Lake Vermont Coal Mine Extension - Department of … · · 2014-12-03This report presents an assessment of the noise and ... Based on the nominated blasting parameters and ... to

ACOUSTICS & AIR QUALITY

ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd

ABN: 55 622 586 522 - ACN: 128 491 967 PO Box 3901, South Brisbane. QLD. 4101.

P: 07-3255-3355 F: 07-3844-7180 W: www.askconsulting.com.au E: [email protected]

Lake Vermont Coal Mine Extension Dysart, Central Queensland

Noise and Vibration Assessment 6763R02V01 29/08/14

Prepared for

Bowen Basin Coal c/o AustralAsian Resource Consultants (AARC)

6763R02V01 Page 2


Document Approval

Author Signature

Approver Signature

Name Tim Osborne Name Gillian Adams

Title Project Engineer Title Director

Document Control

W:\6700\6763\ASKout\Noise\6763R02V01.docx

Document Ref Date of Issue Status Author Reviewer

6763R02V01_draft 22/05/14 Draft TO MR/GA

6763R02V01_draft2 19/06/14 Draft TO MR/GA



6763R02V01 29/08/14 Final TO MR/GA

Disclaimer: This document and associated tasks were undertaken in accordance with the ASK Consulting Engineers Quality Assurance System, which is based on Australian Standard / NZS ISO 9001:2008. This document is issued subject to review, and authorisation by a Senior Consultant noted in the above table. If the table is incomplete, this document shall be considered as preliminary or draft only and no reliance shall be placed upon it other than for information to be verified later.

This document is prepared for our Client's particular requirements which are based on a specific brief with limitations as agreed to with the Client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by a third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party without prior consent provided by ASK Consulting Engineers. The information herein should not be reproduced, presented or reviewed except in full. Prior to passing on to a third party, the Client is to fully inform the third party of the specific brief and limitations associated with the commission.

The information contained herein is for the identified purpose of acoustics only. No claims are made and no liability is accepted in respect of design and construction issues falling outside of the specialist field of acoustics engineering including and not limited to structural integrity, fire rating, architectural buildability and fit-for-purpose, waterproofing, safety design and the like. Supplementary professional advice should be sought in respect of these issues.

Copyright: This report and the copyright thereof are the property of ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd (ABN 55 622 586 522). It must not be copied in whole or in part without the written permission of ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd. This report has been produced specifically for the Client and project nominated herein and must not be used or retained for any other purpose. www.askconsulting.com.au

6763R02V01 Page 3


Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 5

Noise and Vibration Criteria ................................................................................................ 5

Noise and Vibration Predictions and Assessment ............................................................. 5

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7

2 Study Area Description ................................................................................................................ 8

3 Proposed Development ............................................................................................................ 10

3.1 Project Description ..................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Open Cut Mine Methodology ...................................................................................... 12

3.3 Pit Design .................................................................................................................... 12

3.4 Equipment and Production Forecast Data ................................................................ 13

4 Noise and Vibration Criteria ..................................................................................................... 16

4.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 16

4.2 Current Lake Vermont Coal Mine EA Limits .............................................................. 16

4.3 Current Legislation, Policy and Guidelines Criteria .................................................. 17

4.3.1 Environmental Protection Act 1994 ................................................................. 17

4.3.2 Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 ................................................ 18

4.3.2.1Overview ................................................................................................................ 18

4.3.2.2Background Creep ................................................................................................ 18

4.3.2.3Acoustic Quality Objectives .................................................................................. 18

4.3.3 EcoAccess Guidelines ........................................................................................ 19

4.3.3.1EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control ............................................................. 19

4.3.3.2EcoAccess – Assessment of Low Frequency Noise ............................................ 20

4.3.3.3EcoAccess – Noise and Vibration from Blasting ................................................. 21

4.3.4 Model Mining Condition Criteria ........................................................................ 21

4.3.4.1Noise Criteria ........................................................................................................ 21

4.3.4.2Noise and Vibration from Blasting Criteria .......................................................... 23

4.4 Proposed Criteria ........................................................................................................ 23

4.4.1 Overall Mine Noise Emissions Criteria .............................................................. 23

4.4.2 Proposed Noise and Vibration from Blasting Criteria ...................................... 24

5 Noise Modelling ........................................................................................................................ 25

5.1 Model Description ....................................................................................................... 25

5.2 Meteorology ................................................................................................................. 25

5.3 Noise Sources ............................................................................................................. 25

5.4 Modelling Scenarios ................................................................................................... 27

5.5 Predicted Noise Levels ............................................................................................... 28

6763R02V01 Page 4


5.6 Dragline Scenario ....................................................................................................... 30

5.7 Cumulative Noise Impact ........................................................................................... 31

5.7.1 Lake Vermont Residence ................................................................................... 32

5.7.2 Meadowbrook Residence .................................................................................. 32

5.7.3 Leichardt Residence .......................................................................................... 32

5.7.4 Residence at Lot 7 KL96 ................................................................................... 33

5.8 Predicted Low Frequency Noise Levels ..................................................................... 33

6 Blasting ...................................................................................................................................... 35

6.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 35

6.2 Predictions .................................................................................................................. 35

6.2.1 Ground Vibration ................................................................................................ 35

6.2.2 Airblast ................................................................................................................ 36

6.3 Assessment ................................................................................................................. 38

7 Discussion and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 39

7.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 39

7.2 Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 39

8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 40

References ........................................................................................................................................ 41

Appendix A Acoustic Terminology .................................................................................................... 42

Appendix B Mining Equipment Locations ....................................................................................... 44

Appendix C Predicted Mining Noise Contours ................................................................................ 49

6763R02V01 Page 5


Executive Summary

This report presents an assessment of the noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension to the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine.

Noise and Vibration Criteria

Noise criteria for the proposed Lake Vermont North extension have been proposed based on the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control Sleep Disturbance criteria and the EPP(Noise) Acoustic Quality Objective criteria, which results in external noise limits of 42 dBA Leq,adj,T in the day and evening and 37 dBA Leq,adj,T in the night. These limits were selected as per note 6 of the Model Mining Conditions criteria.

Criteria for noise and vibration from blasting have been proposed in accordance with the Model Mining Conditions criteria to be used in place of the current Lake Vermont Coal Mine EA criteria. The criteria include airblast noise limits of 115 dB (linear peak) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts initiated and not greater than 120 dB (linear peak) at any time, and vibration limits of 5 mm/s peak particle velocity (PPV) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts and not greater than 10 mm/s PPV at any time.

Noise and Vibration Predictions and Assessment

A noise model has been developed with the SoundPLAN computer program using the CONCAWE algorithms to predict noise emissions under adverse and neutral meteorological conditions. The operational mining Years 27 and 37 were selected for modelling. The predicted noise levels at the nearby sensitive receptors are shown in Table ES.1. The predictions in Table ES.1 are based on mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension, including the equipment operating at the run-of-mine (ROM) pad, under adverse meteorological conditions. The noise contours for the modelled mining operations under the neutral and adverse meteorological conditions are shown in Appendix C.

Table ES.1 Predicted Noise Levels from Lake Vermont North and ROM Pad

Receptor Predicted Noise Levels (Adverse Meteorological Conditions) Leq dBA

Year 27 Year 37

Lake Vermont 33 35 Lot 7 CNS53 27 27

Meadowbrook 28 31 Mockingbird Downs 30 30

Old Kyewong 29 30 Leichardt 25 27

Lot 7 KL96 21 31

From Table ES.1 it can be seen that the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit is not exceeded at any of the receptors for Year 27 or Year 37.

When taking into account the cumulative impact due to the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine, the predicted noise level at the Lake Vermont residence is 37 dBA Leq based on the Year 27 scenario, which complies with the night-time noise limit.

6763R02V01 Page 6


At the Meadowbrook, Leichardt and Lot 7 KL96 residences, the predicted cumulative impacts resulted in noise levels below the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit.

At the Lot 7 CNS53, Mockingbird Downs and Old Kyewong residences, the predicted noise levels were dominated by the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine, and the change in noise level due to the proposed Lake Vermont North extension was predicted to be less than 1 dBA, and therefore cumulative impacts were not considered further for these receptors.

A scenario including a dragline in place of other equipment was predicted to result in equal or lower noise levels compared to the standard scenario.

An assessment of low frequency noise has been conducted, and no exceedances of the criteria were predicted.

Based on the nominated blasting parameters and calculations, the ground vibration and airblast levels from blasting are predicted to comply with the nominated criteria at the nearest sensitive receptors.

6763R02V01 Page 7


1 Introduction

ASK Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd (ASK) was commissioned by AustralAsian Resource Consultants (AARC) to provide a noise and vibration impact assessment for the Lake Vermont Coal Mine Extension (the Project), to be located to the north and east of the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine. The Lake Vermont Coal Mine is located approximately 15 kilometres to the north-east of the township of Dysart as shown in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1 Location of Existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine

This report presents an assessment of the noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed extension to the Lake Vermont Coal Mine. It is to form an appendix to the Environmental Authority (EA) amendment application for consideration by Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP).

The purpose of this report is as follows:

Propose appropriate noise and vibration criteria. Determine noise emission levels from the proposed fixed and mobile plant. Determine airblast and vibration levels due to blasting operations. Assess noise and vibration impacts for two scenarios of mining operations under adverse and

neutral meteorological conditions in accordance with the nominated noise and vibration criteria.

Provide recommendations for inclusion in the EA amendment application.

To aid in the understanding of the terms in this report a glossary is included in Appendix A.

30 km

Lake Vermont Coal Mine

Saraji Coal Mine

Closed Norwich Park Mine

6763R02V01 Page 8


2 Study Area Description

The Lake Vermont Coal Mine is located approximately 15 kilometres to the north-east of the township of Dysart and approximately 7 kilometres to the east of the Saraji Coal Mine. Access to Lake Vermont Coal Mine is via the Dysart Connection Road. The proposed extension is to the north and east of the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine. The areas to the north and east of the mine which are to be developed are currently cleared land which has previously been used for grazing.

The nearest sensitive receptors are summarised in Table 2.1 including their northing and easting UTM coordinates and are shown on Figure 2.1. The nearest private residential receptor, Mockingbird Downs homestead, is approximately 2 kilometres to the east of mining operations within the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine. All of the sensitive receptors listed in Table 2.1 are residences. The approximate distances shown in Table 2.1 are based on the smallest distance from mining operations within either the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine or the proposed Lake Vermont North extension.

Table 2.1 List of Sensitive Receptors with UTM Coordinates (WGS84 Z55)

Name / Location Real Property Description

Approximate Distance from Lake Vermont

Mine (km)

Direction from Lake Vermont

Mine

Easting

(m)

Northing

(m)

Meadowbrook Lot 10 CNS93 6 West 638086 7520400 Lake Vermont Lot 4 CNS382 5 West 640116 7516958

Old Kyewong Lot 5 SP190749 4 South 646743 7509949

Mockingbird Downs

Lot 1 SP190747 2 South-East 652135 7513934

Pownall, South of Carfax Rd Lot 7 CNS53 3 South-East 653025 7512686

Leichhardt Lot 7 CNS53 7 South-East 656168 7515625 North of Isaac

River Lot 7 KL96 6 North 652696 7532404

6763R02V01 Page 9


Figure 2.1 Location of Subject Site and Sensitive Receptors

The receptor locations listed in Table 2.1 and presented in Figure 2.1 are the nearest sensitive receptors which may be potentially impacted by noise and vibration emissions from the proposed Project. They were selected based on the presence of a residence and the distance of the receptor from the site.

Lake Vermont Coal Mine

Saraji Coal Mine

6763R02V01 Page 10


3 Proposed Development

3.1 Project Description

The Project involves the extension of the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine which has been operating since 2007. The Lake Vermont Coal Mine is an open cut coal mine owned by the Bowen Basin Coal and operated by Thiess Mining. The mine is located within the Bowen Basin.

The existing mine operates using traditional open cut mining methods and produces both coking coal and PCI products. Coal extracted from the mine is processed on-site with product coal loaded onto trains via a rail load-out facility for transport offsite. The mine currently operates 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

Production from the proposed Lake Vermont North extension is expected to commence in 2017 with the life of the extension of the open cut mine estimated to be 28 years (2017 to 2044). The extension to the existing mine will operate in the same manner as existing mining operations.

A plan of the proposed mine site layout in Year 37, showing the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area, as provided by Bowen Basin Coal, is shown in Figure 3.1.

6763R02V01 Page 11


Figure 3.1 Lake Vermont and Lake Vermont Mining Lease Areas (Year 37)

ROM Pad

Approved Lake Vermont Mining

Lease Area

Proposed Lake Vermont North

Mining Lease Area

6763R02V01 Page 12


3.2 Open Cut Mine Methodology

Open cut mining is to be conducted using either conventional truck and excavator methods or via the use of a dragline. The open cut operations are described as follows and illustrated in Figure 3.2:

The surface will be cleared of vegetation and stripped of topsoil. Blasting will loosen overburden material, which will then be loaded by excavators into haul

trucks and used to fill the previously mined side of the same or adjacent pit. In some cases push dozers will be used to spread blasted overburden material thus reducing excavator work.

Excavators will mine run-of-mine (ROM) coal and load it into haul trucks to be transported from the pits to the existing ROM pad.

The haul trucks will unload ROM coal at the ROM pad to await front end loader (FEL) transfer into one of two hoppers for transport by conveyor to the two existing Coal Handling and Preparation Plants (CHPP).

After processing, product coal will be transferred to stockpiles via conveyor system. Product coal is loaded into trains via a surge bin fed by an under-stockpile reclaim tunnel and

conveyor system.

Figure 3.2 Process Flow Diagram

3.3 Pit Design

The proposed extension consists of several open cut pits. During the establishment of the pits, overburden will be removed from the respective pit and transported to an adjacent waste/overburden dump. After the first few years of mining, in-pit dumping will be incorporated and access to the pit floor will be achieved via a ramp constructed in spoil. The deepest pit will be approximately 170 metres deep (10 metres AHD) compared to natural ground level being approximately 180 metres AHD. ROM coal tonnages will vary over the mine life with coal production peaking at 3 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa).

Clearing by dozer

Stripping by scraper Drilling Blasting

Overburden excavation and hauling to dump

Coal excavationCoal to ROMCoal to CHPP

Coal to stockpiles

Coal to train loadout

6763R02V01 Page 13


3.4 Equipment and Production Forecast Data

The proposed mobile fleet numbers for the open-cut mining operations, which have been provided by Bowen Basin Coal and used in the impact assessment, are presented in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 for Lake Vermont and Lake Vermont North respectively.

Table 3.1 Lake Vermont Major Mobile Equipment Fleet

Year

Exca

vato

rs

Ove

rbur

den

Truc

ks

Coal

Tru

cks

Wat

er C

arts

Gra

ders

Doz

ers

(Tra

cked

)

Doz

ers

(Whe

eled

)

Dril

l Rig

2014 9-10 38 10 3 5 21 2 4-5 2015 9-10 38 11 3 5 21 2 4-5 2016 9-10 38 11 3 5 21 2 4-5 2017 9-10 38 12 3 5 21 2 4-5 2018 9-10 38 12 3 5 21 2 4-5 2019 9-10 38 12 3 5 21 2 4-5 2020 9-10 39 12 3 5 21 2 4-5 2021 9-10 39 13 3 5 21 2 4-5 2022 9-10 39 13 3 5 21 2 4-5 2023 9-10 39 13 3 5 21 2 4-5 2024 9-10 39 13 3 5 21 2 4-5 2025 9-10 39 14 3 5 21 2 4-5 2026 9-10 39 14 3 5 21 2 4-5 2027 9-10 39 14 3 5 21 2 4-5 2028 9-10 41 14 3 5 20 2 4-5 2029 9-10 41 14 3 5 20 2 4-5 2030 9-10 41 14 3 5 20 2 4-5 2031 7-8 33 12 3 4 18 2 4-5 2032 6-7 26 9 3 4 15 2 2 2033 4 14 6 3 3 12 1 2 2034 2 4 4 3 2 6 1 1 2035 2 4 3 3 2 5 1 1 2036 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 1

6763R02V01 Page 14


Table 3.2 Lake Vermont North Major Mobile Equipment Fleet

Year

Exca

vato

rs

Ove

rbur

den

Truc

ks

Coal

Tru

cks

Wat

er C

arts

Gra

ders

Doz

ers

(Tra

cked

)

Doz

ers

(Whe

eled

)

Dril

l Rig

2017 2 7 2 1 2 5 1 1 2018 2 7 2 1 2 5 1 1 2019 2 7 2 1 2 5 1 1 2020 3 11 2 1 3 7 1 1 2021 3 11 2 1 3 7 1 1 2022 4 16 3 2 3 8 1 1 2023 4 16 3 2 3 8 1 1 2024 4 16 3 2 3 8 1 1 2025 4 17 3 2 3 8 1 2 2026 4 17 3 2 3 9 1 2 2027 4 17 4 2 3 9 1 2 2028 4 17 4 2 3 9 1 2 2029 4 17 4 2 3 9 1 2 2030 4 17 4 2 3 9 1 2 2031 5-6 22 4 2 4 10 1 2 2032 5-6 22 4 2 4 10 1 2 2033 5-6 22 5 2 4 11 1 2 2034 5-6 22 5 2 4 11 1 2 2035 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2 2036 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2 2037 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2 2038 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2-3 2039 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2-3 2040 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2-3 2041 5-6 27 5 2 4 11 1 2-3 2042 5-6 26 5 2 4 11 1 2-3 2043 5-6 26 5 2 4 11 1 2 2044 4-5 21 4 1 3 10 1 2

ASK has been advised that the number of major items of equipment at the ROM pad and rail load-out facility will generally remain unchanged throughout the life of the mine. The major items of fixed and mobile equipment include the following:

Two coal handling and processing plants (CHPP) Two coal crusher plants Conveyors, conveyor drives and stackers Two tracked dozers Two front end loaders (FEL)

6763R02V01 Page 15


Further details on the types of equipment used in the noise model are included in Section 5.3.

6763R02V01 Page 16


4 Noise and Vibration Criteria

4.1 Overview

Noise and vibration criteria are required to assess the potential impacts of the proposed Lake Vermont North operations on sensitive receptors.

The noise limits for the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine under the current Environmental Authority (EA) are based on 'background plus' criteria and are described further in Section 4.2.

The relevant EHP noise and vibration criteria have been considered in determining proposed noise and vibration criteria for the Lake Vermont North operations, and are listed as follows:

Environmental Protection Act 1994. Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008. EcoAccess Guideline “Planning For Noise Control”. EcoAccess Guideline “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise”. EcoAccess Guideline “Noise and Vibration from Blasting”. Guideline Mining – Model Mining Conditions.

4.2 Current Lake Vermont Coal Mine EA Limits

The noise limits for the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine under the current Environmental Authority (EA) are presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Current Lake Vermont Coal Mine EA Noise Limits

Noise Level dBA Monday to Sunday (including public holidays)

7am – 6pm 6pm – 10pm 10pm – 7am

Noise measured at a 'Sensitive Receptor'

LA10, adj, 10 mins B/g + 5 B/g + 5 B/g + 3 LA1, adj, 10 mins B/g + 10 B/g + 10 B/g + 8

Noise measured at a 'Commercial Place'

LA10, adj, 10 mins B/g + 10 B/g + 10 B/g + 5 LA1, adj, 10 mins B/g + 15 B/g + 15 B/g + 10

As shown in Table 4.1, the current EA noise limits for Lake Vermont Coal Mine are based on the measured background (B/g) noise level plus 5 dBA during the day and evening, and 3 dBA during the night at 'sensitive receptors'. The minimum background noise level for calculating the noise limits is set at 25 dBA. The background noise level is generally considered to be the L90 noise level, being the noise level exceeded for 90% of the measurement period.

The 'background plus' limits presented in Table 4.1 are applied against the total resulting noise levels from both the mine and the existing ambient noise environment.

It is noted that the current noise limits (see Table 4.1) apply only short term noise descriptors being the L1 and L10 noise level, described as the noise level exceeded for 1% and 10% of the measurement period respectively. The noise limits currently applied by EHP include longer term descriptors such as the Leq noise level (see Glossary in Appendix A). As the EA noise limits for the

6763R02V01 Page 17


existing mine are not representative of current EHP noise policy, it is proposed to apply new noise criteria based on current EHP policy, as described in the following sections.

The EA for the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine includes blasting vibration and airblast criteria as presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Current Lake Vermont Coal Mine EA Blasting Vibration and Airblast Criteria

Issue Criteria

Airblast Airblast pressure level is not more than 115 dB (linear) peak for 4 out of 5 consecutive blasts initiated and not greater than 120 dB (linear) peak at any time.

Vibration For vibrations of more than 35Hz – not more than 25 mm per second ground vibration, peak particle velocity; or For vibrations of not more than 35Hz – not more than 10 mm per second ground vibration, peak particle velocity

The airblast limits are the same as contained within the current EcoAccess Guideline “Noise and Vibration from Blasting”, except that the Guidelines note that the 115 dB (Linear Peak) limit applies for 9 out of 10 consecutive blasts.

The vibration limits are different to those contained within the current EcoAccess Guideline “Noise and Vibration from Blasting” and are detailed in Section 4.3.3.3.

4.3 Current Legislation, Policy and Guidelines Criteria

4.3.1 Environmental Protection Act 1994

In Queensland, the environment is protected under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (The Act). The object of the Act is to protect Queensland’s environment while allowing for development that improves the total quality of life, both now and in the future, in a way that maintains the ecological processes on which life depends (ecologically sustainable development).

The Act states a person must not carry out any activity that causes, or is likely to cause, environmental harm, unless the person takes all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise the harm. This is termed the ‘general environmental duty’. Environmental harm is defined as any adverse effect, or potential adverse effect (whether temporary or permanent and of whatever magnitude, duration or frequency) on an environmental value, and includes environmental nuisance. Environmental nuisance is unreasonable interference or likely interference with an environmental value caused by noise or vibration.

The Act describes a number of offences relating to noise standards, including building work, regulated devices (e.g. power tools), pumps, air-conditioning equipment, refrigeration equipment, indoor venues, outdoor events, amplifier devices other than at indoor venue or open-air events, power boat sports in waterways, operating power boat engines at premises, blasting, and outdoor shooting ranges.

The following noise sources are excluded from the Act – audible traffic signals, warning signals for railway crossings, safety signals from reversing vehicle, operating a ship, aircraft, public and state controlled roads, busway, light rail, rail, and non-domestic animals.

This Act refers to the Environmental Protection Policy as being subordinate legislation to the Act.

6763R02V01 Page 18


4.3.2 Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008

4.3.2.1 Overview

In respect of the acoustic environment, the object of the Act is achieved by the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008 (EPP (Noise)). This policy identifies environmental values to be enhanced or protected, states acoustic quality objectives, and provides a framework for making decisions about the acoustic environment.

4.3.2.2 Background Creep

The EPP(Noise) contains noise criteria for controlling background creep, which are to be applied “for an activity involving noise”. The criteria are as follows:

To the extent that it is reasonable to do so, noise from an activity must not be—

a) for noise that is continuous noise measured by LA90,T — more than nil dBA greater than the existing acoustic environment measured by LA90,T; or

b) for noise that varies over time measured by LAeq,adj,T — more than 5 dBA greater than the existing acoustic environment measured by LA90,T.

The EPP(Noise) does not define “continuous noise”, but by definition, “continuous noise” would be required to occur for at least 90% of a measurement period (typically 15 minutes or 60 minutes). This criterion is not considered relevant for assessment of mining noise measured at several kilometres from a mine as the noise at that distance is often highly variable.

The criterion for “noise that varies over time” is appropriate for noise sources operating for less than 90% of a measurement period, and could apply to intermittent events or noise which varies over time due to plant or meteorological variations.

It is noted that these criteria include the introduction “to the extent that it is reasonable to do so”. Given these criteria are understood to not generally be applied to coal mines it is interpreted that they are not generally reasonable, and therefore, emphasis is placed on achieving compliance with other EHP criteria that are defined to protect health and wellbeing, and the ability to sleep.

4.3.2.3 Acoustic Quality Objectives

The EPP(Noise) contains a range of acoustic quality objectives for a range of receptors. The objectives are in the form of noise levels, and are defined for various periods of the day, and use a number of acoustic parameters.

Schedule 1 of the EPP(Noise) includes the following acoustic quality objectives to be met at residential dwellings:

Outdoors o Daytime and Evening: 50 dBA LAeq,adj,1hr, 55 dBA LA10,adj,1hr and 65 dBA LA1,adj,1hr

Indoors o Daytime and Evening: 35 dBA LAeq,adj,1hr, 40 dBA LA10,adj,1hr and 45 dBA LA1,adj,1hr o Night: 30 dBA LAeq,adj,1hr, 35 dBA LA10,adj,1hr and 40 dBA LA1,adj,1hr

In the EHP EcoAccess Guideline “Planning For Noise Control” it is proposed that the noise reduction provided by a typical residential building façade is between 5 to 10 dBA with windows open. ASK understands that based on this noise reduction range EHP applies a correction (reduction) of 7 dBA. That is, with an external noise source, a 7 dBA reduction in noise levels from outside a house to inside a house is expected when windows are fully open. Thus the indoor noise objectives noted above should be considered as the following external objectives (with windows open):

Daytime and Evening: 42 dBA LAeq,adj,1hr, 47 dBA LA10,adj,1hr and 52 dBA LA1,adj,1hr

6763R02V01 Page 19


Night: 37 dBA LAeq,adj,1hr, 42 dBA LA10,adj,1hr and 47 dBA LA1,adj,1hr

A sensitive receptor is defined as “an area or place where noise (including low frequency, vibration and blasting) is measured to investigate whether nuisance impacts are occurring” and includes numerous land uses including dwellings and work places.

The EPP(Noise) states that the objectives are intended to be progressively achieved over the long term. However, as the Lake Vermont North extension involves the introduction of additional noise sources it would seem reasonable that the acoustic quality objectives are achieved upon commencement of operation, and this may be the intent of the policy. Therefore, consideration of achieving these acoustic quality objectives will be included in the design noise limits for the Lake Vermont North extension.

4.3.3 EcoAccess Guidelines

EHP has a number of EcoAccess guidelines relevant to the assessment of noise and vibration. These are summarised as follows.

4.3.3.1 EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control

EHP EcoAccess Guideline “Planning For Noise Control” contains procedures and methods that are applicable for setting conditions relating to noise emitted from industrial premises for planning purposes. The guideline is applicable to noise from all sources, individually and in combination, which contribute to the total noise from a site.

The procedure takes into account three factors: firstly, the control and prevention of background noise creep in the case of a steady noise level from equipment such as caused by ventilation fans and other continuously operating machinery; secondly, the containment of variable noise levels and short-term noise events such as those caused by forklifts and isolated hand tools to an acceptable level above the background noise level; thirdly, the setting of noise limits that should not be exceeded to avoid sleep disturbance.

4.3.3.1.1 Control and Prevention of Background Creep

The control and prevention of background creep criteria are intended to prevent progressively increasing background noise levels due to new developments. The methodology takes into account the type of receiver land use and gives recommended background noise levels (L90) and planning noise levels (PNL to be assessed with the LAeq,1hour parameter) for different environments.

Based on the receivers surrounding Lake Vermont Coal Mine being 'very rural, purely residential' land uses (noise area category Z1 from Table 3 of the Planning for Noise Control document), the resulting night-time noise limit would be 28 dBA LAeq,1hour.

4.3.3.1.2 Sleep Disturbance Criteria

The World Health Organization (WHO) issued its “Guidelines for Community Noise” in April 1999. The WHO guideline states the following in regard to sleep disturbance from continuous noise from activities such as mining operations:

“Where noise is continuous, the equivalent sound pressure level should not exceed 30 dBA indoors, if negative effects on sleep are to be avoided. When noise is composed of a large proportion of low-frequency sounds a still lower guideline value is recommended, because low-frequency noise (e.g. from a ventilation system) can disturb rest and sleep even at low sound pressure levels.”

6763R02V01 Page 20


The EcoAccess Guideline “Planning for Noise Control”, in referring to the World Health Organisation guidelines, makes the following general recommendation regarding short term transient noise events:

“As a rule in planning for short-term or transient noise events, for good sleep over eight hours, the indoor sound pressure level measured as a maximum instantaneous value should not exceed approximately 45 dBA maxLpA more than 10 to 15 times per night.”

For less regular night events, the allowable internal noise level is higher, as follows:

Approximately 3 events per night: 50 dBA Lmax. Approximately 1 event per night: 65 dBA Lmax.

Note: For the purpose of this assessment the maxLpA level is defined using the Lmax descriptor.

The WHO guideline states the following in regard to annoyance response to community noise:

“Annoyance to community noise varies with the type of activity producing the noise. During the daytime few people are seriously annoyed by activities with Leq levels below 55 dBA; or moderately annoyed by Leq levels below 50 dBA. Sound pressure levels during the evening and night should be 5 – 10 dBA lower than during the day. Noise with low frequency components requires even lower levels.”

As noted previously, EHP proposes that the noise reduction provided by a typical residential building façade is 7 dBA assuming open windows. Thus the indoor noise objectives noted above could be converted to external objectives (with windows open) assuming the 7 dBA reduction. The indoor and outdoor sleep disturbance noise limits are summarised in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Summary of WHO Sleep Disturbance and Annoyance Criteria

Descriptor Number of Noise Events

Indoor Criterion in dBA

Outdoor Criterion, dBA

Sleep Disturbance (Short Duration Events)

10 – 15 Lmax 45 Lmax 52 3 Lmax 50 Lmax 57 1 Lmax 55 Lmax 62

Sleep Disturbance (Continuous Noise) Continuous Leq 30 Leq 37

Annoyance (Night Time) Continuous Leq 35 Leq 42

Note: The outdoor criteria are based on an EHP EcoAccess nominated outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction of 7 dBA for open windows.

In line with recent discussions with EHP, it is understood that these criteria are generally included in coal mine project noise criteria and thus will be considered further.

4.3.3.2 EcoAccess – Assessment of Low Frequency Noise

EHP EcoAccess Guideline “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise” contains methods and procedures that are applicable to low frequency noise emitted from industrial premises and mining operations for planning purposes. Items such as boilers, pumps, transformers, cooling fans, compressors, oil and gas burners, foundries, wind farms, electrical installations, diesel engines, ventilation and air-conditioning equipment, wind turbulence and large chimney resonance may comprise sources of high level noise having frequency content less than 200 Hz.

6763R02V01 Page 21


These sources may exhibit a spectrum that characteristically shows a general increase in sound pressure level with decrease in frequency. Annoyance due to low frequency noise can be high even though the dBA level measured is relatively low. Typically, annoyance is experienced in the otherwise quiet environments of residences, offices and factories adjacent to or near low frequency noise sources. Generally, low level/low frequency noises become annoying when the masking effect of higher frequencies is absent. This loss of high frequency components may occur as a result of transmission through the fabric of a building, or in propagation over long distances.

Where a noise immission occurs exhibiting an unbalanced frequency spectrum, the overall sound pressure level inside residences should not exceed 50 dBZ to avoid complaints of low frequency noise annoyance. A spectrum is considered unbalanced when the un-weighted overall noise level is more than 15 dB higher than the A-weighted overall noise level.

4.3.3.3 EcoAccess – Noise and Vibration from Blasting

EHP EcoAccess Guideline “Noise and vibration from blasting” contains criteria and procedures that are applicable to noise and vibration emitted from blasting. It applies to activities such as mining, quarries, construction and other operations which involve the use of explosives for fragmenting rock.

The criteria address human comfort and are below typical limits for prevention of structural damage. The criteria apply at residential and commercial receptors. The criteria are presented in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4 EcoAccess Blasting Vibration and Airblast Criteria

Issue Criteria

Airblast Air blast overpressure of 115 dB (linear peak) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts initiated and not greater than 120 dB (linear peak) at any time.

Vibration 5 mm/s peak particle velocity (PPV) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts and not greater than 10 mm/s PPV at any time.

It is understood that these criteria are generally included in coal mine project vibration criteria and thus will be considered further.

4.3.4 Model Mining Condition Criteria

4.3.4.1 Noise Criteria

The EHP has prepared a document titled Guideline Mining – Model Mining Conditions, which includes additional noise criteria for mining projects. These noise criteria may be used instead of the criteria contained in other EHP documentation, as discussed earlier.

The criteria are applicable to noise “generated by mining activities” with the noise limits shown in Table 4.5 and explained in the associated notes.

6763R02V01 Page 22


Table 4.5 Model Mining Condition Limits

Sensitive Place

Noise Level dBA

Measured as:

Monday to Saturday Sundays and Public Holidays

7am to 6pm

6pm to 10pm

10pm to 7am 9am to 6pm 6pm to

10pm 10pm to

9am

LAeq, adj, 15 mins CV = 50 AV = 5

CV = 45 AV = 5

CV = 40 AV = 0

CV = 45 AV = 5

CV = 40 AV = 5

CV = 35 AV = 0

LA1, adj, 15 mins CV = 55 AV = 10

CV = 50 AV = 10

CV = 45 AV = 5

CV = 50 AV = 10

CV = 45 AV = 10

CV = 40 AV = 5

Commercial Place

Noise Level dBA

Measured as:

Monday to Saturday Sundays and Public Holidays

7am to 6pm

6pm to 10pm

7am to 6pm

6pm to 10pm

7am to 6pm

6pm to 10pm

LAeq, adj, 15 mins CV = 55 AV = 10

CV = 50 AV = 10

CV = 45 AV = 5

CV = 50 AV = 10

CV = 45 AV = 10

CV = 40 AV = 5

Noise limits notes:

1. CV = Critical Value

2. AV = Adjustment Value

3. To calculate noise limits in Table D1:

If bg ≤ (CV – AV): Noise limit = bg + AV

If (CV – AV) < bg ≤ CV: Noise limit = CV

If bg > CV: Noise limit = bg + 0

4. In the event that measured bg (LA90, adj, 15 mins) is less than 30 dBA, then 30 dBA can be substituted for the measured background level.

5. bg = background noise level (LA90, adj, 15 mins) measured over 3 - 5 days at the nearest sensitive receptor.

6. If the Project is unable to meet the noise limits as calculated above alternative limits may be calculated using the processes outlined in the “Planning for Noise Control” guideline.

In this instance, the nearest commercial places are near to sensitive places, and hence only the noise criteria for sensitive places need be applied.

It is likely that the background noise levels at the receptors around Lake Vermont Coal Mine will be below 30 dBA L90 without mining noise, particularly during the night. This would result in the following noise limits:

Day (7am to 6pm): 35 dBA LAeq,adj,15 mins and 40 dBA LA1,adj,15 mins Evening (7am to 6pm): 35 dBA LAeq,adj,15 mins and 40 dBA LA1,adj,15 mins Night (7am to 6pm): 30 dBA LAeq,adj,15 mins and 35 dBA LA1,adj,15 mins

Noise limit note 6 states that alternative noise limits may be proposed in accordance with the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control guideline if the Project is unable to meet the standard Model Mining Condition noise limits. It is understood from recent discussions with EHP that they are more

6763R02V01 Page 23


likely to accept alternative criteria if there is existing mining noise at the site, rather than a green-field site.

4.3.4.2 Noise and Vibration from Blasting Criteria

The Guideline Mining – Model Mining Conditions document also contains criteria for noise and vibration from blasting. These criteria are presented in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6 Model Mining Conditions Blasting Vibration and Airblast Criteria

Issue Sensitive or Commercial Blasting Criteria (7am to 6pm)

Airblast overpressure 115 dB (linear) peak for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts initiated and not greater than 120 dB (linear) peak at any time.

Ground vibration peak particle velocity

5 mm/s peak particle velocity (PPV) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts and not greater than 10 mm/s PPV at any time.

4.4 Proposed Criteria

In line with ASK’s involvement on other mining projects and recent direct or indirect discussions with EHP, criteria are proposed for the following aspects of noise and vibration emissions:

Overall mine noise emissions Blasting vibration and airblast emissions

4.4.1 Overall Mine Noise Emissions Criteria

From recent discussions with EHP it is understood that the current standard for assessing noise emissions from mining activity are the Model Mining Conditions criteria, which are the preferred criteria, particularly for new mines. As per note 6 of the Model Mining Conditions document, alternative criteria can be proposed in accordance with the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control guideline, if the Project cannot meet the standard Model Mining Conditions criteria, and if justification can be provided for selecting alternative criteria. It was confirmed in a discussion with an EHP noise expert on 6/08/14 that alternative criteria can be proposed, including criteria based on the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control guideline and the EPP(Noise) Acoustic Quality Objective criteria if justification can be provided for the alternative criteria.

The reasons for applying the recommended criteria instead of the standard Model Mining Conditions criteria are listed as follows:

Given the proximity of the nominated sensitive receptors to the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine and Saraji Coal Mine, it is expected that these receptors would currently experience a level of mining noise that would contribute to the background noise level. Therefore, it may be difficult to determine the background noise level upon which to base the Model Mining Conditions noise criteria for these receptors. However, given the rural location it could be expected that the night-time background noise levels would fall below the minimum background noise level of 30 dBA.

Based on discussions with EHP, it is understood that the noise criteria contained within the Model Mining Conditions would be expected to be applied to a green-field site where new noise sources are introduced. This is not the case for the Northern Expansion which is located in an existing mining area, close to multiple coal mines.

6763R02V01 Page 24


It is understood that no noise complaints have been received due to the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine operations as advised by Bowen Basin Coal. This provides further justification for not applying the Model Mining Conditions criteria.

EcoAccess and EPP(Noise) criteria have been deemed acceptable by EHP on other recent mining applications and are considered to reflect industry standards.

For Lake Vermont North extension, it is proposed to apply the noise limits presented in Table 4.7 which are based on the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control Sleep Disturbance criteria and the EPP(Noise) Acoustic Quality Objective criteria and allowable under note 6 of the Model Mining Conditions document.

Table 4.7 Proposed External Noise Limits

Proposed Noise Limits

Leq,adj,T (T= 15 minutes to 1 hour), dBA*

Daytime Evening Night-time

42 42 37

Notes: * To be achieved under the majority of adverse meteorological conditions.

Daytime = (7am to 6pm), Evening = (6pm to 10pm), Night-time = (10pm to 7am).

The proposed night-time noise limit of 37 dBA Leq,adj,T corresponds to achieving an internal continuous sleep disturbance limit of 30 dBA Leq, assuming a 7 dBA reduction through a façade with open windows (in line with the EcoAccess – Planning for Noise Control guideline).

A limit of 42 dBA Leq,adj,T is proposed for the daytime and evening, as this would achieve an acoustic quality objective of 35 dBA Leq,adj,T inside a dwelling.

From ASK's experience, the difference between the average Lmax noise events and the Leq due to the variable noise from equipment is typically 5 to 8 dBA. Therefore, in compliance with the external 37 dBA Leq criteria, it is predicted that an external 50 dBA Lmax sleep disturbance limit will also be achieved.

4.4.2 Proposed Noise and Vibration from Blasting Criteria

It is understood that the Model Mining Conditions criteria are the current standard for noise and vibration criteria from blasting, and these criteria are proposed to be used for Lake Vermont North extension. The criteria, as presented in Table 4.6, include airblast noise limits of 115 dB (linear peak) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts initiated and not greater than 120 dB (linear peak) at any time, and vibration limits of 5 mm/s peak particle velocity (PPV) for nine (9) out of ten (10) consecutive blasts and not greater than 10 mm/s PPV at any time.

6763R02V01 Page 25


5 Noise Modelling

5.1 Model Description

Noise modelling was carried out using the SoundPLAN computer program using the CONCAWE algorithms, which is widely used and accepted for noise modelling and is approved by EHP.

The SoundPLAN program was used to develop a three-dimensional digital terrain noise model of the Lake Vermont Coal Mine, the Lake Vermont North extension and the surrounding area including the location of sensitive receptors. The model incorporates terrain data for the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine, the surrounding natural topography and the Lake Vermont North extension.

5.2 Meteorology

The mining noise levels at residential receptors can vary significantly depending upon the meteorology and the mining activities. Meteorology has a significant effect on the noise levels, particularly due to wind speed and direction and vertical temperature gradients, which include temperature inversions.

It is possible to measure noise variations of the order of 15 to 20 dBA due to changes in meteorology. This needs to be carefully assessed, as it is considered that compliance with noise limits needs to be achieved under ‘most’ conditions. There is no strict definition for ‘most’ conditions, but it would be expected that designing to achieve the nominated noise limits for adverse night-time meteorological conditions is an acceptable target.

The SoundPLAN model has been setup to predict noise levels under neutral and adverse meteorological conditions. The conditions used in the noise model are as follows:

Neutral o Pasquill Stability Class: D (no temperature inversion) o Temperature: 25 °C o Wind Speed: 0 m/s o Relative Humidity: 40%

Adverse o Pasquill Stability Class: F (temperature inversion) o Temperature: 10 °C o Wind Speed: 2 m/s directed to produce the highest noise level o Relative Humidity: 70%

5.3 Noise Sources

The model uses the sound power level (Lw) of each noise source to predict noise emissions. The sound power levels used in the model were based on measurements conducted at another coal mine as well as other noise source data obtained from previous projects or published sources. Table 5.1 lists the sound power levels for the plant and mobile equipment proposed to be associated with mining of the Lake Vermont North extension. Table 5.2 lists the sources of data used to compile the sound power level data presented in Table 5.1.

6763R02V01 Page 26


Table 5.1 Noise Source Sound Power Level (Lw) Data

Equipment Data Source

Octave Sound Power Levels Leq, dBZ Overall

63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k dBZ dBA

Mobile Equipment Liebherr R9800 4 125 129 117 115 112 110 105 98 131 119 Liebherr R996 4 123 127 115 113 110 108 103 96 129 117

Liebherr R9400 4 122 126 114 112 109 107 102 95 128 116 Hitachi EX1200 2 122 126 114 112 109 107 102 95 128 116 Liebherr T282 4 117 127 122 120 115 113 106 98 129 121

CAT 793 1 115 125 120 118 113 111 104 96 127 120 CAT 789 2 115 125 120 118 113 111 104 96 127 120

CAT 773 Water Cart 2 115 125 120 118 113 111 104 96 127 120 CAT 777/Komatsu

785 Water Cart 2 115 125 120 118 113 111 104 96 127 120

CAT D11/10T (Tracked Dozer) 5 111 119 117 119 113 114 105 93 124 120

CAT D11 on ROM pad (Tracked Dozer) 5 106 114 112 114 108 109 100 88 119 115

CAT 834 (Wheeled Dozer) 3 101 101 101 106 104 105 97 87 112 110

CAT 16/24 (Grader) 1 108 115 112 105 104 102 98 90 118 110 CAT 992 (FEL) 2 117 117 109 106 106 100 96 86 121 110

Drill Rig 3 114 114 113 113 112 109 104 99 121 116 Fixed/Stationary Equipment

CHPP 1 125 119 113 113 110 107 101 93 127 115 Crusher 1 120 116 101 103 100 95 90 81 121 106

Conveyor Drive 3 98 97 98 100 99 94 87 78 106 102 Stacker 3 76 86 94 98 100 97 91 82 104 103

Conveyor 3 76 75 76 78 77 72 65 56 84 80 Rail Load-out Bin 3 95 92 94 95 95 97 94 85 103 102 Train moving at

0.75km/h during loading

3 105 100 99 98 99 99 96 89 109 105

Notes: 1. The LW presented for the conveyor is the LW per metre of conveyor length.

2. The LW for the train locomotive is based on it moving at 0.75km/h during loading, but is listed as a stationary source

6763R02V01 Page 27


Table 5.2 Source of Data for Equipment Sound Power Levels

Source # Data Source

1

ASK database, sound power level calculated from measurements at another coal mine. Sound power levels for dump trucks and tracked dozers were calculated based on the time spent conducting certain activities (e.g. moving, idling) since the different activities were measured to have differing noise levels.

2 ASK database, based on sound power level calculated from measurements at another coal mine for similar equipment.

3 Data for these sources was extracted from another similar coal mine project. Generally this data is similar to noise data for similar equipment at other mine sites and is considered suitable for noise modelling purposes.

4 Data for the Liebherr sources was based on measurements of similar equipment at another coal mine and increased by an assumed factor based on the relative size of the equipment.

5

Data for the tracked dozers was based on measurements at another coal mine and decreased based on information on the operation of the dozers at Lake Vermont Coal Mine provided by Bowen Basin Coal. ASK was advised that the tracked dozers are generally limited to first gear only in reverse, for which a 5 dBA reduction is applied. ASK was advised that the dozers at the ROM pad move only short distances and track noise is minimal, for which a 10 dBA reduction was applied.

The calculated sound power levels in Table 5.1 are similar to the sound power data used in other recent ASK coal mine projects.

5.4 Modelling Scenarios

Mining noise emissions from the proposed Lake Vermont North extension have been predicted for two modelling scenarios. The modelling scenarios have been based on the proposed extensions mining operations in Year 27 and Year 37, which were selected in order to model scenarios representative of worst-case conditions in terms of equipment numbers and equipment locations. Year 27 includes a near-maximum equipment fleet for both the Lake Vermont Mine and the Lake Vermont North extension, thus representing the peak total noise exposure for sensitive receptors from the proposed extension and the approved Lake Vermont Mine. Year 37 includes near-maximum equipment when mining operations are only at the proposed Lake Vermont North extension.

Modelling of the nominated mine year scenarios has included mine ground elevations, equipment numbers and equipment locations for each mine year based on the information provided by Bowen Basin Coal. The locations of the equipment included in noise modelling as supplied by Bowen Basin Coal are indicated in Appendix B. The location of equipment in the noise model has generally been located where it will spend the majority of time operating. Overburden trucks and dozers have been placed near the top of the dumps.

The noise model has been setup to include separate predictions from equipment within the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area (not including the ROM pad), the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area (not including the ROM pad), and the ROM pad .

The overall sound power levels of the equipment associated with these different areas are shown in Table 5.3.

6763R02V01 Page 28


Table 5.3 Overall Scenario Sound Power Levels

Year Location Octave Sound Power Level Leq, dBZ Overall

63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k dBZ dBA

27

Lake Vermont North 133 141 135 134 129 127 120 112 143 135 Lake Vermont 136 144 139 137 132 131 124 115 147 139

ROM Pad 130 126 120 121 118 115 109 100 132 123 Total 139 146 140 139 134 133 125 117 148 141

37 Lake Vermont North 134 142 136 135 130 129 121 113 144 137

ROM Pad 130 126 120 121 118 115 109 100 132 123 Total 135 142 137 135 130 129 122 113 145 137

A scenario with the inclusion of a dragline is presented in Section 5.6.

5.5 Predicted Noise Levels

Noise predictions have been conducted for the proposed Lake Vermont North extension for both Year 27 and Year 37 scenarios under each of the proposed meteorological conditions, being neutral and adverse conditions. The predicted noise levels at the nominated sensitive receptors are shown in Table 5.4 and Table 5.5 for Years 27 and Year 37 respectively.

To demonstrate the noise impacts of the proposed Lake Vermont North extension, the noise sources have been separated by location as follows:

Lake Vermont North: only equipment located within the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area, not including equipment on haul routes travelling through the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area, or equipment at the ROM pad.

All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North: equipment within the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area, equipment associated with Lake Vermont North that is on haul routes travelling through the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and equipment at the ROM pad.

The noise contours for the modelled mining operations under neutral and adverse meteorological conditions are shown in Appendix C as follows:

Figure C.1 Year 27 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Neutral Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.2 Year 27 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Adverse Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.3 Year 27 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Neutral Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.4 Year 27 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Adverse Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.5 Year 37 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Neutral Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.6 Year 37 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Adverse Meteorological Conditions.

Figure C.7 Year 37 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Neutral Meteorological Conditions.

6763R02V01 Page 29


Figure C.8 Year 37 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Adverse Meteorological Conditions.

Table 5.4 Predicted Noise Levels for Year 27

Receptor

Predicted Noise Levels Leq dBA

Neutral Adverse

Lake Vermont North

All Equipment Associated with Lake

Vermont North

Lake Vermont North

All Equipment Associated with

Lake Vermont North

Lake Vermont 20 26 27 33 Lot 7 CNS53

(South of Carfax Rd) 20 21 26 27 Meadowbrook 19 21 26 28

Mockingbird Downs 22 24 29 30 Old Kyewong 16 22 22 29

Leichardt 18 19 24 25 Lot 7 KL96 15 15 21 21

Note: *Predicted noise levels less than 0 dBA have been listed as 0 dBA.

Table 5.5 Predicted Noise Levels for Year 37

Receptor

Predicted Noise Levels Leq dBA

Neutral Adverse

Lake Vermont North

All Equipment Associated with Lake

Vermont North

Lake Vermont North

All Equipment Associated with

Lake Vermont North

Lake Vermont 25 28 32 35 Lot 7 CNS53

(South of Carfax Rd) 20 21 26 27 Meadowbrook 23 24 30 31

Mockingbird Downs 22 23 29 30 Old Kyewong 18 23 24 30

Leichardt 20 21 26 27 Lot 7 KL96 24 24 31 31

Note: *Predicted noise levels less than 0 dBA have been listed as 0 dBA.

From Table 5.4 and Table 5.5 it can be seen that the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit is not exceeded at any of the receptors due to mining operations associated with the Lake Vermont North extension.

The predicted noise levels increase by between 1 and 3 dBA from Year 27 to Year 37 at Lake Vermont, Meadowbrook, Leichardt and Old Kyewong. These increases in noise level are primarily due to the increase in equipment operating within the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area. The predicted noise level at the Lot 7 KL96 residence increases by a greater amount as the

6763R02V01 Page 30


operations at the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area move further to the north in the Year 37 scenario.

5.6 Dragline Scenario

An option has been proposed to use a CAT 8750 dragline. ASK has been advised by Bowen Basin Coal that the dragline would replace the following equipment:

1 × 600 tonne excavator 1 × 300 tonne excavator 5 × CAT 793 dump trucks 5 × CAT 789 dump trucks 1 × D11 dozer (tracked) 1 × D10 dozer (tracked) 1 × CAT 834 (wheeled dozer) 1 × water cart 2 × graders.

ASK has been advised that a single D11 dozer (tracked) would be used with the dragline approximately 30% of the time, and other equipment including graders and water carts would be required for minor assistance for access roads to the dragline.

Sound power level data for draglines has been reviewed from other mining noise assessments. The sound power levels for draglines from these assessments ranged from 113 to 121 dBA LW. A noise assessment for the Ensham Central Project, prepared by Bassett Acoustics in 2006, contained sound power data for a Erie 8750, which is understood to be the same model or similar as proposed for the Lake Vermont North project. The overall sound power level for this dragline was 121 dBA LW. A 1 dBA correction has been added to the sound power level as a conservative measure, with the resulting spectral sound power level data used to predict noise emissions from the dragline presented in Table 5.6. For comparison, Table 5.6 also presents the total sound power level for all equipment associated with the dragline scenario and the total sound power level for the equipment that would be replaced with the dragline scenario.

Table 5.6 Sound Power Level Data for Dragline Scenario in Lake Vermont North

Equipment Octave Sound Power Levels Leq, dBZ Overall

63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k dBZ dBA

CAT 8750 Dragline 118 118 117 120 117 114 107 101 126 122 All equipment in dragline scenario 121 127 123 124 120 118 110 103 131 126

All equipment being replaced in dragline

scenario 129 137 131 130 125 123 116 108 139 131

From Table 5.6 it can be seen that the dragline scenario would result in a reduced overall sound power level compared to the equipment it would replace.

The dragline scenario has been modelled with noise predictions conducted for the Year 27 scenario. For the purposes of noise modelling, it was assumed that half of the equipment replaced was from the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area with the other half from the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area. The dragline and associated equipment were placed on the western side of

6763R02V01 Page 31


the Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area. The predicted noise levels, based on all equipment associated with Lake Vermont North, were equal to or marginally lower (less than 1 dBA) than the standard non-dragline scenario.

Based on the presented sound power data and noise predictions, it is expected that the use of a dragline will not result in increased noise levels compared to the standard scenario noise predictions. Therefore, modelling of the non-dragline scenarios is considered worst-case and the dragline scenario will not be considered further for cumulative noise impacts.

5.7 Cumulative Noise Impact

The cumulative noise impacts of the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine and the existing Saraji Coal Mine have been considered in addition to the proposed Lake Vermont North extension.

In the Year 27 scenario, the dominant noise source at the majority of the receptors is equipment within the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area. Equipment associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area adds to this noise level by in the order of 0 to 2 dBA. The increase in noise level due to equipment associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension above the noise level of the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine is presented in Table 5.7. In the Year 37 scenario, the mining operations are all associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension, and therefore there is no additional equipment at the Lake Vermont Coal Mine to be considered in the cumulative impacts.

Table 5.7 Predicted Noise Level Increase due to Lake Vermont North for Year 27

Receptor Predicted Noise Level Increase due to Lake Vermont North Leq dBA

Lake Vermont 1 Lot 7 CNS53

(South of Carfax Rd) 0 Meadowbrook 2

Mockingbird Downs 0 Old Kyewong 0

Leichardt 1 Lot 7 KL96 2

From Table 5.7 it can be seen that the increases in noise level are minimal, being 2 dBA or less. The increases in noise level which are less than 1 dBA are considered insignificant, and the cumulative impact at these receptors is not considered further. The increase in noise level is greater than 1 dBA at Lake Vermont, Meadowbrook, Leichardt and Lot 7 KL96 residences, and the cumulative impacts at these receptors will be considered further.

6763R02V01 Page 32


5.7.1 Lake Vermont Residence

As shown in Table 5.4 the predicted noise level due to mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension is 33 dBA Leq in Year 27 at the Lake Vermont residence. The predicted noise level from both the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 37 dBA Leq under adverse meteorological conditions. This complies with the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit.

Noise emission levels are predicted to decrease from 37 dBA Leq to 35 dBA Leq at the Lake Vermont residence in Year 37 compared to the Year 27 as operations move further into the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area.

The Lake Vermont residence is located approximately 4.5 kilometres from the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine, 5.6 kilometres from the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area and 3.5 kilometres from Saraji Coal Mine. As noise impacts from Saraji and Lake Vermont Coal Mines on the Lake Vermont residence will be from opposing directions, it is not possible for cumulative impacts to occur under worst case wind conditions for both mines simultaneously.

5.7.2 Meadowbrook Residence

As shown in Table 5.4 the predicted noise level due to mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 28 dBA Leq in Year 27 under adverse meteorological conditions at the Meadowbrook residence. The predicted noise level from both the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 31 dBA Leq under adverse meteorological conditions. This complies with the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit.

Noise emission levels are not predicted to increase at the Meadowbrook residence in Year 37, where operations have moved further into the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area, compared to Year 27, with both predicted noise levels being 31 dBA Leq.

The Meadowbrook residence is approximately 6.1 kilometres from the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine, 6.0 kilometres from the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area and 3.0 kilometres east of the existing Saraji Coal Mine. As noise impacts from Saraji and Lake Vermont Coal Mines on the Lake Vermont residence will be from opposing directions, it is not possible for cumulative impacts to occur under worst case wind conditions for both mines simultaneously.

5.7.3 Leichardt Residence

As shown in Table 5.4 the predicted noise level due to mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 25 dBA Leq in year 27 under adverse meteorological conditions at the Leichardt residence. The predicted noise level from both the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 32 dBA Leq under adverse meteorological conditions. This complies with the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit.

Noise emission levels are predicted to decrease from 32 dBA Leq to 27 dBA Leq at the Leichardt residence in Year 37 compared to Year 27 as operations have moved further into the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area in Year 37.

The Leichardt residence is approximately 20 kilometres east of the existing Saraji Coal Mine and therefore noise emissions from Saraji Coal Mine are expected to be negligible.

6763R02V01 Page 33


5.7.4 Residence at Lot 7 KL96

As shown in Table 5.4 the predicted noise level due to mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 21 dBA Leq in Year 27 under adverse meteorological conditions at the Lot 7 KL96 residence. The predicted noise level from both the approved Lake Vermont Mining Lease Area and the proposed Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area is 25 dBA Leq under adverse meteorological conditions. In the Year 37 scenario the predicted noise level from all equipment associated with Lake Vermont North is 31 dBA Leq. These predicted noise levels comply with the 37 dBA Leq,adj,T night-time noise limit.

The Lot 7 KL96 residence is approximately 20 kilometres northeast of the existing Saraji Coal Mine, and noise emissions from Saraji Coal Mine are therefore expected to be negligible.

5.8 Predicted Low Frequency Noise Levels

An assessment of low frequency noise emissions has been included in accordance with the EcoAccess – Assessment of Low Frequency Noise criteria presented in Section 4.3.3.2.

The internal noise limit is an un-weighted noise level of 50 dBZ which is considered to correlate with an external noise limit of 57 dBZ, assuming a 7 dB reduction from outside to inside through a building with open windows. If the external noise level exceeds 57 dBZ and the difference between the un-weighted and A-weighted noise levels exceeds 15 dB, then the noise is considered to have unacceptable low frequency content and further assessment is required.

The un-weighted noise levels have been predicted under adverse meteorological conditions at the nominated sensitive receptors. The un-weighted (dBZ) and A-weighted (dBA) noise levels are used to assess the low-frequency component of the noise emissions.

The predicted un-weighted and A-weighted noise levels are shown in Table 5.8 and Table 5.9 for the Year 27 and Year 37 scenarios respectively.

Table 5.8 Predicted Noise Levels for Assessment of Low Frequency Noise for Year 27

Receptor Predicted Noise Level Leq

dBZ dBA dBZ - dBA

Lake Vermont 46 33 13 Lot 7 CNS53

(South of Carfax Rd) 43 27 15 Meadowbrook 42 28 15

Mockingbird Downs 45 30 15 Old Kyewong 44 29 15

Leichardt 40 25 15 Lot 7 KL96 37 21 16

6763R02V01 Page 34


Table 5.9 Predicted Noise Levels for Assessment of Low Frequency Noise for Year 37

Receptor Predicted Noise Level Leq

dBZ dBA dBZ - dBA

Lake Vermont 48 35 13 Lot 7 CNS53

(South of Carfax Rd) 42 27 15 Meadowbrook 45 31 14

Mockingbird Downs 45 30 15 Old Kyewong 44 30 15

Leichardt 42 27 15 Lot 7 KL96 44 31 13

From Table 5.8 and Table 5.9 it can be seen that the predicted noise levels are well below the 57 dBZ Leq noise limit, and therefore low frequency noise is compliant.

6763R02V01 Page 35


6 Blasting

6.1 Overview

It is anticipated that the existing vibration levels around the mine site and at the location of sensitive receptors will generally be negligible, except at locations which are close to roads, rail lines or near major items of fixed plant. Mining operations involved with the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine and other existing surrounding mines may also influence the vibration levels at the nominated sensitive receptors. Modelling of vibration levels associated with these existing mines has not been included in this assessment.

The only vibration source of significance from the mining of the Lake Vermont North extension would be blasting. Blasting activities within the pits have been assessed for both ground vibration and airblast. The relevant criteria for ground vibration and airblast have been presented and discussed in Section 4.3.3.3.

6.2 Predictions

Ground vibration and airblast levels caused by blasting activities have been predicted based on the formulas and methodology of Australian Standard AS2187.2 “Explosives - Storage Transport and Use - Use of Explosives”, which predicts the peak particles velocity (PPV) in mm/s and the airblast over pressure (peak pressure) in dB.

6.2.1 Ground Vibration

In accordance with the criteria presented in Section 4.3.3.3 ground vibration levels are to achieve 5mm/s PPV for nine out of ten blasts and not greater than 10mm/s PPV at any time. Ground vibration can be calculated at various distances from a blast using the following formula from AS2187.2:

V = K (R / Q1/2)-B

where: V = ground vibration as peak particle velocity (PPV) (mm/s)

K = site constant

R = distance between charge and point of measurement (m)

Q = effective charge mass per delay or maximum instantaneous charge (kg)

B = site exponent or attenuation rate

Ground vibration from blasting generally increases with an increase in charge mass and reduces with distance.

A site exponent (-B) (attenuation rate) of –1.6 has been estimated for the site based on ASK’s experience with similar mining projects. The site constant (K) was assumed to be in the range 800 to 1600. The maximum instantaneous charge mass will be 650 kg for prestrip blasting and 1650 kilograms for burden blasting as advised by Bowen Basin Coal.

Table 6.1 contains the calculated ground vibration levels (mm/s) at various distances from the blast for both prestrip blasting and burden blasting.

6763R02V01 Page 36


Table 6.1 Ground Vibration Levels at Various Distances from the Blast

Distance from Blast

km

Vibration Level mm/s

Prestrip Burden

K = 800 K = 1600 K = 800 K = 1600

1.0 2.3 4.5 4.8 9.5

1.5 1.2 2.4 2.5 5.0

2.0 0.7 1.5 1.6 3.1

2.5 0.5 1.0 1.1 2.2

3.0 0.4 0.8 0.8 1.6

3.5 0.3 0.6 0.6 1.3

4.0 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.0

4.5 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.9

5.0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7

5.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.6

6.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5

6.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5

7.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4

7.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4

8.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3

8.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3

9.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3

9.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3

10.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Table 6.1 shows that the 10 mm/s PPV criterion would be achieved at distances greater than 1.0 kilometre from the blast. The 5 mm/s PPV criterion is achieved at distances greater than 1.5 kilometres from the blast.

The nearest sensitive receptor is approximately 4 kilometres away from the nearest pit within the proposed Lake Vermont North extension area. Therefore, ground vibration due to blasting is predicted to be compliant with the nominated criteria at all sensitive receptors.

Blast parameters will need to be reviewed to ensure that the nominated vibration criteria are met at all locations.

6.2.2 Airblast

In accordance with the criteria presented in Section 4.3.3.3 airblast pressure levels are to achieve 115 dBZ for nine out of ten blasts and not greater than 120 dBZ at any time. For blasting in an open-cut mine, the distance to the 120 dBZ Lpeak contour line from the blast can be calculated using the following formula:

D120 = (k * h / maximum (B, S))2.5 * m1/3

6763R02V01 Page 37


Where: D120 = distance to the 120 dBZ Lpeak contour (m)

k = a site constant determined from the ratio S/B and S/h which requires local calibration

h = hole diameter (mm)

B = burden (mm)

S = stemming height (mm)

m = charge mass (kg)

The site constant, k, has been assumed to be equal to 180 based on ASK’s experience with other mining projects.

The following blast information has been provided by Bowen Basin Coal in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2 Blast Information

Parameter Prestrip Burden

h 270 mm 229 mm

S 6500 mm 7000 mm

B 8000 mm 7500 mm

m 650 kg 1650 kg

Table 6.3 contains the separation distances and the reduction of noise levels due to distance.

Table 6.3 Airblast Noise Levels at Various Distances from the Blast

Distance from Blast, km Airblast Level, dBZ

Prestrip Burden

1.0 116.9 117.7 1.5 111.6 112.4 2.0 107.9 108.7 2.5 105.0 105.8 3.0 102.6 103.4 3.5 100.6 101.4 4.0 98.9 99.7 4.5 97.4 98.2 5.0 96.0 96.8 5.5 94.8 95.6 6.0 93.6 94.4 6.5 92.6 93.4 7.0 91.6 92.4 7.5 90.7 91.5 8.0 89.9 90.7

6763R02V01 Page 38


Distance from Blast, km Airblast Level, dBZ

Prestrip Burden

8.5 89.1 89.9 9.0 88.4 89.2 9.5 87.7 88.5

10.0 87.0 87.8

The burden blasting is predicted to result in higher airblast levels. The distance to the 120 dBZ contour line for burden blasting is calculated to be 840 metres. The distance to the 115 dBZ contour line for burden blasting is 1230 metres.

Based on these calculations and blast parameters, the airblast criteria would be achieved at all sensitive receptors.

6.3 Assessment

Based on the blasting calculations presented within this section, the ground vibration and airblast levels from open cut operations within the Lake Vermont North extension are predicted to be acceptable at the nearest receptors based on the nominated criteria (see Section 4.3.3.3).

6763R02V01 Page 39


7 Discussion and Recommendations

7.1 Overview

From the assessment of noise and vibration emissions, the nominated criteria were not predicted to be exceeded at the nominated sensitive receptors due to mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension.

As noise impacts from Saraji and Lake Vermont Coal Mines on the Lake Vermont and Meadowbrook residences will be from opposing directions, it is not possible for cumulative impacts to occur under worst case wind conditions for both mines simultaneously.

7.2 Monitoring

Given there are no significant exceedances predicted and that noise complaints have not been made due to the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine operations, it is recommended that noise monitoring only be conducted on an as-needed basis as mining in the Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area progresses. Noise monitoring should be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the EA, the Guideline Mining – Model Mining Conditions document and the EHP Noise Measurement Manual.

It is also recommended that the mine operators conduct vibration and airblast monitoring on an as-needed basis. Blast design parameters should be revised if exceedances are recorded.

6763R02V01 Page 40


8 Conclusion

A noise and vibration impact assessment has been conducted for the proposed Lake Vermont North extension. A noise model has been developed to predict the impact of the proposed Lake Vermont North extension at nearby sensitive receptors from mining operations for the Year 27 and Year 37. Calculations have also been made to predict noise and vibration levels due to blasting.

From this assessment, the following conclusions are made:

Noise criteria for the mine have been proposed in Section 4.4, which includes noise limits of 42 dBA Leq,adj,T in the day and evening and 37 dBA Leq,adj,T in the night.

In Year 27 there are no exceedances predicted from mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension. As described in Section 5.7.1, when taking into account the cumulative impact due to the approved Lake Vermont Coal Mine the predicted noise level at the Lake Vermont residence, under adverse conditions, is 37 dBA Leq, which complies with the night-time noise limit.

In Year 37 there are no exceedances predicted from mining operations associated with the proposed Lake Vermont North extension.

As noise impacts from Saraji and Lake Vermont Coal Mines on the Lake Vermont and Meadowbrook residences will be from opposing directions, it is not possible for cumulative impacts to occur under worst case wind conditions for both mines simultaneously.

It is expected that the use of a dragline will not result in increased noise levels compared to the standard scenario noise predictions based on the presented sound power data and noise predictions in Section 5.6 and Table 5.6.

An assessment of low frequency noise has been conducted, and no exceedances of the criteria were predicted.

Based on the blasting parameters and calculations in Section 6, the ground vibration and airblast levels from blasting are predicted to meet the nominated criteria at the nearest sensitive receptors.

Given there are no predicted exceedances and that noise complaints have not been made due to the existing Lake Vermont Coal Mine, it is recommended that noise monitoring is only conducted on an as-needed basis.

6763R02V01 Page 41


References

ASK Consulting Engineers (ASK) (2013), Cameby Downs Expansion Project - 2013 Noise and Vibration Assessment 6612R02V01, ASK Consulting Engineers, Queensland

ASK Consulting Engineers (ASK) (2013), Jellinbah Mine – Mackenzie North Mining Lease Area Noise and Vibration Assessment 6494R01V01, ASK Consulting Engineers, Queensland

Bassett Acoustics (2006), Ensham Central Project – Environmental Noise Assessment (report no BA0183r7a.6.5rp.doc), Bassett Acoustics, New South Wales

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) (2007), Climate Change in Australia Technical Report, CSIRO, Australia

Environmental Protection Act (2004) (Qld)

Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy (2008) (Qld)

Environmental Protection Agency (2004), EcoAccess Guideline “Planning For Noise Control”, available from Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland

Environmental Protection Agency (2002), EcoAccess Guideline “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise”, available from Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland

Environmental Protection Agency (2006), EcoAccess Guideline “Noise and vibration from blasting”, available from Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland

Standards Australia (2006), Explosives - Storage Transport and Use - Use of Explosives AS2187.2-2006, Standards Australia, NSW

World Health Organization (1999), Guidelines for Community Noise. World Health Organization, Geneva.

6763R02V01 Page 42


Appendix A Acoustic Terminology

Parameter or Term Description

Frequency The number of vibrations, or complete cycles, that take place in one second. Measured in hertz (Hz), where one Hz equals one cycle per second. A young person with normal hearing will be able to perceive frequencies between approximately 20 and 20,000 Hz. With increasing age, the upper frequency limit tends to decrease.

dB The decibel (dB) is the unit measure of sound. Most noises occur in a range of 20 dB (quiet rural area at night) to 120 dB (nightclub dance floor or concert).

dBA Noise levels are most commonly expressed in terms of the ‘A' weighted decibel scale, dBA. This scale closely approximates the response of the human ear, thus providing a measure of the subjective loudness of noise and enabling the intensity of noises with different frequency characteristics (e.g. pitch and tone) to be compared.

dB, dB(linear) or dBZ

Noise levels are sometimes expressed in terms of the linear, Z or un-weighted decibel scale – they all take the same meaning. The value has no weighting applied to it and is the same as the dB level.

dBC Noise levels are sometimes expressed in terms of the ‘C' weighted decibel scale, dB(C). This scale is very similar to the dB, dB, dB(linear), dBZ un-weighted scale. The difference being that some negative weighting is applied below 250Hz and above 1kHz. The magnitude of the weighting is significantly less than the dBA scale.

Octave band Ranges of frequencies where the highest frequency of the band is double the lowest frequency of the band. The band is usually specified by the centre frequency, i.e. 31.5, 63, 125, 250, 500 Hz, etc.

Day The period between 7am and 6pm.

Evening The period between 6pm and 10pm.

Night The period between 10pm and 7am.

Free-field The description of a noise receiver or source location which is away from any significantly reflective objects (e.g. buildings, walls).

Noise sensitive receiver or Noise sensitive receptor

The definition can vary depending on the project type or location, but generally defines a building or land area which is sensitive to noise. Generally it includes residential dwellings (e.g. houses, units, caravans, marina), medical buildings (e.g. hospitals, health clinics, medical centres), educational facilities (e.g. schools, universities, colleges),

LP The instantaneous noise level, which is noted during a noise event.

6763R02V01 Page 43


Parameter or Term Description

LPA As for LP except the frequency weighting is defined as being the ‘A’ weighted decibel scale. Often the ‘A’ is not included in the subscript if the level is reported as being dBA.

L1 The noise level exceeded for 1% of the measurement period.

L10 The noise level exceeded for 10% of the measurement period. It is sometimes referred to as the average maximum noise level.

L90 The noise level exceeded for 90% of the measurement period. This is commonly referred to as the background noise level.

minL90 The background noise levels calculated using the ‘lowest 10th percentile’ of the L90 levels in each period of the day. This ‘lowest 10th percentile’ method is defined in the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) guidelines.

minL90,1hour As for minL90 except the measurement intervals are defined as 1 hour duration.

Leq The equivalent continuous sound level, which is the constant sound level over a given time period, which is equivalent in total sound energy to the time-varying sound level, measured over the same time period.

Leq,1hour As for Leq except the measurement intervals are defined as 1 hour duration.

Leq,adj,T The Leq adjusted for tonal or impulsive noise characteristics and with a measurement interval of 'T' duration (e.g. 15 minutes, 1 hour).

LAmax or max LpA Maximum A-weighted sound pressure level.

LAmax,T Average maximum A-weighted sound pressure level.

LAmax,adj,T Adjusted maximum sound pressure level over time period of length ‘T’. The adjustments may be for tonality and impulsiveness.

LAr,Tr The rating noise level, as used by the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) EcoAccess “Planning for Noise Control” guideline document.

LW The sound power level of a noise source is its inherent noise, which does not vary with distance from the noise source. It is not directly measured with a sound level meter, but rather is calculated from the measured noise level and the distance at which the measurement was undertaken.

Low frequency noise

Noise that occurs in the 10 Hz to 200 Hz frequency range, as defined in the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) EcoAccess “Assessment of Low Frequency Noise” draft guideline document.

6763R02V01 Page 44


Appendix B Mining Equipment Locations

Table B.1 Equipment Type Legend

Equipment Type Model Symbol

Excavators

Liebherr R9800

Liebherr R996

Liebherr R9400

Hitachi EX1200

Trucks Overburden Haul Routes

Coal Haul Routes

Dozers

CAT D11

CAT D10

CAT D11 Push Dozer

CAT 834 (Wheeled Dozer)

6763R02V01 Page 45


Figure B.1 Conceptual Coal Haul Routes and Equipment Locations in Year 27

6763R02V01 Page 46


Figure B.2 Conceptual Overburden Haul Routes and Equipment Locations in Year 27

6763R02V01 Page 47


Figure B.3 Conceptual Coal Haul Routes and Equipment Locations in Year 37

6763R02V01 Page 48


Figure B.4 Conceptual Overburden Haul Routes and Equipment Locations in Year 37

6763R02V01 Page 49


Appendix C Predicted Mining Noise Contours

Figure C.1 Year 27 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Neutral meteorological conditions.

Figure C.2 Year 27 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Adverse meteorological conditions.

Figure C.3 Year 27 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Neutral meteorological conditions.

Figure C.4 Year 27 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Adverse meteorological conditions.

Figure C.5 Year 37 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Neutral meteorological conditions.

Figure C.6 Year 37 Lake Vermont North Mining Lease Area Only – Adverse meteorological conditions.

Figure C.7 Year 37 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Neutral meteorological conditions.

Figure C.8 Year 37 All Equipment Associated with Lake Vermont North – Adverse meteorological conditions.

NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.1Predicted Noise ContoursYear 27Lake Vermont North MiningLease Area OnlyNeutral Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763

Location:Lake Vermont Coal Mine QLD

NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.2Predicted Noise ContoursYear 27Lake Vermont North MiningLease Area OnlyAdverse Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.3Predicted Noise ContoursYear 27All Equipment Associatedwith Lake Vermont NorthNeutral Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.4Predicted Noise ContoursYear 27All Equipment Associatedwith Lake Vermont NorthAdverse Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.5Predicted Noise ContoursYear 37Lake Vermont North MiningLease Area OnlyNeutral Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.6Predicted Noise ContoursYear 37Lake Vermont North MiningLease Area OnlyAdverse Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.7Predicted Noise ContoursYear 37All Equipment Associatedwith Lake Vermont NorthNeutral Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


NR8

Noise LevelLeq dBA

202530354045

Length Scale 1:777880 0.40.8 1.6 2.4 3.2

km

Figure C.8Predicted Noise ContoursYear 37All Equipment Associatedwith Lake Vermont NorthAdverse Weather Conditions

Job No. 6763


Documents

Lake Vermont Coal Mine Extension - Department of … · · 2014-12-03This report presents an assessment of the noise and ... Based on the nominated blasting parameters and ... to