8/8/2019 OSHA Noise Control Standards Legislation ManuFACT for Business and Manufacturers

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/osha-noise-control-standards-legislation-manufact-for-business-and-manufacturers 1/2

ManuFACTS: OSHA Noise Control StandardsExpensive and Expansive Mandates Contribute to

Rising Regulatory Costs

• The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a federalregister notice on October 19, 2010 announcing its intention to change its officialinterpretation of workplace noise exposure standards and enforcement. Thisproposal would significantly increase costs and uncertainty, limit employer flexibility and cost jobs.

• With this proposal, OSHA would alter a long-running and effective policy that allowsemployers to provide “personal protective equipment” such as ear plugs and earmuffs if they are more cost-effective than engineering controls like noise-dampeningequipment and muffling systems in order to protect their employees from highnoise levels.

• Should this proposal be implemented, manufacturers would be forced to makesweeping changes to their workplaces - including diverting resources away fromjobs toward costly new practices and equipment - even if mechanisms are already in place to protect employees from loud noises.

• OSHA has indicated that it intends to enforce this new interpretation by issuingcitations for employers found in non-compliance. Unless employers can proveto OSHA inspection officers that the changes would put their company out ofbusiness or would be impossible to make - a task for which there are no clearguidelines or standards - companies will be forced to put the costly new requirementsinto effect.

• Employers will be forced to spend more resources to comply with these additionalOSHA requirements - costs that will be particularly burdensome for small businesses -instead of on job creation, investment and expansion. The Small Business Administrationreports that small firms already spend nearly $3,000 more per employee thanlarger firms to comply with government regulations.

What Manufacturers Can DoContact Congress to express how OSHA’s proposal on noise exposure in the workplace will impact their ability todo business and compete and urge senators and representatives to oppose the proposal.

1331 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20004 P 202 • 637 • 3000 F 202 • 637 • 3182 www.nam.org

8/8/2019 OSHA Noise Control Standards Legislation ManuFACT for Business and Manufacturers

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/osha-noise-control-standards-legislation-manufact-for-business-and-manufacturers 2/2

More Information• In its notice, OSHA announced a goal of requiring employers

to implement all “feasible” controls - citing a 1981 SupremeCourt case upholding “feasible” to mean “capable of beingdone” - regardless of the costs or effectiveness of currently-usedpersonal protective equipment.

• If OSHA implements the proposal, employers that have notmade every systematic change “capable of being done” willhave to:

- Develop new workplace practices, procedures and workschedules;

- Install new equipment such as baffles and other soundcontainment devices; and

- Retrofit machines and production systems with often expensivenoise-dampening controls.

• According to the notice, these changes must be implementedregardless of their costs unless an employer can prove thatmaking such changes will “put them out of business” or willthreaten the company’s “viability.”

• This potential change is not a proposed regulation or standard,and it does not lower the threshold for employee noise exposure.It is, however, an attempt to change long-held OSHA policyoutside of the formal rulemaking proceess.

• In light of the broad economic impact of the proposal and thedifficulty of gathering relevant data, the NAM formally requestedan extension of the original December 20 deadline for publiccomment. On November 19, the Department of Labor granted theNAM’s request and announced an extension of the commentperiod by 90 days.

Bottom Line

OSHA’s proposal to reinterpret its workplace noise exposurestandards runs counter to a policy that has served employers andemployees well for decades. If implemented, it will add unnecessarycosts and burdens that will harm manufacturers’ ability to createjobs and compete.

More InformationWeb: www.nam.org/hrp

E-mail: hrpolicy@nam.org

January 2011