1. O Rikhotso; Dr JL Harmse; Prof JC Engelbrecht
Are industry implemented hearing conservation programmes effective? Industry evaluation

2. CONTENT
Background
Research question
Study design
Results and discussion
Implications of results for stakeholders
Conclusion
Recommendations
Acknowledgements

3. BACKGROUND: US

4. BACKGROUND: UK

5. Background: South Africa

6. Research Question Ethical approval (FCRE 2016/03/012(SCI))
Based on presented NIHL statistics – are industry HCPs achieving stated goals/purpose i.e. NIHL mitigation & prevention of hearing threshold deterioration
HCP: Elements
Government policy and company policy
Noise exposure monitoring
Noise control
Provision of HPDs – selection and use
Audiometric testing programme
Training programme
Record keeping
Ethical approval (FCRE 2016/03/012(SCI))

7. Study design 1. HPD collection 19 different HPDs found
North America brands : ANSI S tested (EPA labelled)
European Union brands: ISO 4869 tested (EN 352 labelled)
Australia/New Zealand: AS/NZS 1270 tested
2. Noise measurements
A-weighted, C-weighted noise levels
Band pressure levels
Plant selection criteria:
3 defined noise environments
Noise zone demarcation
Steady continuous noise

8. Results: HPD rating labels - Single number methods
Rating labels (in dB) and HPD classes
HPD manufacturer, name and type
NRR
SNR
CSA
SLC80 H M L
3M 1426 economy earmuff (Over the head) 21 -
3M EARClassic foam earplug 29
3M EARClassic yellow neon foam earplug 33
3M Optime 95 earmuff (Hard hat attached) B
3M Optime 98 earmuff (Hard hat attached) 23 A
Dromex EG-3201 corded reusable earplug 25 22
Dromex J earmuff (Over the head) 24 28 12
Elvex HB-25 earmuff (Hard hat attached) 35 19
Elvex HM-20 earmuff (Hard hat attached) 36 30
Elvex Quattro corded reusable earplug 26
Howard Leight Bilsom 304L foam reusable earplug
A(L) 4 32
Howard Leight fusion detectable, corded reusable earplug
Howard Leight fusion, corded regular reusable earplug
MSA V earmuff (Hard hat attached)
Perfect fit earplug
Profit earplug
Uvex 3000H earmuff (Hard hat attached) 31
Uvex whisper corded reusable earplug 20 17
Uvex whisper+ reusable earplug 27
1 HPD labelled with “NNR”

9. Results: Rating labels: Assumed protection values
HPD name
Testing standard
Labelled assumed protection values in dB per frequency band
63Hz
125Hz
250Hz
500Hz
1kHz
2kHz
3.15kHz
4kHz
6.3kHz
8kHz
3M 1426 economy earmuff
ANSI S3.19 – 1974 -
10.5
15.8
24.2 32
31.7
33.1
32.2
29.8
28.1
3M EARClassic foam earplug
16.9
18.1
20.9
21.5
22.6
30.9
38.1 34
3M EARClassic yellow neon foam earplug
33.6
35.5
38.2
37.8 36
41.7
42.4
45.6
43.8
3M Optime 95 earmuff
9.6
14.2
25.3 30 31
32.4 33
3M Optime 98 earmuff
10.8
17.1
28.2
33.7
33.8
37.6
34.8
35.8
35.4
Dromex EG-3201 corded reusable earplug
EN 352-2
23.3
26.9
25.5
26.2
24.7
29.5
29.3
37.2
Dromex J earmuff
8.1
7.4
10.4
19.9
27.5
27.8 28
24.9
Elvex HB-25 earmuff
11.1
34.7
31.1
33.4
32.6
33.5 EN 10
15.9 24
32.1
30.2
Elvex HM-20 earmuff 16
19.3
31.8
34.4
34.3
35.1
36.3
36.6
Elvex Quattro corded reusable earplug
EN 352 – 2
19.4
22.1 20
20.8 21 --
28.7
32.7
25.1
26.8
27.1
29.7
30.5
34.2 35
36.7
AS/NZS 1270 15
16.1
17.5
22.5
23.6
Howard Leight Bilsom 304L foam reusable earplug
30.8
32.9
35.9
38.4
38.9
16.8
15.6
18.5
19.5
36.8
Howard Leight fusion detectable, corded reusable earplug
18.6
23.2 23
22.9
23.8
27.3
Howard Leight fusion, corded regular reusable earplug
15.2
13.8 17
18.3
MSA V earmuff
7.7
29.6 29
31.6
Perfect fit earplug
22.3
25.7
29.1
Uvex whisper corded earplug
17.4
14.3
19.1
23.9
31.2
Uvex whisper+ reusable earplug
EN352 – 2
20.5
20.2
23.7
26.1
32.8
2 HPDs without APVs (UVEX3000H & Profit earplug)

10. Earmuffs (banded) (in dB) Earmuffs attached to safety helmet(in dB)
Pass/Fail criteria for HPDs HPDs used in RSA: SANS , , (EN 352 equivalent)
Earmuffs (banded) (in dB)
Earplugs (in dB)
Earmuffs attached to safety helmet(in dB)
Test frequency
125 Hz 10 18
250 Hz 15 16
500 Hz 21 19
1000 Hz 29 23
2000 Hz 31 26
4000 Hz 32 30
8000 Hz

11. Results NOISE LEVELS 95* 85* 109.4* 94* 83.3 107.6* Plant A Plant B
Octave band pressure levels (dBL) – average logarithmic values for all total measurement points
Instrument readings (log average)
Calculated values
LAeq
LCeq
LAeq,8h (dBA)
LCeq,8h (dBC)
63Hz
125Hz
250Hz
500Hz
1kHz
2kHz
4kHz
8kHz
Plant A 89
88.5
84.2 85
85.7
83.9
86.6
90.7
94* 97
95* 99
Plant B
80.5
85.6
83.4
80.8
78.2
74.5
71.1
70.1
83.3
90.8
85*
92.5
Plant C
107.7
107.3
105.4
103.1
101.6
96.1
100.4
95.2
107.6*
114.7
109.4*
116.5
* Above noise rating limit

12. Calculation procedures & HPD adequacy rating scale
HSE (HML method, SNR method)
NIOSH (NIOSH method 2 & 3)
OSHA (Appendix V – OSHA adjusted method)
OBM (HSE, OSHA & NIOSH) – similar across
Safety factors
Calculated protection effective to the ear (in dBA)
Protection rating outcome
>85 dBA
Insufficient ()
Between 85 – 80 dBA (85 & 85 – 5)
Acceptable ()
Between 80 – 75 dBA ( 85 – 5 & 85 – 10)
Good ()
Between 75 – 70 dBA (85 – 10 & 85 – 15)
<70 dBA
Overprotection
()

13. Results: Adequacy rating outcomes
Table 1: : NIOSH & OSHA NRR methods
HPD name
Noise variable
Plant A
Plant B
Plant C
NIOSH (8-hour rating levels)
OSHA (8-hour rating levels)
3M 1426 economy earmuff
NRR (dBC)
83dB ()
77dB ()
101dB ()
89dB ()
82dB ()
106dB ()
NRR (dBA)
74dB ()
71dB ()
95dB ()
78dB ()
102dB ()
3M EARClassic foam earplug
85dB ()
76dB ()
100dB ()
98dB ()
3M EARClassic yellow neon foam earplug
81dB ()
72dB ()
96dB ()
3M Optime 95 earmuff
87dB ()
80dB ()
105dB ()
3M Optime 98 earmuff
99dB ()
88dB ()
79dB ()
61dB ()
93dB ()
Howard Leight Bilsom 304L foam reusable earplug
MSA V earmuff
75dB ()
65dB ()
67dB ()
Perfect fit earplug
91dB ()
84dB ()
108dB ()
103dB ()
64dB ()
86dB ()
Profit earplug
109dB ()
104dB ()
52dB ()
90dB ()

14. Results: Adequacy rating outcomes
Table 2: SNR and HML methods
HPD name
Rating label
Plant A
Plant B
Plant C
Adequacy rating (average noise levels)
Adequacy rating (8-hour rating level)
Dromex EG-3201 corded reusable earplug
SNR
76dB ()
70dB ()
94dB ()
78dB ()
72dB ()
96dB ()
HML
66dB ()
91dB ()
68dB ()
92dB ()
Dromex J muff ear muff
77dB ()
71dB ()
95dB ()
79dB ()
73dB ()
97dB ()
80dB ()
74dB ()
98dB ()
Elvex HB-25 earmuff
67dB ()
93dB ()
Elvex HM-20 earmuff
69dB ()
62dB ()
88dB ()
64dB ()
Elvex Quattro corded reusable earplug
75dB ()
Howard Leight Bilsom 304L foam reusable earplug
86dB ()
58dB ()
83dB ()
60dB ()
84dB ()
Howard Leight fusion detectable, corded reusable earplug
63dB ()
87dB ()
65dB ()
Howard Leight fusion, corded reusable earplug
Uvex 3000H earmuff
90dB ()
89dB ()
Uvex whisper corded reusable earplug
Uvex whisper+ reusable earplug
70dB ()

15. Results: Adequacy rating outcomes
Table 3: Octave band method
HPD name
Testing method
Plant A
Plant B
Plant C
Adequacy rating (band pressure levels)
3M 1426 economy earmuff
OBL (S3.19 – 1974)
66dB ()
60dB ()
83dB ()
3M EARClassic foam earplug
3M EARClassic yellow neon foam earplug
54dB ()
46dB ()
69dB ()
3M Optime 95 earmuff
65dB ()
62dB ()
84dB ()
3M Optime 98 earmuff
59dB ()
81dB ()
Dromex EG-3201 corded reusable earplug
OBL (EN 352-2)
61dB ()
Dromex J muff ear muff
74dB ()
70dB ()
92dB ()
Elvex HB-25 earmuff
58dB ()
80dB ()
OBL (EN 352-1)
73dB ()
93dB ()
Elvex HM-20 earmuff
56dB ()
79dB ()
Elvex Quattro corded reusable earplug
S3.19 – 1974
85dB ()
76dB ()
98dB () EN
89dB ()
102dB ()
Howard Leight Bilsom 304L foam reusable earplug
51dB ()
AS/NZS 1270:2002
64dB ()
87dB ()
Howard Leight fusion detectable, corded reusable earplug
EN &
82dB ()
Howard Leight fusion, corded reusable earplug
72dB ()
MSA V earmuff
Perfect fit earplug
Uvex whisper corded reusable earplug
75dB ()
Uvex whisper+ reusable earplug

16. Discussion: Implications of results for stakeholders
Employers
Incorrect HPD selection and use
Weak supervision in HCP
Casts doubt on employer’s stated goal of “zero harm”
Administrative compliance with non-compliant outcome
Unable to demonstrate legal compliance
Legislator
Regulatory uncertainty relating to HPD selection
Response plan to NIHL cases adequate or not?
Unable to measure compliance

17. CONCLUSION
Compensation statistics indicate gaps in industry implemented HCPs
HPD selection and use not always correct
Multiple adopted ratings contributes to incorrect selection and use
Regulatory uncertainty contribution – AS/NZS case country statement
Employers (embraced self-regulation) partly bear responsibility for uncertainty
Study demonstrated that HCP effectiveness only possible if all elements are in place

18. RECOMMENDATIONS Regulatory
Regulator to propose a common rating scheme: Basis for legal compliance. HPD policy informed by regulator guidance
Regulatory system: goal setting or a combination. Voluntary protection propramme, Cooperative compliance programme
Noise regulation should require formal HCP evaluation. Advocate for progress reports on noise reduction initiatives
Adopt the AS/NZS approach. Merge SANS with SANS parts 1, 2 and 3/ SANS parts 1 & 2 mandatory. Employers forced to consider noise engineering controls
Introduce intra-company NIHL incidence rate as measure for HCP effectiveness. NIHL incidence rate proposal: <3dB PLH shift 2%; 3- <9db PLH shift 1%; 10dB PLH shift 3%
Country compendium of HPDs approved for use in SA industry.

19. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr JL Harmse and Prof JC Engelbrecht for their academic supervision.
Prof Karabo Shale (now with MUT): Academic guidance and encouragement during initial stage of project.
THANK YOU!