Occupational Noise

Core Body of Knowledge for the

Generalist OHS Professional

Second Edition, 2019

22.1

February 2019
Copyright notice and licence terms
Copyright (2019) Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS), Tullamarine, Victoria,
Australia

This work is copyright and has been published by the Australian Institute of Health and
Safety (AIHS). Except as may be expressly provided by law and subject to the conditions
prescribed in the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth of Australia), or as expressly
permitted below, no part of the work may in any form or by any means (electronic,
mechanical, microcopying, digital scanning, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission of the
AIHS.

You are free to reproduce the material for reasonable personal, or in-house, non-commercial
use for the purposes of workplace health and safety as long as you attribute the work using
the citation guidelines below and do not charge fees directly or indirectly for use of the
material. You must not change any part of the work or remove any part of this copyright
notice, licence terms and disclaimer below.

A further licence will be required and may be granted by the AIHS for use of the materials if
you wish to:
• reproduce multiple copies of the work or any part of it
• charge others directly or indirectly for access to the materials
• include all or part of the materials in advertising of a product or services or in a
product for sale
• modify the materials in any form, or
• publish the materials.
Enquiries regarding the licence or further use of the works are welcome and should be
addressed to:
The Manager, OHS Body of Knowledge
Australian Institute of Health and Safety, PO Box 2078, Gladstone Park, Victoria,
Australia, 3043
Manager@ohsbok.org.au

Disclaimer
This material is supplied on the terms and understanding that the Australian Institute of
Health and Safety (AIHS) and its respective employees, officers and agents, the editor, or
chapter authors and peer reviewers shall not be responsible or liable for any loss, damage,
personal injury or death suffered by any person, howsoever caused and whether or not due
to negligence, arising from the use of or reliance on any information, data or advice provided
or referred to in this publication. Before relying on the material, users should carefully make
their own assessment as to its accuracy, currency, completeness and relevance for their
purposes, and should obtain any appropriate professional advice relevant to their particular
circumstances.

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

Acknowledgements

The Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS)

financially and materially supports the OHS Body of
Knowledge as a key requirement of the profession.

The OHS Body of Knowledge forms the basis of the

AIHS OHS capability agenda and informs the other
platforms of the agenda: education assurance through
accreditation; role clarity, capability assurance through
individual certification and continuing professional
development.

Thus, the OHS Body of Knowledge is strategically

important to the AIHS and vital for the profession.
(www.aihs.org.au).

The OHS Body of Knowledge provides a framework

for OHS professional education and continuing
professional development. As the body managing
accreditation of OHS professional education, the
Australian OHS Education Accreditation Board
influences, supports and monitors the OHS Body of
Knowledge, and has a major role in the development
and review of individual chapters to ensure that the
quality and evidence base reflects current OHS
research and leading-edge thinking, and so provides a
suitable standard for OHS education and professional
development.

www.ohseducationaccreditation.org.au

The AIHS and the OHS Body of Knowledge

appreciate the support of Beno Groothoff and his
company Environmental Directions in the
development of this chapter. Environmental Directions
Pty. Ltd. is a consultancy specialising in the provision
of occupational hygiene and environmental services to
a broad range of clients from small and medium
enterprises to large companies, universities and
government departments within Australia.

https://environmentaldirections.com.au

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

Bibliography
ISBN 978-0-9808743-2-7

First published in 2012

Author
Beno Groothoff , Managing Director, Environmental Directions Pty Ltd

Peer reviewers
Jane Whitelaw, Lecturer, Postgraduate OHS Program, University of Wollongong
Marion Burgess, Research Officer, Acoustics and Vibration Unit, University of NSW,
Canberra
Gary Foster, Managing Director, Foster OHS Pty Ltd

Second Edition published in 2019

In this edition the original chapter has been split into two chapters: 22.1 Occupational Noise
and 22.2 Vibration. The changes incorporated into this chapter on occupational noise consist
mainly of updating the Model Work Health and Safety legislation references to reflect latest
editions of regulations and codes of practice and the inclusion of the guidance material on
noise management as published by Safe Work Australia

Author
Beno Groothoff , Managing Director, Environmental Directions Pty Ltd

Citation of the whole OHS Body of Knowledge should be as:

AIHS (Australian Institute of Health and Safety). (2019). The Core Body of Knowledge for
Generalist OHS Professionals. Tullamarine, VIC: Safety Institute of Australia.

Citation of this chapter should be as:

Groothoff, B. (2019). Occupational Noise. In The Core Body of Knowledge for Generalist
OHS Professionals. Tullamarine, VIC: Australian Institute of Health and Safety.

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

 Occupational Noise

Beno Groothoff MHlthSc, GDipOHS, DipMechEng, FAIOH, COH, MAAS

Managing Director, Environmental Directions Pty Ltd
Email: beno@environmentaldirections.com.au

Beno has over 45 years’ experience in the fields of occupational hygiene and health and
environmental control, gained both in the Netherlands and in Australia. In Brisbane he has worked in
private practice, worked with the Environmental Protection Agency followed by 22 years with
Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. As Managing Director of Environmental Directions Pty Ltd
he provides occupational hygiene services and has written and presented workshops and two day
training courses on noise for a number of organisations, including Brüel & Kjær in Sydney and the
Australian Institute of Occupational Hygiene (AIOH). He was the course coordinator at QUT's
Occupational Hygiene and Toxicology course, updating and presenting lectures to post graduate and
masters’ students. He now lectures in occupational noise and vibration management in the
Occupational Hygiene course at the University of Queensland to post graduate and masters’
students. He is a member of the AV10 Committee of Standards Australia on occupational noise and
vibration.

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

 Core Body of Knowledge for the Generalist OHS Professional

Occupational Noise

Abstract
The health impacts of noise hazards are well recognised with noise-induced hearing loss
identified as a priority work-related disease for Australian workers. Although noise-related
legislation focusing on reduction at source has existed for many years, provision of hearing
protectors is still the predominant control strategy in many workplaces. This chapter
discusses the concept of noise as a hazard and its effects on individuals. It provides a basic
understanding of acoustics and the factors that impact on hearing loss and health together
with the principles of noise measurement and control. It concludes with an examination of
the role of the generalist OHS professional in the management of noise hazards.

Keywords
noise, hearing, hearing loss, ototoxic, tinnitus, audiometry, control

Contextual reading
Readers should refer to 1 Preliminaries for a full list of chapters and authors and a synopsis of the
OHS Body of Knowledge. Chapter 2, Introduction describes the background and development
process while Chapter 3, The OHS Professional provides a context by describing the role and
professional environment.

Terminology
Depending on the jurisdiction and the organisation, Australian terminology refers to ‘Occupational
Health and Safety’ (OHS), ‘Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) or ‘Work Health and Safety’
(WHS). In line with international practice this publication uses OHS with the exception of specific
reference to the Work Health and Safety (WHS) Act and related legislation.

Jurisdictional application
This chapter includes a short section referring to the Australian model work health and safety
legislation. This is in line with the Australian national application of the OHS Body of Knowledge.
Readers working in other legal jurisdictions should consider these references as examples and refer
to the relevant legislation in their jurisdiction of operation.

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

Table of contents

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Definitions ................................................................................................................... 1
2 Historical context ......................................................................................................... 2
3 Extent of the problem................................................................................................... 2
4 Understanding noise .................................................................................................... 3
4.1 Basic acoustics ........................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Noise and its measurement ......................................................................................... 4
4.3 Noise-induced hearing loss ......................................................................................... 6
4.4 Audiometric testing ...................................................................................................... 6
4.5 Ototoxicity ................................................................................................................... 7
4.6 Social and community noise ........................................................................................ 8
4.7 Noise ‘stress’ ............................................................................................................... 9
4.8 Acoustic shock ............................................................................................................ 9
4.9 Impact of noise on human performance .................................................................... 11
5 Legislation and standards ......................................................................................... 11
6 Control of noise hazards............................................................................................ 13
6.1 Elimination or minimisation through safe design ........................................................ 14
6.2 Engineering controls.................................................................................................. 14
6.3 Administrative controls .............................................................................................. 15
6.4 Hearing protection ..................................................................................................... 15
6.5 An occupational noise management program............................................................ 17
7 Implications for OHS practice.................................................................................... 18
8 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 19
Key thinkers ...................................................................................................................... 20
References ........................................................................................................................ 20

List of Tables

Table 1 Class of hearing protection …………………………………………………….. 16

22.1 Occupational Noise September 2019

1 Introduction
The terms noise and vibration are often linked as in, for example, ‘noise and vibration
engineering.’ This is because exposure to vibration is usually associated with exposure to
noise, and the physics of vibration and noise are similar.1 While the specific health effects of
noise exposure are often insidious and can manifest after a long period of latency. The
health effects of noise should be taken seriously by their creators as part of their business
activities. Management of noise hazards is a specialist area with advice able to be sourced
from acoustic consultants, noise and vibration engineers, occupational hygienists and
audiologists. This chapter deals with occupational noise from the perspective of the
generalist OHS professional and so addresses the basic knowledge required to understand,
identify, assess and control noise hazards in the workplace and to engage with the
appropriate specialists.

1.1 Definitions
Noise has been defined in several ways. The Code of Practice: Managing Noise and
Preventing Hearing Loss at Work under the national model Work Health and Safety
legislation defines hazardous noise in relation to hearing loss as “noise that exceeds the
exposure standard for noise in the workplace” (SWA, 2018a, p. 36). This is the definition
used by regulators. AS/NZS 1269.0: Occupational Noise Management: Overview and
General Requirements (SA/SNZ, 2005a) defines noise as “all sound [in the workplace],
whether wanted or unwanted.” However, neither of these definitions acknowledges the
damaging effects on people’s health associated with noise occurring from exposure at work,
in the community or both.

The World Health Organization (WHO) describes the distinction between occupational and
environmental noise:

Noise is present in every human activity, and when assessing its impact on human well-being it
is usually classified either as occupational noise (i.e. noise in the workplace), or as
environmental noise, which includes noise in all other settings, whether at the community,
residential, or domestic level (e.g. traffic, playgrounds, sports, music) (Concha-Barrientos,
Campbell-Lendrum & Steenland, 2004, p. 1).

This chapter concerns occupational noise.

1
See OHS BoK 22.2 Vibration for information on identifying, assessing and controlling work-related
vibration hazards.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 1 of 23
2 Historical context
The problem of noise affecting health and hearing has been recognised throughout history.
Probably the earliest notation is attributable to Pliny the Elder’s (23–79AD) Naturalis
Historiæ (Natural History), which referred to the noise of the falling water in the Nile
cataracts and its ill effects on the hearing of the local inhabitants (NIOSH, 1988; Rosen,
1974). In ancient Rome, carts were banned from cities at night as their wheels made too
much noise on the cobblestoned streets (Berglund, Lindvall & Schwela, 1999). Bernardo
Ramazzini (1633–1714) described the hearing impairment of coppersmiths in De Morbis
Artificum Diatriba (Diseases of Workers) (Rosen, 1974). With the onset of the industrial
revolution, the incidence of noise-induced hearing loss increased; works by Thomas Barr
(1886) on hearing loss in Scottish boilermakers, and Gottstein and Kayser (1881) on
German personnel in railway works, were landmark studies in the development of our
modern day understanding of occupational noise-induced hearing loss (Atherley & Noble,
1985). Georg von Békésy (1899–1972) discovered the ‘travelling wave’ by which sound is
analysed and communicated in the cochlea, and for which he received a Nobel Prize in 1961
(see PBRC, n.d.).

Since the early part of the 20th century, much research has been conducted into the
relationship between noise exposure and hearing loss. Notably, in 1970, Burns and
Robinson “proposed the concept of immission, which is based on the equal-energy
hypothesis, to describe the total energy from a worker’s exposure to continuous noise over a
period of time (i.e. months or years)” (NIOSH, 1998). The equal-energy hypothesis, which
states that “equal amounts of sound energy will produce equal amounts of hearing
impairment, regardless of how the sound energy is distributed in time” formed the basis for
the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health recommendation for a 3-dB
exchange rate (for a 3-dB increase in noise level the exposure time must be halved to
maintain the acoustic energy balance concept) (NIOSH, 1998). This concept was adopted in
ISO 1999 Acoustics – Determination of Occupational Noise Exposure and Estimation of
Noise-Induced Hearing Impairment (ISO, 1990). The 3dB equal energy concept has been
adopted in Australian Standard 1269 for several decades now and is again used in the
current 2005 edition of the AS/NZS 1269 series, “Occupational noise management”
(SA/SNZ, 2005a). Modern noise regulations use the equal energy concept as related to the
normalised 8-hour shift.

3 Extent of the problem

Occupational noise-induced hearing loss (ONIHL) is listed as a priority disorder for the
Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022 (SWA, 2012, p. 17). However,
current data on the prevalence of ONIHL is difficult to obtain.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 2 of 23
The report Work-related Noise Induced Hearing Loss in Australia (ASCC, 2006) estimated
that about 1 million employees in Australia were exposed to hazardous levels of noise (in the
absence of hearing protection), accounting for about 16% of adult-onset hearing loss. The
2010 publication by Safe Work Australia National Hazard Exposure Workers Surveillance
(NHEWS) (de Crespigny, 2010) found that between 28% and 32% of Australian workers are
likely to work in an environment where they are exposed to non-trivial [>84dB(A)] loud noise
generated during the course of their work. Manufacturing and Construction industries were
the main industries in which workers reported exposure to loud noise. Technicians and
trades workers, machinery operators and drivers, and labourers were the main occupations
in which workers reported exposure to loud noise.

Due to the long latency and cumulative effect of ONIHL, workers’ compensation claims do
not give a true indication of the health impact. The inadequacy of compensation data as a
measure of the extent of the problem of noise-induced hearing loss is further exacerbated by
changes in definitions and method of data collection for workers compensation claims.
Between July 2002 and June 2007 there were about 16,500 successful workers'
compensation claims for industrial deafness (SWA, 2010a, p 1.). In 2007–8, there were
4,000 claims for occupational noise-induced hearing loss (ONIHL) (up from 3,250 in 2003-4)
at a median cost of $11,200 per claim with no time lost reported for the claims (SWA, 2011).
In contrast, the current method of data collection refers only to ‘serious claims’ where a
serious claim is defined as “an accepted workers’ compensation claim for an incapacity that
results in a total absence from work of one working week or more”. This definition also
includes common-law payments. (SWA, 2018b, p. 10.) As ONIHL is not usually associated
with time lost, it does not register as a serious claim and under mechanism of injury “sound
and pressure” only 115 serious claims were recorded. This apparently low number of claims
is not representative of the people suffering ONIHL. A 2006 report by Access Economics
titled Listen Hear! stated that in 2005, 37% of all hearing losses were noise induced from
occupational and leisure activities. The report estimated that the direct and indirect costs to
the community amounted to about 4.3 billion dollars annually (Access Economics, 2006). A
more recent study estimates that the 4.3 billion dollars has blown out to about 5.9 billion
dollars (Hearing Care Industry Association, 2017). Besides hearing loss, occupational noise
is associated with tinnitus, cardiovascular disease, depression, increased risk of accidents,
and decreased productivity (SWA, 2010a, p 1.)

4 Understanding noise
Noise and vibration are closely linked in that noise originates from a vibrating body and both
noise and vibration are transmitted as waves through a medium. In the case of noise the
medium is usually air. Knowledge of units of measurement such as hertz and decibels
together with some understanding of the physics of waves including frequency, wavelength,

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 3 of 23
amplitude and reflection, absorption and transmission is important in understanding the
behaviour of noise and so the development of controls.2

4.1 Basic acoustics

Sound consists of very small pressure changes, which are superimposed on the
atmospheric pressure. Air molecules move in a pendulum motion backwards and forwards
from their resting position, causing momentary compression and rarefaction of the air
pressure. The air molecules pass some of their energy on to neighbouring molecules and so
spread their energy over an increasingly larger volume, much like the ripples when a stone
is thrown into water. The pressure changes are detected by the eardrum, which vibrates in
response. The vibrations are transferred via a lever system consisting of three tiny bones in
the middle ear to the fluid-filled inner ear. In the inner ear, tiny hair cells convert the
vibrations into electrical pulses that are sent to the brain. The brain is then able to process
these electrical pulses into meaningful sounds.

A primary indicator that noise may be hazardous to hearing is when a person has to raise
their voice to talk to someone who is about an arm’s length away in a noisy workplace. A risk
assessment, including noise measurement, should then be conducted to identify the
processes, noise sources and workers likely to be exposed above the exposure standard.
The Code of Practice: Managing Noise and Preventing Hearing Loss at Work (SWAa, 2018,
Appendix C) includes a basic noise hazard identification checklist.

4.2 Noise and its measurement

A noise assessment may be simple or quite complex depending on circumstances such as
the type and size of the workplace, the number of workers and whether previous noise-
assessment data is available.

A noise assessment can be carried out with a sound level meter (SLM) or a noise dose
meter (NDM). In recent years noise dose badges have become available. A noise dose
badge is basically a smaller version of the traditional noise dose meter but, apart from being
much smaller, has no cable between the meter and microphone that can get in the way of
the worker, and are small enough for workers to literally forget they are wearing it and so
results may be more reliable. Just like sound level meters these badges can measure
several parameters simultaneously. An SLM is usually hand held and therefore the assessor
is present as the measurements are made; this has the advantage that the assessor can
observe firsthand what is being measured. An NDM is designed to be worn on a person for a
period of time whilst that person conducts work. In practice, the assessor is not always

2
See OHS BoK 14 Foundation Science.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 4 of 23
present during the entire assessment period and therefore may have to rely on the wearer to
provide input to the survey. In each case, the meter’s microphone should be held within a
sphere of 10 to 20 centimeters of the ear, in accordance with the requirements of AS/NZS
1269.1 Occupational Noise Management – Measurement and Assessment of Noise
Immission and Exposure (SA/SNZ, 2005b). Both ears may need to be assessed and the
worst exposed ear results used for noise management purposes. Both types of instruments
measure the sound pressure variations as a sound pressure level expressed in decibels
(dB). The decibel scale is logarithmic, or compressed, as the human ear is capable of
hearing over a large range of sound pressures.3

Measurements are normally made using a weighting scale, which is A-weighting for sounds
such as the 'LAeq,8h' (i.e. sound measured over a period of time), and C-weighting 'LC,peak' for
impulsive type sounds (i.e. sounds of less than 1 second duration, such as explosions and
impact sound). The A-weighting is an electronic frequency filter used in sound level
measuring instruments to simulate the measured sound as if perceived by the human ear.
The human ear’s sensitivity varies with the pitch of sound (frequency). It is less sensitive at
low-pitched sounds, and more sensitive at high-pitched sounds. The A-weighting filter
follows this variability by reducing the sensitivity of the sound level meter at low and high
frequencies compared to those within the 1000Hz to 4000Hz frequency range.

A person carrying out a noise assessment should meet the competency requirements listed
in AS/NZS 1269.1, including:

- the objectives of the assessment

- the basic physics of sound
- the correct usage and limitations of sound-measuring instruments required to gather data for
noise assessments
- the information needed and methods used to determine occupational noise exposures
- how to record results and explain them to people in the workplace
- the method for evaluating personal hearing protectors
- when to advise that someone with more specialised knowledge on noise measurement or
noise control is required, and
- the relevant statutory requirements, codes of practice and standards used in Australia.
A competent person should also have a basic understanding of the:

- mechanisms of hearing
- harmful effects of noise, and
- principles of engineering noise control and noise management measures. (SWA, 2018a, p.
17-18)

3
Commercially available sound measuring ‘apps’ for smart phone and tablets are useful indicative
tools for estimating sound levels but cannot be used to demonstrate legislative compliance.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 5 of 23
4.3 Noise-induced hearing loss
Except for extremely loud noise of an explosive or impact nature where some amount of
hearing loss and/or structural damage occurs (acoustic trauma) immediately, loud noise
initially fatigues the delicate hair cells in the inner ear causing a shift in hearing threshold.
This is called a temporary threshold shift (TTS). A simple test can be conducted by workers
to assess the effects of occupational exposure to noise and its impact on hearing acuity:

Drive to work and switch off the engine, but not the ignition. Switch on the car radio
and reduce the volume to just audible. Do not switch off the radio, but switch off the
ignition and go to work. After work, switch on the ignition. The radio should come on
as well. If the radio cannot be heard, a temporary threshold shift has occurred during
the workday. The change in hearing threshold is experienced as dull or blocked
hearing and sometimes ringing in the ears (tinnitus). This may last from hours to
days after the exposure.

Generally, hearing recovers overnight, giving a false impression that all is well. However,
the effects of regular exposures are cumulative. The hair cells are eventually destroyed
causing a permanent threshold shift (PTS) that normally is not noticed until the damage is
well advanced. Damaged hair cells are incapable of repairing themselves; the loss of
hearing is therefore permanent as there is no cure available and hearing aids cannot restore
the natural hearing. (SWA, 2018a, p. 11.)

Noise-induced damage to the inner ear hair cells usually occurs in the high-pitched
frequency range of 4000–6000 Hz. This range is critical for understanding speech and the
nuances involved with speech. In contrast to other forms of hearing loss, the person
suffering from noise-induced hearing loss can hear well, but cannot understand the words
because sounds such as ‘fff,’ ‘th’ and ‘shh,’ and high-pitched consonants such as ‘s,’ ‘t,’ ‘k’
and ‘c,’ are harder to hear or not heard at all. This causes misunderstandings in
conversations, particularly where there is background noise. Audiometric tests can be
conducted to assess the degree of noise-induced hearing loss. (SA/SNZ, 2014a; SWA,
2018a)

4.4 Audiometric testing

Under the model Work Health and Safety Act (WHSA s 19.3g) persons conducting a
business or undertaking (PCBU) are required to monitor the heath of workers (SWA, 2016).
Under certain conditions (as described in SWA, 2018a) where workers are likely to be
exposed to noise, ototoxins and/or vibrations, this requirement to monitor health includes
audiometric testing. AS/NZS 1269.4 Occupational Noise Management – Auditory
Assessment (SA/SNZ, 2014a) describes audiometric testing as: “… pure tone audiometric
testing of threshold sensitivity is the method of auditory assessment usually used in noise
management programs…”. Audiometric testing requires specialised equipment that is

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 6 of 23
appropriately calibrated and the testing must be conducted by suitably qualified persons as
described in AS/NZS 1269.4.

It is important to note that while audiometric testing forms an important part of identifying and
managing the risks from noise exposure at the workplace, “such testing is not itself a
protective mechanism and is relevant only in the context of a comprehensive noise
management program” (AS/NZS 1269.4, p. 4). Any changes in a person’s hearing levels as
revealed by audiometric testing should be investigated as to the cause and the need for
corrective action.

4.5 Ototoxicity
During the last four decades, research (see, for example, Prasher et al., 2004, Morata. T.C,
2007) has been conducted on ototoxic agents, which are chemical substances that either
alone or in concert with noise may have a more detrimental effect on hearing than noise (oto
= ear, toxic = poisonous). There are three main classes of ototoxins: solvents, heavy metals
and asphyxiants. Also, some medications such as anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombolitic,
antibiotic and chemotherapy drugs, and salicylic acid (aspirin) are considered to be ototoxic.
A list of common otoxins can be found in Appendix B, Table 6, of the Code of Practice
(SWA, 2018a).

The most common routes of entry into the body of these ototoxins are via inhalation, skin
absorption and, to a lesser extent, ingestion due mainly to poor personal hygiene practices
at work. Because of the action variability between the many chemicals identified to date it is
difficult to come up with a ‘safe’ method of risk assessment. Also, Safety Data Sheets (SDS)
generally do not give information on the ototoxic effects of a substance. However,
workplaces using known or suspected ototoxic chemical substances should look for
information on the chemical’s general toxicity, neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity as such
chemicals also may affect the auditory system.

Exposure limits of chemical substances are stated in Safe Work Australia’s (2010b)
Hazardous Chemicals Information System.4 However, exposure standards for chemicals and
for noise have not yet been altered to take account of increased risk to hearing. The Code of
Practice (SWA, 2018a) recommends that until revised standards are established, the daily
noise exposure of workers exposed to ototoxins should be reduced to a maximum of 80
dB(A). Workers then should also undergo audiometric testing and be given information on

4
See: http://hcis.safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 7 of 23
ototoxic substances. Monitoring hearing with regular audiometric testing is recommended
where workers are exposed to:

• Any of the ototoxic substances listed in Appendix B where the airborne exposure
(without regard to respiratory protection worn) is greater than 50 per cent of the
national exposure standard for the substance, regardless of the noise level
• Ototoxic substances at any level and noise with LAeq,8h greater than 80dB(A) or LC,peak
greater than 135dB(C) 5 (SWA, 2018a)

A listing of ototoxic substances most commonly used in industrial settings is given in Table 6
of Appendix B of the Code of Practice. More information on ototoxins can be found in
AS/NZS 1269.0 (SA/SNZ, 2005a, Appendix C).

4.6 Social and community noise

Community noise has been acknowledged throughout the centuries as a health issue
(section 2). Since the early 1900s, many studies have investigated the effects of noise in
communities. To date, the main findings include health effects such as stress, annoyance,
sleep disturbance, interference with concentration and activities, increased blood pressure
and heart rate, and ischaemic heart disease (Department of Health, 2018). Furthermore,
there is some evidence that the intellectual development of children in noisy suburbs may be
compromised compared to those living in quiet suburbs (e.g. Tamburlini, von Ehrenstein &
Bertollini, 2002).

The enormous popularity of personal media players is another source of community concern
as they can be used for many hours at high volume, often with ear buds that concentrate the
noise, and insufficient warning is provided by the makers of the devices on the potentially
damaging effects of regular exposure to loud noise on hearing (see SCENIHR, 2008). Unlike
the situation in Europe where the maximum volume of personal media players is regulated,
Australian regulators do not deem the risks important enough to deal with the issue. In 2010,
Australian Hearing found that almost 40% of young Australians had trouble hearing in
background noise and 13% received “a yearly noise dose from nightclubs, concerts and
sporting activities which alone exceeds the maximum acceptable dose in industry”

The Access Economics report Listen Hear! (2006) stated that 37% of all hearing losses are
noise induced from occupational and leisure activities. This amounts to direct and indirect
costs to the community of about 4 billion dollars annually (Access Economics, 2006).

5
See Section 6.1 for explanation of terms of measurement for noise exposure.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 8 of 23
4.7 Noise ‘stress’
While the Code of Practice (SWA, 2018a) comments on noise levels that do not damage
hearing but may have other adverse health effects, there is no regulation of noise levels
below LAeq,8h 85 dB(A). These lower noise levels are typically found in open plan offices,
hospital and call centre environments. The Code notes that relatively low levels of noise can
“chronically interfere with concentration and communication [and that] persistent noise stress
can increase risk of fatigue and cardiovascular disorders including high blood pressure and
heart disease” (SWA, 2018a, p.13). While safe levels of noise to guard against health
problems other than hearing loss have not yet been determined, the code advises that the
risk of adverse health effects can be minimised by; “keeping noise levels below 50 dB(A)
where work is being carried out that requires high concentration or effortless concentration,
and below 70 dB(A) where more routine work is being carried out that requires speed or
attentiveness or where it is important to carry on conversations” (SWA, 2018a, p. 13). To
mitigate the chances of adverse health effects occurring in workers careful consideration
must be given to the acoustic environment in which open plan offices and particularly call
centres operate. Guidance in this regard can be obtained from AS/NZS 2107: Acoustics-
Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. (SA/SNZ,
2016). This Standard provides design sound levels for a range of occupancies in the un-
occupied state but ready for occupancy.

4.8 Acoustic shock

As outlined in the Code of Practice:

Acoustic incidents are sudden, unexpected loud noises occurring during telephone headset
use, including crackles, hisses, whistles, shrieks or high-pitched noises. Acoustic shock is not
caused by the loudness of a telephone, as all phone noise is electronically limited to a peak
noise level of 123 decibels, but by a sudden rise in noise levels. (SWA, 2018a, p. 40)

It is important that the acoustic environment of a call centre is optimal, e.g. meets the
recommendations of AS/NZS 2107 (SA/SNZ, 2016), and the space between telephone
operators not too cramped as that enables the operators to keep their conversation volumes
low and in turn keep the volume in their headsets low.

Noises that may cause acoustic incidents can originate from two main sources, i.e. either
from within the call centre telephone system or from the customer end. Sources from within
the telephone system may include; mobile phones or fax machines used in a call centre,
faulty telephones or headsets, individual telephone systems not protected by shriek rejection
devices (Volume limiter amplifiers), or the whole of the call centre telephone network not
protected by an Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS). Sources from the customer end may
include; loud noise in a workplace close to the phone, oscillation feedback from an old style
cordless phone, misdirected fax tones over the telephone line and deliberate abuse by
customers. In most cases these noises may cause an acoustic incident in the telephone
operator but the operator is likely to be able to continue work, after having reported the
incident. Where these noises are severe however, they may lead to an acoustic shock and

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 9 of 23
the operator may not be able to continue work, either for a limited period or not at all.
(Groothoff, 2005).

The symptoms of acoustic shock – experienced by only a small proportion of people after an
acoustic incident – are grouped into three categories:

Primary (immediate) symptoms, which can include but are not limited to:
• a feeling of fullness in the ear
• burning sensations or sharp pain around or in the ear
• numbness, tingling or soreness down the side of face, neck or shoulder
• nausea or vomiting
• dizziness, and
• tinnitus and other head noises such as eardrum fluttering.
Secondary symptoms, which include but are not limited to:
• headaches
• fatigue
• a feeling of being off-balance, and
• anxiety.
Tertiary symptoms, which include but are not limited to:
• hypersensitivity (sensitivity to previously tolerated sounds such as loud noises,
television and radio); and
• hyper vigilance, i.e. being overly alert. (Safe Work Australia, 2018a, p. 41.)

The likelihood that acoustic shock will result from an acoustic incident is low; however,
factors including high background noise, the operator’s psychosomatic state (e.g.
experiencing feelings of tension) and physiological state (e.g. suffering a middle ear
infection) may increase the likelihood of occurrence. While acoustic incidents may occur in
any workplace, call centres are the most common sites. Control strategies for acoustic
incidents should target:

• Workplace design, including acoustic requirements

• Systems of work, performance monitoring of workers, training and stress
management, systems for reporting and measures for dealing with acoustic incidents
and shock
• Technical control systems including compliance with telecommunication
requirements, suitable shriek rejection devices such as Volume Limiter Amplifiers for
each telephone operator, and uninterrupted power supply (UPS) systems to prevent
brown-outs and black-outs causing signals in headsets (Groothoff, 2005).

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 10 of 23
4.9 Impact of noise on human performance
Since the early 1900s there have been, and still are, many studies investigating the effects
of noise in communities. The main findings so far include health effects such as: stress;
annoyance; sleep disturbance; interference with concentration and activities; increased
blood pressure and heart rate; and ischaemic heart disease (Babisch, 2013, p. 13. WHO,
2013.)

In the work environment, relatively low noise levels in office situations, range typically between
about 40 and 70 dB(A) depending on the interior construction of the office and the activities
carried out. These noise levels are not capable of causing noise induced hearing loss.
However, because noise is known to interfere with concentration and thought processes, they
are known to cause stress and other health effects in susceptible individuals. (Groothoff,
2015).

Noise related stress factors include: stress, leading to irritability, headaches, moodiness and
insomnia, disturbance of psychomotor reactions, loss of concentration, speech interference.
Health related effects include; reduced productivity, reduced quality of work and/or service,
increased absenteeism. All of these effects affect the productivity of workers and therefore
noise reduction would be expected to improve productivity (Groothoff, 2015).

5 Legislation and standards

The national model legislation (SWA, 2016) requires a person conducting a business or
undertaking (PCBU) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of
workers (WHSA s 19). This obligation requires elimination of risks to health and safety so far
as is reasonably practicable or, if elimination is not reasonably practicable, minimisation of
those risks so far as is reasonably practicable (WHSA s 17). The Work Health and Safety
legislation applies also to designers, manufacturers, suppliers and installers of plant with
regards to their obligations to provide plant and information so that it is safe for use. This
requirement also applies to the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss for the end user.
(See WHSR s 59.) Because the risks of sustaining occupational noise-induced hearing loss
are foreseeable, exposure limits are set under health and safety and mining legislation. The
Model Work Health and Safety Regulations (SWA, 2019) stipulate exposure standards for
noise as:

• LAeq,8h of 85 dB(A) or
• LC,peak of 140 dB(C). (WHSR, s 56(1))

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 11 of 23
 In this regulation:

LAeq,8h means the eight-hour equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level in
decibels (dB(A)) referenced to 20 micropascals, determined in accordance with
AS/NZS 1269.1:2005 (Occupational noise management – Measurement and
assessment of noise immission and exposure).

LC,peak means the C-weighted peak sound pressure level in decibels (dB(C)) referenced to
20 micropascals, determined in accordance with AS/NZS 1269.1:2005 (Occupational
noise management – Measurement and assessment of noise immission and exposure)
(WHSR s. 56(2)).

These limits are determined without taking into account any protection that may be provided
to the person by the use of personal hearing protectors. Due to the recovery time for
temporary hearing loss, the eight-hour equivalent exposure limit must be adjusted for longer
shifts. For example, the Code of Practice advises that for shifts of “10 hrs or more to less
than 14 hrs,” 1 dB(A) should be added to the measured LAeq,8h dB(A) (SWAa, 2018, p. 19).

The Code of Practice (SWA, 2018a) provides information on noise and occupational noise-
induced hearing loss (ONIHL), and how to control risks and so comply with the regulated
exposure limits. The Australian/New Zealand Standard series AS/NZS 1269 Occupational
Noise Management Set (SA/SNZ, 2005c) provides extensive information on all facets of
noise assessment, including instrumentation, evaluation of results and noise management.
By following the guidance in the Code of Practice and the relevant sections of AS/NZS 1269
(particularly Part 1), a PCBU or other responsible person should, in most cases, be able to
demonstrate compliance with the regulated exposure standard and thus prevent ONIHL.

As noted in section 4.4, audiometric testing is an important element in identifying exposure

to hazardous noise. The WHSR (s 58) require audiometric testing within 3 months of a
worker commencing the work; and at least every 2 years when:

• A worker is frequently required to use personal protective equipment as protection

risk of hearing loss associated with noise that exceeds the exposure standard for
noise.
• Personal protective equipment is provided as a control measure.

Relevant standards include:

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2005). AS/NZS 1269

Set:2005 Occupational Noise Management Set. Sydney and Wellington: Standards
Australia/Standards New Zealand.

Includes:

AS/NZS 1269.0:2005 Overview and General Requirements

AS/NZS 1269.1:2005 Measurement and Assessment of Noise Immission and
Exposure

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 12 of 23
 AS/NZS 1269.2:2005 Noise Control Management
AS/NZS 1269.3:2005 Hearing Protector Program
AS/NZS 1269.4:2014 Auditory Assessment
AS/NZS 2107: 2016 Acoustics-Recommended design sound levels and
reverberation times for building interiors

AS/NZS 1270: 2002 Acoustics – Hearing Protectors

AS 2436: 2010 Guide to Noise and Vibration Control on Construction, Demolition and
Maintenance Sites

6 Control of noise hazards

Generally, workplaces contain various noise sources that are not always used at the same
time, or consistently, throughout shifts. Therefore noise levels will vary with time. Also,
worker movement around machines and work areas may result in variations in noise
exposure. In production areas, it may be costly or not possible to stop production to measure
individual noise sources. However, effective noise control requires identification and analysis
of noise sources to determine the priority sources for attention (see SWAa, 2018).

Where noise sources have been identified that are likely to produce excessive noise, the
next step is to prioritise noise control by determining the duration of use of each machine or
item of equipment during a typical shift and the time the operator spends using them or
working near them. For instance, a machine or equipment item with a high noise level, but
with short usage per shift may well have a lower priority for noise reduction than a machine
or equipment item with a lower noise level, but long usage per shift. For example, a milling
machine operated for six hours per day at 88 dB(A) at the operator’s ears, needs more
urgent noise reduction than an auger operating for 15 minutes per day at 94 dB(A). The
Ready Reckoner in Appendix D of the Noise Code of Practice shows clearly that at 88dB(A)
the exposure can be up to 4 hours before the red (danger) area has been reached. It also
shows that at 94db(A) it only takes one hour to reach the red area. Therefore the auger
needs more urgent treatment than the milling machine.

The national model legislation (WHSR s 57) requires that the hierarchy of control (WHSR s
36) be followed, the effectiveness of the controls be monitored (s 37) and reviewed (s 38).

Workplaces cannot automatically rely on the use of hearing protectors, or other forms of
personal protective equipment, where it is reasonable and practicable to use higher-order
controls. In practice, provision of hearing protection is the predominant method employed for

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 13 of 23
preventing ONIHL. The original November 2008 National Hazard Exposure Worker
Surveillance report found that of the 4500 workers interviewed:

• 17% were at workplaces where no controls were implemented

• 63% were provided with earplugs
• 60% were provided with earmuffs
• 41% received training on how to prevent hearing loss
• 36% had job rotation
• 36% were at workplaces where quieter machinery was purchased whenever possible
• 22% were at workplaces where places where noisy equipment was placed in an
isolated room (ASCC, 2008, p 25).

The Code of Practice: Managing Noise and Preventing Hearing Loss at Work (SWAa, 2018)
and the AS/NZS 1269 series (SA/NZS, 2005c) provide information on managing
occupational noise. Information on noise control also may be found in other codes of
practice such as those for plant, risk assessment, construction and tunneling.

6.1 Elimination or minimisation through safe design6

Workplace noise that exceeds the exposure standard must, so far as reasonably practicable,
be reduced to non-hazardous exposure levels. The best way to do this is by eliminating the
source of noise emission. One way of doing this is by no longer carrying out the work that
creates the noise. Where this is not practicable, substitution of the activity or process by
changing the noisy components of the activity or process for a quieter one should be
considered, e.g. instead of hammering a piece of metal to bend it, the metal could be heated
and then bend with pliers or a press.

Workplace noise can also be minimised through design by replacing old plant and
equipment with new quieter plant and equipment through a “Buying Quiet” program.

6.2 Engineering controls

Engineering noise controls address control at the source by modifying the noise source itself
or through enclosures (e.g. made from a solid material and lined internally with a sound-
absorbent lining), modifications and/or additions (e.g. silencers or mufflers to existing noise
sources), placing barriers in the noise path or by enclosing the receiver end (e.g. a control

6
See also OHS BoK 34.3 Healthy and Safe Design

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 14 of 23
room). Generally, engineering noise control is the most effective way of controlling noise, but
may sometimes be cost prohibitive.7

Some basic principles of engineering noise control consist of:

• Mounting vibrating sources within machines on isolators or dampeners

• Replacement of metal components with quieter materials such as plastic, nylon or
compound components
• Installing local enclosures around particular noisy machine components
• Incorporation of sound absorbent materials
• Provision of air and gas exhausts with silencers
• Change to a quieter type of fan, fan blade pitch or number of blades, or fitting sound
attenuators in ventilation ducts.

Most of the above options are commercially available from suppliers and much of the work
can be done in-house by maintenance or engineering departments.

6.3 Administrative controls

Administrative noise control measures aim to reduce the amount of noise to which a worker
is exposed via organisational methods, for example, delineating hearing protection areas,
noise mapping to identify safe/unsafe noise areas, rescheduling workers’ duties to limit
exposure times, optimising maintenance (e.g. SWA, 2018a).

6.4 Hearing protection

Hearing protectors should be worn where hazardous noise levels exist in the workplace that
cannot be reduced by higher-order controls or until such times that the noise levels have
been reduced to non-hazardous levels through elimination, substitution or engineering
noise-control measures (SWA, 2018a). There are three basic types of hearing protectors
available:

• Disposable or individually molded earplugs

• Ear canal caps
• Passive or active earmuffs.

7
For more information on engineering controls, see Tillman, 2007, Chapter 10.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 15 of 23
Passive earmuffs are the conventional type while electronically active noise level-dependent
earmuffs allow noise up to 82 dB to enter the ear after which an electronic system shuts the
reception down and they act like passive earmuffs. Noise-cancelling earmuffs reduce
(mainly) low-frequency noise by monitoring the noise environment outside the earmuff,
feeding it through electronics inside the ear cup and creating an anti-sound of 180-degree
phase difference to the original sound sine wave. The principle of this is that a positive and a
negative cancel each other out, hence the term ‘noise cancelling’. In reality while not all
noise is cancelled out a significant noise reduction is obtained.

The ideal in-ear noise level under the protector should fall between 75 and 80 dB(A) to
reduce workplace noise to safe levels while enabling hearing and communication without
over-protection and thus the likely removal of the protector in noisy environments.

Removing personal hearing protectors for even short periods significantly reduces the
effective attenuation (noise reduction) and might provide inadequate protection. For
example, a worker wearing a hearing protector of 30dB rating for a full 8-hour day will
receive the 30 dB maximum protection level. However, one hour without wearing the
hearing protector causes the maximum protection level to fall to 9 dB. (SWA, 2018a, pp.
24-25)

While there are several methods for selecting hearing protection AS/NZS 1269.3 (SA/SNZ,
2005) recommends the classification method for selection in most circumstances (Table 1).
The class of the specific hearing protection is determined by a testing regime as prescribed
under AS/NZS 1270 Acoustics and hearing protection (SA/SNZ, 2002) and is marked on the
packaging of the protective device. A selection is then made based on the measured LAeq,8h
noise level. (e.g. if the worker’s LAeq,8h noise level is 96dB(A) then a Class 3 hearing
protector would be required for that worker).

Table 1: Class of hearing protection (SA/SNZ, p. 20)

LAeq,8h, dB(A) Class

less than 90 1

90 to less than 95 2

95 to less than 100 3

100 to less than 105 4

105 to less than 110 5

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 16 of 23
A common misconception is that hearing protectors control noise. Hearing protectors do not
control workplace noise as the noise in the workplace is still there but the wearing of a
hearing protector reduces the in-ear noise level. Exposure is not reduced by the wearing of
personal hearing protectors. A person wearing hearing protectors in a sound field is in a
situation of protected exposure, not non-exposure (SA/NZS, 2005b, p. 8). Thus hearing
protectors should be used only when other means of control are not reasonably practicable.
When hearing protection is required, there should be a systematic approach that includes:

• Selection of hearing protection by a suitably qualified person

• Training in fitting and wearing of the hearing protection for those required to use the
hearing protection
• Establishment of arrangements to fit the hearing protectors before entering the noisy
work area
• Establishment of arrangements for cleaning, maintenance and secure storage
• Marking of areas where hearing protection is required
• Appropriate documentation
• Monitoring of the effectiveness of the hearing protection use
• Management and oversight by a suitably qualified person (See, for example,
SA/NZS, 2005d).

AS/NZS 1269.3 Occupational Noise Management – Hearing Protector Program (SA/SNZ,

2005d) provides information on the details and scope of the requirements for a systematic
approach to implementing a hearing protector program as well as a training program for
hearing protectors.

6.5 An occupational noise management program

Where noise is likely to be in excess of the noise exposure standard, the workplace should
implement a systematic noise management program.8 The basic steps of a noise
management program are outlined in AS/NZS 1269.0–2005 Occupational Noise
Management – Overview and General Requirements.

A cost effective way to manage noise is to apply noise control measures to existing noisy
equipment and processes and to purchase quieter equipment in the future...While these
control measures are being formulated and implemented, people need to be protected from
the effects of excessive noise through hearing protector programs (SA/SNZ, 2005a).

8
While some workplaces may refer to ‘hearing conservation programs,’ generally this implies the
prevention of noise-induced hearing loss in workers by protecting their hearing through the use of
hearing protectors.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 17 of 23
A noise management program contains the following key elements:

• Hazard identification
• Risk assessment
• Hearing conservation policy statement
• Noise level and noise level exposure surveys
• Engineering and administrative noise-control measures
• Education and training
• Personal hearing protection
• Audiometric testing
• Evaluation of effectiveness of the program
• Record keeping system (See, for example, SA/NZS, 2005a).

The AS/NZS 1269 Occupational Noise Management series of standards (SA/SNZ, 2005c)
provides full details of effective noise management programs. Additional information can be
found in the Code of Practice (SWA, 2018a).

7 Implications for OHS practice

Noise can be a hazard in any industry and any workplace. Noise control and prevention of
hearing loss is not only a legal obligation under WHS legislation and mining legislation, but
also an ethical issue as people with hearing loss suffer from social isolation and have
reduced career prospects. While there are simple tests for the presence of hazardous noise
levels, identification and analysis of noise sources as a basis for control can be complex,
requiring specialist expertise. The generalist OHS professional has an important role in
identifying the presence of hazardous noise, undertaking basic noise measurements, and
providing preliminary advice on noise control measures, including the role of hearing
protection. The Code of Practice—Managing Noise and Preventing Hearing Loss at Work
(SWA,2018), introduces in Appendix D a point system in the form of a ready reckoner. It
assigns 100 points to LAeq,8h of 85dB(A). The points can be added in the normal arithmetic
way to give the total exposure for the shift and a table (Table 11) can then be used to find
the daily exposure level in LAeq dB(A). The Code provides a few worked examples on how to
determine the total daily exposure. Knowing the noise emission and duration may give
useful information to the generalist OHS professional for the management of noise hazards
The generalist OHS professional should recognise when specialist advice is required,
including the nature of the advice (e.g. acoustic engineering or occupational hygiene) and be
able to coordinate and work with the specialists.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 18 of 23
The generalist OHS professional has a key role in ensuring that a noise management
program is an integral part of the OHS management system. This includes ensuring that:

• Policies and procedures are developed for the noise management program
• ‘Buy quiet’ principles are included in purchasing policies
• Hazard-identification processes and workplace inspections include subjective and/or
objective assessment of noise levels
• When indicated, risk-assessment processes include noise surveys conducted by
suitably qualified persons
• Maintenance processes address noise and vibration issues, and include monitoring
of condition of plant and equipment for noise and vibration
• Managers, supervisors and workers receive appropriate information and training on
noise and vibration hazards and, where required, the fitting, wearing and
maintenance of hearing protectors
• Areas where hearing protection are required are identified and signposted
• Where required, appropriate processes are in place for selection and supply of
hearing protectors
• The need for audiometric testing is identified and appropriate processes are in place
for conduct and documentation of hearing testing
• The effectiveness of the noise management program is monitored through audit,
noise survey and other appropriate measures.

8 Summary
Blue collar occupations are most affected by noise as it is a hazard in many workplaces and
occupational noise-induced hearing loss has been classified as one of eight priority diseases
in Australian workplaces. Identification of noise hazards in the workplace is fairly simple;
however, awareness of individual hearing deficit may be delayed due to the cumulative
nature of noise exposure and the complicating impact of leisure noise and age-related
hearing loss. Although regulations and guidance for noise hazards that emphasise the
importance of control at source have existed in Australia for many years, hearing protectors
are reported to be still the predominant control measure. Thus, in many workplaces, there is
a need for change in the approach to control of noise hazards.

The generalist OHS professional has a role in identifying, assessing and controlling noise
hazards, and particularly in implementing a noise management program as part of an OHS
management system. Specialist expertise may be required to conduct noise surveys, and to
advise on development of control strategies.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 19 of 23
Key thinkers
T. Barr, E. Berger, W. Burns, G. von Bekesy, J. Gottstein, R. Kayser, C. M. Harris, L.
Beranek, K. Kryter, T. Morata, P. Niall, M. Sliwinska-Kowalska

References
Access Economics. (2006). Listen Hear! The Economic Impact and Cost of Hearing Loss in
Australia. Retrieved from https://hearnet.org.au/wp-
content/uploads/2015/10/ListenHearFinal.pdf.

ASCC (Australian Safety and Compensation Council). (2006) Work-related noise induced
hearing loss. Retrieved from
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1702/workrelated_noise_i
nduced_hearing.pdf.

ASCC (Australian Safety and Compensation Council). (2008) National hazard exposure
worker surveillance. Barton ACT.

Atherley, G., & Noble, W. (1985). Occupational deafness: The continuing challenge of early
German and Scottish research. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 8(2), 101–117.

Babisch. W., 2013. ‘Quieter Cities of the future’; CAETS – Source Book.

Berglund, B., Lindvall, T., & Schwela, D. H. (1999). Guidelines for Community Noise.
Geneva: WHO. Retrieved from
http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsci/i/fulltext/noise/noise.pdf.

Concha-Barrientos, M., Campbell-Lendrum, D., & Steenland, K. (2004). Occupational Noise:

Assessing the Burden of Disease from Work-related Hearing Impairment at National
and Local Levels (Environmental Burden of Disease Series, No. 9). Geneva: WHO.
Retrieved from http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/en/ebd9.pdf.

de Crespigny, F. (2010). National Hazard Exposure Worker Surveillance: Noise Exposure

and the Provision of Noise Control Measures in Australian Workplaces. Canberra, ACT:
Safe Work Australia. Retrieved from https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/national-
hazard-exposure-worker-surveillance-noise-exposure-and-provision-noise-control-
measures.

Department of Health. (2018). The health effects of environmental noise. Commonwealth

Government of Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/A12B57E41EC9F326CA
257BF0001F9E7D/$File/health-effects-Environmental-Noise-2018.pdf.

Groothoff, B., (2005), “Acoustic Shock in Call Centres”, Proceedings of Acoustical Society
Conference, Busselton Western Australia.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 20 of 23
Groothoff, B., (2015) Training Module – Occupational Noise Management, Brüel & Kjær
Australia Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Hearing Care Industry Association (2017) Social and economic costs of hearing loss in
Australia, Retrieved from: http://www.hcia.com.au/hcia-wp/wp-
content/uploads/2015/05/Social-and-Economic-Cost-of-Hearing-Health-in-
Australia_June-2017.pdf.

ISO (International Organization for Standardization). (1990). ISO 1999:1990 Acoustics –

Determination of Occupational Noise Exposure and Estimation of Noise-Induced
Hearing Impairment. Geneva: ISO.

Morata, T.C, (2007) Promoting hearing health and the combined risk of noise-induced
hearing loss and ototoxicity’’. Audiological Medicine 5, no.1: 33-40.

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health). (1988). Proposed National
Strategies for the Prevention of Leading Work-related Diseases and Injuries: Noise-
induced Hearing Loss (Publication No. 89–135). Cincinnati: OH: US Department of
Health and Human Services. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/89-
135/pdfs/89-135.pdf.

PBRC (Pacific Biosciences Research Centre). (n.d.). Georg von Békésy (1899–1972).
University of Hawaii at Manoa. Retrieved from
http://www5.pbrc.hawaii.edu/bekesy/von_bekesy.html.

Prasher, D., Campo, P., Fetcher, L., Johnson, A.-C., Lund, P., Morata, T. et al. (2004).
NoiseChem. Noise and Industrial Chemicals: Interaction Effects on Hearing and
Balance (Key Action 4: Environment and Health 2001–2004 Final Report). Retrieved
from http://ec.europa.eu/research/quality-of-life/ka4/pdf/report_noisechem_en.pdf.

Rosen, G. (1974). A backward glance at noise pollution. American Journal of Public Health,
64(5), 514–517.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2010a). National Hazard Exposure Worker Surveillance:
Vibration Exposure and the Provision of Vibration Control Measures in Australian
Workplaces. Barton, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/national-hazard-exposure-worker-
surveillance-vibration-exposure-and-provision-vibration-control.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2010b). Hazardous Chemicals Information System. Retrieved
from http://hcis.safeworkaustralia.gov.au.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2011). Compendium of Workers Compensation Statistics

Australia 2008-09. Canberra, ACT. Retrieved from
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/compendium-workers-compensation-
statistics-australia-2008-09.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2012). Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022.
Canberra, ACT. Retrieved from https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/australian-
work-health-and-safety-strategy-2012-2022.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2016). Model Work Health and Safety Bill. Canberra, ACT:
Safe Work Australia. Retrieved from

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 21 of 23
 https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1702/model-whs-act-
21march2016.pdf.9

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2018a). Code of Practice: Managing noise and preventing
hearing loss at work. Canberra, ACT. Retrieved from
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/model-code-practice-managing-noise-and-
preventing-hearing-loss-work.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2018b). Australian Workers Compensation Statistics 2016-17.
Canberra, ACT. Retrieved from https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/australian-
workers-compensation-statistics-2016-17.

SWA (Safe Work Australia). (2019). Model Work Health and Safety Regulations.
Canberra, ACT: Safe Work Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1902/model-
whs-regulations-15-january-2019.pdf.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2002). AS/NZS 1270:2002

Acoustics – Hearing Protectors. Sydney and Wellington: Standards Australia and
Standards New Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2005a). AS/NZS 1269.0:2005

Occupational Noise Management. Part 0: Overview and General Requirements. Sydney
and Wellington: Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2005b). AS/NZS 1269.1:2005

Occupational Noise Management. Part 1: Measurement and Assessment of Noise
Immission and Exposure. Sydney and Wellington: Standards Australia/Standards New
Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2005c). AS/NZS 1269 Set:2005

Occupational Noise Management Set. Sydney and Wellington: Standards
Australia/Standards New Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2005d). AS/NZS 1269.3:2003

Occupational Noise Management. Part 3: Hearing Protector Program. Sydney and
Wellington: Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2014a). AS/NZS 1269.4:2014

Occupational Noise Management. Part 4: Auditory Assessment. Sydney and Wellington:
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand.

SA/SNZ (Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand). (2016). AS/NZS 2107 Acoustics –

Recommended Design Sound Levels and Reverberation Time for Building Interiors.
Sydney and Wellington: Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand.

SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks). (2008).
Potential Health Risks of Exposure to Noise from Personal Music Players and Mobile

9
Safe Work Australia updates the model Act, regulations and codes of practice from time to time.
OHS professionals should check the SWA website (www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au) for the latest
editions.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 22 of 23
 Phones Including a Music Playing Function. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved
from http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_017.pdf.

Tamburlini, G., von Ehrenstein, O. S., & Bertollini, R. (Eds.). (2002). Children’s Health and
Environment: A Review of Evidence (Environmental Issue Report No. 29). European
Environment Agency & WHO: Copenhagen & Rome. Retrieved from
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/98251/E75518.pdf.

WHO (2013) Burden of disease from environmental noise, Brussels, Belgium.

September 2019
22.1 Occupational Noise Page 23 of 23