PROTECTING EYES & EARS
TIME TO LISTEN
A decade after the Control Noise at Work Act was passed, noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) is still one of the biggest cause of occupational disease worldwide. Yet, it is preventable and having the right information to analyse noise is vital, explains Neal Hill, Product Line Manager at Casella.
Exposure to noise is an inevitable part of many people’s daily working lives. Determining what is a safe or unsafe level of noise is far from a simple process and it is much more complex than just interpreting how loud a sound is. It’s important to remember that it’s not just the seemingly obvious, high-risk industrial sectors where noise is a threat to worker health.
In the UK, 10 years have passed since the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 were agreed and nine years since they came into force, bringing in more stringent limits of noise exposure in workplaces. These rules reinforced the legal responsibility of employers to protect workers from the consequences of overexposure to noise and similar legislation exists in the EU and worldwide. However, noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) is still one the of the most prevaent occupational diseases — why?
FOLLOWING THE RULES The changes to the regulations were certainly a positive step forward. If complied with in an appropriate way, they go a long way to reduce the number of people suffering from NIHL. Changes to exposure limits were particularly encouraging and included: reducing the maximum
www.tomorrowshs.com
exposure level by 5 dB (to 85 dB(A)); creating more action levels at 80 and 85 dB(A); putting compulsory health surveillance in place; and introducing weekly averaging and tighter hearing protection controls.
The most effective way to comply with the regulations and protect workers from hearing damage is by conducting risk assessments and implementing appropriate control measures. A key part of a risk assessment is having the right data, which should also be the basis of any decision on control. A lack of good occupational exposure data can severely limit effective intervention. In fact, the British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS) has highlighted the urgent need to obtain better data on the prevalence and intensity of workplace exposures for a variety of physical and chemical agents.
The impact of noise on workers’ hearing and the interventions required can vary depending on sound levels and the length of time over which exposure occurs. The key is to examine what are called lagging and leading indicators. The monitoring and reporting on an incident that has already happened is called a lagging indicator. As this event is historical it means some level of hearing
damage may have already occurred. Therefore, taking the approach of acting on lagging indicators, such as an audiometric test of an employee’s hearing, is an inadequate method of protecting worker health.
Leading indicators are more proactive. They are described by the organisation Step Change in Safety as: “Something that provides information which helps the user respond to changing circumstances and take actions to achieve desired outcomes or avoid unwanted outcomes. Their role is to help improve future performance by promoting action to correct potential weaknesses without waiting for demonstrated failures.” This is the safer of the two options and the preferred option for compliance with the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005.
TOOLS FOR THE JOB Hand-held sound level meters have long been used to conduct site-wide noise surveys or to asses noise levels in a specific area. Noise dosimeters, which are attached to the shoulder of individual workers and worn for a given period of time, help to determine personal exposure to noise. This is important as the individual may conduct varied tasks throughout their
39
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54