Collins, K. Case Study Samples

Question 6

Dear Madam,
I am writing to inquire about your availability to conduct a workplace monitoring in our company. Jack’s panel is an Australian panel beating business that has employed five panel beaters and two spray painters. It has one workshop that engages in repairing vehicles. There is one manager and supervisor in the workshop. Most of the work performed requires that the panel beaters use tools like a pneumatic hacksaw. There is a large amount of noise produced when cutting the metal planes. There are activities that require the use of hammers and electric hand grinders. The main solvent used in the spray painting process is xylene. Ventilated painting booths are used to conduct the painting process
The amount of noise our employees are exposed to is a major concern of the company. Employees’ exposure to chemicals like xylene is also a concern. We would like your professional input after conducting a monitoring in our workplace. We hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,

Question 7
Dear Sir,
I am writing this email to respond to your earlier inquiry. It is important to know that there are exposure standards for particular substances such as xylene. There are mostly three types of exposure standards including peak limitation, short-term exposure limit, and 8-hour time-weighted average. The standards do not divide the line between healthy and unhealthy work environment. Peak limitation exposure standards are the peak airborne concentration of a certain substance determined over the shortest practicable period, which is not more than 15 minutes. Short-term exposure standards are the time-weighted average airborne concentration of a certain substance that is allowed over a 15 minute period. Eight hour time-weighted average exposure standards are the mean airborne concentration of a certain substance that is allowed over eight-hour working day and a five-day working week. The choice of the exposure standards applicable in your case depends on how harmful the products being used are.
Conducting a workplace monitoring requires the selection of the proper measuring devices and the collection of workplace information and data. Monitoring is a process that assesses the risk with the risk management process. The first step is to check if the use of the measuring devices is necessary. In some instances, the risk can be assessed using our senses. For example, if it is difficult for your employees to communicate with each other at a normal conservational level then the noise is probably in excess of 85dB. The continued exposure may cause hearing damage. I hope my email has been helpful to you, looking forward to an actual meeting.
Sincerely,

Becky, M.

Question 22
In the case of Jack’s repairs, some workers were exposed to damaging noise levels that could result in permanent or temporary loss of hearing. Tom exposure to 91dB noise lasted eight hours. His task of cutting panels required him to use a pneumatic hacksaw. The amount of noise exposure for him is damaging since a person’s exposure to 91dB of noise should last for two hours. Mark, another employee whose task was hammering panels and required the use of a hammer, was exposed to 148dB. According to the code of practice for managing noise and preventing hearing loss at work, this amount of noise level should not occur. Such level of noise can result in instant damage to the eardrum. John’s task is grinding panels, and he mostly uses a grinder to perform this task. His exposure to 88dB noise levels lasts eight hours. The exposure time for 88dB is four hours meaning; John’s exposure to these noise levels could be damaging to his hearing. Sam, who is the supervisor, is exposed to 83dB of noise for only eight hours. The exposure time is okay, and he is unlikely to be at risk of damaged hearing. Tom and John’s exposure color correspondent depending on the duration of exposure is red. Sam’s exposure color correspondent is yellow. The analysis shows that most of Jack’s Repair’s employees are exposed to high noise levels for a long time. They are at risk of suffering from temporary or permanent damage to their hearing (Safe work Australia 4).
The most effective way to control noise is by eliminating the source of noise completely. For example, by stopping the use of a noisy machine or changing the procedure in conducting work so that hazardous noise is not produced. If it is not reasonable to eliminate the source of noise, the risk associated with hearing loss should be minimized. It includes ensuring that noise does not exceed the exposure standard. There are certain measures that can be taken to minimize the risk. Plants or processes that are quieter can substitute the hazard. Plant and processes can also be modified to reduce noise levels using engineering controls. Distance, enclosures, barriers and sound absorbing surfaces are used to isolate people from sources of noise. Noise assessment is done depending on the type of workplace, number of people potentially at risk of hazardous noise and the information available on noise in a workplace. Noise assessment should determine the noise levels produced during particular tasks and the amount of exposure time of workers during each task (OSHA 1).

Works Cited

Occupational Safety & Healthy Administration. Occupational Noise Exposure. 2015. Web. 4 April 2015. Retrieved from https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/noisehearingconservation/
Safe Work Australia. Guidance on the Interpretation of Workplace Exposure Standards for Airborne Contaminants. 2012. Web. 4 April 2015. Retrieved from http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/SWA/about/Publications/Documents/680/Guidance_Interpretation_Workplace_Exposure_Standards_Airborne_Contaminants%20.pdf