Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi
We have individuals reguarly exposed to noise levels of 88Db at ear (while wearing hearing protection).
Exposure times are around 3 hours but can exceed this.
Using the HSE LAeq noise calculator, an 88Db value when entered into the activity section and 3 hours added provides an LAeq value of 84Db (under the upper EAV of 85Db).
We do currently make suitable secondary protection in the form of moulded earplugs available upon request.
On occasion, 4 hours may be exceeded - this gives a LAeq value of 85Db (the upper EAV)
Therefore, the plan is to provide moulded earplugs to all and ensure they are made aware of their legal duty to use the earplugs when activities are known to exceed 4 hours.
I think this will demonstare compliance with NAWR 2005.
Do you agree?
Edited by user 21 January 2017 13:59:36(UTC)
| Reason: amend
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Setting a requirement to use hearing protection can only demonstrate compliance if you have also considered methods of reducing the noise exposure in other ways. It's not enough to tell them it's their legal responsibility - you need to be willing to enforce it as well.
The noise exposure over a whole day needs to be considered, are their other activities always low-noise? It seems to me it would be more practical to make hearing protection mandatory whenever the task is done / whenever in the area rather than leaving it to the individual to decide if they are likely to be exposed for four hours or not. That has so much scope for error, it makes it difficult to enforce and their hearing is at risk even with a three hour exposure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Refering to the hierarchy of control may assist in the order of actions you could take.
1,Eliminate
2,Reduce
3,Isolate
4,Control
5,Safe systems of work
6,PPE
Use of enclosures, baffles, and with some machinery just tooling selection can reduce the levels but where the levels are exceeded after an action plan of noise control is implemented, you need to consider over protection. There are many forms of hearing protection and all have varying Sound Level Reduction (SLR), Noise Reduction Ratings (NRR).
You should be aiming to reduce the levels to 70dba-80dba
Work areas that are identified as a significant risk would normally (as Kate mentioned) have compulsory/mandatory rules regarding particular PPE to be worn.
Remember that a health surveillance programme needs to be implemented if not already to monitor those employees that are identified as at risk.
As for ensuring employees take responsibility, I implement Safe Systems of Work (SSoW) which includes all PPE to be worn amongst many other things which the employee has to name and sign. This assists to satisfy section 2,2c HASAWA 1974 and section 10 of MHSWR 1999 (provision of information and instruction)
Employees should then be reminded of their own duty of care set out by section 7 HASAWA 1974 and section 14 of the MHSWR 1999
Please note that the information provided for each of the regulations is not comprehensive but relevant to your question.
Hope this helps
|
 1 user thanked Striker84 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I think you should be thinking of Lepd values to ensure compliance rather than Leq.
Hope this helps
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Therefore, the plan is to provide moulded earplugs to all and ensure they are made aware of their legal duty to use the earplugs when activities are known to exceed 4 hours. I think this will demonstare compliance with NAWR 2005. Do you agree?
The mitigating effects oif hearing protectors must NOT be taken into account when calculating noise exposure. It may only be taken into account when calculating the Maximum Exposure Limit.
Throwing the employees a few sets of hearing protectors and demanding that they wear them does not negate your legal responsibilities, unfortunately. In my opinion, employee exposure to noise (with or without hearing protection) is likely to exceed the Upper Exposure Action Value of 85Dba. As a remedial measure, I would expect to see signage, a policy on the mandatory wearing of protection policy, noise awareness training, training on the use of hearing protection, and audiometry health survelliance.
I would also expect to see some form of action plan on the part of the employer in demonstrating an attempt in reducing the noise level.
|
1 user thanked acetylene for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Few quick points, in absence of being able to reduce noise at source: You could increase the attenuation of the hearing protection You can change the method of calculation of effectiveness (eg. using octave band rather than HML method) You can double up on hearing protection in exceptional circumstances (plugs under muffs) this can ad du pto 6dBA extra protection And... the actual noise exposure limit level within hearing protection is 87dBA LEPD, currently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.