Posted By ScotsAM Hi. I'm looking for some verification. We have currently had 2 machines installed in an area which previously had at a maximum 75dB(A). We now approach 100dB(A)at the loudest area. We have implemented a hearing protection zone and are currently looking to engineer out, or at least isolate the noise sources. My question is if the machine's in question aren't running. Would it be fine for employees to then have the choice of hearing protection? My instinct says yes as there IS no risk involved then. What's your thought?

Posted By ScotsAM Hi. Sorry, 4 machines create 75dB. 2 new machines bring the 'ambient' working noise to over 85dB. Loudest part of one of the machines is 100dB.

Posted By Guderian I think you have answered your question yourself in your 1st post. 75db isn't much of a problem - just check from time to time, noise levels aren't increasing. When above the NAW 2005 action limits you should invoke the normal hierarchy of controls i.e. engineering solution first, before relying on hearing protection. Hearing protection is ok in the short term, until a better solution is found. You recognise when above the NAW limits you have to do something, which you have started to identify. Have confidence in your own ability & judgement!!

Posted By Saz G From personal experience (and this is only my opinion) if you allow personnel to make a decision (ie: I'll wear them when the machines are running), then the 'mandatory' becomes 'selectively'. We have 3 production areas with different machines in that, together, generate high noise levels. We have an action group that constantly looks at engineering reduction methods and enclosing/segregation options etc, but by the very nature of our business (recycling and producing plastic)and the machinery used (shredders and blenders) it will always be noisy. The noise levels are acceptable within each area if only one machine is running, but if more than one or all four are, then hearing protection is required. We took the stance that they are mandatory hearing protection areas at all times, because as a previous poster mentioned, operatives do not know when machines will start up and sometimes then, do not have ear defenders with them. We use a common sense approach in enforcement however, so if we are in an area and all machines are off and someone removes their defenders to talk etc, they are not reprimanded. It works well and removes the choice.

Posted By Saz G :-) Go for the easy to police and understand option I say. If the rules are unclear and personnel can interpret them in other ways, they have an argument for not following them. Most hearing protection now is comfy, lightweight and second nature in noisy environments.

Posted By Saz G I think we're all familiar with the CN @ W Regs Sen Sar and your suggestions are fine on paper, but in areas where the noise levels differ on an hourly, minute-by-minue basis dependant upon the machinery running and you can only go by 8-hr TWA measurements, then how can you say that at any point of a shift, that the noise level at a certain point that an operator is stood/working will be below 75dB or 85dB?? Unfortunately, the real working environment is never that straight forward, as I am sure you know.

Posted By Saz G In support of the above, when I joined the company I currently work for, I was surprised to learn that they had been (unecessarily in some cases) wearing hearing protection since 1979 as standard in production areas. It is now (obviously) accepted practice. They took the 'better safe than sorry' and why bother with all the documented assessments and measurements (again rightly or wrongly) route. When they first started looking in earnest at health surveillance and audiometric testing and began baseline assessments some 4 years ago, they found that only 2 persons out of their 85 strong (operational) workforce (85% of whom had been there for more than 10 years) had any type of hearing impairment and one of those had had it since birth! The noise levels in production areas have ranged from 65dB to 110dB over the years, so I guess 'over protection' is not to be 'overrated'.

Posted By Sen Sar Saz Maybe a blanket approach is easier so that all the boxes can be ticked. HP in any environment idaelly should only be 75dB- 80dB at the ear.Anything below 70db would definately be "over protection" and is isolating for the wearer and can hammper their ability to hear alarms & warnings. Many people do not understand exactly how the SNR ratings on HP work. All i was trying to point out to ScotsAM is that there are other ways to create zones within a workplace, I would not suggest that the employee should be left the choice as we all know what would happen. Sar :-)

Posted By ScotsAM One of the main drawbacks I'm finding to engineering controls is how the economic downturn is affecting the company and thus unwilling to spend money. Unfortunately H&S isn't on the same par as production targets in some areas. It's very obvious when hearing protection should be in use as the noisiest machine in the area produces a siren like whine when it's blades reach operating speeds.