 the enforcement of the engineering controls provision has been severely hampered," counters Anderson. "The agency has lost a lot of expertise in noise control engineering."
What Is an Effective Program?
The most powerful reason for OSHA to re-examine its noise standard may be that too many workers in hearing protection programs are losing their hearing. OSHA's noise standard permits hearing conservation programs provided they are as effective as engineering controls. There is evidence that current OSHA policy is permitting hearing protection programs that are not as effective as engineered solutions. As a result, a new administration could shift the way it enforces 1910.95.
"What is an effective hearing conservation program?" asks Anderson. "That's the first thing that must be answered."
He points out that under OSHA's definition, an effective hearing conservation program allows 5 percent of the work force to have an STS each year. But, says Anderson, this number is at least five times the annual STS rate of the engineered solution the standard requires.
To put the case in more personal terms, if 5 percent of the work force has an STS each year, after 20 years everyone has had one STS. According to Anderson's research, if engineering controls are used to bring noise levels down to 90 dB, as called for in 1910.95, then just 0.7 to 1 percent of the work force has an STS annually, and only 21 to 29 percent of the work force should have an STS over a 30-year period.
Moreover, the hearing loss OSHA allows officially may be a far cry from what is actually taking place on the shop floor.
Until now, it has been difficult to obtain reliable and comprehensive data on occupational hearing loss. It was not recorded separately on the OSHA log, and because hearing loss does not generally result in a lost workday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not track it.
All this is about to change.
Beginning next year, employers will have to record every STS on the OSHA log. OSHA says by 2005, BLS will have good data on hearing loss. It will soon become clear how well a company's hearing conservation program is protecting the hearing of its workers.
"OSHA should get a gold star for this one," comments Stephenson. "It opens up a whole new way to monitor what's happening to the hearing health of American workers."
It may also open a whole new set of challenges for employers with hearing protection programs.
Sidebar: The New Wave of Hearing Protectors
"There has been nothing new in hearing protection for 20 years, and suddenly there's a whole lot that's new," says Lee Hager, hearing loss prevention consultant for Sonomax Hearing Health Care, headquartered in Montreal.
NIOSH's Mark Stephenson agrees. He's most excited about electronic earmuffs that can amplify outside noise so those with impaired hearing can communicate or hear warning bells. The devices are equipped with "smart circuits" that sense when noise reaches a certain level so that the external microphone is turned off.
"These products are ideal for hearing-impaired workers in construction environments, where noise levels vary and communication is important," comments Stephenson.
Although these hearing protectors have come down in cost, their primary disadvantage remains their price: approximately $200 per unit, according to Mike Cimino, marketing director for Peltor Communications of North America, a manufacturer of electronic and two-way communication headsets. Peltor is part of the Aearo Co., wiheadquartered in Indianapolis.
Cimino says Peltor also produces models with built-in FM radios that are very popular with workers, increasing the chances the units will be used. Often employees will share the cost with employers. A more expensive version has a two-way radio that allows for communication with any number of other workers.
All three items are being used in construction and industrial settings, according to Cimino. "Manufacturing employment is dropping, which means communication in the workplace is more critical than ever because there are fewer people on the job."
Hager ex