Hearing Conservation Program

Archive Notice - OSHA Archive

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

August 13, 2018

Mr. Michael Rice
Occupational Health Office
Robley Rex VA Medical Center
800 Zorn Avenue
Louisville, Kentucky 40206

Dear Mr. Rice:

March 1, 1984 is the deadline for baseline audiograms

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

February 3, 1984

Mr. James M. Sitton
Occupational Safety and Health Services, Ltd.
5 Medical Blvd., Suite A
Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39401

Dear Mr. Sitton:

This will provide a correction to my letter to you of January 16, 1984, regarding the date by which employers must establish a valid baseline audiogram for their employees requiring them, when a mobile test van service is used.

Hearing conservation standard in relation to poultry processing industry.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

(Date Unreadable)

Honorable John W. Warner
United States Senator
805 Federal Building
Norfolk, Virginia 23501

Dear Senator Warner:

Thank you for your letter of June 3, 1982, on behalf of your constituent, Mr. Taylor L. Grizzard, President of the Virginia Processors Association, concerning the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) hearing conservation amendment to the occupational noise exposure standard.

Methods of training for microprocessor audiometer technicians.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

August 4, 1983

Maurice Miller, Chairperson
Council for Accreditation in
Occupational Hearing Conservation
Lenox Hill Hospital
100 East 27th Street
New York, New York 10021

Dear Mr. Miller:

Your letter of May 17, 1983, to Assistant Secretary Thorne Auchter, regarding the certification of microprocessor audiometer technicians was referred to this office for reply.

Provisions to assure that workers are adequately protected from noise exposure.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

January 19, 1982

Mr. Ben F. Ervin
Corporate Safety Engineer
Butler Manufacturing Company
BMA Tower, Penn Valley Park
Kansas City, Missouri 64141

Dear Mr. Ervin:

Dr. Alice Suter has asked me to respond to your inquiry concerning compliance with the monitoring requirement of the new hearing conservation amendment (29 CFR 1910.95(e)(1)). Please accept my apology for the delay in our response.

Variable day to day exposures cannot be averaged for compliance with action level

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

January 11, l982

Mr. Peter S. DeFao, Jr.
Senior Staff Industrial Hygienist
Exxon Company, U.S.A.
P.O. Box 222
Linden, New Jersey 07036

Dear Mr. DeFao:

This is in response to your inquiry of December 7, 1981, regarding interpretation of the Hearing Conservation Amendment to OSHA's noise standard, 29 CFR 1910.95.

Positive determination of work-relatedness of standard threshold shift not required.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

 

(Letter undated)

Steven C. White, Ph.D.
Director, Reimbursement Policy Division
American Speech - Language - Hearing
Association
10801 Rockville Pike
Rockville, Maryland 20852

Dear Dr. White:

This is in response to your letter of March 16, 1983, to Assistant Secretary Auchter regarding responsibility for determining that a standard threshold shift (STS) is not work-related under the hearing conservation amendment.

Revisions of hearing conservation standard under consideration applicable to logging industry.

OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.

(Date Unreadable)

Mr. Donald A. Bell
General Manager
Alaska Loggers Association, Inc.
111 Stedman, Suite 200
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901

Dear Mr. Bell:

Assistant Secretary Auchter has asked me to respond to your letter of July 1, 1982, concerning the application of the hearing conservation standard to the logging industry. Please accept my apology for the delay in responding.