Turf war: California sues fake-grass makers over lead content
California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown and other law enforcement officials allege that three makers of artificial turf deliberately failed to disclose that their products contain lead.
SACRAMENTO — California's attorney general wants to put a new spin on the old admonition "Don't Step on the Grass!"
The warning could read "Don't Roll on the Artificial Turf" if Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown and local law enforcement officials prevail in an lawsuit filed late Tuesday against three top makers of the green plastic playing fields and grass-like indoor-outdoor carpeting.
The complaint filed in Alameda County Superior Court alleges the three manufacturers violated California's Proposition 65 environmental law by knowingly failing to disclose that their products contain lead.
The lawsuit, which has been joined by L.A. City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo and the Solano County Dist. Atty. David W. Paulson , names Beaulieu Group LLC of Georgia, Astroturf LLC of Georgia and Fieldturf USA Inc. of Florida.
Beaulieu's products are "safe and we are in compliance with California's Proposition 65," said Peter Farley, the company's general counsel. Astroturf and Fieldturf did not respond to calls for comment.
Lead, which is used to give a natural green hue to the artificial turf, has been identified by state agencies as a chemical that can cause cancer, damage to male and female reproductive systems, and birth defects in developing fetuses.
Children and other individuals can ingest harmful levels of lead by absorbing it through the skin or by rubbing the ersatz grass and then touching food or their mouths, the suit contends.
The state attorney general's office said it found excessive lead levels in some, but not all, of the artificial turf samples tested from the three companies.
Although artificial turf presents little or no danger when it is new, lead levels rise to potentially harmful levels as it gets older, said Deputy Atty. Gen. Dennis A. Ragen, the state's lead attorney on the lawsuit.
"As it ages, it forms more dust," he said, and could contain levels of lead that are more than 20 times what's allowed by Proposition 65.
The state, Ragen said, is negotiating with the three companies and is optimistic that a legal settlement can be reached that requires the products to be reformulated so that no lead is used in the manufacturing.
Most companies targeted by Proposition 65, known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, are eager to change their products rather than be forced to sell them with a warning that they contain chemicals "known to the state of California" to cause cancer or birth defects.
