Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds

Expand Messages
  • Betty Parshall
    this is lengthy but we all need to know and express our opinions to Rec & Park.  Crocker soccer fields are now off limits except for team games - no more free
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 21, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      this is lengthy but we all need to know and express our opinions to Rec & Park.  Crocker soccer fields are now off limits except for team games - no more free time playing on that "grass!"

      --- On Sun, 9/21/08, JohnMcLarenPark@... <JohnMcLarenPark@...> wrote:
      From: JohnMcLarenPark@... <JohnMcLarenPark@...>
      Subject: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
      To:
      Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 12:58 PM

      Hi folks! Your help is URGENTLY NEEDED to prevent Louis Sutter Playground in your McLaren Park from being converted into a synthetic (plastic and rubber) field. There are lots of problems with the fields that I won’t go into here because it would take volumes to describe. (Just a brief one: the field will be fenced off. No one will be able to walk or play on it except the athletes.) The MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM is the health consequences of the toxic materials from which the synthetic fields are manufactured.  Especially problematic is the crumb rubber made of ground of tires that are full of lead. The lead ladden crumb rubber is used as the padding underneath the plastic grass. Please keep in mind the perfect characterization of the lead ladden rubber tire issue: “IF WE DON’T WANT THE TIRES IN OUR DUMP SITES BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO TOXIC, WHY WOULD WE PUT THEM IN OUR PLAYGROUNDS”
      Below is an outline of current developments regarding the plastic grass and the crumb rubber.  If you want more information on the developments listed, the supporting documents are in attached PDF’s.

      We need to keep our kids, families and community healthy, and safe from toxic materials. We can start by stopping the Recreation and Park Department from converting Louis Sutter Playground into a sythetic grass field.

      All you have to do to help out is send an emal to:

      RECPARK.COMMISSION@... and to

      JOHNMCLARENPARK@...

      (you can simply copy and paste the address in you email address box)

      The message can simply say as little as:

      PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT LOUIS SUTTER PLAYGROUND TO A SYNTHETIC FIELD

      and as much more as you want.

      Also, please share the information that follows with your neighbors and friends.

      All the best, FRANCO

      1. June 18, 2008  - the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued an Advisory concerning artificial turf and its two components: the manufactured grass (blades) and the crumb rubber cushion. The distinction is extemely important when it comes to health consequences.  The CDC’s major concern was the crumb rubber and it’s lead content. The Advisory gives careful instruction about what parents should do if their children are exposed to the crumb rubber. (attached)

      2. July 30, 2008 - the
      Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a press release (attached) stating the artificial turf is safe. (Somewhat contradictory, the pronouncements included precautions that should be taken when someone is exposed to lead.)  The release was based on a staff report concluding that the product is safe.However, the report contained contradictory caveats.  (also attached)

      3. Aug. 8, 2008 -
      Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro addresses the CPSC pronouncement in a letter to Nancy Nord, (Acting) Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission: (full text attached)

      “........I believe that the study did not adequately support the title of the CPSC press release of July 30, 2008: “CPSC Staff Finds Synthetic Turf Fields OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  Given the numerous unresolved issues relating to the health and safety of synthetic turf, and the limitations described in CPSC’s own study, the CPSC should have proceeded with more caution before issuing the message that synthetic turf fields are “OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  I would appreciate a response from you as to how CPSC decided to issue this message despite the limitations of the synthetic turf study and the fact that synthetic turf may pose a number of health risks in addition to lead exposure...........”

      4. August 14, 2008 - the
      California Assembly passed SB1277 calling for a study of synthetic field materials. The bill elaborates the serious concerns about synthetic fields generally and crumb rubber specifically. The bill is currently enrolled in the California Senate. (attached)

      5. Aug. 19, 2008 - The
      Attorney  General of the State of Connecticut called the  Synthetic  Turf  Study  conducted by the CPSC “dangerously deceptive”. The AG urged its removal and  revision. The AG’s reaction is/was addressing the fact that the CPSC study focused on the composition of the artificial grass blades and not the more dangerous and insidious crumb rubber. (attached)

      6. Sept. 2, 2008 -
      Attorney General Jerry Brown and the Center for Environmental Health filed a suit in the Alameda Superior Court  alleging that six major synthetic turf producers have not complied with California State Proposition 65  - SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986   Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive  Toxicity.  No  person  in  the  course  of  doing  business  shall  knowingly  and  intentionally  expose  any  individual  to  a  chemical  known  to  the  state  to  cause  cancer  or reproductive  toxicity  without  first  giving  clear  and  reasonable  warning  to  such  individual,  except as  provided  in  Section  25249.10. (attached)

      7. Sept. 5, 2008 -
      Consumer Reports issues its own report regarding the CPSC pronouncement of July 30. In its review, it found:

      - The CPSC study didn’t analyze enough samples from older fields i.e., only two samples were from fields more than five years old.

      - CPSC staff acknowledged that some conditions such as age, weathering, exposure to sunlight, and wear and tear might change the amount of lead that could be released from the turf; the oldest field in their study showed the highest exposure to lead

      - The total lead content of the grass blades tested ranged from “none detected” to 9,600 parts per million (ppm)

      - Ten of 26 samples tested far exceeded the current 600 ppm legal limit that applies to lead in paint and that limit will be significantly reduced as a result of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

      - Shouldn't the fields that our children play on meet the same standards?

      - The CPSC study did not take into account exposure to lead from inhalation or direct ingestion of dust from the synthetic field. The CDC advisory pointed to this hazard.

      - Assumptions the CPSC made about how to measure ingestion levels are questionable. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The CPSC analysis and conclusions should be consistent with those of the medical community.

      - Although environmental issues are not under the CPSC’s purview, we need to be concerned that lead dust liberated from artificial playing fields may leach into soil and enter nearby waterways.




      **************
      Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
      (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
    • anne seeman
      Thank you, Betty. Although lengthy, I urge everyone to read the information and email the commissioners. Anne ... From: Betty Parshall
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 21, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank you, Betty. Although lengthy, I urge everyone to read the information and email the commissioners.

        Anne

        --- On Sun, 9/21/08, Betty Parshall <bparshal@...> wrote:
        From: Betty Parshall <bparshal@...>
        Subject: [Valley_Eye] Fw: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
        To: valley_eye@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 2:23 PM

        this is lengthy but we all need to know and express our opinions to Rec & Park.  Crocker soccer fields are now off limits except for team games - no more free time playing on that "grass!"

        --- On Sun, 9/21/08, JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com> wrote:
        From: JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com>
        Subject: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
        To:
        Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 12:58 PM

        Hi folks! Your help is URGENTLY NEEDED to prevent Louis Sutter Playground in your McLaren Park from being converted into a synthetic (plastic and rubber) field. There are lots of problems with the fields that I won’t go into here because it would take volumes to describe. (Just a brief one: the field will be fenced off. No one will be able to walk or play on it except the athletes.) The MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM is the health consequences of the toxic materials from which the synthetic fields are manufactured.  Especially problematic is the crumb rubber made of ground of tires that are full of lead. The lead ladden crumb rubber is used as the padding underneath the plastic grass. Please keep in mind the perfect characterization of the lead ladden rubber tire issue: “IF WE DON’T WANT THE TIRES IN OUR DUMP SITES BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO TOXIC, WHY WOULD WE PUT THEM IN OUR PLAYGROUNDS”
        Below is an outline of current developments regarding the plastic grass and the crumb rubber.  If you want more information on the developments listed, the supporting documents are in attached PDF’s.

        We need to keep our kids, families and community healthy, and safe from toxic materials. We can start by stopping the Recreation and Park Department from converting Louis Sutter Playground into a sythetic grass field.

        All you have to do to help out is send an emal to:

        RECPARK.COMMISSION@ SFGOV.ORG and to

        JOHNMCLARENPARK@ AOL.COM

        (you can simply copy and paste the address in you email address box)

        The message can simply say as little as:

        PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT LOUIS SUTTER PLAYGROUND TO A SYNTHETIC FIELD

        and as much more as you want.

        Also, please share the information that follows with your neighbors and friends.

        All the best, FRANCO

        1. June 18, 2008  - the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued an Advisory concerning artificial turf and its two components: the manufactured grass (blades) and the crumb rubber cushion. The distinction is extemely important when it comes to health consequences.  The CDC’s major concern was the crumb rubber and it’s lead content. The Advisory gives careful instruction about what parents should do if their children are exposed to the crumb rubber. (attached)

        2. July 30, 2008 - the
        Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a press release (attached) stating the artificial turf is safe. (Somewhat contradictory, the pronouncements included precautions that should be taken when someone is exposed to lead.)  The release was based on a staff report concluding that the product is safe.However, the report contained contradictory caveats.  (also attached)

        3. Aug. 8, 2008 -
        Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro addresses the CPSC pronouncement in a letter to Nancy Nord, (Acting) Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission: (full text attached)

        “........I believe that the study did not adequately support the title of the CPSC press release of July 30, 2008: “CPSC Staff Finds Synthetic Turf Fields OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  Given the numerous unresolved issues relating to the health and safety of synthetic turf, and the limitations described in CPSC’s own study, the CPSC should have proceeded with more caution before issuing the message that synthetic turf fields are “OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  I would appreciate a response from you as to how CPSC decided to issue this message despite the limitations of the synthetic turf study and the fact that synthetic turf may pose a number of health risks in addition to lead exposure.... .......”

        4. August 14, 2008 - the
        California Assembly passed SB1277 calling for a study of synthetic field materials. The bill elaborates the serious concerns about synthetic fields generally and crumb rubber specifically. The bill is currently enrolled in the California Senate. (attached)

        5. Aug. 19, 2008 - The
        Attorney  General of the State of Connecticut called the  Synthetic  Turf  Study  conducted by the CPSC “dangerously deceptive”. The AG urged its removal and  revision. The AG’s reaction is/was addressing the fact that the CPSC study focused on the composition of the artificial grass blades and not the more dangerous and insidious crumb rubber. (attached)

        6. Sept. 2, 2008 -
        Attorney General Jerry Brown and the Center for Environmental Health filed a suit in the Alameda Superior Court  alleging that six major synthetic turf producers have not complied with California State Proposition 65  - SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986   Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive  Toxicity.  No  person  in  the  course  of  doing  business  shall  knowingly  and  intentionally  expose  any  individual  to  a  chemical  known  to  the  state  to  cause  cancer  or reproductive  toxicity  without  first  giving  clear  and  reasonable  warning  to  such  individual,  except as  provided  in  Section  25249.10. (attached)

        7. Sept. 5, 2008 -
        Consumer Reports issues its own report regarding the CPSC pronouncement of July 30. In its review, it found:

        - The CPSC study didn’t analyze enough samples from older fields i.e., only two samples were from fields more than five years old.

        - CPSC staff acknowledged that some conditions such as age, weathering, exposure to sunlight, and wear and tear might change the amount of lead that could be released from the turf; the oldest field in their study showed the highest exposure to lead

        - The total lead content of the grass blades tested ranged from “none detected” to 9,600 parts per million (ppm)

        - Ten of 26 samples tested far exceeded the current 600 ppm legal limit that applies to lead in paint and that limit will be significantly reduced as a result of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

        - Shouldn't the fields that our children play on meet the same standards?

        - The CPSC study did not take into account exposure to lead from inhalation or direct ingestion of dust from the synthetic field. The CDC advisory pointed to this hazard.

        - Assumptions the CPSC made about how to measure ingestion levels are questionable. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The CPSC analysis and conclusions should be consistent with those of the medical community.

        - Although environmental issues are not under the CPSC’s purview, we need to be concerned that lead dust liberated from artificial playing fields may leach into soil and enter nearby waterways.




        ************ **
        Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
        (http://www. walletpop. com/?NCID= emlcntuswall0000 0001)


      • Kevin Blackwell
        Betty, I could not open the attachments without a password...Let me know how I can get around this...Kevin Betty Parshall wrote: this is
        Message 3 of 4 , Sep 22, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Betty,
           
          I could not open the attachments without a password...Let me know how I can get around this...Kevin

          Betty Parshall <bparshal@...> wrote:
          this is lengthy but we all need to know and express our opinions to Rec & Park.  Crocker soccer fields are now off limits except for team games - no more free time playing on that "grass!"

          --- On Sun, 9/21/08, JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com> wrote:
          From: JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com>
          Subject: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
          To:
          Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 12:58 PM

          Hi folks! Your help is URGENTLY NEEDED to prevent Louis Sutter Playground in your McLaren Park from being converted into a synthetic (plastic and rubber) field. There are lots of problems with the fields that I won’t go into here because it would take volumes to describe. (Just a brief one: the field will be fenced off. No one will be able to walk or play on it except the athletes.) The MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM is the health consequences of the toxic materials from which the synthetic fields are manufactured.  Especially problematic is the crumb rubber made of ground of tires that are full of lead. The lead ladden crumb rubber is used as the padding underneath the plastic grass. Please keep in mind the perfect characterization of the lead ladden rubber tire issue: “IF WE DON’T WANT THE TIRES IN OUR DUMP SITES BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO TOXIC, WHY WOULD WE PUT THEM IN OUR PLAYGROUNDS”
          Below is an outline of current developments regarding the plastic grass and the crumb rubber.  If you want more information on the developments listed, the supporting documents are in attached PDF’s.

          We need to keep our kids, families and community healthy, and safe from toxic materials. We can start by stopping the Recreation and Park Department from converting Louis Sutter Playground into a sythetic grass field.

          All you have to do to help out is send an emal to:

          RECPARK.COMMISSION@ SFGOV.ORG and to

          JOHNMCLARENPARK@ AOL.COM

          (you can simply copy and paste the address in you email address box)

          The message can simply say as little as:

          PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT LOUIS SUTTER PLAYGROUND TO A SYNTHETIC FIELD

          and as much more as you want.

          Also, please share the information that follows with your neighbors and friends.

          All the best, FRANCO

          1. June 18, 2008  - the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued an Advisory concerning artificial turf and its two components: the manufactured grass (blades) and the crumb rubber cushion. The distinction is extemely important when it comes to health consequences.  The CDC’s major concern was the crumb rubber and it’s lead content. The Advisory gives careful instruction about what parents should do if their children are exposed to the crumb rubber. (attached)

          2. July 30, 2008 - the
          Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a press release (attached) stating the artificial turf is safe. (Somewhat contradictory, the pronouncements included precautions that should be taken when someone is exposed to lead.)  The release was based on a staff report concluding that the product is safe.However, the report contained contradictory caveats.  (also attached)

          3. Aug. 8, 2008 -
          Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro addresses the CPSC pronouncement in a letter to Nancy Nord, (Acting) Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission: (full text attached)

          “........I believe that the study did not adequately support the title of the CPSC press release of July 30, 2008: “CPSC Staff Finds Synthetic Turf Fields OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  Given the numerous unresolved issues relating to the health and safety of synthetic turf, and the limitations described in CPSC’s own study, the CPSC should have proceeded with more caution before issuing the message that synthetic turf fields are “OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  I would appreciate a response from you as to how CPSC decided to issue this message despite the limitations of the synthetic turf study and the fact that synthetic turf may pose a number of health risks in addition to lead exposure.... .......”

          4. August 14, 2008 - the
          California Assembly passed SB1277 calling for a study of synthetic field materials. The bill elaborates the serious concerns about synthetic fields generally and crumb rubber specifically. The bill is currently enrolled in the California Senate. (attached)

          5. Aug. 19, 2008 - The
          Attorney  General of the State of Connecticut called the  Synthetic  Turf  Study  conducted by the CPSC “dangerously deceptive”. The AG urged its removal and  revision. The AG’s reaction is/was addressing the fact that the CPSC study focused on the composition of the artificial grass blades and not the more dangerous and insidious crumb rubber. (attached)

          6. Sept. 2, 2008 -
          Attorney General Jerry Brown and the Center for Environmental Health filed a suit in the Alameda Superior Court  alleging that six major synthetic turf producers have not complied with California State Proposition 65  - SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986   Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive  Toxicity.  No  person  in  the  course  of  doing  business  shall  knowingly  and  intentionally  expose  any  individual  to  a  chemical  known  to  the  state  to  cause  cancer  or reproductive  toxicity  without  first  giving  clear  and  reasonable  warning  to  such  individual,  except as  provided  in  Section  25249.10. (attached)

          7. Sept. 5, 2008 -
          Consumer Reports issues its own report regarding the CPSC pronouncement of July 30. In its review, it found:

          - The CPSC study didn’t analyze enough samples from older fields i.e., only two samples were from fields more than five years old.

          - CPSC staff acknowledged that some conditions such as age, weathering, exposure to sunlight, and wear and tear might change the amount of lead that could be released from the turf; the oldest field in their study showed the highest exposure to lead

          - The total lead content of the grass blades tested ranged from “none detected” to 9,600 parts per million (ppm)

          - Ten of 26 samples tested far exceeded the current 600 ppm legal limit that applies to lead in paint and that limit will be significantly reduced as a result of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

          - Shouldn't the fields that our children play on meet the same standards?

          - The CPSC study did not take into account exposure to lead from inhalation or direct ingestion of dust from the synthetic field. The CDC advisory pointed to this hazard.

          - Assumptions the CPSC made about how to measure ingestion levels are questionable. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The CPSC analysis and conclusions should be consistent with those of the medical community.

          - Although environmental issues are not under the CPSC’s purview, we need to be concerned that lead dust liberated from artificial playing fields may leach into soil and enter nearby waterways.




          ************ **
          Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
          (http://www. walletpop. com/?NCID= emlcntuswall0000 0001)



        • Betty Parshall
          I can only provide e-mail addresses, I don t think there are other attachments mentioned. E-mail the Commission:  recpark.commission@sfgov.org   E-mail
          Message 4 of 4 , Sep 22, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            I can only provide e-mail addresses, I don't think there are other attachments mentioned.
            E-mail the Commission:  recpark.commission@...
             
            E-mail Friends of McLaren Park.  President Franco Mancini will gather opinions, comments, and questions, and see that the Commission gets them:  johnmclarenpark@...
             
            Hope this helps.
            Betty

            --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Kevin Blackwell <kblackwell@...> wrote:
            From: Kevin Blackwell <kblackwell@...>
            Subject: Re: [Valley_Eye] Fw: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
            To: Valley_Eye@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 2:54 PM

            Betty,
             
            I could not open the attachments without a password...Let me know how I can get around this...Kevin

            Betty Parshall <bparshal@flash. net> wrote:
            this is lengthy but we all need to know and express our opinions to Rec & Park.  Crocker soccer fields are now off limits except for team games - no more free time playing on that "grass!"

            --- On Sun, 9/21/08, JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com> wrote:
            From: JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com <JohnMcLarenPark@ aol.com>
            Subject: URGENT: Your Voice is Needed to Save Our Playgrounds
            To:
            Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 12:58 PM

            Hi folks! Your help is URGENTLY NEEDED to prevent Louis Sutter Playground in your McLaren Park from being converted into a synthetic (plastic and rubber) field. There are lots of problems with the fields that I won’t go into here because it would take volumes to describe. (Just a brief one: the field will be fenced off. No one will be able to walk or play on it except the athletes.) The MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM is the health consequences of the toxic materials from which the synthetic fields are manufactured.  Especially problematic is the crumb rubber made of ground of tires that are full of lead. The lead ladden crumb rubber is used as the padding underneath the plastic grass. Please keep in mind the perfect characterization of the lead ladden rubber tire issue: “IF WE DON’T WANT THE TIRES IN OUR DUMP SITES BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO TOXIC, WHY WOULD WE PUT THEM IN OUR PLAYGROUNDS”
            Below is an outline of current developments regarding the plastic grass and the crumb rubber.  If you want more information on the developments listed, the supporting documents are in attached PDF’s.

            We need to keep our kids, families and community healthy, and safe from toxic materials. We can start by stopping the Recreation and Park Department from converting Louis Sutter Playground into a sythetic grass field.

            All you have to do to help out is send an emal to:

            RECPARK.COMMISSION@ SFGOV.ORG and to

            JOHNMCLARENPARK@ AOL.COM

            (you can simply copy and paste the address in you email address box)

            The message can simply say as little as:

            PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT LOUIS SUTTER PLAYGROUND TO A SYNTHETIC FIELD

            and as much more as you want.

            Also, please share the information that follows with your neighbors and friends.

            All the best, FRANCO

            1. June 18, 2008  - the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued an Advisory concerning artificial turf and its two components: the manufactured grass (blades) and the crumb rubber cushion. The distinction is extemely important when it comes to health consequences.  The CDC’s major concern was the crumb rubber and it’s lead content. The Advisory gives careful instruction about what parents should do if their children are exposed to the crumb rubber. (attached)

            2. July 30, 2008 - the
            Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a press release (attached) stating the artificial turf is safe. (Somewhat contradictory, the pronouncements included precautions that should be taken when someone is exposed to lead.)  The release was based on a staff report concluding that the product is safe.However, the report contained contradictory caveats.  (also attached)

            3. Aug. 8, 2008 -
            Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro addresses the CPSC pronouncement in a letter to Nancy Nord, (Acting) Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission: (full text attached)

            “........I believe that the study did not adequately support the title of the CPSC press release of July 30, 2008: “CPSC Staff Finds Synthetic Turf Fields OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  Given the numerous unresolved issues relating to the health and safety of synthetic turf, and the limitations described in CPSC’s own study, the CPSC should have proceeded with more caution before issuing the message that synthetic turf fields are “OK to Install, OK to Play On.”  I would appreciate a response from you as to how CPSC decided to issue this message despite the limitations of the synthetic turf study and the fact that synthetic turf may pose a number of health risks in addition to lead exposure.... .......”

            4. August 14, 2008 - the
            California Assembly passed SB1277 calling for a study of synthetic field materials. The bill elaborates the serious concerns about synthetic fields generally and crumb rubber specifically. The bill is currently enrolled in the California Senate. (attached)

            5. Aug. 19, 2008 - The
            Attorney  General of the State of Connecticut called the  Synthetic  Turf  Study  conducted by the CPSC “dangerously deceptive”. The AG urged its removal and  revision. The AG’s reaction is/was addressing the fact that the CPSC study focused on the composition of the artificial grass blades and not the more dangerous and insidious crumb rubber. (attached)

            6. Sept. 2, 2008 -
            Attorney General Jerry Brown and the Center for Environmental Health filed a suit in the Alameda Superior Court  alleging that six major synthetic turf producers have not complied with California State Proposition 65   - SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986   Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive  Toxicity.  No  person  in  the  course  of  doing  business  shall  knowingly  and  intentionally  expose  any  individual  to  a  chemical  known  to  the  state  to  cause  cancer  or reproductive  toxicity  without  first  giving  clear  and  reasonable  warning  to  such  individual,  except as  provided  in  Section  25249.10. (attached)

            7. Sept. 5, 2008 -
            Consumer Reports issues its own report regarding the CPSC pronouncement of July 30. In its review, it found:

            - The CPSC study didn’t analyze enough samples from older fields i.e., only two samples were from fields more than five years old.

            - CPSC staff acknowledged that some conditions such as age, weathering, exposure to sunlight, and wear and tear might change the amount of lead that could be released from the turf; the oldest field in their study showed the highest exposure to lead

            - The total lead content of the grass blades tested ranged from “none detected” to 9,600 parts per million (ppm)

            - Ten of 26 samples tested far exceeded the current 600 ppm legal limit that applies to lead in paint and that limit will be significantly reduced as a result of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

            - Shouldn't the fields that our children play on meet the same standards?

            - The CPSC study did not take into account exposure to lead from inhalation or direct ingestion of dust from the synthetic field. The CDC advisory pointed to this hazard.

            - Assumptions the CPSC made about how to measure ingestion levels are questionable. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The CPSC analysis and conclusions should be consistent with those of the medical community.

            - Although environmental issues are not under the CPSC’s purview, we need to be concerned that lead dust liberated from artificial playing fields may leach into soil and enter nearby waterways.




            ************ **
            Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators.
            (http://www. walletpop. com/?NCID= emlcntuswall0000 0001)



          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.