Part of Case study is about noise levels at Nutripex-

Involvement of specialists The Production Manager has taken some noise readings at various points within the tableting area, as part of a risk assessment. This has never been done before. Noise levels have been found to be between 84 dB(A) and 86 dB(A). Because of these findings the human resources (HR) manager engaged a consultant from Healthy and Safe (HaS) to carry out more detailed noise measurements and advise on noise reduction methods and a health surveillance programme. Based on HaSs recommendations, the HR manager is introducing audiometry testing for all existing workers in the tableting department and any new workers going forward. Workers remain concerned about the levels of dust, so Nutripex have decided to engage an Occupational Hygienist (OH) to help review exposure of workers to vitamin C powder and other raw materials. Some initial results of the OHs work are given in supporting document 1. In the last couple of weeks there have been frequent alarms on the LEV control panel. As a result of this, the PM arranged for a thorough inspection and test (TExT) of the LEV, which has just been completed by a competent external contractor, AirTest. The PM is looking through the results and recommendations in AirTests report. One of the recommendations is to change the current design of the LEV at the charging point where raw materials are added to the mixing machines.

Tableting In the tableting area the product makes its way through several processes, including a punch press; here, pressure is applied to the product by dies to form the completed tablet. The tablets are ejected onto a vibrating belt to shake off any loose dust. The two tableting machines are particularly noisy. In this area, there is a long run of LEV ducting that branches to two hoods, one for each tableting machine. Some of this ducting is sagging in places and has adhesive tape wrapped around the joints. In most cases this has made the sagging worse. Nearby is the LEV dust-collector and air-cleaner unit. Workers in this area are responsible for changing the collection bags and have commented on how, recently, the bags are taking much longer to fill up. Also located here is the fan for the LEV system. When the fan is running it is very difficult to have a conversation in this area. Workers are supplied with earplugs, that are not used regularly. When questioned, workers frequently say that they have lost one or both of their earplugs. Several workers, including Worker Y, have been working in the tableting area since they joined Nutripex, 18 months ago. They had all previously worked in a nearby drinks-bottling plant, that was making people redundant just as Nutripex was recruiting for more production workers.

Noise and health surveillance at Nutripex

Case Study Questions:

4 (a) Suggest reasons why audiometry testing has been recommended for workers in the tableting department at Nutripex.

(b) (i) Discuss what the information in supporting document 5 shows.

(ii) Using the HSEs L108 appendix 4 [HSE-health and safety executive] explain how the information in supporting document 5 could be used to aid decision making with a hearing health surveillance programme at Nutripex.

(iii) Use the numerical information in the shaded area of supporting document 5 and in appendix 4 of L108 to determine the outcome of the audiometry testing for Worker Y. Note: You should use simple calculations to support your answer.

(c) Based on the information in supporting document 5

(i) what effects on their hearing could Worker Y be experiencing?

(ii) describe the likely physical changes in the inner ears of Worker Y.

(d) Comment on why introducing audiometry testing for some workers might be problematic for Nutripex.

(e) Audiometry testing may sometimes not produce an accurate representation of the effects of noise exposure on the hearing of Nutripex workers.

Give reasons why this may be the case with Worker Y.