1. Hearing Conservation Theresa Y. Schulz, PhD. Lt. Col. USAF (ret.)

2. Topics Noise And Acoustics Motivating Workers Noise Reduction Reducing Costs for Hearing Loss

3. Noise + Acoustics Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Causes no pain Causes no visible trauma Leaves no visible scars Is unnoticeable in its earliest stages Accumulates with each overexposure Takes years to notice a change Is Permanent + 100% Preventable

4. Noise + Acoustics Noise-induced hearing loss is the most common permanent and preventable occupational injury in the world. World Health Organization

5. Noise + Acoustics Worker’s Compensation In many countries, excessive noise is the biggest compensable occupational hazard. Cost of NIHL to developed countries ranges from 0.2 to 2% of its GDP. NIHL is on the rise globally. (Source: WHO)

6. Noise + Acoustics United States Statistics Most common occupational injury in the United States. 22 million US workers are exposed to hazardous noise at work on a daily basis. Approx. 8 million Americans suffer from NIHL. (Source: NIOSH, 2009)

7. Noise + Acoustics Non-OccupationalOccupational

8. Noise + Acoustics Noise Measurement Devices SOUND LEVEL METER Sound is measured immediately in a specific area PERSONAL DOSIMETER Sound “averaged” throughout day for sample employee/job IN-EAR DOSIMETER Collects personal noise dose – the only real measure of risk

9. NOISE AND ACOUSTICS ~ Hierarchy of Controls ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS Rotate Workers Extended Breaks 2 nd /3 rd Shift ENGINEERING CONTROLS Buy Quiet Vibration Pads Enclosures Barriers Isolation PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT Noise + Acoustics - Hierarchy of Controls

10. Ototoxic by themselves Synergistic effect with noise Large differences in sensitivity Recommend: increased frequency of audiometric testing Synergistic Ototoxics Carbon Monoxide Hydrogen Cyanide NOISE NOISE AND ACOUSTICS ~ Hierarchy of ControlsNoise + Acoustics Ototoxic Chemicals Confirmed Ototoxics Ethyl Benzene Lead and inorganic compounds (as Pb) Styrene Toluene Trichloroethylene Possible Carbon disulfide n-Hexane Xylene

11. Noise Reduction Rating (NRR)

12. Hearing Protection Selection Comfort Noise ReductionSizeCommunicationJob Requirements Hygiene Use with Other PPE Hearing Protection Selection Factors The right hearing protector should feel comfortable One protector may not satisfy all workers Offer a variety of earplugs or earmuffs to meet varying worker needs and preferences Selecting HPDs with suitable attenuation for noise environment Avoid overprotection in marginal noise environments Consider banded earplugs for intermittent noise or electronic earmuffs for impact noise. Every ear canal has its own shape and size Ensure proper fit with variety of earplug sizes and shapes Sized multiple-use earplugs Low-pressure foam earplugs for smaller ear canals Keep workers connected to their environment Uniform attenuation allows speech/signals to be hear more naturally Sound amplification earmuffs for workers with hearing impairment Consider job requirements in HPD selection Detectable earplugs for process industries Hi-visibility earmuffs for dark/high traffic areas Dielectric HPDs for electrical environments Proper care and maintenance can extend life and performance of HPDs Examine and clean all multiple-use earplugs daily Clean and replace ear cushions on earmuffs every 4-6 months Select HPDs that can work with other PPE without compromise Cap-mounted earmuffs for hard hats Multiple-position earmuffs for full-brim hard hats Ultraslim neckband earmuffs with welding shields

13. How much noise is reaching the ear of the worker ? That is completely unknown … Noise Level = 100 dB Noise Reduction Rating = 30 dB (55 – 104 dB) Noise Reduction Rating

14. How much protection? 0 dB 33 dB EAR #1 EAR #2 EAR #3

15. -10 125 250 5001000 20003150400063008000 Frequency in Hz 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Attenuation in dB Max Poor Fit NRR = 0dB Max Good Fit NRR = 33dB Good Fit vs Bad Fit Fitting Tips

16. Noise Reduction Rating A laboratory estimate of the amount of attenuation achievable by 98% of users when properly fit A population-based rating ― some users will get more attenuation, some will get less The NRR is only a population estimate, not a predictor of individual attenuation.

17. A test subject in the Howard Leight Acoustical Lab, San Diego, CA, accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) Noise Reduction Rating – Determining an NRR 10 human subjects tested in a reverberant room Tested with ears open/occluded at nine frequencies Each subject tested 3x NRR calculated to be population average

18. NRR Attenuation Number of test subjects 1418 1 2 3 4 19 20 22 24 2325 28303226 27 5 Noise Reduction Rating – Determining an NRR NRR

19. From Kevin Michael, PhD and Cindy Bloyer “Hearing Protector Attenuation Measurement on the End-User” 192 users of a flanged reusable earplug ~ 27 NRR Retraining and refitting resulted in an average 14 dB improvement for this group Real user attenuation <0 to 38 dB 30 20 10 0 -10 Attenuation in dB 40 50 NRR = 27 Multiple-Use Earplug Real-World Attenuation ≠ NRR Noise Reduction Rating

20. NIOSH Earmuffs NRR – 25% Formable Earplugs NRR – 50% All Other Earplugs NRR – 70% OSHA NRR ÷ 2 (feasibility of engineering controls) CSA Class A up to 100 B up to 95 C up to 90 Noise Reduction Rating De-Rating Methods Fit Test

21. Noise Reduction Rating The EPA recently made an announcement about a proposed change to the Noise Reduction Rating [NRR] This is the first change in hearing protector regulation in nearly 30 years

22. 20 human subjects tested in a simulated industrial room Subject trained then fits their own earplugs Tested with ears open / occluded at 9 frequencies Each subject tested 2x NRR calculated to be population average Noise Reduction Rating Determining New NRR

23. New NRR (NR sa) Attenuation Number of test subjects 111418 1 2 3 4 19 20 22 24 232527 30 33 5 20% achieved > 26 dB 80% achieved > 20 dB 2826

24. Current NRR Label Mock-up of New Label 80 th % Minimally- trained 20 th % Proficient Users Noise Reduction Rating

25. How to Apply the New Label Two-number range displays the estimated protection achievable by minimally-trained users [80%] versus proficient users [20%]. A wider range indicates greater variability in the fit of that HPD. Smaller ranges indicate more consistency of fit. For example, earmuffs will usually have a tighter fitting range than earplugs, and may have a smaller NRR range. 80%20%

26. 1. FIT 2. WEAR TIME A worker who selects an earplug with an NRR of 30 effectively reduced his 8-hour NRR to just … but then removes that HPD for just … 30 dB 5 min 10 min 30 min 15 min 26 dB 24 dB 22 dB 18 dB In noise exposures, small intervals of no protection quickly void large intervals of adequate protection. Noise Reduction Rating Factors in Achieving the NRR

27. Noise Reduction Rating What Can I Do Now? Evaluate Noise Spectra to determine if spectral balance corrections will be necessary Update HC Training Program on proper fit of hearing protectors. Hold a “Toolbox Training” and hold a refresher fit training session. Although the new labeling regulation takes effect whenever the final rule is published by the EPA, there are a number of actions you can take now to prepare your Hearing Conservation Program for the change.

28. Noise Reduction Rating What Can I Do Now? Evaluate Current HPD Selection to determine whether they are appropriate for your noise environment. Use the Howard Leight Hearing Protector Selector for recommendations. Howard Leight Hearing Protector Selector Upgrade to One-on-One Training research studies confirm that one-on-one training is superior to group training

29. Noise Reduction Rating Earplug Fit Testing Provides an accurate, real-world picture of your employees’ hearing protector effectiveness. Identify if your employees are: Receiving optimal protection Require additional training Need to try a different earplug style

30. Noise Reduction Rating Earplug Fit Testing As a problem solver: Derating Schemes One-on-One Training HPD Selection NRR Change

31. Noise Reduction Rating In-Ear Dosimetry As a Problem Solver Continuously monitors in noise level at the workers ear The only true measure of the hazard!

32. Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

33. Jurisdiction One Ear (Max) Both Ears (Max) Comments NC$37.2k$80k+ aids SC$38.7 (80 wks) $80k (165 wks) *NMER TN$38.6k$77.2k+ aids DOL -LSA52 wks200 wks+ aids Sample HL Compensation* *Source: AIHA Noise Manual *NMER= No minimum exposure required

34. Indicators for Hearing Loss: Standard Threshold Shift Temporary Threshold Shift Recordable Hearing Loss Dosimetry In-ear Dosimetry Personal Attenuation Level (PAR) Hearing Loss Compensation Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

35. Lagging Indicators vs. Leading Indicators Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

36. Indicators for Hearing Loss: Standard Threshold Shift Temporary Threshold Shift Recordable Hearing Loss Dosimetry In-ear Dosimetry Personal Attenuation Level (PAR) Hearing Loss Compensation Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

37. Fit Testing In-Ear Dosimetry Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

38. In-ear dosimetry measures/records worker’s actual noise dose, with and without protection Provides real-time monitoring and alerts when worker approaches/exceeds safe limits Only metric with direct potential to measure and prevent further progression of occupational hearing loss

39. Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

40. Research > Alcoa Intalco Works Mean Hearing Threshold (2k, 3k, 4kHz): 2000 – 2007 (N = 46) Employees using continuous in-ear dosimetry starting in 2005 Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

41. Preventive Action After NIHL In practice, an OSHA-recordable STS is not a preventive action It is documentation of a hearing loss after the fact. How soon will an employee suffering NIHL be re-fit / re-trained ? “Best case scenario” per Hearing Conservation Amendment 0 246810121416 Months Audiometric test Retest Notification Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss In-ear dosimetry “worst case” scenario … 1 Day

42. In-ear dosimetry as a Problem Solver Employees with Documented Noise-Induced Hearing Loss or Standard Threshold Shift [STS] Employees At-Risk for NIHL Employee Training + Sampling Dual-Protection/Extreme Noise Exposure Engineering Controls Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss In-ear monitoring as a Problem Solver

43. Real-Ear Attenuation at Threshold (R.E.A.T.) Loudness Balance ( Real-Ear Attenuation Above Threshold ) Microphone in Real-Ear (M.I.R.E.) In-Ear Dosimetry Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

44. AudiometricFitCheckEARfitVeriPRO REAT MIREREAAT Sound booth Very Quiet Room Quiet RoomAnywhere PAR Derived PARPAR Any earplug Selected modified earplugs Any earplug Special training required Anyone can perform Ear plug fit-testing methods

45. OSHA Alliance: Best Practice Bulletin www.hearingconservation.org Additional Information www.howardleight.com Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

46. “How well can users predict their attenuation after a short fit-testing training session?" Pre and Post-Test Fit-Testing as a Training Tool

47. Pre and Post-Test Fit-Testing as a Training Tool Ability to Predict Noise Reduction 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Within 5 dB category +/- 7.5 dB (one Category off) +/- 12.5 dB (2 categories off) Number of Ears (Each subject estimated atten. for each ear) 56% 32% 12%

48. Published NRR Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

49. Personal Factors Gender Age Years in Noise Ear Canal Size Familiarity Model of Earplug Program Factors # Group Trainings # Personal Trainings Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

50. Published NRR Trying a second earplug often improves attenuation REDUCING COSTS / CLAIMSReducing Costs of Hearing Loss

51. Earplug fit-testing as a Problem Solver Training tool for noise-exposed workers Train-the-trainer tool Follow-up on significant threshold shifts in hearing Documentation of HPD adequacy Assessment of overall HCP effectiveness Match HPD to worker’s specific noise level Selection of appropriate HPDs for new hires Benefits per Best Practices Bulletin (OSHA Alliance) Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss

52. PROS Estimate Measure NRR obsolete Fulfills OSHA compliance Eliminates need for de-ratings Medico-legal cases Delineates non-occupational Eliminates double protection Provides employee feedback (HPD Inventory control) CONS Cost Time Investment Not standardized Reducing Costs of Hearing Loss Tools for HCP Prevention Metrics

53. Training + Motivation

54. Common Objections to Wearing HPDs “Hearing protectors are uncomfortable to wear.” “I don’t need them! I am used to the noise.” “I already lost some of my hearing, so why should I wear them?” “I can’t hear my co-workers if I wear them.” “I can always get fit with a hearing aid.” “Can I hurt my eardrums if I insert an earplug to deeply.” “My machine sounds different.” “Won’t I get an ear infection?” Training + Motivation

55. Show, Don’t Tell Provide copy of annual audiogram to worker Use personal examples to demonstrate consequences of hearing loss Ask questions: What is your favorite sound? What sound would you miss the most if you couldn’t hear? What sounds connect you to people and your environment? Training + Motivation Personalize Hearing Loss

56. Training + Motivation Training Materials www.hearforever.org www.hearingconservation.org atl.grc.nasa.gov/HearingConserv ation/Resources/index.htmlatl.grc.nasa.gov/HearingConserv ation/Resources/index.html www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise www.dangerousdecibels.org Demonstrate Future Risk www.hearforever.org/ILCA2010

57. Training + Motivation Send Clear Message On + Off Job HC Part of Everyday Life Include recreational hearing conservation in annual training Provide extra HPDs for home use Promote Hearing Conservation at company/family events

58. Training + Motivation Remove Barriers to HPD Use Make HPDs Available Highlight “where to find HPDs” in annual training Make sure HPDs are well- stocked and accessible Include group of workers in selection process for increased acceptance Offer wide variety to match comfort, job requirements

59. Listen Up! Hear Forever Make Hearing Conservation a Part of Your Everyday Life HearForever.org