Noise Risk Assessment: From Identifying Exposure to Protecting Hearing

Engineering controls can make a critical difference

A Penang case heard in Butterworth on 4 May 2026 resulted in a RM120,000 fine against a manufacturing employer. The notice describes failure to implement engineering noise controls recommended by the noise risk assessor, including a physical noise barrier at a corrugator machine. Two workers had occupational-health-doctor-confirmed noise-induced hearing loss. The two versions of this infographic in the folder describe the same case.

Identify workers who may face excessive noise

Several notices concern the initial identification of excessive noise. In Selangor, a food manufacturer was fined RM8,000 on 22 February 2023 following an offence dated 2 November 2021. Another employer was fined RM5,000 on 7 March 2023 for an identification failure dated 17 August 2022; its poster separately mentions a compound concerning uncertified lifting machinery.

A machinery-manufacturing notice also reports a RM5,000 fine for failing to identify potentially exposed workers, with the offence dated 7 February 2023. In Johor, a case decided on 9 May 2024 resulted in a RM3,000 fine for the same type of failure. Its poster and accompanying media statement are consolidated in this summary.

Carry out the assessment and connect related hazards

On 7 August 2025, a milling employer in Pengkalan Chepa, Kelantan, was fined RM2,500 for failing to conduct a noise risk assessment.

A Perak sawmill case dated 21 April 2021 combined two issues: missing CHRA for wood-dust and chemical exposure, and failure to identify excessive noise from activities including bandsaw operation and blade sharpening. The total fine was RM5,000, comprising RM2,500 for each offence.

Similarly, a Johor plating-sector case decided on 26 February 2025 resulted in RM6,000 across two offences: failure to identify excessive noise and failure to examine and test an engineering-control fume hood. These cases show why noise and chemical risks should both be included in workplace planning.

A historical reminder

An older Kedah statement dated 15 November 2018 reports a RM1,000 fine against a glass manufacturer for failing to conduct initial noise monitoring under the regulations applicable to that case. It illustrates the long-standing importance of exposure identification; its historical legal framework and fine should not be treated as today’s requirements.

From assessment to hearing protection

Identify noisy tasks and the workers who perform or work near them.
Engage a registered noise risk assessor where assessment is required.
Assign responsibility for the report’s engineering and other control recommendations.
Connect controls with suitable hearing protection, worker training and audiometric follow-up.
Keep evidence of completed actions and review exposure when work changes.

Official information is available from DOSH on noise risk assessors.

Source: DOSH/JKKP enforcement notices and supporting materials supplied in the corresponding topic folder. Repeated images of the same case are consolidated. Dates and fines describe the historical cases shown, rather than current maximum penalties.