Document ZByOEV41gpEjavndKqz8KEL3V

THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO 8230 Montgomery Road. Suite 107 Cincinnati, Ohio 45236 R'Cf^jrd F Ce'esie Go -*ji PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NAR-214 August 17, 1988 Ms. Judy Spencer Legal Department Industrial Commission of Ohio 246 North High Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 Re: OD193988 Employer: North American I ronton, Ohio Employee: Ricky Evans Refractories Company Dear Ms. Spence r: Ricky Evans is a thirty year-old man who has worked as a laborer and/or truck driver at Ncrth American Refractories (NARCO) since 1984. He is claiming a vork-related, noise-induced hearing loss, based upon exposures incurred mostly during the period 1964-:np> and somewhat since. During the 1984-1986 period, ms employer was doing some contract construction work at an Armco Plant in Ashland, Ky. At that time, he was a supervisor of a work-crew. This required him to be in the plant for varying amounts of t i:>' while work was in progress which would have produced moderate-to-high noise levels. According to Kim Nelson, Manager of Safety and Health for NARCO, Mr. Evans was supervisor of the job at Armco and frequently drove a truck delivering material to the worksite. Because of this, he was not on the job-site continuously. From '986, till now, he has been a truck driver only. Hearing loss can be caused by a variety of factors. There ar_- a number of diseases which can cause temporary and/or permanent hearing loss. Several therapeutic drugs, especial iy the aureomycin drug group are ototoxic and can cause tinnitus (ringing in the ears). Finally, the most frequent cause of hearing loss is exposure to excessive noise levels. Noise exposure can occur at work or at a wide variety of personal pursuits off the job. Mr. Evans has a substantial hearing loss in both ears. the audiogram, it is not possible to tell whether it is noise-induced, or caused by some physiologic problem or From v I f (0 medication. Even if one could determine that it is noise-induced, it is impossible to determine the job contribution and that from the personal lifestyle. There is some evidence in this file that Mr. Evans has a very noisy hobby - motorcycle racing and riding. Racing can be especially noisy as there are generally no mufflers on racing bikes. Even if Mr. Evans was exposed to continuous noise on his job, it is unusual for a man of his young age and short noise exposure time, to have as severe a hearing loss as he. In most cases, two years of work-related noise exposure are not sufficient to cause this degree of loss. It is not impossible for this to occur, however, as individual responses to chemical and physical agent exposures vary considerably. Mr. Evans states in his claim that when he first start job at Armco Steel, they were given hearing protectors but not always use them. Mr. Nelson, the Safety Director, stated that Mr. Evans would not wear the hearing protectors at all, and admits that NARCO did little to enforce wearing them. In summary, work-related noise-induced hearing loss can net be ruled out, based upon the evidence presented in this claim. It does seem highly unlikely that the short time of Mr. Evans' noise exposure would be responsible for all of his hearing loss. If I may be of further assistance in this claim, please :~t me know. Sincerely, James S. Ferguson, CIH Irdustrial Hygienist JF: r f