Laserfiche WebLink
C. If site was abated by a responsible --arty, did the Department <br /> receive a signed statement from a _icensed professional on <br /> all Remedial ACtion(s) ? to 5-2 -g7 <br /> Yes X No Dates (from) 4-9-87 ( )__ <br /> D. Did a registered engineer or geologist verify that acceptable <br /> engineering practices were implemented? 3-24 ; 6-18; 10110-87 <br /> Yes_X a <br /> No` Nme Date of verification. <br /> E_ Did the Department confirm completion of all Remedial Action? <br /> Yes X No Date of verification_Insn of Apr & May 87 . <br /> F. Did the Department (directory or through contractor) actually <br /> perform the Remedial Action? <br /> Yes__ No_X_ Name of Contractor: <br /> G. Was there a community Relations Plan in place? Yes` No *X <br /> H. Was a Remedial Action Plan developed for this site? Yes--X-H0— <br /> Did <br /> esXNo_Did DHS hold a public meeting regarding the draft RAP? <br /> Yes 1-7-97 No <br /> J . were public comments addressed? <br /> Yes X Nc_ Date of DHS analysis and response: <br /> K. Are all of the facts cited above adequately documented in the <br /> DHS files? Yes .JX No <br /> If no, identify areas where documentation is lacking: <br /> 1o , EPA In oft in the Remedial Action: <br /> A. Was the EPA involved in the site cleanup? Yes No x <br /> B. If yes, did EPA concur with all Remedial Actions? Yes_ No_ <br /> C. EPA comments: N A <br /> EPA staff involved in cleanup: (Name, Title) <br /> (Address, Phone Number) <br /> *9.G. The CRP was never approved; however, a public meeting was noticed <br /> and held, and a copy of the draft RAP was placed in the Stockton/San <br /> ,Toa ibrary fo 30 days All cones ra sed athe public mea <br /> ailg via public noticing have been addressmL <br /> -4- September 1987 <br /> ZIO/fi80d 8£IOY IRG 01 'V 'd '% 'IVB I Piolm NoFd Bdo:a £6-8Z-V8 <br />