Noise Impact Assessment

Transcription

1 Noise Impact Assessment Deer Creek Energy Limited Joslyn North Mine Prepared For Millennium EMS Solutions Prepared By Mr. James Farquharson, CET Mr. Clifford Faszer, P. Eng. Faszer Farquharson & Associates Ltd. December 30, 2005 FFA File

2 Executive Summary Deer Creek Energy Limited (DCEL) is submitting an application to the Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) and Alberta Environment (AENV) for approval to construct, operate, and reclaim the proposed Joslyn North Mine Project (the JNM Project). The JNM Project is located on the Joslyn Lease that consists of Oil Sands Leases (OSLs) T24 (OSL 24), (OSL 452, formerly Permit 70) and (OSL 799), which is approximately 70 kilometres north of Fort McMurray located in Townships 95 and 96, Ranges 11 and 12, W4M. For the purpose of this application the three leases will be referred to as Lease 24. As part of their application to the EUB DCEL is required to complete a Noise Impact Assessment. The results of this assessment are compared with the Permissible Sound Levels (PSL) of the EUB Noise Control Directive ID 99-8 (Directive) to determine compliance. The environmental noise propagation model prepared for this assessment may also be used to develop and evaluate noise control measures should the results indicate non-compliance. Millennium EMS Solutions, on behalf of DCEL, retained Faszer Farquharson & Associates to complete this assessment. This assessment follows previous assessments of the DCEL SAGD facilities located in Lease 24 by Faszer Farquharson & Associates. Faszer Farquharson & Associates used a combination of manufacturer s data, file data of previously measured mining equipment and theoretical assessment techniques to determine sound pressure levels of the significant noise sources associated with the proposed project. The sound pressure levels were used to calculate sound power levels for the significant noise sources associated with the proposed project equipment. Where appropriate, duty factors were assigned to the mining equipment based on information received from DCEL. Data regarding the topography and vegetation of the study area, along with the location of the trapper s cabin and the community of Fort McKay was provided by DCEL with supplemental information obtained from commercial sources. Significant noise sources associated with the DCEL SAGD facilities were also included. This information was used as input parameters for an environmental noise propagation computer model to calculate the sound level of the facility and mining operations at each point of interest. The modelling was completed for the mining operations located nearest the residences of interest. The modelling was undertaken for the years 2010, 2014, 2019 and This approach reflects dates of significant changes in mining operations and the positioning of the mining equipment in relation to the reception locations over the study period. i

3 The overall results of the modelling are presented in the following table in comparison to the allowable sound level limits. Predicted Sound Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Year Predicted Sound Level (dba) EUB Daytime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) EUB Nighttime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) Trappers Cabin Fort McKay FFA File The noise propagation model results indicate that the proposed mining operations for the development of the Joslyn North Mine would potentially comply with the daytime PSLs of the EUB Directive at both reception locations. The noise propagation model results further indicate that the nighttime sound level limits would be met up to 2014 at the trapper s cabin and through to year 2034 at Fort McKay. It is predicted that the nighttime sound level limits would be exceeded after the year 2014 at a trapper s cabin located on the DCEL Lease 24. Faszer Farquharson & Associates recommends that DCEL consider relocation of this cabin as a potential mitigation strategy to ensure that the project complies with the allowable sound level limits. Validating the noise model with on site measurement and monitoring program is also recommended. ii

4 Contents Executive Summary... i Background & Scope... 1 Site Description & Residence Locations... 1 Mining Equipment... 2 Approach... 2 Criteria... 3 Sound Power Level Calculations... 4 Noise Model... 5 Results... 6 Recommendations Cumulative Effects Conclusion Appendix A Permissible Sound Level Determination Trapper s Cabin...A-1 Fort McKay...A-2 iii

5 Tables Predicted Sound Levels ii Table 1 Mining Equipment 2 Table 2 Permissible Sound Levels 3 Table 3 Source Sound Power Levels 4 Table 4 Modeled Conditions 5 Table 5 Predicted Sound Levels 6 Table 6 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels 7 Trapper s Cabin Year 2019 Table 7 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels 8 Fort McKay Year 2019 Table 8 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels 9 Trapper s Cabin Year 2034 Table 9 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels 10 Fort McKay Year 2034 iv

6 List of Figures Figure 1 - Regional Area Map Figure 2 - Lease 24 Map with contours and receptor locations Figure 3 - Mine Development 2010 and 2014 Figure 4 - Mine Development 2019 and 2034

7 Background & Scope Deer Creek Energy Limited (DCEL) is submitting an application to the Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) and Alberta Environment (AENV) for approval to construct, operate, and reclaim the proposed Joslyn North Mine Project (the JNM Project). The JNM Project is located on the Joslyn Lease that consists of Oil Sands Leases (OSLs) T24 (OSL 24), (OSL 452, formerly Permit 70) and (OSL 799), which is approximately 70 kilometres north of Fort McMurray located in Townships 95 and 96, Ranges 11 and 12, W4M (Figure 1). For the purpose of this application the three leases will be referred to as Lease 24. As part of their application to the EUB DCEL is required to complete a Noise Impact Assessment. The results of this assessment are compared with the Permissible Sound Levels (PSL) of the EUB Noise Control Directive ID 99-8 (Directive) to determine compliance. The environmental noise propagation model prepared for this assessment may also be used to develop and evaluate noise control measures should the results indicate non-compliance. Millennium EMS Solutions, on behalf of DCEL, retained Faszer Farquharson & Associates to complete this assessment. This assessment follows previous assessments of the DCEL SAGD facilities located in Lease 24 by Faszer Farquharson & Associates. Site Description & Residence Locations The DCEL Joslyn North Mine is located within oil sands Lease 24. The processing facility will be located near the northern boundary of Lease 24 in SEC W4M, approximately 15 kilometres northwest of Fort McKay, Alberta. The nearest dwelling to the mine and plant site identified by DCEL is a trapper s cabin located on the south side of the Ells River in LSD W4M. This cabin is approximately 7 kilometres from the proposed DCEL plant site and approximately 2 kilometres south of the main external disposal area. In addition to the location of the area residences, bordering the north boundary of DCEL Lease 24 is the Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) Lease 18 Horizon Project. This project presently under development includes a bitumen mine and processing facility. Figure 2 presents a contour map of the study area indicating the DCEL Joslyn North Mine, the reception locations for which modelling was completed and other area features. 1

8 Mining Equipment Table 1 lists the major equipment proposed for use in the Joslyn North Mine. The equipment is anticipated to operate on a 24 hour per day basis. Table 1 Mining Equipment Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Equipment Description Approach Terex MT 5500 Truck P & H 4100 Shovel Caterpillar 992 Loader Caterpillar 24 Grader Caterpillar 844 RT Dozer Caterpillar 16 Grader Caterpillar 793 Water Truck Caterpillar D11 Dozer Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Caterpillar 988 Loader Caterpillar D10 Dozer Caterpillar 777 Haul Truck Caterpillar 330B Backhoe Caterpillar D7 Side Track Dozer Caterpillar 583R Side Boom Track Dozer FFA File Faszer Farquharson & Associates used a combination of manufacturer s data, file data of previously measured mining equipment and theoretical assessment techniques to determine sound pressure levels of the significant noise sources associated with the proposed project. The sound pressure levels were used to calculate sound power levels for the significant noise sources associated with the proposed project equipment. Where appropriate duty factors were assigned to the mining equipment based on information received from DCEL. Data regarding the topography and vegetation of the study area, along with the location of the trapper s cabin and the community of Fort McKay was provided by DCEL with supplemental information obtained from commercial sources. Significant noise sources associated with the DCEL SAGD facilities were also included. This information was used as input parameters for an environmental noise propagation computer model to calculate the sound level of the facility and mining operations at each point of interest. The modelling was completed for the mining operations located nearest the residences of interest. The modelling was undertaken for the years 2010 and 2014 (shown in Figure 3), 2019 and 2034 (shown in Figure 4). This approach reflects dates of significant changes in mining operations and the positioning of the mining equipment in relation to the reception locations over the study period. The results of the modelling were reviewed and compared to the PSLs of the EUB Directive to determine the potential for compliance at each reception location. The model may also be used to develop and evaluate noise control measures if the results exceed the allowable levels of the EUB Directive. The expected change in sound level resulting from the noise control measures can then be predicted to the points of interest. 2

9 Criteria The EUB Directive is a receiver-oriented noise regulation that applies to energy industry facilities operating in the Province of Alberta under EUB license. The Directive requires a Noise Impact Assessment for any permanent facility where there is a reasonable expectation of a continuous noise source. This Directive specifies allowable sound levels for energy industry facilities at designated receptor points including residences. In lieu of a residence within 1500 metres of a facility, the Directive indicates that a level of 40 dba L eq should not be exceeded at this distance during the nighttime. These specified limits are the permissible sound levels (PSLs). The Directive requires that all facilities licensed after October 1988 meet the PSLs of the Directive. Actual compliance can only be determined by comparing the comprehensive sound level to the permissible sound levels of a valid comprehensive sound survey. Although it is not mandatory that a comprehensive sound survey be completed, the EUB expects that the comprehensive sound level of the facility comply with the applicable PSLs. The PSLs are derived from information regarding the area population density; proximity to heavily travelled transportation routes including motor vehicle routes, rail lines, aircraft flyways and other specified adjustments. The PSL during the daytime may be adjusted to a level 10 dba above the nighttime level. Table 2 presents the PSLs for the locations assessed. The detailed determination of the PSLs is presented in Appendix A. Table 2 Permissible Sound Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Location Daytime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) Nighttime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) Community of Fort McKay Trapper s Cabin FFA File

10 Sound Power Level Calculations Sound power levels of the plant and mining equipment were calculated from a combination of manufacturer s data, file data of previously measured mining equipment and theoretical assessment techniques. The calculations followed accepted acoustical engineering evaluation methods for the determination of sound power levels from sound pressure levels for large machinery. Table 3 presents the calculated sound power levels of the significant project noise sources. The values are order ranked from highest to lowest overall dba sound power level. Table 3 Source Sound Power Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Description Sound Power Level (db re: W) Octave Band Centre Frequency (Hz) Sum (dba) Plant Terex MT 5500 Truck (dumping) Crusher P & H 4100 Shovel Caterpillar 992 Loader Caterpillar 24 Grader Terex MT 5500 Truck (box down) Caterpillar 844 RT Dozer Caterpillar 16 Grader Caterpillar 793 Water Truck Caterpillar D11 Dozer Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Caterpillar 988 Loader Caterpillar D10 Dozer Caterpillar 777 Haul Truck Caterpillar 330B Backhoe Caterpillar D7 Side Track Dozer Caterpillar 583R Side Boom Track Dozer FFA File The order ranked sound pressure levels at a distant point of reception may differ from the source order ranked sound power levels. This can occur for a number of reasons including duration of operation, the frequency composition of each noise source, the physical height of the noise source above the ground, acoustical shielding at the site or the topography between the site and the receiver. 4

11 Noise Model Faszer Farquharson & Associates employed the use of ENM, an environmental noise propagation model, for this assessment. ENM is an environmental noise assessment software package from RTA Technology Pty. Ltd. The calculated source sound power levels complete with the physical information regarding the mining equipment layout and location of the residences were entered in the model. The meteorological conditions selected favoured the transmission of sound from the mining equipment to each point of reception and thus emulate a period during which DCEL may experience noise complaints regarding their operations. Table 4 lists the selected conditions. Table 4 Modeled Conditions Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Parameter Modeled Input +25 C 5.0 kph Temperature Wind Velocity Wind Direction Relative Humidity 50% Topography Yes Terrain Category Rural Ground Type Grass Temperature Gradient ( C/100m) 0 Receiver height above ground 1.5m From the mine to each residence FFA file Faszer Farquharson & Associates reviewed model input and results during the modelling process and, where warranted, additional calculations were completed outside of the model to verify the ENM results. Given the terrain is a mixture of forest, muskeg, cleared lands and mined lands Faszer Farquharson & Associates selected grass as the ground type. 5

12 Results Table 5 presents the overall modeled sound pressure levels the Joslyn North Mine to each selected reception point for the four individual years that were evaluated. The modelling was completed using a receiver elevation of 1.5 metres above the ground surface at each point of reception. Table 5 Predicted Sound Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Year Discussion of Results Predicted Sound Level (dba) EUB Daytime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) EUB Nighttime Permissible Sound Level (dba L eq ) Trappers Cabin * * ** ** Fort McKay * * ** ** FFA File *Shown on Figure 3 **Shown on Figure 4 The results indicate that the allowable daytime sound level limit would be met at both receiver locations. The results also indicate that the nighttime allowable sound level limit is met up to 2014 at the trapper s cabin and through to year 2034 at Fort McKay. Sometime between years 2014 and 2019 the sound level of the project is predicted to exceed the allowable nighttime sound level at the trapper s cabin through to the end of the project. 6

13 Table 6 presents the source order-ranked results for the top 30 noise sources at the trapper s cabin in year The detailed results are order ranked by noise source and thus highlight the significance of the noise from the various pieces of mining equipment and the plant. Table 6 Trapper s Cabin Year 2019 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Source Source Sound Level Contribution (dba) Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Top of Pile 36.1 Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Reclaim 35.4 Deer Creek Plant 35.0 Terex RH200 Middle Bench 33.8 Terex RH200 High Bench 30.1 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top of Pile 26.5 Caterpillar D11Dozer Reclaim 25.3 P & H 4100 Shovel Bench Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Top of Pile 22.9 P & H 4100 Shovel Bench P & H 4100 Shovel Pit Caterpillar 992 Loader Higher Bench 20.0 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Bench 19.7 Caterpillar 844 RT Dozer Medium Bench 19.3 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top Bench 19.1 Caterpillar D11Dozer Middle Bench 18.9 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Bench 17.0 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Reclaim 16.5 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Pit 15.1 Caterpillar 988 Loader Mid Bench 15.0 Terex MT 5500 Truck Higher Bench 14.8 Caterpillar D10 Dozer Lower Bench 14.5 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Haul Road 14.5 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Pile 14.1 Caterpillar 24 Grader By Plant 13.7 Crusher 13.6 Caterpillar 24 Grader Road Toward Crusher 12.9 Phase IIIA Cooler Inlet 11.8 Phase II Cooler Inlet 11.2 Caterpillar 793 Water Truck Pit 9.6 Project Sum 42.2 FFA File Note: Sound Pressure level values below the reference level of 20 micro Pascals are indicated by a negative sign preceding the value. The results indicate that the central plant and the trucks dumping are the two most significant noise sources at trappers cabin in

14 Table 7 presents the source order-ranked results for the top 30 noise sources at Fort McKay in year The detailed results are order ranked by noise source and thus highlight the significance of the noise from the various pieces of mining equipment and the plant. Table 7 Fort McKay Year 2019 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Source Source Sound Level Contribution (dba) Terex RH200 High Bench 18.6 Deer Creek Plant 18.4 Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Top of Pile 14.6 Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Reclaim 14.3 P & H 4100 Shovel Pit Caterpillar D11Dozer Top of Pile 7.0 Caterpillar D11Dozer Reclaim 5.6 Caterpillar 24 Grader Road Toward Crusher 4.9 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Top of Pile 4.9 Terex RH200 Middle Bench 4.8 Phase IIIA Cooler Inlet -0.6 Phase II Cooler Inlet -4.5 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top Bench -4.9 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Pile -5.0 Caterpillar 992 Loader Bench -5.0 P & H 4100 Shovel Pit Phase IIIA Cooler Outlet -5.6 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Haul Road -6.4 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Reclaim -6.6 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Pit -6.9 P & H 4100 Shovel Bench P & H 4100 Shovel Bench Caterpillar 24 Grader By Plant -7.3 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Bench -8.1 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Bench -8.3 Caterpillar 992 Loader Higher Bench -8.5 Crusher -8.7 Phase II Cooler Outlet -9.4 Phase III Heater Outlet -9.9 Caterpillar 844 RT Dozer Pit Project Sum 23.6 FFA File Note: Sound Pressure level values below the reference level of 20 micro Pascals are indicated by a negative sign preceding the value. The results indicate that the central plant and the trucks dumping are the two most significant noise sources at Fort McKay in

15 Table 8 presents the source order-ranked results for the top 30 noise sources at the trapper s cabin in year The detailed results are order ranked by noise source and thus highlight the significance of the noise from the various pieces of mining equipment and the plant. Table 8 Trapper s Cabin Year 2034 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Source Source Sound Level Contribution (dba) Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Pile 41.3 Deer Creek Plant 35.0 Terex RH200 Bench Terex RH200 Bench Terex RH200 Bench Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Reclaim 29.9 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top of Pile 29.4 Terex RH200 Bench Caterpillar D11Dozer Reclaim 21.0 Caterpillar 992 Loader Higher Bench 19.1 Caterpillar 992 Loader Bench 18.7 P & H 4100 Shovel Pit Caterpillar 793 Water Truck Pit 18.7 P & H 4100 Shovel Bench Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Top of Reclaim 17.8 P & H 4100 Shovel Pit Caterpillar D10 Dozer Reclaim 16.7 Terex RH200 Pit 15.7 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Haul Road 14.4 Terex MT 5500 Truck Haul Road Caterpillar 24 Grader By Plant 13.5 Crusher 13.1 Phase IIIA Cooler Inlet 12.7 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top Bench 12.4 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Bench 12.1 Caterpillar 988 Loader Mid Bench 11.9 Caterpillar 844 RT Dozer Pit 11.5 Phase II Cooler Inlet 11.4 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Reclaim Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Crusher 9.6 Project Sum 44.0 FFA File Note: Sound Pressure level values below the reference level of 20 micro Pascals are indicated by a negative sign preceding the value. The results indicate that the central plant and the trucks dumping are still the two most significant noise sources at the trappers cabin in

16 Table 9 presents the source order-ranked results for the top 30 noise sources at the community of Fort McKay in year The detailed results are order ranked by noise source and thus highlight the significance of the noise from the various pieces of mining equipment and the plant. Table 9 Fort McKay Year 2034 Order Ranked Sound Pressure Levels Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine Source Source Sound Level Contribution (dba) Terex RH200 Bench Terex RH200 Bench Terex RH200 Bench Terex RH200 Bench Deer Creek Plant 18.4 Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Pile 17.1 Terex MT 5500 Truck Dumping Reclaim 13.6 Caterpillar 992 Loader Higher Bench 10.9 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top of Pile 8.4 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Top of Reclaim 6.0 Caterpillar 385B Backhoe Bench 5.0 Caterpillar D11Dozer Reclaim 4.8 Caterpillar 988 Loader Mid Bench 3.4 Caterpillar D11Dozer Top Bench 3.2 Phase IIIA Cooler Inlet 2.4 Caterpillar D10 Dozer Reclaim 0.8 Caterpillar D10 Dozer Higher Bench -0.3 Terex MT 5500 Truck Hauling Top of Reclaim Terex MT 5500 Truck Higher Bench -1.6 Phase II Cooler Inlet -1.7 Terex RH200 Pit -2.1 Caterpillar 992 Loader Bench -2.1 Phase IIIA Cooler Outlet -2.5 P & H 4100 Shovel Bench Phase II Cooler Outlet -5.3 Caterpillar 793 Water Truck Pit -6.2 Caterpillar 24 Grader On Haul Road -6.7 Caterpillar 583R Side Boom Track Dozer -6.7 Caterpillar 24 Grader By Plant -7.5 Phase III Heater Outlet -8.1 Project Sum 31.7 FFA File Note: Sound Pressure level values below the reference level of 20 micro Pascals are indicated by a negative sign preceding the value. The results indicate that the central plant and the trucks dumping are the two most significant noise sources at Fort McKay in

17 Recommendations Faszer Farquharson recommends relocation of the trapper s cabin after year 2014 but before the year 2019 as a possible mitigation strategy when the project operations are predicted to exceed the allowable sound level limits. Faszer Farquharson & Associates recommends that DCEL initiate a community noise program as a component of the overall environmental program for the facility. The community noise program would record community noise concerns and address those concerns through sound level monitoring and mitigation programs as necessary. Cumulative Effects The EUB Directive requires that companies proposing facilities where there is already an energy industry presence need to consider the overall contribution of all energy industry facilities and ensure that the total energy industry sound level does not exceed the allowable levels. As CNRL is currently developing their Horizon Project, a bitumen mine, central extraction and upgrading facility that borders the northern edge of DCEL s Lease 24 a review is warranted. The Noise Assessment prepared for the CNRL Horizon project indicates that the sound of this project as proposed would spill onto DCEL s Lease 24. The CNRL assessment presents the results of four mining scenarios that are expected over the life of the project. Scenario 4 presents a situation where the sound of the CNRL activities would have the greatest impact on the DCEL Phase II, Phase IIIA SAGD and the Joslyn North Mine project areas. The noise impact of the CNRL Scenario 4 activities is predicted to have the greatest impact on the northern portions of the Deer Creek Lease 24 when CNRL mining activities are near the southern boundary of their lease. The CNRL assessment does not provide sufficient detailed information that could be combined with the Deer Creek noise model to determine the cumulative noise impact of the combined facilities. In a review of the available data it may be concluded that the Deer Creek operations would have the greatest impact on the receiver locations identified in this assessment and that the contribution of the CNRL operations would be significantly lower given the location of the receivers in respect to the CNRL facilities. Professional opinion suggests that the predicted noise impact of the Deer Creek facilities in combination with the CNLR facilities would not be measurably higher than that reported in this assessment. Faszer Farquharson & Associates has recommended additional assessment during the project life to determine if the operations exceed the EUB Noise Control Directive. That assessment would include the effect of the CNRL operations. Faszer Farquharson & Associates recommends a collective approach to community noise issues and encourages Deer Creek and CNRL to cooperate on such matters. This collective approach is favoured by the EUB in situations where more than one licensee may contribute to the noise environment at a receiver location. Conclusion The noise propagation model results indicate that the proposed mining operations for the development of the Joslyn North Mine would potentially comply with the daytime PSLs of the EUB Directive at all of the residences. The noise propagation model results 11

18 further indicate that the nighttime sound level limits would be exceeded after the year 2014 at a trapper s cabin located on the DCEL Lease 24. Faszer Farquharson & Associates recommends that DCEL consider relocation of this cabin as a possible mitigation strategy to ensure that the project complies with the allowable sound level limits. An on site noise measurement and monitoring program is also recommended to confirm the predicted noise levels. 12

19 Appendix A Permissible Sound Level Determination

20 Trapper s Cabin Permissible Sound Level Determination (PSL) Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine AEUB Noise Control Directive Basic Nighttime Sound Level (BSL) Nighttime Daytime (22:00-07:00) (07:00-22:00) Dwelling Unit Density per ¼ Section of Land Proximity to Transportation* 1 8 Dwellings Dwellings >160 Dwellings Category Category Category Class A Adjustments Class Reason for Adjustment Daytime Adjustment N/A 10 Basic Sound Level Value (dba L eq ) A1 Seasonal Adjustment (1 Nov 31 Mar) +5 A2 Absence of Both Tonal and Impulse/Impact Components +5 A3 Ambient Monitoring Adjustment -10 to +10 Class Adjustment = Sum of A1, A2 and A3 (as applicable), but not to exceed a maximum of 10 dba L eq Class B Adjustments Class Duration of Activity Total Class A Adjustments 0 0 Value (dba L eq ) B1 1 day +15 B2 1 week +10 B3 < or = to 2 months +5 B4 > 2 months Class B Adjustment = one only of B1, B2, B3 or B4 *Proximity to Transportation Category Definitions Class B Adjustment PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVEL (dba) Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Dwelling units more than 500m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and not subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. Dwelling units more than 30m but less than 500m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and not subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. Dwelling units less than 30m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. FFA File A-1

21 Fort McKay Permissible Sound Level Determination (PSL) Deer Creek Joslyn North Mine AEUB Noise Control Directive Basic Nighttime Sound Level (BSL) Nighttime Daytime (22:00-07:00) (07:00-22:00) Dwelling Unit Density per ¼ Section of Land Proximity to Transportation* 1 8 Dwellings Dwellings >160 Dwellings Category Category Category Class A Adjustments Class Reason for Adjustment Daytime Adjustment N/A 10 Basic Sound Level Value (dba L eq ) A1 Seasonal Adjustment (1 Nov 31 Mar) +5 A2 Absence of Both Tonal and Impulse/Impact Components +5 A3 Ambient Monitoring Adjustment -10 to +10 Class Adjustment = Sum of A1, A2 and A3 (as applicable), but not to exceed a maximum of 10 dba L eq Class B Adjustments Class Duration of Activity Total Class A Adjustments 0 0 Value (dba L eq ) B1 1 day +15 B2 1 week +10 B3 < or = to 2 months +5 B4 > 2 months Class B Adjustment = one only of B1, B2, B3 or B4 *Proximity to Transportation Category Definitions Class B Adjustment PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVEL (dba) Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Dwelling units more than 500m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and not subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. Dwelling units more than 30m but less than 500m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and not subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. Dwelling units less than 30m from heavily travelled roads and/or rail lines and subject to frequent aircraft flyovers. FFA File A-2

22

23 Main Menu Search Main TOC

24 Main Menu Search Main TOC

25 Main Menu Search Main TOC