A federal draft report on occupational-noise exposure recommends that workers who are exposed to noise levels of 82 decibels or more should be in hearing-conservation programs. This is three dBA lower than the standard currently enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The draft report, titled "Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure," was released on April 1, 1996, by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
The change could pose a problem for some newspapers. "Newspapers that are not required by the current OSHA standard to have a hearing-conservation program may have to implement a program if the standard is revised," says Elizabeth Miller-Philbrook, a senior industrial hygienist with NAA.
However, several steps would have to occur before OSHA could implement the new cutoff. NIOSH would have to finalize the criteria document and OSHA would have to change its standard. "If NIOSH adopts this criteria document, OSHA may revise its standard. OSHA often adopts NIOSH recommended standards--that's where the first noise standard came from," says Miller-Philbrook.
The NIOSH draft report reaffirms the institute's recommended limit of 85 dBA for occupational-noise exposure, but also recommends a three-dBA "exchange rate." The exchange rate represents the relationship between noise level and duration. This means that an employee would be allowed to be exposed to 82 dBA for 16 hours, 85 dBA for eight hours, 88 dBA for four hours, etc. At 82 dBA, the employer would be required to have a hearing-conservation program.
The report concludes that "the excess risk of developing occupational-noise-induced hearing loss for a 40-year lifetime exposure at the 85-dBA level is 8 percent, which is considerably lower than the 25 percent excess risk at the 90-dBA permissible exposure limit currently enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Mine Safety and Health Administration." The three-dBA exchange rate has gained worldwide support "and is more firmly supported by scientific evidence," says the draft report.
In June, NIOSH solicited comments about its draft report during a public meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio. Reviewers and consultants, as well as representatives from industry and academia attended the meeting. The comment period closed on Aug. 30, 1996, says Henry Chan, manager of the draft document.
Economic effects of the proposed changes are unknown. "NIOSH has not done any feasibility studies," says Chan.
The document will be presented to NIOSH Director Linda Rosenstock and "assuming she accepts the draft, it will go to print," says Chan. Then the document will be forwarded to OSHA.
Constance Holloway is a free-lance writer and editor based in Charlotte, N.C. E-mail, Constan583@aol.com; phone, (704) 549-8886.
©1997 Newspaper Association of America. All rights reserved.