Appendix J - Peabody Energy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Road Traffic Movements The additional Project related construction and operation workforce traffic movements is presented in Table 29. Table 29 Project Related Daily Construction and Operation - Vehicle/Day Vehicle Type Construction Operations Employee Vehicles (car) 50 0 Large Deliveries (trucks) 12 4 Oversize Loads (semi-trailer/oversize) 2 0 Visitors/Representatives (car/small truck) 6 2 Small Deliveries (van/small truck) 12 6 Total 82 12 Source: MWT 2008 Traffic Noise Impact - Lawrence Hargrave Drive For the purposes of noise impact assessment, the existing traffic and additional Project construction and operation daily traffic flows together with the morning and afternoon peak hour flows are presented in Table 30. The percentage increase arising from the Project contributed traffic is shown in brackets. Table 30 Daily Existing and Project Traffic Flows - Lawrence Hargrave Drive Time Period Existing Traffic Including Colliery Project Additional for Construction/ Operation Cumulative Total Daily - 24 hour 5,871 12 (0.0%) 5,883 Daytime - morning 449 2 (0.4%) 451 Daytime - afternoon 509 0 (0.0%) 509 Source: MWT 2008 The maximum increase arising from the additional Project related traffic flow is only 0.4% during the construction and operation morning peak hour. The anticipated 0.4% increase in vehicle movements corresponds to a negligible (
Table 31 Peak Hourly Existing and Project Traffic Flows - Parkes Street Time Period Existing Traffic Including Colliery Project Additional for Construction/ Operation Cumulative Total Daily - 24 hours 7,486 94 (1.3%) 7,580 Daytime - morning 749 14 (1.9%) 763 Daytime - afternoon 552 1 (0.2%) 553 Source: MWT 2008 The maximum increase arising from the additional Project related traffic flow is only 1.9% during construction and operation morning peak hour. The anticipated 1.9% increase in vehicle movements corresponds to a negligible (0.1 dB) increase in the existing traffic noise levels and therefore any Project related traffic noise impacts are likely to be acceptable. 11.2 Rail Transport Railway Noise Criteria RailCorp operates the South Coast rail network in NSW. Noise emissions from the railway are regulated via the RailCorp’s EPL No. 12208. The intent of the relevant EPL conditions is to control airborne noise by two principal means: • Noise Limits. • Management of noise via PRPs. EPL Section L6 Noise Limits (note) provides railway operating noise objectives as follows: It is an objective of this licence to progressively reduce noise levels to the goals of 60 dB(A)Leq, (24 hr) and 85 dB(A) max pass by noise, at one metre from the facade of the nearest affected residential property through the implementation of the Pollution Reduction Programs. In the development of new works, the licensee is required to work towards the planning goals of 55 dB(A) Leq, (24 hr) and 80 dB(A) max pass by noise, at one metre from the facade of the nearest affected residential property. The goals do not represent unobtrusive noise levels. Rather, the objectives recognise that rail operations are inherently noisy and represent a compromise between what may be desirable from a community point of view (ie maintaining amenity) and what is necessary to enable trains to operate. Rail Traffic Movements The midweek daily existing, additional and cumulative train movements are presented in Table 32 with the percentage increase arising from the Project additional traffic shown in brackets. Also shown are the estimated train operating conditions between Helensburgh and Otford in the vicinity of the Project site. Heggies Pty Ltd Report Number 10-5055-R1 Revision 0 Metropolitan Coal Project Noise Impact Assessment Helensburgh Coal Pty Ltd (10-5055R1) 31 July 2008 Page 41
Page 1 and 2: APPENDIX J METROPOLITAN COAL PROJEC
Page 3 and 4: Metropolitan Coal Project Noise Imp
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS 11 OFF-SITE TRANS
Page 7 and 8: 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Assessment Requi
Page 9 and 10: • HCPL to implement a continuous
Page 11 and 12: Table 2 Current and Proposed Hours
Page 13 and 14: Table 3 Nearest Potentially Affecte
Page 15 and 16: Table 5 Atmospheric Stability Frequ
Page 17 and 18: Table 8 Unattended Background Noise
Page 19 and 20: 4.4 Ambient Traffic Noise Monitorin
Page 21 and 22: Ideally, the intrusive noise emissi
Page 23 and 24: 5.4 Noise Impact Assessment Methodo
Page 25 and 26: Table 16 Fixed Plant Noise Audit -
Page 27 and 28: 6.5 Project Noise Model Scenarios T
Page 29 and 30: The PRP 12 Study concluded that whi
Page 31 and 32: 7.6 Continuous Noise Improvement Pr
Page 33 and 34: Existing Metropolitan Colliery Nois
Page 45: Table 27 Predicted Distance Require
Page 49 and 50: Table 34 Midweek Existing and Cumul
Page 51 and 52: Table 38 Predicted Train Generated
Page 53 and 54: • Negligible noise level increase
Page 55 and 56: HCPL would implement a range of noi
Page 57 and 58: Similarly, ground vibration levels
Page 59: Appendix A1 Report 10-5055-R1 Page
Page 62 and 63: Initial Development Schedule Projec
Page 64 and 65: LARGE COAL CIRCUIT ROM Bin Dump Hop
Page 66 and 67: Zoning LEGEND Coal Lease Boundary M
Page 68 and 69: Appendix E1 Report 10-5055-R1 Page
Page 70 and 71: Appendix E1 Report 10-5055-R1 Page
Page 72 and 73: Appendix F1 Report 10-5055-R1 Page
Page 96 and 97:
Appendix G1 Report 10-5055-R1 Page
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Appendix H Report 10-5055-R1 Page 1
Page 112 and 113:
6 217 000 N 35 314 000 E 315 000 E
show all

Appendix J - Peabody Energy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?