Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Noise & Health  
 CURRENT ISSUE    PAST ISSUES    AHEAD OF PRINT    SEARCH   GET E-ALERTS    
 
 Next article
 Previous article
Table of Contents

Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Citation Manager
Access Statistics
Reader Comments
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed6711    
    Printed396    
    Emailed10    
    PDF Downloaded97    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 8    

Recommend this journal

 

 ARTICLE
Year : 2009  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 42  |  Page : 2--7

The hearing conservation amendment: 25 years later


Alice Suter and Associates, Ashland, Oregon, USA

Correspondence Address:
Alice H Suter
575 Dogwood Way, Ashland, OR 97520
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1463-1741.45306

Rights and Permissions

It has been twenty-five years since the final version of the Hearing Conservation Amendment was issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the U.S. Department of Labor. Since that time, some things have changed and others have stayed exactly the same. Certainly the noise-exposed workforce is more knowledgeable about the hazards of noise, and the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) has greatly increased. There have been significant strides in the technology for measuring noise and for protecting hearing through HPDs. But there is considerable room for improvement. Some of the noise regulation's provisions are embarrassingly outdated, some are in dire need of improvement, and others, such as the requirements for engineering noise control, are not being enforced. Sadly, there seems to be little progress in reducing overall noise exposure levels. What needs to be done at this point is a major overhaul of the noise regulation: recommitment to engineering noise control; reduction of the permissible exposure limit (PEL) to 85 dBA; a shift to the 3-dBA exchange rate; and a nationwide assessment of hearing loss in American workers to determine the effectiveness of current hearing conservation measures to identify and address the weaknesses in programs and regulations.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article