appendix f - noise impact assessment · ttm soundmatters has been engaged by cdm smith to undertake...

Appendix F – Noise Impact Assessment

Moray Power Project

North Galilee Basin, Central Queensland

Environmental Noise Assessment Report

Moray Power Pty Ltd

Reference: 14BRA0064 R01_3

10 November, 2014

Site: Moray Power 1 Reference: 14BRA0064 R01_3

© 2014 - TTM Consulting Pty Ltd

ABN 65 010 868 621

41A Quay Street, Sanctuary Cove

PO Box 930 Sanctuary Cove QLD 4212

T: (07) 5514 8000 F: (07) 5514 8144 E: [email protected]

Rev No.

Author Reviewed/Approved Description Date

Name Signature

B J Fox K Hewett Internal review 19/06/2014

0 J Fox Draft report 20/06/2014

1 J Fox Client review 18/07/2014

2 J Fox 07/11/2014

3 J Fox Acoustic report 10/11/2014


Table of Contents

Executive Summary 5 1.

Introduction 6 2.

2.1. Project Overview 6

2.2. Scope 6

2.3. Site Location 7

2.4. Noise Sensitive Locations 7

2.5. Site Layout 8

Ambient Noise Measurements 9 3.

3.1. Measurement Methodology 9

3.2. Measured Noise Levels 9

Noise Criteria 10 4.

4.1. Legislation 10

4.2. Construction Noise Criteria 11

4.3. Operational Noise Criteria 11

4.4. Sleep Disturbance Criteria 13

4.5. World Health Organization Guidelines for Community Noise 13

4.6. Industrial and Commercial Noise Criterion 14

Noise Modelling 15 5.

5.1. Noise Modelling Parameters 15

Construction Phase 16 6.

6.1. Noise Sources 16

6.2. Results of Modelling 16

Commissioning Phase 21 7.



Operational Phase 26 8.


8.2. Location of Noise Sources 27


Recommendations and Conclusion 33 9.


Table Index

Table 1: Noise Sensitive Receivers 8

Table 2: Noise Survey Locations (sourced from GHD 2012) 9

Table 3: Measured Ambient Noise Levels 9

Table 4: Acoustic Quality Objectives at Noise Sensitive Properties 10

Table 5: Project Specific Noise Levels 12

Table 6: Summary of WHO Guidelines for Community Noise 14

Table 7: Noise Modelling Parameters 15

Table 8: Construction Phase Noise Sources 16

Table 9: Predicted Construction Noise Levels 19

Table 10: Commissioning Phase Noise Sources 21

Table 11: Predicted Commissioning Noise Levels 24

Table 12: Operational Phase Noise Sources 26

Table 13: Location of Operational Noise Sources in the SoundPLAN model 27

Table 14: Predicted Operational Noise Levels 31

Figure Index

Figure 1: Site Locality and Noise Sensitive Receivers 7

Figure 2: Construction Noise – No wind 17

Figure 3: Construction Noise – E wind 17

Figure 4: Construction Noise – SE wind 18

Figure 5: Construction Noise – SW wind 18

Figure 6: Construction Noise – N wind 19

Figure 7: Commissioning Noise – No wind 22

Figure 8: Commissioning Noise – E wind 22

Figure 9: Commissioning Noise – SE wind 23

Figure 10: Commissioning Noise – SW wind 23

Figure 11: Commissioning Noise – N wind 24

Figure 12: Site Layout 28

Figure 13: Operational Noise – No wind 29

Figure 14: Operational Noise – E wind 29

Figure 15: Operational Noise – SE wind 30

Figure 16: Operational Noise – SW wind 30

Figure 17: Operational Noise – N wind 31


Appendices

Appendix A References 34

Appendix B Site Layout 36

Appendix C Meteorological Data – Wind Roses 38


Executive Summary 1.

Moray Power Pty Ltd is proposing to develop a power station in the north Galilee Basin,

Central Queensland to be known as the Moray Power Station Project (the Project).

TTM Soundmatters have been engaged to provide an acoustic assessment as supporting

evidence for a Material Change of Use. The purpose of the acoustic assessment is to provide

an independent assessment of expected noise levels at the potentially affected noise sensitive

receiver locations and determine appropriate noise mitigation measures where required.

Information related to site details, noise sensitive receiver locations, noise criteria, and

proposed equipment was provided by CDM Smith and GHD.

This report was prepared to assess potential noise impacts associated with the three project

stages; construction, commissioning and operational phase. Acoustic modelling was

undertaken using SoundPLAN version 7.3 implementing the CONCAWE prediction method

with consideration of worst case wind scenarios.

Four noise sensitive receiver locations were considered in the assessment, which in terms of

relative distance from the Project were, the primary work area for mine employees, industrial

area, airport, and the workers residential camp. The assessed sensitive locations do not

include any private residences as there are no nearby residences that will be occupied during

the construction or operational phase. Results indicate that noise levels would be above the

criteria at the primary work area for mine employees. The predicted worst case exceedance is

5 dB(A) above the indoor EPP Noise and WHO guideline criteria assuming open windows.

Standard glazing treatments would achieve a further 10dB reduction, and therefore

compliance with the indoor criteria would be achieved if windows of the receiver were closed.

Therefore standard glazing treatments at Receiver 1 would satisfy the acoustic requirements

and no further treatments are required.

Even under worst case conditions, noise levels at Receivers 2, 3, and 4 are predicted to comply

and no further acoustic treatment is required for these locations.


Introduction 2.

2.1. Project Overview

TTM Soundmatters has been engaged by CDM Smith to undertake an environmental noise

assessment of the Moray Power Station Project (the Project) in the north Galilee Basin,

Central Queensland. The Project is located approximately 147km north-west of the town of

Clermont.

To undertake the assessment TTM utilised the following reference material:

a. Project information and site layout provided by CDM Smith;

b. Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Project: Mine Technical Report (ref: 25215-D-RP-0017).

Herein referred to as GHD 2012;

c. Noise input memorandum (ref: 41/27532). Herein referred to as GHD 2014. The memo

provided information on equipment, and activity type and sound pressure levels

proposed for construction, commissioning and operation phases, based on the

concept design;

d. Noise criteria of:

i. Environmental Protection Act 1994;

ii. Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 (EPP Noise);

iii. Planning for Noise Control (PNC) Guideline (EPA2004);

e. Analysis and calculations conducted by TTM Soundmatters.

2.2. Scope

The scope of the assessment addresses the requirements of Department of Environment and

Heritage Protection, Guideline EM962 for environmentally relevant activities (ERAs) in

relation to noise, and contains:

i. Details of the nearest noise sensitive locations;

ii. Noise criteria and established noise limits taken from the GHD 2012 report;

iii. Computer based SoundPLAN noise modelling of the construction,

commissioning, and operational phases of the project;

iv. Analysis of modelled noise levels;

v. Details of noise control recommendations to be incorporated to achieve predicted

compliance.


2.3. Site Location

The proposed power station is located in the north Galilee Basin approximately 147km north-

west of the town of Clermont, Central Queensland. The site locality is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Site Locality and Noise Sensitive Receivers

The Project is located on land that is dominated by gilgaied topography. Land between the

project site and noise sensitive receivers is undulating in some instances. Noise modelling is

based on a digital ground model of 0.5m resolution and effects from topography have been

taken into account.

2.4. Noise Sensitive Locations

The closest existing residential dwelling is Labona Homestead, located approximately 5.5 km

north-west of the Project area. This homestead is owned by a Galilee Basin mining proponent

who has indicated that the homestead will be removed as part of a separate project.

Therefore, the closest private residence, expected to be occupied during construction and

operation of the Project (Doongmabulla), is approximately 18 km west of the Project area.

The nearest noise sensitive locations considered in this assessment are identified in Figure 1

and detailed in Table 1 over the page. The location and identification (use) of these receivers

was provided by CDM Smith.

Site

Receiver 3

Receiver 4

Receiver 2

Receiver 1 KEY

Receiver 1: Primary work area

Receiver 2: Industrial area

Receiver 3: Airport

Receiver 4: Workers camp


Table 1: Noise Sensitive Receivers

Receiver

Number

Description Distance from

Project (km)

Direction from

Project

1 Primary work area for mine employees 2.4 NW

2 Industrial area 7.4 N

3 Airport 7.6 NE

4 Workers camp 11.1 NE

Of the nearest locations, only Receiver 4 is considered to be used as a residential area for

sleeping purposes. Privately owned residential dwellings are located at significantly greater

distances from those identified above (approximately 7 km further) and therefore would

experience much less noise impact compared to the results presented in this report. Further,

these receivers are located outside of the ground contour information provided to TTM for

noise modelling purposes.

2.5. Site Layout

The proposed site layout of the Moray Power Station is shown in Appendix B.


Ambient Noise Measurements 3.

3.1. Measurement Methodology

Ambient noise monitoring was conducted by GHD (2012) to establish specific noise criteria in

areas that surround the Project site. The noise survey was conducted at two locations, as

described in Table 2.

Table 2: Noise Survey Locations (sourced from GHD 2012)

Logger GPS coordinates Description of noise survey location Monitoring period

1 220

04.217’ S

1460

14.664’ E

Doongmabulla Homestead

(18 km west of the Project area)

26 Aug – 7 Sep 2011

2 220

00.660’ S

1460

21.593’ E

Labona Homestead

5.5 km north-west of the Project area)

26 Aug – 6 Sep 2011

The selected measurement locations were considered representative of the acoustic

environment experienced by the nearest noise sensitive receivers located in close proximity to

the project site. Although the original baseline data was collected in 2011, the area has not

had any significant development since that time. Hence, the background noise levels are still

considered relevant to 2014.

The environmental noise monitors were set to measure noise levels in 'A' weighting, 'Fast'

response, over 15 minute statistical intervals. All sampling activities were undertaken with due

consideration to the specifications outlined in AS 1055 (1997) Acoustics - Description and

Measurement of Environmental Noise and the Queensland Government Noise Measurement

Manual (EPA 2000).

3.2. Measured Noise Levels

The results of ambient noise monitoring conducted by GHD are reproduced in Table 3.

Table 3: Measured Ambient Noise Levels

Measured Noise Levels

Logger 1 Logger 2

Day

dB(A)

Evening

dB(A)

Night

dB(A)

Day

dB(A)

Evening

dB(A)

Night

dB(A)

Measured background, LA90 31 31 27 25 25 22

Measured ambient, LAeq 48 41 43 44 41 39

The measured noise levels presented above were used to establish the project specific noise

levels derived in Section 4.3.


Noise Criteria 4.

The noise criteria used for this assessment was sourced and reproduced from GHD 2012.

4.1. Legislation

The Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act) provides for the protection of environmental

values, including environmental values relating to maintenance of public amenity. The EP Act

establishes a number of environmental protection policies. In relation to noise, the EP Act is

supported by the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 (EPP (Noise)). The EPP Noise

Section 7 outlines the key environmental values for the acoustic environment, as set out

below:

The environmental values to be enhanced or protected under this policy are:

a. The qualities of the acoustic environment that are conducive to protecting the health

and biodiversity of ecosystems; and

b. The qualities of the acoustic environment that are conducive to human health and

wellbeing, including by ensuring a suitable acoustic environment for individuals to do

any of the following –

i. Sleep;

ii. Study or learn;

iii. Be involved in recreation, including relaxation and conversation; and

iv. The qualities of the acoustic environment that is conducive to protecting the

amenity of the community.

To further assist in determining noise levels consistent with the identified environmental

values, the EPP Noise also sets out acoustic quality objectives as shown in Table 4. Based on a

typical dwelling façade noise reduction of 10 dB(A) through a partially open window, an

external criterion of 40 dB(A) LAeq,adj,1hr is recommended for health and well-being in relation to

the ability to sleep. Measurement of this acoustic quality objective is at the receptor.

Table 4: Acoustic Quality Objectives at Noise Sensitive Properties

Sensitive Receiver Time of Day Acoustic Quality Objectives, dB(A)

LAeq,adj,1hr LA10,adj,1hr LA1,adj,1hr

Dwelling

(Outdoors)

Day and Evening

(7am – 10pm) 50 55 65

Dwelling

(Indoors)

Day and Evening

(7am – 10pm) 35 40 45

Night (10pm – 7am) 30 35 40


4.2. Construction Noise Criteria

The construction phase of the project will occur over a period of 24 to 36 months, with

activities occurring 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Generally work will be restricted to

daylight hours, however some critical-path works will progress overnight particularly during

commissioning. As a conservative approach to the noise assessment, this report has assumed

activities will be undertaken 24 hour per day, 7 days per week.

For construction work occurring during normal daytime hours, provided all mechanical

powered plant is fitted with appropriate mufflers, specific noise limits are not prescribed in

Queensland. In this regard, it is noted that the EPP Noise does not include construction noise

limits.

In Queensland, it is generally accepted that construction activities should be in accordance

with general building work hours as described under section 440R – “Building Work” of the EP

Act. Under the EP Act, no audible noise is permitted:

- Between 6:30 pm and 6:30 am – Monday to Saturday;

- On Sundays and public holidays.

The time restrictions are designed to strike a balance between protecting noise amenity and

the need to start construction activities early in the morning and also recognise the difficulties

of controlling some types of construction noise.

Noise impacts during construction are therefore usually minimised by limiting the hours of

operation and, in particular circumstances, scheduling the noisiest activities to occur at times

when they would generate least disruption. Particular noise limits should be applied to

construction works extending outside normal working hours. As such, the World Health

Organisation (WHO) recommend for quality of sleep, maximum noise levels that should not

exceed 45 dB(A). This guideline is recommended for construction work occurring outside the

hours listed above. Based on a typical building façade noise reduction of 10 dB(A) through a

partially open window, an external criterion of 55 dB(A)Lmax is recommended for sleep

disturbance, assessable at 4 metres (m) from the building façade.

Section 440R restrictions presented above are relevant to typical building works in an urban

environment and are not considered relevant to this Project due to the remote nature.

Accordingly, the proponent is seeking to undertake operations 24 hours per day, 7 days per

week.

4.3. Operational Noise Criteria

Planning for Noise Control (The PNC Guideline; EPA 2004) provides guidance on the

assessment of operational noise impacts. The guideline includes noise criteria designed to

protect sensitive receptors from noise significantly louder than the background level, and to

limit the total noise level from all sources near a receptor, hence protecting the amenity.


In line with the PNC Guideline, noise from continuous sources should be limited to 3 dB(A)

above the rating background noise level for each period, unless the combined (ambient plus

site contribution) noise level would exceed the recommended ambient noise level for the

receptor zone. In that case, the noise limit for the site is set so that the combined noise level

for the receptor zone does not exceed the recommended level. Table 5 shows the derivations

of the LA90, 1hr and LAeq, 1hr noise criteria with consideration to PNC Guideline for each monitoring

location.

A rural residential area has been selected for setting the recommended outdoor background

planning noise level. A Z1 noise area category (very rural, purely residential, less than 40

vehicles an hour) has been selected for determining the Planning Noise Level (PNL) at the

assessed receptor locations.

The project specific noise levels are based on site specific ambient noise monitoring data.

Ambient noise monitoring was conducted at two locations in 2011 known as Doongmabulla

(Logger 1) and Labona (Logger 2) Homesteads. Further detail is provided in Section 3.

Table 5 shows the project specific noise criteria adopted for this assessment. Comparison

between the criteria shown in Table 5 and the EPP Noise external night-time criterion of 40

dB(A) LAeq,adj,1hr indicates the PNC criteria are more stringent. The PNC criteria are therefore

used in this assessment. By default, adoption of the PNC criteria for the project will ensure

compliance with the EPP Noise 40 dB(A) LAeq,adj,1hr criteria.

Table 5: Project Specific Noise Levels

Criterion

Logger 1 Logger 2

Day

dB(A)

Evening

dB(A)

Night

dB(A)

Day

dB(A)

Evening

dB(A)

Night

dB(A)

Measured background, LA90 31 31 27 25 25 22

Acceptable measured background, LA90

31 31 27 25 25 25

Recommended background, min LA90 (PNC Table 1)

35 30 25 35 30 25

Adjusted background, min LA90 (PNC Table 2)

33 25 25 30 28 25

Measured ambient, LAeq 48 41 43 44 41 39

Recommended PNL LAeq, 1 hour (PNC, Table 3, Category Z1)

40 35 30 40 35 30

Planning noise level (PNC Table 4 adjusted)

38 31 33 34 31 29

Specific/component noise level 36 28 28 33 31 28

Project Specific Noise Level LAeq, 1 hour

36 28 28 33 31 28


4.4. Sleep Disturbance Criteria

The EPP Noise recommends that for the health and well-being of residents, in relation to the

ability to sleep, the following acoustic quality objectives apply, when measured indoors:

- 30 dB LAeq, adj, 1hour

- 35 dB LA10, adj, 1hour

- 40 dB LA1, adj, 1hour

For these criteria, noise levels are measured over a one hour period and are adjusted for tonal

character or impulsiveness.

Additionally, the purpose of the PNC Guideline is to limit the external maximum noise impact

level, according to the likely number of occurrences and the potential noise reduction from

outside to inside.

Maximum noise levels over the night time period should be restricted to prevent sleep

disturbance. The Guideline recommends that instantaneous internal sound pressure levels do

not exceed a maximum sound pressure level of 45 dB(A)Lmax more than 10-15 times per night

as a rule in planning for short-term or transient events. On this basis, a external noise level of

55 dB(A)Lmax more than 10-15 times per night is considered appropriate for assessment

purposes, as the Guideline states a 10 dB outside to inside reduction in noise level through a

partially open window is typical.

4.5. World Health Organization Guidelines for Community Noise

The WHO discusses the effects of environmental noise in non-industrial environments in its

Guideline for Community Noise (1999). This guideline examines aspects such as sleep

disturbance, annoyance, and speech intelligibility and provides guidance for protecting people

from adverse effects induced by excessive noise. The guideline is also referred to in the PNC

Guideline’s section on sleep disturbance criteria.

Most people are likely to experience a high level of annoyance should daytime sound pressure

levels at outdoor living areas exceed 55 dB(A) Leq for a steady, continuous noise. Moderate

annoyance may be felt should daytime outdoor sound pressure level exceed 50 dB(A) Leq.

Sound pressure levels during the evening and night should be 5 to 10 dB lower than the level

during the day.

When the noise comprises of a large low frequency component, lower guideline values are

recommended as LFN can disturb sleep at lower sound pressure levels. The recommendation

of lower noise levels for LFN also applies for outdoor living areas. For intermittent noise, it is

necessary to take into account the maximum sound pressure level as well as the number of

noise events. Interference to speech intelligibility may be prevented by maintaining

background noise to levels of about 35 dB(A) to 45 dB(A).

Table 6 summarises the WHO Guideline values.


Table 6: Summary of WHO Guidelines for Community Noise

Descriptor Indoor Guideline Value Outdoor Guideline Value

Speech intelligibility

(dwellings indoors)

35 dB(A) Leq (steady noise) Not applicable

Sleep disturbance (Bedrooms) 30 dB(A) Leq (steady noise)

45 dB(A) Leq (intermittent noise)

45 dB(A) Leq (steady noise)

60 dB(A) Leq (intermittent noise

Annoyance (daytime and evening)

35 dB(A) Leq 50 dB(A) Leq

While the WHO Guidelines provide values for sleep disturbance, external amenity and speech

intelligibility, these values are less stringent than the PNC Guideline goals outlined previously.

The above 30 dB(A) Leq guideline value shown in Table 6 equates to 40 dB(A) Leq external

(based on typical 10 dB(A) façade reduction – as per Australian Standard AS3671 and indeed

WHO recommends 15 dB(A) façade reduction). Given the PNC Guideline criterion is 28 dB(A)

Leq, 1hour outdoor at night-time, it is considered that the adoption of the PNC Guideline

criteria for this Project will also ensure compliance with the WHO guidelines.

4.6. Industrial and Commercial Noise Criterion

The industrial precinct and airport, when developed as part of the Carmichael Coal Mine

Project, may be exposed to a certain degree of noise from the project operations. These areas

are, however, less noise sensitive than residential receivers as they are predominately work

areas and not used for sleeping purposes. The PNC Guideline recommends background noise

planning levels for industrial and commercial noise receivers.

The following noise targets have been adopted for commercial and industrial areas:

Shop or commercial office: 55 dB(A) LAeq, 1hour;

Industrial area or factory: 60 dB(A) LAeq, 1hour.


Noise Modelling 5.

5.1. Noise Modelling Parameters

Acoustic modelling of the project site was undertaken using SoundPLAN software version 7.3

and implementing the CONCAWE prediction method to predict the effects of construction

and operational noise from the site on the nearest noise sensitive locations.

Various wind conditions were considered. The chosen conditions were the worst case wind

speed and directions taken from the annual, diurnal, and seasonal wind roses provided by

Katestone Environmental Consultants. This information was modelled specifically for the

project and is considered site specific. Based on this information, the chosen wind scenarios

used in the noise assessment are as follows:

1. No wind;

2. Easterly winds at 7m/s;

3. Southeast winds at 5m/s;

4. Southwest winds at 5m/s;

5. Northerly winds at 6m/s.

The following parameters and assumptions were made with regard to the model

configuration:

Table 7: Noise Modelling Parameters

Description Value

Reflection order 1O

Terrain topography 0.5m resolution

Air absorption ISO 9613

Environment Temperature – 10oC; Humidity – 70%

Noise contour calculation grid space 50m

Receiver height above ground 1.8m

Receiver calculations Free-field


Construction Phase 6.

6.1. Noise Sources

The expected noise sources during the construction phase of the Project are presented in

Table 8. The data used in the assessment was sourced from GHD 2014. A source height of 3m

was used for sources in the construction noise model to represent the worst case.

Table 8: Construction Phase Noise Sources

Equipment No. Sound Power Level of Equipment

SWL, dB(A) LAeq Noise Source

Height (m)

Dozer 20t 4 115 3

Rock breaker 1 120 3

Tracked excavator 30t 8 112 3

Grader 1 109 3

Scraper 4 118 3

Moxie or large truck 2 106 3

Water truck 1 104 3

Roller 1 107 3

Agitator 2 111 3

Large rotary piling rig 1 111 3

Wheeled telescopic crane 4 112 3

Mobile telescopic crane 5 112 3

Light vehicles 50 119 0.5

Diesel generator 3 101 3

Truck mounted concrete pump 1 108 3

6.2. Results of Modelling

The modelled noise levels representing the construction phase for all wind scenarios are

presented in Figure 2 to Figure 6. Construction noise is modelled for worst case, being

constant percentage on-times for a 24 hour a day, seven days a week schedule. Moving noise

sources such as trucks and dozers were located at the nearest position relative to the nearest

receivers. A 1.8m high receiver height was used to represent noise levels at ground floor.


Figure 2: Construction Noise – No wind

Figure 3: Construction Noise – E wind


Figure 4: Construction Noise – SE wind

Figure 5: Construction Noise – SW wind


Figure 6: Construction Noise – N wind

6.2.1. Summary of Construction Noise Levels

Table 9 presents the predicted construction phase noise levels at the receiver locations.

Table 9: Predicted Construction Noise Levels

Receiver Wind Direction Predicted External Noise Level, Leq dB(A)

Complies with the criteria (Yes/No)

Night 28 dB(A) EPP 30 dB(A) internal*

1 No wind 34 No Yes

E 40 No Yes

SE 40 No Yes

SW 38 No Yes

N 26 Yes Yes

2 No wind <15 Yes Yes

E <15 Yes Yes

SE 19 Yes Yes

SW 19 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes


E <15 Yes Yes

SE 16 Yes Yes

SW 18 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes






E <15 Yes Yes

SE <15 Yes Yes

SW <15 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes

*equivalent to an external noise level of 40dB(A) based on typical building façade attenuation of 10 dB(A) through an open window.

For construction work occurring during normal daytime hours, provided all mechanical

powered plant is fitted with appropriate mufflers, specific noise limits are not prescribed in

Queensland. As construction may take place outside of day hours we have assessed noise

against the project specific noise limits and the internal noise limits of EPP Noise and sleep

disturbance. However it should be noted that the majority of construction will be undertaken

between the hours of 6.30am and 6.30pm. Although some critical path activities are proposed

to occasionally occur 24 hours a day, typical heavy vehicle and plant will only be necessary on

an infrequent basis outside of these hours. Therefore this assessment has been based on a

worst case scenario.

Noise levels at Receiver 1 are predicted to exceed the night criteria of 28 dB(A) under all wind

conditions except those originating from the north. Noise level exceedances are relatively low

however, and given construction activities are of a transient nature and the receiver is the

mine infrastructure area and not of residential use, the noise impact is not expected to be

significant. Noise levels would comply with the 30 dB(A) internal criteria of EPP Noise and

sleep disturbance.

Noise levels are predicted to comply with the assessment criteria during all time periods and

under all wind conditions at Receiver 2, 3 and 4.


Commissioning Phase 7.

7.1. Noise Sources

Activities undertaken during the commissioning phase will be intermittent in nature and

structured so that the overall impact of the activities is reduced (i.e. scheduling activities so

that all noise events are not occurring concurrently). However the worst case scenario for

commissioning has been modelled and is anticipated to be a combination of the following:

1. All construction noise activities as per Section 6;

2. Steam purging;

3. Safety valves discharging.

Table 10 presents the expected noise levels associated with steam purging.

Table 10: Commissioning Phase Noise Sources

Equipment No. Sound Power Level of Equipment SWL, dB(A) LAeq

Noise Source Height (m)

All construction noise sources As per Table 8 As per Table 8

Steam purging 1 120 3

Safety valve discharging 2 116 3

Noise data was sourced from GHD 2014.


The modelled noise levels representing the commissioning phase for all wind scenarios are

presented in Figure 7 to Figure 11. Noise is modelled for worst case being constant

percentage on-times, with moving noise sources such as trucks and dozers located at the

nearest worst case position with respect to the nearest receivers. A 1.8m high receiver height

was used to represent noise levels at ground floor.


Figure 7: Commissioning Noise – No wind

Figure 8: Commissioning Noise – E wind


Figure 9: Commissioning Noise – SE wind

Figure 10: Commissioning Noise – SW wind


Figure 11: Commissioning Noise – N wind

7.2.1. Summary of Commissioning Noise Levels

Table 11 presents the predicted commissioning phase noise levels at the receiver locations.

Table 11: Predicted Commissioning Noise Levels




1 No wind 34 No Yes

E 42 No No (+2)

SE 42 No No (+2)

SW 40 No Yes

N 27 Yes Yes


E <15 Yes Yes

SE 20 Yes Yes

SW 20 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes


E <15 Yes Yes

SE 18 Yes Yes

SW 19 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes






E <15 Yes Yes

SE <15 Yes Yes

SW <15 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes


As stated, activities undertaken during the commissioning phase will be intermittent in nature

and structured so that the overall impact of the activities is reduced (i.e. scheduling activities

so that all noise events are not occurring concurrently). Therefore the predicted noise levels

are worst case.

Noise levels at Receiver 1 are predicted to be above the criteria in most cases (i.e. under the

various wind conditions, and day/evening/night periods). Acoustic treatment for Receiver 1

should be considered so that internal noise levels comply with the indoor criteria of EPP Noise

and WHO guidelines. It should be noted that Receiver 1 is the mine infrastructure area which

is a work zone and not for residential use, and therefore the noise impacts are not expected to

be significant.

Commissioning noise levels are predicted to comply with the assessment criteria at Receiver

2, 3 and 4 under all wind conditions.


Operational Phase 8.

8.1. Noise Sources

The noise sources associated with the operational phase of the project are presented in Table

12. The data used in the assessment was sourced from GHD 2014. The reasonable worst case

scenario expected during operation is four thermal plants and one diesel set in operation. The

number of units operating indicates the quantity of equipment that will be operating

concurrently under the reasonable worst case scenario.

The table identifies those noise sources which will be housed within a type of enclosure. The

enclosures were incorporated into the noise model, however there is only a negligible

difference of 0.4 dB(A) compared to if they were not enclosed. This is because noisier plant

(i.e. Fin Fan coolers and Air Cooled Condenser [ACC] fans) are not enclosed and they make the

largest contribution to overall noise levels at the receiver locations.

Table 12: Operational Phase Noise Sources

Equipment No. Sound Power Level of Equipment SWL,

dB(A) LAeq

Noise Source

Height (m)

Source located within an

enclosure (Yes/No)

Boiler feed pump 4 109 3 Yes

Turbine 4 109 3 Yes

Fin Fan cooler fan 32 128 3 No

Plant air compressor 3 103 1 Yes

Primary air (PA) fan 8 117 3 Yes

Forced draft (FD) fan 8 117 3 Yes

Induced draft (ID) fan 8 117 3 Yes

Diesel generator (DG) sets 1 103 1 Yes

Transformers 4 99 1 No

Air Cooled Condenser (ACC) fan 32 128 3 No

Condensate extraction pumps 4 104 1 Yes

Ash handling system compressors

3 98 1 Yes

Slurry disposal pumps for ash disposal

1 93 1 No

Ash silo fluidizing blowers 2 96 1 Yes

Light vehicles 50 119 0.5 No

Coal handling plant

(open conveyor – per metre)

137 +

182 126 3 TBA (assumed No)

Since original noise modelling was conducted for the Project (June 2014) the proponent has

included coal handling plant within the design. The coal handling plant will primarily include a

Run of Mine (ROM) hopper, conveyors and transfer towers. Partial enclosure and roofing of


the conveyers and enclosure of the transfer towers is expected to considerably reduce any

noise generated from this infrastructure. Noise modelling results for the Project, without the

coal handling plant, indicates that only one receiver (receiver 1 – the operational mine work

area) exceeds EPP Noise criteria. Due to the noise mitigation measures for the coal handling

plant, it is not expected that this additional infrastructure will cause an exceedance of the

commissioning or operational noise at any of the other receivers and therefore remodelling

has not been completed. Assuming worst case of not enclosing of the conveyors, noise levels

are calculated to increase by only 1 dB with the addition of the coal handling plant. If 50% of

the conveyors were enclosed, there would be no overall increase of total noise levels.

8.2. Location of Noise Sources

The position of operational phase noise sources in the SoundPLAN model are based on the

site layout plan shown in Figure 12 and advice from CDM Smith. Table 13 outlines the site plan

reference area for each of the noise sources in the SoundPLAN model.

Table 13: Location of Operational Noise Sources in the SoundPLAN model

Equipment Site plan Reference number

Boiler feed pump 4

turbine 1

Fin Fan cooler fan 33

Plant air compressor 14

PA fan 4

FD fan 4

ID fan 4

DG sets 22

Transformers 16/17

ACC Fans 13

Condensate extraction pumps 13

Ash handling system compressors 14

Slurry disposal pumps for ash disposal 30

Ash silo fluidizing blowers 11

Light vehicles 43


Figure 12: Site Layout



The modelled noise levels representing the operational phase for all wind scenarios are

presented in Figure 13 to Figure 17. A 1.8m high receiver height was used to represent noise

levels at ground floor.

Figure 13: Operational Noise – No wind

Figure 14: Operational Noise – E wind


Figure 15: Operational Noise – SE wind

Figure 16: Operational Noise – SW wind


Figure 17: Operational Noise – N wind

8.3.1. Summary of Operational Noise Levels

Table 14 presents the predicted operational phase noise levels at the receiver locations.

Table 14: Predicted Operational Noise Levels




1 No wind 38 No Yes

E 45 No No (+5)

SE 45 No No (+5)

SW 44 No No (+4)

N 32 No Yes

2 No wind 18 Yes Yes

E 16 Yes Yes

SE 24 Yes Yes

SW 24 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes

3 No wind 17 Yes Yes

E <15 Yes Yes

SE 22 Yes Yes

SW 23 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes






E <15 Yes Yes

SE <15 Yes Yes

SW <15 Yes Yes

N <15 Yes Yes


Operational noise levels at Receiver 1 are predicted to exceed the indoor criteria (depending

on wind direction) with open windows. Standard glazing treatments would achieve a further

10dB reduction, and therefore compliance with the indoor criteria would be achieved if

windows of the receiver were closed. Therefore no further acoustic treatments are required.

Compliance is achieved at Receiver 2, 3 and 4 under all wind conditions.


Recommendations and Conclusion 9.

Noise levels are predicted to comply with the most stringent night time noise criteria (28dB(A)

externally) at Receiver 2, 3 and 4 during all stages of the project. Therefore no further

recommendations are required for these receivers.

The highest predicted external noise level at Receiver 1 is 45 dB(A) LAeq, which is due to the

operational phase with E or SE winds. At this noise impact, internal noise levels at the

receiver are predicted to be 5 dB(A) above the indoor EPP Noise and WHO guideline criteria

assuming open windows. Standard glazing treatments would achieve a further 10dB

reduction, and therefore compliance with the indoor criteria would be achieved if windows of

the receiver were closed. Therefore no further acoustic treatments are required.

The noise mitigation measures identified above would likely result in a considerable reduction

in the noise levels experienced at Receiver 1. Given that Receiver 1 will be the operational

work area for the mine, and that no persons will be residing at this location, any impact

resulting from criteria exceedance is likely to be negligible.


Appendix A References


References:

GHD 2012, Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Project: Mine Technical Report (ref: 25215-DRP- 0017)

GHD 2014, Noise inputs memorandum (ref: 41/27532).

State of Queensland 2012, Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008.


Appendix B Site Layout


Appendix C Meteorological Data – Wind

Roses

appendix f - noise impact assessment · ttm soundmatters has been engaged by cdm smith to undertake...

Documents