Posted by syntheticturfmd under Press Releases, Synthetic Turf Issues

California Senator Abel Maldonado authors Senate bill (SB1277) that originally called for preparation and posting of a study investigating the tremendous liability, and health issues lying in wait, in the crumb rubber used as infill in synthetic turf fields.  The impact on both the environment and the public were to be investigated but the bill out of the senate completely neuters the intent of the original bill.

Do the taxpayers need to spend $200,000 on another wasted Study –

The original legislation submitted by Senator Maldonado shows his depth of understanding of this subject (read the original bill below with red lines). However, the bill voted out of the senate as SB1277 has been completely neutered and winds up being little more than another excuse to spend $200,000 of the taxpayers money for an almost worthless study – The original bill to study the crumb rubber infill problems has been watered down to a study on how to clean and maintain synthetic turf . No effort is being made in the revised bill to address the real problem issues.

The original bill put forth by Senator Maldonado would been worth every penny of the allocated funds and would have revealed many studies showing that crumb rubber infill used in synthetic turf fields is in fact, not only harmful to anyone using the field by harboring infectious disease such as MRSA, but also is detrimental to the environment in the leaching of carcinogens through run off of heavy metals with storm water and through airborne off-gassing when the field temperatures exceed 120 degrees. The $200,000 allocated to fund the study ironically is generated from fees paid for the disposal of tires. Although this bill has been signed into law, this forward thinking (original) legislation was stripped of its usefulness and the study now moves forward with a due date of Sept. 1, 2010.

Better Late Than Never???

As the momentum of the bio-related health issues that affect players and the ecological impact that affects the environment builds, so do the number of these carcinogen producing and infectious disease harboring fields. While it is a positive effect to have this study “in the works”, it is also disconcerting that the results are not due until 2010.

The recent study by the UMDNJ (see our post – below – on this study) shows definitively that ingestion of crumb rubber particles is extremely dangerous. This study found that the lead contained in crumb rubber particles are released by the stomach’s gastric juices and are absorbed by the body. The study showed – “Because we know that even low levels of lead can cause neuro-cognitive problems – such as IQ loss – in children, these absorption fractions are meaningful.”

The question at hand is

Will the Maldonado study come soon enough or be far reaching enough to recognize the alternative to unhealthy artificial turf for use in high use arenas? This study would not even be necessary if the CPSC had not failed (through a narrowly focused lens) to let the presence of some heavy metals in the turf fibers of some very old artificial turf fields distract them from investigating the real problem – the crumb rubber infill.

Those individuals in a position to decide on the turf field solutions to place their (and our) kids on, must now decide which of the available systems to use — unhealthy crumb rubber in all its forms and blends — or the Organite Anti-Microbial Infill – as the only safe, healthy, and environmentally sound choice.

Three Blind Mice … Influential turf installation companies

Previous posts on this site show that there exists a plethora of research and studies that reveal infectious diseases such as MRSA and staph are harbored in the crumb rubber (and crumb rubber and sand mix) infill used to hold up the turf fibers of the biggest synthetic turf companies that exist today. Note that despite what some would claim, ground crumb rubber is just that ground crumb rubber – whether it be ambient ground or cryogenically ground makes absolutely no difference to the content of the lead (or other heavy metals) contained in the rubber. Well financed and influential turf companies continue to push artificial turf infill solutions that, today, are known problem systems, and these companies continue to deny any problems exist in order to maintain their stranglehold on the industry.

Surfacing almost daily, there continues to be more evidence that substantiates the harboring of infectious disease in the fields constructed using crumb rubber infill or any version of it. The latest occurrence was at Morgan State University where the field, through a process of eliminating all other sources, was correctly blamed as the point of infection despite denials by the three blind mice. (Reported by Alex Demetrick – WJZ-TV) http://wjz.com/sports/staph.mrsa.infection.2.797936.html

Not Too Good to Be True … a necessity or a panacea?

Solutions to both environmental and health (as well as safety) concerns remains largely unrecognized. What is needed is a solution to the crumb rubber problem that:

· will be heavy metals free,

· is totally carcinogen free,

· emits no PAHs,

· does not off-gas harmful particles that can be inhaled,

· is free of gastro intestinal absorption,

· does not leach harmful run off,

· lowers surface temperatures,

· has no need for anti-microbial recoating,

· maintains an Ultimate Gmax rating under 150 for the life of the product

We, at TargaPro, have been utilizing such a substance and touting its benefits, almost as a lone voice on the subject, for the past year. Previous blog posts on this site have highlighted reports of those who have an awareness of the issues which have an impact on people and the environment. Along with these individuals, TargaPro, is working diligently to make these venues safe, healthy, and environmentally sound due to the ongoing demand for high use synthetic turf fields.

In addition to lead free fibers and no urethane backings, the solution is Organite™, an Anti-Microbial infill, http://www.targapro.com/products/sports/Tech-prod-Specs/tech-specs/organite.html as one of the system components that provides an integrated solution to – high traffic use, storm water management, safety and health issues as well as ecological soundness http://www.targapro.com/products/sports/environmental-issues/H-and-E.html .

Following is the marked-up original California Senate Bill 1277 submitted by Senator Maldonado. Note how the redlining of this bill completely changes the intent of the bill from a health study on the use of crumb rubber within synthetic turf” to an almost useless study on best practices for cleaning and maintaining synthetic turf”.

AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 24, 2008

SENATE BILL No. 1277

Introduced by Senator Maldonado

February 19, 2008

An act to add Article 3 (commencing with Section 115810) to Chapter

4 of Part 10 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code, relating

to An act relating to synthetic turf.

legislative counsel’s digest

SB 1277, as amended, Maldonado. Synthetic turf.

Existing law requires all new playgrounds open to the public built by

a public agency or any other entity to conform to the playground-related

standards set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials

and the playground-related guidelines set forth by the United States

Consumer Product Safety Commission.

This bill would prohibit a person from installing synthetic turf, as

defined, on an athletic playing field within the boundaries of a public

or private school or public recreational park unless and until the Office

of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has prepared a site specific

environmental impact report on this installation. The bill would also

require, on or before June 30, 2009, require, on or before September

1, 2010, the State Department of Public Health to prepare and make

available to the public a health study on the use of crumb rubber within

best practices for cleaning and maintaining synthetic turf.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.

State-mandated local program: no.

This bill is also available on line (with revisions) at http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_1277_bill_20080324_amended_sen_v98.pdf

Advertisements

A post inclusive of an article from the San Francisco Chronicle delineating issues surrounding recent lawsuits filed in California against Synthetic Turf companies over “lead in the turf” issues.
It seems as though there is a rising tide of concern over the long held suspicions that there are problems (with both the turf fibers and particularly with the infill) of the synthetic turf fields being installed almost everywhere today.  The question is … are these latest lawsuits filed by the State of California just scratching the surface?

Fiber manufacturers in the United States can (or should be able) to show the yarns (fibers) they are using are below the EPA standards for lead levels … but manufacturers outside the US are not bound by our US standards and the companies importing synthetic fibers from abroad must be held accountable for showing their products meet the EPA standards.
Surely then, it does behoove us to continue to test for lead levels in fields manufactured by companies who built systems with fibers imported from abroad …  and today those companies need to provide proof that the fibers they are currently using meet the EPA standards.  Note that most of the turf fibers being produced today in the US contain lead levels far below the EPA acceptable standards.
Since the newer turfs do not have this fiber problem it seems apparent to us that the real focus should be addressing the crumb rubber infill and urethane backed turf recycling problems. Will the real health problems — not just lead in the fibers of mostly older fields — eventually be unearthed?
Where is the testing for problems such as bio-related infections being hosted by the turf, off-gassing of PAHs and dust particulates from crumb rubber and silica sand infills?  And what about the environmental impacts from carcinogen laden rainwater runoff, disposal of all forms of crumb rubber infill’s and urethane backed turf products that must be treated as hazardous waste with the attendant costs associated with such disposals? When will someone get around to addressing these issues in the fields that are currently installed?
You do realize of course that there is a solution to the lead in the fibers problem.  TargaPro provides an Environmentally Safe Synthetic Turf Field product using turf from Challenger Industries (manufactured with Bonar Yarns) and infilled with an anti-microbial infill (Organite) that addresses all the issues currently under study.  No lead in the fibers — No more Crumb Rubber infill – No urethane backing – all resulting in an environmentally safe and 100% recyclable product.
For more information and details of the solution to these problems – visit our website today!!

Suits filed over lead in artificial turf
Jane Kay, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
________________________________________

Six artificial-turf companies are breaking state law by not warning the public of exposure to dangerous amounts of lead from the fake green grass, according to two separate lawsuits filed Tuesday by the California attorney general and an environmental group.
The suits, designed to stop the sale of any new turf manufactured with lead, say the toxic metal gets on the hands and bodies of children and adults who play on synthetic grass found at athletic fields, public schools, parks, day care centers and residences.

Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires warning of exposure to an unsafe level of a chemical that can cause cancer or birth defects. Lead is a carcinogen and can cause neurological damage, says the lawsuit filed in Alameda Superior Court.  “The goal is to get the lead out of the California pipeline so it’s not being sold in the state,” said Dennis Ragen, the deputy attorney general handling the case for the state. The companies have already expressed a willingness to make turf without lead, Ragen said.
The state attorney general – joined by the city attorney of Los Angeles and the district attorney of Solano County – filed against Astro Turf, the first branded distributor of synthetic grass; Beaulieu Group, which sells to Home Depot, Ace Hardware and Lowe’s, and Field Turf USA, a leading manufacturer and installer of football fields.
The Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland nonprofit, sued Shaw Industries, one of the world’s biggest carpet companies, as well as Synthetic Turf International and Turf Headquarters, name-brand vendors.
In May, the center sued Beaulieu, and sent letters of intent to sue 15 other manufacturers, distributors and retailers. On Tuesday, the center also filed additional intent-to-sue letters. None of the company representatives could be reached for comment Tuesday.
According to Ragen, there have been very productive settlement negotiations with Astroturf and Beaulieu. He hasn’t yet been able to talk to Field Turf, he said.
Annie Costa, executive director of the Association of Synthetic Grass Installers, said the trade group is looking forward to receiving clear direction on how to handle existing inventories, including what kinds of warnings or health advisories would be appropriate. The industry is already beginning to reformulate the products because of California’s concerns, she said.
In 2007, 20 million square feet of artificial turf was installed in landscapes, lawns, putting greens, day care centers and kennels, among other locations in California; 35 million square feet were installed in sport fields, including football, lacrosse, soccer and field hockey.
San Francisco’s Recreation and Park Department has issued a report that recommends putting in dozens of lead-free artificial turf grass and environmentally sound base materials.
In July, the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission looked at 14 samples from four companies and determined that synthetic turf wasn’t a danger because of lead. However, the agency recommended that companies voluntarily remove it. Some have already begun to phase it out.
The state of New Jersey found high lead levels at community athletic fields, generating an inquiry by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  But more comprehensive lead studies procured by the Center for Environmental Health found lead in artificial turf at worrisome levels, including artificial grass used by residential installers and do-it-yourselfers.
More than 150 samples from two dozen companies tested by an independent lab showed that 30 percent had high lead levels. Ten or more companies had high levels of lead in different varieties of artificial turf. One of the major companies had a sample showing lead at 150 times higher than federal standards that will come into play with new legislation banning lead in children products. The concerns are that children put their contaminated hands in their mouths or breathe in dust from degraded plastic.

This is our view of the  “lead in synthetic turf” controversy currently raging in the industry and what portions of it are correct and what portions of it are not being properly addressed. You may have a different view and we would be very interested in hearing them.

Recently, we have been asked to produce a quick reference guide about the health issues related to synthetic turf for our company, TargaPro; by a number of our existing clients that are fielding questions from concerned parties. As we are bidding and currently working a number of sites where artificial turf has become a major issue, the copmpany has prepared a statement that obviates those concerns. Supporting documents for the statements below are available upon request.

Following the CPSC ruling that “there is no problem with the turf”, we see a constant stream of misinformation pertaining to the issue of lead in synthetic turf and the resulting health issues. The CPSC was correct – about only one issue, that being, there is no real problem with the “turf” (testing being limited to the manufactured “carpet”); however, only the turf fibers were tested, no other components were considered and that is where the potential problems truly do exist. A broader picture of this real problem is encapsulated below.

The issue is not lead in the new fields, only a few older fields had/have lead in the fibers.

  • -The lead content issue is a result of fields that were installed many years ago, made with nylon yarns.
  • -Currently, most all fields are produced with fibers that have low lead content levels and are of no concern.
  • -We use tested polyethylene fibers and yarns for our turf. The test results for lead on TargaPro’s EcoGreen66 Synthetic Turf are – 6 MG/KG as opposed to the standard of 85 MG/KG.

There are, in fact, three real issues:

1) Carcinogen runoff from the infill.

  • -Outdoor fields begin to gas off carcinogens at 120 degrees; indoor fields have no heat-driven issues.
  • -Cryogenic and ambient ground rubber, and silica sand, used for infill material may result in carcinogen runoff, gas off of harmful chemicals, and the heat island affect, when used on outdoor fields.
  • -TargaPro utilizes an Anti-Microbial Infill (AMI) called Organite™ as a non-carcinogenic, environmentally clean alternative exceeding all HIC values, G-Max and P-Max requirements, and contains no rubber.

2) Bacteria-harboring infill and bio-health related issues.

  • -Crumb rubber and sand mixed infills can harbor harmful bacteria that leave athletes subject to infection.
  • -TargaPro uses the Anti-Microbial Infill as a health agent also, killing bacteria on the molecular level addressing bio-health related issues.

3) Disposal of spent fields

  • The backings used for synthetic turf construction will become an issue related to landfill disposal of the fields following the typical 8 year guarantee. Urethane backings are not considered recyclable.
  • TargaPro’s EcoGreen66 Synthetic Turf uses a polyolefin, three layer-woven backing that attributes the entire system as 100% recyclable.