Document bBnQ1Er27mzVNO49E5L7b4ooD

(conoco) Interoffice Communication to Safety Directors From Tom Grumbles Date September 16, 1981 subject OSHA OCCUPATIONAL NOISE STANDARD: HEARING CONSERVATION AMENDMENT Except for these provisions which continue to be stayed, the amendment became effective August 22, 1981. A large portion of the standard has been stayed and the portions now in effect basically constitute a perfor mance standard, with few specific requirements for compliance. I have enclosed copies of the standard and the sections that are stayed. The standard portions now in effect begin on page 267 of the text. I see little effect at the plant level for most of our locations, however, some administrative items are necessary to assure compliance with the standard. 1. The requirement for initial determinations of noise exposures has been stayed, however, the monitoring requirements remaining necessitate an evaluation of available information to identify employees potentially exposed to over 85 dBa TWA. I would recommend this be done in a formal manner similar to chemical exposure written determinations. If monitoring is indicated from this determination it must be completed by February 22, 1982. Employers are now free to use personal or area monitoring to satisfy this requirement. 2. Baseline audiograms must.be completed by August 22, 1982. The standard was amended to allow older baseline audiograms "that reflect substantial compliance with the requirements of the amendment" to be used. I will ask the Medical Department to assure that our older audiograms will meet these requirements. It appears they will. 3. Although the recordkeeping requirements have been substantially reduced, records should be checked for compliance with the effective requirements. Specifically the type of equipment and equipment calibration information are required. 4. If it is determined education programs are needed, let me know and we can proceed in the usual manner to develop a program. Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the noise standard. As indicated, OSHA is asking for comments on further proposed amendments and the portions still stayed. These comments are being formulated now, and any input from you is encouraged. ' ]CTV----------------------Thomas G. Grumbles ajo cc W. W. Massad, RDG CC 000001806 Editor: Mary R. Kilcoyne G-142 September 2, 1981 FEDERAL LEVEL OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION Occupational Noise Exposure Standard t ,, The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has partially lifted the administrative stay on the proposed amendment to its occupational noise standard requiring hearing conservation programs for all emplo>ees whose noise exposures equal or exceed an 8 hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels (dB) (Federal Register, pp.42622-38, avail able from SDA). OSHA also is requesting comments on the continuation of the stay for other provisions and information and comments on the merits of any provisions in the hearing conservation amendment. The hearing conservation amendment originallly was issued January 16 (see G-7, 1/30/81), but its effective date was deferred three times. An interim stay is still in effect for most of the specific requirements under the amendment, pending collection and review of public comment. Dates: Except for those provisions that continue to be stayed, the amendment became effective August 22, 1981. Comments on the continua tion of the stay must be received by September 22, 1981. Comments on the provisions which are reopened must be received by November 23, 1981. Under the new timetable established by OSHA, initial monitoring under the amendment must be completed by February 22, 1982 and baseline audiograms must be on file by August 22, 1982. Basically, the monitoring requirements under the amendment have been reduced to two provisions, OSHA observed. When information indicates that any employee's exposure may equal or exceed an eight-hour time weighted average of 85 decibels, the employer must obtain measurements for workers who may be exposed at or above that level. Also, all con tinuous, intermittent, and impulsive sound levels from 80 dB to 130 dB must be integrated into the computation. (continued) THE SOAP AND DETERGENT ASSOCIATION 475 Park Avenue South, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212)725-1262 G-142 -2- September 2, 1981 Employers now are free to use either personal monitoring or area monitoring, and they can use any measurement procedure they consider appropriate. Re monitoring can be performed as often as the employer deems necessary, and can be- done with any instrument or measurement technique the employer chooses. The agency did put into effect the requirement that employees can observe the monitoring process, but continued the stay on the requirement that ob servers be given an explanation of measurement procedures. Employers are not required to allow observers to monitor all steps of the procedure, or required to report the results to the observers. Most of the audiometric testing provisions opposed by industry in earlier comments were stayed by the agency. Employers now can use hearing protection to reduce workers' noise exposure preceding audiometric testing, whereas the rule originally required that the worker be removed from all workplace noisij for 14 hours preceding testing. The agency} also said it would accept older baseline audiograms that reflect "substantial compliance" with the requirements of the amendment. A provision concerning audiometric review was clarified to state that tech nicians may review audiograms, and need refer only problem audiograms to professionals OSHA maintained that it had always been its intention that professionals do not have to review every audiogram. Hearing protection requirements were revised to limit the number of free protectors that employers would be required to provide. Employers may form ulate their own "reasonable-policies" as to how many free protectors to pro vide, the. agency reported, adding that an employer should not have to bear the expense of replacing protectors lost through "employee negligence." Recordkeeping provisions were reduced substantially. According to the notice, the interim stay still applies to earlier requirements to retain detailed information such as the names of workers tested, date of the last laboratory calibration of equipment, type of equipment used, and date and location of measurements. Possible alternatives to the hearing conservation standard have been suggested, OSHA reported. An alternative hearing conservation rule, it said, might in clude the following provisions: Cl) Employers should conduct audiograms annually for every worker exposed to noise exceeding 85 dBA as an eight-hour time weighted average, according to standards on audiometers and audiometric test rooms established by the American National Standards Institute, and as supervised by a qualified tech nician. (2) Such audiograms should be reviewed annually by a qualified audiologist, otolaryngologist, or physician to identify workers whose hearing acuity has diminished more than it would normally. (continued) CCR oooooiaoe G-142 -3- September 2, 1981 (3) Employers should instruct these workers in the proper use* of hearing protection when working in noisy areas, and should take appropriate mea sures to enforce the use of suitable protective devices when the employees are exposed to noise levels exceeding 85 dBA as an eight-hour TWA. '7 ' -^v ' V Kt CCR 00000X809 256 -ere not protected by safety belts attached to lifelines and 1926.451(yXU) for failure to install standard guardrails on the open sides and ends of a pump jack scaffold (No. 81-1921). Well Tech, Inc., Alice, Texas, is contesting a live-item nonserious citation, including 1910.23(cXl) for failure to guard open-sided platforms, 1910.27(f) for failure to main tain a fixed ladder in a safe condition, and 191G.141(bXlXvi) for failure to prohibit the use of a common drinking cup (No. 81-1898). OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER Winslow Mechanical Contractors, Inc., Williamstown N.J., is contesting a serious citation and a $480 penalty for 1926.500(dXl) for failure to ensure the use of protective eye equipment by an employee drilling holes in a concrete ceiling. The company also is contesting a nonserious citation for 1926.500(eXlXiii) for failure to provide stairway railings as required (No. 81-1911). Full Text OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION PARTIAL LIFTING OF STAY ON HEARING CONSERVATION RULES [46 FR 42622, Aug. 21, 1981] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration CFR Part 1910 Occupational Noise Exposure; Hearing Conservation Amendment dates: Except for those provisions that continue to be stayed, the amendment is effective August 22.1981. See Supplementary Information for details. Comments on the continuation of the stay must be received by September 22. 1981. Comments on the provisions which are reopened must be received by November 23,1981. agency: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. ACTION: Partial lifting of administrative stay; request for comments; clarification and interpretation of rule; corrections. addresses: Written comments should be submitted to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. H-011. Room S-6212, U.S. Department of Labor. 200 Constitution Avenue. NW., Washington. summary: On January 16.1981 OSHA D.C. 20210. telephone 202-528-7894. published an amendment to its occupational noise exposure standard FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (46 FR 4078) requiring hearing Dr. Alice Suter, Office of Physical conservation programs for all employees Agents Standards, Occupational Safety whose noise exposures equal or exceed and Health Administration, Room N-- an 8-hour time-weighted average sound 3718. U.S. Department of Labor. 200 level (TWA) of 85 decibels (dB).The Constitution Avenue. N.W., Washington. amendment was to become effective on D.C 20210, Telephone (202) 523-7151. April 15.1981, with various provisions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: being phased in over a two year period. OSHA deferred the effective date of the amendment until August 22.1981 in order to give the Agency time to evaluate numerous requests for clarification and petitions for administrative stay. I. Background On January 16,1981 (48 FR 4078) OSHA promulgated an amendment to ite occupational noise exposure standard (29 CFR 1910.95 (a) and (b)).1 The new hearing conservation amendment requires employers to provide an effective hearing conservation program for all employees exposed to an 8 hour TWA of 85 dBAThis amendment supplements the existing standard and specifies the essential elements of an effective hearing conservation program. Briefly, the amendment contains requirements for monitoring employee noise exposure, annual audiometric testing for those employees exposed at or above a TWA of 85 dB, the proper selection of hearing protectors such as ear plugs, education and training of employees, warning sign# and the keeping of records pertaining to exposure monitoring and audiometric testing. The amendment covers all employees who work for employers covered by the Act except those engaged in construction or agriculture. OSHA estimated that at least 5.1 million employees in as many as 300.000 establishments have noise exposures above 85 dB and are therefore covered by the amendment The amendment was estimated to coat approximately $254 million per year * or $53 per worker per year. Employers were given 90 days in which to become familiar with the By its action today, OSHA is (1) lifting the administrative stay as to many portions of the amendment (2) making 'ertain technical corrections, (3) inviting ibiic comment on the continuation of the stay for other provisions, (4) inviting new information and comments on the merits of many provisions in the hearing, conservation amendment and (5) clarifying various provisions of the amendment 1 The existing standard sets a permissible exposure Level for noise of 90 dB as an 8 hour time weighted average and requires the employer to reduce employee exposure to within level by the use of feasible engineering controls or administrative controls. In addition, the existing standard requires that a "continuing effective hearing conservation program'1 be implemented when employee exposure exceeds 90 dB without regard to the use of hearing protectors, but the standard does not spell out the elements of such a bearing conservation program. 1 Assuming an exchange rate of 5 dB, a TWA of 85 dB is approximately half a TWA of 90 dB. 3The actual cost of tha amendment was estimated to be about SZ'O million per year, but this figure was adjusted to $254 million per year in recognition of the ongoing hearing conaervation programs some employers have established. Therefore, tha $254 million dollar estimate contained in the Regulatory Analysis represents the amount of aaw coat that would ha incurred by industry ae result of tha amendment This coat has subsequently been recalculated, based on new information, to S23LS million. 00000181 8-27-81 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20037 OCR CURRENT REPORT 257 standard. Various provisions of the standard were to be phased in. over a two year period. For example, employers were given 6 months from the effective date of the standard to do initial determinations and to monitor the employee exposures (originally this was to be done by October 15.1981). Baseline audiograms had to be completed within a year of the effective date of the standard (April 15.1982) and employers were given an additional year in which to obtain certain equipment such as audiometric test booths and dosimeters meeting the requirements of the standard. After the amendment was promulgated the Agency received numerous requests for clarifications and interpretations of various provisions of the standard. A number of objections based on misunderstandings of certain portions f the standard or preamble were also received. In addition, there were petitions for administrative stay and a number of requests that the entire amendment be reconsidered pursuant to Executive Order 12291 (48 FR 13193) which was issued on February 17,1981. Over 250 comments, petitions, and requests for clarification were received and it was necessary for the Agency to defer the effective date of the standard several times (see 46 FR 21385. 4/10/81, 46 FR 28845, 5/29/81 and 46 FR 39137, 7/ 31/81) in order to evaluate the merits of the numerous petitions and comments. Petitions for judicial review under section 6(f) of the Act have been filed by the Chocolate Manufacturers Association. Chamber of Commerce, American Iron and Steel Institute. Fleck Industries. Inc., and the AFL-CIO. OSHA has very carefully reviewed and analyzed all of the comments, petitions, and requests for clarifications in light of the lengthy preamble to the amendment and consistent with the requirements of E.O.12291 to evaiute the cost-effectiveness of agency regulations. Based on this review, OSHA has decided that major portions of the amendment which are outlined below should be allowed to go into effect The underlying rationale for these requirements can be found in the preamble to the ]anuary 18.1981 rule (see 48 FR 4078 et seq.), which is hereby reaffirmed for those portions going into effect. A Regulatory Impact Analysis conforming to the requirements of Executive Order 12291 has been prepared and is summarized briefly below. The petitions for administrative stay are therefore denied insofar as they relate to the portions of the amendment which are being put into effect. More detailed reasons for denying these parts of the petitions will be sent to the petitioners shortly. OSHA concludes that the provisions which are going into effect on August 22 constitute a coherent and protective hearing conservation amendment. Many of the petitions, comments and objections were based on misinterpretations of the meaning and purpose of certain portions of the amendment. Where this was the case, the discussion below provides explanations and clarifications in response to these comments. In addition, in some instances comments pointed out clear errors in the standard. These errors in the standard are also discussed and corrected below. As to certain other provisions, the Agency is reopening the record for additional comment Generally, the record has been reopened for substantive comment where there is reason to believe, based on the comments received to date, that there may be a more cost effective way of accomplishing the desired result of saving employee hearing, or where new information as to the feasibility or desirability of a requirement has been submitted which deserves further evaluation. For most of the provisions on which the record is being reopened, comments are also requested on whether these provisions should continue to be stayed while the public is given an opportunity to submit their substantive comments and these comments are evaluated. A short period of time (30 days) is being given in which to comment on whether these provisions should continue to be stayed. In the meantime, these provisions are stayed. After considering all timely public comments on whether the interim stays should be allowed to remain in effect pending consideration of the substantive comments, the Assistant Secretary will make a decision on the stays which will be published in the Federal Register. This procedure is considered to be the most practical way of resolving the stay matter and to comply with all procedural requirements which may apply. The alternative of allowing these provisions to go into effect for the brief period of time necessary to solicit public comment and then possibly reinstituting the stay would be confusing to employers and employees. In addition such a course of action would not result in any increased employee protection since essentially no action need be completed within the time period given for comments on the stay. Where public comment has been requested as to whether the stay should continue, substantial questions have been raised concerning the extent to which these provisions contribute to occupational safety and health and whether their inclusion in the standard is necessary or appropriate. Therefore, at least until the public comments on the stay can be evaluated, it is inappropriate to allow these provisions to go into effect. Good cause is therefore found for continuing the administrative stay of these provisions whil epublic comments on the stay can be considered. To assist the public in determining which portions of the standard are in effect and which portions are stayed, a copy of the amendment, with only those portions which are in effect, has been reprinted below. (L Public Participation A. Interim Stays Interested persons are invited to submit written views and arguments as to whether the interim stay of any of the paragraphs discussed below should be allowed to continue pending reconsideration of the substantive requirements contained in these paragraphs. These comments must be submitted in quadruplicate to the Docket Officer. Docket H-011, Room S-8212, Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210 and must be received in the Docket Office no later than September 22,1981. Comments on the stays should be marked "stay'* at the top of the first page. All submissions will be available for public inspection and copying at the above address. B. Substantive Provisions Interested persons are requested to submit written data, views and arguments on the provisions that are reopened below. Any hearing requests submitted will be given appropriate consideration. These comments must be submitted in quadruplicate to the Docket Officer. Docket H-011, Room S-6212, Department of Labor, 200 Constitutions Avenue, N.W,, Washington, D.C. 20210. These submissions must be received in the Docket Office no later than November 23.1981. The submissions will be available to the public for inspection and copying at the above address. All timely submissions received, as well as all post promulgation comments and petitions which have already been submitted to the Agency, will be made part of the record of this proceeding and will be considered by the Assistant Secretary in making any modifications to the hearing conservation amendment HI. Summary and Explanation of Actions Taken The material below details and discusses the provisions of the hearing conservation amendment for which the a-27-ai Occupational Safety & Health Reporter CCR 0000018U 258 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY 8 HEALTH REPORTER interim stay is continuing. Several non* " stantive or technical amendments i corrections are included. Also, specific questions are posed and mbstantive comments requested on thevarious provisions on which the record is being reopened. In addition, clarifications and interpretations which are responsive to comments received are given for many of the provisions which are going into effect. Permissible Exposure Limit The subject of the permissible exposure limit (PEL) was mentioned frequently in the comments and petitions. Many commenters confused the action level concept with the PEL and interpreted the amendment as lowering the PEL to 85 dB. The amendment does not lower the PEL to 85 dB; the PEL is still 90 dB (see 29 CFR 1910.95 (a) and (b)). The 85-dB TWA referred to in the amendment is an action level wt ch triggers the initiation of hearing conservation programs. The issue of the appropriate PEL, including the appropriate exchange rate, will be considered in the near future when 29 CFR 1910.95 (a) and (b) are reviewed. This review will include consideration of the appropriate method of compliance the permissible exposure level, iring Conservation Program-- -agraph (c). Paragraph (c) will be corrected by inserting the words "slow response" after "an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level measured on the A scale", ia the first sentence. These words were inadvertently left out of the amendment and have been added to conform paragraph (c) with $ 1910.95(a) and with the original intention as expressed in the preamble (see 46 FR 4137,1/19/81). Exposure Monitoring--Paragraphs (dm The hearing conservation amendment required that employers make an initial determination concerning the need for monitoring. If the initial determination was positive, employers were required to measure personal noise doses for representative employees using, equipment meeting minimum specifications and calibrated to ensure accuracy. This monitoring was required to be conducted at least every two years and within 60 days of a change of process which changed noise exposures to the extent that employees previously exposed below 85 dB would be exposed above 85 dB. or if the change was such that it rendered inadequate the hearing rs issued. .. Agency received a number of requests to administratively stay and to ^consider the requirements for noise txpoeure monitoring. Probably the most serious objection came from employers who believed that personal exposure monitoring was unnecessary for purposes of hearing conservation programs. They stated that area monitoring sufficient to identify the employees who need to be included in the program, and that area monitoring is simpler and less costly. The adequacy of hearing protector attenuation would be computed from sound levels obtained for the various areas in which employees worked. Some employers maintained that the requirement for initial determination was unnecessary, and that the specific bases from which a positive determination could result were unnecessarily complicated and might lead to labor-management conflict Other commenters objected to the requirement that the employee with the highest exposure be selected (if one employee was to represent the others), saying that the effect of such a requirement was to force employers to monitor all employees, ha addition, comments objected to the periodic remonitoring requirement, stating that remonitoring every twn yean was costly and unnecessary, and that remonitoring when there was a change in process or equipment should be sufficient Objections were raised to requiring employee exposure notification; also to the idea of notifying workers of their measured exposure levels since exposure levelsmight vary considerably for day-to-day. Moreover, notifying workers of their actual exposure levels would be difficult for employers using area monitoring. Commenters believed that individual notification was unnecessary and that posting a notice of exposure should suffice. ' OSHA received many adverse comments os the requirements d paragraph (g)> Method of measurement Commenters questioned the accuracy of noise dosimeters, especially in impulsive noise conditions^ and objected to setting the dosimeter's lower threshold at 80 dB. Some questioned the technical feasibility of dosimeters meeting the crest factor test specified in the standard. Rather than requiring the ANSI Sl.25. Section 7.5 test Cor measuring a crest factor capability as high as 30 dB, it was suggested that the frequency, duration and repetition of the test signal be stated. Many comments were opposed to the inclusion of Appendix B, Temporal Sampling Procedures for Use with a SoundLevel Meter. They stated that it was unnecessarily complex and rigoroum The sampling strategy outlined in Appendix B would be unnecessarily stringent if area monitoring procedures were to be used. The requirements for microphone placement would also be incompatible with the concept of area monitoring. The Agency also received comments objecting to the calibration requirements, stating that they am unnecessary. The many objections to specific noise exposure monitoring requirements have persuaded OSHA to reconsider these provisions and seek further comment on their appropriateness. In the meantime. OSHA will require employers to monitor noise exposure where employees are exposed at or above an 8-hour timeweighted average of 85 dB, and the stay of all of the detailed monitoring requirements published in fanuary will continue. Paragraphs (d) through (b) therefore are being stayed lor further comment, with the exception of parts of paragraph (e) and paragraph (g]{2)(iiHfrk Thus, the monitoring obligation will consist of two sentences: (e)(1) When information mdfcetes that any employee's exposure may equal orexceed as 8-hour time-weighted average of 86 decibels, th* employer shall obtain measurements tor employees who may be exposed at orabove that leveL (g)(2)(tt)(h) All continuous feitemdttest, and impulsive sound levels from 80 dB to 130 dBshall be integrated into the computation. As it now reads, the requirement for monitoring is a performance requirement. This change allows employers to use an area monitoring or a personal monitoring approach, with whatever measurement procedure they consider appropriate. While monitoring must be completed;within 9 TM**"*K* remonitoring may be dona as often or as seldom me employers consider to be warranted by the circumstances. All continuous, intermittent and impulsive sounds between 80 dB and 130 dB must be included in the measurement, although the employer is free to use any instruments or measurement technique that will do this. While the standard which is going into effect does not require the employer to calculate each employee's noise dose, the standard does require all employees exposed at or above a TWA of 85 dB to be included in a hearing conservation program. Therefore, when enforcing the standard, OSHA will inspect to determine whether employers have failed to include in the hearing conservation program all employees whose exposures equal or exceed a TWA of 85 dB. Comments are requested on whether the interim stay of the monitoring provisions should continue. In addition, in order to evaluate the monitoring provisions, OSHA is requesting comments, information, and data on the following: 6-27-81 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037 CCR 000001812 CURRENT REPORT 259 1. The need for monitoring to achieve a an interim basis and comments are that audiometric tests be performed by a successful hearing conservation program. solicited as to whether paragraph (i)(2) licensed or certified "audiologist, 2. The need for an initial detacaiinatina to, help focus oo whether monitoring is necessary, in addition to general monitoring requirements. 3. The advantages and disadvantages of area monitoring or personal exposure is necessary to assure that employees are afforded a meaningful opportunity to exercise their statutory right to observe monitoring, or whether the performance language of paragraph (i)(l) is sufficient. otolaryngologist, or other qualified physican ' * The same words are used in paragraph (j)(7)(iii), which specifies the qualifications of personnel who review audiograms. Comments to monitoring for hearing conservation Audiometric Testing Program-- the Agency have requested a purposes. Paragraph (j). clarification of the word "qualified" 4. Criteria for selecting a representative Qualifications ofpersonnel which precedes "physician". OSHA employee to monitor. administering audiometric tests. One intended the word "qualified" to mean 5. The circumstances under which commenter interpreted the amendment remonitoring is necessary. to provide that only audiologists or 8. The need for notifying employees oftheir medical doctors can test employees' actual exposures. 7. The approprieteneas of requiring measuring instruments to conform with consensus standards such as ANSL hearing. The standard, however, in paragraph (j)(3) allows trained technicians to perform audiometric tests a. The ability of sound level meters and if they demonstrate competency in any licensed physician who believes that he or she has adequate training or knowledge to administer audiometric tests and interpret the results. The Agency believes that the word `'qualified'' is unnecessary and that adequate professional judgment and dosimeters to measure impulsive, administering tests and in the use and responsibility can be assumed. intermittent, and continuous noise accurately, care of audiometers. Questions were Therefore the Agency is considering including criteria for determining accuracy. <itao raised as to whether nurses could deleting the word "qualified" in 9. The need foe specifying a test for to audiometric testing. All persons who paragraphs (j}(3) and (j)(7](iii), and f V dosimeter crest factor capability, and If so. suggestions as to the content of such a teat 10. TJk availability and cost of dosimeters with a dynamic range of 80 dB to 130 d& 11. Appropriate sampling procedures foe us* with a sound level meter for purposes ai area monitoring or personal monitoring, and the need for requiring such procedures. 12. The need for standardized microphone placement for purposes of area monitoring or personal monitoring and if so. suggestions as to appropriate microphone placement. 13. 17m need for fieid aed laboratory calibration requirements for noiM measuring 14. The need for requiring specific monitoring practices that employees must be allowed to observe, and if so. the nature of these practices. Observation of Monitoring Paragraph Cfl. can demonstrate competency in administering tests and in the use of audiometers may administer audiometric tests required by the standard. * Another request was to clarify the requirement that a technician must have "satisfactorily demonstrated competence" in audiometric testing. The proof of competence is left up to the professional who supervises the technician. A certificate of the satisfactory completion of a recognized training program would be one way of meeting the requirement: the Agency believes that on-the-job training may also be effective and technicians may also qualify by this route. Qualifications of supervisors. One comment addressed the statement in the requests comments on the issue. Also in paragraph (j)(3). the Agency is changing "a person who is certified by the Council of Accreditation in Occupational Hearing Conservation" to "a technician who is certified by the Council of Accreditation in Occupational Hearing Conservation * * V This substitution conforms the wording to a sentence later in the same paragraph that reads, "A technician who performs audiometric tests must be responsible to an audiologist, otolaryngologist or qualified physician." It was suggested that one might interpret this paragraph as meaning that a person who is certified by the Council to perform audiometric tests need not be responsible to a professional. OSHA's Employees must be able to observe preamble that the amendment requires intent was that all non-professionals the monitoring process since the right to certain functions to be carried out by an engaging in audiometric testing must be observe monitoring is mandated by audiologist, otolaryngologist "or in the responsible to a professional Therefore section 8(c)(3) of the Occupational absent of one of these specialists, a non-professionals will be referred to a Safety and Health Act Paragraph (i)(I), qualified physician." However, the "technicians" for purposes of the which merely restates the observation standard does not use the words "in the amendment In addition, the Agency is right given by the Occupational Safety absence of one of these specialists". deleting the words "by an audiometric and Health Act will go into effect Therefore, for compliance purposes, the technician" which precede "who has Some comments expressed concern audiologist otolaryngologist, and other satisfactorily demonstrated competence that allowing employees to observe physician are on an equal footing. While * * * ", since these words are now monitoring would disrupt production the Agency believes that audiologists redundant This deletion does nothing to because employees would leave their and otolaryngologists will be in the best change the meaning of the requirement work stations en masse to watch the position to make judgments about Baseline audiogram--Paragraph (j}(5). procedure. It has not been OSHA's testing procedures and about the Paragraph (j)(5)(i) required employers to experience that employee observation of validity and interpretation of perform baseline audiograms (after the1 monitoring is disruptive since in moat audiograms, physicians with specialities initial phase-in period) within 4 months cases a representative of the employees other than otolaryngology may be quite of an employee's first exposure to noise acts as an observer. The stay is being capable of making these judgments. at or above the action level. Ideally, the continued on paragraph (i)(2) which Also, as explained below, OSHA is baseline audiogram should be specifically entitles observers to receive considering deleting the word conducted before employment, or before an explanation of the measurement "qualified" as it applies to physicians, exposure to hazardous noise levels in procedures, observe all steps related to since in this context it adds nothing to order to avoid contamination by the noise exposure measurements and the meaning or effectiveness of the threshold shifts. Any hearing loss, record the results obtained. Comments standard. / indicated confusion as to the amount of Paragraph (j)(3). and paragraph explanation necessary. Therefore, the (j)(7)(ni). In the first sentence of temporary or permanent that is caused by an employee's work in a noisy area would contaminate the baseline V'' stay of paragraph (i)(2) will continue os paragraph (j)(3) the amendment requires audiogram, making it appear as though 8-27-SI Occupational Safety & Hesitn Reporter CCR 000001813 260 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER worker had a preexisting hearing be exposed to levels of noise that could .^48. Such losses can occur in a matter cause a temporary hearing loss. As if months or even days depending on discussed above, any temporary hearing .he susceptibility of the individual to loss caused by an occupational noise noise and the level of exposure. This exposure would contaminate the could result in measuring future losses baseline audiogram: the baseline would against a false baseline. Thus the true be misleading in that the worker would extent of hearing threshold shifts that appear to have less hearing ability than have been caused by noise exposure he or she actually does have. Since the would not be detected. first test might not be truly Pre-employment audiometric testing representative of the employee's hearing would be generally feasible for large ability, this could result in measuring companies that carry out their own future losses against a false yardstick; audiometric test programs, or for small actual future hearing loss would companies that send employees to local therefore be understated. OSHA clinics or doctors' offices for testing. received many objections to the Although the Agency was aware of the prohibition on the use of hearing need for prompt baseline testing, the protectors for this purpose. Comments principal reason for selecting the 4- stated that many companies would month period was that it allowed experience a significant hardship, trying employers to exclude most seasonal and to schedule all baseline audiograms temporary workers, for whom continued before the workshift or paying testing and fr'low-up would be employees overtime for coming in for extremely difficult. This 4-month testing on days when they were not provision took into account the need to scheduled to work. Some comments take audiograms as soon as possible to suggested that if the wearing of ear reflect the employee's true hearing protectors was particularly well ability before exposure to workplace supervised on the day of the baseline noise, and the problems of requiring audiogram (and especially if employees baseline audiograms on a pre employment basis. However, such a wore ear muffs, which are clearly visible to the supervisor), employees could 'uirement would probably result in work in noise for a few hours before led expenditures for companies that being tested without incurring enerally rely on mobile test services temporary threshold shift While this is chat come to the plant once a year since still an open issue, OSHA has decided these employers would have to send to stay the prohibition against using new employees who need baseline hearing protectors to satisfy the 14 hour audiograms to a local clinic or quiet rule before the baseline audiogram physician, where the cost per employee is taken. In addition, the Agency is would be higher. considering adding language to the In order to investigate more thoroughly the feasibility of obtaining baseline audiograms relatively soon after an employee's initial exposure, the Agency wfll continue the stay of standard that explicitly allows the use of hearing protectors to provide the required quiet. The Agency is reopening the record on this issue and requests data, evidence and comments on: paragraph (j)(5)(i) insofar as the 4-month 1. Whether hearing protectors will be period is concerned. Specifically OSHA effective in preventing temporary threshold requests data and information on: shift before baseline audiograms. 1. Factors precluding baseline testing within 4 months of initial exposure to noise. 2. Whether the requirement to obtain baseline audiograms within 4 months of the initial exposure is unnecessarily stringent 3. Recommended time periods within which baseline audiometric testing should be conducted for specified TWA'i between 65 dB and 110 dB. 2. Any steps that are necessary to ensure hearing protector effectiveness on the day of baseline audiometry. 3. The level of quiet and the length of the quiet period before the baseline audiogram which is necessary to insure the integrity of the baseline audiogram. 4. Any experience on the part of those administering or evaluating audiometric examinations that indicates that some Paragraph (j){5)(ii) requires employers baselines may contain temporary threshold to perform baseline audiograms after shift employees have been away from Paragraph (j)(5)(ii)(b) requires workplace noise for at least 14 hours. employers to notify employees of the Paragraph (a) prohibits need to avoid high levels of non- employers from using hearing protectors occupational noise exposure during the i substitute for the 14 hours without 14-hour period preceding their baseline posure to workplace noise. The audiogram. This-requirement was reason for the prohibition was that included because the Agency hearing protectors are often fitted and acknowledges the fact that employers worn improperly, allowing the worker to cannot be held responsible for hearing lose that is incurred away from the workplace. However, employers could help to minimize the contribution of nonoccupational noise exposure to the baseline audiogram by counseling workers ahead to time as to the need for avoiding such exposures. It has been suggested, however, that paragraph (j)(5](ii](6) may be unnecessary because this kind of notification would normally occur during training which is already required by the standard. Since the paragraph may constitute an unnecessary and redundant requirement OSHA has decided to continue the stay of this requirement and to request any comments and information that would justify retaining it in the standard. Grandfathering ofpre-existing baseline and audiograms. Many coxnmentere asked whether or not OSHA would accept the validity of baseline audiograms taken before the effective date of the amendment Most comments urged the acceptability of audiometric tests that were performed using hearing protectors as a substitute for 14 hours away from workplace noise. Since the prohibition against the use of hearing protectors to achieve the quiet hours is being stayed. OSHA will accept baseline audiograms that were taken using hearing protectors as a substitute for 14 quiet hours. The Agency will continue to accept these audiograms in the future as valid baseline audiograms regardless of the outcome of the stay, and will accept or "grandfather" older baseline audiograms that reflect substantial compliance with the audiometric test requirements of the amendment For example, to be acceptable, baseline audiograms should be administered by a trained technician, taken at the required test frequencies (500.1000, 2000. 3000, 4000 and 6000 Hz), in a reasonably quiet room, and with calibrated equipment The Agency is prepared to be flexible in accepting or grandfathering old baseline audiograms because in most cases this would be more protective of the employee since old baselines will allow the true extent of the hearing loss over the years to be evaluated. Obtaining a new baseline audiogram-after many years of noise exposure might be less protective since the hew audiogram might show higher thresholds and the true extent of future losses would appear smaller than when compared with die original baseline. Evaluation of audiogram--Paragraph (j)(7). Paragraph (j)(?)(ii) of the amendment states that audiogram evaluation must be performed by an audiologist, otolaryngologist, or qualified physician. The Agency has 8-27-81 Published by THg BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037 CCR 00000181^ CURRENT REPORT 261 combined this section with paragraph requesting comments and information (j)(7)(iii), so that it now reads "An on the following: audiologist, otolaryngologist or qualified physician shall review the 1. Whether it is necessary to determine the cause of a significant threshold shift in order audiograms to determine whether there to protect a worker's hearing. is a need for further evaluation." The 2. Methods or guidelines for distinguishing original first sentence in paragraph between occupational and non-occupationai UXT)(H} will be deleted since it suggests hearing loss. that a professional must review each Paragraph (j)(7](iv) requires that audiogram. Professionals do not need to where annual audiometric testing review every audiogram. Some reveals the presence of a significant comments assumed that the amendment threshold shift, a new audiogram shall prohibited technicians from reviewing a be given within 60 days to determine if routine audiogram. Technicians may the shift is permanent. There were review audiograms and give only objections to this provision on the basis problem audiograms to the professionals that it is extremely difficult to discern if for review. The preamble did state that a significant threshold shift is computers could be used to compute permanent: that the definition of shifts shown on audiograms so long as significant threshold shift used in the an appropriate professional provided amendment might result in as many as input in the development of the 30-40% of those tested showing computer program. Although the text of significant threshold shifts and having to the amendment may have been unclear, be re-tested, and that the burdens of re it was ul Agency's intention that testing would be substantial for those technicians, once they have been employers using mobile audiometric test adequately trained, could perform the services. Some of the provisions same function, and let the professional included in paragraph (j)(7)(iv), such as review audiograms where the the requirement that hearing protectors audiogram's validity was in question, or not be used to obtain the necessary where there might be a medical problem quiet hours before re-testing, are or other problem that would indicate a inconsistent with the continued stays of need for further evaluation. other parts of the amendment (see. for The Agency has decided that the example, discussion of paragraph requirement for the reviewer to (iH5)(ii)(o)). Moreover, it might not be determine work relatedness of a worthwhile to require retesting without significant threshold shift which is including the requirement for 14 hours contained in paragraph (j)[7tfm)' should away from workplace noise, in that in be stayed pending further public most cases without this requirement the comment. A number of comments retest results would be the same. Any objected to the requirement, stating that benefit that the retest requirement might occupational and non-occupationai have is further clouded by the hearing loss can appear to ba identical continuing stay of the significant on the audiogram. In some cases it may threshold shift definition discussed be very difficult even for an audiologist below. The stay of all the requirements or physician to determine the cause, or contained in`paragraph (j)(7)(iv) will work relatedness, of a threshold shift. therefore continue. Comments and data This objection also applies to two other are requested on the following issues: portions of the amendment. In 1. Whether retesting within a short period paragraph (j)(8)(iv)(6), which requires of time to confirm the presence of a referral for further evaluation as significant threshold shift is necessary to the necessary, the words "to determine the protection of employee hearing. cause of the permanent significant threshold shift" will be stayed pending further consideration. Also, paragraph 2. If retesting is necessary, is the requirement that such retesting be accomplished within SO days appropriate? (j](8)(iv)(</) will be stayed pending Follow-up procedures--Paragraph further public comment. The latter (j)(8). Paragraph (j)(8)(ivH&) required paragraph requires employers to record that employees be referred for a clinical the existence of a permanent significant audiologicai evaluation or an otologicai threshold shift on the OSHA Form 200 examination, as appropriate.-under when the professional reviewer certain circumstances. Some determines that the shift is work related. commenters wanted to know who pays In addition to difficulties in making the for audiometric test referrals. Since determination, the need for such a employers are responsible for providing requirement ia questionable since it employees with a safe and healthful duplicates the requirements for working environment, they must pay for reporting occupational illnesses and examinations to discover whether or the injuries set forth in 29 CFR1904.2. With extent to which a harmful agent in the respect to these provisions, OSHA is workplace is affecting employees' health or safety. In addition, they must pay for examinations to discover whether a protective device, which is worn to mitigate adverse effects, is in itself having an adverse health effect. Consequently, employers must bear the expense of referral in cases where the validity or the significance of the test results is questionable or when a pathology of the ear is caused or aggravated by wearing hearing protection. This requirement that employers pay for medical examinations is mandated by section 6(b)(7) of the Act When the reviewer suspects a medical problem that is not related to the wearing of ear protection (such as an upper respiratory infection), the employer need not assume the cost of further testing or treatment. Employees who refuse follow-up examination or treatment. Where the standard requires referral for further evaluation, some commenters were concerned that employers would be held responsible for the worker's refusal to go. However, the requirement was phrased in terma of "refer" rather than "require." As long as the employee is referred for further evaluation, the employer has carried out his or her responsibility even if the employee refuses the medical treatment This is consistent with all OSHA requirements for medical surveillance, which only require that employers make medical examinations available to employees. Employee notification of significant threshold shift---(STS). Paragraph (jK8)(iv)(a) requires notification of employees within 21 days of the determination pf the existence of a significant threshold shift. A number of commenters wanted to know from what point the 21-day period began. The amendment specifies 21 days from the determination. For companies with inhouse testing capabilities, the determination of STS could occur at the time of testing or at the time the annual audiogram is compared to the baseline. In cases where the company sends its test results to a professional reviewer, the determination would occur when the employer receives the results of the review. Employers should not delay the review of audiograms, since the existence of an STS should be identified as quickly as possible so that protective measures may be initiated. Revised baseline: Paragraph (j)(9>. This paragraph requires baseline audiograms to be revised when subsequent testing reveals either a significant threshold shift, or an improvement in hearing at two or more test frequencies. Some comments requested further guidance on the 8-27-81 Occupational Safaty & Health Reporter CCR 000001815 262 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER junt of improvement in hearing definition of STS should be reevaluated thresholds needed to trigger a revision in light of these comments. For these f the baseline. Other questions were reasons the Agency has stayed the submitted concerning whether a revision paragraph defining significant threshold should be done where an annual shift, and is reopening the record on this audiogram shows improvements at some issue. For many employers, this stay will frequencies and losses at others. The have little effect since it is contemplated Agency has determined that this section that the rulemaking will be completed needs to be stayed to be consistent with and that there will be a definition of the stay of the retest requirement. If significant threshold shift in the retests are not performed, professional standard before the first annual reviewers will not be able to tell audiogram needs to be compared with whether a hearing loss is temporary or the baseline. Employers who have permanent If baselines are revised on ongoing hearing conservation programs the basis of a temporary hearing loss, with established employee baselines, future comparisons would be invalid, and who may be taking annual and baselines might continually need to audiograms in this interim period may be revised, resulting in confused use any reasonably protective recordkeeping and insufficient definition. The Agency in its protection of employees because of enforcement activities will rely on the invalid audiogram comparisons. definition currently used in its Industrial Therefore any requirement for revision Hygiene Field Operations Manual, of baseline a* diograms will be stayed which is 20 dfl at any frequency. until a decision is made on the subject Paragraph (j)(10)(v) allows a of retesting. correction for presbycusis, (hearing loss Consequently the Agency is from aging], when making the requesting comments on the following: determination of significant threshold 1. The need for revising baseline audiograms, when either improvement in hearing or a significant threshold shift occurs. \ The amount of improvement needed re baseline audiograms should be shift Non-mandatory Appejidix F contains tables of presbycusis values and instructions on how to use them in the determination of significant threshold shift. The effect of allowing _.ised. these corrections is to reduce the Significant threshold shift--Paragraph amount of threshold shift OSHA (j](10). This paragraph defines believes that paragraph (j)(10)(v) and significant threshold shift in a manner Appendix F should be stayed until the that becomes progressively more final decision is made on the definition stringent as an employee's hearing loss becomes greater. Unlike the proposal, the amendment allows employers to of significant threshold shift Since employers will be using various interim definitions, corrections for presbycusis make a specified correction to the audiogram for aging in determining whether a significant threshold shift has occurred. The Agency received a may be inappropriate for use with certain definitions. Also, OSHA's final decision on the best definition of significant threshold shift may preclude number of comments requesting that corrections for presbycusis. OSHA reconsider the definition of To help resolve the question of the significant threshold shift. Most appropriate definition of significant commenters agreed that a definition of threshold shift OSHA is requesting the significant threshold shift is necessary. following data and information: However, many commenters objected to 1. The need for any standardized definition the complexity of the definition chosen, of significant threshold shift. asserting that it would be difficult to 2. Audiograms of noise exposed employees evaluate audiograms using the taken over a period of years showing complicated multi-part criteria without a individual hearing histories. computer and asserting that it would not function as intended. Specifically, some commenters felt that the definition was so stringent that it would result in identifying "normal people" as having significant threshold shifts: others felt 3. Explanations and evidence as to why the amendment's definition of significant threshold shift is too stringent or too lenient 4. Suggestions of simpler definitions of significant threshold shift that are as protective as the one in paragraph (j)(10). 5. The necessity and appropriateness of that the definition was too lenient to presbycusis corrections in combination with adequately protect young workers with definitions of significant threshold shift nd hearing. OSHA did not intend to uire that computers be used to evaluate audiograms. This might place an undue burden on small or medium* 9. The appropriateness of statistical trend analysis in assessing threshold shift of individual employees, as suggested in post promulgation comment number 213. sized companies that have their own Audiometric Teat Requirements-- testing programs. OSHA agrees that the Paragraph (k). Audiometer specifications. One comment questioned why references to manual type and computer audiometers were not contained in Appendix C. Use of these types of audiometers is permitted under the standard. Appendix C was included specifically for pulsed-tone and self-recording audiometers because the ANSI standard S3.6-1969 which is referenced In the amendment does not contain requirements for these instruments. The ANSI standard which is referenced in the amendment does prescribe performance specifications for manual audiometer so there was no need to refer to the manual audiometers in Appendix C. Microprocessor audiometers are allowed by the amendment if they meet the requirements of ANSI S3.6-1969. In order to clarify this point OSHA is considering adding specific language allowing the use of microprocessor audiometers. Paragraph (k)(4) states that audiometric examinations must be given in a room meeting the requirements listed in Appendix D, Audiometric Test Rooms. In order to obtain accurate audiograms, it is necessary to use a quiet booth or room for testing. Appendix D contains tables that list maximum allowable sound pressure levels in audiometric test rooms. Table D-l is essentially the same as the current ANSI standard, with a relaxation of 5 dB at 500Hz. Table D-2, taken from the 1960 ANSI standard, contains requirements that are considerably less stringent than those of Table D-l. The amendment allowed background sound pressure levels to be within the limits listed in Table 9-2 until April 15,1963. at which time audiometric test rooms would have to meet the more stringent levels in Table D-l. The reason for the requirement was to enable employers to test employees' hearing to at least 0 dB (referenced to ANSI 1969 audiometric zero) at all test frequencies except 500 Hz. The Agency received a variety of comments on the issue of whether or not the sound levels in Table D-l are necessary or feasible for industrial audiometric test programs. Some comments stated that the requirement meant that large rooms with double walls would need to be used, which would take up a considerable amount of space and would be very costly. Others said that compliance with Table D-l would be extremely difficult for mobile test units, because of the occasional need to park in noisy locations. Some comments also maintained that the levels specified in Table D-l were 3-27-81 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037 OQOOim6 CC* 0 CURRENT REPORT 263 appropriate for clinical testing but not the audiometer to preclude use of the for industrial testing. For these reasons electroacoustic ear. The standard's OSHA is staying the requirement for requirement for a daily functional check complying with Table D-l in Appendix is twofold: a person with known stable 0. However, employers wishing to hearing must be tested, and a listening purchase audiometric test booths in the check must also be performed. The near future should bear in mind that the electroacoustic ear can be used in place issue of the appropriate background of the testing requirement, but the sound pressure levels has not been listening check still must be performed finally decided. Therefore, in order to to make sure that the signal is free of avoid potentially costly retrofit or unwanted sounds or distortion, and that replacement, new purchasers may wish the general functioning of the to come as close to meeting the levels in audiometer is satisfactory. Table D-l as is practical. With respect Performance Criteria. Post to audiometric test rooms. OSHA is promulgation comment #286a requesting information and comments recommended that OSHA consider the on: analysis of audiometric data as an 1. Octave band sound pressure levels In existing test rooms used for industrial audiometry. Z. Feasibility of retrofitting rooms not indicator of the effectiveness of the .hearing conservation program. The Agency is interested in exploring this kind of approach..and requests data, meeting the levels in Table D-l. information, and comments on the 3. Criteria for establishing differences following: between- clinical and industrial audiometric test proj, ams, including rationale for selecting the lowest notwnasked threshold test levels. 1. Methods of evaluating the effectiveness of hearing conservation programs. 2. Criteria for judging program effectiveness through audiometric te9t data. Audiometer calibration--Paragraph a. Where hearing threshold shift is the (k)(5). Paragraphs (k)(5)(i) and (k}(5](ii) contain requirements for more extensive calibrations when an audiometer's output deviates from its stated level by more than a certain amount (5 dB or 10 dB}. Comments pointed out that the phrase "deviations of more than S dB" criterion, the amount of threshold shift deemed to be acceptable, the length of time over which the shift occurs, and the percentage of the population exhibiting such shifts. b. Where hearing level is the criterion, the amount of occupational hearing loss deemed to be acceptable in a population, the non-, could literally mean a deviation of only occupational hearing loss data used for 6 dB, which is a very stringent comparison purposes, and the duration of requirement for triggering an acoustic exposure. calibration. Likewise, "deviations of mora than 10 dB" could literally mean that a deviation of only 11 dB would trigger an exhaustive calibration. In establishing these requirements, the Agency assumed the use of manual audiometry, which is conducted in 5- Hearing Protectors--Paragraph (1). Hearing protectors above 85 dB. One commenter mentioned that his company requires the use of hearing protectors by all employees exposed to sound levels of 85 dB regardless of the duration of the exposure. Similarly, others believed that decibel increments. Therefore the OSHA should require the use of phrases "deviations of more than 5 dB" protectors for all employees exposed to or "deviations of more than 10 dB" as a TWA of 85 dB or greater. Under the used in the above paragrapha were standard, the wearing of protectors is intended to mean deviations of 10 dB mandatory for workers whose and 15 dB respectively. It was pointed exposures exceed 90 dB and for workers out. however, that when self-recording who have experienced a significant audiometry is used, thresholds can be threshold shift, but only voluntary for calculated in 1-decibel increments, in other workers whose exposures exceed which case 6 dB or 11 dB deviations may 85 dB. This combination of requirements appear. Therefore, in order to treat both is designed to provide necessary types of audiometers equally, OSHA protection, but not require hearing will, as an interim measure, interpret the protector use where the risk of material words "more than 5 dB" in these impairment is relatively small. paragraphs to mean 10 dB or greater, and "more than 10 dB" to mean 15 dB or greater. In addition, OSHA requests comments on whether the language of the standard should be changed to If an employer finds it more efficient and easier to promote employee use of hearing protectors by requiring hearing protector use by all employees exposed to levels of 85 dB or greater, this is explicitly incorporate this interpretation. permissible since it is more protective One comment interpreted the than-the OSHA requirement. OSHA procedure prescribed in the preamble considers its requirement to be a for checking the functional operation of minimum, and employers are free to require measures that are more protective than those specified in the standard* Hearing protector replacement-- Paragraph (l)(i). One comment interpreted the amendment's requirement that "hearing protectors shall be replaced as necessary," to mean that employers have to pay for lost or mutilated protectors. The Agency believes that employers should not have to pay for an unlimited supply of protectors or replace protectors that have been lost due to employee negligence. Employers may formulate their own reasonable policies as to how many free replacement protectors to supply. Although employers must -replace worn out protectors, they should not have to bear the expense in cases where empfoyeea have been irresponsible. Hearing protector attenuation-- Paragraph (m). The amendment requires employers to evaluate hearing protector attenuation for the specific noise environments in which the protector will be used. Employers may use any of the methods listed in Appendix G to do this. The easiest method involves the use of the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR) which is printed on the hearing protector package. One comment expressed concern that employers who wish to use the NRR because of its simplicity would be penalized because of ita.conservative correction factors. Others, however, noted that the NRR may not be nearly conservative enough. Research has shown that hearing protectors are not as effective in real life conditions as they are in the laboratory. OSHA believes that because of its simplicity the NRR is the best method available at this time, and employers are encouraged to use it. The Agency does, however, caution employers that the NRR values may be unrealistically high. Employers should use extra care in fitting and supervising the use of hearing protectors when the full amount of the NRR is needed. Some recent information submitted to the Agency suggests that only about half the attenuation predicted by the NRR is actually obtained in field use (see post promulgation comment 268). In addition, OSHA has recently learned that the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Noise Abatement, which required the labelling of hearing protectors with the NRR, will soon be abolished. OSHA does not know at this time whether the EPA labelling regulation will be rescinded, and if so whether hearing protector manufacturers will continue to use the NRR voluntarily. Therefore the Agency may need to amend Appendix G so that 3-27-51 Occupational Safety & Healtft Reporter CCR 000001817 264 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER _,,cimation3 of hearing protector humidity, and presence of dust, grease, attenuation more adequately predict the or metal particles, also have a bearing attenuation received in actual use. on the choice of protectors. A protector Consequently the Agency is reopening that is suitable for a hot environment the record and is requesting data and may not be the best one in a greasy information on: environment. Once employers and 1. Ear muff and ear plug attenuation in field conditions. 2. Simple field methods for evaluating hearing protector attenuation. employees have settled on the types and sizes of protectors that will be worn, there is no need to keep a varied selection always available. 3. Suggested corrections to the NRR. One commenter interpreted the Certain portions of Appendix G (which gives various methods of determining the attenuation of hearing protectors] have been stayed insofar as they make reference to Appendix B, which has also been stayed. After requirement as meaning that employees alone would make the hearing protector selection. This was not the intention of the Agency. The Agency believes that the employee and the employer (who should have some knowledge of the fundamentals of hearing protection) evaluating the comments, the Agency may delete the second part of Appendix G*s paragraph (iii)(A). the second part of should work together in selecting the right protector. While the employer may know about attenuation values and paragraph (iv)(A) and its accompanying other technical considerations, the footnote, a; i paragraph (iv)(B), all of which refer to Appendix B. or identified employee is the best person to judge the protector's comfort If the protector is time segments which are described in uncomfortable, it is not likely to be worn Appendix B. In addition, procedures for properly, and may not be worn at all. estimating attenuation using sound level Training Program--Paragraph (n). meters and area monitoring may be The Agency received a number of added to Appendix G. For example, the requests to reconsider the training following types of provisions may be requirements. Comments objected to the added: specificity of the requirements, saying (v) When using area monitoring procedures that it would impede the employer's dnd a sound level meter set to the A- flexibility to conform the program to the weighting network: needs of his own employees. Some (A) Obtain a representative sound level for pointed out that some of the training the area in question. (B) Subtract 7 dB from the NRR and subtract the remainder from the A-weighted sound level for that area. (vi] When using area monitoring procedures and a sound level meter set to the C-weighting network: (A) Obtain a representative sound level for the area in question. (B) Subtract the NRR from the C-weighted requirements exceed the information that employees need to know to protect their hearing. Therefore OSHA has made effective only those requirements for training that it believes are essential to the success of the hearing conservation program. The remaining requirements are stayed pending consideration of further comments on sound level for that area. their necessity. Comments are invited on the above and similar suggestions. Hearing protector selection-- Paragraph (1](3). Some comments reflected a misunderstanding of the intent of the requirement for giving employees an opportunity to choose hearing protectors from a variety of protectors. Some suggested that the requirement entailed providing employees with a shopping list of different brands and types of protectors. Paragraph (n](3)(i) has been stayed because the Agency believes that the requirements may be redundant Employees have access to the noise standard under paragraph (oj(l), concerning access to information and training materials. Paragraphs (n) (3) (iii), (n) (3) (iv), and (n) (3 ] (v) are stayed since information about engineering and administrative controls and the employer's compliance plan may not be relevant to the employee's understanding of or The intent of the requirement is that cooperation in the hearing conservation workers should have more than one type program. In light of these stays, of device, more than one si2e (where the employers may be able to avail devices come in different sizes], and themselves of pre-prepared training preferably three or more devices to materials such as pamphlets or films, hoose from. The reason for this which are professionally prepared and requirement is that ear canals come in which may be more effective and less many shapes and sizes, and even the same person can have two differently expensive than individually developed programs. sized ear canals. Characteristics of the OSHA requests comments and noise environment such as temperature. information on the necessity of the above stayed training requirements for effective hearing conservation programs. In addition, comments are requested on whether there are any disadvantages in including such provisions in a regulation for hearing conservation programs. Warning Signs--Paragraph (p). Comments objected to the requirements for warning signs, stating that the signs would be costly and inconvenient and that confusion would result as to whether hearing protection was advisory or mandatory in certain areas. In light of these comments, the requirements for warning signs will be stayed pending further comment OSHA is requesting information on the following: 1. Educational value of warning signs. 2. Necessity of requiring warning eigne to have an effective hearing conservation program. Recordkeeping--Paragraph (q). OSHA received numerous requests to reconsider the amendment's recordkeeping requirements. Comments objected to the detailed nature of the provisions, the burden on small and medium-sized companies, and the redundancy of some of the requirements. OSHA has therefore decided to reduce the extent of the recordkeeping requirements in the interim by staying certain provisions. Comments are invited on whether these provisions arenecessary for the hearing conservation amendment or whether they should be deleted. Exposure measurements--Paragraph (qj(l). The Agency is staying and seeking comment on all of paragraph (q](l) except for the general requirement in paragraph (q)(l)(i) to " maintain an accurate record of all employee exposure measurements required by * * 1 (paragraph (e)'of] this section". The bracketed words in paragraph (q](l)(i), as well as all of paragraph (q}(l)(ii) are also being stayed to be consistent with the interim stays affecting most of the specific monitoring requirements in paragraphs (e) through (h). These paragraphs require the retention of detailed information such as names of persons whose exposures were actually measured, date of last laboratory calibration, the type of measuring equipment used, and the date and location of measurements. Comments are requested on whether any of the information required by the paragraphs covered by the interim stay is necessary to achieve a successful hearing conservation program. Audiometric tester-paragraph (q](2). OSHA i9 also staying and inviting further comments on the second part of paragraph (q)(2)(ii)(c), which requires 8-27-81 Published by THE BUREAU OP NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037 CCR 000001818 CURRENT REPORT 265 records of the qualifications of the the deletion of the requirement that such person who administered the information be kept as a separate audiometric test and paragraph record. The provisions for record (q)(2)(li)(/), which requires records of retention in paragraph (q)(5)(i) requiring the manufacturer and model of the the retention of noise exposure audiometer. While employers may wish measurement records for 2 years are to keep this information to help them to going into effect. Paragraph (q)(5)(ii) is evaluate various aspects of their own being partially stayed insofar as programs, the Agency believes that it employers have to retain such records may not be necessary for the standard for 5 years after termination of to require that such information be kept. employment. Employers will, however, In addition. OSHA is staying and be required to retain audiometric test inviting comment on the possible records for the length of employment. deletion of paragraph (q)(2)(ii)(g), which OSHA invites comments on whether the requires a statement as to whether the retention period for audiometric test sound pressure levels in the test room records (length of employment plus 5 meet those specified in Tables D-l or D-- years) in paragraph (q)(5)(ii) is 2 of Appendix D. This is consistent with necessary for a successful hearing the stay of Table D-l. In addition, this conservation program. Since provision is redundant with the audiometric test records can be valuable requirement in paragraph (q)(3) to to employees after they have left a record the background sound pressure company. OSHA also invites comments levels in audiometric test rooms. Some on whether employers should be envisioned that employers would have required to offer a departing employee to list1 ackground sound pressure levels on eao/ and every audiogram. The Agency's intention was merely that the background sound pressure levels be kept with the audiometric test record, not necessarily on each record. The stay of this provision will focus attention, on the similar requirement in paragraph (q)(3) and clarify the issue. Audiometric test rooms--Paragraph his or her audiometric test records. Recordkeeping Clearance. As noted above, this standard contains recordkeeping requirements, some of which are going into effect now and some of which are being stayed pending receipt and review of further comments on the necessity of the requirements. The recordkeeping requirements in the amendment have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget OSHA is staying and considering the deletion of paragraph (q)(3)(ii), which specifies the audiometric frequencies for which sound pressure level measurements are to be kept, and requires noting the date of the pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. Public Law 96-511. 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35. The OMB approval number is 1218-0048. Custody of Records. The question was raised as to whether the amendment requires employers to keep records at measurement OSHA has stayed these requirements because they are not believed to be necessary in view of the fact that Table D-2 in Appendix D the workplace. The Agency recognizes that some employers, especially small companies, may prefer to hire contractors to fulfill their hearing already gives the pertinent frequencies. In addition, the Agency believes that conservation requirements, and may choose to have the contractors keep the employers will note the date of records. This is acceptable to OSHA as measurement as a matter of course. The long as all records are readily available Agency requests comments on the in case they are needed by the necessity of retaining such a provision. employer, employees, designated Calibration of audiometers-- representatives, or by OSHA. Paragraph (q}(4). Appendices--Paragraph (r). Similarly, since die date of the last In paragraph (r)(2) reference to acoustic or exhaustive calibration of the Appendix B (Temporal Sampling audiometer also must be kept with the Procedures for Use With a Sound Level employee's audiometric test record, Meter) and Appendix F (Calculations keeping a separate record of calibration end Application of Age Corrections to results is unnecessary. OSHA is Audiograms) has been stayed to be therefore considering deleting paragraph consistent with the stays of Appendix B (q)(4) in its entirety. and Appendix F. Record retention--Paragraph (q)(5). Effective datea--Paragraph (s). 'Hie Agency is staying and is Since the amendment will became considering deleting paragraphs effective on August 22,1981 instead of (q)(5)(iii) and (qX5](iv], requiring that April 15,1981. the start-up dates records of test room sound pressure contained in paragraphs (s)(2) and (s)(3) levels and audiometer calibrations be for completion of monitoring and kept for 5 years, to be consistent with baseline audiograms are being adjusted to reflect the same amount oftime given in the January 16,1981 amendment Accordingly, monitoring must be completed by February 22,1982. and baseline audiograms must be completed by August 22.1982. In paragraph (s)(2), references to the initial determination and to paragraph (d) have been stayed to be consistent with the stay of paragraph (d), requiring initial determinations. Paragraphs (s)(4) concerning the effective date for the more stringent requirements for background sound pressure levels in audiometric test rooms and (s)(5). concerning the effective date for the more stringent requirements for noise dosimeters, are being stayed to be consistent with the staying of these substantive requirements in Table D-l of Appendix D and paragraph (gj respectively. Other Alternatives. Possible alternatives to the hearing conservation standard have been suggested to the Agency. These alternatives might include the following provisions: 1. Employers shall conduct audiograms annually of every employee exposed to noise in excess of an 8-hour time weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBa,1 according to standards on audiometers and audiometric test rooms established by the American National Standards Institute.* and under the supervision of a qualified technician: 2. Such audiograms shall be reviewed annually by a qualified audiologist, otolaryngologist or physician to identify employees whose hearing acuity has diminished more than normal: 3. Employers shall instruct all employees identified under paragraph Z in the proper use of hearing protection when working in noisy areas and shall take appropriate measures to enforce the use of suitable protective devices for those employees when they are exposed to noise levels in excess of an 8-hour time weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 dBa. The purpose of this suggestion is to determine whether the goal of hearing conservation could be achieved by a performance standard that does not contain detailed compliance requirements but rather leaves implementation to physicians and other experts in the field. One of the benefits of the suggestion, for example, may be that more employees would read and fully understand the standard. In addition, small employers whose resources may be limited might `See Appendix A 'American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Specification for Audiometers. S3.8-1969. and the Institute's Specification for Audiometric Test Rooms. ANSI S3.1-1977. Audiometers shall be calibrated annually to ensure the standard is met ANSI S3.1-1S77 must be followed for testing performed at frequencies of 1.000 Hz and above: for testing below Hs. ANSI S3.1-1960 may be used. 8-27-31 Occupational Safety & Health Reporter CCR 000001819 266 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER '* mselves be better able to comply ause of the brevity and simplicity of tms alternative. As a result of a greater understanding on the part of both employees and employers, more effective compliance with the standard may be encouraged. OSHA invites comments on the above alternative, especially with respect to the following points: 1. Do ihffabove provisions constitute an adequate hearing conservation program? Would the protection provided to workers against noise-induced hearing loss by the above provisions be comparable to the protection provided by the hearing conservation amendment as issued? What provisions going into effect on August 22 will result in $170.6 million in new costs. Hie Regulatory Impact Analysis relies on the benefits calculations of the Regulatory Analysis which was prepared for the amendment published in January 18.1961. OSHA estimated that hearing conservation programs for all employees exposed above 85 dfi would eliminate 212,000 cases of material impairment of hearing after 10 years. 996,000 after 30 years and 698.000 cases at equilibrium. Even assuming fall compliance with the present standard which requires hearing conservation programs for all employees exposed over 90 dB, the amendment would evidence supports the conclusions of prevent 38.000 additional impairments comparability or non-comparability? 2. How would the employer's compliance with the above provisions differ from the actions necessary for compliance with the hearing conservation amendment? What would be the impact of these differences on costs of compik- tee? 3. How would OSHA enforcement of the above provisions differ horn enforcement of within IQ years, 143,000 within 30 years, and 189.000 at equilibrium. Therefore the standard would significantly reduce the risk of hearing impairment present in many workplaces. The original benefits estimates assumed that the provisions in the amendment formed a system of checks and balances to assure that the hearing conservation amendment? employees who were highly susceptible OSHA will consider the comments submitted on these alternative provisions and the responses to the questions listed in deciding whether any farther rulemaking activity on the r re included in the alternative is w*anted. to noise would be identified and prevented from incurring material impairment by intervening at an early stage with counseling, training, retesting and professional evaluation where necessary. Because of the interrelated nature of the hearing conservation provisions, it is very difficult to predict ,. Summary of Regulatory Impact what effect the relaxation of any Analysis requirement or group of requirements A Regulatory Impact Analysis, consistent with the requirements of Executive Order 12291 has been prepared. The document discusses, inter alia, the costs of the hearing conservation provisions published in January and the costs of the provisions going into effect on August 22. presents information on relative costeffectiveness between the two sets of provisions, and describes the impact on small business, consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act will have on the benefits predicted. Copies of the Regulatory Impact Analysis can be obtained from the Docket Office, at the address listed in the "Address" section at the beginning of this Federal Register document Comments, including analysis and data to support any conclusions drawn, are invited on the following issues: 1. Whether it is appropriate to aasuma that the provisions going into effect on August 22 will be adequate to achieve the benefits predicted. 2. Whether the continued stay ofcertain As mentioned in the background provisions has lowered the coats and section of this Federal Register notice, simultaneously diminished the benefits likely the total cost of the amendment to be realized. published in January was estimated to be $269 million or an average of $53 per worker included in hearing conservation 3. Whether general performance requirements for noise exposure monitoring are sufficient to identify ail employees who need to be included in hearing conservation programs mandated by the amendment progrems_so that they will receive the The Regulatory Impact Analysis also benefits of such programs. presents recalculated costa of $234.6 4. Whether the provisions going into effect million for the January amendment. This August 22 represent a cost-effective adjustment was based on new alternative to the January 18 amendment information. The provisions going into V. Environmental Impact effect on August 22 are considerably lesr stly: these provisions are ' ed to result in total costs of . million or an average of $36 per worker per year. After adjusting for current compliance activities, the On February 19.1974 OSHA announced in the Federal Register its intention to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement assessing the impact of a standard that would be proposed for occupational noise exposure (See 39 FR 6119). Information was solicited from the public on a variety of environmentally related issues including possible environmental impacts of the recommended standard and any irreversible commitments of resources which would be involved if the standard should be implemented. A draft Environmental Impact Statement was made available to the public on June 16,1975 (40 FR 25525) and environmental impact was specifically an issue at the first hearing held in 1975. A Final Environmental Impact Statement was prepared in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Guidelines (40 CFR1500 et seq.) and the Department of Labor's regulations setting out procedures to be used by Department of Labor agencies to insure compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (29 CFR Part 11). The final Environmental Impact Statement was made available to the public at the time the final rule was published. The Final Environmental Impact Statement concluded that the hearing conservation amendment would beneficially impact the workplace environment by reducing both the incidence and the degree of hearing loss among Workere. ft also concluded that the incidence of other adverse health effects associated with noise exposure might also be reduced. OSHA does not believe that staying various provisions of the amendment will have any significant environmental impact Therefore, no revised Environmental Impact Statement is necessary. Comments and data are requested on whether the Agency's action today will have any significant environmental impact VL Conclusion Comments and data are hereby requested in response to the specific questions posed in the discussion above. In addition, interested persona are invited to submit any other relevant comments and data on any of the provisions which have been reopened for comment These substantive comments must be submitted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Public Participation section (see section IL B), and be received by November 23,1981. The stay is still in effect for all or part of the paragraphs listed below. Comments are specifically requested as to whether the interim stay of these provisions should remain in effect pending the submission and evaluation of substantive comments on these provisions. Comments on the interim stays must be submitted in accordance 1-27-81 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20037 000001820 CCR CURRENT REPORT 267 with the procedures outlined in the and inserting in its place paragraph (e) Monitoring. (1) When information Public Participation section (see section (j)(7)(iil) as amended below. indicates that any employee's exposure IL A)f and must be received by 4. Paragraph (j)(7}(ni) of f 1910.95 is may equal or exceed an 8-hour time- September 22,1961. amended by removing the word "the" weighted average of 65 decibels, the A. Provisions Stayed before "audiologist" and inserting the word "an" in its place; in addition, the employer shall obtain measurements for employees who may be exposed at or Paragraph (d). word "also" is removed. above that level. Paragraph (e), except for part of (e)(1). Paragraph (f). Paragraph (g), except for part of (g)(2)(ii)(b). Paragraph (h). Paragraph (i). except for part of (i)(l). Part of paragraph (j)(5)(i). Paragraph (j)(5)(U)(a). Paragraph (jK5)(i)(h). Part of paragraph (j)(7)(i). Part of paragraph Q)(7)(ii). Part of paragraph (j)(7)(iii). 5. Paragraph (k)(5)(iii) of 1910.95 is amended by inserting the words "and above 6000 Hz" after the words "below 500 Hz" in the second sentence. 6. Paragraph (r)(2) of 1910.95 is amended by removing the words "appendices B. F and" before "H"; the word "are" which appears twice in the sentence is removed and the word "is" is inserted in its place. 7. Paragraph (s)(l) of 5 1910.95 is amended by removing the words "April (g)(2)(ii)() All continuous, intermittent and impulsive sound levels from 80 dB to 130 dB shall be integrated into the computation. (1) Observation of monitoring. (1) The employer shall provide affected employees or their representatives with an opportunity to observe any measurements of employee noise exposure which are conducted pursuant to this section. Paragraph Part of paragraph (J)(8). Paragraph (j)(8) (iii] and (iv). Part of paragraph (j)(8)(iv) (o) add (6). Paragraph (jK8)(iv)(d). Paragr ph (j){9). Paragraph fij(lO). Part of paragraph (l)(2)(i). Paragraph (n)(3) (ij. (iii). (iv) and (v). Paragraph (p). Part of paragraph (q)(l)(i). Paragraph (q)(l)(ii). Part of paragraph (q)(2)(ii)(c). Paragraph (q)(2)(ii)(d). Paragraph (q)(2)(u)(g). Paragraph (q)(3)(ii).. Paragraph (qX4). Part of paragraph (q)(5](ii). Part of paragraph (q)(5) (iii) and (iv). Part of paragraph (r](2). Part of paragraph (s)(2). Paragraph (s}(4). Paragraph (sj(5). 15,1981" and inserting "August 22,1981" in its place. 8. Paragraph (s)(2) of 1910.95 Is amended by removing the words "October 15.1981" and inserting "February 22.1982" in its place. 9. Paragraph (a)(3) of 1910.95 is amended by removing the words "April" 15.1982" and inserting "August 22,1962" in its place. 10. Paragraph I. (l)(ii) in Appendix A of 51910.95 is corrected by removing "C.T." and inserting "C*/T" in its place. 11. Table E-2 in Appendix E of 1910.95 is corrected by changing "TDH-39" in the middle column heading to read "TDH-49". 12. In Appendix H of 5 1910.95. the address given for the Superintendent of Documents in the right hand column of the chart is corrected by changing the zip code from "20404" to "20402". Appendix B is stayed in its entirety. C. Provisions Going Into Effect August Part of appendix D, including Table D-l. 22 Appendix F. Part of Appendix G. The text of the hearing conservation amendment contained in 1910.95(c}-{8) B. TechnicalAmendments and appendices A-I to 5 1910.95 (j} Audiometric testing program. (1) The employer shall establish and maintain an audiometric testing program as provided in this paragraph by making audiometric testing available to all employees whose exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 decibels. (2) The program shall be provided at no cost to employees. (3) Audiometric tests shall be performed by a licensed or certified audiologist, otolaryngologist or other qualified physician, or by a technician who is certified by the Council of Accreditation in Occupational Hearing Conservation, or who has satisfactorily demonstrated competence in administering audiometric examinations, obtaining valid audiograms, and properly using, maintaining and calibrating audiometers. A technician who performs audiometric tests'must be responsible to an audiologist otolaryngologist of qualified physician. (4) All audiograms obtained pursuant to this section shall meet the requirements of Appendix & J1910.96 (Amended] For the reasons set out in the preamble. Part 1910 of Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below. 1. Paragraph (c) of 51910.85 is amended by inserting the words "slow response'* after **85 dedbels measured on the A scale'*. currently in effect is shown below. 1910*95 Occupational noise exposure. (c) Hearing conservation program. The employer shall administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program, as described in paragraphs (c) through (s) of this section whenever employee noise exposures Audiometric Measuring Instruments. (5) Baseline audiogram, (i) The employer shall establish for each employee so exposed a valid baseline audiogram against which subsequent audiograms can be compared. (ii) Testing to establish a baseline audiogram shall be preceded by at least 14 hours without exposure to workplace noise. Z Paragraph (j](3) of $ 1910.95 Is equal or exceed an 8-bour time-weighted (6) Annual audiogram. (i) At least amended by deleting the word "person** average sound level (TWA) of 85 annually after obtaining the baseline in the first sentence and inserting the decibels measured on the A scale slow audiogram, the employer shall obtain a word "technician'* in its place. Also in response or, equivalently, a dose of fifty new audiogram for each employee the first sentence, the words "by an percent. For purposes of the hearing exposed at or above a time-weighted audiometric technician'' are removed. conservation program, employee noise average of 85 decibles. 3. Paragraph (i)(7}(ii) of S 1910.95 is exposures shall be computed in (ii) Annual audiometric testing may be amended by removing the first sentence accordance with Appendix A and Table conducted at any time during the which states "such evaluation shall be G~16a, and without regard to any workshift performed by an audiologist, attenuation provided by the use of (7) Evaluation of audiogram, (i) Each * otolaryngologist or qualified physician'* personal protective equipment. employee's annual audiogram shall be 8-27-8t Occupational Safety a Health Reporter CCR 000001821 268 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER (pared to that employee's baseline __diogram to determine if the audiogram :s valid and if a significant threshold .lift has occurred. (ii) An audiologist otolaryngologist or qualified physician shall review the audiograms to determine whether there is need for further evaluation. The employer shall provide to the person performing this evaluation the following information: (a) A copy of the requirements for hearing conservation as set forth in paragraphs (c) through (r) of this section: (Z>) The baseline audiogram and most recent audiogram of the employee to be evaluated: (c) Measurements of background sound pressure levels in the audiometric test room as required in Appendix 0: Audiometric Test Rooms. (rf) Records of audiometer calibrations required by paragraph (k)(5) of this section. > (8) Follow-up procedures. If a comparison of the annual audiogram to the baseline audiogram indicates a significant threshold shift the employer shall ensure that the following steps are taken: (i) Employees not using hearing actors shall be fitted with hearing i actors, trained in their use and care, i required to use them. (ii) Employees already using hearing protectors shall be refitted and retrained in the use of hearing protectors and provided with hearing protectors offering greater attenuation if necessary. (iv)(o) Inform the employee in writing, within 21 days of the determination, of the existence of a significant threshold shift: [b) Refer the employee for a clinical audiological evaluation or an otological examination, as appropriate, if additional testing is necessary or if the employer suspects that a medical pathology of the ear (as defined in Appendix I) is caused or aggravated by the wearing of hearing protectors: (e) Inform the employee'of the need for an otological examination if a medical pathology of the ear which is unrelated to the use of hearing protectors is suspected. (k) Audiometric test requirements, (l) Audiometric tests shall be pure tone, air conduction, hearing threshold examinations, with test frequencies including as a minimum 500.1000. 2000, 3000. 4000. and 6000 Hz. Tests at each fr ncy shall be taken separately for ear. ^2) Audiometric tests shall be conducted with equipment that meets the specifications of. and is maintained and used in accordance with, American National Standard Specification for Audiometers. S3.8-1900. (3) Pulsed-tone and self-recording audiometers, if used, shall meet the requirements specified in Appendix C* Audiometric Measuring Instruments. (4) Audiometric examinations shall be administered in a room meeting the requirements listed in Appendix 0: Audiometric Test Rooms. (5) Audiometer calibration, (i) The functional operation of the audiometer shall be checked before each day's use by testing a person with known, stable hearing thresholds, and by listening to the audiometer's output to make sure that the output is free from distorted or unwanted sounds. Deviations of more than 5 dB shall require an acoustic calibration. (ii) Audiometer calibration shall be checked acoustically at least annually in accordance with Appendix E: Acoustic Calibration ofAudiometers. Test frequencies below 500 Hi and above 6000 Hz may be omitted from this check. Deviations of more than 10 dB necessitate an exhaustive calibration. (iii) An exhaustive calibration shall be performed at least every two years in accordance with sections 4.1.2; 4.1.3; 4.1.4.3: 4.4.1; 4.4.2; 4.4.3: and 4.5 of the American National Standard Specification for Audiometers, S3.61969. Test frequencies below 500 Hz and above 6000 Hz may be omitted from this calibration. (1) Hearing protectors. (1) Employers shall make hearing protectors available to all employees exposed to a timeweighted average of 85 decibels or greater at no cost to the employees. Hearing protectors shall be replaced as necessary. (2) Employers shall ensure that hearing protectors are worn by all employees: (i) Who are exposed to a time- weighted average of 85 decibels or greater and who have experienced a significant threshold shift: or (ii) Who are required by paragraph (b)(1) of this section to wear personal protective equipment (3) Employees shall be given the opportunity to select their hearing protectors from a variety of suitable hearing protectors provided by the employer. (4) The employer shall provide training in the use and care of all hearing protectors provided to employees. (5) The employer shall ensure proper Initial fitting and supervise the correct use of all hearing protectors. (m) Hearing protector attenuation. (1) The employer shall evaluate hearing protector attenuation for the specific noise environments in which the protector will be used by one of the methods described in Appendix G: Methods for Estimating the Adequacy of Hearing Protector Attenuation. (2) Hearing protectors must attenuate employee exposure at least to a time- weighted average of 90 decibels as required by paragraph (b) of this section. (3) For employees who have experienced a significant threshold shift hearing protectors must attenuate employee exposures to a time-weighted average of 85 decibels or below. (4) The adequacy of hearing protector attenuation shall be re-evaluated whenever employee noise exposures increase to the extent that the hearing protectors provided may no longer provide adequate attenuation. Tlie employer shall provide more effective hearing protectors where necessary. (n) Training program, (l) The employer shall institute a training program for all employees who are exposed-to noise at or above a TWA of 85 dB, and shall ensure employee participation in such program. (2) The training program shall be repeated annually for each employee included in the hearing conservation program. Information provided in the training program shall be updated to be consistent with changes in protective equipment and work processes. (3) The employer shall ensure that each employee is informed of the following: (ii) The effects of noise on hearing; (vi) The purpose of hearing protectors, the advantages, disadvantages, and attenuation of various types, and instructions on selection, fitting, use, and care; and (vii) The purpose of audiometric testing, and an explanation of the test procedures. (o) Access to information and training materials. (1) The employer shall make available to affected employees or their representatives copies of this standard and shall also post a copy in the workplace. (2) The employer shall provide to affected employees any informational materials pertaining to this standard that are supplied to the employer by the Assistant Secretary. (3) The employer shall provide, upon request all materials related to the employer's training and education program pertaining to this standard to the Assistant Secretary and the Director. (q) Recordkeeping. (1) Exposure measurements, (i) The employer shall maintain an accurate record of all i 7 j / J * 3-27-31 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20037 CCR 000001322 CURRENT REPORT 269 employee exposure measurements Appendix A: Noise Exposure Computation required by this section. (2) Audiometric tests, (i) The employer shall retain all employee audiograms obtained pursuant to paragraph (j) of this section; This Appendix is Mandatory I. Computation of Employee Noise Exposure (1) Noise dose is computed using Table G-- 18a as follows: (ii) This record shall include: ii) When the sound level. L is constant () Name and job classification of the employee; (hi Date of the audiogram; (c) The examiner's name: (e) Date of the last acoustic or exhaustive calibration of the audiometer over the entire work shift, the noise dose. D. in percent, is given by: D = 100 C/T where C is the total length of the work day. in hours, and T is the reference duration corresponding to the measured sound level. L as given in Table G-l&a or by the formula shown as a footnote to that table. (ii) When the workshift noise exposure is (/) Employee's most recent noise composed of two or more periods of noise at exposure assessment; (3) audiometric test rooms, (i) The employer shall maintain accurate records of the measurements of the background sound pressure levels in audiometric test rooms. different levels, the total noise dose over the work day is given by: D=100 (C./T,+C./T.+... + C*/T,,), where C* indicates the total time of exposure at a specific noise level, and T,, indicates the reference duration for that level as given by Table G-10a. (5) Record retention. The employer shall retain records required in this paragraph (qj for at least the following periods. (2) The eight-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA), in decibels, may be computed from the dose, in percent, by means of the formula: TWA = 16.81 log,, (Df 100)4-90. For an eight-hour workshift with the (1) Noise exposure measurement nose level constant over the entire shift, the records shall be retained for 2 years. TWA is equal to the measured sound level. (ii) Audiometric test records shall be (3) A table relating dose and TWA is given retained for the duration of the affected in Section 1L employee's employment () Access to records. Ail records Table G-I6a required by this section shall be provided upon request to employees, former employees, representatives A-wWoWd sound ImI. L (daoddf) duraDon. T (houq designated by the individual employee and the Assistant Secretary. The provisions of 29 CFR I9l0.20(a)-(e) and (g)--(I) apply to access to records under this section. [7] Transfer of records. If the employer ceases to do business, the employer shall transfer to the successor employer all records required to be maintained by this section, and the 90.... ..... 81........ 82 83.. --. 64---------86 84 8as7... .... ss.... ... 90----------- 91.. .... 92----- 32 27.9 24.3' 21.1 18.4 18 13.9 12.1 10.8 9.82 7.0 9.2 successor employer shall retain them for the remainder of the period prescribed in paragraph (q)(5) of this section. (r) Appendices. (1) Appendices A. C. D, E. G. and 1 to this section are 93_______ 94--.-- 99_______ 96--__ 97_______ 98.______ 99-- 5.3 4.8 4 3.8 3.0 2.8 ZJ Incorporated as part of this section and 100101--------- the contents of these Appendices are 102______ 2 1.7 IS mandatory. (2) Appendix H to this section is informational and is not intended to create any additional obligations not otherwise imposed or to detract from any existing obligations. (s) Effective dates, (l) Paragraphs (c)- 103._____ 104--------108._____ ioe____ 107______ 108._____ 109. ------ 1i1l0l._______ 112.. -- 1.4 1.31 0.87 0.78 0-68 0.57 0.3 0.44 0.38 (r) of this section shall become effective August 22,1981 unless otherwise noted below. (2) Monitoring conducted pursuant to 113-_____ 11*._____ ni._____ ; rs._____ nr. ___ ns. _... 0.33 0.29 00.J232 0.19 0.18 paragraph (e) of this section shall be completed by February 22,1982. " (3) Baseline audiograms required by paragraph (j) of this section shall be completed by August 22.1982. } 19._____ 120._____ 121_____ . 122_____ 129--.-- 124._____ 128._____ 0.14 0.128 0.11 o.oes 0.062 0.072' 0062 Table G-16*--Continued A tmg/mo sound Ml L imciM) 128-- 129..-. l*M= nee dVMOA, r<iwi aosd 0028 0021 In the above table the reference duration. T. is computed by T=--2L03M--it where L is the measured A-weighted sound level. II. Conversion Between "Dose" and "8* Hour Time-Weighted Average" Sound level Compliance with paragraphs (c)-{r) of this regulation is determined by the amount of exposure to noise in the workplace. The amount of such exposure is usually measured with an audiodosimeter which gives a readout in terms of "dose." In order to better understand the requirements of the amendment, dosimeter readings can be converted to an "8-hour time-weighted average sound level" (TWA). In order to convert the reading of a dosimeter into TWA, see Table A-l, below. This table applies to dosimeters that are set by the manufacturer to calculate dose or percent exposure according to the relationships in Table G-16a. So. for example, a dose of 91 percent over an eight hour day results in a TWA of 1&.3 dB, and, a dose of 50 percent corresponds to a TWA of 85 dB. If the dose as read on the dosimeter is less than or greater than the values found in Table A-l, the TWA may be calculated by using the formula: TWA=16.01 logjo (D/100J+90 where TWA=8-hour time-weighted average sound level and D = accumulated dose in percent exposure. Table A-1.--Conversion From "Percent Noise Exposure" or "Dose" to "8-Hour TimeWeighted Average Sound Levei" {TWA) Ooso or porcdnt nom nseaura TWA to____ _____ 73.4 IS_____________________________7S3 20_____ -78.4 29-- 80.0 3081J 35______________________________________ _________ 82,4 40.--____ ____ ___________ 83.4 43............................ ......----- ..... ........ 54.2 50 B&O 55u-____________________________________________ 85.7 60_________ 86.3 65---70 73________-- 80 8S9 87.4 87.9 88.4 81 38.5 62____________________ 88.8 8388.7 8-27-81 Occupational Safety & Health Reporter 000001323 CCR 270 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER Tabte K-i.--Conversion From "Percent Noise 'Exposure" or "Dose" to "8-Hour TimeWeighted Average Sound Lsvet' (.TWA1-- Continued Table A-1.--Conversion From "Percent Noise Exposure" or "Doss" to "8-Hour Time Weighted Average Sound Levet" (WA>-- Continued Oom or poreonr noiao omoaun TWA Oom orpwow* ram xpMura TWA 84________ aa7 85._____ 88.8 88_-_________________________ --..... .....................- 88.8 87-------------------- --------------------------- ---------------------- 89.0 88-_________________ 98.1 99__________________________________ ____________ an --,__________ 89.2 99.2 91 ___________ --__________________ -................ ' 89.3 92 89.4 90____ -....... 89.5 94 ----------- 89.8 95 _______ 89.8 98 _....____________..._____________________ 89.7 97----------- _------------------------ _----------- _----------- MLS 98...:____ 89.9 99 ----------------- 89.9 100 _______ --______ ___________ ________________ 900 101 _________ __________________ ____ -.... .......... 102 ______________________ ___________ _ 901 740. 90.1 103. _________________902 780..._ 104. ______.________ _________ --___ ___ 90J 105. -_______ _______________________ 90.4 106. ______ 90.4 107. 90.5 108......... ..........--........................ .............................. 90.8 109.---------------- 90.8 110 ________...____________ __ ______ 90.7 111 _ 908 112...... 90.8 113 114 ----------------------118................. .......................................... ..... .......X____ 909 90.9 91.1 1057 118 .................................. 91.1 117............... ..........-- .............................................. 91.1 11891-2 119 .......... 91.2 iiO91.3 ................................ .... .................... ........---........ 91.8 -......... --............................................. -- 91.9 -o92-2 *092.4 970. 148------------------------------------- 92.7 ISO................ .... ....................................--.................. 92.9 155934 asa 180---------------------------------------------------------------------- 93.4 iss._____ _________ 93.8 170------175.___ 180 165TM_______ 934 94.0 Appendix C: Audiometric Measuring 942 94.4 Instruments 190_____________ ___ _____ -............... , 196____________________________________ 04.6 94.9 This Appendix is Mandatory 20096.0 210---------- 96.4 220 98.7 230.960 240--------------------------------------------------------------------- , 98.3 25098.5 280 908 270972 280.97.4 290 97.7 1. In the event that pulsed-tone audiometers are used, they shall have a tone on-time of at least 200 milliseconds. 2. Self-recording audiometers shall comply with the following requirements: (A) The chart upon which the audiogram is traced shall have tines at lift ................................................................................97.9 positions.... ------- ------ 982 corresponding to all multiples 32096.4 of 10 dB hearing level within the 330---------------------------------------------------------------------- 98.6 intensity range spanned by the 340...................................................... 988 35099.0 audiometer. The lines shall be equally 380...... 370-------------------- 380---------------------------------------------------------------------- 390---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4ftft .. .................... . ........ ....... 410........................................................ 420--..... --__________ ___________ -..................... 992 spaced and shall be separated by at 984 988 least Vi inch. Additional increments are 99.8 optional. The audiogram pen tracings 1000 shall no1t0e02xceed 2 dB in width. 1004 (B) It shall be possible to set the stylus 430----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1008 440................................................. 450---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1008 460-------- ------------- ------_______ _ 47Q -- ------ 101.0 101.2 460------- - ............... ......................... ,..................... 1012 490----------------------------------------------------------------------- 101.8 mfoar ncuaalibllyraa1tit0o0t7nhepu1r0p-odsBeisn.crement lines (C) The slewing rate for the audiometer attenuator shall not be more than 6 dB/sec except that an initial ' ------------------------------------------------------------------..................... ..................... .......... .... ............... ......... ............ ...... 101.8 slewing rate greater than 8 dB/sec is 1012 101.8 permitted at the beginning of each new 44ft . 550102J ..................... ............ .... --,.......... 102.0 test frequency, but only until the second 1022 subject response. (D) The audiometer shall remain at each required test frequency for 30 seconds (3 seconds). The audiogram shall be clearly marked at each change of frequency and the actual frequency change of the audiometer shall not deviate from the frequency boundaries marked on the audiogram by more than 3 seconds. (E) It must be possible at each test frequency to place a horizontal Line segment parallel to the time axis on the audiogram, such that the audiometric tracing crosses the line segment at least six times at that test frequency. At each test frequency the threshold shall be the average of the midpoints of the tracing excursions. Appendix D: Audiometric Test Rooms This Appendix is Mandatory Rooms used for audiometric testing shall not have backgound sound pressure levels exceeding those in Table D- * when measured by equipment confoming at least to the Type 2 requirements of American National Standard Specification for Sound Level Meters. Sl.4-1971 (R1978), and to the Class II requirements of American National Standard Specification for Octave. Half-Octave, and Third-Octave Band Filter Sets, Sl.11-1971 (R1978). Table 0-2.---Maximum Allowable Octave- Band Sound Pressure Levels for Audiomst- no Test Booms Clef'* barirt canW fraquancy (Hz)____ 500 Sound praaawa tavai (del 40 1000 40 2000 47 4000 8000 57 52 Appendix E: Acoustic Calibration of Audiometers This Appendix is Mandatory Audiometer calibration shall be checked acoustically, at least annually, according to the procedures described in this Appendix. The equipment necessary to perform these measurements is a sound level meter, octave-band filter set and a National Bureau of Standards 9A coupler. In making these measurements, the accuracy of the calibrating equipment shall be sufficient to determine that the audiometer is within the tolerances permitted by American Standard Specification for Audiometers. S3.6-1969. (1) Sound Pressure Output Check A. Place the earphone coupler over the microphone of the sound level meter and place the earphone on the coupler. 8-27-ai Published by THg BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC.. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20037 ooooo1924 CCR CURRENT REPORT 271 B. Set the audiometer's hearing threshold level (HTL) dial to 70 dB. C. Measure the sound pressure level of the tones at each test frequency from 500 Hz through 6000 Hz for each earphone. D. At each frequency the readout on the sound level meter should correspond to the levels in Table E-l or Table E-2, as appropriate, for the type of earphone, in the column entitled "sound level meter reading." Appendix G: Methods for Estimating the (A) Obtain the employee's C-weighted Adequacy of Hearing Protector dose for the entire workshifi and Attexttuation convert to TWA (see Appendix A, II). This Appendix is Mandatory For employees who have experienced a significant threshold shift hearing protector attenuation must be sufficient to reduce employee exposure to a TWA of 85 dB. Employers must select one of the following methods by which to estimate the adequacy of hearing (B) Subtract the NRR from the Cweighted TWA to obtain the estimated A-weighted TWA under the ear protector. (ii) When using a dosimeter that is not capable of C-weighted measurements, the following method may be used: (A) Convert the A-weighted dose to TWA (see Appendix A). protector attenuation. (B) Subtract 7 dB from the NRR. (2) Linearity Check The most convenient method is the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR) (C) Subtract the remainder from the A-weighted TWA to obtain the A. With the earphone in place, set the frequency to 1000 Hz and the HTL dial on the audiometer to 70 dB. B. Measure the sound levels in the coupler at each 10-dB decrement from 70 dB to 10 dB. noting the sound level meter reading at each setting. C. For each 10-dB decrement on the audiometer the sound level meter should indicat; a corresponding 10 dB decrease. D. This measurement may be made electrically with a voltmeter connected to the earphone terminals. (3) Tolerances developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), According to EPA regulation, the NRR must be shown on the hearing protector package. The NRR is then related to an individual worker's noise environment in order to assess the adequacy of the attenuation of a given hearing protector. This Appendix describes four methods of using the NRR to determine whether a particular hearing protector provides adequate protection within a given exposure environment. Selection among the four procedures is dependent upon the employer's noise measuring instruments. estimated A-weighted TWA under the ear protector. (iii) When using a sound level meter set to the A-weighting network: (A) Obtain the employee's A-weighted TWA. (B) Subtract 7dB from the NRR. and subtract the remainder from the A- weighted TWA to obtain the estimated A-weighted TWA under the ear protector. (iv) When using a sound level meter set on the C-weighting network: (A) Obtain a representative sample of the C-weighted sound levels in the employee's environment. When any of the measured sound Instead of using the NRR. employers (C) Subtract the NRR from the C- levels deviate from the levels in Table may evaluate the adequacy of hearing weighted average sound level to obtain E-l or Table E-2 by 3 dB at any test protector attenuation by using one of the the estimated A-weighted TWA under r frequency between 500 and 3000 Hz, 4 dB at 4000 Hz. or 5 dB at 6000 Hz. and exhaustive calibration is advised. An exhaustive calibration is required if the three methods developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), which are described in the "List of Personal the ear protector. Appendix H: Availability of Referenced Documents deviations are greater than 10 dB at any test frequency. Table E-t.--Reference Threshold Levels for Telephones-- TDH-39 earphones Ftequoncy, Hi i)rno----H-mstosur --SrtokumiAnodAtofkr Hearing Protectors and Attenuation Data." HEW Publication No. 76-120, 1975, pages 21-37. These methods are known as NIOSH methods #2 and *3. The NRR described below is a simplification of NIOSH method *2. The mo9t complex method is NIOSH method *1. which is probably the most accurate method since it uses the largest amount Paragraphs (c) through (s) of 29 CFR 1910.95 and the accompanying appendices contain provisions which incorporate publications by reference. Generally, the publications provide criteria for instruments to be used in monitoring and audiometric testing. These criteria are intended to be 48 of spectral information from the mandatory when so indicated in the individual employee's noise applicable paragraphs of Section 1910.95 500..-.. - 11.5 BIS environment. As in the case of the NRR and appendices. 2000.......... -- 9 77 79 method described below, if one of the It should be noted that OSHA does 3000... ... 10 SO NIOSH methods is used, the selected not require that employers purchase a 5000....... ....... 79.5 method must be applied to an copy of the referenced publications. 1SJ ass individual's noise environment to assess Employers, however, may desire to the adequacy of the attenuation. obtain a copy of the referenced Table E-2.--Reference Threshold Levels for Employers should be careful to take a publications for their own information. Telephones--TDH-49 Earphones sufficent number of measurements in The designation of the paragraph of Frequency, Hi areiotToworfDMpooohHorooaof-ttnnto4oeot9reoo. order to achieve a representative sample the standard in which the referenced for each time segment. rloeuaSedointmpn,Jo.0w8 Note.--The emptoyer must remember that calculated attenuation values reflect realistic publications appear, the titles of the publications, and the availability of the publications are as follows: values only to the extent that the protectors are properly fitted and worn. 500........................ -___ ___________ 13.S 83.5 1000--------- -................--......... 7.5 77.5 When using the NRR to assess hearing 81.0 protector adequacy, one of the following 30.5 methods must be used: 53.5 (i) When using a dosimeter that is capable of C-weighted measurements: 000001B25 CCR 8-27-81 Occupational Safety & Healtn Reporter 272 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER ncnrancwQ puMcnon }1910B5(g)(1MO------------ "Spaaflcaaon tar Faraoota Notaa Ooi rratata.- ANSI SI 25-1978. (ASA Z5'979). {I910 95lgj(1)()------------- "Spactftcetton lor Sound Lata Manors, SM-1971 (R1978). | igio.954k>(2), aoctandn "Soaoficattawt tar Autflomatare.'' S3.6. '969. Aopandbt D.......... ...............Specification tar Octave. Had-OcUM and Thinl-Oeiave Sand Fitter Sou." Sl.ii1971 (R1976). Aepandta Q------------ --------- "(.isi ol Personal Hearing Protector* and Attenuation Data." Hgw Pub. No. 76120. 1975. AvakaO* frow^ Badt Numaer* Department Dept STD. Amenean imMute ol Physic*. 333 E. 5tft St. New Yota. NY 10017. American Nationai Standard* insMuta, tnc. 1430 SmMy, New Yota. NY 10018. American National Standards institute. lnc_ 1430 Broadway, Naw vota, NY 10018. Amancan National Standwda insoiwe. tnc.. 1430 Sroadway. Now York. NY 10018. Sack NurttWf* Oapanmam, Dept STD. Amancan trwauta ol Physics. 333 S. 45tn St. Naw Yota. NY 10017: Amancan National Standards institute, tnc.. 1430 Sroadway. Naw Yota. NY 10016. Supanntandant of Documents, U.S. Cowenvaent Pnnnng Office. Washington. D.C. 20402. Noise dosimeter--An instrument that integrates a function of sound pressure over a period of time in such a manner that it directly indicates a noise dose. Otolaryngologist--A physician specializing in diagnosis and treatment of disorders of die ear. nose end throat. Representative exposure--Measurements of an ^mpioyee's noise dose or 6-hour time- weighted average sound level that the employers deem to be representative of the exposures of other employees in the workplace. Sound level--Ten times the common logarithm of the ratio of the square of the measured A-weighted sound pressure to The referenced publications (or a microfiche of the publications) are available for review at many universities and public libraries throughout the country. These publications may also be examined at the OSHA Technical Data Center. Room N2439. Urate.1 States Department of Labor. 200 Constitution Avenue N.W.. Washington. D.C. 20210. (202) 523-9700 or at any OSHA Regional Office (see Hearing, and Language Association or licensed by a state board of examiners. Baseline audiogram--The audiogram against which future audiograms are compared. Crest factor--Absolute value of the ratio of the peak value and the root-mean-square value measured over a specified time interval where both values are measured in reference to the arithmetic mean value of the wave. Criterion sound level--A sound level of 90 decibels. the square of the standard reference pressure of 20 micropascais. Unit: decibels (dB). For use with this regulation. SLOW time response, in accordance with ANSI Si.4-1971 (R1976). is required. Sound level meter--An instrument for the measurement of sound level. Time-weighted average sound level--That sound level, which if constant over an Shour exposure, would result in the same noise dose as is measured. telephone directories under United States Government--Labor Department). pendix I: Definitions These definitions apply to the following terms as used in paragraphs (c) through (r) of 29 CFR 1910.95. Audiogram--A chart, graph, or table resulting from an audiometric test showing an individual's heering threshold levels as a function of frequency. Audiologist--A professional, specializing in the study and rehabilitation of hearing, who is certified by the American Speech. Decibel (dB)--Unit of measurement of sound level. Hertz (Hz)--Unit of measurement of frequency, numerically equal to cycles per second. Medical pathology--A disorder or disease. For purposes of this regulation, a condition or disease affecting the ear. which should be treated by a physician specialist. Noise dos--'Hie ratio, expressed as a percentage, of (1) the time integral, over a stated time or event, of the 0.6 power of the measured SLOW exponential tuneaveraged. squared A-weighted sound pressure and (2) the product of the criterion duration (6 hours) and the 0.6 power of the squared sound pressure corresponding to the criterion sound level (90 dB). Vtl. Authority This document was prepared under the direction of Thome G. Auchter, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. 200 Constitution Avenue. N.W.. Washington, D.C. 20210. (Secs. 4. 6. 8. 54 Stat. 1592. 1593, 1599. [29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657): 5 U.S.C. 553: Secretary of Labor s Order No. 8-78 (41 FR 25059)) Signed at Washington. D.C. this 18th day of August 1981. Thome G. Auchter, Assistant Secretory ofLabor. Journal MEETINGS SCHEDULED September 8-10 -- Sampling and Evaluating Airborne Asbestos. Los Angeles, Calif. (University of Southern Califor nia, Institute of Safety and Systems Management, Office of Extension and In-Service Programs, Los Angeles, Calif. 90007; tel: (213) 743-6523/6524). September 9 -- ABCs of Back Injury, Houston. Texas (Texas Safety Association, OSH Training Department. PO. Box 9345, Austin, Texas; tel: (512) 451-7421). The course also will be held Nov. 10 in Amarillo, Texas, c. 8 in Dallas. Texas, Jan. 19 in Corpus Chrisli, Texas, . eb. 11 in Houston. Texas, March 17 in El Paso, Texas, March 31 in Austin, Texas, and May 12 in Dallas, Texas. State University, East Lansing, Mich., 48824: tel: (517) 355-0171). September 10-11 -- The 41st Annual American Medical Association Congress on Occupational Health and the Cen tral States Occupational Medical Association's Fall Semi nar. Milwaukee. Wis. (Barbara S. Jansson. Department of Environmental. Public, and Occupational Health, AMA, 535 Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. 60610; tel: (312) 751-6669). September 14-15 -- The Professional Healthcare Safety Associations Annual Convention, Palm Springs, Calif. (Douglas A. Kenyon. CHCM, Pacific Medical Center, Clay & Buchanan Streets, San Francisco, Calif. 94115; teL* (415) 563-4321). September 9-10 -- Third Annual Conference for Health in The Workplace -- Identification and Control of Occupation al Health Hazards. East Lansing, Mich. (Marc Van Wormer, Lifelong Education Programs. Kellog Center. Michigan September 14-15 -- Human Factors Engineering for Con trolling Hazards, Washington, D.C.. (International Institute for Safety and Health. 5010A Nicholson Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852; tel: (301) 984-8969). 8-27-81 Copyright <0 1981 by The Bureau ol National Affairs, me. 0095-3237/81/500.50 CCR 000001826