Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents|
| Standard Number:||1910.95|
May 3, 1983
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.
As published in the Federal Register on August 21, 1981, the hearing conservation amendment continued the stay pending further comment and evaluation on the requirement that an audiologist, otolaryngologist or qualified physician review audiograms to determine whether an STS is work-related and that work-related STS's be recorded on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Form 200. Numerous comments, including yours (Exh. 327-154)m were received and reviewed in reaching a decision regarding the determination of work- relatedness. Many commenters described the difficulties in making this determination.
OSHA revoked the requirement for the need to make a positive determination of work-relatedness in part because such a determination is not necessary in order to take steps to protect a worker's hearing. However, it was felt that under certain, perhaps unique, circumstances, a negative determination might avoid costly and inappropriate follow-ups. Several commenters suggested that such a determination is, in fact, a medical diagnosis that legally could be made only by a physician (See Exh. 325-130, and 325-179). This provision will not be excercised very often given the difficulties commenters raised in determining work-relatedness. It was felt that such a finding, if made at all, would most appropriately be made by a physician. A