law. Other statutes, however, also necessitate the reporting of
information about releases of chemicals to the environment, creating the
possibility of overlap or duplication of reporting requirements. EPA
anticipates some overlap and acknowledges that respondents may use
readily available data collected pursuant to other provisions of law to
complete the EPCRA §313 reports. However, information required by these
other statutes may not provide readily accessible multi-media release
and transfer, inventory, or pollution prevention data with the same
scope, level of detail, chemical coverage, and frequency of collection
as data currently included in TRI.

TRI contains information on releases, transfers, inventories, and
pollution prevention activities for nearly 650 toxic chemicals and
chemical categories. EPA is not aware of national databases that are
comparable to the whole of TRI; however, several existing data sources
contain media-specific data on releases and transfers. In theory,
information from these databases could be combined to form an analog of
release and transfer data contained in TRI. However, in practice, given
the currently available data sources (see Table 1 and Appendix D), this
substitution is implausible. For example, there are differences in
chemical coverage and facility coverage, as well as differences in the
level of public access, reporting frequencies, and the integration of
data from various sources at the facility level.

Chemical Release and Transfer Data

The 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act require EPA to monitor and
regulate the emissions of criteria air pollutants (CAPs) and hazardous
air pollutants (HAPs). EPA is required to identify the sources of these
pollutants, quantify the sources by category, develop regulations, and
then assess public health and environmental impacts. To facilitate this
process, two emissions inventories were created: the National Toxics
Inventory (NTI) for HAPs and the National Emission Trends (NET) for
CAPs. These two databases were combined in 1999 to form the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) database.

NEI contains estimates of annual emissions for stationary and mobile
sources of CAPs and HAPs. NEI is currently maintained by the Emission
Inventory and Analysis Group (EIAG) in EPA’s Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS). NEI is organized into four main
categories: point sources (stationary), nonpoint sources (stationary),
on-road sources (mobile), and nonroad sources (mobile). 

Permit Compliance System (PCS) tracks permit compliance and enforcement
status of facilities that discharge to surface waters ( HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/pcs" http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/pcs
). For entities that have received permits to discharge wastewater into
navigable waters, PCS contains information on permit issuance and
expiration dates, quantities the company is permitted to discharge, and
the actual monitoring data showing what the company has discharged. PCS
data are not directly comparable to TRI data because PCS is a permit
tracking system and not a loadings system. Thus, PCS typically contains
data on monthly monitoring of pollutant concentrations and flow, and not
total releases. Since monitoring required by the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) covers only selected chemicals in
the wastewater, PCS contains data on a very limited set of the TRI
chemicals.

Table 1

Major Release and Transfer Databases

Data Source	Media and Chemical Coverage	Relevant Release Statistics
Available	Ease of Database Substitution for TRI Data

National Emissions Inventory (NEI)	Contains annual emissions of six CAPs
and 189 HAPs for facilities above reporting thresholds.	Total annual
releases.	Includes air releases only. Data are updated only every 3
years. Coverage of TRI chemicals is limited.

Permit Compliance System (PCS)	Contains monthly discharge monitoring
data for selected water pollutants and flow rates for major sources. 
Concentration data; total annual releases (can be calculated); average
daily releases, maximum “moment” if continuous monitoring.	Includes
only chemicals for which a discharge limit has been set. Difficult to
link between PCS parameters and a Chemical Abstract Service (CAS)
number. Very limited monitoring data for minor dischargers.

Biennial Reporting System (BRS)	Contains waste volumes by Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste code reported biennially.
Total annual off-site transfers of hazardous waste for land disposal;
total annual releases to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).	Many
RCRA waste codes are not specific to an individual CAS number.
Quantities of chemicals in waste cannot be determined. Portion of waste
stream matching each waste code cannot be determined. 

Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), large quantity
generators and treatment storage and disposal facilities are required to
submit information on the generation, management, and final disposition
of RCRA-defined hazardous wastes. Every two years, filers must report
the following information about each waste generated or managed in the
preceding year: constituent waste codes; amounts generated; on- and
off-site treatment, storage, and management; wastes received; and
off-site shipment recipients. Facilities submit these biennial Hazardous
Waste Reports to the state or EPA Regional office. The biennial reports
are stored centrally in EPA’s RCRAInfo system and are available
approximately two years after the covered year ( HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/index.htm"
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/index.htm ).
Biennial Reporting System (BRS) data do not duplicate the information
contained within TRI, as: (1) hazardous waste codes do not necessarily
map to unique chemicals; (2) quantities of specific chemicals in the
waste stream cannot be determined; (3) reporting occurs every other
year, as opposed to annually for TRI; and (4) data are not available to
the public until two years after reporting.

Chemical Inventory Data

TRI also contains inventory data, which make up a small portion of the
total data. The most likely alternatives for TRI inventory data are the
Tier I/II data reported under EPCRA §312. Under EPCRA §312, regulated
facilities must submit annual inventory reports of hazardous chemicals
stored on-site to the state. Tier I requires reporting on broad
categories of physical hazards, while Tier II requires chemical-specific
information by CAS number. The information contained in the Tier I and
Tier II reports surpasses the chemical inventory data requested on TRI
Form R in terms of the chemicals covered and level of detail. However,
there are significant difficulties associated with public access of Tier
I and Tier II data, including the lack of a nationally integrated
database and restrictions on public access due to security concerns.

Under §112(r) of the Clean Air Act, facilities with processes that use
or store more than a specified amount of certain flammable and toxic
substances are required to develop and implement a risk management
program and submit to EPA a summary of their program—called a Risk
Management Plan (RMP). These plans include the amounts (in pounds) of
each substance that are processed or used, hazard assessments of the
potential effects of hypothetical accident scenarios, a five-year
history of accidental releases involving regulated substances at the
facility, and information about the facility’s accident prevention and
emergency response programs. Facilities with processes that use or store
more than a threshold amount (500–20,000 pounds) of a listed chemical
must file an RMP and update their filing at specified times, including
following a significant accidental release. 

Pollution Prevention Data

In addition to release/transfer and inventory data, TRI also collects
pollution prevention data from reporting facilities. Pollution
prevention data somewhat analogous to data in TRI can be found in the
National Biennial Reports (described above) and in databases
administered by two state environmental agencies. While BR data provide
both qualitative and quantitative pollution prevention information,
facility or chemical coverage is not directly comparable to those data
specified in TRI pollution prevention reporting requirements. BR
contains data on generation, transfer, and management of hazardous
wastes, while pollution prevention data contained in TRI includes
information on wastes or process by-products in all production phases
and media. In addition, states have come to rely on the pollution
prevention data provided to them by TRI. As a result, no state program
collects all of the pollution prevention data currently available in
TRI.

In Appendix D, data elements available from several information sources
are compared to those reported to TRI. The analysis is broken down by
the specific types of data collected under TRI. While Appendix D
displays sources that might appear to be substitutes for TRI, they do
not adequately address the entire scope of TRI, even in combination. For
example, a given source may:

Not include all toxic chemicals covered by TRI

Be compiled less frequently than TRI

Not be easily accessible (or accessible at all) to the general public.

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

EPA is planning to submit a request to renew existing approved ICRs for
both Form R and A to OMB. Both ICRs are scheduled to expire on January
31, 2008. Before submitting the ICRs to OMB for review and approval, EPA
is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information
collections. A Federal Register Notice will be published to announce
this renewal request.

3(c) Consultations

EPA has consulted with a large number of individuals and organizations
throughout all segments of the public in the development and continued
implementation of the TRI Program. EPA has received feedback from
various organizations, including environmental and public interest
groups, trade associations, and individual representatives, through its
outreach efforts in venues such as:

Stakeholder meetings and online dialogues to discuss issues such as
options for reporting burden reduction

The TRI National Meeting held every year and open to the public every
other year. 

EPA continually seeks this feedback and incorporates it into the ongoing
evolution of the TRI Program. Lists of organizations with which EPA has
consulted in the past few years are presented in Appendix E. 

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Section 313 requires annual reporting on either Form R or Form A.
Section 313(i) permits EPA to modify the reporting frequency by
rulemaking; however, EPA must first notify Congress and then delay the
initiation of such a rulemaking for at least 12 months, but no more than
24 months, from the date of the notification. In addition, EPA must
find:

...that the modification is consistent with the provisions of subsection
(h) of [§313] based on -

	(i)	experience from previously submitted toxic chemical release forms

	(ii)	determinations made under paragraph (3).

Paragraph (3), in turn, provides that EPA must determine:

The extent to which information relating to the proposed modification
provided on the toxic chemical release forms has been used by the
Administrator or other agencies of the federal government, states, local
governments, health professionals and the public.

The extent to which information is (i) readily available to potential
users from other sources, such as state reporting programs, and (ii)
provided to the Administrator under another federal law or through a
state program.

The extent to which the modification would impose additional and
unreasonable burdens on facilities subject to the reporting requirements
under this section.

Since TRI represents the best available multi-media database for
tracking toxic chemical releases in the United States, a change in the
reporting frequency to less than once a year could have a significant
impact on the availability of timely toxic chemical data and affect data
users, particularly at the community level. Additionally, public access
to the most current toxic chemical release data and other waste
management information would become more difficult. 

3(e) General Guidelines

This ICR adheres to the guidelines stated in the 1995 Paperwork
Reduction Act, as amended, OMB's implementing regulations, and all
applicable OMB guidance.

Although reporting facilities are required to identify the chemical for
which reports are submitted, they can claim the chemical identity as a
trade secret. A generic name must be provided as part of the information
made available to the public. EPA securely stores and maintains the true
identity of the chemical (see also Section 3(f)). 

EPA continues to encourage submission through the Internet via EPA’s
Central Data Exchange (CDX) by using the Toxics Release Inventory Made
Easy (TRI-ME) reporting software. In preparing submissions within the
TRI-ME reporting software and submitting them via the Internet, both the
cost and the time required to enter and process the data are reduced.
Also, for facilities using the TRI-ME reporting software, quality checks
are streamlined, allowing EPA to release the data to the public sooner.
All these benefits apply to reporters using the technology, regardless
of whether they submit via Form R or Form A.

Small facilities (with fewer than 10 full-time employees or the
equivalent) are exempt from reporting under EPCRA §313. Two particular
provisions that apply to TRI reporters universally: 1) the optional
range reporting provision and 2) an alternate threshold allowing
increased Form A eligibility are particularly beneficial to non-exempt
smaller facilities with small releases and wastes.

3(f) Confidentiality 

Respondents may designate the specific chemical identity of a substance
as a trade secret according to EPCRA §322. Procedures for submission
and review of trade secret claims under EPCRA §313 are set forth in 40
CFR 350. When a facility claims the chemical identity to be a trade
secret and properly substantiates the claim, EPA will not disclose the
identity of the chemical to the public. EPA securely stores forms with
trade secret information and allows access to those documents only to
persons with Trade Secret clearance. Data made available to the public
through any means do not include trade secret information.

	3(g) Sensitive Questions

This collection does not request any sensitive information.

4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 	4(a) Respondents/NAICS
Codes

The reporting requirements found in EPCRA §313 apply to owners and
operators of facilities that have 10 or more full-time employees,
manufacture or process more than 25,000 pounds or otherwise use more
than 10,000 pounds of a listed chemical, and are in the manufacturing
sector or in any of seven additional industry sectors added to the TRI
Program by EPA in 1997. Historically these sectors were identified by
their Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes. Beginning with
Reporting Year (RY) 2006, the TRI Program has converted from SIC codes
to NAICS codes (71 FR 32464, June 6, 2006). The full list of NAICS codes
for facilities that must report to TRI (including exemptions and/or
limitations) if all other threshold determinations are met can be found
in Appendix F. 

	4(b) Information Requested

Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

Facilities reporting to TRI report releases and other waste management
of listed chemicals on Form R. The required data items, which are
summarized below, are specified in 40 CFR §372.85. Form R is divided
into two sections. In Part I, respondents report facility identification
information such as facility name and address, NAICS code, Dun and
Bradstreet (D&B) number, name of parent company and parent company D&B
number, and name and address of technical contact. In Part II,
respondents report:

Toxic chemical identity

Mixture component identity

Activities and uses of the toxic chemical at the facility

Maximum amount of the toxic chemical on-site at any time during the
calendar year

Quantity of the toxic chemical entering each environmental medium
on-site

Transfers of the toxic chemical in wastes to off-site locations

On-site waste treatment methods and efficiency

Source reduction and recycling activities.

As mentioned above, EPA is proposing changes to the Form R and Form A
Certification Statement to standardize responses and enhance the utility
of the data. More specifically, the changes to the forms and TRI
Reporting Forms and Instructions (RFI) described below will allow
facilities to provide more detailed information on how they estimate
their data, facilitate efficient contact with the appropriate facility
personnel, and improve understanding of the reasons behind form
revisions or withdrawals. The changes are presented below:

1)	Provide more specific "basis of estimate" codes (Form R only).
Facilities may currently select among four codes to indicate how they
calculate their release quantities: the use of monitoring data (code M),
mass balance calculations (C), emission factors (E), and other
approaches (O). The modification in the RFI to provide more specific
codes will allow reporting facilities to provide more detailed
information Collecting this detailed information—more specific
“basis of estimate” data—will help the TRI Program determine which
methods are most often used and/or appropriate for use by particular
industries for certain chemicals, as well as when new TRI guidance may
be needed. Therefore, EPA will provide a more extensive list of codes
for "basis of estimate" in the RFI, including (M1)and (M2) for
continuous and periodic/random monitoring, respectively; and (E1) and
(E2) for published and site-specific emission factors, respectively.
(Note: codes (C) and (O) remain unchanged). Via these codes, facilities
will indicate the principal method used to determine the quantities
reported to TRI. 

2)	Enhance the Public Contact information (Form R and/or Form A, as
noted below). These changes provide efficiency gains for the Agency and
the reporting facilities. Adding a "Public Contact" field to the Form A
will provide the name of a person who can respond to questions from the
public about the Form A Certification Statement in the same way that a
person currently responds for Form R submissions. In addition, providing
an e-mail address for the public contact on both Form R and Form A will
make it easier to contact and follow-up with the Public Contact if
necessary. 

3)	Add boxes for entering revision codes (Form Rs and As). The TRI
Program currently receives many form revisions each year, but does not
currently collect information on the reasons for the revisions. The new
revision codes will allow both the public and the TRI Program staff to
better understand why a facility resubmitted a form. In addition, by
analyzing the reasons for revisions, the TRI Program may be better able
to address recurring reporting issues or problems that facilities may be
facing, ultimately reducing errors and saving time for both the Agency
and the reporting facilities. Therefore, facilities will now report up
to two codes (listed and defined in the RFI) indicating the main
reason(s) that a form is being revised.

4)	Provide a field for withdrawing a form; add boxes for entering
withdrawal codes (Form Rs and As). Currently, a facility that wishes to
withdraw a previously submitted form must submit its request, including
the rationale, as a hard copy memorandum to the TRI Data Processing
Center via regular mail, certified mail, or overnight delivery. Adding a
"Withdrawal" field and associated code boxes for reasons for withdrawal
to Form R and Form A will (1) streamline the withdrawal process for
facilities, (2) make it easier for EPA to automate the withdrawal
process and (3) improve the Agency’s ability to analyze the reasons
for withdrawals.

Facilities must maintain records used to provide the information
required on the form according to 40 CFR §372.10. Those records may
include estimation methodology and calculations; engineering reports;
inventory, incident, and operating logs; and other supporting materials.
Facilities must keep a copy of each report filed for at least three
years.

		(ii) Respondent Activities

To comply with the EPCRA §313 reporting requirements facilities’
activities are considered in the following phases:

Compliance Determination Facility staff must determine whether they meet
the criteria for EPCRA §313 reporting. Staff will spend time becoming
familiar with the definitions, exemptions, and threshold requirements
under the TRI Program, reviewing the list of TRI chemicals, and
conducting preliminary threshold determinations to determine if the
facility is required to report.

Rule Familiarization First-time filers must read the reporting package
and become familiar with the reporting requirements. Staff will spend
time reviewing instructions and training personnel to be able to respond
to a collection of information. 

Calculations and Report Completion Facility staff must gather data and
perform calculations to provide the information required on the form.
Staff will spend time searching data sources, completing the form, and
reviewing the information. 

Recordkeeping and Submission Facility staff must maintain recordkeeping
systems and mail the report to EPA and the state in which the facility
is located. Staff will spend time transmitting or otherwise disclosing
the information. 

Supplier Notification Certain suppliers of mixtures or trade-name
products containing reportable substances must annually notify their
customers of the product's composition, if the customers are subject to
EPCRA §313 reporting. Staff will spend time informing customers, either
by letter or through the materials safety data sheet (MSDS) for the
product.

EPA makes instructions and guidance documents available to respondents;
in addition, a toll-free hotline is available to handle general and
technical inquiries from the regulated community.

5	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED—AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY,
AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a) Agency Activities

EPA engages in many activities to fulfill the requirements of EPCRA.
These activities can be grouped in the following categories that cover
what the Agency does to assist the regulated community with compliance,
to process the data, to maintain the database, and to make the data
available:

Assistance to Reporters

Electronic Reporting

Paper-Based Reporting

Data Processing and Quality Control

Database Organization

Links to State Reporting

Making Data Available

List Revisions and Petition Reviews

Trade Secrecy Reviews

Assistance to Reporters. The Agency operates a successful outreach
program to assist businesses in obtaining and completing both the Form R
and Form A Certification Statement. Assistance to electronic reporters
includes automated error-checking and messaging, pre-populated data
fields, and consolidated state and federal report submissions.,
Additionally, general guidance has been prepared for estimating
releases, including 14 industry-specific guidance documents.

EPA operates a training program to familiarize EPA Regional personnel
with the reporting requirements and to train them in providing technical
assistance to respondents. Using that training, the EPA Regions conduct
numerous workshops each year to explain the reporting requirements to
the regulated community. EPA also conducts a training program on EPCRA
§313 reporting requirements to train private businesses and consultants
that wish to provide advice on EPCRA §313 compliance. Also, EPA
operates a toll-free hotline to answer general questions and direct
potential respondents to proper EPA personnel. A second hotline is
available to answer questions about the electronic reporting software
and the procedure for submitting and certifying data to EPA over the
Internet. In addition, the Agency maintains a Web site with current
program-specific information and guidance ( HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/tri" http://www.epa.gov/tri ).

EPA has also provided guidance for persons or organizations interested
in petitioning the Agency to add or delete chemicals from the TRI list.
In addition to this guidance, EPA convenes pre-petition meetings to
assist petitioners if they request such assistance.

Electronic Reporting. Ninety-seven percent of all TRI Form Rs and Form
As are prepared and submitted using the Toxics Release Inventory Made
Easy (TRI-ME) reporting software. TRI-ME is a software application that
TRI facilities can use for entering and validating their data.
Historically, this software has been desktop-based and distributed via
posting on the TRI Web site and mailing directly to facilities (via
CD-ROM) each year. Beginning in RY2007, a new version of
TRI-ME—TRI-MEweb, will be fully launched with the intent to eventually
replace TRI-Me desktop. 

Given that this ICR covers the transition period between reporting by
TRI-ME desktop and TRI-MEweb, both methods are discussed here.
Capabilities in TRI-ME desktop that will be replaced or incorporated
into TRI-MEweb include:

Facilities can key or upload their data into TRI-ME. TRI-ME provides
reporting guidance to help facilities determine if they need to report
for specific chemicals and to assist them in the actual reporting.
TRI-ME also provides facilities with extensive data validation checking
through point-of-entry edit checks as well as a cumulative, mandatory
batch test prior to submission. The cumulative batch test provides users
with descriptive messages and links back to the form where potential
errors exist.

After entering their data into the TRI-ME application and validating
them, facilities have two options for submitting their data to EPA.
First, facilities can send their TRI data to EPA and certify them
electronically via EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). Second, they can
save the data to a diskette, print and sign a certification letter, and
mail both items to TRI’s EPCRA Data Processing Center. 

Data submitted to TRI via the CDX are automatically forwarded to the TRI
EPCRA Data Processing Center (DPC) and loaded into the TRI Processing
System (TRIPS) database. The TRIPS database is located at EPA’s
National Computer Center in Research Triangle Park, NC. For diskette
submissions, the data are received at the DPC, cataloged, scanned for
viruses and loaded into the TRIPS database. 

Through the TRI State Data Exchange Network, facilities are able to
submit their data via CDX once to both EPA and the participating state
government. Upon submission to CDX, a copy of the data is simultaneously
sent to EPA’s TRIPS database and to the appropriate state via the TRI
State Data Exchange Network. This reporting option allows facilities to
fulfill their legal obligation to report to the federal and state
entities through a single submission of data to CDX. 

In 2007 (RY 2006), the TRI Program piloted a Web version of the TRI-ME
software that   also increases the original functionality of the TRI-ME
desktop application in several areas. Full implementation of TRI-MEweb
is planned for 2008 (RY2007).  Similar to the existing desktop version,
the TRI-MEweb application allows online submission and certification of
the data. But additional enhancements include: 

Preloaded Forms and Central Data Storage. The TRI-MEweb application
allows users to preload their forms with prior year data stored in an
EPA-maintained database. This database is separate from the TRIPS
database which is used to store certified TRI submissions.  TRI-MEweb
currently allows users to review and revise data as far back as 2006
(RY2005) and will eventually allow for the recall of up to five previous
years worth of data. In addition, the application stores
work-in-progress data via the same online database, so that users will
no longer have to manage the data themselves (i.e., they will not have
to save the information on their hard drive).

Quick Lists. The TRI-MEweb application contains a redesigned
questionnaire and “quick lists” that streamline reporting tasks.
Similar to tax reporting software, from which TRI-MEweb was modeled,
“quick lists” allow users to narrow their data entry to only the
pertinent areas. 

Data Quality Checks. The Web version introduces new semantic checks of
data quality that compare a facility’s data to prior year submissions;
EPA registry data; and ultimately, data from industry and
similarly-sized facilities. Unlike the experience in TRI-ME desktop
software, comparisons occur online in real time, allowing the user to
review data for quality concerns and make corrections at that time. 

On-Line Revisions and Withdrawals The application allows true online
revision and withdrawal of data by facilities. Through this feature,
facilities will be able to access previously submitted forms,
revise/withdraw, and recertify them in one quick and easy step. 

Automated Section 8 Calculator TRI-MEweb automatically calculates
Section 8 Column B (current year) estimates based on data entered in
other form sections. Users may tailor the calculation's inputs, but
cannot enter their own calculated values. This approach is intended to
reduce the frequent mathematical errors in Section 8 and simplify the
reporting process. 

TRI Assistance Library The TRI Assistance Library is available in a
Web-based format to help users complete their TRI submissions.  

Paper-Based Reporting. Facilities can also submit data to TRI on paper
forms. When facilities submit TRI reports on paper, the information is
keyed into the TRIPS database on a PC-based wide area network (WAN).
Automated data quality checks begin at data entry; these include various
edit checks and the start of standardization of some of the data fields.
At this point, the emphasis is on identifying forms that are not
completed correctly. If the problem(s) identified prevent further
processing of the form, EPA sends a Notice of Significant Error (NOSE)
to the respondent.

Unlike with paper submissions, the mandatory data validation routines in
the TRI-ME reporting application will not allow the submission of forms
that are not completed correctly. This protection applies to the data
entry fields in the form but cannot, of course, apply to the signature
field in cases when the reporter does not sign the Certification
Statement for forms submitted on diskette. 

Data Processing and Quality Control. Once the reported data have entered
the TRIPS database, all the validation checks that were initially run
via the TRI-ME application are repeated. For paper submissions, these
checks are performed for the first time. Forms that fail these tests
receive error notices known as Notices of Technical Error (NOTE). A NOTE
points out possible data validity errors that are not technical in
nature but are also not egregious enough to prevent the form from being
disseminated (see NOSE above). In addition, a set of data quality checks
that compare the incoming data with prior years data and various data
thresholds are performed on the data for the first time. Further
standardization of facility identification information continues. 

Upon the completion of the data validation and quality checks, Facility
Data Profile (FDP) reports are generated and made available for facility
review on the FTP Web site. The reports contain an echoing back of the
data and all validation (NOTE errors) and data quality messages that
were generated after the data were loaded into the database. Facilities
receive an e-mail alerting them when a report becomes available and
asking them to access the password-protected site and review the report.
After review, facilities can revise their data by submitting a certified
replacement form via the TRI-ME software or on paper. 

Database Organization. EPCRA §313(j) requires EPA to make TRI data
available to the public through computer telecommunications and other
means. EPA has found it beneficial to undertake a variety of activities
to make the data more usable, given that computer searches only retrieve
data in exactly the format requested. Because facilities report their
data in a wide variety of ways, EPA has taken steps to use consistent
names for counties, use a variety of nomenclature standards for names
within the database, and assist in the standardization of the response
data.

EPA generates a facility identification number for newly reporting
facilities at the time of data entry. This allows linkage to all years
of reports for a particular facility or location. The identification
number also allows easy retrieval of cross-year data, even when a
facility is sold or changes its name. This number has been sent to all
facilities, and they are required to use it on all future submissions to
the Agency. Use of the facility identification number also facilitates
data quality reviews and cross-year analysis.

Links to State Reporting. Under EPCRA §313, facilities are required to
submit forms both to EPA and the state in which they operate. For
additional quality assurance and tracking purposes, EPA provides all
states with a listing of facilities that reported to the Data Processing
Center for each reporting year. This reconciliation activity typically
results in the identification of several cases where facilities did not
report to both. Many states then provide lists of forms to EPA when EPA
has not received copies, and vice versa. Both the state and EPA then
contact the facilities from which they are missing forms and request
submission. This activity has provided a critical step to assist EPA in
coordinating the data collection with the states and completing both
data repositories.

In 2004, EPA implemented the TRI State Data Exchange Network, which
enabled facilities to simultaneously submit their data to EPA and their
respective state governments. This new reporting option allowed
facilities to fulfill their legal obligation to report to the federal
and state entities through the sole submission of data through CDX. To
utilize the TRI State Data Exchange Network, facilities have to (1) use
the TRI-ME desktop application, (2) submit their data over the Internet
to EPA’s CDX, and (3) be located in a participating state. At the same
time a transmission is sent to EPA’s TRIPS database, CDX sends the
data on to participating states via the Environmental Information
Exchange Network (Exchange Network). The Exchange Network is a
standards-based data network that allows the transfer of data between
states and EPA. This capability will be sustained in the new TRI-MEweb
application. 

In 2006, EPA introduced a new flow to the TRI State Data Exchange
Network by which data submitted via diskette and paper to the TRI Data
Processing Center are also forwarded to participating states. This
second stage of the network flow does not remove the obligation to
report to both EPA and the reporter’s state government because of
necessary intervening steps such as data entry. However, it eliminates
the need for dual data entry systems, allowing participating states to
discontinue their data entry systems. In addition, these states no
longer need to perform the annual form reconciliation with EPA, since
they are obtaining the exact same flow of data that EPA receives from
facilities. 

Making TRI Data Available. Many options are available for accessing TRI
data. For example, the annual TRI Public Data Release (PDR) includes an
overview of the most recently reported TRI data, information on trends,
and downloadable data files of all TRI reports submitted for the
reporting year. The TRI data for RY 2005 were released on March 22,
2007, which was earlier than ever before. The RY 2005 PDR includes key
findings, links to the data, and a link to TRI Explorer, one of EPA's
electronic tools for TRI data analysis.

The TRI Program has also developed the electronic Facility Data Release
(e-FDR) in response to public requests to make the TRI data available as
soon as possible after the data are received by EPA. The e-FDR is a
facility-level, form-by-form release of the TRI data, which provides an
early look at individual facility data, but which does not include the
in-depth analyses (e.g., national trend analyses) that are provided in
the PDR several months later. The first e-FDR, for RY 2003, was released
in November 2004; the second e-FDR, for RY 2004, was released in
November 2005; and the latest e-FDR, for RY 2005, was released in
September 2006. 

EPA has also developed database tools that can be used to access the
data. One such tool, TRI Explorer, allows users to search the TRI data
by ZIP code, county, and state, as well as view data at the national
level. Combined with hazard and exposure information, it serves as a
valuable tool for identifying potential chemical hazards in communities.

Using EPA’s Envirofacts, users can determine which facilities
in designated areas have reported toxic releases, including air
emissions, surface water discharges, releases to land, underground
injections, and transfers to off-site locations. Envirofacts allows the
user to query and view data for each TRI Form R submitted by a facility.

Finally, the TRI Data Mart is a new tool that is to be released in 2007
to provide a single point of enhanced access to TRI data and analytical
tools, just some of which are currently available through TRI Explorer
or Envirofacts. The TRI Data Mart will provide greater analytical
capabilities and be able to respond to a variety of customized data
queries. 

List Revisions and Petition Reviews. The list of toxic chemicals subject
to reporting under EPCRA §313 is subject to change. The list can be
modified by EPA-initiated reviews of chemicals or by public petition.
EPCRA §313(e) requires the Agency to respond to petitions within 180
days either by initiating a rulemaking to add or delete the chemical(s)
or by publishing an explanation of the reason for denying the petition.
If a state governor submits a petition to add a chemical or chemicals
and EPA does not respond within 180 days, the chemical(s) are
automatically added to the toxic chemical list. After receiving a
petition, EPA begins an intensive review that includes chemistry and
toxicity analyses of the chemical(s). Depending on the toxicity of the
chemical or chemicals, EPA's review also may include exposure and
engineering analyses. The review produces a hazard assessment that may
be subjected to an external peer review process before being used to
determine if the chemical or chemicals meet the listing criteria. If a
chemical meets the criteria for addition to the list, it is added or
maintained on the list. For petitions to de-list a chemical, if the
Agency determines that there is not sufficient evidence to establish any
of the listing criteria, then the chemical is removed from the list. 

The criteria for inclusion on the list are stated in EPCRA §313(d)(2):
the chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated to cause
significant adverse acute human health effects at concentration levels
that are reasonably likely to exist beyond facility site boundaries as a
result of continuous, or frequently recurring, releases; the chemical is
known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated to cause in humans
cancer or teratogenic effects, or serious or irreversible reproductive
dysfunctions, neurological disorders, heritable genetic mutations, or
other chronic health effects; or the chemical is known to cause or can
reasonably be anticipated to cause a significant adverse effect on the
environment because of its toxicity, its toxicity and persistence in the
environment, or its toxicity and tendency to bioaccumulate in the
environment. EPA may list chemicals as a category or add individual
chemicals that meet the EPCRA §313(d)(2) criteria. 

Trade Secrecy Reviews. Respondents claiming a chemical identity as a
trade secret must include substantiation. Each year TRI receives
reporting forms with the trade secret box checked but no accompanying
substantiation form. In these cases, EPA treats the trade secret claim
as a mistake, and notifies the submitter. In many of these cases, the
trade secret claim was not intended and no substantiation is necessary.
In other cases, however, EPA receives completed trade secret claims. For
more information on trade secrecy reviews, including the costs to EPA,
see the ICR for the Trade Secrecy Rule for EPCRA (EPA #1428, OMB
#2050-0078).

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

EPA continues to encourage Form R and A submissions through the Internet
via EPA’s CDX and the interactive, intelligent, user-friendly TRI-ME
software. This software asks the user simple, straightforward questions
to help the user determine if the facility is subject to TRI reporting.
TRI-ME has greatly reduced data quality errors and has therefore reduced
the likelihood of a facility being in violation of the reporting
requirements, or having to subsequently submit revisions. In the last
five years TRI-ME usage has increased. Ninety-seven percent (66 percent
CDX and 31 percent diskette) of submissions were received electronically
for RY 2005. 

Beginning in RY2007, the TRI Program will fully implement TRI-MEweb, an
innovative online application with all the functionality of TRI-ME
desktop plus major enhancements. This online tool will have significant
new features to further help reduce reporting burden, improve data
quality, and reduce errors. 

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

EPCRA §313 (b)(1)(A) provides that facilities with fewer than 10
full-time employees (or the equivalent) are not required to report. In
addition, EPA has taken several steps to minimize the burden for covered
small businesses. A range reporting option was added to the Final Rule
(53 FR 4500, February 16, 1988) that codified the EPCRA §313 reporting
requirements. Range reporting was the preferred option from the
Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis to provide burden reduction for
small businesses. Range reporting provides an option for releases of
less than 1,000 pounds to be recorded as a code representing one of
three ranges (1 to 10 pounds, 11 to 499 pounds, or 500 to 999 pounds)
rather than as a specific estimate of the release amount. The benefit is
not, however, limited to small businesses. Range reporting is not
permitted on Form Rs for PBT chemicals.

In addition, in response to a petition from the Small Business
Administration, EPA has promulgated the alternate threshold (59 FR
61488, November 30, 1994), manifested in Form A reporting, as discussed
in Section 1(b). Although any reporting facility meeting the criteria
may use the alternate threshold, it is thought that this alternate
threshold will be most advantageous to small entities. See the Form A
ICR Supporting Statement for more details.

5(d) Collection Schedule

Facilities must report their information on a calendar-year basis, and
submit Form Rs or Form As to EPA by July 1 each year. On average, EPA
has released the national TRI data set to the public approximately 10
months after the annual reporting deadline. In response to public
requests to shorten the time frame for release of TRI information, EPA
is encouraging facilities to submit revised reports sooner, and
streamlining data quality operations. The Agency expects these measures
will help it to meet the ultimate goal of releasing data in the year of
submission. Also, it is important to note that EPA's national database
is just one avenue of access to the TRI information. Each state also
makes its data available to the public, and most states are able to make
their data available prior to EPA's release of the national data. For
example, nearly half of the states release their TRI data within four
months of the TRI reporting deadline.

ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 

This information collection activity imposes burden and cost on certain
facilities affected by EPCRA §313 reporting requirements. It also
imposes costs on EPA to process and make available the data collected
and stored in the Toxics Release Inventory. The following sections
present the derivation of Form R respondent burden and cost as well as
Agency burden and cost. For TRI reporters, estimates of average Form R
reporting burden per respondent are presented. These unit burden
estimates are then combined with appropriate wage rates to develop unit
costs. Total Form R respondent burden and costs are estimated by
combining the universe of reporting forms and facilities with estimates
of unit burden and cost. This universe of reporting forms and facilities
is based on reporting in RY 2005, adjusted to account for the predicted
impacts of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule and proposed changes. When
estimating reporter burden, the submission medium is assumed to be 100
percent paper, reflecting the most conservative case. The combined total
number of forms and facilities (i.e., respondents) is hereafter referred
to as the ICR Universe. The Form R burden and cost associated with the
new data elements and revised instructions are presented separately in
alternate tables and then accounted for in the bottom-line burden and
cost estimates. 

OMB last approved this ICR on March 3, 2006, with an expiration date of
January 31, 2008. The approved ICR reflected a reporting burden of
3,746,590 hours and $170.5 million for Form R respondents. In this ICR
Renewal, the effect of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule is expected to
sustain the reduced overall burden due to increased Form A eligibility
(i.e., number of Form Rs decreased and number of Form As increased,
yielding a net burden decrease) with total responses, burden, and cost
of Form R reporting projected at 66,751 responses, 3,215,715 hours and
$160.73 million. Further, the TRI Program is proposing to add data
elements and revise instructions on both reporting forms. The added data
elements and revised instructions are estimated to increase the total
Form R respondent burden and cost for Form R reporting to 3,217,280
hours and $160.79 million, respectively. 

For Agency burden, estimates of fixed costs associated with rent for the
EPCRA Reporting Center, development costs for data access tools,
compliance assistance measures, and other activities and expenses are
presented. Variable costs, dependent on the number of Form Rs processed,
are also calculated. In Agency burden estimates, the FY2005 distribution
of submission media (paper, diskette, CDX online) is assumed to be the
same over the course of the ICR period. 

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

This section presents the burden of this information collection activity
to Form R respondents in terms of the time required for facility
personnel to perform the activities outlined in Section 3 of this
document. These burden estimates are based on previous ICRs and economic
analyses, respondent experience as reflected in comments to EPA and
other parties, best professional judgment, and information acquired
through site visits and telephone interviews. 

The burden to respondents is estimated for Form R requirements
(including compliance determination and supplier notification) and
petitions. Average respondent burden estimates are developed and then
multiplied by the number of facilities or reports (as appropriate) to
estimate the total burden to respondents. Therefore, the resultant
burden estimates used by EPA are national average values. As with any
average, some facilities will be above the average, and others will be
below it. Large, complex facilities may require more than the average
time to comply. However, many other facilities subject to the rule are
not large or complex. Overall, EPA considers these burden estimates
reasonably representative of national averages.

One factor to note is that reporter burden has been impacted over time
by technology advances. For example, in 2003, EPA implemented the TRI
State Data Exchange Network, which enabled facilities in participating
states to submit their data simultaneously via CDX to EPA and to their
state government. This new reporting option allowed facilities to
fulfill their legal obligation to report to the federal and state
entities through the sole submission of data to EPA via CDX. In
addition, EPA has developed the interactive, intelligent, user-friendly
TRI-ME software. This software asks the user simple, straightforward
questions to help the user determine if the facility is subject to TRI
reporting. TRI-ME has greatly reduced data quality errors and has
therefore reduced the likelihood of a facility being in violation of the
reporting requirements, or having to subsequently submit corrections.
Additionally,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EPA expects that TRI-ME has resulted
in a burden reduction in the activities of Form R completion and
recordkeeping/submission. As a conservative estimate of reporting
burden, however, reporter burden savings associated with technology
advances, including TRI-ME and concurrent federal and state reporting
are not reflected in this ICR.

Form R Respondent Requirements 

The activities associated with TRI reporting during the period of this
ICR include the following:

Compliance Determination: Facility staff must determine whether the
facility meets the criteria for EPCRA §313 reporting. This activity
includes the time required to become familiar with the definitions,
exemptions, and threshold requirements under the TRI Program, to review
the list of TRI chemicals, and to conduct preliminary threshold
determinations to determine if the facility is required to report.

Rule Familiarization: Staff of a facility that is reporting under EPCRA
§313 for the first time must read the reporting package and become
familiar with the reporting requirements. This includes the time needed
to review instructions, and the time needed to train personnel to
respond to a collection of information.

Calculations and Report Completion: Facility staff must gather data and
perform calculations to provide the information required on the form.
This activity includes the time required to search data sources and the
time to complete and review the information.

Recordkeeping and Submission: Facility staff must maintain recordkeeping
systems and submit the report to EPA and the state in which the facility
is located. This activity includes the time required to transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.

Supplier Notification: Certain suppliers of mixtures or trade name
products containing reportable substances must annually notify their
customers of the product's composition, if the customer is subject to
EPCRA §313 reporting. This activity includes the time required to
inform customers, either by letter or through the materials safety data
sheet (MSDS) for the product.

Since the last Form R ICR, this ICR incorporates two substantive
changes. First, due to the TRI Burden Reduction Rule promulgated
December 22, 2006, the total number of Form Rs filed by facilities is
expected to decrease. With expanded Form A eligibility, overall burden
as well as total Form R reporting burden is expected to decrease. The
unit burdens (PBT and non-PBT) associated with filling out Form R,
however, remain unchanged. The change in the number of Form Rs filed is
discussed in Section 6(d). Second, EPA is proposing to add data elements
and revise instructions for Form Rs and As that would that improve the
consistency and granularity of TRI data via details of standardized
responses. The addition of data elements as well as the revision of
certain instructions will slightly increase the unit burden associated
with filling out Form R but will not affect the number of Form Rs
submitted. Note that the tables below are often presented in (a) and (b)
versions to reflect the base case (incorporating the TRI Burden
Reduction Rule) and then the proposed changes.

The remainder of this section discusses the unit burden hour estimates
for each specific industry activity. Activities are organized into two
categories: those performed at the facility level and those that must be
performed for each Form R submitted. The estimated hours required to
complete each activity are summarized in Table 2a by labor category. The
estimated hours required to respond to the new data elements and
instructions are presented in Table 2b. Tables 3a and 3b present the
annual estimated burden hours according to type of facility for
facilities that submit three Form Rs each before and after the addition
of the new data elements and instructions, respectively. These estimates
represent the burden on a "typical" facility, although many facilities
file fewer Form Rs, and some file more. The total annual burden to all
facilities is discussed in Section 6(d). Note that the total annual
burden estimate is based on unit reporting burdens multiplied by the
total number of facilities or forms (as appropriate); it is not based on
the "typical" facility burdens shown in Table 3a and 3b.

Table 2a

Reporter Average Annual Burden Hour Estimate by Activity

Category	Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Hours

Facility

Level	Compliance Determination - all facilities	1	3	0	4

	Rule Familiarization - first-time filers	12	22.5	0	34.5

	Supplier Notification	0	7	17	24

Per

Form R	Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers - PBTs
20.3	43.9	2.7	66.8

	Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers - Non-PBTs	20.5
44.4	2.8	67.6

	Calculations and Report Completion - subsequent year filers - PBTs	14.1
30.4	1.9	46.3

	Calculations and Report Completion - subsequent year filers - Non-PBTs
7.5	16.1	1.0	24.6

	Recordkeeping/Submission - all filers	0	4	1	5



Table 2b

Incremental Annual Burden Increase by Activity

(Per Form R)

Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total

Minutes	Total Hours

Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers - PBTs and
Non-PBTs	0.2	0.6	1.1	1.9	0.03

Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	0.2	0.6	1.1	1.9	0.03

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.00

Calculations and Report Completion - subsequent year filers - PBTs and
Non-PBTs	0.2	0.5	0.7	1.4	0.02

Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	0.2	0.5	0.7	1.4	0.02

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.00

Note:

The derivation of reporting burden estimates associated with the new
data elements and revised reporting instructions follows the methodology
used in the Economic Analysis for the TRI Reporting Forms Modification
Rule, July 2005. 

Table 3a

Reporter Typical Annual Burden Hour Estimate 

per Facility in Each Subsequent Year

Type of Facility	Average Annual Hours Burden

	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Hours

Compliance Determination Only	1	3	0	4

Compliance Determination and 3 PBT Form Rs	43.3	106.1	8.6	157.9

Compliance Determination and 3 Non-PBT Form Rs	23.6	63.2	6.1	92.9

Compliance Determination, 3 PBT Form Rs, and Supplier Notification	43.3
113.1	25.6	181.9

Compliance Determination, 3 Non-PBT Form Rs, and Supplier Notification
23.6	70.2	23.1	116.9

Note: Components do not add across due to rounding for display purposes.

	

Table 3b

Reporter Typical Annual Burden Hour Estimate 

per Facility in Each Subsequent Year, 

Including New Data Elements

Type of Facility	Average Annual Hours Burden

	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Hours

Compliance Determination Only	1.0	3.0	0.0	4.0

Compliance Determination and 3 PBT Form Rs	43.3	106.1	8.6	158.0

Compliance Determination and 3 Non-PBT Form Rs	23.6	63.2	6.1	93.0

Compliance Determination, 3 PBT Form Rs, and Supplier Notification	43.3
113.1	25.6	182.0

Compliance Determination, 3 Non-PBT Form Rs, and Supplier Notification
23.6	70.2	23.1	117.0

Notes:

1) The derivation of reporting burden estimates associated with the new
data elements and revised reporting instructions follows the methodology
used in the Economic Analysis for the TRI Reporting Forms Modification
Rule, July 2005.

2) Components do not add across due to rounding for display purposes.

	Activities Performed at the Facility Level

Compliance Determination - A facility must report under EPCRA §313 if
it: (1) is within a NAICS code or industry group corresponding to the
statutory requirement covered by the TRI Program; (2) has 10 or more
full-time equivalent (FTE) employees; and (3) manufactures, processes,
or otherwise uses any of the listed chemicals above the threshold
quantities. All facilities must determine if they meet these criteria.
Most facilities incur little burden to make determinations regarding the
first two criteria. Many facilities require time for the management and
technical staff to determine the types of chemicals used at the facility
and whether these chemicals are manufactured, processed, or otherwise
used above threshold levels, in order to make the determination under
the third criterion.

To make the determination, a facility will typically (1) review whether
it manufactures, processes, or otherwise uses any of the chemicals in
any quantity, and then (2) determine whether it exceeds a threshold
quantity. In many cases, particularly at facilities that do not
manufacture, process or otherwise use any listed chemicals, the first
activity should be completed relatively quickly. The second activity may
involve a more detailed set of calculations.

The average burden for compliance determination is estimated to be 4
hours per facility per year. This reflects the overall average time
requirements of facilities ranging from those that do not have listed
chemicals on-site, to those that have very large or small quantities of
listed chemicals (i.e., are significantly above or below the thresholds
and thus do not require a significant amount of time to make the
determination) or have not had significant changes from the prior year,
to facilities that have more complex and time-consuming compliance
determination requirements.

Rule Familiarization - If a facility will be reporting under the EPCRA
§313 requirements for the first time, facility staff must review and
comprehend the reporting requirements, as well as EPA procedures for
submitting, revising, and withdrawing forms. At a minimum, this effort
will involve reading the instructions to the Toxics Chemical Release
Inventory Reporting Form R. The effort may also involve consulting EPA
guidance documents, attending a training course, and/or calling the
EPCRA technical hotline. The cost associated with rule familiarization
occurs only in the first year that a facility becomes subject to
reporting. In subsequent years, staff are assumed to be familiar with
the requirements that apply to their facility. Thus, the facility would
no longer bear this cost. Similarly, facilities that already report one
or more existing TRI chemicals will not incur a rule familiarization
cost for each additional chemical.

It is estimated that facilities reporting under EPCRA §313 for the
first time will need to make a one-time expenditure of 34.5 hours for
rule familiarization. This burden estimate is comprised of 12 hours of
management time and 22.5 hours of technical time.

Supplier Notification - Certain suppliers of mixtures or trade name
products containing reportable substances must annually notify their
customers of the product's composition if the customer is subject to
EPCRA §313 reporting or sells the product to another company that is
subject to reporting. Facilities may be subject to the supplier
notification requirements even if they are not covered by the EPCRA
§313 reporting requirements. For example, a facility with less than 10
FTEs or that does not meet reporting thresholds may still be required to
notify certain customers. Supplier notification is required so that
customers can make threshold determinations and complete reports for
their own facilities. A letter identifying the chemical by name and CAS
number and indicating its percentage by weight in the formulation can
provide the notification. Notification can also be provided on the MSDS
for the product. On average, approximately 24 hours per TRI reporting
facility are estimated for compliance with this requirement.

Activities Specific to Completing Form R

Calculations and Report Completion (Existing Data Elements) - Facilities
that determine they must report under EPCRA §313 will incur additional
burden to retrieve, process, review, and transcribe information to
complete each report. Most of the time required for form completion is
for calculating releases, transfers, and other waste management
practices; relatively little time is required to copy information to the
form. The facility must complete one Form R for each listed chemical it
is reporting to TRI.

The burden is estimated to average 46.34 hours per PBT Form R and 24.66
hours per Non-PBT Form R for ongoing, annual reporting. To complete Form
R, facilities will need to verify and update data, review previous
calculations, and modify the information reported on the previous year's
Form R. For a facility completing three forms in subsequent years, this
results in an average estimated burden of 158.0 hours per PBT Form R and
93.0 hours per Non-PBT Form R. The estimate for first-year calculations
and report completion is 66.86 hours per Form R for a PBT chemical and
67.66 hours per Form R for a Non-PBT chemical (all estimates include
proposed changes).

Calculations and Report Completion (New Data Elements and Revised
Instructions) - the new data elements and revised instructions proposed
by EPA will add minimal burden to the form as follows:

More specific “basis of estimate” codes – Facilities are currently
required to enter a basis of estimate code for each release and
otherwise managed waste estimate (Sections 5 and 6). Facilities will now
have a total of six basis of estimate codes from which to select. Two of
the current codes will remain: Mass Balance (C) and Other (O). (M1)and
(M2) will be added, for continuous and periodic/random monitoring,
respectively; (E1) and (E2) will be added  for published and
site-specific emission factors, respectively.  In the first year, it is
estimated that 0.2 minutes of management time, 0.6 minutes of technical
time, and 1.1 minutes of clerical time will be required to review and
record the appropriate basis of estimate code. In subsequent years, it
is estimated that 0.2 minutes of management time,   0.5 minutes of
technical time, and 0.7 minutes of clerical time will be required to
review and record the appropriate basis of estimate code

Code boxes indicating that the form is a revision or withdrawal as well
as the reason for revision or withdrawal. For a revision or withdrawal,
the facility will indicate with up to two codes the reason(s) for
revision or withdrawal in the code box. Given that revision and
withdrawal procedures are considered to be part of Rule Familiarization,
these procedural changes, which apply to a subset of the ICR Universe,
are negligible and assumed to be zero.

Recordkeeping and Submission - After a facility has completed the form,
it incurs additional burden for recordkeeping and submission associated
with filing a Form R report. Recordkeeping allows a facility to use the
information in making calculations in subsequent years and as
documentation in the event it receives a compliance audit. Facilities
must maintain records used to provide the information required on Form
R; those records may include estimation methodology and calculations;
engineering reports; inventory, incident, and operating logs; and other
supporting materials. Recordkeeping and submission are estimated to
require an average of 5 hours per Form R, or 15 hours for a facility
filing three Form Rs.

Average Burden per Respondent

The estimated burden per respondent depends on the type of respondent
and the number of reports submitted. For example, the burden for
facilities that only perform compliance determination is estimated to
average 4 hours per facility. For facilities required to file three Form
Rs, but not required to comply with supplier notification, the burden is
estimated to be 158.0 hours if all three reports are for PBT chemicals
and 93.0 hours if all three reports are for Non-PBT chemicals. For
facilities submitting three Form Rs that are also required to comply
with supplier notification, the average burden is estimated at 182.0
hours and 117.0 hours per facility for PBT chemicals and Non-PBT
chemicals, respectively (all estimates include proposed changes).

Petitions

The activities required to prepare and file a petition are listed below.
Included is a discussion of the burden associated with each activity.
The time needed to complete these activities is presented in Table 4.
The total annual burden for all petitions is estimated in Section 6(d).

Table 4

Reporter Average Burden Hour Estimate per Petition

Activity	Average Annual Hours Burden	Total Hours Burden

	Management	Technical	Clerical

	1. Read EPA Policy and Guidance	4	0	0	4

2. Plan Activities	2	1	0	3

3. Prepare Literature Search	2	7	0	9

4. Conduct Literature Search	0	48	0	48

5. Process, Review, and Focus Information	12	74	0	86

6. Write Petition	4	8	6	18

7. Review and Edit Petition	4	8	2	14

8. Submit to EPA and File	0	0	3	3

Total Hours per Petition	28	146	11	185

These estimates assume prior knowledge by the respondent of the issues
prompting the listing of specific chemicals. An additional assumption
was made that the petitioners had no in-house library facilities and,
consequently, that they would have to use a university library or
similar facility. Based upon the experience of the previous reporting
years, fewer than five petitions per year are expected. Following are
descriptions of the specific activities associated with preparing and
filing a petition for chemical listing or de-listing.

Read EPA policy and guidance documents and consult with EPA. The reading
and interpretation of EPA policy and guidance notice is conducted by
management and involves four hours per petition.

Plan activities. Management and technical personnel conduct the planning
activities jointly. Three hours per petition are required to complete
these activities.

Prepare literature search. Both management and technical personnel,
involving about nine hours, conduct this activity.

Conduct literature search. Technical personnel conduct this activity,
which requires about 48 hours per petition.

Process, review, and focus information. Both technical and management
personnel, involving a total of 86 hours per petition, complete this
activity.

Write petition. A combination of technical, management, and clerical
personnel complete this activity. About 18 hours are required per
petition to complete the writing.

Review and edit petition. A combination of management, technical, and
clerical personnel are involved in this activity, requiring a total of
14 hours per petition.

Submit petition to EPA and file. The clerical personnel, requiring
approximately three hours per petition, perform this activity.

Total respondent burden. The total burden of submitting a petition is
estimated to average 185 hours.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

The cost to respondents is based on the time needed to complete the
activities listed in Section 6(a) and the hourly cost of labor at
appropriate levels (loaded labor rates). There are no specific capital
and operation and maintenance costs associated directly with this
information collection activity. There may be some small additional
costs for mailing and supplies. Total annual costs for all facilities
are discussed in Section 6(d).

	(i) Estimating Labor Costs

Form R Requirements

To determine the per-facility costs for typical respondents, the unit
burden hour estimates for compliance activities are multiplied by fully
loaded hourly rates for the appropriate categories of labor conducting
these activities. Loaded hourly rates are the product of wages,
benefits, and overhead. Hourly wage rates are divided into three
categories: managerial, technical, and clerical. Average wage and salary
data for these categories are obtained from the Employer

Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) report from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) for all goods-producing, private industries. The
additional cost of benefits, such as paid leave and insurance, is also
derived from information provided in the ECEC report. Loading factors
for benefits are calculated separately for managerial, technical, and
clerical labor by dividing the benefits percentage of total compensation
by the wage percentage of total compensation. Based on information
provided by the chemical industry and chemical industry trade
associations, an additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied for
general overhead. This loading factor is added to the benefits loading
factor, then applied to the base wage. The new wage rates are calculated
using current data on salaries and benefits for these three labor
categories. The fully loaded 2006 hourly wage rates are shown in Table
5.

Table 5

Loaded Hourly Wage Rates by Labor Category

2006

Labor Category	Average Hourly Wage	Benefits

(% wages)	Overhead

(% wages)	Loaded Hourly Rate

Managerial	$35.54 	43.88%	17%	$57.18 

Technical	$31.51 	40.85%	17%	$49.74 

Clerical	$15.39 	44.51%	17%	$24.86 

Average respondent costs are summarized by activity in Table 6a for the
current Form R and in Table 6b for the new data elements and
instructions only. Average costs per facility are summarized before and
after the addition of the new data elements and instructions,
respectively, in Tables 7a and 7b. The average cost per facility for
those completing only compliance determination is $206. Based on the
burden hour estimates in Tables 3a and 3b and the loaded hourly rates in
Table 5, the average subsequent year cost for a facility performing
compliance determination and submitting three PBT forms is $7,968. The
average subsequent year cost for a facility performing compliance
determination and submitting three Non-PBT forms is $4,649.  For
facilities that must also comply with supplier notification, the average
subsequent year cost increases to $8,739 for PBT reports and $5,420 for
Non-PBT reports (all estimates include proposed changes).

Table 6a

Reporter Average Annual Cost Estimate by Activity

Category	Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

Facility

Level	Compliance Determination - all facilities	$57	$149	$0	$206

	Rule Familiarization - first-time filers	$686	$1,119	$0	$1,805

	Supplier Notification	$0	$348	$423	$771

Per

Form R	Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers – PBTs
$1,160	$2,182	$67	$3,409

	Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers - Non-PBTs
$1,172	$2,206	$69	$3,447

	Calculations and Report Completion – subsequent year filers – PBTs
$806	$1,510	$46	$2,362

	Calculations and Report Completion – subsequent year filers -
Non-PBTs	$432	$799	$25	$1,256

	Recordkeeping/Submission - all filers	$0	$199	$25	$224

Table 6b

Reporter Average Incremental Annual Cost Increase by Activity

Per Form R

Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

Calculations and Report Completion - first-time filers - PBTs and
Non-PBTs	$0.18	$0.46	$0.47	$1.12

Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	$0.18	$0.46	$0.47	$1.12

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

Calculations and Report Completion - subsequent year filers - PBTs and
Non-PBTs	$0.16	$0.43	$0.29	$0.89

Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	$0.16	$0.43	$0.29	$0.89

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

Table 7a

Typical Reporter Average Annual Cost Estimate per Facility in Each
Subsequent Year

Type of Facility	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

Compliance Determination Only	$57	$149	$0	$206

Compliance Determination and 3 Form Rs – PBTs	$2,476	$5,277	$213
$7,966

Compliance Determination and 3 Form Rs - Non-PBTs	$1,352	$3,144	$151
$4,647

Compliance Determination, 3 Form Rs, and Supplier Notification – PBTs
$2,476	$5,625	$635	$8,736

Compliance Determination, 3 Form Rs, and Supplier Notification -
Non-PBTs	$1,352	$3,493	$573	$5,418

Table 7b

Typical Reporter Average Annual Cost Estimate per Facility in Each
Subsequent Year, Including New Data Elements

Type of Facility	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

Compliance Determination Only	$57	$149	$0	$206

Compliance Determination and 3 Form Rs - PBTs	$2,476	$5,279	$214	$7,968

Compliance Determination and 3 Form Rs - Non-PBTs	$1,352	$3,146	$151
$4,649

Compliance Determination, 3 Form Rs and Supplier Notification - PBTs
$2,476	$5,627	$636	$8,739

Compliance Determination, 3 Form Rs and Supplier Notification - Non-PBTs
$1,352	$3,494	$574	$5,420

Petitions

The primary cost to respondents for developing and submitting petitions
under EPCRA §313 (e) will be the labor costs associated with the
activities outlined in Section 6(a) of this document. These costs are
the product of the labor hours expended to prepare the average petition,
the wage rates for the employees involved in preparing the petitions,
and the average number of petitions submitted annually. Based on the
burden hour estimates in Table 4 and the loaded hourly rates in Table 5,
the cost estimate for the preparation of a petition is presented in
Table 8.

Table 8

Reporter Average Cost per Petition

Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

1. Read EPA Policy and Guidance	$229	$0	$0	$229

2. Plan Activities	$114	$50	$0	$164

3. Prepare Literature Search	$114	$348	$0	$463

4. Conduct Literature Search	$0	$2,388	$0	$2,388

5. Process, Review, and Focus Information	$686	$3,681	$0	$4,367

6. Write Petition	$229	$398	$149	$776

7. Review and Edit Petition	$229	$398	$50	$676

8. Submit to EPA and File	$0	$0	$75	$75

Total Cost per Petition	$1,601	$7,263	$274	$9,138

Based upon prior years of implementation of EPCRA §313, it is assumed
that fewer than five petitions will continue to be submitted annually
(in recent years, only one or two petitions have been submitted each
year). The total average unit cost to prepare a petition is estimated to
be $9,138.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

This section estimates the burden and costs to EPA to process Form R
reports based on information characterizing the resources used in
previous years. EPA incurs burden and costs for five categories of
activities: data processing, outreach and training, information
dissemination, policy and petitions, and compliance and enforcement.
These activities are described in detail in Table 9.

Table 9

EPA Activities for TRI Reporting Forms

Category	Description

Data Processing	Data entry – entering the information into the
database, microfilming or microfiching the reports, and filing all
reports;

Data quality – reviewing reports for completeness, errors, and
inconsistencies; making inquiries to resolve discrepancies; and
reentering corrected data;

Magnetic media support – distributing the computer program for
electronic submissions; creating and updating intelligent reporting
software;

Programming and operating the EPA mainframe and local area network;

Data analysis – developing tools to use TRI data, analyzing data to
support EPA needs, and preparing data for use by others; and

EPCRA Reporting Center fixed costs – rent and form storage.

Outreach and Training	Providing EPCRA technical hotline, technical
guidance, industry outreach, and regional, state, and public training;
and

Responding to requests for information through TRI User Support.

Information Dissemination	Public Data Release, Internet, data access
tools.

Policy and Petitions	Analysis to support petitions, list revisions,
trade secret claims, and rulemakings.

Compliance and Enforcement	Technical assistance, compliance outreach,
facility inspections, issuance of cases, and creation of Supplemental
Environmental Projects (SEPs).

The estimate of EPA burden and costs is separated into a fixed component
and a variable component; EPA staff commitments (as measured by FTEs)
are reported in total. Activities and expenses that are not greatly
affected by marginal changes in report quantities are reported as fixed
costs. These activities and expenses include rent for the EPCRA
Reporting Center, development costs for data access tools, compliance
assistance measures, and other activities and expenses listed above. The
variable component is the amount that varies depending on the number of
forms. The variable unit costs are estimated as total data processing
costs divided by the total number of reports processed in RY 2005. Table
10 details the costs associated with the activities of Table 9 in total
and for each Form R and Form A. 

Table 10

Agency Burden and Cost* 

Category	Annual Cost

(million)	Form R

(million)	Form A

(million)

Data Processing (Fixed Cost)

Forms Processing (Variable Cost)	    $ 4.25 

    $ 0.45 	    $ 3.70 

    $ 0.39 	    $ 0.55 

    $ 0.06 

Outreach and Training	    $ 1.10 	    $ 0.96 	    $ 0.14 

Information Dissemination 	    $ 0.81 	    $ 0.70 	    $ 0.11 

Policy and Petitions	    $ 1.08 	    $ 0.94 	    $ 0.14 

Compliance and Enforcement	    $ 0.37 	    $ 0.32 	    $ 0.05 

Totals	   $ 8.06 	    $ 7.01 	    $ 1.05 

*This estimate includes all Agency activities related to all TRI work,
reflecting a 50 FTE effort with 13 FTEs from Regional office support.
The portion of FTEs attributed to Form R activities is approximately 87%
of the total, or 44 FTEs.

Note that total costs are allocated to Form Rs and As in same proportion
as the number of Form Rs and Form As in the ICR Universe (66,751 Form
Rs; 10,255 Form As). See the explanation of these counts in Section
6(d).

Table 11 summarizes the fixed and variable costs associated with
reporting under the EPCRA §313 requirements by form type and by
submission media.

Table 11

Agency Data Processing Costs

	Form R	Form A

	Paper 	CDX 	Diskette 	Paper 	CDX 	Diskette 

Variable

Cost Per Form	$24.79	$6.26	$3.01	$18.42	$6.26	$3.01

Fixed Costs	$3.7 million	$.55 million

Average Cost per Form	$61.25	$59.63

As discussed in the following section, approximately 67,000 Form R
reports are expected to be filed per year (following the implementation
of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule). Thus, the total annual burden to EPA
associated with Form Rs is estimated to be $6.62 million in fixed costs,
$.39 million in variable costs, and 44 FTEs (or 91,520 hours at $5.1
million in loaded labor costs). These costs reflect the burden to
conduct the EPA activities described above plus an additional (variable)
cost for each form processed depending on the submission media. The
analysis assumes that, on average, the fixed FTE requirement is met by
EPA employees at the general pay scale for grade GS-12, step 8 (at a
loaded salary of $115,289) using a loading factor of 1.4 that includes
wages and benefits but not overhead, which is included in the fixed
costs portion of the Agency burden estimate.

	6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Estimated Total Annual Burden for All Respondents

This section presents the total annual burden hours for all respondents,
both those complying with EPCRA §313 and those submitting petitions.
The total burden hours for all respondents to comply with EPCRA §313
are estimated by multiplying the unit burden estimate for each
compliance activity by the relevant units: facilities or reports. As a
result of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule, facilities reporting on
chemicals that were previously ineligible for Form A (PBTs or above the
non-PBT eligibility threshold) may now be able to file a Form A instead
of a Form R for one of more of their chemicals. Table 12 shows the
assumed universe of TRI facilities and forms for both the Form R and
Form A ICRs and the effect of changes in Form A eligibility. This
universe is based on reporting in RY 2005, adjusted to account for the
impact that the TRI Burden Reduction Rule is expected to have on Form R
reporting.

It is estimated that approximately 11,780 Form Rs will be replaced by
Form As, assuming all who are eligible for the simplified Form A take
advantage of it. Additionally, a very small number of Form
As—47—will no longer be eligible to be filed as a Form A and will be
replaced by Form R(s) due to the new definition of the Annual Reportable
Amount. These estimates (including newly eligible Form As) are strictly
projections for what is expected in RY2007 given the anticipated effects
of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule, and assuming reporter characteristics
are roughly the same in RY2007 as they were in RY2005, See Table 12 for
additional details.

Table 12

ICR Universe of TRI Facilities and Forms

	Form R	Form A

	Number of Chemicals (Same as Number of Forms)	Number of Chemicals
(Note: Average of 2.2 Chemicals per Form)

RY 2005 TRI Universe

Number of Facilities	21,154	4,713

Number of PBT Chemicals	15,645	221

Number of Non-PBT Chemicals	62,891	10,754

Newly Eligible for Form A

Number of Facilities	6,620

Number of PBT Chemicals	2,375

Number of Non-PBT Chemicals	9,457

Newly Ineligible for Form A

Number of Facilities	35

Number of Non-PBT Chemicals	47

RY 2008 ICR Universe

Number of Facilities	19,441	10,235

Number of PBT Chemicals	13,270	2,397

Number of Non-PBT Chemicals	53,481	20,164

RY 2008 ICR Universe of Forms

Form R = 78,536-11,832 +47 = 66,751

Form A4 = [(10,776+11,832)/2.2]-[47/1.1]=10,235

Notes: 

1. In RY 2005 the TRI Burden Reduction Rule was not in place (i.e., no
eligibility for reporting PBTs on Form A), but Form As were incorrectly
filed for 22 PBT chemicals. 

2. The number of facilities cannot simply be added or subtracted across
columns or down rows due to the fact that any given facility may be
filing both Form Rs and a Form A; also note that the categories of
chemicals reported on each form are not mutually exclusive, with overlap
of those switching (by chemical) from Form R to A and vice versa. 

3. These projections assume that the number of facilities filing Form A
is an adequate proxy for the number of Form A Certifications.

4. To count the number of Form As, the number of chemicals has to be
divided by the number of chemicals per form. For the main group of Form
R chemicals being moved to reports on Form A, the average count of
chemicals per Form A is 2.2; for the small group of chemicals that are
no longer eligible for Form A and moved to Form R, the average count of
chemicals per form is 1.1.

While the number of facilities estimated to perform compliance
determination (201,785) each year remains the same, the number of
facilities performing report completion and recordkeeping activities is
reduced to approximately 20,000 facilities for approximately 67,000 Form
Rs. As a result, 181,785 facilities are estimated to complete only the 

compliance determination procedure. An additional 20,000 facilities are
expected to complete compliance determination, form completion, and
recordkeeping, and of these, 3,734 facilities are expected to also
conduct supplier notification. Of the 20,000 facilities that file Form
Rs, it is expected that 535 facilities will be reporting to TRI for the
first time as they exceed applicable thresholds, and that these
facilities will file 912 of the Form Rs. Tables 13a and 13b present the
total annual burden hours based on these estimates for the current Form
R and for the new data elements and instructions, respectively. 

Table 13a

Reporter Total Annual Burden Hour Estimate for Form R

Activity	Hours

Per Form/

Per Facility	Number of Facilities	Number of Reports	Total Burden

Compliance Determination - all facilities subject to EPCRA §313	4
201,785	N/A	807,140

Rule Familiarization - first-time filers only	34.5	535	N/A	18,458

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - PBTs	66.8	N/A	250
16,706

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - Non-PBTs	67.6	N/A
662	44,773

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - PBTs	46.3	N/A
13,020	603,025

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - Non-PBTs	24.6
N/A	52,819	1,301,319

Recordkeeping/Submission - all reports	5	N/A	66,751	333,753

Supplier Notification	24	3,734	N/A	89,616

Total	 	 	 	3,214,790

Table 13b

Reporter Incremental Annual Burden Hour Increase 

for Form R

Activity	Hours

Per Form/

Per Facility	Number of Reports	Total Burden

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - PBT and Non-PBT

	Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	0.032	912	28.7

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	0.000	912	0.0

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - PBT and
Non-PBT

	Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	0.023	65,839	1,536.2

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	0.000	65,839	0

Total

	1,565.0

Notes:

1) The derivation of reporting burden estimates associated with the new
data elements and revised reporting instructions follows the methodology
used in the Economic Analysis for the TRI Reporting Forms Modification
Rule, July 2005.

2) The total burden column does not sum due to rounding.

The annual hours burden for all petitions is calculated by multiplying
the per-petition burden estimate for each activity by the expected
number of petitions per year. A total of five petitions are estimated to
be filed annually. Table 14 presents the total annual hours burden for
all 

petitions. The total annual hours burden for all petitions submitted is
expected to be 925 hours. 

Table 14

Reporter Total Annual Burden Hour Estimate for All Petitions (5
petitions per year)

Activity	Annual Hours Burden

	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Hours

1. Read EPA Policy and Guidance	20	0	0	20

2. Plan Activities	10	5	0	15

3. Prepare Literature Search	10	35	0	45

4. Conduct Literature Search	0	240	0	240

5. Process, Review, and Focus Information	60	370	0	430

6. Write Petition	20	40	30	90

7. Review and Edit Petition	20	40	10	70

8. Submit to EPA and File	0	0	15	15

Total Annual Hours Burden	140	730	55	925

Estimated Total Annual Cost for All Respondents

The total annual reporting cost for all respondent facilities is
determined by multiplying the unit cost estimates by the relevant units
(facilities or reports) for each compliance activity. Tables 15a and 15b
present the total annual reporting cost for the current Form R and for
the new data elements and instructions, respectively.

Table 15a

Reporter Total Annual Cost Estimate for Form R

(2006 dollars)

Activity	Cost	Number of Facilities	Number of Reports	Total Cost

Compliance Determination - all facilities subject to EPCRA §313	$206.40
201,785	N/A	$41,648,424

Rule Familiarization - first-time filers	$1,805.31	535	N/A	$965,841

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - PBTs	$3,408.02	N/A
250	$852,005

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - Non-PBTs	$3,447.41
N/A	662	$2,282,189

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - PBTs	$2,362.55
N/A	13,020	$30,760,430

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - Non-PBTs
$1,256.28	N/A	52,819	$66,355,021

Recordkeeping/Submission - all reports	$223.82	N/A	66,751	$14,940,112

Supplier Notification	$770.80	3,734	N/A	$2,878,167

Annual Total	 	 	 	$160,682,189

Table 15b

Reporter Incremental Annual Cost Increase for Form R 

 (2006 dollars)

Activity	Incremental Cost	Number of Reports	Total Burden

Form R Completion - reports from first-time filers - PBT and Non-PBT

	Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	$1.12	912	$1,019

Include check boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	$0.00	912	$0

Form R Completion - reports from subsequent year filers - PBT and
Non-PBT

	Enhance “basis of estimate” codes	$0.89	65,839	$58,416

Include code boxes on form to indicate reason(s) for revision or
withdrawal, if a form is being resubmitted	$0.00	65,839	$0

Total

	$59,436

The annual cost for all petitions is calculated by multiplying the
per-petition cost for each activity by the expected number of petitions
per year. A total of five petitions are assumed to be filed annually.
The total annual cost for all petitions submitted is shown in Table 16.

Table 16

Reporter Total Annual Cost Estimate for All Petitions

(2006 dollars)

Activity	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Cost

1. Read EPA Policy and Guidance	$1,144	$0	$0	$1,144

2. Plan Activities	$572	$249	$0	$821

3. Prepare Literature Search	$572	$1,741	$0	$2,313

4. Conduct Literature Search	$0	$11,938	$0	$11,938

5. Process, Review, and Focus Information	$3,431	$18,404	$0	$21,835

6. Write Petition	$1,144	$1,990	$746	$3,879

7. Review and Edit Petition	$1,144	$1,990	$249	$3,382

8. Submit to EPA and File	$0	$0	$373	$373

Total Cost per Petition	$8,005	$36,310	$1,367	$45,685

	6(e) Bottom-Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

This section presents the total burden and cost to the regulated
industry to comply with the information collection requirements under
EPCRA §313 and under PPA §6607, as well as the cost to EPA to process
Form Rs annually.

		(i) Respondent Tally

The previous tables have detailed the total burden and cost for
complying with EPCRA §313 and for submitting a petition independently.
Table 17 presents the total burden and cost for both activities.

Table 17

Total Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

Activity	Number of Respondents

	Number of Responses	Annual Burden Hours	Annual Costs

(millions of 2006 dollars)

Current Form Rs1	 19,441	66,751	3,214,790	$160.68 

Petitions2	 n/a	n/a	925	$0.05 

Subtotal	 19,441	 	3,215,715	$160.73 

New Data Elements and Instructions3	 19,441	66,751	1,565	$0.06 

Grand Total	3,217,280	$160.79 

Notes:

1. The estimate for Current Form R burden includes burden for compliance
determination for 201,785 respondents (facilities). Out of this group,
19,441 respondents (facilities) go beyond this step and complete the
steps to submit Form R reports to TRI.

2. The estimate for Petitions burden assumes that 5 petitions per year
are submitted with no assertions about the number of petitions per
respondent (facility).

3. The basis for these estimates is derived from RY2005 TRI reporting.

4. In comparison to the last ICR and last OMB Action, the estimates in
this table reflect a net baseline shift of         -3,388 responses, and
-128,577 hours.

The Agency Tally

The total annual burden to EPA associated with Form Rs is estimated to
be $6.62 million in fixed costs, $.39 million in variable costs, and 44
FTEs (or 91,520 hours at $5.1 million in loaded labor costs). These
costs reflect the burden to conduct the EPA activities described above
plus an additional (variable) cost for each form processed depending on
the submission media.

	

Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

Significant variation in the annual respondent reporting/recordkeeping
burden and cost is not expected over the course of the clearance period.

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

As a result of OMB's March 3, 2006 approval of the last ICR Renewal (for
2006-2007), OMB's inventory reflected 82,000 responses, 3,746,590 hours,
and $170.5 million for this information collection. By the end of 2006,
the TRI Burden Reduction Rule was promulgated and the inventory was
recalculated at 66,900 responses 3,241,473 hours (no cost reported) due
to shifts from Form R to Form A.

In this ICR Renewal, the effect of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule is
expected to sustain the reduced overall burden due to increased Form A
eligibility (i.e., number of Form Rs decreased and number of Form As
increased) with total responses, burden, and cost of Form R reporting
projected at 66,751 responses, 3,215,715 hours, and $160.73 million.
Further, the TRI Program is proposing to add data elements and revise
instructions on both reporting forms. The added data elements and
revised instructions are estimated to increase the total respondent
burden and cost for Form R reporting to 3,217,280 hours and $160.79
million. 

Since the last ICR, the reduction in the estimate of total burden of
approximately 529,000 hours is due to (1) the filing of approximately
3,000 fewer forms in RY 2005 than in RY 2002 (the ICR Universe assumed
in the last ICR Renewal) and (2) the fact that the Non-PBT chemical
eligibility for Form A has been expanded and, for the first time,
limited use of Form A will be allowed for PBT chemicals (estimate
includes proposed changes). The addition of one data element and one
change to the reporting instructions is expected to result in a minor
increase in reporting burden of 1,565 hours. Refer to Figure 1 and Table
18 for extended background information on the chronology of both TRI
rulemaking and ICR Renewal.

Table 18

Recent Changes in TRI Form R Burden

Activity – Explanation	TRI Form R ICR (EPA # 1363, OMB #2070-0093) 

	Change	Total

	# Responses	Burden Hours	Total Responses	Total Burden Hours

1997 Baseline	—	—	90,362	5,538,727

RY 1997 Program Change - Industry Expansion Rule: This rule added 7 new
industries to the list of industries subject to TRI reporting beginning
in RY98.	39,033	2,467,463	129,395	8,006,190

1999 Adjustment - Form R Correction Worksheet: This adjustment revised
the number of responses to be more consistent with actual reporting
levels. However, it did not correct for overestimation of expected
reporting from the Industry Expansion Rule.	(13,226)	(665,666)	116,169
7,340,524

RY 1999 Program Change - PBT Rule: This rule lowered reporting
thresholds for certain PBT chemicals, and added other PBT chemicals at
lower thresholds beginning in RY 2000.	19,990	1,485,411	136,159
8,825,935

RY 2000 Program Change - Lead Rule: This rule lowered reporting
thresholds for lead and lead compounds beginning in RY2001.	9,813
786,169	145,972	9,612,104

January 2003 Form R ICR Renewal: This request incorporated accounting
adjustments to reflect actual number of responses.	(57,855)	(4,045,540)
88,117	5,566,564

October 2003 Form R ICR Renewal: This request reflected actual number of
responses and accounted for a lower subsequent year reporting burden for
non-PBT chemicals.	(4,117)	(1,677,812)	84,000	3,888,752

May 2005 Form R ICR Renewal: This request reflected actual number of
responses.	(2,000)	(91,413)	82,000	3,797,339

RY 2005 Program Change - TRI Reporting Forms Modification Rule: This
rule eliminated certain data elements and simplified others beginning in
RY 2005.	—	(50,749)	82,000	3,746,590

RY 2006 Program Change – TRI Burden Reduction Rule: This rule expanded
non-PBT chemical eligibility for Form A and, for the first time, allowed
limited use of Form A for PBT chemicals. (As calculated by this ICR.)1
(15,100) 	(505,117)	66,900	3,241,473

New Data Elements and Revised Instructions: The proposed additions and
revisions improve and enhance the data as well as standardize the
information collected.2	(149)	(24,193)	66,751	3,217,280

CURRENT ICR UNIVERSE PROJECTION	—	—	66,751	3,217,280

Note:

Originally recalculated and reported on the OMB Action at 70,139
responses and 3,344,292 hours; estimates in this table are corrected to
incorporate a baseline shift (See Footnote 23 for more details). 

6(g) Burden Statement (To appear on Collection Instrument)

The annual public burden related to Form R for calculations, report
completion, recordkeeping and submission, which is approved under OMB
Control No. 2070-0093, is estimated to average 51.34 hours per response
for PBT chemicals and 29.66 hours for Non-PBT chemicals (all estimates
include proposed changes). There is additional burden associated with
rule familiarization, compliance determination, and supplier
notification as described in Table 2a. 

Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-TRI-2007-0355, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in-person viewing at the Office of Environmental
Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. The EPA Docket
Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Office
of Environmental Information Docket is (202) 566-1752. The
www.regulations.gov site can be used to submit or view public comments,
access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. When in the system, select “search,” then key in the
Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-TRI-2007-0355 and OMB Control No. 2070-0093 in any
correspondence.

The completed form should be submitted in accordance with the
instructions accompanying the form.

REFERENCES

Certain references cited are available in EPA docket # OPPTS-400104;
other references are readily available.

Arbuckle, J. Gordon, et al., 1993. Environmental Law Handbook, Twelfth
Edition. Government Institutes, Inc., Rockland MD.

Memorandum from J. Karnes to Brian Muehling (EPA/OTS) on Updating of
Unit Labor Costs to Reflect Inflation and Industry Comments for CAIR,
Centaur Associates Inc. May 28, 1987.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. County Business
Patterns - 1997. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1999.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation. U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 2006.
September.

U.S. EPA, 1999. "Economic Analysis of the Final Rule to Modify Reporting
of Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic Chemicals Under EPCRA §313".
Economics, Exposure and Technology Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics. October 1999. 

U.S. EPA, 1986. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of
1986, §313 (42 U.S.C.A. §1023.   HYPERLINK
http://www.epa.gov/tri/lawsandregs/index.htm. 
http://www.epa.gov/tri/lawsandregs/index.htm. 

U.S. EPA, 1990. Pollution Prevention Act (42 U.S.C.A. §13101-13109.
U.S. EPA   HYPERLINK http://www.epa.gov/tri/lawsandregs/index.htm. 
http://www.epa.gov/tri/lawsandregs/index.htm. 

U.S. EPA, . 40 CFR Part 372 Toxic Chemical Release Reporting: Community
Right-to-Know. http://www.epa.gov/tri/lawsandregs/index.htm#cfr



APPENDIX A

BLANK FORM R

APPENDIX B

REPORTING FORM INSTRUCTIONS 

ASSOCIATED WITH FORM CHANGES

Appendix B: Reporting Form Instructions Associated with Form Changes

This appendix presents the instructions that will accompany the proposed
form revisions and additions by data element.

PART 1 FACILITY IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION

4.4 Public Contact 

Enter the name and telephone number (including area code) of a person
who can respond to questions from the public about the form. You should
also enter an e-mail address for this person. If you choose to designate
the same person as both the Technical and the Public Contact, or you do
not have a Public Contact, you may enter “Same as Section 4.3” in
this space. This contact person does not have to be the same person who
prepares the form or signs the Certification Statement and does not
necessarily need to be someone at the location of the reporting
facility. 

PART II CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC INFORMATION 

Basis of Estimate Instructions (Applies to Form R only)

 tc \l3 "Section 5 Column B: Basis of Estimate 

For each release and otherwise managed waste estimate (Sections 5 & 6),
you are required to indicate the principal method used to determine the
amount of release and otherwise managed waste reported. You should enter
a letter code identifying the method that applies to the largest portion
of the total estimated release and otherwise managed waste quantity.

The codes are as follows:

M1 – Continuous emission monitoring

M2 – Periodic or random emission monitoring

C – Mass balance calculations

E1 – Published emission factor

E2 – Site-specific emission factor

O – Other methods of estimation

For example, if 40 percent of stack emissions of the reported EPCRA  XE
"EPCRA"   §313 chemical were derived using source testing data, 30
percent by mass balance, and 30 percent by published chemical-specific
emission factors, you should enter the code letter “M2” for periodic
or random emission monitoring.

If the monitoring data, mass balance, or emission factor used to
estimate the release is not specific to the EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313
chemical being reported, the form should identify the estimate as based
on other methods of estimation (O).

If a mass balance calculation yields the flow rate of a waste, but the
quantity of reported EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 chemical in the waste is
based on solubility data, you should report “O” because engineering
calculations were used as the basis of estimate of the quantity of the
EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 chemical in the waste.

If the concentration of the EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 chemical in the
waste was measured by continuous emissions monitoring equipment and the
flow rate of the waste was determined by mass balance, then the primary
basis of the estimate should be “continuous emission monitoring”
(M1). Even though a mass balance calculation also contributed to the
estimate, “continuous emission monitoring” should be indicated
because monitoring data were used to estimate the concentration of the
chemical in waste.

Mass balance (C) should only be indicated if it is directly used to
calculate the mass (weight) of EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 chemical
released. Monitoring data should be indicated as the basis of estimate
only if the EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 chemical concentration is measured
in the waste.  Monitoring data should not be indicated, for example, if
the monitoring data relate to a concentration of the EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"  
§313 chemical in other process streams within the facility.

It is important to realize that the accuracy and proficiency of release
estimation will improve over time. However, submitters are not required
to use new emission factors or estimation techniques to revise previous
Form R submissions.

INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED FOR WITHDRAWN AND REVISED FORMS

Submitting a Request to Revise TRI Data 

Facilities that filed a Form R and/or Form A Certification Statement
under EPCRA §313 may submit a request to revise a form that was
previously submitted, stored in the Toxics Release Inventory Processing
System (TRIPS), and made available to the public through Envirofacts and
TRI Explorer.  Facilities may request a revision for one or more of the
following reasons:

•	New Monitoring Data (RR1)

•	New Emission Factor(s) (RR2)

•	New Chemical Concentration Data (RR3)

•	Recalculation(s) (RR4)

•	Other Reason(s) (RR5)

The revision code(s) should be entered in the “Revision” box on the
first page of the reporting form.  You may enter up to two revision
codes on the form. 

Please note that late submissions for chemicals not reported in a
previous reporting year are not considered revisions for that year.

How do I revise my submission(s)?

If you have determined that your facility wishes to revise a TRI
submission, you must send your request to EPA and the appropriate State
agency.  For submitting a revision to EPA, please use one of the
following methods:

1.  TRI-MEweb.  The preferred method for revising TRI forms from
Reporting Year 2005 through the current year is to use TRI-MEweb.  For
more information regarding access to TRI-MEweb, please visit   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/tri"  http://www.epa.gov/tri .  TRI-MEweb provides
several advantages compared to hard-copy reporting, such as
pre-populating the form with the previous year’s data, allowing
reporters to electronically sign and submit the form over the Internet,
providing automated data quality checks, and electronically confirming
EPA’s receipt of a submitted form.  If you have questions about
accessing TRI-MEweb, please contact the CDX Hotline at epacdx@csc.com or
call toll-free at 1-888-890-1995.

2.  TRI-ME via CDX.  The preferred method for revising TRI forms from
Reporting Year 2002 through Reporting Year 2004 is to use the TRI
Made-Easy (TRI-ME) software and submit the report via CDX and the
Internet.  You can download the TRI-ME software at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/tri"  http://www.epa.gov/tri .  If revising a report
from a particular reporting year, you must use the TRI-ME software for
that same reporting year.  For example, if you are revising a form for
Reporting Year 2003, you must use the Reporting Year 2003 version of
TRI-ME, which is available at   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/tri" 
http://www.epa.gov/tri .  If you have questions about using the TRI-ME
software and submitting a report through CDX, please contact the CDX
Hotline at epacdx@csc.com or call toll-free at 1-888-890-1995. 

3.  TRI-ME  XE "TRI-ME"   via Diskette.  If you do not have Internet
access and you wish to revise a form for Reporting Year 2005 or a prior
year, EPA encourages you to use the TRI-ME software and to submit your
revised report by diskette to one of the addresses below.  All diskette
submissions must be accompanied by a signed Certification Statement.  If
you do not have the TRI-ME software for the reporting year  XE
"Reporting Year"   that you need, please contact EPA at 301-429-5005.  

Send diskette and hard copy revision requests by regular mail to the
following address:

TRI Data Processing Center

P.O. Box 1513

Lanham, MD 20703-1513

Attention: TRI Revision Request

Send diskette and hard copy revision requests by certified mail or
overnight mail to the following address:

TRI Data Processing Center

c/o Computer Sciences Corporation

Suite 150

8400 Corporate Drive

Landover, MD 20785-2294	

Attention: TRI Revision Request

Phone:  301-429-5005

4.  Hard Copy Form.  EPA strongly discourages paper submissions due to
the increased possibility of data entry errors; however, if necessary,
you may revise a previously submitted hard-copy form by using either 1)
a photocopy of the original or 2) a blank form.  

Photocopy of Original Submission.  You may submit a photocopy of your
original submission (from your file) with the corrections made in blue
ink.  Please re-sign and re-date the certification statement on Page 1. 
For RY 2007 revisions and beyond, please enter the appropriate revision
code(s).  For RY 2006 and prior years, please enter an “X” in the
space marked “Enter ‘X’ here if this is a revision,” on page 1
of the form.

Blank Form.  Hard copy submissions may be submitted using the form
applicable for that particular reporting year or the most recent form
available.  You can request prior year reporting forms at
tridocs@epa.gov.  For RY 2007 revisions and beyond, please enter in the
appropriate revision code(s).  For RY 2006 and prior years, please enter
an “X” in the space marked “Enter ‘X’ here if this is a
revision,” on page 1 of the form.

See 3. above for mailing instructions for diskette and hard copy
revision requests .

Submitting a Request to Withdraw  XE "Withdraw"   TRI Data

Facilities that filed a Form R and/or Form A Certification Statement
under EPCRA §313 may submit a request to withdraw a form that was
previously submitted, stored in the Toxics Release Inventory Processing
System (TRIPS), and made available to the public through Envirofacts and
TRI Explorer.  EPA may periodically review withdrawals. 

Facilities may request a withdrawal for one or several reasons, such as:

•	Did not meet the reporting threshold for manufacturing, processing,
or otherwise use (WT1)

•	Did not meet the reporting threshold for number of employees (WT2) 

•	Not in a covered NAICS Code (WT3) 

•	Other reason(s) (WO1)

The withdrawal code(s) should be entered in the “Withdrawal” box on
the first page of the reporting form.  You may enter up to two
withdrawal codes on the form.

How do I withdraw my submission(s)?

If you have determined that your facility wishes to withdraw a TRI
submission, you must send your request to EPA and the appropriate State
agency.  For submitting a withdrawal to EPA, please use one of the
following methods:

1.    TRI-MEweb. The preferred method for requesting a withdrawal of a
previously submitted TRI form from Reporting Year 2005 through the
current year is TRI-MEweb.  For more information regarding access to
TRI-MEweb, please visit   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/tri" 
http://www.epa.gov/tri  or contact the CDX Hotline at epacdx@csc.com or
call toll-free at 1-888-890-1995.

2. TRI-ME via CDX.  For the RY 2007 version of the software only,
withdrawals may be submitted electronically using the TRI-ME  software
and submitting the report via CDX and the Internet.  You can download
the TRI-ME software at   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/tri" 
http://www.epa.gov/tri .  If you have questions about submitting via
CDX, please contact the CDX Hotline at epacdx@csc.com or call toll-free
at 1-888-890-1995

3. TRI-ME via Diskette.  For the RY 2007 version of the software only,
withdrawals can be submitted via diskette to one of the addresses below.
 Withdrawals submitted on diskette using the prior versions of the
TRI-ME software will not be accepted.  

Send diskette and hard copy withdrawal requests by regular mail to the
following address:

TRI Data Processing Center

P.O. Box 1513

Lanham, MD 20703-1513

Attention: TRI Withdrawal Request

Send diskette and hard copy withdrawal requests by certified mail or
overnight mail to the following address:

TRI Data Processing Center

c/o Computer Sciences Corporation

Suite 150

8400 Corporate Drive

Landover, MD 20785-2294

Attention: TRI Withdrawal Request

Phone:  301-429-5005

4.   Hard Copy Form.  All other withdrawal requests may be submitted by
hard copy as follows:

Reporting Year 2007 Forward.  You may submit a photocopy of your
original submission (from your file).  Using blue ink, re-sign and
re-date the certification statement on Page 1 and enter the appropriate
withdrawal code(s) in the space provided on page 1 of the form.\

Reporting Year 2006 and Prior Years.  Please submit a photocopy of the
form you wish to withdraw (from your file), and attach – as a cover
page – page 1 of the current year’s reporting form, which includes a
field for the withdrawal codes.  Using blue ink, please sign and date
the certification statement and enter the appropriate withdrawal code(s)
in the space provided on page 1 of the current year’s form.  

See 3. above for mailing instructions for diskette and hard copy
withdrawal requests. 

APPENDIX C

EXAMPLES OF HOW TRI DATA ARE USED

Appendix C

Examples of How TRI Data Are Used

Type of Use	User	Description

GOVERNMENT

Uses Within EPA	Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT)	OPPT
uses TRI data to track environmental progress towards annual performance
goals as part of GPRA. Specifically, OPPT is using RSEI data to set
risk-based and pollution prevention performance goals. For example, for
FY05, OPPT set a goal of 12% reduction from 2001 in the
production-adjusted risk-based score of releases and transfers of toxic
chemicals. Pollution prevention goals were also determined based on TRI
releases; for example, one goal for FY04 was a 32% reduction in
TRI-reported releases at federal facilities.

	Office of Air and Radiation (OAR)

	OAR's National Emission Inventory (NEI) database contains information
about sources that emit criteria air pollutants (and their precursors)
and hazardous air pollutants. Several sources, including TRI, are used
to compile information on annual air pollutant emissions from point,
nonpoint, and mobile sources. Data from the NEI are used for air
dispersion modeling, regional strategy development, regulation setting,
air toxics risk assessment, and tracking of emissions trends over time. 

	Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and the Office of
Research and Development (ORD)	OECA and ORD developed a "Multi-Media
Ranking System" to prioritize sites for enforcement actions and to
evaluate the effectiveness of environmental laws in reducing risks from
sites. The system ranks sites based on their multi-media releases of
pollutants, their potential risk to human health and the environment,
and the history of legal violations by the facility. The system combines
TRI data with data from EPA air and water databases. 

	Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)	TRI data assist in
priority setting for waste minimization efforts by OSWER. Many of the 31
priority chemicals OSWER has identified as the focus for its waste
minimization efforts are reported to TRI. In combination with other
information OSWER collects on waste minimization, TRI data are useful in
analyzing long-term trends and identifying particular industry practices
that warrant attention by the program, serving OSWER pollution
prevention goals.

	Office of Water (OW)	OW is charged with reviewing and revising the
effluent limitations guidelines established under the Clean Water Act
(CWA). Guidelines have been established for 55 major industrial
categories. OW identifies changes to guidelines for existing industrial
categories, plus new industrial categories, if they pose a large risk
from toxic discharges. As part of the review process in 2003 and 2004,
OW looked at water releases reported in TRI to help the Office identify
industries with greater risk for potential revision or implementation of
effluent limitations. TRI data were then also used to determine which
industries could achieve effluent reductions through a voluntary program
rather than new regulation. Use of TRI data was helpful in identifying
which industrial sectors' releases were mostly attributed to a small
percentage of facilities, as the releases for the sector could
potentially be reduced if the largest releasers participated in
voluntary pollutant reduction programs.

	Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation (OPEI)	OPEI launched the
Sector Strategies Program in 2003 as an industry-EPA partnership to
promote improved environmental performance. TRI data were used to
measure environmental performance trends for participating industry
sectors, for the first annual report released in 2004. TRI data continue
to be used to measure environmental trends in subsequent annual reports.

OPEI's Performance Track Program used an analysis of TRI data conducted
by the Office of Water in developing water-related regulatory incentives
for its members. OW evaluated industrial sectors' TRI data to determine
sectors where a small percentage of facilities were responsible for the
majority of risk related to water discharges. If these facilities could
participate in a voluntary environmental program, the sector as a whole
may not require new effluent guidelines. For sectors identified by OW,
Performance Track determined the top releasers and evaluated if they
would be eligible for this voluntary program. If deemed eligible,
current Performance Track facilities in these sectors would also benefit
because they would not be subject to increased regulation. However, the
analysis indicated that many of the top releasers in those sectors would
probably not be eligible due to their level of compliance with
environmental requirements.

	National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE)	Economists at NCEE
have used TRI data in environmental justice analyses. In a study of
communities in Texas, TRI locational data were used to examine
relationships between various socioeconomic factors and siting of
facilities. A related study used TRI emissions information to determine
if there was a disproportionate burden of risk in different communities.
The project incorporated data on pounds released in addition to toxicity
weights for the chemicals released to look at the risk factor.

Environmental Solutions	Colorado Department of Public Health and the
Environment	The Pollution Prevention (P2) Program of the Colorado
Department of Public Health and the Environment used TRI data, in
combination with other data about hazardous waste and toxic chemical
releases to air and water, to identify the 10 industry organizations
responsible for the largest quantities of hazardous waste generation or
toxic chemical releases in the state. This research served as the basis
for establishing priorities for P2 activities and for distribution of
technical assistance grants. The report also aided in targeting large
companies for participation in the "Governor's P2 Challenge Program" to
reduce toxic chemical releases and hazardous waste generation.

Environmental Targeting	U.S. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)	For the purpose of targeting exposure screening
for facility employees in certain geographic areas, OSHA and local
public health departments used TRI data to identify facilities that
release specific chemicals. EPA provided OSHA with all submitted TRI
data for the 28 facilities that are subject to the OSHA special
inspection program. These data provided OSHA inspection teams with
valuable information, such as a list of chemicals that are used in
significant quantities by each facility. 

Risk Assessment	OPPT	OPPT's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model provides year-to-year indicators of the potential impacts
of TRI chemical releases on human health and the environment. The
indicators consider TRI release and transfer volumes, chronic toxicity,
exposure potential, and the size of receptor populations. Both generic
and site-specific exposure characteristics can be incorporated into the
model. The model allows the targeting and prioritization of chemicals,
industries, and geographic areas. Facility scores can also be tracked
from year to year to analyze trends.

PUBLIC USE

Citizen Activists and Community Organizations	Silicon Valley Toxics
Coalition	California's Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition has used TRI data
for more than a decade. The Silicon Valley Environmental Index ( 
HYPERLINK http://www.svep.org  www.svep.org ) shows "sustainability
trends" in Santa Clara County, California. The Index includes
information about hazardous materials and air and water quality. 

National Organizations	Environmental Defense (ED)	ED launched its
Scorecard Web site in 1998 (  HYPERLINK http://www.scorecard.org 
http://www.scorecard.org ). The site's "polluter locator" allows users
to perform a search by ZIP code on a database containing information on
several thousand chemical-releasing facilities. The Scorecard also
provides data on the health effects and regulatory status of different
chemicals. The site correlates TRI chemical release data with U.S.
Census demographic data. 

Direct Negotiation	Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group
(PennPIRG)	In 1998, Butler County, PA, warned pregnant women and infants
against drinking water from Connoquenessing Creek due to high levels of
nitrates in the water. In its report, PennPIRG used TRI data to
highlight the significant quantities of nitrate compounds being released
into the creek. The report identified the major source of the nitrates
as the AK Steel Corporation. TRI data showed that the company had
discharged approximately 29 million pounds of nitrates into the creek in
1997 and 32 million pounds in 1998. This report and several newspaper
articles about these toxic chemical releases prompted the state to
commit to reduce the levels of nitrates that AK Steel is permitted to
release into the creek. Pennsylvania began developing a new water permit
to reduce allowable nitrate releases to a level 90 percent lower than
the previous level. In June 2000, EPA issued an emergency order
requiring AK Steel to significantly reduce the nitrate compounds it
discharges into Connoquenessing Creek. In addition, AK Steel was
required to provide and pay for an alternative water source for the
affected public on any day that the local water plant could not meet the
federal maximum nitrate contaminant standard.

Environmental Justice

	Local groups in Louisiana	Local groups in Louisiana have used TRI data
to illustrate the high toxic chemical release rates in the Mississippi
River corridor and the Lake Charles region compared to those in other
regions. Several small communities have confronted industrial facilities
about their toxic chemical releases and possibly related health effects.
One illustrative dispute arose in Mossville, Calcasieu Parish,
Louisiana, where some residents suspected that poor health in their
community was due to the activities of 17 industrial facilities located
within one half-mile of the community. Their concerns prompted numerous
public interest organizations to collaborate on the report, Breathing
Poison: The Toxic Costs of Industries in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.
The 2000 report used TRI data and information from the Scorecard Web
site to convey the health risks to which the community might be exposed.
It stated the need for "pollution reduction, environmental health
services, and a fair and just relocation for consenting residents."

INDUSTRY USE

Cost Reduction	Berg Electronics	After reporting toxic chemical releases
to the TRI, Berg Electronics realized that it was releasing almost
300,000 pounds of toxic chemicals into the environment annually. By
installing a new cleaning system, the company reduced its toxic chemical
releases to less than 400 pounds per year. Although the initial costs
for the new system were relatively high ($500,000), the company was able
to save approximately $1.2MM a year by avoiding cleanup and hazardous
waste disposal costs.

INTERNATIONAL RIGHT-TO-KNOW

	Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)	The CEC, which was
created by a side-agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement,
began its Pollutant Release and Transfer (PRTR) work by preparing a
document that compares U.S. and Canadian PRTR systems. The CEC now
develops an annual report, titled Taking Stock that correlates data from
the TRI and the Canadian National Pollutant Release Inventory to give an
overall view of releases and transfers of toxic chemicals within and
between countries. The CEC has also created an Internet search engine
that allows the public to obtain continental PRTR data.

INVESTMENT

	Investor Responsibility Research Center (IRRC)	Using TRI data, the IRRC
developed an Emissions Efficiency Index® that indicates which companies
have a competitive edge in environmental performance. The Index is
predicated on the idea that greater toxic chemical releases are
associated with higher risks of negative publicity, more tort actions,
and higher costs for pollution control and waste management. IRRC's
constituency uses TRI-based information to identify companies with poor
environmental records. Using the index, investors can either screen such
companies out of their portfolios or purchase shares and use their
ownership as leverage to improve environmental performance.

ACADEMIC USE

Research	Linda Bui, Economics Researcher at Brandeis University	Linda
Bui of Brandeis University has used TRI data in her work on the effect
of public disclosure laws such as TRI. One such study, published in The
Review of Economics and Statistics in 2003, evaluated the relationship
between TRI releases and housing prices and other political economy
variables. In another study, Bui examined firm-level response of
petroleum refineries to public disclosure of their toxic chemicals
through TRI. TRI releases to air and water were evaluated in relation to
firm expenditure on abatement technology for other non-hazardous
chemicals discharged. In addition, Bui looked at whether state pollution
prevention policies and TRI-type programs helped to explain differences
in TRI releases at the refineries across states as a measure of
effectiveness of public disclosure policies. 

Classroom Use	Delaware's Department of Natural Resources	Delaware's
Department of Natural Resources designed a set of lessons for a high
school and middle school air quality education program. This program,
which incorporates TRI data, includes a lesson on air quality impact
associated with industrial sources. Students use the data to locate
facilities in their area that have air emissions. They are also able to
identify the types and quantity of facility emissions. They can compare
businesses that report to TRI between counties and explore the health
hazards posed by the reported emissions.

Appendix C References:

Bureau of National Affairs, 1995. "State Pollution Prevention Laws &
Programs and Document Submissions Chart."

California Air Resources Board, Technical Support Division, 1993.
Emissions Inventory Criteria and Guidelines Regulation Pursuant to the
Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (as
amended June 1990, September 1990, June 1991, and June 1993).

Chines, Peter, 1994. Investor Responsibility Research Center, Inc.
Letter to Samuel Sasnett, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, April 21, 1994; and attachment, "How
to Read IRRC's Corporate Environmental Profiles," pp. 18-19.

Cummens, Pat, 1993. Untitled presentation, in Proceedings: Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) Data Use Conference (Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, July). 

Greene, Terry, 1995. "JSI Community Outreach Project," in Proceedings:
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Data Use Conference: Building TRI and
Pollution Prevention Partnerships (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, March).

Hartmann, Carolyn, 1993. Troubled Waters: Major Sources of Toxic Water
Pollution (Washington, DC: U.S. Public Interest Research Group, June).

Hausman, Rick, 1993. "Environmental Investing: Dollars and Change,"
Online: The RTK NET Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Fall). 

Kolwey, Neil and Margery Lynch, 1994. Pollution Prevention Priorities: A
Study of Priorities for Pollution Prevention Activities in Colorado
(Colorado Pollution Prevention Advisory Board, May).

"Notes from the Field: Students Use SARA Title III Data to Conduct Local
Toxic Waste Audits," Hazardous Materials Dialogue, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1992.

Orum, Paul, and Beth Wohlberg, 1994. "Reports Using Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) Data," Working Notes on Community Right to Know,
July-August.

Rice, Faye, 1993. "Who Scores Best on the Environment," Fortune, Vol.
128, No. 2 (July 26, 1993). 

Smith, Ted, 1992. Untitled presentation, in Proceedings: Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI) Data Use and Pollution Prevention Conference
(Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, June). 

U.S. EPA, 1993. "Proceedings: Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Data Use
Conference." July 1993.

U.S. EPA, 1993b. State Directory: 33/50 and Voluntary Pollution
Prevention Programs, 1993. (Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, October). 

U.S. EPA, 1999g. "1997 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release:
State Fact Sheets,” Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA
745-F-99-001, March 1995.

U.S. EPA 1995h. "An Overview of the Toxics Release Inventory Data in the
U.S.," Environmental Assistance Division, Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, June, 1995.APPENDIX D

INFORMATION SOURCES CONTAINING DATA SUBSETS, BUT NOT COMPREHENSIVELY
COMPARABLE ALTERNATIVES TO TRI DATA 

Appendix D 

Information Sources Containing Data Subsets, but not Comprehensively
Comparable Alternatives to TRI Data

(TRI Included for Comparison)

Description	Chemical Coverage	Industry/Facility Coverage	Reporting
Frequency	Public Access

TRI DATA

EPCRA  XE "EPCRA"   §313 requires facilities to submit reports on
disposal and releases of particular toxic chemicals exceeding a given
threshold. The reports provide information on the quantity of chemical
released into the environment, to which medium (air, land, water) the
chemical was disposed, as well as information about waste management and
the amount of chemicals stored on-site.	Approximately 600 toxic
chemicals, as defined by Congress in EPCRA.	NAICS codes corresponding to
SIC codes 20-39, as well as 10; 12; 4911, 4931, and 4939; 4953; 5169;
5171; and 7389.

A facility need only report if it has 10 more FTEs.	Annual	EPA compiles
the TRI data and makes them available through several data access tools,
including the TRI Explorer and Envirofacts. Other organizations also
make the data available to the public through their own data access
tools.

AIR EMISSIONS (SECTIONS 5.1 AND 5.2)

National Emissions Inventory (NEI)

NEI provides estimates of man-made pollutant emissions from stationary
sources, as well as area sources and mobile sources. These estimates,
submitted to EPA by delegated authorities (state or county), electric
utilities, and/or generated by EPA from various sources, differ in the
methodology used.	6 CAPs and 189 HAPs	No NAICS limitations	Triennial	MS
Access database files can be downloaded from EPA’s FTP site.

Air Facility System (AFS)

AFS contains compliance and permit data for stationary sources of air
pollution regulated by U.S. EPA, and state and local air pollution
agencies.	N/A 	No NAICS limitations	Annual	Can be accessed through EPA
data access tools, Envirofacts or the Enforcement and Compliance History
Online (ECHO) database, on a facility-by-facility basis.

State Air Emissions Inventories

Several states and regional agencies maintain their own air emissions
inventories. However, the amount of data as well as the types of data
elements collected vary widely from state to state.	Varies widely (e.g.,
the California Air Resources Board maintains its own list of approx. 400
toxic air pollutants)	Varies, but states often develop their own toxics
inventories due to perceived gaps in TRI's industry coverage	Varies	Most
of these data are submitted to NEI, and some are available on the Web on
a state-by-state basis.

Title V Part 70 Operating Permits

Under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, facilities designated as "major
sources" and facilities otherwise subject to §112 and Title W must
apply for a Title V Part 70 Operating Permit. As part of the application
for a Title V permit, some facilities may have to report emissions of
air toxics.	189 HAPs	No NAICS limitations	At the time of permit
application, renewal, and modification—permits are typically renewed
every 5 years	No central repository for the information.

DIRECT DISCHARGES TO WATER (SECTION 5.3)

Permit Compliance System (PCS)

PCS tracks permit compliance and enforcement status of facilities
regulated by NPDES under CWA and is managed by EPA's OECA. PCS tracks
all point source discharges to surface waters, but does not include
indirect releases.	Monitoring data for major dischargers includes only
chemicals for which a monitoring requirement has been set in the
permit—a facility's record may not include all pollutants actually
discharged	No NAICS limitations	Major permittees must submit DMRs
monthly or quarterly; nonmajor permittees must submit at least annually
Can be accessed through EPA data access tools, Envirofacts, ECHO, or the
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS)/NDPES, on a
facility-by-facility basis.



UNDERGROUND INJECTION AND LAND DISPOSAL ON-SITE (SECTIONS 5.4 AND 5.5)

RCRA Biennial Reports

RCRA requires hazardous waste generators and treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities (TSDFs) to report to EPA or to a delegated authority
(i.e., the states or EPA Regional offices) at least every two years the
quantity and nature, pollution prevention efforts, and disposition of
generated hazardous waste. 	Biennial Reports contain data on hazardous
wastes as defined by RCRA and reported by waste codes—not all of which
map directly to a single, unique chemical	No NAICS limitations, however,
certain waste categories are excluded (e.g., mining, agriculture)
Biennial	Can be accessed through EPA data access tools, Envirofacts or
RCRAInfo, on a facility-by-facility basis.

DISCHARGES TO A POTW (SECTION 6.1)

RCRA Biennial Reports (BR)

Biennial Reports require some reporting of discharges to POTWs. (See
above for more details.)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)

Permit Compliance System (PCS)

PCS allows for reporting of indirect discharges to water. (See above for
more details.)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)

TRANSFERS TO OTHER OFF-SITE LOCATIONS (SECTION 6.2)

RCRA Biennial Reports (BR)

Biennial Reports contain hazardous waste data from large quantity
generators and TSDFs. Biennial Reports also require reporting of
off-site transfers on Form GM. Information includes the EPA ID of the
facility to which the waste was shipped, the processes used to treat,
recycle, or dispose of the waste at the off-site facility, the off-site
availability code, and the total quantity of waste shipped during the
report year. The reports also provide data on the volume of hazardous
waste shipped off-site for land disposal, a release end-point of
relevance to TRI. (See above for more details.)	(See above)	(See above)
(See above)	(See above)

CHEMICAL STORAGE AND INVENTORY DATA (SECTION 4.1)

EPCRA §312 Tier I and II Reports

EPCRA §312 requires that states establish plans for local chemical
emergency preparedness and that inventory information on hazardous
chemicals be reported by facilities to state and local authorities.
Hazardous or extremely hazardous substances (essentially any substance
that poses a health or physical hazard)	No NAICS exemptions for
facilities that are covered under the reporting threshold requirements,
but facilities not included under OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard
(e.g., mines) do not have to file 	Annual	On a facility-by-facility
basis, by forwarding a written request.

Risk Management Plan (RMP)

Under §112(r) of the Clean Air Act, facilities with processes that use
or store more than a specified amount of certain substances are required
to develop and implement a risk management program and submit to EPA a
summary of their program—called a Risk Management Plan (RMP). These
plans include information about chemical amounts stored or processed at
RMP facilities.	Certain flammable and toxic substances	No NAICS
limitations	At least every five years, or within six months of an
incident	Restricted access.

POLLUTION PREVENTION DATA (SECTIONS 8.1-8.7)

RCRA Biennial Reports (BR)

Biennial Reports contain pollution prevention information on hazardous
waste from large quantity generators and TSDFs. Data are collected
primarily by states, and are collated by EPA. (See above for more
details.)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)	(See above)

State Environmental Agency Databases

Two states, New Jersey and Massachusetts, have passed laws to collect
pollution prevention data on materials accounting that exceed that found
in Section 8 of Form R.

Include more industries than TRI	Annual

	EMERGENCY RELEASE DATA (SECTION 8.8)

National Response Center (NRC)

NRC collects real-time information about virtually all oil and chemical
spills throughout the U.S. to identify spills for which to coordinate
emergency response.	Oils and chemicals	No source exemptions	Real-time
Historical information about spills can be retrieved through the NRC
online query system:   HYPERLINK "http://www.nrc.uscg.mil/foia.html" 
http://www.nrc.uscg.mil/foia.html .

Integrated Management Information System (IMIS)

IMIS is an OSHA database that contains records of workplace health and
safety inspections conducted by OSHA industrial hygienists. Two general
types of inspections are conducted by OSHA: (1) scheduled or planned
inspections, and (2) unplanned inspections, which are investigations of
workplace incidents. Inspection data are entered and stored within IMIS,
providing a record of OSHA activities at each workplace that has been
inspected.	Hazardous substances (no quantity information)	No NAICS
limitations	Real-time	Most of the data are online at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/industry.html" 
http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/industry.html . For any additional
information, the public must submit a written Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) request to OSHA.



STATE RIGHT-TO-KNOW PROGRAMS

Several states require expanded state TRI reporting to include
industries/facilities not covered by TRI or to report release
information beyond that required by the federal TRI Program. Overall,
however, the additional data collected by states are far less complete
and uniform than available under the TRI Program. States with additional
reporting include Arizona, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.
Varies by state, but often identical to TRI	Varies, but may include more
industries than TRI	Annual	No central repository for the information.
Accessibility varies by state.

Appendix D References:

Abt Associates, “Comparison of Toxics Release Inventory and the Permit
Compliance System,” (2005).

Abt Associates, “Comparison of Toxics Release Inventory and the
National Emissions Inventory,” (2005): 6.

Great Lakes Information Network, 1996. "Regional Air Pollutant Inventory
Development System," Information from Great Lakes Information Network
Web site:   HYPERLINK http://www.glc.org/projects/air/rapids/rapids.html
 http://www.glc.org/projects/air/rapids/rapids.html    HYPERLINK
http://www.glc.org  http://www.glc.org .

ICF Incorporated, 1993. Data Gaps and Redundancies in Pollution
Prevention Reporting; A Compendium of Memoranda. Prepared for U.S. EPA,
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxics, Pollution Prevention
Division.

Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute, 1994. Toxics Use
Reduction: Fact Sheet 1. Lowell, MA: University of Massachusetts Lowell.
February.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, 1993. An Overview
of the Toxics Use Reduction Act. Prepared by Manik Roy. February.

Seitz, John S., Director OAQPS, 1995. Memorandum: "Title V Permitting
for Non-major Sources in Recent §112 Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) Standards," May 16, 1995.

U.S. EPA, 1991. 1991 Hazardous Waste Report: Instructions and Forms. EPA
Form 8700-13A/B (5-80) revised 8-91. 

U.S. EPA, 1994. "National Analysis: The Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste
Report (Based on 1991 Data)." September 1994.

U.S. EPA, 1995a. Information from the AIRS AFS Home Page: (  HYPERLINK
http://www.epa.gov/docs/airs/afs.html). 
http://www.epa.gov/docs/airs/afs.html). 

U.S. EPA, 1995e. "User's Guide to Federal Accidental Release Databases,"
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, September 1995.

U.S. EPA, 2002. RMP National Database overview, October 2002.  
HYPERLINK
"http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/content/RMPoverview.htm" 
http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/content/RMPoverview.htm .

U.S. EPA, 2003. “National Analysis: The National Biennial RCRA
Hazardous Waste Report (Based On 2003 Data)"   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/br03/" 
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/br03/ .

U.S. EPA, 2006. "Phase III: Data Proxies for the Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI)," January 2006.APPENDIX E

LISTS OF ORGANIZATIONS WITH WHICH EPA HAS CONSULTED



2004 TRI Burden Reduction Stakeholder Meeting 

List of Participating Organizations

 

 ACCCI/NOPA

 AF&PA

 American Iron and Steel Institutes

 American Petroleum Institute

 Analytical Services Corporation

 Bureau of National Affairs

 CCC

 Copper and Brass Fabricators Council

 Giboon, National Association of Chemical Distributors

 House Government Reform – Sub Reg Affairs

 Hunter and Williams; Edison Electric Institutes

 MCF Consulting, Inc.

 National Association of Chemical Distributors

 National Federation of Independent Business

 National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association

 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association

 New Jersey DEP

 OMB Watch

 Resources Committee, House

 SBA Advocacy

 Senate EPW Maj. Office

 Society of Glass and Ceramic Decorators

 SOCMA

 Specialty Graphic Imaging Association

 U.S. Department of Energy

 U.S. Public Interest Research Group

 U.S. Small Business Administration

 Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

2006 Environmental & Community 

Right-To-Know Meeting

List of Participating Organizations

 

U.S. PIRG

Unison Institute

OMB Watch



2006 Industry & Small Business Stakeholder Meeting

List of Participating Organizations

 

American Chemistry Council

American Forest & Paper Association

API

Bryan Cave

Consumer Specialty Products Association

EPA Office of Public Liaison

IPC - The Association Connecting Electronics Industries

National Mining Association

National Association of Chemical Distributors

National Federation of Independent Business

National Paint and Coatings Association, Inc.

National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association

Office of Management and Budget

SGIA

Small Business Administration

SOCMA

The Policy Group

Western Business Roundtable

TRI 2006 National Conference

List of Participating Organizations 

 

AR Department of Emergency Management

CO Department of Public Health and Environment

DC Department of the Environment

DE Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control

Environmental Council of the States

FL Department of Environmental Protection

GA Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division

IN Department of Environmental Management

KS Department of Health & Environment

KY Office of the Commissioner, Department for Environmental Protection

MA Department of Environmental Protection

MD Department of Environment

MI Department of Environmental Quality

MN EPCRA Program

MS Department of Environment Quality

NC Hazardous Waste Section, Division of Waste Management

NE Department of Environmental Quality

NJ Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Pollution
Prevention & Right to Know

OH Environmental Protection Agency Division of Air Pollution Control

OK Department of Environmental Quality

OR Office of Homeland Security

PA Department of Environmental Protection

PA Department of Labor & Industry, Bureau of PENNSAFE

SC Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Air Quality

TX Commission on Environmental Quality

U.S. EPA

U.S. EPA OAQPS

U.S. EPA OAR/OAQPS

U.S. EPA Region 1

U.S. EPA Region 10

U.S. EPA Region 2

U.S. EPA Region 3

U.S. EPA Region 4

U.S. EPA Region 5

U.S. EPA Region 6

U.S. EPA Region 7

U.S. EPA Region 8

U.S. EPA Region 9

U.S. EPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Enforcement Division

U.S. EPA Toxics and Pesticides Enforcement Division

U.S. EPA/NEIC

U.S. EPA/OEI

UT Department of Environmental Quality

VA Department of Environmental Quality

WA Department of Ecology

WY Office Homeland Security

2007 TRI National Training Conference

List of Participating Organizations

 

AL Department of Environmental Management

Alaska Inter-Tribal Council (AITC)

American Petroleum Institute

Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.

AR Department of Emergency Management

Belt Paving, Inc.

BNA

Bureau of PENNSAFE

Calvert

Chevron

CITGO Petroleum Corporation

CO Department of Public Health and Environment

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)

ConocoPhillips

DE Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control

Department of the Army Ft. Meade

DuPont

ECOS

Environment Canada

Environmental Services Section

ExxonMobil

FL Department of Environmental Protection

Government Accountability Office

IA Department of Natural Resources

ID Bureau of Homeland Security

IN Department of Environmental Management

Inside EPA

IPC Association Connecting Electronics Industries

KS Department of Health & Environment

KY Department for Environmental Protection

MA Department of Environmental Protection

Maniilaq

Marathon Petroleum Company

MI Department of Environmental Quality

MO Department of Natural Resources

Monterey Institute of International Studies and United Nations Institute
for Training and Research

MS Department of Environment Quality

NC Emergency Management

ND Emergency Services

NE Department of Environmental Quality

NIH / National Library of Medicine

NJ Department of Environmental Protection

NJ Department of Health

Northrup Grumman Corporation

NY State Department of Environmental Conservation

OH Environmental Protection Agency

OK Department of Environmental Quality

OR State Fire Marshall

Rock-Tenn Company

SC Department of Health and Environmental Control

SD Department of Environment & Natural Resources

Shell Global Solutions

Society of Glass and Ceramic Decorators

SOCMA

Thompson Publishing

TX Commission on Environmental Quality

U. S. EPA Region 8

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. Army Environmental Command

U.S. Army Reserve 94th Environmental

U.S. Department of Energy

U.S. EPA

U.S. EPA Region 1 

U.S. EPA Region 10

U.S. EPA Region 10

U.S. EPA Region 2

U.S. EPA Region 3

U.S. EPA Region 4

U.S. EPA Region 5

U.S. EPA Region 6

U.S. EPA Region 7

U.S. EPA Region 8

U.S. EPA Region 9

U.S. EPA/NEIC

U.S. EPA/OAPQS

U.S. EPA/OEI

U.S. EPA/OPPT

U.S. EPA/OSWER

U.S. GAO

U.S. Public Health Service

U.S. Small Business Administration

University of Maryland Baltimore Campus

UT Department of Environmental Quality

VA Department of Environmental Quality

WA Department of Ecology

APPENDIX F

FACILITIES REQUIRED TO REPORT TO TRI (NAICS)

Table F-1

Facilities Required to Report to TRI (NAICS)

(Corresponding to SIC codes 20 through 39)

Subsector 

or Industry 

Code

 Industry

 Code	

Exceptions and/or Limitations

311	Except 311119 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged
in Custom Grain Grinding for Animal Feed (previously classified under
SIC 0723, Crop Preparation Services for Market, Except Cotton Ginning);

Except 311330 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
the retail sale of candy, nuts, popcorn and other confections not for
immediate consumption made on the premises (previously classified under
SIC 5441, Candy, Nut, and Confectionery Stores);

Except 311340 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
the retail sale of candy, nuts, popcorn and other confections not for
immediate consumption made on the premises (previously classified under
SIC 5441, Candy, Nut, and Confectionery Stores);

Except 311811 - Retail Bakeries (previously classified under SIC 5461,
Retail Bakeries); 

Except 311611 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
Custom Slaughtering for individuals (previously classified under SIC
0751, Livestock Services, Except Veterinary, Slaughtering, custom: for
individuals);

Except 311612 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
the cutting up and resale of purchased fresh carcasses for the trade
(including boxed beef) (previously classified under SIC 5147, Meats and
Meat Products);

312	Except 312229 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged
in providing Tobacco Sheeting Services (previously classified under SIC
7389, Business Services, NEC);

313	Except 313311 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged
in converting broadwoven piece goods and broadwoven textiles (previously
classified under SIC 5131, Piece Goods Notions, and Other Dry Goods,
broadwoven and non-broadwoven piece good converters), and facilities
primarily engaged in sponging fabric for tailors and dressmakers
(previously classified under SIC 7389, Business Services, NEC (Sponging
fabric for tailors and dressmakers));

Except 313312 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
converting narrow woven textiles, and narrow woven piece goods
(previously classified under SIC 5131, Piece Goods Notions, and Other
Dry Goods, converters, except broadwoven fabric);

314	Except 314121 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged
in making custom drapery for retail sale (previously classified under
SIC 5714, Drapery, Curtain, and Upholstery Stores);

Except 314129 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
making custom slipcovers for retail sale (previously classified under
SIC 5714, Drapery, Curtain, and Upholstery Stores); 

Except 314999 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
binding carpets and rugs for the trade, carpet cutting and binding, and
embroidering on textile products (except apparel) for the trade
(previously classified under SIC 7389, Business Services Not Elsewhere
Classified, Embroidering of advertising on shirts and Rug binding for
the trade);

315	Except 315222 - Exception is limited to custom tailors primarily
engaged in making and selling men's and boys' suits, cut and sewn from
purchased fabric (previously classified under SIC 5699, Miscellaneous
Apparel and Accessory Stores (custom tailors));

Except 315223 - Exception is limited to custom tailors primarily engaged
in making and selling men's and boys' dress shirts, cut and sewn from
purchased fabric (previously classified under SIC 5699, Miscellaneous
Apparel and Accessory Stores (custom tailors));

Except 315233 - Exception is limited to custom tailors primarily engaged
in making and selling bridal dresses or gowns, or women's, misses' and
girls' dresses cut and sewn from purchased fabric (except apparel
contractors) (custom dressmakers) (previously classified under SIC Code
5699, Miscellaneous Apparel and Accessory Stores);

316

	321

	322

	323	Except 323114 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily
engaged in reproducing text, drawings, plans, maps, or other copy, by
blueprinting, photocopying, mimeographing, or other methods of
duplication other than printing or microfilming (i.e., instant printing)
(previously classified under SIC 7334, Photocopying and Duplicating
Services (instant printing));

324

	325	Except 325998 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily
engaged in aerosol can filling on a job order or contract basis
(previously classified under SIC 7389, Business Services, NEC (aerosol
packaging)); 

326	Except 326212 - Tire Retreading (previously classified under SIC
7534, Tire Retreading and Repair Shops (rebuilding)); 

327

	331

	332

	333

	334

	335

	336

	337	Except 337110 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily
engaged in the retail sale of household furniture and facilities that
manufacture custom wood kitchen cabinets and counter tops (previously
classified under SIC 5712, Furniture Stores (custom wood cabinets));

Except 337121 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
the retail sale of household furniture and facilities that manufacture
custom made upholstered household furniture (previously classified under
SIC 5712, Furniture Stores (upholstered, custom made furniture));

Except 337122 - Exception is limited to facilities primarily engaged in
the retail sale of household furniture and facilities that manufacture
nonupholstered, household type, custom wood furniture (previously
classified under SIC 5712, Furniture Stores (custom made wood
nonupholstered household furniture except cabinets));

339	Except 339115 - Exception is limited to lens grinding facilities
that are primarily engaged in the retail sale of eyeglasses and contact
lenses to prescription for individuals (previously classified under SIC
5995, Optical Goods Stores (optical laboratories grinding of lenses to
prescription));

Except 339116 - Dental Laboratories (previously classified under SIC
8072, Dental Laboratories);

111998	Limited to facilities primarily engaged in reducing maple sap to
maple syrup (previously classified under SIC 2099, Food Preparations,
NEC, Reducing Maple Sap to Maple Syrup);

211112	Limited to facilities that recover sulfur from natural gas
(previously classified under SIC 2819, Industrial Inorganic Chemicals,
NEC (recovering sulfur from natural gas));

212324

	Limited to facilities operating without a mine or quarry and that are
primarily engaged in beneficiating kaolin and clay (previously
classified under SIC 3295, Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise
Treated (grinding, washing, separating, etc. of minerals in SIC 1455)); 

212325	Limited to facilities operating without a mine or quarry and that
are primarily engaged in beneficiating clay and ceramic and refractory
minerals (previously classified under SIC 3295, Minerals and Earths,
Ground or Otherwise Treated (grinding, washing, separating, etc. of
minerals in SIC 1459));

212393

	Limited to facilities operating without a mine or quarry and that are
primarily engaged in beneficiating chemical or fertilizer mineral raw
materials (previously classified under SIC 3295, Minerals and Earths,
Ground or Otherwise Treated (grinding, washing, separating, etc. of
minerals in SIC 1479));

212399	Limited to facilities operating without a mine or quarry and that
are primarily engaged in beneficiating nonmetallic minerals (previously
classified under SIC 3295, Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise
Treated (grinding, washing, separating, etc. of minerals in SIC 1499));

488390	Limited to facilities that are primarily engaged in providing
routine repair and maintenance of ships and boats from floating drydocks
(previously classified under SIC 3731, Shipbuilding and Repairing
(floating drydocks not associated with a shipyard));

511110

	511120

	511130

	511140	Except facilities that are primarily engaged in furnishing
services for direct mail advertising including address list compilers,
address list publishers, address list publishers and printing combined,
address list publishing, business directory publishers, catalog of
collections publishers, catalog of collections publishers and printing
combined, mailing list compilers, directory compilers, and mailing list
compiling services (previously classified under SIC 7331, Direct Mail
Advertising Services (mailing list compilers));

511191

	511199

	512220

	512230 	Except facilities primarily engaged in music copyright
authorizing use, music copyright buying and licensing, and music
publishers working on their own account (previously classified under SIC
8999, Services, NEC (music publishing));

516110	Limited to facilities primarily engaged in Internet newspaper
publishing (previously classified under SIC 2711, Newspapers:
Publishing, or Publishing and Printing), Internet periodical publishing
(previously classified under SIC 2721, Periodicals: Publishing, or
Publishing and Printing), Internet book publishing (previously
classified under SIC 2731, Books: Publishing, or Publishing and
Printing), miscellaneous Internet publishing (previously classified
under SIC 2741, Miscellaneous Publishing), Internet greeting card
publishers (previously classified under SIC 2771, Greeting Cards);

541710	Limited to facilities that are primarily engaged in guided
missile and space vehicle engine research and development (previously
classified under SIC 3764, Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion
Units and Propulsion Unit Parts), and in guided missile and space
vehicle parts (except engines) research and development (previously
classified under SIC 3769, Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and
Auxiliary Equipment, Not Elsewhere Classified); 

811490	Limited to facilities that are primarily engaged in repairing and
servicing pleasure and sail boats without retailing new boats
(previously classified under SIC 3732, Boat Building and Repairing
(pleasure boat building));

Table F-2

Facilities Required to Report to TRI (NAICS)

(Corresponding to SIC codes other than SIC codes 20 through 39)

Subsector or Industry Code	Exceptions and/or Limitations

212111

	212112

	212113

	212221

	212222

	212231

	212234

	212299 

	221111	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

221112	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

221113	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

221119	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

221121	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

221122	Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce.

424690

	424710

	425110	Limited to facilities previously classified in SIC 5169,
Chemicals and Allied Products, Not Elsewhere Classified.

425120	Limited to facilities previously classified in SIC 5169,
Chemicals and Allied Products, Not Elsewhere Classified.

562112	Limited to facilities primarily engaged in solvent recovery
services on a contract or fee basis (previously classified under SIC
7389, Business Services, NEC);

562211	Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

562212	Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

562213	Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

562219	Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

562920	Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

 Certain sectors are subject to TRI reporting. For a complete listing of
the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes subject
to TRI reporting see Appendix F of this ICR Supporting Statement. These
NAICS codes correspond to the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
codes included in the statutory requirement pursuant to EPCRA §313 (42
U.S.C. 11001 et seq.) and PPA §6607 (42 U.S.C. 11071 to 11079).

 Refer to Appendix A of this Supporting Statement for a blank Form;
refer to Appendix A of the Form A Supporting Statement for a blank Form
A. For the full set of instructions and Forms, refer to
http://www.epa.gov/tri/report/#forms.

 For additional details, refer to Appendix A: Blank Form R, and Appendix
B: Reporting Form Instructions Associated with Form Changes.

 The Office of Management and Budget publishes these guidelines in
accordance with the Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality,
Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by
Federal Agencies (Government-wide Guidelines) published in interim final
form by OMB in the Federal Register in Volume 66, No. 189 at 49718 on
September 28, 2001, and updated in final form in Volume 2, No. 67 at
8452 on February 22, 2002.

 For a complete chronology of TRI rulemaking and ICR Renewals along with
resultant impact on Form R reporting burden, see Figure 1 and Table 18.

 The previous ICR period was 2006-2007. By the end of 2006, the TRI
Burden Reduction Rule was promulgated, and the inventory was
recalculated at 3,344,292 hours (no cost reported) due to shifts from
Form R to Form A reporting (decrease of Form R burden of 402,298
hours—see the Economic Analysis of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule,
December 2006). Please note that the recalculation of burden was
estimated by subtracting projected changes from the previous ICR
inventory. This calculation differs from the approach taken in the
current ICR Renewal’s economic analyses. In the 2006 calculation, the
base number of the previous inventory was derived under different
conditions (RY 2002, 93,380 total forms) than the increments (RY 2005,
89,312 total forms). In this ICR Renewal (and Form R/A Supporting
Statements), RY 2005 data are used for baseline and increment estimates.

 “Ease of substitution” refers only to the potential of the
information in the database to substitute for TRI reporting. It does not
imply that the database is not adequate for the purposes for which it
was designed.

 For specific details, refer to Appendix A: Blank Form R, and Appendix
B: Reporting Form Instructions Associated with Form Changes.

 Reporting instructions associated with the new data elements are
presented in Appendix B.

 Prior to RY2007, electronic reporting was conducted primarily via TRI-
Made Easy (TRI-ME) desktop software. For the reporting cycle that begins
with this ICR, the TRI Program is launching TRI-MEweb, a Web-based
reporting software with all the capabilities of the previous system,
plus major enhancements.  

 Historically, A CD-ROM containing an annually updated reporting package
was distributed directly to all TRI respondents who reported in the
prior year. The package contained an electronic copy of the reporting
forms and detailed instructions along with a reporting software
application that allows reporters to submit their data over the Internet
or on computer diskettes. Starting in  RY2007, the CD-ROMs will be
available upon request, but not mass-mailed.  As always, the reporting
forms and instructions and the application are available for download at
http://www.epa.gov/tri

 TRI-MEweb is slated to become the sole reporting software for TRI
electronic reporting in 2009 or 2010, when the desktop version of TRI-ME
will be discontinued.

 The methodology used in this ICR to estimate the number of forms and
facilities that would be affected by the TRI Burden Reduction Rule is
the same as the methodology used in the Economic Analysis (EA) of the
TRI Burden Reduction Rule. Due to the difference in reporting years used
in each analysis (RY 2004 in the EA and RY 2005 in the ICR), however,
the estimated number of forms and facilities affected by the TRI Burden
Reduction Rule differs slightly between analyses.

 For a complete chronology of Rule changes and ICR Renewals along with
resultant impact on Form R reporting burden, see Table 18.

 The previous ICR period was 2006-2007. By the end of 2006, the TRI
Burden Reduction Rule was promulgated, and the inventory was
recalculated at 3,344,292 hours (no cost reported) due to shifts from
Form R to Form A reporting (decrease of Form R burden of 402,298
hours—see the Economic Analysis of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule,
December 2006). Please note that the recalculation of burden was
estimated by subtracting projected changes from the previous ICR
inventory. This calculation differs from the approach taken in the
current ICR Renewal’s economic analyses. In the 2006 calculation, the
base number of the previous inventory was derived under different
conditions (RY 2002, 93,380 total forms) than the increments (RY2005,
89,312 total forms). In this ICR Renewal (and Form R/A Supporting
Statements), RY 2005 data are used for baseline and increment estimates.

 Approximately 71 percent of affected facilities filed three or fewer
Form Rs in RY 2005. The most common number of reports filed is one. The
average number of Form Rs filed by facility in RY2005 is 3.7. The
average number of number of Form Rs filed by facility in the ICR
Universe is 3.4.

 This estimate is based on the most recent inventory approved by OMB on
March 3, 2006, which includes a downward adjustment of approximately 2
percent to reflect burden savings associated with the TRI Reporting
Forms Modification Rule.

 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Private industry workers,
Goods-producing industries, white-collar occupations, as published by
the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Table 11 of
the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Summary, September 2006.

 Prior to the TRI Burden Reduction Rule, the Annual Reportable Amount
was defined as the sum of quantities reported in Form R Sections
8.1-8.7; with implementation of the TRI Burden Reduction Rule, the
Annual Reportable Amount was redefined to include the sum of quantities
in Sections 8.1-8.8. Based on RY 2005 TRI data, it is estimated that 35
facilities currently filing Form As on 47 chemicals would lose Form A
eligibility.

 The Bureau of Census's County Business Patterns - 1997 indicates that
there are 191,745 facilities with 10 or more employees in manufacturing
sectors. There are an additional 10,040 facilities in the seven
non-manufacturing industries that are estimated to perform compliance
determination, for a total of 201,785 facilities performing compliance
determination. The number of facilities and forms in the ICR Universe
has been rounded up to the nearest thousand for this ICR. For more
information on the derivation of the number of facilities and forms
newly eligible (and ineligible) for Form A, see the Economic Analysis of
the TRI Burden Reduction Rule, September 2006.

 Note, however, that some of these facilities may file a Form A.

 Based on first-time reporting in RY 2005, adjusted for first-time Form
R filers for which all of their Form Rs are newly eligible for Form A.

 Originally recalculated and reported on the OMB Action at 70,139
responses and 3,344,292 hours; estimates in text are corrected to
incorporate a baseline shift. The revised numbers for this last OMB
Action in text (and in Table 18) are based on a consistent base and
increment (RY2004), as are the final estimates for this ICR Universe in
Tables 17 and 18 (RY2005). By comparison, the previous recalculation was
estimated by subtracting projected changes (derived from RY2004 with
approximately 89,645 total forms A and R) from the previous ICR
inventory (based on RY2002 with 93,380 total forms A and R), without
accounting for baseline shifts related to decreases in Form R reporting
overall since RY2002.  

		

 PAGE   

 PAGE   47 

								                                                                
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                        

		December 2007

December 2007

	       PAGE  3 	                                                       
           

							December 2007

 PAGE   50 

December 2007

				  PAGE  49 								

December 2007

 PAGE   50 

                                                                        
                                                                        
                  

											Draft	6/27/07

December 2007

 PAGE   84 

                                                                        
                                                                        
     

Figure 1

TRI Rulemaking and ICR Chronology

  PAGE  1 

June 2007