OSHA's noise exchange rate standard and hearing loss protection

¶ … OSHA Uses as Opposed to Other Organizations

OSHA a 5 dB exchange rate, ACGIH, DoD, organizations a 3 dB exchange rate. Explain The exchange rate depicts an increase or a decrease, an aspect that corresponds to halving or multiplying the noise dose by a factor of two. Assuming similar duration of exposure, a dose of 90dB occurs as twice that of 85dB with the use of a 5db exchange rate. The 3dB (A) exchange rate occurs as stringent based on its maximum permitted duration of 15 minutes in a scenario of a 100dB (A) noise exposure. On the other hand, maximum duration for a 5dB (A) exchange rate with the same conditions occurs as one hour. Proponents of the 3dB exchange rate rule point to the logicality that doubling the sound level should result in halving of the allowable exposure time (Harbison, Bourgeois, & Johnson, 2015)

Why OSHA?

OSHA utilizes a standard exchange rate of 5dB, an adherence to the permissible exposure limit (PEL) for noise, which is 90 dBA. PEL depicts an eight-hour time-weighted average (TWA). Further, the PEL indicates a 100% dose noise exposure. In the standardized 5dB exchange rate, the TWA exposure of 95 dBA equals to a 200% of noise dose. On the other hand, a noise dose of fifty percent equal 85 dBA TWA exposure (Harbison, Bourgeois, & Johnson, 2015). Today, most of noise measuring instruments provide readouts in TWA and noise dose.

Impact to employees

A more protective PEL depicts a significant reduction in noise-induced hearing losses that results from exposures to work-related noise. A shift from 5-db to 3-db brings along a more protective noise dose calculation paradigm. National and international organizations have adopted a 3-dB exchange rate as opposed to the recommended 5-dB by OSHA. The shift impacts employees, based on the emergence of globalization enabling individuals from a particular country to work in different countries and continents.

The credibility of the 3-dB exchange rate emanates from the extensive research and profound evidence that supports the shift. Field data from intermittent exposures such as mining and forestry depict low hearing loss compared to the prediction of the 3-dBA exchange rate. Continuous exposures to the intermittencies produce savings on sufficiently quiet scenarios. The widened acceptance of 3-dBA exchange rate indicates sufficient evidence and research on this subject leading to its preference. It occurs as a boost for workers as it reduces risks of exposures to excess noise levels. For years, the Army and the Air Force have used the 3-dBA. Extending 3-dBA exchange rate to higher levels eliminates the limit set of 115 dBA (Berger, 2003). Consequently, it allows short bursts of noise such as passing siren that possibly exceeds the current limit.

Inadequacy in hearing regulations has contributed to hearing loss for workers. Experts recommend of the reasonably safe exposure of 80 dBA. The leniency of 3-dBA stretches to durations longer than 8 hours based on an assumption of the 85 dBA PEL. It is expensive to implement the 5-dBA exchange rate (ER) compared to 3-dBA. Based on the wide adoption of 3-dBA, it becomes cheaper to adopt the ER in all sectors of the economy compared to the implementation of 5-dBA. In the long run, 5-dBA proves as an expensive approach, unlike the 3-dBA. Profound evidence on 3-dBA on its merits that exceed that of 5-dBA resound the essentiality of this ER in the workplace today (Harbison, Bourgeois, & Johnson, 2015).