• Baseline/reference audiogram

To determine whether an STS has occurred, the employer must compare the current hearing test results to the employee’s baseline audiogram. In the original final rule issued in July 2002, OSHA noted that if the employee has previously experienced a recordable hearing loss, then the employer must compare the current test results to the audiogram, which was previously designated a recordable case. However, this interpretation would have required employers to track separate baselines for each employee—revised baselines for hearing conservation purposes and revised baselines for recordability purposes. In order to simplify the process, OSHA changed the definition of revised baseline in its December 2002 amendment to the 1904.10 rule. Now, revised baseline will be determined according to existing hearing conservation program definitions under 1910.95, allowing companies to track both hearing conservation program shifts and work-related hearing loss cases utilizing the same baseline audiograms.

• Retest/confirmation of STS

If the annual audiogram shows an STS, a hearing retest may be performed within 30 days. If the retest does not confirm the STS, then the case need not be recorded. However, if the retest confirms the STS, then the STS, if work-related, must be recorded within seven calendar days of the retest. If a retest is not performed, then the case (again, if work-related) must be recorded within seven calendar days of the end of the retest period (i.e., 37 days).

• Results of subsequent testing

If later testing performed as part of the hearing conservation program indicates that the STS is not persistent, then the employer may erase or line-out the recorded entry. OSHA explained that it added this language to the final rule “to minimize the recording of temporary hearing loss cases while capturing complete data on the incidence of hearing loss disorders.”

• Determination of work-relatedness

In the 1904.10 final rule, OSHA stressed the importance of case-by-case review, and stated that hearing loss work-relatedness must be determined according to specifications of section 1904.5. That is, if an event/exposure in the workplace caused or contributed to the shift in hearing or “significantly aggravated” a previously existing hearing loss, then the STS is recordable. In addition, OSHA specifically stated that a case need not be recorded if a physician or other licensed health care professional determines that the hearing loss is not work-related or not significantly aggravated by occupational noise exposure. OSHA later provided further guidance as part of a settlement agreement with the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), following a NAM lawsuit over the recordkeeping rule. OSHA clarified that when cause is not obvious, the employer must make a determination of whether the case is “more likely than not” work-related. The burden of proof will rest with OSHA in the event of a citation for failure to record (OSHA, 2001).

• Forms

Although OSHA also has updated its recordkeeping forms (now OSHA Form 300, 301, and 300A), designation of a separate column for recording hearing loss has been delayed until Jan. 1, 2004. OSHA stated that it agreed with commenters—such as the ASHA-led Coalition to Protect Workers’ Hearing—that a separate column is needed to facilitate analysis of hearing loss data at individual workplaces and to improve the agency’s ability to track and assess this common occupational illness and prioritize hearing loss prevention efforts. In 2003, employers should record cases of occupational hearing loss as an “injury” (single-event acoustic trauma) or ”other illness” (long-term noise exposure) on Form 300, as appropriate.

• State plans

Although state-run OSHA plans were allowed to continue utilizing more stringent enforcement criteria during 2002, all are required to adopt the final federal rule for hearing loss recordability, effective Jan. 1, 2003.

• Applicable industries

Certain industries are not covered under the hearing conservation amendment 1910.95 (construction, agriculture, oil and gas drilling, etc.), but are included under 1904. If such employers choose to conduct audiometric testing programs, then the hearing loss recordability provisions of 1904.10 will apply.

• Trend analysis

In response to concerns among employers regarding an increase in the number of hearing loss cases to be reported beginning in 2003, OSHA issued a note of caution in December 2002. It is recognized that the data captured in 2003 and future years will not be comparable to prior years when less stringent hearing loss criteria may have been used.

Implications for Hearing Conservation Programs