Comments on OSHA Proposed Delay of Portions of Recordkeeping Standard

August 17, 2001

Docket Officer
Docket No. R-02A
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Room N-2625
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20210

Re:     Docket Number R-02A

Dear Sir/Madam:

The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) expresses its appreciation to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for the opportunity to comment on the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements Proposed Delay of Effective Date.  Announcement of the notice of proposed delay was published in the Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 128, July 3, 2001, beginning on page 35113.

As the world's largest association of occupational and environmental health professionals, AIHA members serve on the front line of worker health and safety.  AIHA members, as well as employees and employers, rely on federal and state requirements to improve the quality of the injury and illness records maintained under the OSH Act.

As a precursor to AIHA's specific comments on the notice of proposed delay, AIHA would like to thank the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for providing all stakeholders with the opportunity to comment on the proposed delay.  AIHA is aware that OSHA believes that there is a need to delay the effective date of the final rule requirements on hearing loss and the musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) definition and column.  In doing so, however, AIHA is hopeful that OSHA will also recognize the impact such a delay could have on the health and safety of workers.

AIHA offers the following:

Comments
Recording Occupational Hearing Loss (CFR 1904)

As OSHA reopens sections of the January 2001 revision to CFR 1904 for comment, the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA)  would like to express our disappointment in the delay of the section pertaining to recording of occupational hearing loss and restate the association's position on the recording of hearing loss as an occupational illness.  The AIHA board in 1996 reaffirmed a 1987 position on recording occupational hearing loss on OSHA form 300.  AIHA also provided testimony during the OSHA hearings leading to the issuance of CFR 1904 as a member of the Coalition to Preserve OSHA and NIOSH and Protect Workers? Hearing (Coalition).

AIHA's fundamental position as stated in these documents and this testimony is that recording age-corrected, work-related, confirmed (persistent) standard threshold shift (STS), defined as a change in hearing of 10 decibels (dB) average at the test frequencies of 2000, 3000, and 4000 hertz (hz) relative to a baseline hearing test on OSHA Form 300 is reasonable, protective, and desirable.

No new evidence has emerged in the intervening 14-year period that would cause the AIHA to change our position.  Each of the points brought forward by the Coalition and cited in the preamble to the January 2001 rule remains valid.

• Age-corrected STS is a large change in hearing that can affect communication ability, particularly for workers with pre-existing hearing loss.
• STS is already calculated and tabulated under 29 CFR 1910.95 (the Hearing Conservation Amendment); using the same criteria for recordability under CFR 1904 reduces recordkeeping and data management burdens for industry.
• Typical occupational exposures do not justify a larger shift criterion.  The very real and potentially debilitating hearing loss resulting from occupational exposure to sounds less than 95 dB as found in the majority of U.S. industry may not be detected if a higher threshold is required for recordability.
• Retest protocol currently in 29 CFR 1910.95 and technological advances in audiometric testing equipment address test variability and reliability.
• Current STS rates are not sufficiently high enough to result in an undue or inappropriate number of recordable events.  Some state-plan states (Michigan, Oregon, and Washington) have adopted STS as their recordable criteria with little detrimental effect on industry.
• Recording STS promotes hearing conservation program awareness and effectiveness.

AIHA further supports recording hearing loss in a separate column on Form 300.  Under the current rule, hearing loss is recorded with and is indistinguishable from all other occupational illnesses.  Grouping hearing loss with dermatitis, CTDs, occupational asthma, tuberculosis, and all other work-related illnesses makes it impossible to reasonably determine the prevalence of occupational noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in industry.

We know that up to 30 million workers are at risk of losing hearing because of the work they do; we do not know the actual prevalence or occurrence of work-related hearing loss among these workers.  The ability to extract this information nationally is essential to target future research and to indicate the importance of this issue to industry.

The extension of recordability requirements to all employers providing hearing tests, not just those in general industry covered by 29 CFR 1910.95, will assist those employers in detecting patterns of hearing loss among their workers and will promote good hearing loss prevention practice to protect those workers not covered by current regulation.

The hearing loss recordability aspects of CFR 1904 as promulgated in January, 2001 are sound, valid, protective, and in the best interests of workers and management.  We strongly support adoption of the rules as issued, with an effective date as early as possible.

Comments
Defining an MSD for Recordkeeping Purposes

The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) would also like to express our disappointment in the delay of the section pertaining to recording of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).

The proposed delay in recording of MSDs is being recommended by the Secretary because of the perceived difficulty in "defining an ergonomic injury".  The final rule contained definitions for recording of an MSD but the Secretary feels that this final rule is premature in defining an MSD for recordkeeping purposes.  Much of this has to do with the March 20, 2001 Congressional disapproval of OSHA's ergonomics standard.

AIHA firmly believes that OSHA should not limit the ability to record and track MSDs when the new OSHA Recordkeeping standard takes effect January 1, 2002.  The revised standard as published significantly streamlines determining the recordability of MSD cases.  Organizations need to know where cases are occurring if effective measures are to be used to control them.  Adequate definitions exist for recording MSDs including specific diagnostic codes.

AIHA also believes that defining "ergonomic injury" is not possible or appropriate.  AIHA considers the term "ergonomics injury" to be confusing.  Ergonomics is a multidisciplinary field that draws on the subjects of physiology, engineering, mathematics and psychology.  Ergonomics does not cause the injury, but instead can help to prevent it.  As was stated in the 1997 AIHA Position Statement on Ergonomics, "[t]he goals of ergonomics are to decrease risk of injuries... The benefits of well-designed jobs, equipment, products, work methods and workplaces include: enhanced safety and health performance; improved quality and productivity; reductions in errors; heightened employee morale; reduced compensation and operating costs; and accommodation of diverse populations, including those with disabilities.

Instead of using the term "ergonomics injury," AIHA believes that musculoskeletal disorders, or MSDs, are a much better term.  In this case, we would draw OSHA's attention to an excellent definition used by the NIOSH from their Elements of Ergonomics Programs published in 1997:

"... musculoskeletal disorders describes the following:

• Disorders of the muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, cartilage, or spinal discs.
• Disorders that are not typically the result of any instantaneous or acute event (such as a slip, trip, or fall) but reflect a more gradual or chronic development ...
• Disorders diagnosed by a medical history, physical examination, or other medical tests that can range in severity from mild and intermittent, to debilitating and chronic.
• Disorders with several distinct features (such as carpal tunnel syndrome) as well as disorders defined primarily by the location of the pain (i.e., low back pain)

The term "WMSDs" refers to (1) musculoskeletal disorders to which the work environment and the performance of work contribute significantly, or (2) musculoskeletal disorders that are made worse or longer lasting by work conditions."

The NIOSH definition is very close to other definitions available from other highly credible sources including:

• The World Health Organization
• The 2nd National Academy of Sciences report published earlier this year (which included specific ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes)
• Definitions developed by OSHA itself in 1990 for the OSHA Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants, and in 2000 for the rescinded Ergonomics Program Standard.

Therefore, AIHA recommends the use of any of the definitions above in defining MSD's.

AIHA strongly supports adoption of the rules as issued, with an effective date as early as possible.

Conclusion

AIHA would again like to thank the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for the opportunity to provide comments on this proposed delay of effective date.  In providing these comments and suggestions, AIHA is hopeful that the final recordkeeping standard will become effective as scheduled and will reflect our concerns and recommendations.  Our suggestions are intended to assure that all stakeholders work together to protect the health and safety of everyone.

If we can be of any further assistance, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Henry B. Lick
(Signature)

Henry B. Lick, Ph.D., CIH, CSP, ROH
President