The Agency for Toxic Substances and | Disease Registry (ATSDR) protects | communities from harmful health eects | related to exposure to natural and humanmade hazardous substances. ATSDR works | closely with tribal agencies, the ATSDR | Partnership to Promote Localized Eorts to | Reduce Environmental Exposure (APPLETREE state partners), and other stakeholders | to conduct public health assessments (PHAs). | PHAs investigate exposures to environmental contaminants, evaluate potential health | eects, and develop public health action | plans to prevent and reduce these exposures | in communities. During the PHA process, | ATSDR and state partners review various | types of data and information to determine | exposure and potential for harmful health | eects in communities living near hazardous | sites (ATSDR, 2022). The scientific evaluation includes several important steps: | • screening contaminants for further | evaluation, | • estimating exposure doses and concentrations, and | • calculating hazard quotients and | cancer risk. | Conducting scientific evaluation and | assessing public health impacts have become | increasingly challenging due to complex sites, | multiple exposure routes, multiple chemical exposures, emerging contaminants, and | evolving knowledge of chemicals and their | toxicities. To improve the scientific quality | and consistency of PHA work conducted by | health assessors at ATSDR and state health | departments, ATSDR has developed a webbased application called the Public Health | Assessment Site Tool (PHAST; Figure 1).

The article discusses the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR) activities for better understanding of hazardous substances and protection of public health in 2022. Topics covered include updating the public health assessment guidance manual (PGHAM), its basic components, and the new e-manual's six main sections. Also noted is the largest section Conducting Scientific Evaluations in the manual with its four subsections.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and | Disease Registry (ATSDR) determines | public health implications associated with | hazardous waste sites and other environmental releases. Since its inception, ATSDR | has continued to improve its approach to | evaluating public health hazards in light of | evolving science. For example, in response | to concerns about the clarity, meaning, and | understandability of the fi ve conclusion | categories outlined in its Public Health Assessment Guidance Manual (www.atsdr.cdc. | gov/HAC/PHAmanual/index.html), ATSDR | established an ad hoc work group to evaluate and recommend changes to the categories based on health and risk communication science. | All site-specifi c public health assessment | reports must include a statement that assigns a hazard conclusion category to the | site, a time period for exposure (e.g., past, | current, or future), or an exposure pathway, | as appropriate. This statement refl ects one | of the following: that the site does not pose | a public health hazard, that the site poses | a public health hazard, or that data are insuffi cient to determine whether any public | health hazard exists. The language used to | convey these categories, however, was diffi cult for community members and lay audiences to understand because it was not written clearly.

BACKGROUND: In 2007, a synthetic turf recreational field in Newark, New Jersey, was closed because lead was found in synthetic turf fibers and in surface dust at concentrations exceeding hazard criteria. Consequently, public health professionals across the country began testing synthetic turf to determine whether it represented a lead hazard. Currently, no standardized methods exist to test for lead in synthetic turf or to assess lead hazards. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to increase awareness of potential lead exposure from synthetic turf by presenting data showing elevated lead in fibers and turf-derived dust; identify risk assessment uncertainties; recommend that federal and/or state agencies determine appropriate methodologies for assessing lead in synthetic turf; and recommend an interim standardized approach for sampling, interpreting results, and taking health-protective actions. DISCUSSION: Data collected from recreational fields and child care centers indicate lead in synthetic turf fibers and dust at concentrations exceeding the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 statutory lead limit of 300 mg/kg for consumer products intended for use by children, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's lead-dust hazard standard of 40 microg/ft2 for floors. CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic turf can deteriorate to form dust containing lead at levels that may pose a risk to children. Given elevated lead levels in turf and dust on recreational fields and in child care settings, it is imperative that a consistent, nationwide approach for sampling, assessment, and action be developed. In the absence of a standardized approach, we offer an interim approach to assess potential lead hazards when evaluating synthetic turf. EDITOR'S SUMMARY: A recreational field in Newark, New Jersey, was closed in 2007 because lead concentrations found in synthetic turf fibers and in surface dust exceeded hazard criteria. Consequently, public health professionals across the country began testing synthetic turf to determine whether it represented a lead hazard. Data collected from recreational fields and child care centers indicated lead in synthetic turf fibers and dust at concentrations that exceed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 statutory lead limit of 300 mg/kg for consumer products intended for use by children and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's lead-dust hazard standard of 40 microg/ft2 for floors. The authors conclude that synthetic turf can deteriorate to form dust containing lead at levels that may pose a risk to children. Currently, no standardized methods exist to test for lead in synthetic turf or to assess lead. Ulirsch et al. (p. 1345) summarize data on lead in fibers and turf-derived dust and discuss risk assessment uncertainties. They also note the need for regulatory agencies to develop standardized methods for assessing lead in synthetic turf and recommend an interim approach for sampling, interpreting results, and taking health-protective actions.