1
Author: Alajlan, Abdulaziz M
Title: Worker Exposure to Noise During Paper Mill: Measurement and Control.
The accompanying research report is submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Stout, Graduate School in partial
completion of the requirements for the
Graduate Degree/ Major: MS Risk Control
Research Advisor: Bryan Beamer, Ph.D.
Submission Term/Year: Summer, 2013
Number of Pages: 41
Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th
edition
I understand that this research report must be officially approved by the Graduate School and
that an electronic copy of the approved version will be made available through the University
Library website
I attest that the research report is my original work (that any copyrightable materials have been
used with the permission of the original authors), and as such, it is automatically protected by the
laws, rules, and regulations of the U.S. Copyright Office.
My research advisor has approved the content and quality of this paper.
STUDENT:
NAME Abdulaziz Alajlan DATE: 07/15/2013
ADVISOR: (Committee Chair if MS Plan A or EdS Thesis or Field Project/Problem):
NAME Bryan Beamer DATE: 7/15/2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This section to be completed by the Graduate School This final research report has been approved by the Graduate School.
Director, Office of Graduate Studies: DATE:
2
Alajlan, Abdulaziz M. Worker Exposure to Noise During Paper Mill: Measurement and
Control.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposures at Company
XYZ and to provide recommendations to reduce or eliminate the noise exposures that might lead
to hearing loss. In this study, a literature review was conducted to provide knowledge and
information on topics related to noise exposure. Noise dosimeters and sound level meters were
utilized to conduct the study. The results of the study showed that Company XYZ is in
compliance with OSHA regulations for noise exposure and there is no need for implementing
engineering or administrative controls in the sampled area. However, Company XYZ is not
meeting ACGIH recommendations for noise exposure and there is a need for implementing a
hearing conservation program. The results of this study guided the researcher to believe that
there are several improvements that could be implemented to enhance Company XYZ’s current
protection against noise exposure. Several recommendations have been provided to Company
XYZ to increase the effectiveness of the existing hearing conservation program.
3
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere appreciation for my thesis advisor Dr. Bryan Beamer
for assisting me throughout the thesis process as well as graduate career. My appreciation and
gratitude extends to the environmental, health, and safety coordinator at Company XYZ for his
assistance and friendship, in which I will always remember. Finally, I would like to thank my
family for the many years of support they have given me throughout my undergraduate and
graduate studies.
4
Table of Contents
............................................................................................................................................. Page
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter I: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6
Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 7
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................ 7
Goals of the Study ........................................................................................................... 7
Significance of the Study ................................................................................................. 7
Assumptions of the Study ................................................................................................ 8
Definition of Terms ........................................................................................................ 8
Limitations of the Study ................................................................................................. 9
Chapter II: Literature Review ................................................................................................... 10
Properties of Sound ...................................................................................................... 10
Health Effects of Occupational Noise ........................................................................... 12
Noise Regulations and Standards .................................................................................. 16
Types of Occupational Noise ........................................................................................ 19
Measurement of Noise .................................................................................................. 20
Noise Control Strategies ............................................................................................... 22
Chapter III: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 24
Subject Selection .......................................................................................................... 24
Instrumentation ............................................................................................................. 24
Data Collection Procedures ........................................................................................... 24
5
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 25
Calculations .......................................................................................................................26
Chapter IV: Results and Discussion .......................................................................................... 28
Overview of Data ......................................................................................................... 28
Process Explanation ...................................................................................................... 30
Figure 1: Napkin Line Number One Process .................................................................. 30
Sound Level Meter Measurement ................................................................................. 31
Table 1: Sound Level Meter Measurements .................................................................. 31
Dosimeter Measurement ............................................................................................... 32
Table 2: Noise Dosimeter Measurements ...................................................................... 34
Time Weighted Average (TWA) Calculation ................................................................ 35
Current Training Practices ............................................................................................... 36
Chapter V: Conclusion and Recommendations ......................................................................... 36
Purpose Statement ........................................................................................................ 36
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 36
Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 37
Recommendations for Further Study ............................................................................. 38
References ............................................................................................................................... 39
6
Chapter I: Introduction
Today, nearly 30 million people in the United States are exposed to hazardous noise. For
more than two decades, noise-related hearing loss has been considered as one of the largest
occupational-health concerns in the work force in the United States. Noise in industries is
defined as an excessive level of sound produced by a mechanical system. Exposure to high levels
of noise can cause people to lose the ability to concentrate on certain activities in daily life such
as conversations. In addition, the existence of loud noise in the workplace can affect employees
by causing psychological stress, irritability, fatigue, and reduced productivity. The ultimate result
of exposure to high levels of noise is permanent hearing loss, which can not be corrected by
either hearing aids or ear surgery. Consequently, hearing loss has become a vital safety concern
in industries in the United States (Occupational Safety and Health Organization [OSHA], n.d).
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) has implemented the
conservation hearing loss program as a result of the employees suffering hearing loss. OSHA’s
general industry standard, 29 CFR 1910.95 (c)(2), requires the implementation of the hearing
conservation program when employee noise exposure exceeds an 8 hour time weighted average
(TWA) sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale (dBA) and 5 dB exchange rate.
The risk of employees’ hearing loss can be reduced by controlling the occupational noise
exposure through implementing engineering control, administrative control, and personal
protective equipment (PPE). The recommendation for engineering control is to control the source
of the noise, the noise transmission path, and noise at the work level (Barrientos, Lendrum, &
Steenland, 2004). Administrative controls could reduce noise exposure by adjusting the time the
worker spent in a noisy area and implementing a job rotation. PPE provides reduced noise
7
exposure by wearing the proper PPE at all times to minimize the exposure when engineering and
administrative controls do not provide sufficient protection (Jensen, Jokel, & Miller, 1978).
Company XYZ employs more than 245 employees in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. The
company manufactures and converts bathroom and facial tissue. It also offers household towels,
napkins, and paper rolls. Company XYZ has been serving the retail sector in the United States
since 1882 and produces over 50,600 metric tons of tissue paper annually.
Statement of the Problem
Workers at company XYZ are exposed to high noise levels over an 8-hour TWA. High
noise exposure places employees at risk of developing hearing loss.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposures at XYZ
Company and provide recommendations to reduce or eliminate the noise exposures that might
lead to hearing loss.
Goals of the Study
The goals of this study are to:
1. Gather and evaluate the current noise exposures that Company XYZ experiences.
2. Determine whether the noise exposures exceed OSHA standards and regulations.
3. Examine the feasibility of the current controls used by Company XYZ to reduce the noise
exposures.
Significance of the Study
The first major justification as to why it is crucial to conduct this noise study on
Company XYZ is that it will preserve employees’ hearing. In fact, employees are the main asset
and resource of the company. Protecting the hearing of employees is significant not only for
8
deficient performance and governmental compliance issues in the work environment but also for
the quality of employees’ lives outside of work. Second, from a financial standpoint, the higher
the exposure to excessive noise in the workplace, the greater the likelihood that the company will
commit governmental violations and increase its workers compensation costs, which ultimately
affects its bottom line. Therefore, this study would help Company XYZ protect its employees
from exposure to excessive noise as well as determine its level of hearing compliance with
governmental regulations.
Assumptions of the study
The assumptions of this study are:
All subjects who participated in the study were of normal health.
All employees were performing typical workloads while being studied.
The information provided by Company XYZ is accurate.
Definition of terms
Decibel (dB). Sound level units
dBA. Sound level in decibels read on the A-scale of sound level meter. A-scale function is
similar to the human ear on detecting very low frequencies. Thus, it is the best scale used for
measuring general sound levels.
OSHA. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, a governmental agency that
enforces occupational safety issue such as noise.
Noise dosimeter. An instrument used to determine the employees exposure to a noise hazard
over a period of time (NSC, 1988).
Time-weighted average sound level. Summation of amount of noise over a period of time is
usually displayed in an eight-hour workday.
9
Limitations of the study
The limitations of this study are:
The results of the study are only particularize to Company XYZ and may not be valuable
for other organizations.
The noise dosimetry testing used in the study was conducted during the day shift.
10
Chapter II: Literature review
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposure at Company
XYZ and determine the level of noise to which its employees are exposed. In order to properly
identify a noise exposure hazard, one must have an understanding of various topics related to
noise and hearing loss. Therefore, this chapter will include a discussion of properties of sound,
the health effects of occupational noise, noise regulations and standards types of occupational
noise, measurement of noise, and noise control strategies.
Like other senses in our bodies, humans often do not recognize the importance of hearing
until they lose it. Hearing is crucial for both worker performance and social interactions and
communications. Humans perceive sound when pressure variations within the air are detected by
physiological hearing functions means. Hertz (Hz) is the unit used to measure frequency and the
units of decibels (dB) are used to measure variations in sound detected by a human ear based on
the perceived loudness (sound-pressure level). In fact, non-impaired human hearing can detect
frequencies that range from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz (National Safety Council, 1988).
In 2001, The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reported
that the second-most self-reported type of occupational injury was hearing loss. In the late 1970s
and early 1980s, the reported worker compensation claims related to occupational hearing loss
were an estimated $835 million during a 10-year period (Seidman, 1999). According to the
World Health Organization (WHO), hearing loss from occupational noise is the largest
compensable health hazard in industrialized countries.
Properties of Sound
In this section, several physical properties of sound will be explained. The basic
definition of sound is a pressure variation the human ear can detect. Frequency, which is
11
measured in hertz (Hz) represents the number of variations or cycles that occur each second. The
produced sound wave determines the actual sound, which includes sound intensity and sound
frequency. The frequency, as stated above, is variations per second (Hz). The normal range of
frequency for human is typically between 20 and 20,000 Hz. Employees will likely perceive
high-frequency noise as more annoying than low frequencies (National Safety Council, 1988).
Therefore, high-frequency noise will receive more attention than low frequencies because it is
more likely to cause adverse health effects.
Wavelength is one of the sound properties that employed in developing engineering
controls to minimize noise exposure. Wavelength is defined as the distance that a sound wave
travels in one cycle, or the distance between two analogous points on the successive parts of a
sound wave. Wavelength and frequency are inversely proportional, connecting the direction and
duration a sound wave travels with the speed of sound. Typically, high-frequency sound has
shorter wavelengths than low frequency. Therefore, high-frequency can not travel around
barriers as easy as low frequency does. Thus, engineering controls such as sound barriers or
walls would not work for low frequency sound. However, these engineering controls work well
in averting high-frequency sound (National Safety Council, 1988).
Amplitude is the degree of change in the refraction and compression of pressure
variations in the sound waves. Due to the high sensitivity of the human ear, it perceives pressure
variations as loudness. Therefore, there is a directional relationship between the sound wave and
the amplitude. These sound waves are measured as sound-pressure level (SPL) and expressed in
decibels. The threshold of audibility at 20 micropascals, 1,000 Hz, is used as the reference
pressure to compute the sound-pressure level. Also, they are proportional to the square of the
measured sound pressure (World Health Organization [WHO], 1999).
12
The human ear, which acts as a microphone or transducer, is the organ responsible for
receiving sound. Once a human ear receives sound waves from any source of sound, it
transforms them into nerve impulses. These nerve impulses are interpreted into sound by the
brain. The main function of the brain is to filter unwanted sound or annoying noise from the
normal sound (Alberti, 2001).
Health Effects of Occupational Noise
In this section, adverse health effects of occupational noise will be discussed. Many
employees are not aware of how predominant noise in the work environment is. Sound
frequency, exposure duration, exposure pattern, and sound intensity are factors that can
determine whether noise can inflict hearing loss. Frequencies above 1,000 Hz are more likely to
cause damage to a person than frequencies below 1,000 Hz. In addition to the noise exposure
factors listed above, there are other components related to the employee himself and the work
environment that may contribute to the level of hearing loss experienced by employees. These
components include employee age, type of occupational noise, individual susceptibility, the
environment in which the noise occurred, diseases of the ear, and relative distance from the
source of the noise (Royster, 2009).
A study conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service indicated that regardless of any
occupational noise exposure, 20% of all employees between the ages of 50 and 59 will develop
hearing loss. In cases of presbycusis, where hearing loss develops as a natural occurrence of age,
it is not probable for a person to experience significant hearing impairment (Joseph, Anticaglia,
and Cohen, 2010). Another study conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service indicated that half
of the estimated 21 million Americans who are experiencing hearing impairments attribute their
13
losses to noise exposure. A combination of hearing loss caused by noise exposure and the natural
effects of presbycusis could result in significant auditory and non-auditory effects.
From a duration standpoint, there are two categories of occupational hearing losses. First,
there are temporary threshold shifts (TTS), which a short-term decrease in hearing abilities.
Second, there are permanent threshold shifts (PTS), which are based on an individual’s threshold
of hearing. The susceptibility of an individual’s ears determines the degree of both TTS and PTS.
In addition, susceptibility is different from one human ear to another based on the frequency of
the noise encountered (Berger, 2000).
Sound intensity and duration of noise exposure play a major role in determining the
degree of TTS. During the first few hours of exposure, the employees experience the greatest
amount of temporary hearing loss. After a short period of time, an individual may become used
to the loud noise because the cilia have become exhausted and they can not function well. A
healthy person may experience TTS when noise levels exceed at least 80 dBA. In case when
noise levels exceed 80 dBA, the potential for TTS to occur depends mostly on the intensity of
sound.
Accumulated temporary threshold shifts are the major cause of permanent hearing loss.
Individuals who routinely experience TTS are more likely to incur long-term hearing
impairments. Permanent damages to the cilia in the ear or the auditory nerve are the major cause
of long-term hearing losses. Sensory-neural hearing loss, which means damage to the auditory
nerve, usually occurs at the 4,000 Hz frequency range. The hearing loss will expand across 2,000
or 3,000 through 6,000 Hz when an individual continues exposure to high-frequency noises
(Berger, 2000).
14
Noise health effects are often categorized into auditory effects, which include hearing
impairment and hearing loss, and non-auditory effects such as cardiovascular effects and job-
performance impairment. According to the World Health Organization, 278 million people are
experiencing hearing impairment, which means partial or complete loss of hearing in one or both
ears. An individual might be hearing impaired for several reasons such as exposure to chemicals
that damage the organs of the ear, sustaining head injury, age, acquiring infectious diseases, and
exposure to excessive noise. In fact, combination of both exposure to excessive noise and other
causes of hearing impairment can lead to a synergistic effect (Barrientos, Lendrum, and
Steenland, 2004).
Sensorineural and conductive hearing loss are the two major types of hearing impairment.
Sensorineural hearing impairment is irreversible and occurs in the inner ear, whereas conductive
hearing impairment is reversible and occurs in the outer and middle ear. Furthermore, there is an
8% risk of workers experiencing sensorineural hearing impairment when the noise exposure is
greater than 85 dBA in the work environment (NIOSH, 1998).
The most common form of hearing loss in industrialized countries is called Noise -
Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL), which is simply the result of damage to the sensory hair cells in
the cochlea (NIOSH, 1998). There are several factors that contribute to NIHL, such as duration
of exposure, sound frequency, SPL, and individual susceptibility. Sensory hair cells can be
initially repaired when they are inflamed by sound energy. Also, they can recover after exposure
to a loud noise for a short period of time followed by a rest or a period of quiet time.
Nevertheless, hair cells can be destroyed when they are exposed to excessive noise or repeated
inflammation from sound energy. Due to the fact that humans can not regenerate hair cells, the
15
result of damaged hair cells is PTS (permanent threshold shift) or permanent hearing loss
(Alberti, 2001).
Cardiovascular and impaired job performance are non-auditory effects of exposure to
high levels of noise. Experiments on animals and epidemiological studies are methods used to
examine the cardiovascular effects of noise exposure in humans. According to a study that
examined the arterial vasculaturer of employees during sleep and eight-hour work shifts,
employees exposed to noise levels of 59 dBA had lower blood pressure and greater arterial
elasticity than workers with 85 dBA noise exposures. Many studies have found a positive
relationship between use of hearing protection and healthy blood pressure (Chan, Chang, Jain,
Lin, and su, 2007).
It is clear that noise exposure is one of the factors that cause job performance impairment.
However, noise exposure is different from one task to another, which makes it hard to compare
accident frequency rates between different tasks. Cohen (1973) conducted a study where he
compared two different groups of workers who have similar work experience and age. He found
that employees exposed to a noise level greater than 95 dBA had a 35% higher accident rate than
employees exposed to less than 80 dBA. In addition, noise exposure has a negative impact on
communication between employees in the workplace. He also proved that the necessary reaction
time for performing a task increases and the probability of correct responses decreases because
of noise exposure.
In addition to all the adverse health effects listed above, noise exposure has several
psychological and physiological effects on humans. There is increasing evidence that noise is
one of the major causes of stress-related illnesses such as ulcers, allergies, hypertension, and
neurological disorders. Exposure to high noise levels is also a factor in illnesses related to fear,
16
nervousness, disturbed sleep, and psychosomatic conditions. In addition, high noise levels are
known to impede adaptation to night vision and also elevate thresholds of flicker fusion.
Constant excessive noise tenses the body’s metabolism and releases adrenaline. It also
causes body fatigue and deteriorates physical conditioning, which means the heart is being
forced and constricted by the blood vessels to work harder and pump the same amount of blood
to vital organs, which might cause cardiovascular effects such as cardiac hypertension (Clayton,
1994).
A study sponsored by NIOSH and conducted by the Raytheon Service Company found a
negative correlation between noise and health. The study examined the medical records of
factory employees who were exposed to noise levels above 95 dBA. These workers were
compared to employees exposed to noise below 80 dBA. The results indicated a statistically
significant increase in circulatory and cardiovascular disorders among workers exposed to higher
noise levels.
Noise Regulations and Standards
The OSHA standard for occupational noise exposure is 29 CFR 1910.95. This standard
institutes an 8-hour shift TWA permissible-exposure limit (PEL) of 90 dBA using a 5 dB
exchange rate. Exposures at 90 dBA were expected to present a 25% increase in the risk of
hearing loss of 25 dB at 1 Hz, 2 Hz, 3 Hz, and 4 Hz (OSHA, n.d). The American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and NIOSH have suggested using 85 dBA as the
exposure limit for an 8-hour TWA and 3 dB exchange rate (Gilbert, 1997).
A study compared the OSHA criteria, 90 dBA 8-hour TWA, 5 dB exchange rate and 80
dBA threshold to the ACGIH and NIOSH criteria, 85 dBA 8-hour TWA, 3 dB exchange rate,
and 80 dBA threshold. The study included 50 employees performing different tasks with two
17
dosimeters for each worker. One of the dosimeters was set with ACGIH and NIOSH criteria and
the other one was set with OSHA criteria.
The purpose of the study was to show how the OSHA-criteria algorithm underestimates
the actual noise exposure in cases of variable noise levels. The measurement of the OSHA-
criteria dosimeter was less than the measurement of the ACGIH and NIOSH criteria dosimeter
by 0.2 dBA to 12.6 dBA. The result of this study shows that the reported exposure of noise levels
using OSHA criteria is less than the actual noise levels that employees are exposed to, which
means the chance for NIHL to occur is higher than what would be predicted from the reported
exposure levels (Petrick, 1996).
Harris (1991) recommended implementing a device that measures levels between 80 dB
and 130 dB in order to control workers’ noise exposure. Under the general industry standard,
(29 CFR1910.95) (b) (1), organizations are required to implement engineering or administrative
control when occupational employees are exposed to noise levels that exceed OSHA’s
acceptable dose of 1.0. If occupational workers are exposed to noise levels that exceed 4.0, an
employer is required to implement engineering controls to minimize the noise exposure. In
addition, if these engineering controls reduce the noise levels below a worker dose of 4.0, yet it
still exceeds a dose of 1.0, the employer has to provide hearing-protection devices (HPD) for the
occupational employees.
Under OSHA regulations, an employer is required to implement HPD for workers based
on the following conditions: first, when the employer does not perform a baseline audiometric
test; second, when workers’ doses exceed 1.0; third, when a worker experiences standard
threshold shift (STS), which refers to a 10 dB reduction in noise sensitivity that a worker is able
to recognize at the frequencies of 2,000 Hz, 3,000 Hz, and 4,000 Hz (OSHA, n.d).
18
In order to determine whether STS has occurred, organizations are required to perform
annual audiometric tests to determine the degree of worker hearing sensitivities, which are based
on the results from the previous year. STS occurs for an employee when the test result indicates
change with an average sensitivity that is greater than or equal to 10 dB in the employee’s ability
to perceive noise levels (NIOSH, 1996).
Employees who are exposed to a TWA of 85 dB or higher have the right to receive
hearing protection from their employer at no cost. The hearing protection must be able to
decrease the noise levels to TWA of 85 dB for employees who have experienced STS and 90 dB
for other employees. With help of a person who is trained in fitting hearing protection,
employees can choose the most suitable size and type of hearing protection for their work
environment. It is the employer’s responsibility to ensure that employees wear hearing protection
properly. Employers are responsible for conducting annual training for their employees who are
exposed to a TWA of 85 dB. The training should cover effects of noise, the pros and cons of
different types of protective equipment, aspects of audiometric testing, personal hearing
protective devices, and characteristics of noise attenuation of hearing protection (Greene, 1992).
The purpose of audiometric testing is to determine whether hearing loss has occurred.
Employers are required to provide, at no cost, audiometric testing to all employees who have
average exposure levels above or equal to 85 dB. The test should include baseline audiograms
from previous years and annual audiograms to compare how hearing has decreased. Also, the test
should be taken separately for each ear, and the employee must not have been exposed to
workplace noise for at least 14 hours prior to the test.
Moreover, audiometric test results must be kept for each employee’s duration of
employment and two years for the noise exposure measurement records. The name and job
19
classification of the employee, the date and time, the tester’s name, and the date of exhaustive
calibration measurements of the sound-pressure levels should be included in the results. In
addition, the result should include the employee’s most recent noise exposure measurement and
the serial number of the audiometer. Employers must provide records when they are requested by
a representative designated by the employee, former employee, and current employee (Greene,
1992).
Types of Occupational Noise
Occupational noise can be divided into three categories: continuous, intermittent, and
impact. Each one of these types has a slightly different effect on the human ear than the other
types. The first type of occupational noise is continuous noise, which is known as a constant
spectrum and level of broadband noise generated by power equipment or any source of noise in
the work environment. Normally, employees are exposed to average noise levels during a period
of eight hours per workday (National safety council, 1988). Continuous noise is one of the
occupational noise types that are regulated by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA, n.d).
Intermittent noise is the second type of occupational noise, and it occurs when
occupational noise has a gap between repetitions or when employees are exposed to non-constant
sound-pressure levels several times during their work shift. Researchers recommended that
specific equipment such noise dosimeters should be used to measure this type of noise especially
when employees constantly move between noisy work areas and quiet environments (National
safety council, 1988).
The third type of occupational noise is called impact or impulse noise, which refers to
sharp and short bursts of noise that last for a duration of half second or less and does do not
20
occur more than one time per second, such as striking two objects together, explosions, and the
firing of weapons. Workers are not supposed to work in an environment where impact or
impulsive noise exceeds a sound-pressure level of 140 dB for each exposure. Researchers
suggested that all types of potential occupational noise that employees are exposed to in the
workplace should be evaluated and controlled if they exceed the limits of standards and
regulations (National safety council, 1988).
Measurement of Noise
Decibels (dB) are the units used to measure the loudness and intensity of sound. The
number 0.0002 mbar is used as a reference pressure to the logarithms of the ratio of the sound
pressure. In order to measure noise exposure, sound-pressure level (SPL) is used. SPL=20 log
(P/PO) where P is the sound pressure and PO is the reference pressure 0.0002 mbar. Noise
intensity, sound frequency, and exposure duration are the major factors that need to be
considered when measuring noise.
There are various instruments used to measure noise in the work environment. These
instruments are appropriate for different types of noise exposure and they can be employed
depending on the noise exposure encountered in the workplace. When measuring noise, different
frequency measurements are grouped together automatically by the instrumentation to achieve
one average reading (Malchaire, 2001).
Some instruments contain different scales to calculate the average reading of the noise
measurement. The most frequently used scales are labeled “A,” “B,” and “C.” Scale A is the
most frequently employed in the measurement of industrial and environmental noise. Scale A is
mostly used to indicate low frequencies because the human ear does not readily perceive them.
Scale B also discriminates against low frequency sounds. In fact, scale B is the least common
21
used because it serves the same function scale A does with lesser extend. In contrast, scale C
does not discriminate against the presence of low frequencies. It actually reflects sound as it
occurs in nature, without bias for human response. Therefore, scale C is useful in measuring the
effectiveness of hearing protectors in the work environment (Gane, 1986).
The most common sound measurement instruments are the sound-level meter (SLM), the
octave-band analyzer, and the noise dosimeter. The purpose of the study and characteristics of
sound are the major factors that determine the type of instruments used to measure the noise
exposure (Malchaire, 2001).
A sound-level meter is a sensitive direct instrument with a microphone used to provide
instantaneous measurement of noise exposure. An SLM measures the electrical signal emitted
from the microphone, then converts it to decibels, which are shown on a digital screen. The most
frequent use of an SLM is for settings in which the employee noise exposure is constant
throughout the workday, for the design of engineering controls, and for achieving general
readings of noise levels. The SLM has a limited capability of determining employees’ average
noise exposures throughout the workday if there are significant variations in noise levels
(National Safety Council, 1988).
An octave-band analyzer is a noise-measurement instrument that amplifies microphone
signals to measure noise levels at separate frequencies. It is believed that octave-band analyzer is
the most effective instrument for evaluating engineering controls to reduce noise levels. In fact,
the wide bandwidths are preferred over narrow bandwidths for sound analysis. Therefore, they
use few measurements to provide spectral distribution of pressure (National Safety Council,
1988).
22
The noise dosimeter is the most preferred instrument to evaluate noise exposure because
it provides instantaneous measurement and measures noise levels over time to achieve a time-
weighted average. Noise dosimeters are also helpful for calculating employees’ exposure to
noise in cases where the levels of noise vary throughout the workday. After evaluating and
recording SPL values, noise dosimeters calculate the employees’ dose based on the criterion set
in the meter. Noise dosimeters are suitable for most types of exposure to occupational noise,
such as intermittent, impulse or impact, and fluctuating (Malchaire, 2001).
Noise Control Strategies
The three primary methods used to control occupational noise exposure are engineering
controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment (PPE). Each strategy has its
own advantages and disadvantages. However, engineering controls are known to be the most
efficient and desirable methods used to attenuate occupational noise exposure.
Engineering controls can be categorized into three classifications: minimizing noise at the
source, sound-absorbing control, and masking sounds (Kurtus, 2007). Reducing noise at the
source can be obtained by adding anti-vibration systems or mufflers. Sound absorbing control
includes engineering-control activities such as placing sound-absorbing materials between the
employee and the noise source. Sound-absorbing materials can be any material that has the
ability to attenuate noise, such as fully or partially reticulated plastic foam, glass fiber, and
mineral rock (Seybert, 2002). Sound masking is actually covering noise, not minimizing the
sound. An example of masking noise would be playing natural water sounds to cover an
annoying noise. In fact, noise masking adds noise to the existing noise, which might create more
damage to the hearing. Routine maintenance on machines, such as tightening and lubrication, can
also play a great role in attenuating occupational noise exposure (Wilkinson, 2002).
23
If engineering controls are not feasible or they do not attenuate noise levels to meet
occupational standards and regulations, organizations may seek administrative controls. There
are no physical activities involved in administrative controls, so they do not actually attenuate
noise. In fact, they are rule-making activities that minimize the duration of exposure to
occupational noise. For example, employee relocation, which is a form of job rotation, allows
workers an adjustment period to regroup after occupational noise exposure. If job rotation or
other administrative controls are not applicable, the organization should provide enclosed booths
that limit employees’ exposure to occupational noise levels (NIOSH, 1996).
The last alternative for occupational noise reduction is personal protective equipment.
There are abundant kinds of ear protection such as earmuffs, which is the most effective personal
protective equipment for high-frequency noise exposures. Earplugs are effective for low-
frequency noise exposure, yet many employees insert them incorrectly, so they annoy the inner
part of the ear and become ineffective. Ear protection does not remove the noise exposure, but
acts as a barrier between the inner ear and the noise to protect the ear from the exposure.
Personal protective equipment has countless limitations; for example, employees who wear PPE
are still exposed to certain levels of noise because, as sound passes through tissues and bones, it
can reach the inner ear. This can happen if there are leaks in the protection equipment or if the
occupational noise causes vibrations in the protective equipment. Personal protective equipment
should be the final option for reducing occupational noise (Harris, 1991).
24
Chapter III: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposure at napkin-line
number One in the Converting Department at Company XYZ and determine the level of noise to
which its employees are exposed. The goals were to gather and evaluate the current noise
exposures that Company XYZ experiences, determine whether the noise exposures exceed
OSHA standards and regulations, and examine the feasibility of the current controls used by
Company XYZ to reduce the noise exposures. This chapter will discuss subject selection,
instrumentation, data collection procedures, and data analysis.
Subject Selection
Company XYZ was selected for this study based on the relative ease with which the
researcher was able to contact and collect information from the risk control professional. The
subject operates napkin-line number one in the converting department and works three to four
days a week with average twelve hours a day including one-hour break. The subject selected had
the highest exposure to occupational noise levels within Company XYZ’s facilities. To ensure
confidentiality, company and subject names were withheld from this study.
Instrumentation
In order to determine an accurate measurement of employees’ occupational exposure to
noise levels at Company XYZ, both noise dosimeter and hand held sound-level meter were used.
The noise dosimeter was calibrated to 114 dB and the sound level meter was set to measure noise
levels between 70 and 140 dBA. All instruments were calibrated before and immediately after
the noise exposure was monitored according to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Data Collection Procedures
Once the noise dosimeter and sound-level meter were calibrated. The noise dosimeter
25
was placed on the employee’s pocket and the microphone was attached to the clothing of the
employee who was working on napkin-line number One in the Converting Department, which is
the noisiest workstation within the facility of Company XYZ. The sound level meter was utilized
to measure the noise on each process involved in napkin-line number one. The sound level meter
was placed three feet away from the noise source, which is the normal distance for employees to
perform that job. After the noise dosimeter and sound-level meter were set up at the selected
employee and the chosen distance, the researcher observed the employees’ behavior and
determined how many employees were wearing their noise-reducing personal protective
equipment (PPE). In addition, the researcher observed the feasibility of current engineering
controls in attenuating noise exposure. During the sampling, the researcher asked a series of
questions related to the components of the hearing-conservation program. After the completion
of the noise monitoring, the dosimeter was removed and paused to stop data collection. At the
end of the sampling period, the instruments were calibrated and all machine data was recorded
on the data sheet. For better interpretation of the data collected, the information stored in the
dosimeter was downloaded to a personal computer with professional computer software.
Data Analysis
After the noise dosimeters’ readings were recorded, the data was analyzed to determine
the highest noise-exposure level at Company XYZ. The measured noise levels were then
compared to OSHA standards and regulations to determine Company XYZ’s compliance with
these standards and regulations. The results also will be utilized to determine the compliance of
Company XYZ to ACGIH recommendations. The dosimeter can compare four criteria at one
sampling. The researcher chose OSHA PEL and HC, and the ACGIH; the OSHA criteria use 90
dBA and 5 dB exchange rate. The only difference between OSHA PEL and HC is that the PEL
26
use 90 dBA threshold and HC use 80 dBA threshold, which means values less than this limit will
be ignored. In addition, the data was compared to NIOSH criteria, which use 85 dBA, threshold
80 dBA, and 3 dB exchange rate. The researcher used true Leg for the fourth criteria and it was
identical to NIOSH criterion without threshold. The data also was utilized to determine whether
the personal protective equipment provided by Company XYZ is adequate in protecting
employees from occupational noise levels. Finally, the effectiveness of employees’ compliance
in wearing PPE with the Company XYZ’s hearing-conservation program was analyzed.
Calculations
In order to identify if Company XYZ have to implement either engineering or
administrative controls the noise dose must be compared to one based on 90 dBA threshold and 5
dB exchange rate. If the dose is greater than one, the company must implement either
engineering or administrative control. If the dose is less than one, the dose then compared to the
hearing conservation criteria. The following formula is used to calculated the dose based on
OSHA regulations:
Dose = Sampling time/ Reference duration
And the following formula is used to calculate the reference duration:
Reference duration = 480/2(SPL - 90)/ 5
To identify if Company XYZ is meeting ACGIH recommendations, the noise dose must
be compared to one based on 80 dBA threshold and 3 dB exchange rate. If the dose is less than
one meaning the Company is meeting the recommendations. However, if the dose is greater than
one that means the noise level is higher than the recommended noise level exposure by ACGIH.
The following formula is used to calculated the dose based on ACGIH recommendation:
Dose = Sampling time/ Reference duration
27
And the following formula is used to calculate the reference duration:
Reference duration = 480/2(SPL - 85)/ 3
Due to the limited accessibility to the facility and the time awarded, the investigator was
able to sample only for thirty minute. Based on the fact that TWA value should only be used for
full shift of eight hour sampling, and the dosimeter function assumes that the un-sampled time to
be zero when sampling for less than eight hours. Therefore, the time-weighted average was
calculated by assuming that the sound level measured in the sampling time equals the exposure
during eight-hour work shift and by using the following equation:
TWA = 16.61 Log 10Average Sound Level/ 16.61 Sampling time _________________________________________________
8 Hours
28
Chapter IV: Results and Discussion
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposure at napkin-line
number one in the Converting Department at Company XYZ and determine the level of noise to
which its employees are exposed. The goals of this study were to:
1. Gather and evaluate the current noise exposures that Company XYZ experiences.
2. Determine whether the noise exposures exceed OSHA standards and regulations.
3. Examine the feasibility of the current controls used by Company XYZ to reduce the noise
exposures.
This chapter will discuss the results of the study including the noise monitoring in napkin
line number one. In addition, Company XYZ compliance to OSHA noise regulations and the
adequacy of hearing protection provided by Company XYZ to their employees will be discussed
as well. This chapter will discuss the training activities for employees at Company XYZ as they
related to hearing conservation program.
Overview of Data:
Data was collected on April 23, 2013 during the first work shifts at Company XYZ using
Quest Technologies dosimeter Model NoisePro DLX. The collected data represent the exposure
to noise experienced by the employee wearing the personal noise dosimeter. The first work shift
at Company XYZ has the greatest number of tasks performed and number of employees. The
sound level meter was also utilized to measure the sound level at each process involved in napkin
line number one. All employees monitored were wearing hearing protection and anti-static shoes
all the time.
The noise dosimeter used in the study has the ability to measure various noise levels such
as the maximum level, impulse sound during the sampling period, and the average of all the
29
recorded sounds during sampling. In addition, it has the ability to show exposure information in
form of dose, which is in percent of the OSHA permissible exposure. Typically, the TWA should
only be used for full shift of eight hour sampling, so the dosimeter assumed the un-sampled time
to be zero when sampling for less than eight hours. This noise assessment does not provide
Company XYZ the exposure during an entire working shift. However, it provides noise levels
during the sampling time. Therefore, the TWA values shown in this study are not accurate
because the sample times were not based on eight hours work shift. Similarly, when comparing
to OSHA regulations, this study still not accurate as OSHA 90 dBA is based on eight-hour work
shift.
30
Process Explanation:
Figure 1. Napkin line number One process
The following list includes the process involved in napkin line number one:
1) The employee places the rolls in roll circles.
2) The machine pulls the rolls from the circles.
3) The machine divides the rolls into four lines.
4) The rolls come out in a group of 100 napkins.
5) The napkins leave production line number 1.
6) Computer desk and quick break area.
Roll
1
2
3
4 5
6
Roll
Roll
Roll
Roll
Roll
Roll
Roll
31
Napkin-line number one is the first stage in the operation process of napkins in the
converting department. Products that leave napkin line number one are sent to other lines for
further process, such as treatment and packaging.
Sound Level meter Measurement:
As stated in Chapter III, noise level surveys were taken in napkin line number one. Table
1 (below) indicates the results of sound level meter readings. Measurements were taken at the
locations of each process involved in napkin line number one as explained in Figure 1 and they
are based on ten seconds interval. As displayed in Table 1, location number three where
employee watch the machine when it cuts rolls into lines seems the nosiest area, which requires
the employee to be aware of excessive noise level in that area.
Table 1
Sound Level Meter Measurements Sound Level Meter Data for April 23, 2013, 1:00pm – 1:30pm (1st shift) *All measurements are in dBA
Location Average Maximum Minimum Peak
(1) Putting the
rolls
84.5 85.3 83.7 98.4
(2) Machine
pulling the rolls
92.2 92.9 91.1 105.6
(3) Machine
cutting the rolls
into four lines
94.3 96.2 93.3 109.9
(4) Napkin 90.0 93.2 98.1 105.6
32
coming out of
machine in group
of 100
(5) Rolls moving
to the next line
88.8 94.1 87.1 111.2
(6) Rest area and
computer work
87.2 89.2 86.2 101.6
Below is an explanation for Table 1 row headers:
- Average is the average sound level measurement during the sampling period.
- Maximum is the highest measured sound level during the sampling time.
- Minimum is the lowest measured sound level during the sampling period.
- Peak is the maximum value reached by the sound pressure. Unlike maximum, there is no time-
constant applied for peak and the signal has not through root mean square circle or calculator.
Dosimeter Measurement:
The noise dosimeter was sat to measure the noise level based on the following four
functions; OSHA PEL, OSHA HC, ACGIH, and User 4. The parameters of these functions were
illustrated in Chapter III. Due to the limited accessibility to the facility and the time awarded, the
investigator was able to sample only for thirty minute. Therefore, the time-weighted average was
calculated manually based on the assumptions made in Chapter I. the TWA calculation will be
explained in a separate section later.
33
In order to determine the compliance of Company XYZ with OSHA regulations and how
well they are meeting ACGIH recommendations with regard to noise exposure, each reading was
collected using a noise dosimeter as shown in Table 2 (below). As indicated in the assumptions
in Chapter I, the average sound level sampled equals the sound level in eight-hour work shift,
which means the average sound level equals the TWA. Once the data was gathered, it was
compared to the OSHA standards of 90 dBA in an eight-hour period. The measured OSHA
permissible exposure level is 86.3 dBA, which is below OSHA standard of 90 dBA.
To identify if Company XYZ have to implement either engineering or administrative
controls the noise dose must be compared to one based on 90 dBA threshold and 5 dB exchange
rate. If the dose is greater than one, the company must implement either engineering or
administrative control. If the dose is less than one, the dose then compared to the hearing
conservation criteria. The following formula is used to calculated the dose based on OSHA
regulations:
Dose = Sampling time/ Reference duration
And the following formula is used to calculate the reference duration:
Reference duration = 480/2(SPL - 90)/ 5
As shown in Table 4-2, the measured sound pressure level (SPL) based on OSHA PEL criteria is
86.3 dBA, so the reference duration is 13.36 hours, and the dose is 8/13.36 which equals 0.59 <
1. This result indicates that Company XYZ is not required to implement engineering or
administrative controls.
In order to determine if Company XYZ needs to implement hearing conservation
program, the noise dose compared to half based on 80 dBA threshold and 5 dB exchange rate. If
the dose is greater than half, the company must implement hearing conservation program. If the
34
dose is less than half, there is no necessity to implement hearing conservation program. As
shown in Table 2, the SPL average based on OSHA Hearing Conservation (HC) criteria is 90.3,
and by using the same equations above, the dose is 1.04 > 0.5, which shows that Company XYZ
have to implement hearing conservation program.
To identify if Company XYZ is meeting ACGIH recommendations, the noise dose must
be compared to one based on 80 dBA threshold and 3 dB exchange rate. If the dose is less than
one meaning the Company is meeting the recommendations. However, if the dose is greater than
one that means the noise level is higher than the recommended noise level exposure by ACGIH.
The following formula is used to calculated the dose based on ACGIH recommendation:
Dose = Sampling time/ Reference duration
And the following formula is used to calculate the reference duration:
Reference duration = 480/2(SPL - 85)/ 3
As shown in Table 2, the measured sound pressure level (SPL) based on ACGIH criteria is 91.0
dBA, so the reference duration is 2 hours, and the dose is 8/2 which equals 4 > 1. This result
indicates that Company XYZ is not meeting ACGIH recommendations for noise exposure.
Table 2
Noise Dosimeter Measurements Noise Dosimeter Data for April 23, 2013, 1:00pm – 1:30pm (1st shift)
OSHA PEL OSHA HC ACGIH USER 4
Average 86.3 dBA 90.3 dBA 91.0 dBA 91.0 dBA
35
Time Weighted Average (TWA) Calculation:
Due to the limited accessibility to the facility and the time awarded, the investigator was
able to sample only for thirty minute. Based on the fact that TWA value should only be used for
full shift of eight hour sampling, and the dosimeter function assumes that the un-sampled time to
be zero when sampling for less than eight hours. Therefore, the time-weighted average was
calculated by assuming that the sound level measured in the sampling time equals the exposure
during eight-hour work shift and by using the following equation:
TWA = 16.61 Log 10Average Sound Level/ 16.61 Sampling time _________________________________________________
8 Hours
The investigator was able to calculate the TWA, which equals the average sound level measured.
Also, the result enables the investigator to compare the sound level to OSHA standards of noise
exposure. In addition, the sound level measured was compared to the engineering and
administrative controls criteria as well as the hearing conservation program criteria.
Current Training Practices:
Safety department at Company XYZ conducts annual training on hearing conservation
program including purpose of hearing protection devices, watching a video about the function of
the ear, effects of loud noises on the ear, and what the audiometric testing involves. Company
XYZ goal of conducting hearing conservation training is to enhance employees’ awareness and
meet legal requirements.
36
Chapter V: Conclusions and Recommendations
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the data presented in Chapter IV and state
conclusions with regard to the results presented. This chapter also will provide recommendations
for improving Company XYZ performance regarding noise level exposure.
Purpose Statement:
The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the noise exposures at XYZ
Company and provide recommendations to reduce or eliminate the noise exposures that might
lead to hearing loss. The goals of this study were to gather and evaluate the current noise
exposures that Company XYZ experiences, determine whether the noise exposures exceed
OSHA standards and regulations, and examine the feasibility of the current controls used by
Company XYZ to reduce the noise exposures. This information was gathered throughout the use
of sound level meter and noise dosimeter. The noise dosimeter was placed in the employee’s
pocket and the windscreen was hanged in his shoulder. An analysis was conducted on Company
XYZ compliance with OSHA standards with regard to noise exposure. In addition, the employee
behavior and compliance in terms of wearing the proper personal protective equipment provided
was casually observed as well. An assessment was made on the current training practices
conducted by Company XYZ.
Conclusion:
While conducting this study, it was indicated that Company XYZ employees have
experienced hearing loss in the near past. It was found that area number three in line number one
where the employee observe the machine cutting the rolls into lines has the greatest exposure to
noise. The results show that the TWA of the sound level in the area sampled was within the
range of OSHA standards for noise exposure. In addition, the dosimeter readings show that
37
Company XYZ is meeting the engineering and administrative criteria for noise exposure. The
data also indicates that Company XYZ needs to implement a hearing conservation program to
meet both OSHA regulations and ACGIH recommendations for noise exposure.
Recommendations:
Even though the TWA was below the OSHA regulation for noise exposure, employees
may still experience hearing loss caused by continues exposure to excessive noise levels. Each
time employees exposed to excessive noise levels, they lose an amount of hearing to a point
where the ear can not recuperate all of the hearing lost which results in adverse health effects
such as hearing loss. Due to the fact that regulations provide minimum level of protection,
Company XYZ should set noise exposure objective at 10 decibels lower than OSHA regulations
in order to prevent hearing loss. Based on this study’s results and conclusions, the following
controls are recommended to be implemented to prevent hearing loss of employees:
Company XYZ could provide better quality hearing protection devices. The main feature
of these devices should be the ability to reduce noise to at least 10 decibels below the
current noise exposure. Company XYZ should pay attention to Noise Reduction Rate
NRR characteristic when buying new personal protective equipment.
Due to the fact that there is a great variation in noise levels within the facility of
Company XYZ, it is recommended that Company XYZ implement a job rotation for
employees as part of the administrative control to reduce the current noise exposure.
It is recommended that Company XYZ put more time and effort on training employees
on the hearing conservation program. In addition, it crucial to make sure that those who
provide the yearly training to employees in the program are knowledgeable on the topic
38
of hearing conservation. It is also important that Company XYZ motivates and
encourages its employees to be active participants in the training programs.
Recommendations for Further Study:
There are several recommendations that the investigator would like to provide to
Company XYZ for future improvement of the noise exposure. These are as follows:
It is recommended that another noise level survey based on eight-hour sampling
performed which entails personal monitoring for the duration of the work shift. A full
shift monitoring will provide the best representation of the noise employees are exposed
to as well as an accurate eight-hour time weighted average. This accurate information
allows for better comparison to OSHA standards, engineering criteria, administrative
criteria, and hearing conservation program criteria.
It is also recommended that another study conducted focusing on the current personal
protective equipment provided. This study should explore the effectiveness of the current
hearing protection devices and to what extend they reduce the current noise exposure
experienced. In addition, the study should clearly identify the NRR that the current
hearing protection provide, and recommend better PPE with more effective NRR if
needed.
39
References
Alberti, P. (2001). The anatomy and physiology of the ear and hearing. In B. Goelzer, C. Hansen,
& G. Sehrdt (Eds.), Occupational exposure to noise: Evaluation, prevention, and control
(pp. 53-62). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Retrieved from
http://www.who.int/occupational_health/publications/noise.pdf
Barrientos-Concha, M., Campbell-Lendrum, D., & Steenland, K. (2004). Occupational noise:
Assessing the burden of disease from work-related hearing impairment at national and
local levels. In D. Campbell-Lendrum, C. Corvalan, A. Pruss, & A. Woodward (Series
Eds.), Environmental burden of disease (Series No. 9; pp. 1-40). Geneva, Switzerland:
World Health Organization.
Berger, E. (2000). Hearing protection devices. In E. Berger, L. Royster, J. Royster, D. Driscoll,
& M. Layne (Eds.), The noise manual (5th ed., text rev; pp. 429-432). Boise, ID:
American Industrial Hygiene Association.
Chan, C., Chang, T., Jain, T., Lin, S., & Su, T. (2007). Effects of occupational noise exposure on
24 hour ambulatory vascular properties in male workers. Environmental Health
Perspectives, 115, 1660-1664
Clayton, E, F., & Clayton, D, G. (1994). Patty’s industrial hygiene and toxicology (Vol 1; 4th
edition). New York, NY: Hill Publishing.
Cohen, A. (1973) Extra-auditory effects of occupational noise part II: Effects on work
performance. Nation Safety News, 9, 68-76.
Gane, C., & Sarson, T. (1986). Structured system analysis: Tools & techniques. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
40
Gilbert, S., Prince, M., Smith, R., & Stayner, L. (1997) Are-examination of risk estimates from
the NIOSH Occupational Noise and Hearing Survey. Found in National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1998). Occupational Noise Exposure.
(Publication No. 98-126). Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Greene, O, L. (1992). Fire & emergency service: Hearing conservation program manual. Federal
Emergency Management Agency, United States Fire Administration. Retrieved from
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/fa-118.pdf
Harris C. (1991). Hand book of acoustical measurement and noise control. New York, NY:
McGraw Hill.
Jensen, P., Jokel, C., & Miller, L. (1978). Industrial noise control manual revised edition.
(Publication No. 79-117). Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrived
from http://www.cdc.gov/nioshlpdfsI79-117.pdf
Joseph, R., Anticaglia, M., & Cohen, A. (2010). Extra-auditory effects of noise as a health
hazards. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0002889708506243#preview
Malchaire, J. (2001). Sound measuring instruments. In B. Goelzer, C. Hansen, & G. Sehrdt
(Eds.) Occupational exposure to noise: Evaluation, prevention and control (pp. 53-62).
Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1996). Preventing occupational
hearing loss-a practical guide. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (1998). Occupational noise
exposure. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
41
National Safety Council, Benjamin, G. S., & Kerwin, M. A. (1988). Fundamentals of industrial
hygiene (Third ed.). Chicago, IL: National Safety Council.
Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (n.d.). Occupational noise exposure.
Retrieved from https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/noisehearingconservation/
Petrick, M., Reist, P., Royster, J., & Royster, L. (1996). Comparison of daily noise exposures in
one workplace based on noise criteria recommended by ACGIH and OSHA. American
Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 57, 924-928. Retrieved from
http://www.informaworld.comlsmpp/content~content=a727072091
Royster, J, D. (2009). Guidelines for developing an effective hearing conservation program.
Sound and Vibration, 23, 22-25.
Seidman, M. (1999). Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). Volta Review, 101 (1), 29. Retrieved
from http://ezproxy.lib.uwstout.edu:2699/ehost/detail?sid=e074009d-5ae2-4712-b732-
5eea16edd691%40sessionmgr113&vid=7&hid=8&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ
%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=3906096.
Wilkinson, R. (2002). Avoiding hearing losses on the farm [Electronic Version] Lansing, MI:
Michigan State University Extension.
World Health Organization. (1999) Guidelines for community noise. Retrieved from
htlp://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/1999/a68672.pdf
Top Related