November 2004 (PDF 11.6 MB) - Barrick Gold Corporation

—the extent of the areas (including existing,developing or proposed residential, healthor education sites) and number of receivers(including groups that may be especiallysensitive to noise, such as pre-schoolers,students, the aged, hospital and nursinghome patients) likely to be affected by noiselevels above the project-specific noiselevels—the daily activities of the community (inparticular, effects such as sleep disturbance,speech interference, level of annoyanceor effects on physical or physiologicalhealth)—property values—zoning of land uses affected by noise andthe appropriateness of the zoning or landuse—the potential change in the ambient noiselevels as a result of the proposal; cumulativenoise impacts in the area; and whetherparts of the area that are already moderatelyor badly affected by noise will bemore or less affected—the extent to which biodiversity (especiallynative birds and other animals) will beaffected—the likely variation between individuals inresponse to the noise—the amenity of areas used for outdoorrecreational activities or conservation,heritage or wilderness areas—other industry in the area (includingagriculture).2. Characteristics of the proposal and its noiseor vibrations, such as:—the noise characteristics of the activity—the extent to which any remaining noiseimpact exceeds the project-specific noiselevels—the circumstances and times when theproject-specific noise levels are likely to beexceeded—the circumstances and times when thesource noise levels are likely to be belowthe project-specific noise levels (for example,when wind blows source noise awayfrom the receiver)—the accuracy with which impacts can bepredicted, and the likelihood that theimpacts will occur in the manner predicted—the degree to which the character of thenoise is new to an area and differs fromexisting noise sources—the economic benefit and social worth ofthe proposal for the local area, the regionor the nation.3. The feasibility of additional mitigation ormanagement measures:—alternative sites or routes for the development—the technical and economic feasibility ofalternative noise controls or managementprocedures.4. Equity issues in relation to:—the costs borne by a few for the benefit ofothers—the long-term cumulative increase in noiselevels—the opportunity to compensate effectivelythose affected.8.3 Negotiated agreements betweenthe proponent and the affectedcommunityAn alternative mechanism that could be applied isthe more inclusive approach of a negotiated agreementbetween the affected community and theproponent, with traditional regulatory/consentauthorities playing a supporting role. Negotiation isdesigned to be available to those people whoseamenity is potentially affected by non-achievementof the project-specific noise levels. While negotiationon agreed noise levels between the proponent andthe community can occur at any time, this shouldoccur when site noise levels exceed the recommendedmaximum L Aeqlevels presented in Table 2.1.The affected community is in the best position toknow how much noise it is prepared to bear for apackage of benefits that would flow from the operationof the facility creating the noise. As this approachis new, a model for the process has not beenestablished. The process could be initiated when theproponent has demonstrated that the projectspecificnoise levels could not be met.NSW industrial noise policy44