PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 18, 1993
Urban Environmental Initiative Act - Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to: (1) report to the Congress on health-based State laws and standards for the cleanup of sites at which hazardous substances were released or disposed; and (2) make recommendations to States on such standards, including guidance on the development of standards for sites in urban areas. Requires the Administrator to report to the Congress on State property transfer laws and whether such laws: (1) promote better land management practices; (2) help locate sites on which hazardous substances have been released or disposed; and (3) provide better protection for the buyer. Directs the Administrator to establish a computer data base that contains a national Superfund site inventory and includes information on any Federal action at a site or facility at which a hazardous substance was released or disposed. Requires the Administrator to: (1) prepare a list of Superfund sites located in urban areas that would be suitable for economic development ("targeted sites"); and (2) carry out a study of the effectiveness of technologies for conducting response actions at targeted sites. Authorizes the Administrator, in any case in which a person purchases a targeted site for purposes of economic development, to provide a covenant not to sue such person under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) for a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance at such site. Requires such covenants to: (1) not take effect unless the person enters into an agreement to complete remedial action at the site; and (2) include an exception that allows the Administrator to sue for future liability where such liability arises out of conditions unknown at the time the Administrator enters into a remedial action agreement. Directs the Administrator, in determining which sites to give priority for response action under CERCLA, to give preference to targeted sites that are located in the most populous areas, pose the greatest threat to human health, and have the greatest potential for economic development. Authorizes the Administrator to provide technical and financial assistance to States for implementing this Act and CERCLA. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Shays, Christopher [R-CT-4] · R–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Public Works + Transportation.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1005 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1005 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1005 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1005 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.