OFFICE OF ADVOCACY 
U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 
WASHINGTON, DC 20416 



October 14, 2004 

The Honorable Kimberly T. Nelson 
Assistant Administrator for Environmental Information 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Ariel Rios Building, 2810A 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20460 
Re: Risk-Based Analysis of Form A and Form NS Toxics Release Inventory Reform 
Proposal Alternatives 

Dear Assistant Administrator Nelson: 

The Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration (Advocacy) is 
pleased to provide the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the enclosed report, “Risk-
Based Analysis of Form A and Form NS Toxics Release Inventory Reform Proposal 
Alternatives,” prepared for Advocacy by our contractor, E. H. Pechan & Associates (Pechan). 
The Pechan report supplements a prior report on reducing regulatory burdens on small 
businesses under the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) prepared for Advocacy by Jack Faucett 
Associates (JFA) and transmitted to EPA in April, 2004. We welcome EPA’s TRI burden 
reduction efforts and look forward to ongoing collaboration with the agency on this important 
initiative. We also appreciate the opportunity that Kevin Bromberg has had to work with your 
staff on the upcoming stakeholder meeting on the 19th. 

As you know, Advocacy recommended specific changes to TRI reporting (specifically 
revisions to the Form A, and development of a Form NS) in our September 2, 2003 comment 
letter on EPA’s Information Collection Request. The April 2004 JFA report provides a detailed 
analysis of some of the regulatory alternatives we have encouraged EPA to consider for revisions 
to the TRI reporting requirements. The new Pechan report goes beyond the JFA report by 


analyzing in more depth two of the major regulatory options: (1) expansion of Form A 
eligibility; and (2) adoption of a new “no significant change” form (Form NS). The Pechan 
report explains that relief based on revisions to the Form A and the introduction of a Form NS 
would provide important burden reduction to approximately 35-45 percent of the currently 
reported Form Rs, without a detriment to data quality. The major contribution of this report is 
the substitution of a risk-based evaluation approach for analyzing the TRI database, using EPA’s 
Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model, instead of relying on a pounds-based 
approach employed by EPA in 1994. While the statements, findings, conclusions and 
recommendations in the report are those of its authors, the Office of Advocacy does generally 
agree with the conclusions and recommendations of this report. Because the Office of Advocacy 
is an independent office, its views do not necessarily represent the positions of the U.S. Small 
Business Administration or this Administration. 

As the EPA moves forward with rulemaking on TRI burden reduction, we encourage the 
agency to consider Advocacy’s recommendations and other regulatory options that reduce 
reporting burden, while maintaining the integrity of the TRI database. The Office of Advocacy 
looks forward to working with EPA on this important task. If you have any questions or 
comments, please feel free to call me or Assistant Chief Counsel Kevin Bromberg at (202) 2056964, 
or email at kevin.bromberg@sba.gov. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas M. Sullivan 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy 

Kevin L. Bromberg 
Assistant Chief Counsel for Advocacy 

Enclosure