TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Identification of Environmental High Impact Areas Title II: Enforcement Initiatives Title III: Community Participation Title IV: Identification and Prevention of Health Impacts Environmental Justice Act of 1992 - Title I: Identification of Environmental High Impact Areas - Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to publish a list, in rank order, of the total weight of toxic chemicals present in each county or other geographic unit in the most recent five-year period for which data are available. Designates the 100 counties with the highest total weight as Environmental High Impact Areas. Title II: Enforcement Initiatives - Directs the Administrator and the Assistant Secretary of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to conduct compliance inspections or reviews of all toxic chemical facilities in such Areas at least every two years. Title III: Community Participation - Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make a grant to individuals who may be affected by a release from any toxic chemical facility in such an Area to: (1) facilitate access to the public participation provisions of this and other Acts; and (2) obtain technical assistance relating to inspections, reviews, and studies. Directs the Administrator to impose user fees or assessments on toxic chemical facilities in such Areas to substitute for appropriations as the funding mechanism for the grant program. Title IV: Identification and Prevention of Health Impacts - Requires the Secretary to issue a report identifying the extent of acute and chronic health impacts in such Areas as compared to other counties. Requires the President, if the report identifies significant adverse impacts, to report proposed legislation to the Congress to remedy and prevent such impacts. Includes within such legislation: (1) expansion of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 to include additional facilities or chemicals or reduced quantities of chemicals triggering reporting obligations; (2) a means to redress regulatory loopholes (such as wastes exempt from or subject to lessened regulatory requirements); and (3) taxes on emissions or restrictions on releases within such Areas to induce source reduction. Establishes a moratorium, with exceptions, on the siting or permitting of any toxic chemical facility in such Areas that may emit toxic chemicals in quantities that cause adverse health impacts if the report identifies adverse health impacts of environmental pollution. Continues the moratorium until certain health-based levels have been attained.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.2105 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.2105 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.2105 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.2105 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.