Measuring and Evaluating Employee Exposure to Noise

Employee Exposure to Static Noise: Measurement and Control The purpose of this report is to analyze the issues arising from exposure to static noisy machinery throughout the day within the company. The report identifies and evaluates noise exposure within the company and will provide recommendations on how to reduce or eliminate the employee exposure to noise, which leads to noise-induced hearing loss. In order to gain insight and increase knowledge a review of various articles relating to noise exposure was conducted. According to Basner et al.

(2014) the exposure to high levels of noise can lead to noise-induced hearing loss. Employees can also lose their ability to concentrate on work and conversations. Employees can suffer from psychological stress, fatigue, irritability, and reduced productivity because of loud noise. Working for long periods in noisy conditions can result in a permanent hearing loss, which cannot be corrected. Within the United States, hearing loss has become an important safety concern for most companies and industries (Arenas and Suter, 2014).

According to the OSHA, there is a conservation-hearing program implemented to assist in reducing the cases of employees suffering from hearing loss. The OSHA's general standard requires that there be a conservation program whenever employees are exposed to noise levels of 85 decibels in excess of 8 hours a day (Sayapathi et al., 2014). Within a workplace environment, measuring noise is vital because it conserves the employees hearing. Measuring would assist in identifying work locations that have noise problems, affected employees, and locations that require additional noise measurement (Seixas et al., 2012).

There are three instruments that are commonly used to measure noise namely noise dosimeter, sound level meter, and integrated sound level meter (Caciari et al., 2013). Based on the readings of these instruments it was established that the noise levels within the company were higher than the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) recommended standard. This demonstrates that there is a need to review the machines and noise produced.

Based on the findings of this report we believe that there are several improvements that should be made in order to enhance the employees' protection against noise exposure. There are several recommendations provided highlighting the various methods that could be adopted to reduce the noise levels to the recommended standard or lower. Sliwinska-Kowalska and Davis (2012) posit that it is possible to reduce noise-induced hearing loss by controlling the employees' exposure to occupational noise through the implementation of administrative controls, personal protective equipment, and engineering controls.

Engineering controls require that the source of the noise, noise level, and noise transmission path be controlled (Masterson et al., 2013). Administrative controls are concerned with reducing the amount of time an employee spends in a noisy area by implementing job rotation (Lutz et al., 2015). Protective personal equipment offers employee protection from noise exposure provided they wear the required gear all the time (Tripathy and Nanda, 2015). Goals of the report The main goals for this report are to: Collect and evaluate the current noise exposure of employees within the company.

Establish if the noise exposures are exceeding the OSHA standards and recommendations. Examine the current control methods used by the company to reduce noise exposure of employees. Significance of the report It is crucial to conduct this report because it would assist in preserving the employees hearing. Employees are the main resources and assets for the company and protecting their hearing is vital not only for governmental compliance and for deficient performance within the workplace, but also for improving and protecting their quality of lives (Rabinowitz, 2012).

Carrying out the analysis is beneficial because it protects the company from a financial standpoint. The higher the noise level exposure is within the workplace, there is a greater likelihood that the company will violate government regulations, and workers compensation costs would increase. The recommendations offered within this report will assist the company to reduce its employee's exposure to excessive noise within the workplace, and will determine the company's compliance with government regulations.

Assumptions The following assumptions have been made within this report: All the employees working within the company were of normal health. The employees were carrying out normal workloads during the report evaluation period. The information provided by the company was accurate. Findings It was established that the company's machines are located in an open plan environment, and all the employees are provided with earplugs that they are supposed to use whenever they are at work. Employees take work breaks behind an acoustic screen located in an open area.

Noise levels within the company have not been measured, but it was observed that employees have difficulty communicating with each other because they have to shout in order to be heard. The background noise is too loud, and this prevents normal conversation to take place within the company. There have been reports of employees been diagnosed with noise induced hearing loss, especially for employees who have worked at the company for more than 10 years.

Based on the findings it is clear that the noise levels are way above the recommended levels of 85 decibels (Ivory et al., 2014). Therefore, there is a need to reduce the noise levels and implement methodologies to reduce employee exposure to the noise. Discussion The main purpose for writing this report is to analyze noise exposure and offer recommendations to the management on ways to reduce the noise exposure of the employees.

The goals of the report were to gather and evaluate the noise exposure that the company's employees' experience, determine if the noise exposures exceed the recommended OSHA standards and regulations, and analyze the current control measures undertaken by the company. The report included all the employees of the company because the work area was an open plan environment. Analysis was also done to establish if the acoustic screen does offer the employees the required protection against noise exposure.

The report also examines the working hours of the employees to establish if any employee is being overexposed to noise by working for longer hours. Special attention was paid to the employees who were working close to the machines because they would have the highest exposure to noise levels. In order to obtain an accurate measurement of noise exposure on the employees, the noise dosimeter, and the handheld sound level meter were used to measure noise within the company.

The sound level meter was used to measure noise levels between 70 and 140 decibels. The calibration of the noise dosimeter was set at 114 decibels. The manufacturer's recommendations were used to calibrate the equipment before and after the noise exposure. After calibration, the noise dosimeter was placed in the employee's pocket with the microphone been attached on their clothing (Ryherd et al., 2012). The sound level meter was used to measure noise at various locations within the company. The normal distance for employees to work within the company was 3 meters.

Therefore, the sound level meter was also placed 3 meters from the machines in order to obtain an accurate measurement. OSHA has recommended the instruments used for analyzing the noise exposure of employees for the purpose of this report and they would assist the company to ensure it maintains compliance at all times. Observation was also used to establish how many employees were actually wearing the provided earplugs when working around the company.

The company's current engineering controls were also analyzed to establish their feasibility in reducing noise exposure to the employees. The noise levels behind the acoustic screen were also measured using the two instruments. This was done to establish if the break area was conducive and offered the employees the necessary protection and break from the machine noise. Interviews were also carried out to establish if the company has implemented any noise conservation programs and the effectiveness of the programs.

The data collected during the analysis was examined, and it was compared to the recommended level of 85 decibels. It was established that the employees are exposed to noise levels in excess of 100 decibels when working close to the machines. The employees working further from the machines were slightly exposed with the readings standing at 95 decibels. These findings demonstrate that the employees are highly exposed to noise within the company, and there is a need to reduce the noise levels.

The compliance of employees in wearing the provided earplugs was not effective since most of them would remove them when they want to speak to each other and forget to put them back, which increases the noise exposure to the employees. The working hours of the employees were in 12-hour shifts, which was higher than the recommended 8-hour exposure to noise (Huang and Griffin, 2012).

These long hours increase the exposure and could explain the initial findings of employees suffering from noise-induced hearing loss after working within the company for many years. The acoustic screen was found to be effective in reducing the noise exposure. However, it was placed too close to the machines, and the relief it offered was not effective because the employees would only take breaks for short periods during their working shift.

The administration should implement a soundproof area where employees can be taking their breaks, and the duration of the breaks should be increased to offer the necessary relief for the employees. Conclusion Before the beginning of this report, it was established that some of the employees working for the company for more than 10 years have already been diagnosed with hearing conditions. It was established that the lack of compliance guidelines was mainly to blame for the excess noise exposure levels faced by the employees.

All the measuring instruments used for this report have shown that the noise levels within the company are too high, and there is a need for engineering and administrative controls. The company needs to implement a noise reduction program in order to comply with the guidelines of OSHA. Implementing a noise conservation program should also be implemented within the company to ensure the company achieves the laid out guidelines and regulations (Sjodin et al., 2012).

Recommendations The company should look into implementing engineering controls aimed at reducing the noise levels produced by the machines. This control would ensure that the employees are working in a less noisy area. The engineering controls do not necessarily mean that the company has to purchase new equipment, but rather it can implement sound protection cases to be placed on the machines in order to reduce the produced noise. This would be a cheaper and most viable option for the company.

There should be a change in the administration controls too in order to ensure that the employee shifts are reduced. The reduction in shifts should be incorporated with increased breaks for the employees. Reducing the working shift would ensure the company complies with the OSHA regulations that require employees working in noisy environments to be exposed for a maximum of 8 hours a day. Compliance would be beneficial to the company because it could reduce the likelihood of lawsuits based on the noise exposure employees' face while working.

The company should also have caution signs that encourage the employees to wear the provided protective gear at all times when working within the company. Implementing a protocol that is easy for the employees to adapt would ensure.