1.1 本指南涵盖了有关合并的信息 活动和使用限制 将保护人类健康和环境的措施纳入联邦、州、部落或地方补救计划，采用基于风险的方法 纠正措施 . 活动和使用限制 应尽早考虑 网站 评估和 补救措施 选择过程，应被视为 补救措施 选择。如果找不到适当的活动和使用限制，用户可能需要重新访问初始 补救措施 选择决定。 1.2 本指南并不强制要求任何一种特定类型的活动和使用限制，而只是帮助用户识别、实施和维护 活动和使用限制 这可能适用于使用基于风险的决策方法的程序。 1.3 本指南确定了在确定任何特定活动和使用限制是否合适时应应用的筛选和平衡标准。本指南确定了制定长期监测和管理计划的必要性，以确保 活动和使用限制 。本指南解释了 活动和使用限制 在 补救措施 过程和类型 活动和使用限制 这是最常见的。 1.4 本指南描述了评估潜在适用性的过程 活动和使用限制 以及使用、筛选和平衡标准来选择一个或多个 活动和使用限制 对于特定 网站 该指南还从交易、利益相关者参与和长期管理的角度描述了一些“最佳实践”。该指南还强调了考虑以下方面的必要性和潜在适用性的重要性:， 活动和使用限制 早在 补救措施 过程。本指南可用于有效实施基于风险的 纠正措施 . 1.5 所有对特定联邦或州计划的引用均为截至发布之日的最新版本。提醒用户不要仅依赖本指南，而应直接咨询相应的程序。 1.6 以国际单位制表示的值应被视为标准值。本标准不包括其他计量单位。 1.7 本标准并不旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如果有的话）。本标准的使用者有责任在使用前建立适当的安全、健康和环境实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 1.8 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒委员会发布的《关于制定国际标准、指南和建议的原则的决定》中确立的国际公认的标准化原则制定的。 =====意义和用途====== 4.1 活动和使用限制 通常与联邦、州、部落和地方补救计划中的基于风险的决策原则结合使用，或者在残留的情况下 关注化学品 在风险评估或实施 补救措施 ( 看见 美国律师协会 在棕地和其他污染场地实施机构控制；美国环保署的机构控制:现场经理在超级基金和RCRA纠正措施清理中识别、评估和选择机构控制的指南 ; 美国环保署 关于可能符合《综合环境反应、赔偿和责任法案》善意潜在购买者、连续财产所有人或无辜土地所有人法定标准的执法自由裁量权指南（“共同要素”） ; 美国环保署 2018年《棕地利用、投资和地方发展法案》后地方政府收购的超级基金责任保护 ); 以及美国环保署确保超级基金场所机构控制实施的战略）。 主要目的 活动和使用限制 要: 4.1.1 消除 暴露途径 为或减少潜力 暴露 为了， 关注化学品 在概念中确定 网站 模型。 4.1.2 向业主、物业权益持有人、产权公司、公用事业公司、租户、房地产经纪人、贷款人、开发商、评估师和其他人发出通知，告知其存在和位置 关注化学品 可能存在于 网站 ; 4.1.3 确定每个目标和目的 活动和使用限制 ，作为 纠正措施 计划 网站 补救计划； 4.1.4 识别 暴露 每个假设 活动和使用限制 基于； 4.1.5 识别 网站 如果将来发生，这些用途和活动将是适当的，并且与维持“ 可接受风险 “或” 无重大风险 ”; 4.1.6 识别 网站 未来不应发生的用途和活动（除非进一步评估和 补救措施 （视情况而定），因为这些活动和使用可能会导致 暴露 人或生态受体 关注化学品 在或附近 网站 以不符合“ 可接受风险 “或” 无重大风险 ”; 4.1.7 明确长期管理目标，以及负责制定管理计划并为实现这些目标付费的实体，包括任何定期合规声明或认证；和 4.1.8 明确长期绩效标准，如操作和维护义务，或工程控制的监控，以确保 活动和使用限制 继续得到满足。 4.1.8.1 需要长期管理的联邦设施的活动和使用限制可能包括利益相关者参与的规定；可持续再利用；气候变化适应、缓解和复原力；纳入土著知识。 4.2 活动和使用限制 应实施以消除 暴露途径 为或减少潜力 暴露 为了， 关注化学品 以下是一些情况的示例，其中 活动和使用限制 可能合适: 4.2.1 受影响的地下水存在于 网站 在有替代供水的地方。可以限制将地下水用于监测以外的任何目的，也可以限制对钻井或地下水处理评估的要求。 4.2.2 A. 网站 就直接接触途径而言，已补救至仅适用于工业或商业用途的水平。除非进行进一步的补救活动（即 网站 可能不会开发用于住宅用途）。 4.2.3 剩余 关注化学品 留在a 网站 覆盖着某种类型的障碍物（例如，帽子、路面等）。障碍物构成了一种 活动和使用限制 此外，可能会对禁止在以下区域进行挖掘的契约或租约施加限制 关注化学品 超过一定的风险水平。限制可能包括禁止干扰盖子。监测和维护盖子或屏障的完整性也可能是一项要求。 4.2.4 持续运营和维护 补救措施 可能是必需的，也可能在限制中指定。在这种情况下，地役权或财产使用权可能会授予前所有人（作为责任方）或其代理人。 4.2.5 此外，干扰操作和维护的活动可能会受到限制。这些限制可能包括对补救系统控制、提取井、监测井或其他正在进行的补救或监测系统所在区域的施工或其他活动的限制。 4.3 尽职调查-- 当涉及房地产交易时，潜在购买者、贷款人、产权公司、房地产估价师和其他人需要意识到对房地产的允许活动和使用施加了限制的可能性。 对先前土地使用的了解是此类限制存在可能性的重要指标。这个 用户 注意，根据惯例 E1527 和 E2247 ，这是 用户的 提供以下信息的责任 AUL 除非双方另有约定（见惯例 E1527 第6.2节，以及 E2247 第6.2节）。 AUL 信息通常包含在标题的记录限制中，而不是典型的标题链中。这个 用户 应寻求记录的土地所有权记录，有时也称为历史环境所有权搜索，以及相关监管数据库中的信息，只要这些数据库存在。 4.4 目前，一些州在其自愿 纠正措施 如果违反了最终信函或证书中的任何条件，则其“无进一步行动”信函（“NFA”）或“竣工证书”（“证书”）中提供的责任免除程序将无效。换句话说，在这些州，如果发生以下情况，责任免除可能无效或可撤销 活动和使用限制 被侵犯。这个 活动和使用限制 通常在NFA信函或证书中描述或附在其中。因此，对于业主、潜在购买者、贷款人、租户和其他依赖NFA信函或证书中提供的责任免除的人来说，确保他们了解可能对 网站 并了解谁对确保这些限制或约束不被违反负有主要责任。在阿拉巴马州，法定责任限制取决于申请人是否真诚地执行阿拉巴马州环境管理部（“ADEM”）批准的自愿财产评估（“VPA”）和/或自愿清理计划（“VCP”）。见《美国联邦法规》第22-30E-10条（现行至2010年常会结束）。然而，阿拉巴马州的这种责任限制 纠正措施 该计划不适用于ADEM批准VPA、VCP或合规认证同意书之前进行的任何活动，以先发生者为准。另见《美国联邦法规》第22-30E-1至-13条（现行至2010年常会结束）。 格鲁吉亚对法定责任限制也有类似的例外。见GA.CODE ANN§12-8-207（截至2010年常会）。格鲁吉亚的限制取决于潜在购买者是否真诚地执行 纠正措施 佐治亚州环境保护部（“EPD”）批准的计划，以及符合风险降低标准的认证，以及 纠正措施 要求。另见GA.CODE ANN§§12-8-100至-108、12-8—200至-210（截至2010年常会）。在密西西比州，为从事自愿补救的棕地方提供责任保护。见《MISS.CODE ANN》第49-35-15（5）条（截至2009年第三届特别会议）。然而，只要棕地一方不违反其与密西西比州环境质量部（“MDEQ”）的棕地协议，密西西比州的责任保护就适用。 另见MISS.CODE ANN第49-35-1至-53条（截至2009年第三届特别会议）。 4.5 这个 用户 警告说 活动和使用限制 不得用于鼓励或宽恕“安全放弃”。一般来说，“安全放弃”是指实际保护 网站 和封锁 暴露途径 同时采取最小的步骤来确保 关注化学品 不要超出物业边界，也不要采取最小的措施将物业重新投入生产使用。在大多数情况下，该物业不会重新投入生产用途，也不符合其“最高和最佳”用途。可能存在以下情况 活动和使用限制 用于完全限制对 网站 （例如，在修复期间），但期望的是，这些场地将被修复，以允许一些生产性用途，从而具有一些潜力 暴露 . 4.6 一般来说，联邦或州政府当局对确定适用和适当的补救标准负有主要责任 关注化学品 ，联邦、州、部落或地方政府当局可能对检查和执行任何 活动和使用限制 这可能是强加的。这对所有受影响的人都很重要 利益相关者 （即联邦、州、部落和地方当局；潜在责任方；公用事业公司；居民；租户；金融界；环保界；以及其他人）就任何 活动和使用限制 ; 这个 暴露 任何假设 活动和使用限制 ; 实施任何 活动和使用限制 ; 以及负责维护和执行 活动和使用限制 随着时间的推移（参见 《机构控制:污染场地机构控制实施和保证计划编制指南》，2012年12月 ). 4.7 使用的语言 活动和使用限制 可能起草得很宽泛，或者对目的有非常集中的陈述。语言可以指定要进行的活动，包括操作和维护或性能标准，或禁止的活动，或允许或不允许的土地使用。可能需要通知各种个人或实体，如租户、贷款人、公用事业公司或地方政府官员。 可能还有描述谁执行限制、取消或终止限制的条件以及取消或终止禁止的程序的语言。

1.1 This guide covers information for incorporating activity and use limitations that are protective of human health and the environment into federal, state, tribal or local remediation programs using a risk-based approach to corrective action . Activity and use limitations should be considered early in the site assessment and remedial action selection process, and should be considered an integral part of remedial action selection. In the event that an appropriate activity and use limitation cannot be found, the user may need to revisit the initial remedial action selection decision. 1.2 This guide does not mandate any one particular type of activity and use limitation but merely serves to help users identify, implement and maintain the types of activity and use limitations that may be appropriate in programs using a risk-based decision-making approach. 1.3 This guide identifies screening and balancing criteria that should be applied in determining whether any particular activity and use limitation may be appropriate. This guide identifies the need to develop long-term monitoring and stewardship plans to ensure the long-term reliability and enforceability of activity and use limitations . This guide explains the purpose of activity and use limitations in the remedial action process and the types of activity and use limitations that are most commonly available. 1.4 This guide describes the process for evaluating potentially applicable activity and use limitations and using and screening and balancing criteria to select one or more activity and use limitations for a specific site . The guide also describes some “best practices” from a transactional, stakeholder involvement, and long-term stewardship perspective. The guide also emphasizes the importance of considering the need for, and potential applicability of, activity and use limitations EARLY in the remedial action process. This guide can be used to effectively implement risk based corrective action . 1.5 All references to specific Federal or state programs are current as of the date of publication. The user is cautioned not to rely on this guide alone but to consult directly with the appropriate program. 1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. 1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== Significance And Use ====== 4.1 Activity and use limitations are typically used in conjunction with risk-based decision-making principles in Federal, state, tribal, and local remediation programs, or where residual chemicals of concern remain following an evaluation of risk or following the implementation of a remedial action ( see American Bar Association's Implementing Institutional Controls at Brownfields and Other Contaminated Sites; EPA's Institutional Controls: A Site Manager's Guide to Identifying, Evaluating and Selecting Institutional Controls at Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action Cleanups ; EPA’s Enforcement Discretion Guidance Regarding Statutory Criteria for Those Who May Qualify as CERCLA Bona Fide Prospective Purchasers, Contiguous Property Owners, or Innocent Landowners (“Common Elements”) ; EPA’s Superfund Liability Protections for Local Government Acquisitions after the Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development Act of 2018 ); and EPA's Strategy to Insure Institutional Control Implementation at Superfund Sites). The principal purposes of activity and use limitations are to: 4.1.1 Eliminate exposure pathways for, or reduce potential exposures to, chemicals of concern identified in the conceptual site model. 4.1.2 Provide notice to property owners, holders of interests in the property, title companies, utilities, tenants, realtors, lenders, developers, appraisers and others of the presence and location of chemicals of concern that may be present on the site ; 4.1.3 Identify the objectives and goals of each activity and use limitation , as an integral component of the corrective action plan for site remediation plan; 4.1.4 Identify the exposure assumptions upon which each activity and use limitation is based; 4.1.5 Identify the site uses and activities which, if they were to occur in the future, would be appropriate and consistent with maintaining a condition of “ acceptable risk ” or “ no significant risk ”; 4.1.6 Identify the site uses and activities which should NOT occur in the future (unless further evaluation and remedial action , as appropriate, are undertaken), as those activities and uses may result in the exposure of persons or ecological receptors to chemicals of concern at or near the site in a manner that is inconsistent with a condition of “ acceptable risk ” or “ no significant risk ”; 4.1.7 Specify long-term stewardship objectives, and the entity which has responsibility for developing stewardship programs and paying for achieving those objectives, including any periodic statements or certification(s) of compliance; and 4.1.8 Specify long-term performance standards, such as operation and maintenance obligations, or monitoring of an engineering control, that are necessary to ensure that the objectives and goals of activity and use limitations continue to be met. 4.1.8.1 Activity and use limitations at federal facilities where long-term stewardship is required may include provisions for stakeholder engagement; sustainable reuse; climate change adaptation, mitigation, and resilience; incorporation of indigenous knowledge. 4.2 Activity and use limitations should be implemented to eliminate exposure pathways for, or reduce potential exposures to, chemicals of concern . The following are some examples of situations where an activity and use limitations may be appropriate: 4.2.1 Impacted ground water exists at a site where an alternative water supply is available. A restriction may be placed on the use of ground water for any purpose other than monitoring, or a restriction may place requirements for well construction or evaluation of treatment of ground water. 4.2.2 A site is remediated to levels appropriate only for industrial or commercial uses with respect to the direct contact pathway. The use of the property will then be restricted to those land uses, unless further remedial activities are conducted (that is, the site may not be developed for residential use). 4.2.3 Residual chemicals of concern remaining on a site are covered with some type of barrier (for example, cap, pavement, etc.) The barrier constitutes one type of activity and use limitation . In addition, a restriction may be placed on the deed or lease prohibiting excavation in areas where the chemicals of concern exceed certain risk levels. The restriction may include prohibiting the disturbance of the cap. Monitoring and maintenance of the integrity of the cap or barrier may be a requirement as well. 4.2.4 Operation and maintenance of an ongoing remedial action may be required and may be specified in a restriction. In this case, an easement or property access right may be given to the former owner (as the responsible party) or to his/her agent. 4.2.5 Also, activities interfering with operations and maintenance may be restricted. These restrictions may include limitations on construction or other activities in areas where remediation system controls, extraction wells, monitoring wells, or other ongoing remedial or monitoring systems are located. 4.3 Due Diligence— When a property transaction is involved, the prospective purchaser, lender, title company, real estate appraiser and others need to be aware of the possibility that restrictions have been placed on permissible activities and uses of the property. Knowledge of prior land uses is an important indicator of the potential for such restrictions to exist. The user is cautioned that, under Practice E1527 and E2247 , it is the user's responsibility to provide information about AULs to the environmental consultant unless the parties have contracted otherwise (see Practice E1527 , section 6.2, and E2247 , section 6.2). AUL information is frequently contained in the restrictions of record on the title, rather than in a typical chain of title. The user should be seeking the recorded land title records, sometimes referred to as a historical environmental title search, and information from relevant regulatory databases, to the extent that such databases exist. 4.4 At the present time, several states provide in their voluntary corrective action programs that liability releases provided in their “No Further Action” letters (“NFA”) or “Certificates of Completion” (“Certificates”) will be of no effect if any of the conditions in the final letter or certificate are violated. In other words, in these states, the releases from liability may be void or voidable if an activity and use limitation is violated. The activity and use limitation is typically described in, or attached to, the NFA letter or Certificate. Accordingly, it is critically important for owners, prospective purchasers, lenders, tenants and others who are counting on the liability releases provided in the NFA letter or Certificate to be sure that they understand what limitations or restrictions may have been imposed on the site and to understand who bears primary responsibility for ensuring that those limitations or restrictions are not violated. In Alabama, the statutory limitation of liability is contingent upon the applicant’s good faith implementation of the Voluntary Property Assessment (“VPA”) and/or Voluntary Cleanup Plan (“VCP”) as approved by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (“ADEM”). See ALA. CODE § 22-30E-10 (current through the end of the 2010 Regular Session). However, such limitation of liability in Alabama’s corrective action program will not apply to any activities conducted before ADEM’s approval of the VPA, VCP, or Letter of Concurrence with a Certification of Compliance, whichever occurs first. See also ALA. CODE §§ 22-30E-1 to -13 (current through the end of the 2010 Regular Session). Georgia has a similar exception to a statutory limitation of liability. See GA. CODE ANN. § 12-8-207 (current through the 2010 Regular Session). Georgia’s limitation is contingent upon the prospective purchaser’s good faith implementation of the corrective action plan as approved by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (“EPD”) as well as the certification of compliance with the risk reduction standards and corrective action requirements. See also GA. CODE ANN. §§ 12-8-100 to -108, 12-8-200 to -210 (current through the 2010 Regular Session). In Mississippi, liability protection is afforded to a brownfield party engaged in voluntary remediation. See MISS. CODE ANN. § 49-35-15(5) (current through the 2009 3rd Extraordinary Session). However, the liability protection in Mississippi applies as long as the brownfield party does not violate its brownfield agreement with the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (“MDEQ”). See also MISS. CODE ANN. § 49-35-1 to -53 (current through the 2009 3rd Extraordinary Session). 4.5 The user is cautioned that activity and use limitations are not to be used to encourage or condone “secured abandonment”. In general, “secured abandonment” is the practice of physically securing the site and blocking exposure pathways while taking minimal steps to ensure that chemicals of concern do not spread beyond the property boundaries or taking minimal steps to put the property back into productive use. In most cases, the property is not placed back into productive use and does not meet its “highest and best” use. There may be instances where activity and use limitations are used to completely restrict access to a site (for example, during remediation), but the expectation is that sites will be remediated to allow some productive use and therefore some potential exposure . 4.6 As a general rule, Federal or state governmental authorities have primary responsibility for determining applicable and appropriate remediation standards for chemicals of concern , and either the Federal, state, tribal, or local government authority may have primary responsibility for inspecting and enforcing any activity and use limitations that may be imposed. It is important for all affected stakeholders (that is, Federal, state, tribal, and local authorities; potentially responsible parties; utilities; residents; tenants; the financial community; the environmental community; and others) to have an open dialogue about the goals and objectives of any activity and use limitations ; the exposure assumptions underlying any activity and use limitations ; applicable and relevant legal authorities for implementing any activity and use limitations ; and the entity which will have responsibility for maintaining and enforcing the activity and use limitations over time (see Institutional Controls: A Guide to Preparing Institutional Control Implementation and Assurance Plans at Contaminated Sites, December 2012 ). 4.7 The language used in activity and use limitations may be drafted broadly or have very focused statements about the purpose. The language may specify activities to be conducted, including operation and maintenance or a performance standard, or activities that are prohibited, or land uses that are allowed or disallowed. There may be a requirement for notice to various individuals or entities, such as tenants, lenders, utilities, or local government officials. There may also be language describing who enforces the restriction, the conditions under which the restriction may be removed or terminated, and the procedure for removal or termination of the restriction.