vipac engineers & scientists adelaide brighton cement ltd ... · and cs2/3/4 dust collectors,...

Melbourne Sydney Adelaide Perth Brisbane Tasmania

Vipac Engineers and Scientists Limited

215 Portrush Road, Maylands, SA 5069, Australia

t. +61 8 8362 5445 | f. +61 8 8362 0793 | e. [email protected]

w. www.vipac.com.au | A.B.N. 33 005 453 627 | A.C.N. 005 453 627

Vipac Engineers & Scientists

Adelaide Brighton Cement Ltd

ABC Birkenhead Site

Noise Abatement and Modelling Update

May 2017

50B-16-0007-TRP-457895-2

13 July 2017


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017

50B-16-0007-TRP-457895-2 Commercial-In-Confidence of 25

NOTE: This is a controlled document within the document control system. If revised, it must be marked SUPERSEDED and returned to the Vipac QA Representative. This document contains commercial, conceptual and engineering information that is proprietary to Vipac Engineers & Scientists Ltd. We specifically state that inclusion of this information does not grant the Client any license to use the information without Vipac’s written permission. We further require that the information not be divulged to a third party without our written consent

Report Title: Noise Abatement and Modelling UpdateJob Title: ABC Birkenhead Site

DOCUMENT NO: 50B-16-0007-TRP-457895-2 REPORT CODE: TRP

PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY:

Adelaide Brighton Cement Ltd Vipac Engineers and Scientists Limited

62 Elder Road 215 Portrush Road,

Port Adelaide, South Australia, 5015, Australia Maylands, SA 5069,

Australia

CONTACT: Tim Radimissis

Tel: (08) 8300 0533 Tel: +61 8 8362 5445

Fax: 61 8 83000431 Fax: +61 8 8362 0793

PREPARED BY:

Author: Date: 13 Jul 2017

Lynne Tan

Project Engineer

REVIEWED BY:

Reviewer: Date: 13 Jul 2017

James Tudor

Project Engineer

AUTHORISED BY:

Date:13 Jul 2017

Peter Moncrieff

Team Leader

REVISION HISTORY

Revision No. Date Issued Reason/Comments

0 08/06/2017 Initial Issue

1 05/07/2017 2nd Draft

2 12/07/2017 Edit corrections

DISTRIBUTION

Copy No.______ Location

1 Project

2 Client (PDF Format) Uncontrolled Copy

3

KEYWORDS:


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................4

2 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................4

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................4

3.1 Existing Receivers.......................................................................................................................5

3.2 Noise Reduction Abatement Program ..........................................................................................6

3.3 Noise Emission Update ...............................................................................................................7

4 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ..........................................................................................................8

4.1 Excerpt from the current EPA policy 2007 [2] ...............................................................................8

4.2 Indicative noise factors ................................................................................................................9

4.3 Adjustment for characteristics ......................................................................................................9

5 ATTENDED NOISE MEASUREMENTS ......................................................................................9

6 NOISE MODELLING.................................................................................................................10

6.1 Noise Sources ...........................................................................................................................11

6.2 Noise Model Calibration.............................................................................................................11

6.3 Modelling Assumptions..............................................................................................................11

7 ASSESSMENT AND RESULTS................................................................................................11

7.1 Noise model Validation ..............................................................................................................11

7.2 Existing Noise Sensitive Receivers ............................................................................................12

8 RECOMMENDED FUTURE NOISE ABATEMENT PROJECTS ................................................14

9 CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................................................14

: Glossary of Acoustic Terminology............................................................16

: Updated Sound pressure Levels..............................................................17

: ABC Buildings Heights Used in the Model................................................23

: Noise Contour Maps................................................................................24


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


1 INTRODUCTION

Vipac Engineers & Scientists (Vipac) were engaged by Adelaide Brighton Cement (ABC) to conduct a noise impact model assessment for the ABC Birkenhead Plant operations on the existing residential receiverslocated within the surrounding suburbs. Vipac have previously conducted SoundPLAN 3D noise modelling for predictions of noise impacts in 2016 [4] and conducted a noise assessment of ABC plant in July 2016 [10], from which recommendations for noise abatement projects were made. Following the July 2016 report, noise abatement measures were taken by ABC on dust collector fans CS2 and CS2/3/4 with the installation of two new noise silencers. Refurbishment of the main fans also occurred during the main shutdown period 14 March – 7 April 2017.

A noise emissions survey of ABC plant was conducted during typical operations on the 23rd May 2017 at the ABC Birkenhead site. Comparisons may be made between noise levels prior to and after the noise abatement projects. Subsequently, the updated sound pressure measurements taken at the site were analysed and incorporated into an update of the existing SoundPLAN noise model [4]. Attended noise measurements made by Vipac on 17 May 2017 [9] were used to calibrate the model. New predictions of noise levels at residential receivers are presented in this report.

2 REFERENCES

[1] Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007, South Australian government.

[2] Guidelines for the use of the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007, June 2009, Environment Protection Authority (EPA).

[3] Vipac Engineers and Scientist Report 50H-07-0035-TRP-423158-0- Stage 2 Sound Plan Model.

[4] Vipac Report 50B-15-0069-TRP-473094-2 Noise Modelling Prediction

[5] Map source - Atlas of South Australia, retrieved 21st June 2010 from http://www.atlas.sa.gov.au, © Copyright Government of South Australia.

[6] Port Adelaide Enfield (City) Development Plan, Consolidated 21 April 2016, Development Act 1993.

[7] Bureau of Meteorology website ‘Outer Harbor (Black Pole) Station’, www.bom.gov.au.

[8] Vipac Report: 50B-16-0007-TRP-457761-2 – ABC Noise Survey March 2017.

[9] Vipac Report: 50B-16-0007-TRP-804784-2 – ABC Attended Noise Measurements May 2017

[10] Vipac Report 50B-16-0068-BRP-799861-3 – Noise Abatement (July 2016)

[11] ABC Birkenhead Plan- Building Heights, Drawings No. 121-46-001 dated 22/08/2013.

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Based on the available site maps, and previous site inspections and environmental noise assessments, Vipac note the boundaries of the subject site are as follows:

North – General industry area to the north (across Wills Street).

East – General industry area on the eastern side of Port River.

South – Port River Expressway / Port River (Future Receivers under Renewal SA Plans).

West – Predominantly residential area with a small strip of commercially zoned land along Victoria Road immediately opposite the Birkenhead Plant.


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


3.1 EXISTING RECEIVERS

Figure 3-1 below shows the receivers locations for the residential zone to the West of the Birkenhead plant and these locations are listed in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1 Attended Measurement Locations

Measurement Location Location Address/ Description

R2 Corner of Alfred St and Hargrave St, Peterhead

R3 Adjacent to 145 Hargrave St, Peterhead (facing Fletcher Rd)

R4 Corner of Robert St and Hargrave St, Birkenhead

R5 Adjacent to 23 Levi St, Birkenhead

R6 Adjacent to 19 Craigie St, Birkenhead

R8 Adjacent to 39 Mary St, Peterhead

R9 Corner of Wills St and Whyte St, Peterhead

R10 Corner of Olive St and Victoria Rd, Largs Bay

R11 Adjacent to 158 Fletcher Rd, Largs Bay (facing east along Olive St)

R12 Adjacent to 33 Hilton St, Birkenhead

R13 Adjacent to 28 Whyte St, Peterhead (facing east down Matilda St)

R14 Adjacent to 15 Waverley St, Largs Bay

R15 Adjacent to 9 Walton St, Peterhead

R16 Adjacent to 77 Victoria Rd, Birkenhead

R17 Corner of Fletcher Rd and Rose St, Birkenhead (adjacent to 53 Fletcher Rd)

R18 Adjacent to 20 Fletcher Rd, Birkenhead (In the park)

N1 Corner of Gunn St and Well St, Birkenhead (adjacent to 39 Well St)

N2 Adjacent to 9 Mary St, Peterhead

N3 Corner of Walton St and Mary St, Peterhead (adjacent to 23 Mary St)


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


Figure 3-1: Attended Noise Measurement Locations near Birkenhead plant

3.2 NOISE REDUCTION ABATEMENT PROGRAM

The noise reduction abatement program has been undertaken following Vipac recommendations [10] on the following plant:

Installation of silencer on dust collector CS2 dust collector (see Figure 3-2). Installation of silencer on dust collector CS2/CS3/CS4 dust collector (see Figure 3-2). Maintenance and refurbishment of the main fans during the March/April 2017 ABC shutdown. Routine maintenance within the limestone reclaimer shed. In the March 2016 shutdown the entire

operational chain assembly was replaced. Installation of a silencer on the Cement Mill 1 Compressor in April 2016 (refer Table 3-2)

NABC Plant


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


Figure 3-2 - CS2 and CS2/3/4 Dust Collectors and with New Noise Silencers

3.3 NOISE EMISSION UPDATE

The noise emission survey was conducted on 23 May 2017. ABC mechanical plant that had previously been measured, or noise sources that not previously been accounted for in the noise model, had new sound pressure levels recorded. Measurements were made with a Brüel & Kjaer Type 1 Hand-held Analyser model 2250 Sound Level Meter (serial number 2590541). The meter was calibrated before and after the measurements and no drift was observed. The results of the 2017 updated sound pressure levels are presented in Table 3-2, with comparisons to the 2016 measurements [4] if applicable.

Table 3-2 - comparison between 2016 and 2017 Sound Pressure levels for ABC plant measured by Vipac

ABC Plant2016 LAeq Sound

Pressure Level (dBA)2017 LAeq Sound

Pressure Level (dBA)Distance (m)

CS2 Dust Collector3 97 @ 0.5m 82 @ 1m 2 0.5 & 1

CS2/3/4 Dust Collector3 102 @ 0.5m 87 @ 1m 2 0.5 & 1

4A Discharge Fan N/A1 90 0.5

Limestone Reclaimer Shed(inside)3

91 83 -

38 Blend Silo Top Dust Collector

91 @ 0.5m 86 @ 1m 0.5 & 1

Bagging Shed N/A1 60 1

Cement Mill 1 (inside) 90 91 -

Cement Mill 1 (outside)3 N/A 76 1

CM1 Compressor Room3 102 84 1

Between CM1 and CM1 Compressor Room

N/A1 88 -

EP Main Outlet Fan Duct 87 88 3

4B Airside Blower N/A1 89 1


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


North Gantry Dust Collector3 91 @ 2m 88 @ 3m 2 & 3

Cement Mill 6 (inside) N/A1 88 -

Cement Mill 6 (outside) N/A1 76 1

Slag Dryer 76 77 4

Cement Mill 1&7 – Clinker Gantry (facing railway)

70 71 12

Gas Train N/A1 73 1

1. N/A indicates the plant had not been measured previously in 20162. Silencer installed3. Noise abatement projects have been implemented on this equipment

Reduction of noise as a result of the recent installation of silencers and noise abatement projects for the CS2 and CS2/3/4 dust collectors, CM1 compressor room silencer and Limestone Reclaimer shed was observed, as seen in Table 3-2. Although measurements were taken at different distances (by 0.5m) the reduction of the noise levels was still significant. These noise levels, and the other levels measured in 2017 were input into the SoundPLAN model for a more up to date calculation of ABC noise activity.

4 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

The Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (EPA) [1] specifies the maximum allowable noise levels based on the time of day and land use, applicable at the most noise sensitive premises. These assessment criteria are determined based on the scheduled maximum noise levels for time of day and land use.

4.1 EXCERPT FROM THE CURRENT EPA POLICY 2007 [2]

Part 1 – Section 5 – Indicative noise levels

(1) … the indicative noise level for a noise source is to be determined as follows:

(a) where –

i. the land uses principally promoted by the relevant Development Plan provisions for the noise source fall within a land use category specified in Table 1 in subclause (9); and

ii. the land uses principally promoted by the relevant Development Plan provisions for the noise-affected premises fall within the same category as those principally promoted by the relevant Development Plan provisions for the noise source,

by reference to indicative noise factors set out in Table 1;

(b) in any other case – by reference to indicative noise factors set out in Table 2 in subclause (9).

(2) When measurements to determine the source noise level (continuous) are taken –

(a) between 7:00am and 10:00pm on the same day – an indicative noise factor used to determine the indicative noise level for the noise source is found in Table 1 or 2 in the column under the heading “day”; or

(b) between 10:00pm on one day and 7:00am on the following day – an indicative noise factor used to determine the indicative noise level for the noise source is found in Table 1 or 2 in the column under the heading “Night”.

(5) …if the land uses principally promoted by the relevant Development Plan provisions for the noise source and those principally promoted by the relevant Development Plan provisions for the noise-affected premises do not all fall within a single land use category, the indicative noise level is the average of the indicative noise factors for the land use categories within which those land uses fall.


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


4.2 INDICATIVE NOISE FACTORS

From the Port Adelaide Enfield Development Plan [6], the residential receivers are located within the zone designated as “Residential”, whereas the Adelaide Brighton Cement Birkenhead Plant is located in the zone designated “Industry”.

Using the information contained within the excerpts detailed in Section 4, the indicative noise levels for the residential locations are detailed in Table 4-1. The average of the ‘General Industry’ and ‘Residential’ land use category indicative noise levels is presented.

Table 4-1: Indicative Noise Level

Day Night

Indicative noise level – dB(A) 59 50

It is noted that commercial buildings exist on Victoria Rd opposite to the ABC plant which would otherwise have less stringent criteria based on the Noise Policy [2]. However it is appropriate to assume the criteria from Table 4-1 is applicable since it is the worst case criteria (i.e. the lowest) and other adjacent residential receivers are required to experience this noise level due to operations.

4.3 ADJUSTMENT FOR CHARACTERISTICS

Note that for a noise containing a characteristic (tonal, impulsive, low frequency or modulating), the following adjustments are to be made to the source noise level:

Noise containing 1 characteristic; a 5dB(A) penalty must be added to the noise level (continuous),

Noise containing 2 characteristics; and 8dB(A) penalty must be added to the noise level (continuous),

Noise containing 3 or 4 characteristics, a 10dB(A) penalty must be added to the noise level (continuous).

5 ATTENDED NOISE MEASUREMENTS

A noise survey was undertaken at 19 residential receiver locations on Wednesday 17 May 2017 [9], in order to capture the existing noise levels in the vicinity. Table 5-1 provide a summary of the night-time attended measurements.

Weather data referred to in the result tables were taken from the Bureau of Meteorology weather station at Outer Harbor. This is likely an overestimate of the wind speed on site, refer to previous report [9]. Noise measurements taken during 15 minute periods where wind speed exceeds 5m/s may be considered to be invalid.

Table 5-1: Summary of Night-time (10:00pm-7:00am) Attended Measurements at Residential Receivers

Measurement Location

Date/TimeCriteriadB(A)

Noise Level

(LA90)dB(A)

Noise Level

(LAeq)dB(A)

Exceedance (dBA)

Wind Speed(m/s)

Wind Direction

(deg)

R2 17/05/2017 23:54 50 55 57 5 5.3 67.5

R3 17/05/2017 23:14 50 49 51 - 6.1 45

R4 17/05/2017 23:51 50 44 45 - 5.3 45

R5 17/05/2017 23:13 50 52 54 2 6.1 45

R6 17/05/2017 22:52 50 45 47 - 5.6 67.5


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


Measurement Location

Date/TimeCriteriadB(A)

Noise Level

(LA90)dB(A)

Noise Level

(LAeq)dB(A)

Exceedance (dBA)

Wind Speed(m/s)

Wind Direction

(deg)

R8 18/05/2017 0:48 50 50 51 - 5.6 67.5

R9 18/05/2017 0:28 50 43 45 - 5.6 67.5

R10 18/05/2017 1:08 50 50 56 - 5.3 67.5

R11 18/05/2017 1:06 50 42 45 - 5.3 67.5

R12 17/05/2017 22:55 50 54 58 4 5.6 67.5

R13 18/05/2017 0:06 50 46 47 - 5.6 67.5

R14 18/05/2017 0:48 50 42 44 - 5.6 67.5

R15 18/05/2017 0:13 50 54 55 4 5.6 67.5

R16 17/05/2017 22:33 50 59 71 9 5.6 67.5

R17 17/05/2017 22:28 50 47 49 - 5.6 67.5

R18 17/05/2017 22:07 50 49 51 - 5.6 67.5

N1 17/05/2017 22:14 50 51 54 1 5.6 67.5

N2 17/05/2017 23:36 50 51 52 1 5.3 45

N3 18/05/2017 0:30 50 52 53 2 5.6 67.5

The background noise level, LA90, exceeded the criteria at 8 measurement positions, all of which were positioned between Mary St, Birkenhead, and the ABC plant. It should be noted that these positions were in close proximity to the ABC plant, but also to Victoria Rd. Positions R16 was dominated by traffic noise along Victoria Road, hence the largest exceedance. For other locations not immediately on Victoria Rd, local traffic noise was mostly absent from the measurements, however distant traffic noise was observed to have an influence on the noise levels. Contributions from constant distant traffic noise are expected to raise the background noise level; therefore the exceedances demonstrated are not necessarily due to ABC operations alone.

6 NOISE MODELLING

Noise predictions were carried out using the validated SoundPLAN acoustic modelling software. The CONCAWE noise propagation algorithm was used in accordance with the guidelines for assessment against the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 [1].

For the prediction of noise impacting on nearby noise sensitive receivers, the acoustic model of the plant was run assuming neutral (i.e. no wind, calm) and worst-case meteorological conditions (i.e. 5m/s steady wind from noise sources to receiver locations). It should be noted that this assumption of worst-case noise source to receiver wind direction is conservative (i.e. only one consistent wind direction would be experienced at any time).


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


6.1 NOISE SOURCES

A noise emission survey was conducted on the mechanical plant detailed in Section 3.2 on the 23rd May 2017. Subsequently, the sound pressure measurements taken of the mechanical plant were input into the noise model.

Appendix B details the updated sound pressure levels, including 1/3 Octave Spectra of the updated mechanical plant. All other noise sources not updated remained the same as for the previous model [3][4].

6.2 NOISE MODEL CALIBRATION

Noise modelling calibration was carried out at 19 residential locations highlighted within Figure 3-1. The predicted noise levels at these residential locations were compared with the measured noise levels that were conducted during night period on 17th and 18th May 2017, as detailed in Section 5 of this report. Meteorological conditions at the time of the attended measurements were taken into account.

6.3 MODELLING ASSUMPTIONS

The following assumptions were made in developing the acoustic model of the ABC Birkenhead Plant:

The areas surrounding the ABC Birkenhead plant, the noise sources and the receiver locations were assumed to be flat terrain.

The ground absorption in the ABC Birkenhead plant and in the vicinity of the plant was assumed to be fully reflective (based on observations on-site and the previously validated predictive model of the Birkenhead facility, discussed in Vipac Report 50H-07-0035-TRP-423158-0 [3].

Building heights for existing buildings within the ABC Birkenhead plant were extracted from previous noise model, as discussed in Vipac Report 50H-11-0044-TRP-775497-4 and ABC Birkenhead Plant –Building Heights Drawing [11]. Appendix C details the existing buildings heights modelled in the noise model.

Acoustic modelling has been conducted based on all sliding / roller doors / windows being fully closed during typical operations.

The influence of traffic noise or noise from other nearby sources is not included in the noise model.

Weather conditions were sourced from Community Park Weather Station;

The wall cladding for lime stone reclaimer, cement mill 1 and 7 were constructed with 0.62mm corrugated metal steel.

7 ASSESSMENT AND RESULTS

7.1 NOISE MODEL VALIDATION

The predicted noise levels generated by the SoundPLAN model were compared to the attended measured noise levels during May 2017 [9] for validation purposes and are summarised in Table 7-1 below:

Table 7-1: Model Validation - Comparison of measured to predicted noise levels

LocationMeasured noise levels

dB(A) [9]Predicted Noise Levels

dB(A)Difference 1

R2 55 53 -2

R3 51 47 -4

R4 45 46 1

R5 52 51 -1

R6 47 44 -3

R8 50 46 -4


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


LocationMeasured noise levels

dB(A) [9]Predicted Noise Levels

dB(A)Difference 1

R9 45 39 -6

R10 50 45 -5

R11 45 40 -5

R12 54 51 -3

R13 46 43 -3

R14 44 40 -4

R15 54 53 -1

R16 59 56 -3

R17 47 43 -4

R18 49 42 -7

N1 51 51 0

N2 51 54 3

N3 52 49 -3

1. Note that a negative number denotes an under prediction and positive denotes an over prediction

In general, the predicted noise levels are within the range that would be considered ‘in good agreement’ with the measured data, especially given the complexity of the plant model and the very high number of noise sources, with the exception of three monitoring locations (R9, R10, R11, and R18), where the difference between the predicted noise levels from the model and measured noise levels range between 5 to 7 dB. Based on Vipac’s observation on site, the difference between the predicted and measured noise level may be due to the influential of the traffic hum from Semaphore Road, Fletcher Road and Victoria Road and the newly added noise source (gas train) at the ABC site boundary.

7.2 EXISTING NOISE SENSITIVE RECEIVERS

Noise prediction modelling has been carried out to identify the potential impact associated with the existing ABC Birkenhead plant operations at the nearest existing residential receivers identified in Figure 3-1. The predicted noise levels representative of the operational phase of the ABC Birkenhead plant post-noise reduction abatement program for both neutral weather condition and worst-case weather condition are presented in Table 7-2.

Note that for each receiver / scenario, the predicted noise levels in Table 7-2 has been assessed against the relevant night-time equivalent noise criterion for the respective locality as follows:

No colour - Predicted noise levels achieve the night time noise criterion.

Orange - Predicted noise levels marginally exceed the night time noise criterion (by less than 3dB(A) which would generally be inaudible to the average human ear1)).

Red – Predicted noise levels exceed the night time noise criterion (by greater than 3dB(A))

Appendix D provides the noise contour maps associated with the acoustic modelled scenarios in respect of the ABC Birkenhead operations.

1 The subjective response or reaction to changes in noise levels can be described as follows: A 3dB(A) change in sound pressure level is just noticeable or perceptible to the average human ear; a 5dB(A) increase is quite noticeable and a 10dB(A) increase is typically perceived as a doubling in loudness.


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


Table 7-2: Predicted Noise Impact at Existing Receivers at 1.5m above ground level

Receiver ID Neutral Weather Condition Worst- Case Weather Condition Noise Criteria

R2 52 53 50

R3 46 49 50

R4 43 46 50

R5 51 52 50

R6 44 45 50

R8 45 47 50

R9 37 39 50

R10 44 48 50

R11 39 41 50

R12 51 52 50

R13 40 43 50

R14 38 41 50

R15 52 53 50

R16 56 56 50

R17 43 45 50

R18 42 44 50

N1 51 52 50

N2 52 54 50

N3 48 49 50

The predicted noise levels due to the ABC Birkenhead Plant operations achieve the night-time noise criteria for most of the noise sensitive receivers under neutral meteorological conditions with the exception of sevenreceivers, which are predicted to exceed by less 3dB at receivers N1, N2, R2, R5, R12, and R15, and exceed by 6dB at R16 . The predicted noise levels at the receivers associated with the worst-case weather condition are generally achieved the noise criteria at most of the receivers apart from seven receivers (N1, N2, R2, R5, R12, R15, R16), which the predicted noise levels are raised above the noise criteria by 2-6dB.

Table 7-3 shows a comparison between the pre- and post-abatement program at the noise sensitive receivers during worst-case meteorological conditions.

Table 7-3: Predicted Noise Levels comparison between pre- and post-noise abatement program during worst case meteorological conditions

Receiver IDPre-Noise Abatement

ProgramPost-Noise Abatement

ProgramDifference

R2 55 53 -2

R3 49 49 0

R4 47 46 -1

R5 54 52 -2

R6 46 45 -1

R8 48 47 -1

R9 40 39 -1


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


R10 49 48 -1

R11 42 41 -1

R12 52 52 0

R13 43 43 0

R14 41 41 0

R15 55 53 -2

R16 57 56 -1

R17 45 45 0

R18 44 44 0

As shown in Table 7-3, the noise reduction abatement program achieved noise reduction at 10 noise sensitive receivers: R2, R4, R5, R6, R8, R8, R9, R10, R15 and R16. No noise reduction was noted at receivers R3, R12, R13, R14, R17 and R18; it is possible that these sites experience noise from sources that were not part of the noise abatement program, or that their distance from the plant is so great that the changes are negligible. The noise sensitive receivers are predicted to achieve a noise reduction by up to 3dB.

8 RECOMMENDED FUTURE NOISE ABATEMENT PROJECTS

Based on Vipac site observations from the noise emissions survey on 23 May 2017, recommended future noise abatement projects include:

Gas Train – installing a roof over the existing gas train walls to mitigate noise emissions 38 Blend Silo Top Dust Collector – Maintenance/Abatement 4A Discharge Fan – Maintenance/Abatement 4B Airside Blower – Maintenance /Abatement

9 CONCLUSION

A noise impact model assessment was performed for the ABC Birkenhead Plant operations on the existing residential receivers located within the surrounding suburbs following the noise reduction abatement program. Overall, the noise abatement program is predicted to have achieved noise reduction at most of the noise sensitive receivers. Receivers where improvement of the noise levels was not predicted are either more highly affected by noise sources that were not updated in the model, or are a significant distance away from the ABC plant for the noise improvements to be negligible.

Vipac recommends future noise abatement projects, including installation of a roof over the gas train, and maintenance of the 38 Blend Silo Top Dust Collector, 4A Discharge Fan and 4B Airside Blower.


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


Attachments:

APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC TERMINOLOGY

APPENDIX B UPDATED SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS

APPENDIX C ABC BUILDINGS HEIGHTS USED IN THE MODEL

APPENDIX D NOISE CONTOUR MAPS


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


: GLOSSARY OF ACOUSTIC TERMINOLOGY

dB(A) A unit of measurement, decibels(A), of sound pressure level which has its frequency characteristics modified by a filter ("A-weighted") so as to more closely approximate the frequency response of the human ear.

L1 The noise level which is equalled or exceeded for 1% of the measurement period. L1 is an indicator of the impulse noise level, and is used in Australia as the descriptor for intrusive noise (usually in dBA).

L10 The noise level which is equalled or exceeded for 10% of the measurement period. L10 is an indicator of the mean maximum noise level, and is used in Australia as the descriptor for intrusive noise (usually in dBA).

L90 The noise level which is equalled or exceeded for 90% of the measurement period. L90 is an indicator of the mean minimum noise level, and is used in Australia as the descriptor for background or ambient noise (usually in dBA).

Leq The equivalent continuous noise level for the measurement period. Leq is an indicator of the average noise level (usually in dBA).

Lmax The maximum noise level for the measurement period (usually in dBA).

Note: The subjective reaction or response to changes in noise levels can be summarised as follows:

A 3 dB(A) increase in sound pressure level is required for the average human ear to notice a change; a 5 dB(A) increase is quite noticeable and a 10 dB(A) increase is typically perceived as a doubling in loudness


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


: UPDATED SOUND PRESSURE LEVELS

Description Distance Taken (m)

LAeq 12.5 16 20 25 31.5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1k 2k 1.6k 2k 2.5k 3.15k 4k 5k 6.3k 8k 10k 12.5k 16k 20k

38 Blending Silo Top

1 86 76 81 78 82 82 83 87 99 84 87 82 84 84 84 83 85 79 77 75 73 73 71 68 68 68 67 65 68 69 64 62 61 56

4b Air Side Blower

1 89 83 83 81 80 79 78 82 86 77 76 74 78 82 90 81 77 84 79 84 78 79 75 74 68 68 65 65 67 63 65 62 59 56

4a Discharge Fan(wall side)

0.5 87 82 82 78 81 80 77 84 77 84 82 81 82 80 80 80 83 84 86 80 77 76 76 73 72 69 68 65 64 64 63 63 61 59


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017




4a Discharge Fan(north side)

0.5 90 81 82 78 81 81 83 85 86 89 90 85 85 79 81 82 82 82 83 78 75 74 72 71 70 68 66 64 62 61 60 58 55 50

CS2/CS3A/CS4 Conveyor

1 87 92 92 88 88 83 82 89 81 82 79 77 81 80 82 79 77 76 75 73 72 74 69 67 66 67 66 67 66 66 66 65 64 61

CS 2 Conveyor

1 82 91 89 87 85 83 80 81 77 80 82 78 80 80 76 74 73 70 71 73 70 71 69 67 66 66 68 71 71 68 66 65 66 63

Main Gantry Discharge

3 88 78 85 85 84 85 86 88 81 83 84 79 83 82 91 81 80 83 81 77 76 75 72 70 69 69 69 70 68 65 61 58 54 49


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017




Slag Dryer

4 77 72 74 73 79 79 77 78 75 76 77 72 74 74 73 70 70 71 70 69 69 66 65 63 62 62 61 60 59 58 56 54 52 48

Bagging Shed(Inside Building)

- 70 63 68 65 67 63 70 83 78 67 65 64 65 62 61 60 65 67 64 58 57 57 54 53 54 52 49 48 48 44 41 38 31 24

Bagging Shed(Outside Building)

1 60 67 68 69 70 67 67 78 71 65 65 62 61 57 55 51 51 54 53 50 48 46 45 42 40 38 33 31 28 27 23 23 21 19

Lime Stone Reclaimer Shed (inside building)

- 83 73 76 80 83 80 75 80 81 81 80 80 78 76 76 74 86 75 71 72 69 67 64 63 62 59 57 55 53 50 48 44 39 34


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017




Lime Stone Reclaimer Shed (Outside building at the blocked

louvre)

1 67 70 71 67 72 71 68 72 73 71 71 66 65 60 61 56 68 58 56 55 54 53 52 50 48 44 41 38 34 30 25 20 18 17

Cement Mill 1 & 7 - Clinker Gantry(facing railway)

12 71 67 71 65 71 66 64 69 73 65 65 61 61 61 64 62 62 62 64 62 61 62 61 58 54 51 50 48 47 45 43 37 32 26

Compressor Room 1 - Exhaust side

1 84 75 95 82 76 80 76 77 84 79 77 75 81 80 76 76 74 76 78 76 74 72 71 69 67 66 66 65 67 66 66 65 62 58

Between Compressor Room 1 and Cement Mill 1

- 88 83 105 91 82 82 75 84 85 88 83 82 81 81 86 85 85 84 79 78 76 75 74 72 70 68 66 64 61 58 54 50 46 41


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017




EP Main Fan Outlet

3 88 85 90 87 89 87 86 85 85 88 86 84 93 90 85 81 81 81 80 80 77 77 75 72 70 68 64 63 62 59 57 56 53 49

Cement Mill 1(Inside building )

- 91 80 94 87 89 86 82 84 82 85 84 87 90 90 89 87 86 86 84 82 80 79 77 76 74 72 70 68 65 62 58 53 49 44

Cement Mill 1 (Outside building)

1 76 74 81 74 77 69 71 84 75 71 74 77 78 76 75 72 71 71 68 66 63 61 59 56 53 55 48 47 43 41 38 35 30 23

Cement Mill 6(Inside building)

- 88 78 91 81 79 78 79 83 98 87 82 84 85 87 87 84 82 82 80 80 77 76 75 74 73 70 68 64 60 57 54 52 48 44


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017




Cement Mill 6(Outside building)

1 76 82 81 76 76 75 77 75 73 71 71 73 76 71 74 72 67 69 71 67 65 68 63 60 59 58 57 55 51 48 45 40 35 27

Gas Train(Adjacent to barrier wall)

1 73 64 66 66 67 67 65 67 66 63 61 60 61 58 57 56 55 55 56 58 62 61 61 59 61 60 58 60 65 64 62 63 65 62

Gas Train(On the other side of Victoria Rd)

33 65 64 68 65 69 70 67 69 76 73 64 66 65 62 62 57 55 56 55 54 53 52 53 51 51 50 47 47 49 47 43 40 36 28

13 July 2017

Commercial-In-Confidence

: ABC BUILDINGS HEIGHTS USED IN THE MODEL

Building Description Building Heights (m)

16000 Tonnes Silo 32

30000 Tonnes Silo 70

Bagging Shed 29

Bulk Dispatch Centre 161

Bulk Loading Station 32

Cement Mill 1 32

Cement Mill 6 23

Cement Mill 7 32

Cement Silos 26.5

Clinker Bend Building 101

Clinker Storage Building 21

Control Centre 151

Fly Ash Building 32

Gantry Storage 20

Kiln 4 Fire Cooler Building 28

Kiln Electro -Filter 13

Lime Stone Reclaimer 32

Main Office 201

Maintenance Office 121

No.3 Kiln Burners Platform Building 61

No.7 Store 151

Precalciner Tower 4B 88

Preheater Tower 4A 65

Raw Mill Blending Silo 34

Raw Mill Building 4B 32

Weigh Building 28.5

Woodchip Building 101

Workshop 201

Note: 1. Building heights were extracted from Vipac’s previous noise model.


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


: NOISE CONTOUR MAPS


ABC Birkenhead Site


13 July 2017


vipac engineers & scientists adelaide brighton cement ltd ... · and cs2/3/4 dust collectors,...

Documents