Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-28-26 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - New synthetic turf and environmental protectionsFrom:Marcia Kaveney To:Mitchell Overton; Addi Jadin Cc:Alison Sweeney; Bozeman Public Comment; Jennifer Madgic; Chuck Winn; Emma Bode Subject:[EXTERNAL]New synthetic turf and environmental protections Date:Tuesday, September 29, 2026 10:57:05 AM Attachments:Synthetic Turf Fact Sheet.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mitch and Addi- This morning I read with some surprise and disappointment about the new synthetic turf field installation. Although I can relate to the hardships of maintaining grass fields having been along time soccer mom, I am unsupportive of the City using public money to install a surface material that is well known to cause health and environmental problems. Unfortunately with all the email notifications from the City I did not see a public meetingabout this proposal- perhaps I missed it, or perhaps it was decided in house. Regardless, the City's article posted 9/29/26 doesn't contain any information about what material is beingused for the fill. And it also doesn't mention what types of drains were installed for preventing runoff into the storm water system. Please let me know what precautions are being taken to offset the plastic waste and run off aswell as what materials this particular turf is made of or where to find this information on the City's website. I can only hope that with all the available information about artificial turfconcerns that the design team incorporated the safest materials and best practices for pollution prevention systems into the design. The links provided did not lead to this additionalinformation. Thank you, Marcia Kaveney https://pasadenanow.com/main/guest-opinion-suzanne-york-before-we-put-more-plastic- under-our-kids-we-need-to-stop-and-think https://www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/page/microplastics Synthetic or artificial turf is a multi-layer plastic product used as a surface on athletic playing fields, playgrounds, golf courses, and residential lawns. It typically consists of a top layer made from nylon, polypropylene, or polyethylene plastic, infill made from recycled tires (“crumb rubber”) or other untested material, a backing layer and a drainage layer. An average 80,000 sq ft. field contains 40,000 lbs of plastic carpeting and 400,000 lbs of infill. Synthetic turf has been shown to reach temperatures in excess of 200°F on a 98°F day. Synthetic turf is always significantly hotter than natural grass, concrete and asphalt, greatly concerning in regards to heat stress for athletes as well as skin burns. Toxic exposure via inhalation, skin contact or ingestion to phthalates, heavy metals (lead, Cadmium), and PFAS chemicals. Yale researchers identified a total of 306 chemicals in crumb rubber with 52 classified as known carcinogens, and another 6 suspected or presumed carcinogenic by both the US EPA and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Studies show that methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is more common on artificial turf fields than on regular grass leading to use of antimicrobials. Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of toxic chemicals due to their rapidly developing organ systems and immature detoxification mechanisms. Children breathe more air per unit of body weight than adults and have greater potential for hand-to-mouth exposure to contaminants than adults do. WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL OR SYNTHETIC TURF? HEALTH RISKS OF SYNTHETIC TURF WHO IS AT RISK? Beyond Plastics is a national project based at Bennington College www.BeyondPlastics.org Synthetic Turf is HAZARDOUS For more information, visit: www.SafeHealthyPlayingFields.org From:Mitchell Overton To:Marcia Kaveney; Addi Jadin Cc:Alison Sweeney; Bozeman Public Comment; Jennifer Madgic; Chuck Winn; Emma Bode Subject:Re: [EXTERNAL]New synthetic turf and environmental protections Date:Tuesday, September 29, 2026 4:31:16 PM Attachments:Handout - Environmental Impact Research Guide - FieldTurf - JUL2024.pdf Hi Marcia, Thank you for reaching out and checking in on details. Public safety and in particular, children's safety is our number one priority. My youngest son and many of our staff are also parents of children that play organized sports at our athletic facilities, and we are aware of the health and environmental concerns surrounding artificial turf and the infill products used. The decisions to mix in synthetic turf fields at the Bozeman Sports Park with our natural grass fields took place in 2016 after much research and deliberation. We work to supply a balance of both natural grass and some synthetic turf. They both have their tradeoffs when it comes to playability and maintenance and ultimately a combination of both is where we landed to hit the sweet spot. With the new field you read about, we now offer 12 specific rectangular pitches between the Bozeman Sports Park and Adam Bronken Complex, and we use two other park facilities (Oak Springs and Four Points) for four additional fields as needed (practice and overflow games). Out of those 16 fields, we offer four synthetic turf fields. We have worked to provide the best balance for the community and provide information so that sports clubs and parents can make informed decisions for their children, who are fortunate enough to have a lot of opportunity for access to the natural environment beyond organized sports on artificial turf. For the infill itself, we currently use a mixture of sand and rubber to meet the required concussion rating and still minimize the potential for rubber to migrate out of the field and we take great care to keep our infill material on the fields and not migrating out. That means regular maintenance and grooming of the fields to ensure a uniform distribution rather than migration and run-off, which ultimately effects player safety. We stay up to date on the national and international studies regarding synthetic turf and natural turf grass and send our relevant teams to Sports Turf Management School to stay up on best practices. Of course, the fields are designed to meet the City's stormwater code which requires onsite management of runoff. We monitor new developments for feasibility such as infill using cork instead of rubber but have not found enough evidence of its success in our climate. I have attached an FAQ relevant to the synthetic turf product we use. Their added playability in terms of hours and weather, as well as their great reduction in irrigation needs, have really added to that balance of offerings for our local youth and adult athletes alike. Thank you for voicing your concern. Please feel free to reach out for any additional details. Mitch Please note the change to my email address Mitchell J. Overton, MS, CPRP Director Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department Parks & Trails, Forestry, Recreation, Cemetery, Aquatics (406) 582-3222 Mitchell.Overton@bozemanmt.gov From: Marcia Kaveney <marciakaveney@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2026 10:56 AM To: Mitchell Overton <Mitchell.Overton@bozemanmt.gov>; Addi Jadin <Addi.Jadin@bozemanmt.gov> Cc: Alison Sweeney <Alison.Sweeney@bozemanmt.gov>; Bozeman Public Comment <comments@bozemanmt.gov>; Jennifer Madgic <Jennifer.Madgic@bozemanmt.gov>; Chuck Winn <Chuck.Winn@bozemanmt.gov>; Emma Bode <Emma.Bode@bozemanmt.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL]New synthetic turf and environmental protections CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mitch and Addi- This morning I read with some surprise and disappointment about the new synthetic turf field installation. Although I can relate to the hardships of maintaining grass fields having been along time soccer mom, I am unsupportive of the City using public money to install a surface material that is well known to cause health and environmental problems. Unfortunately with all the email notifications from the City I did not see a public meetingabout this proposal- perhaps I missed it, or perhaps it was decided in house. Regardless, the City's article posted 9/29/26 doesn't contain any information about what material is beingused for the fill. And it also doesn't mention what types of drains were installed for preventing runoff into the storm water system. Please let me know what precautions are being taken to offset the plastic waste and run off aswell as what materials this particular turf is made of or where to find this information on the City's website. I can only hope that with all the available information about artificial turfconcerns that the design team incorporated the safest materials and best practices for pollution prevention systems into the design. The links provided did not lead to this additionalinformation. Thank you, Marcia Kaveney https://pasadenanow.com/main/guest-opinion-suzanne-york-before-we-put-more-plastic-under-our-kids-we-need-to-stop-and-think https://www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/page/microplastics ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE ............ KEEPING ATHLETES & COMMUNITIES SAFE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 02 We understand that converting to artificial turf from natural grass, or replacing an existing surface, is an important and involved project for your organization and community. .............. With over 25 years of experience in artificial turf and sports construction, FieldTurf has one of the most knowledgeable and experienced teams in the industry. Our unwavering dedication to quality has guided our commitment to delivering surfaces that make a difference for athletes and their communities. In this guide, you’ll find answers to common environmental, health, and athlete impact questions relating to artificial turf. As a company, we’ve always been committed to trusting the science. Along with information from our team of experts, the comprehensive collection of data and answers in this guide are supported by leading independent and third-party research. Keeping your athletes & communities safe has been and will always be our first priority. Every day, we push the boundaries of research and innovation to engineer the most advanced artificial turf systems in the industry. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 03 CONTENTS Answers to common environmental, health, and athlete impact questions relating to artificial turf. What are the benefits of artificial turf over grass? Does artificial turf pose a risk of water contamination due to water run-off? Are there potential health risks from exposure to (SBR) styrene-butadiene rubber in artificial turf fields? What has a higher carbon footprint, artificial turf or natural grass? Is there potential risks of heat islands with artificial turf? How artificial turf is making a difference for athletes, schools, and communities How can I make my FieldTurf project more sustainable? What are PFAS and do FieldTurf system contain them? Is there a potential heat risk associated with artificial turf versus grass fields? Which offers the greatest value, artificial turf or natural grass? Is there a potential health risk of air quality with artificial turf? Does playing on artificial turf increase the risk of player injuries? Does artificial turf pose a risk of promoting MRSA/STAPH infections? 04 18 07 23 15 30 05 20 13 28 12 25 17 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 04 Synthetic turf offers a range of benefits over natural grass fields. .............. One of the most beneficial aspects of synthetic turf is that it helps preserve water, making it an environmentally conscious choice for communities and organizations seeking to reduce water usage. The Salt Lake County Council in Murray City, Utah, estimated that converting to synthetic turf would save 2 million gallons of water per year per field, which equates to over 16 million gallons of water over the field’s expected lifetime. With no need for pesticides, line painting, or chemicals for maintenance, synthetic turf helps protect the broader community’s health by reducing the need for products containing harsh ingredients or volatile compounds, reducing the potential for spillover of these compounds into surrounding neighborhoods, ecosystems, or habitats. With no gas-powered mowers required to maintain them, synthetic turf fields reduce greenhouse gas emissions during their overall maintenance and use lifecycle. Synthetic turf also provides increased availability of fields, meaning more hours of use are open to athletes and communities for sport and play. Synthetic turf is made of recycled materials, helping divert waste from local landfills. One of the main components of a standard field is (SBR) styrene-butadiene rubber which is made from granulated post-consumer automotive tires. With a wide range of benefits, synthetic turf is a smart choice for facilities and their communities. .............. Source: https://www.abc4.com/news/local-news/salt-lake-county-council-approves-converting-three-murray-sports-fields-to-artificial-turf/ WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF ARTIFICIAL TURF OVER GRASS? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 05 Building for tomorrow: it’s our sustainability commitment. .............. That means our innovation isn’t limited to product specs. Our promise to keep players safe on our turf has naturally evolved into an obsession — one with a singular focus to completely eliminate its potential to harm not just people but the environment, too. Now in everything we do, we strive for the lowest impact on people and the planet — from our zero turf to landfill commitment, to circular design, to the utmost care for those who play on and handle our products. FieldTurf’s industry-leading sustainability program, Sustain The Game, is proof of our commitment. We understand that sustainability is a complex, multifaceted topic, so we’ve prepared a collection of answers to popular questions: CAN FIELDTURF FIELDS BE RECYCLED? Yes, FieldTurf surfaces can be 100% recyclable, and we have successfully recycled numerous fields across the country. When AMB Sports and Entertainment embarked on replacing the surface at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in 2022, the organization trusted FieldTurf to ensure all components of the field avoided being sent to landfills in the replacement of the surface. The carpet material was successfully turned into composite wood products and other materials, and the infill was cleaned and separated for reuse. HOW IS A FIELDTURF FIELD RECYCLED? Artificial turf is made of common materials, including polyethylene, polypropylene, and nylon, while infill is made of either natural materials, sand, and (SBR) styrene-butadiene rubber. All of these are recyclable or compostable. HOW CAN I MAKE MY FIELDTURF PROJECT MORE SUSTAINABLE? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 06 The first step to recycling an aged field is to remove the carpet and send the rolls to one of our Tarkett Sports recycling facilities to extract the infill, clean it, and separate it for reuse. The carpet is then sent to a specialized recycling partner to be cut, processed, and through the use of a proprietary process that upcycles the material into a high-grade polyurethane & polypropylene blend, the carpet can be transformed into various products like composite nailer boards, planters, and park benches. HOW DOES FIELDTURF MANAGE JOB SITE WASTE? Under our Goal Zero commitment, FieldTurf will divert 100% of its manufacturing and job site waste in North America by the target date of 2025. The initiative is an industry-first. To achieve the goal, FieldTurf is working with suppliers, employees, and partners to ensure full alignment FieldTurf is calling on everyone, including customers and other turf manufacturers, to join their mission to achieve Goal Zero and work toward eliminating waste to landfills. HOW CAN I REDUCE THE CARBON IMPACT OF MY PROJECT? With the FieldTurf Carbon Offset Program, you can now calculate the exact emissions from the manufacturing, transport, and installation of the surface and offset them, so your project achieves carbon neutrality. Offsets are provided through the Carbonfund Foundation’s Carbonfree® Partner Program. This program funds third-party validated and verified renewable energy, forestry, and energy efficiency projects supporting a low-carbon transition for the planet. WHAT BENEFITS DO FIELDTURF FIELDS DELIVER ANNUALLY? FieldTurf fields are making a real difference every year. • Over 16 billion gallons of water are saved annually • Over 17 million tires are recycled into raw materials to build new fields annually, diverting them from landfills. • Over 65 million pounds of infill is re-used in new fields through onsite re-use and infill regeneration.. • Over 4 million pounds of fertilizer is saved annually, eliminating potentially negative impacts on plant, animal, and human environments. Data representing 2023 achievements. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 07 The majority of FieldTurf systems are designed with styrene- butadiene rubber (SBR) infill, otherwise known as crumb rubber, made of reclaimed tires. .............. Recycled crumb rubber, used in various everyday products and surfaces such as children’s toys, surgical gloves, food packaging, playgrounds, and running tracks, has been scientifically proven to be a safe material. More than 110 technical studies conducted by government bodies in the U.S. and Europe, along with several world health organizations, leading universities, and independent scientific bodies, have concluded that there is no health risk posed by using recycled SBR. You can find the following recent studies and additional attachments that confirm the safety of crumb rubber for us in sports fields. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Largest US study ever on tire crumb rubber) Synthetic Turf Field Recycled Tire Crumb Rubber Characterization Research Final Report: Part 1 - Tire Crumb Rubber Characterization Synthetic Turf Field Recycled Tire Crumb Rubber Characterization Research Final Report: Part 2 - Tire Crumb Exposure Characterization Did not find increased risk between crumb rubber and natural grass fields: “Recycled tire crumb rubber infill field users and natural grass field users experienced similar differences in pre-and post-activity PAH concentrations, including for hydroxynaphthalene.” ARE THERE POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS FROM EXPOSURE TO (SBR) STYRENE-BUTADIENE RUBBER IN ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELDS? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 08 Chemicals found in synthetic turf fields are also often found in surface soil at natural grass playing fields: “As described previously [EPA and CDC/ATSDR 2019], while there is concern about chemical exposures resulting from the use of recycled tire in synthetic turf fields, it is important to consider that some PAHs and other chemicals are also found in surface soil and may be present in other types of fields, including natural grass fields. For example, metals (including lead) and PAHs (including benzo[a]pyrene) of potential concern at synthetic turf fields with tire crumb rubber infill are also often found in surface soil present at natural grass playing fields [EPA and CDC/ATSDR 2019].” Chemicals are present, but low risk: “Support the conclusion that although chemicals are present (as expected) in the tire crumb rubber and exposures can occur, they are likely limited” “For metals, only small fractions (average mean about 3% for gastric fluid and <1% for saliva and sweat plus sebum) are released from tire crumb rubber into simulated biological fluids compared to a default assumption of 100% bioaccessibility.” No difference found in presence of metals pre-and-post activity: “The concentrations of metals in whole blood and serum were compared in samples collected from study participants pre- and post-activity. Significant differences were not observed in the means and geometric means between the pre- and post-activity samples for football or soccer players.” Washington State Department of Health Study “We did not find the number of cancers among soccer players” — Washington State Department of Health Study One of the most comprehensive human health studies came from the State of Washington Department of Health and researchers at the University of Washington School of Public Health, which had formed a project team to investigate issues specifically related to soccer playing and cancer. Their findings were very reassuring. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 09 “We know that crumb rubber is made from tires that contain chemicals that have been shown to cause cancer. However, what is critical to consider are the routes of exposure and the potential dose someone receives. The available research suggests exposures from crumb rubber are very low and will not cause cancer among soccer players. The Washington State Department of Health recommends that people who enjoy soccer continue to play regardless of the type of field surface.” THEY CONCLUDED: “We did not find the number of cancers among soccer players, select and premier players, or goalkeepers reported to the project team to be higher than expected based on Washington cancer rates for people of the same ages.” European risk assessment study on synthetic turf rubber infill – Part 3: Exposure and risk characterization “No health concerns were found for synthetic turf with ELT-derived infill materials” — European Risk Assessment Study on Synthetic Turf Rubber Infill (ERASSTRI) The European Risk Assessment Study On Synthetic Turf Rubber Infill (ERASSTRI) is one of the most comprehensive multinational exposure studies to be conducted. The study involved researchers collecting various samples from indoor and outdoor synthetic turf fields and rubber recycling facilities across Europe, looked at different exposure possibilities and concluded that “no health concerns were found for synthetic turf with ELT-derived infill materials.” THE THREE-PART, PEER-REVIEWED, 20-MONTH STUDY: • Examined Wide Variety of Sources: The study analyzed 86 crumb rubber samples from synthetic turf fields and rubber recycling facilities in 14 European countries. • Included Comprehensive Bioaccessibility Analysis: The study analyzed the migration of crumb rubber infill into artificial body fluids (sweat, saliva, and gastric fluid), as well as particles in the air above and around 17 synthetic turf fields in six European countries. • Conducted Complete Health Risk Analysis: Calculated for oral, dermal, and inhalation routes using their extensive database obtained from infill sample collection, risk assessment analysis, and exposure measurements, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk characterizations indicated no health concerns. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 10 “Calculated cancer risks for exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were below 1:1 million. Risk characterization ratios (RCRs) for non-carcinogenic substances were below 1, indicating no health concerns. For 2-hydroxybenzothiazole no toxicological data were found from which to derive a substance-specific reference value. A threshold-of-toxicological concern approach revealed maximum RCRs slightly above 1, which is acceptable, given the conservativism of the approach. ERASSTRI substantially improved the data available for assessing human health risks from using ELT-derived infill material. Overall, no health concerns could be identified for the use of synthetic turfs with ELT-derived infill material.” Comprehensive Multipathway Risk Assessment of Chemicals Associated With Recycled Crumb Rubber in Synthetic Turf Fields THE STUDY CONCLUDED: • Estimated non-cancer hazards and cancer risks for all the evaluated scenarios were within US EPA guidelines. In addition, cancer risk levels for users of synthetic turf fields were comparable to or lower than those associated with natural soil fields. • For most scenarios, cancer risks were higher for natural soil fields. • The use of synthetic turf fields containing recycled rubber infill would not result in unacceptable risks or hazards to adults or children under US EPA’s risk assessment guidelines. “Methods: All available North American data on the chemical composition of recycled rubber, as well as air sampling data collected on or near synthetic turf fields, were identified via a literature search. Ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation pathways were evaluated according to US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) guidance, and exposure scenarios for adults, adolescents, and children were considered. Results: Estimated non-cancer hazards and cancer risks for all the evaluated scenarios were within US EPA guidelines. In addition, cancer risk levels for users of synthetic turf fields were comparable to or lower than those associated with natural soil fields. Conclusions: This HHRA’s results add to the growing body of literature that suggests recycled rubber infill in synthetic turf poses negligible risks to human health. This comprehensive assessment provides data that allow stakeholders to make informed decisions about installing and using these fields.”, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 11 District of Columbia Study on the Safety of Synthetic Materials Currently Used in Construction and District Public Recreational Spaces This recently published study, which was undertaken to fulfill the requirements of the District of Columbia’s Safe Fields and Playgrounds Act of 2018, identified and assessed the health and safety effects of all synthetic materials used in the construction of District recreational spaces. The study, conducted by the District of Columbia’s Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE) and the Department of Health (DOH), compared laboratory test results from samples of natural grass and soils against samples of synthetic turf materials. The analysis revealed that comparable levels of carcinogenic chemicals such as arsenic and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were present in both natural grass / soils samples and some of the artificial turf samples, while the majority of artificial turf samples contained few to no toxic chemicals at all. In particular, FieldTurf’s carpet and infill was found to contain the same levels of arsenic and PAHs as the natural grass and soil samples, while FieldTurf’s grass carpet alone was found to contain no likely carcinogenic chemicals of potential concern. OVERALL THE STUDY CONCLUDED THAT: “Available broad-based evidence does not indicate that playing on synthetic/artificial turf will result in exposure to contaminants at levels that pose a significant risk to human health, provided such areas are properly installed and maintained, and users follow simple hygienic practices (e.g., washing hands, avoiding eating on the artificial field, and, to the extent practicable, removing as much dusty materials from shoes and clothing before going indoors).” ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 12 Researchers have refuted the false claim that exposure to styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR) can be carcinogenic, from their study (Milone & MacBroom, engineering, landscape architecture, and environmental science firm based in Connecticut, December 2008, ‘“Evaluation of the Environmental Effects of Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields”) .............. “Under favorable conditions for vapor generation, no detectable concentrations of volatile nitrosamines or 4-(tert-octyl) phenol existed in the air column at a height of four feet above the tested synthetic playing surfaces or in the air either upwind or downwind of the fields.” Other studies have affirmed these findings, including a study across five fields in Connecticut (Ginsberg G, Toal B, Simcox N, Bracker A, Golembiewski B, Kurland T, Hedman C. Human health risk assessment of synthetic turf fields based upon investigation of five fields in Connecticut. J Toxicol Environ Health), however, even though outdoor and indoor synthetic turf fields are not associated with elevated adverse health risks, proper installation of indoor fields should include guidance from an architect, designer or HVAC expert regarding the adequacy of ventilation for your installation, best- practice oversight that is commonly required for all indoor construction investments: “Cancer and noncancer risk levels were at or below de minimis levels of concern. The scenario with the highest exposure was children playing on the indoor field. The acute hazard index (HI) for this scenario approached unity, suggesting a potential concern, although there was great uncertainty with this estimate. The main contributor was benzothiazole, a rubber-related semivolatile organic chemical (SVOC) that was 14-fold higher indoors than outdoors. Based on these findings, outdoor and indoor synthetic turf fields are not associated with elevated adverse health risks. However, it would be prudent for building operators to provide adequate ventilation to prevent a buildup of rubber-related volatile organic chemicals (VOC) and SVOC on indoor fields. The current results are generally consistent with the findings from studies conducted by New York City, New York State, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Norway, which tested different kinds of fields and under a variety of weather conditions.” IS THERE A POTENTIAL HEALTH RISK OF AIR QUALITY WITH ARTIFICIAL TURF? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 13 First, it’s important to note that when it comes to surface temperature, artificial turf and natural grass fields vary. .............. Like all plants, grass, through the process of photosynthesis, makes oxygen that produces a cooling effect at surface level. However, research by industry-leading expert civil engineering and landscape architecture firm Milone and Macbroom found that beyond the surface, ambient heat between artificial turf and grass largely trends to the same median temperature. At the height of 5ft, the temperature of the two surfaces is virtually the same. This highlights the importance of looking beyond surface-level temperature to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the conditions of a field. IS THERE A POTENTIAL HEAT RISK ASSOCIATED WITH ARTIFICIAL TURF VERSUS GRASS FIELDS? TIME OF DAY (HRS)) ºF ºF ºF ºF ºF 12:00 101 99 101 103 101 12:30 101 99.7 101 104 101 13:00 103 100 103 104 101 13:30 102 101 102 103 101 14:00 101 100 101 103 101 14:30 99 97 99 104 101 15:00 99 100 99 104 101 AMBIENT TEMPERATURE NATURAL GRASS SYNTHETIC TURF AIR TEMPERATURE 2’ ABOVE SURFACE AIR TEMPERATURE 2’ ABOVE SURFACE AIR TEMPERATURE 5’ ABOVE SURFACE AIR TEMPERATURE 5’ ABOVE SURFACE Chart data sourced from TABLE 1 and TABLE 2 of research. RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 14 A study by Andrew Grundstein, Department of Geography, University of Georgia and Earl Cooper, Department of Kinesiology, University of Georgia, collected matched wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) data over three commonly used athletic surfaces (grass, artificial turf, and hardcourt tennis) across an athletic complex on the campus of the University of Georgia in Athens, GA, and concluded: “Our study indicates that in a humid, subtropical climate over a well-watered grass field, there is no difference in WBGT when compared to artificial turf and hardcourt tennis surfaces.” A = ARTIFICIAL TURF • G= NATURAL GRASS • T = TENNIS COURT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 15 “Heat islands” often happen in urbanized areas that experience higher temperatures than rural and suburban settings. .............. The temperature differences can be caused by a combination of built environments and our urban activities, such as transportation, energy consumption, and building construction. It is possible for heat islands to negatively impact human health, by causing discomfort and even heat- related illnesses. But it’s not just parking lots. Any built environment can make a heat island. And that could include both built-and-designed artificial turf and natural grass fields. The temperature of the field and risk of heat island can be influenced by a variety of factors, such as the amount of shade in the area, the presence of nearby buildings or water features, and the prevailing winds. These factors can create microclimates that affect the temperature of the surface. The results of the temperature measurements obtained from the fields studied in Connecticut (Milone and Macbroom) indicate that solar heating of the materials used in the construction of artificial turf playing surfaces does happen and is most pronounced in the polyethylene and polypropylene fibers used to replicate natural grass (the carpet), rather than the crumb rubber particles (the infill). Most FieldTurf systems are designed with more infill and a lower face weight (amount of fiber per square foot) than competitive synthetic turf systems, which could help mitigate the risk heat island. Rapid cooling of the fibers was noted if the sunlight was interrupted or filtered by clouds. Even more significant cooling was noted if water was applied to the synthetic fibers as a cooling tactic in quantities as low as one ounce per square foot. The elevated temperatures noted for the fibers generally resulted in an air temperature increase of fewer than five degrees, even during periods of calm to low climate-and-weather related temperature. IS THERE POTENTIAL RISKS OF HEAT ISLANDS WITH ARTIFICIAL TURF? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 16 So even though we’ve established that artificial turf can be hotter at the surface than natural grass—artificial turf also cools down quickly and retains limited heat, so none of the negative impacts attributed to heat islands, such as driving up energy demand for air conditioning or creating conditions that can lead to heat stroke should be attributed to artificial turf. That being said, it is important to note that the heat island effect is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by many factors, including land use patterns, building materials, and weather conditions. There are many other strategies that can be employed to mitigate this effect, such as using cool roofing materials and promoting the use of public transportation. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 17 MRSA stands for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, a type of bacteria that is resistant to several antibiotics. .............. In the community (where you live, work, shop, and go to school), MRSA most often causes skin infections. It sometimes causes pneumonia (lung infection) and other infections. If left untreated, MRSA infections can become severe and cause sepsis—the body’s extreme response to an infection. Anyone can get MRSA. The risk increases with activities or places that involve crowding, skin-to-skin contact, and shared equipment or supplies. Some of the people who carry MRSA can go on to get an MRSA infection. Non-intact skin, such as when there are abrasions or incisions, is often the site of an MRSA infection. Athletes, daycare and school students, military personnel in barracks, and those who receive inpatient medical care or have surgery or medical devices inserted in their bodies are at higher risk of MRSA infection. Research has proven that synthetic turf does not play a role in promoting MRSA/staph. Researchers at Penn State (study: Human health issues on synthetic turf in the USA) confirmed that staph is not an issue on artificial turf, and in fact, natural grass harbors more bacteria. “In conclusion, there are generally lower numbers of total microbes present in the infill or fibers of the synthetic turf systems tested compared to natural turfgrass rootzones and Staphylococcus aureus bacterium were not found on any of the playing surfaces. Staphylococcus aureus bacterium was found on towels and other devices used by athletes. Under non-extreme temperatures and very limited light conditions present during the indoor portion of this study, S. aureus survived on both synthetic and natural turfgrass for multiple days. However, the bacteria do not appear to thrive under these conditions as the numbers of surviving bacteria decrease significantly with time.” Based on the findings of the S. aureus survey, concern that infilled synthetic turf harbours and provides a breeding ground for S. aureus bacteria is unwarranted within the context of this study. S. aureus bacteria were found on a number of surfaces that athletes commonly come into contact with, such as towels and blocking pads; however, the tested synthetic turf did not contain any S. aureus.” DOES ARTIFICIAL TURF POSE A RISK OF PROMOTING MRSA/STAPH INFECTIONS? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 18 Water run-off refers to the movement of water across any surface and into surrounding areas. .............. Run-off is always a concern because water can carry a range of contaminants such as heavy metals, chemicals, and fertilizers which can impact the environment and public health by potentially contaminating surface water and groundwater sources. This contaminated water also has the potential to enter rivers, lakes, or other bodies of water, and ultimately find its way into drinking water sources. This can have serious consequences for both the environment and human health, making it important to carefully manage and monitor the water run-off. Any surface can pose an issue—even pesticide-treated or fertilized natural grass produces run-off that could be concerning: Environmental Implications of Excess Fertilizer and Manure on Water Quality “When nutrients and other pollutants associated with animal manures and commercial fertilizers are not managed properly, they can affect plant and animal life (including humans) negatively. Some of these impacts include algae blooms causing the depletion of oxygen in surface waters, pathogens and nitrates in drinking water, and the emission of odors and gases into the air.” For artificial turf, water run-off does not typically contain heavy metals, organics, or zinc, and crumb rubber (infill) also does not have a significant impact on groundwater quality. A 2014 study was conducted by CDM Smith and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection to evaluate the potential impacts of water run-off from artificial turf fields on water quality. As part of this study, a sample of turf was collected from an active section of the field in June 2013. The sample was then tested using the synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP), a standardized method for determining the release of contaminants from solid materials into the water. DOES ARTIFICIAL TURF POSE A RISK OF WATER CONTAMINATION DUE TO WATER RUN-OFF? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 19 By using this method, the researchers were able to assess the potential for contaminants to leach out of the artificial turf and impact the surrounding environment: “Water samples were collected from the field and water samples were tested for arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and zinc and were compared to criteria from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for freshwater aquatic life and drinking water. Based on the results of the sampling effort, the athletic field is not a source of metal concentrations”. In another study from the New York State Department of Health in May 2009 (An Assessment Of Chemical Leaching, Releases To Air And Temperature At Crumb-Rubber-Infilled Synthetic Turf Fields) collected thirty-two samples of groundwater in relation to artificial turf run-off and no organics or zinc were detected. “The dilution-attenuation factor (DAF) from the NYSDEC’s soil cleanup guidance for hazardous remediation sites was applied and demonstrated that crumb rubber may be used as an infill without significant impact on groundwater quality.” In another study, the Town of Wilton, CT, Found Very Low Levels of PFAS From Turf “The sampling test results showed: • No PFAS chemicals detected in the stormwater discharge points from the artificial turf fields. • Some very low level PFAS chemical compounds in the surface water bodies tested. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 20 The following provides an overview of PFAS, the extensive testing we have done on numerous FieldTurf carpets, and the results and evidence that show our products are safe. .............. We take PFAS concerns seriously and have had our products thoroughly assessed by outside experts. As always, we are fully committed to prioritizing athlete safety – and we believe this is a key reason why we are a market leader for synthetic turf fields WHAT ARE PFAS? There is a lot of misinformation about PFAS, and it’s critical to cut through the confusion. PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are everywhere: they are long-lasting chemicals that you can find in many types of consumer products, such as fast-food containers, microwave popcorn bags, candy wrappers, personal care products such as shampoo and dental floss, and cosmetics such as nail polish and eye makeup. The term PFAS can refer to more than 10,000 different chemicals used in commerce, including fluoropolymers. Roughly 30 have been identified as posing potential health concerns. Most PFAS are likely only present at very low levels in the environment. FIELDTURF COMMISSIONED EXTENSIVE INDEPENDENT TESTING OF OUR PRODUCTS Our holistic approach to Protect People & Planet is stitched into the fabric of how we do business and sits at the heart of our day-to-day decision-making. That’s why we voluntarily submitted our products for rigorous testing by an outside lab. The approach they used and the results are summarized below. In short, we cast a wide net in terms of testing and the results show that there are only occasional trace amounts of PFAS in our products – and these amounts fall below U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s limits for soil. WHAT ARE PFAS AND DO FIELDTURF SYSTEMS CONTAIN THEM? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 21 APPROACH: • Extensive laboratory testing was conducted with three of our carpets (FieldTurf Core Synthetic Turf Carpet, FieldTurf Classic HD Synthetic Turf Carpet, and FieldTurf Revolution 360 Turf Carpet) for more than 70 different PFAS compounds using methods designed to detect even very low levels. This is the largest list of PFAS compounds that is currently available from commercial laboratories and includes those that have been identified as potential health concerns. • In addition, a special process (called a TOP assay) was used to simulate the potential effects of “weathering” these products to evaluate any release of PFAS compounds over time as they degrade. The TOP assay involves heating the products and oxidizing them with a strong chemical. This process is significantly more aggressive than conditions a normal field would experience on a daily basis – especially because any PFAS compounds potentially present in some synthetic turf products are essentially locked inside the products and are highly resistant to wear. Put another way, even though any potential PFAS would be trapped inside the product, the TOP assay artificially exposes them and allows testing. • These methods ensured we were not just looking for the most commonly addressed compounds (PFOA and PFOS) and we made sure to get highly specific results – right down to the sample detection limits. RESULTS: • Low levels of some PFAS compounds, below laboratory reporting limits, were identified in some FieldTurf products – but the specific PFAS compounds detected are not on the EPA’s RCRA “Hazardous Constituent” list, and the levels reported are lower than even the most stringent EPA soil screening health guideline levels for PFAS compounds. As part of our rigorous testing process, one of our products was tested twice (called a “duplicate”) to determine whether or not the results were reproducible (see Tables 3 and 4). This is a standard quality control practice for laboratory testing. • Under the EPA’s definition of PFAS compounds, the fluoropolymers used in some of FieldTurf synthetic turf products are likely considered to be PFAS. This is also true for any synthetic turf product made from or with fluoropolymers, regardless of manufacturer. However, the laboratory testing of FieldTurf products made with fluoropolymers (which are designed to resist degradation) found that little (if any) PFAS would leach from these types of materials over time – and this was only after the aggressive TOP assay process was used. • Data validation of the laboratory results showed that in fact laboratory contamination, not the product samples, was the source of the majority of detections. The remaining detections are extremely low level (below the reporting limits in most cases) and non-reproducible, raising the question as to whether these low levels are actually related to the product or also laboratory errors. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 22 On an additional note, we also urge you to consider testing using sampling from a field recently installed in the City of Portsmouth (MA), which concluded, “Based on this evaluation, the detection of very low levels of a limited number of PFAS in the synthetic turf components does not represent a human health risk to those using the synthetic turf ballfields.” PFAS IN NATURAL SOILS As a result of their use in many different products, low levels of many PFAS are found in natural soils, even in remote areas. The low levels of the PFAS compounds detected in some FieldTurf products are similar to PFAS levels found in a national study that evaluated the presence of PFAS in normal soils (including parks). Further, the testing of FieldTurf products did not detect any of the two PFAS compounds of most concern (PFOA and PFOS), which are commonly found in natural soils. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE PURCHASING When considering who to choose for a synthetic turf field, you should feel empowered to ask detailed questions about the PFAS testing that has been done on the materials and know exactly what you are purchasing. Be careful of products that offer limited testing results, for instance those that only test for a few PFAS compounds (such as PFOA and PFOS) or have elevated reporting limits. We have confidence in the safety of our products because we had them independently and thoroughly evaluated. We took this approach to ensure that you can closely scrutinize our products and get the most accurate information possible. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 23 When it comes to comparing greenhouse gas emissions, it’s important to consider the total lifetime of artificial turf vs natural grass. .............. On the overall balance of things, artificial turf is assumed to produce a higher carbon footprint than natural grass due to manufacturing and disposal over the total course of its lifetime, even though there are much more emissions from the maintenance of natural grass. Because the manufacturing and disposal of artificial turf can generate high emissions, FieldTurf is working to reduce the footprint of its manufacturing facilities and innovate to provide end-of-life options that divert used fields away from landfills by recycling them back into useful materials. Carbon intensity also plays a role in comparing both field solutions. A study by the Zurich University of Applied Sciences conducted a lifecycle analysis for different types of fields ranging from natural turf with and without drainage, hybrid turf, and artificial turf unfilled and filled. They measured the carbon intensity of greenhouse gases for each option per hour of use, noting that the hours of use vary significantly between the natural turf and artificial turf (with more play time on artificial turf). The results show that kgCO2e per hour of use begins to converge as hours of use increase. For example, you may only be able to get 500 hours of use from the natural turf without drainage (lowest footprint option), while you may be able to get 1600 hours of use from the artificial turf filled (highest footprint option)—yet the greenhouse gas footprint per hour of use for both field types would be the same. WHAT HAS A HIGHER CARBON FOOTPRINT, ARTIFICIAL TURF OR NATURAL GRASS? RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 24 The annual usage time not only depends on the turf type, but also on other factors like the existing infrastructure for lighting that allows for longer daily usage of the sports fields Greenhouse gas emissions in kg CO2-eq according to IPCC (2013) per hour of use, depending on the total hours of use per year visualized for the natural, hybrid, and artificial turf sports fields under study; data points indicate the theoretical hours of use. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 25 Keeping your athletes safe has been and will always be FieldTurf’s first priority. .............. When reviewing artificial turf and player safety, it’s crucial to remember that not all turf is created equal. THE FIELDTURF DIFFERENCE: • FieldTurf’s heavyweight infill systems were proven to deliver a lower incidence of total injuries. • FieldTurf’s unique wide-gauge design delivers leading cleat release times FieldTurf is the only artificial turf company with systems reviewed by published peer-reviewed research. STUDY HIGHLIGHTS: COLLEGE FOOTBALL FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS 3-year study FieldTurf systems led to: • 13% Fewer Muscle Strains / Tears • 11% Fewer Concussions • 31% Fewer Ligament Tears • 24% Fewer High Ankle Sprains • 21% Fewer Severe Injuries • 23% Fewer Injuries on 4-8+ Year Old Surface DOES PLAYING ON ARTIFICIAL TURF INCREASE THE RISK OF PLAYER INJURIES? HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS 5-year study FieldTurf systems led to: • 44% Fewer Concussion Injuries Combined • 43 % Fewer ACL Injuries Combined • 25% Less Time Lost to Long-Term Injuries (22+ Days) • 16% Less Time Lost to Short-Term Injuries (1-2 Days) RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 26 HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL HEAVYWEIGHT INFILL VS OTHER INFILL WEIGHT SURFACES 7-year study RECIPIENT OF THE 2016 AMERICAN ORTHOPAEDIC SOCIETY FOR SPORTS MEDICINE SPORTS TRAUMA AND OVERUSE PREVENTION (STOP) SPORTS INJURIES AWARD FOR TOP RESEARCH ON YOUTH SPORTS INJURY PREVENTION Systems with >9 lbs per square foot of infill compared to all other infill weight surfaces led to: • 19%-29% lower incidence of total injuries • 35%-55% lower incidence of Substantial injuries • 19%-26% lower incidence of severe injuries • 32%-47% lower incidence of player-to-turf injuries • 17%-22% lower incidence of Ligament Sprains and Tears • 58%-63% lower incidence of injuries on surfaces aged 8+ years, vs systems with 0-5.9 lbs per square foot FIELDTURF RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT Independent and third-party multi-year research is validating our effort to provide athletes with the safest field possible. FieldTurf has been actively collaborating with the University of Calgary researchers for many years on advanced traction research projects, as well as working with Penn State University’s Center for Sports Surface Research on a variety of research studies. Our latest venture, the Smart Team Project. The FieldTurf Innovation & Performance Center (FIPC) has sourced the latest and most advanced technology in athlete monitoring, analytics, and sports surfacing to connect its partner school. With the help of advanced biometrics and real-time analytics, the SmartTeam Project will collect millions of data points obtained through athlete monitoring wearables, video analytics, and surface testing. The project’s mission is to translate the findings into tangible learnings that could result in meaningful change for athletes. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 27 The technology will record in-depth athlete biometrics (heart rate, speed, distance, player load), head impacts in real-time and monitor recovery, strain, and sleep. The SmartTeam Project will leverage an advanced video analysis tool and connect to the world’s only smart field technology to monitor field activity and maintenance. This technology will enable the recording of live events and overlay them with precise field surface conditions obtained through a battery of industry testing Every day, FieldTurf pushes the boundaries of research and innovation to engineer the most advanced artificial turf system in the industry. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 28 A high-quality natural grass field can only be utilized for a fraction of the time an artificial turf field can be utilized. .............. Artificial turf can be played on for 3,000 hours/year, whereas a natural grass field can be utilized for 300 – 600 hours to maintain its best playable condition. FOR EXAMPLE, THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY WORK GROUP CONCLUDED: “Despite the higher up-front and future replacement costs, an artificial turf MCPS Stadium field provides a substantially lower net cost per hour of use than any of the natural grass options because of the substantially increased hours of use and additional revenue generated from that increased use.” WHICH OFFERS THE GREATEST VALUE: ARTIFICIAL TURF OR NATURAL GRASS? 20 YEAR COST SUMMARY Artificial Turf Initial Capital Cost 1,125,000 530,000 580,000 150,000 75,000 1,280,000 150,000 175,000 100,000 60,000 206,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 900,000 500,000 2,611,000 1,680,000 1,755,000 1,150,000 635,000 1,600,000 ---- 1,011,000 1,680,000 1,755,000 1,150,000 635,00020 YEAR NET COSTS20 Year Replacement Cost* 20 Year Maintenance / Other Costs 20 Year Total Costs 20 Year Revenue - MCPS** 20 Year Net Cost - MCPS Bermuda (Sand Base) Bermuda (Native Soil) Cool Season (Native Soil) Kentucky BG (Sand Base) 2,300 600 500 400 300 21.98 140.00 175.50 143.75 105.83 COST PER HOUR OF USEANNUAL HOURS OF USE 20 YEAR NET COST PER HOUR OF USE - MCPS *Assumes two artificial turf carpet replacements (after years 8 and 16) and one major natural grass rehab after year 12.**No revenue assumed for natural grass fields since MCPS would reserve these fields only for MCPS team games and practices. HERE’S WHAT INDEPENDENT REVIEWS OFTEN FIND WHEN COMPARING NATURAL GRASS AND ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELDS: “Despite the higher up-front and future replacement costs, an artificial turf MCPS Stadium field provides a substantially lower net cost per hour of use than any of the natural grass options because of the substantially increased hours of use and additional revenue generated from that increased use.” - MONTGOMERY COUNTY WORK GROUP - REVIEW OF BENEFITS & ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL GRASS & ARTIFICIAL TURF RECTANGULAR STADIUM FIELDS PREPARED BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY WORK GROUP 800-724-2969 | info@fieldturf.com | fieldturf.com RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 29 In 2020, a report prepared by Atlanta-based planning, engineering and landscape architecture firm Eberly & Associates for Woodward Academy in East Point, GA, sheds significant light on the topic. The firm combined initial installation and annual maintenance costs for a new baseball field at a college-preparatory school with an estimated annual hour of usage to perform a 10-year lifecycle and hourly cost analysis of both artificial turf and natural grass. The report concluded that over 10 years, the cost per hour of a synthetic turf was less expensive than natural grass. Maintenance costs for grass were estimated at $23,000 per year, while annual maintenance costs for synthetic turf were estimated at $5,000. “The availability-of-use calculation varies among researchers and manufacturers, but generally it is thought that with weather issues (i.e. drainage from large rain events) and maintenance requirements — which include actual field maintenance and resting a natural field from use — a synthetic field would have anywhere from two to three times greater availability of use,” the report concludes. The results of the firm’s analysis indicate that even though upfront costs for a synthetic turf baseball field might be higher than grass, turf will pay long-term dividends in the form of less maintenance and extended use over a 10-year period. Cost isn’t the only factor to consider when examining artificial turf vs natural grass for baseball. TOTAL COST $895,041 $550,102 ASSUMPTION OF AVAILABLE USE 48 WEEKS/YEAR - 42 HRS/WEEK 40 WEEKS/YEAR - 20 HRS/WEEK TOTAL AVAILABLE HOURS 2,016 HOURS 800 HOURS COST PER HOUR $44.40 $68.76 NATURAL GRASSSYNTHETIC TURF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 30 Synthetic Turf Increases Access To Play In Wet And Chilly Washington. “Those teams who had access to turf fields played, while those that didn’t had to reschedule.” (Tim Martinez, “Martinez: Turf fields benefit most, but not all,” The Columbian, 4/18/23) .............. Julie Souza, Deputy Mayor and Councilmember, Rye City, Souza Says Set The Record Straight on Artificial Turf. “Natural Grass Can’t Do the Job. The current, failed field cancels play over 40% of the time because (a) it doesn’t recover from rain and (b) a natural grass playing surface cannot be maintained under heavy use.” “We asked Princeton’s Graydon whether, given the use hours needed, we should consider a new natural grass field. His response: “Even with the most durable grass, you might as well put dirt down. You won’t be able to maintain [grass].” “Natural grass can only be safely and properly maintained at 10 to 15 hours of weekly use. Rye uses the field 36 to 45 hours per week. The only safe and durable surface that supports that level of use is synthetic turf.” (MyRye.com, “LETTER: Souza Says Set The Record Straight on Artificial Turf”, myrye.com, 01/30/24) .............. Jerry Riddle, Father, artificial turf helps daughter have a sense of belonging. He said having a new turf field will help his 17-year-old daughter, Sarah, who has Asperger’s Syndrome be able to have a sense of belonging, while having fun on the baseball field. (Star Conner, Local Little League baseball team in Davie County raising $500,000 for players with special needs and disabilities, WXII12.com, 04/11/24) .............. HOW ARTIFICIAL TURF IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE FOR ATHLETES, SCHOOLS, AND COMMUNITIES RETURN TO CONTENTS PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 31 John Boynton, Carlisle-MA Community Member, Renovates Surfaces With Artificial Turf, After Due Diligence. “All four of my kids do play on these fields. It’s a tremendous opportunity for them to get outside, be active—I’m convinced that they are safe. We found that there is actually twenty years of research that has been undertaken into this specific question and we determined that the science really has spoken clearly.” (Safe Fields Alliance, “The Truth About Crumb Rubber and Artificial Turf,” Youtube, 2/1/16) .............. Jim Dorsey, GA High School Athletic Director, Synthetic Turf Does Not Cause A Health Concern And Works Great. “We presently have three artificial turf fields. Our first fields went in about thirteen or fourteen years ago. My course of action, primarily, was just to research studies that I could find on the internet dealing with this issue and based on their findings, there was just no correlation whatsoever that I could find on any of the things that I read that pointed to the fact that crumb rubber could be an issue. You know, my children went to school here, played on these surfaces while they were here. We have thousands of kids that come through, not only just our students here at McEachern High School but our youth leagues, our middle school programs utilize our fields day in – we literally have thousands of kids that have played on our fields over this twelve, thirteen year span and I’ve absolutely had no issues whatsoever.” (Recycled Rubber Facts, “The Many Benefits Of Recycled Rubber,” Recycled Rubber Facts, 2019) .............. Artificial Turf Fields Allowed Football Teams In Vicksburg, MS To Play Extended Seasons Without Worrying About Field Weather Damage. “It’s hard to deny, however, the functional appeal of turf, especially after Week 1 of the high school football season. In the days leading up to the 2019 Red Carpet Bowl, it allowed Warren Central’s Viking Stadium to serve as a central practice facility for both its primary tenants and Vicksburg High’s team. Construction crews are still installing the turf at VHS’ Memorial Stadium, and doing work on the adjacent practice field. The Gators have been bussing to the nearby City Park softball fields and Vicksburg Junior High for practices.” (Ernest Bowker, “Artificial Turf Brings Plenty Of Peace To Mind,” Vicksburg Post, 8/29/19) .............. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 32 Turf Is A Safe Cost-Effective Option For Kids Of All Ages. “Kids stand a higher risk for these injuries in football due to the conditions of the fields. The maintenance cost to upkeep these fields and repair them as grass fields is enormous even with volunteers doing most of the work. Turf is a much safer and cost-effective option when considering that it can bring in revenue with more than just football.” (Jackson, Blake, “Letter: Artificial Turf Is Safer, Cheaper Than Grass,” State Journal, 12/9/19) .............. Scott Stueber, NY School District Athletic Director, Claims Turf Repairs Have Attracted More Students To Athletics. “’The grass fields on all three schools were in disrepair,’ Scott Stueber, the district’s athletic director, said. ‘I think the new turf fields have helped all the teams, not just football, and now the field looks cleaner and the kids can take pride in their facilities.’ Coaches for the district’s varsity football teams said the turf fields offered players better footing, and with it, more speed and agility, in games and practices. The fields have also reportedly increased the number of students wanting to play football, and made more frequent practices possible.” (Nicole Alcindor, “Turf Fields Earn High Marks,” LIHerald, 1/2/20) .............. Chris Wagner, NY High School Coach, Says Turf Is Safer And Provides A More Consistent, Better Quality Surface. “’I think the turf field is safer — there’s less injury because there are no rocks or stones — it’s a more consistent surface and, rain or shine, we can play,’ North High School head coach Chris Wagner said. ‘The sidelines, numbers and yard lines are perfect on turf fields, which makes the game more organized.’ Although this was Wagner’s first year of coaching at North, he has coached football at other schools for 40 years. He said he noticed a difference when he played with teams on grass fields. Artificial turf, he said, has a number of advantages over grass fields, including built-in drainage systems, which prevent puddles and mud — conditions, Wagner said, that negatively affect traction and the quality of play on natural grass.” (Nicole Alcindor, “Turf Fields Earn High Marks,” LIHerald, 1/2/20) .............. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 33 Joe Guastafeste, NY High School Coach, Claims Turf Fields Can Properly Accommodate Multiple Sports Safely. “At South, head varsity coach Joe Guastafeste said that prior to the installation of the artificial turf, the football field was also used as a baseball field. The dual configuration, he said, led to the mixing of clay from the baseball diamond and mud from the football field, which resulted in exceptionally slippery conditions. ‘Our [grass] field was known as the most dangerous field throughout Nassau County because grass would mix with clay, [there would be] constant puddles and there was always dangerous and uneven terrain,’ Guastafeste explained. The turf field, he added, solved those problems.” (Nicole Alcindor, “Turf Fields Earn High Marks,” LIHerald, 1/2/20) .............. Michael Rubino, NY High School Football Coach, Claims Turf Lengthens Sports Season. “Central’s varsity football coach and athletic director, Michael Rubino, said his team likes artificial turf because it allowed for more practices. ‘We always had to hope for a dry and sunny day,’ Rubino said, recalling the seasons on natural grass. ‘Now, if it rains or snows the night before, with turf, guys can train more effectively and efficiently because turf fields remain the same in December as it is in the summer.’” (Nicole Alcindor, “Turf Fields Earn High Marks,” LIHerald, 1/2/20) .............. John Germano, NJ High School Athletic Director, Supports Turf Fields Extended Use. “Over the years, Egg Harbor Township, Ocean City and St. Augustine Prep have installed turf fields. Schools are making the move because they find value in the investment, district officials said. The districts are able to save on maintenance, play during inclement weather and use the fields as much as they want, which also benefits local recreation programs. ‘It’s nonstop use for both our high school and our rec programs. It’s great,’ Germano said.” (Zac Spencer, “Barnegat Joins Schools Moving Toward Artificial Turf Fields,” Atlantic City Press, 2/21/20) .............. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 34 Mike Pellegrino, NJ Athletic Director, Claims Athletic Programs Compete To Get Playing Time On Turf Fields. “The only problem with a field that can take that much abuse is scheduling all the teams that want to play on it, said Mike Pellegrino, Egg Harbor Township athletic director. ‘Sometimes we’re trying to fit 11 games on the field in a six-day span,’ he said. ‘They all want to showcase and play under the lights. As an athletic director, it makes your days much longer.’” (Zac Spencer, “Barnegat Joins Schools Moving Toward Artificial Turf Fields,” Atlantic City Press, 2/21/20) .............. PA Superintendent Prefers Turf Because Lower Maintenance Costs Create Long-Term Cost Savings. “The recommendations for the artificial surface and other renovations would total about $1.8 million, according to Superintendent Shannon Wagner. A combination of hearing from parents, students, and the community along with more research led to the administration to go with the artificial turf, Wagner said. While preliminary estimates showed artificial turf cost substantially more than natural sod to install, that isn’t the case over a decade when considering maintenance costs. In the long run artificial turf costs less than grass, Wagner said.” (Mary Ann Thomas, “Burrell Administration Recommends Artificial Turf For Buccaneers Stadium,” TRIB Live, 3/11/20) .............. American Legion Field at Bartlett High School in Anchorage, AK, hasn’t let a little snow get in the way of its #baseball and #softball schedules. “While weather conditions have led to cancellations at several of the area’s non-FieldTurf fields, our turf system, combined with the tremendous efforts of snow removal crews, have helped Bartlett High maintain its status as a reliable game day host.” (4/22/23) .............. Michael Bass (Alvin ISD Athletic Director) loves their FieldTurf at Freedom Field “The great thing about a turf field is that it eliminates having the cost of having to do fertilizer, mowing to maintain, and insecticide, so you save yourself every year approximately $100,000 - $150,000, probably even more nowadays. “ (@SportsDissected on YouTube, Video, 10/01/22) .............. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RESEARCH GUIDE 35 Bobby Cruz, Director - United Independent School District Loves FieldTurf’s Exceptional Drainage “We had some unusually heavy rains hit us here in Laredo and our kids were able to practice immediately after the storms. In fact, they wanted to practice in the afternoon on the same day after getting 9 inches of rain in one day. We could have easily done it but the streets were flooded and we didn’t want to risk putting kids on the roads, so we waited until the next day. ALL of our outdoor programs utilized the field.” (LinkedIn, post, 08/01/22). .............. Antonio Arserio the Mayor of the City of Margate discusses the Reopening of Vinson Park after major renovations. “It’s probably the biggest game changer out of all our parks in our city” (@cityofmargatefla on YouTube, Link, 04/23/22) © Copyright 2024. FieldTurf USA, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Version 002 - April 22, 2024.