Home
What's New

Supporting Organizations

The Proposal
Map

Existing Contaminants
Test Results
Voice your concern

Why say NO

How you can help
Advertise
Research

Calendar of Events

Research Summaries
Related Sites

Letters and Publicity

Who I Am
Editorial
Mailing List

Research Summaries


Legal Cases
April 12, 2002 Wayne County, Ohio Angerman vs. Burick
March 26, 2003 Court of Appeals Angerman vs. Burick - Appeal
October 28, 2003 Flathead County, Montana Moyer vs. Morin



Mine Safety
Various dates MSHA US Department of Labor - Mine Safety and Health Administration



Noise
March 22, 2006 Noise containment at other motorcross tracks In a March 16 article in the Woodinville Weekly, Mr. Gary Strode (president of MXGP, Inc.) makes reference to a motorcross track in the Las Vegas, NV area. The community believes that this motorcross track in Boulder City, NV is that facility. The site appears to be designed for reduced wind and dust, and enhanced spectator viewing of the track. The community does not believe that the site was designed with any noise-containment mechanism since there appears to be no residential area within a radius of 10+ miles.

UPDATE on March 24: There is another motorcross track located in the center of the Las Vegas Motor Speedway (www.lvms.com). The Speedway is located approximately eight miles North-Northeast of downtown Las Vegas. There appear to be no noise-abatement mechanisms other than the grandstands. There are no residential neighborhoods for miles, and the entrance to Nellis Air Force Base is located within one-half mile of the Speedway.

So again, the community are perplexed why Mr. Strode would think either of these two tracks offered an effective noise-containment mechanism when there are no residential areas in the vicinity of either site...

Please contact me if these are not the correct motorcross tracks, or you are certain which track Mr. Strode referred to in the article.
March 29, 2006 American Motorcyclist Association California's Riverside County passes drastic restrictions on off-road vehicles on private land



Pollution
November 8, 2002 US Environmental Protection Agency Control of Emissions From Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines (Marine and Land-Based)
"...recreational vehicles (including off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain-vehicles, and snowmobiles), significantly contribute to regional haze and visibility impairment in federal Class I areas and where people live, work and recreate."



Snohomish County
Various dates Snohomish County Code Snohomish County Code Search Application
Search for County Code 30.22.110 to find the Rural Use Matrix.
download the file from me (0.2 Mb, up to 2 minutes)
January 18, 2006 Snohomish County Council County Council Boosts Off Road Vehicle Use
"...The county council says the forest and recreation zoned lands in the county are well suited to development of a private ORV park. They are long distances from developed areas..."
August, 2003 Mineral Resource Land Planning Mineral Lands Designation - Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
download the file from me (2.0 Mb, up to 8 minutes)
February 1, 2006 Mineral Resource Land Planning Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO)
download the file from me (1.0 Mb, up to 6 minutes)
older Mineral Resource Land Planning Older versions of the Mineral Resource Overlay (MRO)



Toxic Waste
March 19, 2006 The Herald Asarco leaving a toxic legacy
March 19, 2006 The Herald In Everett, work remains at Asarco site
March 20, 2006 The Herald Lawyers dissect Asarco's cleanup obligation in US
March 20, 2006 The Herald Tearing down... taking shape



US Environmental Protection Agency
current Ground Water & Drinking Water Arsenic in Drinking Water
current Safewater List of Drinking Water Contaminants & MCLs
current Safewater Private Drinking Water Wells



US Geological Survey
1998 Ground Water & Surface Water Ground Water and Surface Water - A Single Resource
download the file from me (11.6 Mb, up to 15 minutes)



Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
December 15, 1991 Reclamation Plan Last approved Plan for the 19000 Yew Way site. Look closely and you will see that the site should have a gradual slope as per the Plan. The slope starts on the Southeast corner at approximately 425 feet (425') and gradually declines to 325 feet (325') as one moves to the Northwest corner. The MXGP proposal would violate the Plan since its dirt berms have a level height across the entire site.
October 28, 1998 Letter Sent to Associated Sand & Gravel (now Rinker Materials)
December 8, 2003 Letter Sent from Rinker Materials to the DNR
January 8, 2004 Letter Sent to Rinker Materials
January 4, 2005 Letter Sent to Rinker Materials
March 20, 2006 Letter Sent to Snohomish County regarding the MXGP proposal



Washington State Department of Health (DOH)
current Office of Drinking Water Drinking Water Programs and Services



Washington State Legislature
Counties Aquifer protection areas
RCW 36.36.010
Purpose
Counties Aquifer protection areas
RCW 36.36.020
Creation of aquifer protection area - Public hearing - Ballot proposition
Department of Ecology Water quality standards
WAC 173-200-020
Definitions
Department of Ecology Solid waste handling standards
WAC 173-350-025
Owner responsibilities for solid waste
Department of Ecology Solid waste handling standards
WAC 173-350-100
Definitions
Department of Ecology Solid waste handling standards
WAC 173-350-500
Ground water monitoring
Department of Ecology Solid waste handling standards
WAC 173-350-700
Permits and local ordinances
Mines, minerals, and petroleum Surface mining
RCW 78.44.010
Legislative finding
Mines, minerals, and petroleum Surface mining
RCW 78.44.050
Exclusive authority to regulate reclamation
Mines, minerals, and petroleum Surface mining
RCW 78.44.121
Reclamation setbacks - Exemption
Mines, minerals, and petroleum Surface mining
RCW 78.44.141
Reclamation - Minimum standards - Waiver