NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 2016

Transcription

1 Panther Environmental Solutions Ltd, Unit 4, Innovation Centre, Institute of Technology, Green Road, Carlow, Ireland. Mobile: Telephone /Fax: Website: NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 2016 PPI Adhesive Products Ltd Units 5/6 Waterford Industrial Estate Waterford IPPC Licence No. P Prepared By: Martin O Looney BSc Maria Ward BSc Date: 19 th July 2016 Report number: EN8566

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. Covering Page 1 Table of Contents Introduction & Scope of Work Equipment Used Measurement Parameters Meteorological Conditions Monitoring Stations Measurement Results Discussion 13 Appendix A - Noise meter & calibrator calibration certs 15 Appendix B - Noise History 18 Appendix C - Site map 20 List of Tables Day Time Results: Table 1 Noise Assessment for NM1 8 Table 2 - Noise Assessment for NM2 9 Table 3 Noise Assessment for NM3 10 Table 4 Noise Assessment for NM4 11 Table 5 Noise Assessment for NM5 12 Table A Summary Table 14 Table B Noise History Graph 18 Table C Noise History Data 18 2

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION & SCOPE OF WORK Panther Environmental Solutions Ltd was commissioned to carry out the annual noise impact assessment at PPI Adhesives Ltd., Units 5/6 Waterford Industrial Estate, Waterford in accordance with the site s IPPC Licence, and this noise survey of the site operations was undertaken on Tuesday 19 th July Monitoring took place during the day-time period only as the facility does not operate at night-time. A total of five monitoring locations were chosen to represent on-site and off-site locations as well as in the vicinity of the nearest noise sensitive receptors in Woodlawn Grove, located approximately 100m from the southern site boundary on the opposite side of the N25 Cork Road. The PPI facility is surrounded by industrial facilities to the north, west and east, which also contribute to the background noise levels. Noise arising as a result of busy traffic on the N25 Cork Road dominates the noise environment at the southern site boundary, and at the nearest noise sensitive receptors. The predominant noise sources arising from the PPI facility are associated with the thermal oxidiser (specifically the ground level fans and the control valves). Results recorded at NM5 (the nearest monitoring point to sensitive receptors at Woodlawn Grove) indicate that the existing noise environment is dominated by traffic noise along the N25 and activities at the PPI facility is not audible. Furthermore the facility is only in operation during the day-time when traffic noise from the N25 is at its greatest, masking any other noise source in the vicinity of these sensitive receptors. Therefore it can be concluded that there are no significant impacts on noise sensitive receptors as a result of operations at the PPI facility. 3

4 The purpose of the noise survey was to evaluate noise emissions from the facility for compliance with Condition 7 of the site s IPPC Licence which states the following: 7 Noise 7.1 Activities on-site shall not give rise to noise levels off site, at noise sensitive locations, which exceed the following sound pressure limits (Leq, 15 minutes) subject to Condition Day: 55 db(a) Night: 45 db(a) 7.2 There shall be no clearly audible tonal component or impulsive component in the noise emission from the activity at any noise sensitive location. 7.3 The licensee shall carry out a noise survey of the site operations annually. The licensee shall consult with the Agency on the timing, nature and extent of the survey and shall develop a survey programme to the satisfaction of the Agency. The survey programme shall be submitted to the Agency in writing at least one month before the survey is to be carried out. A record of the survey results shall be available for inspection by any authorised persons of the agency, at all reasonable times. Condition 3 of the site s IPPC licence states that: Noise from the activity shall not give rise to second pressure levels (Leq, T) measured at noise sensitive locations which exceed the limit values by more than 2 db(a) Since January 2004 and for the foreseeable future, the PPI facility has ceased operating at night-time and working hours are currently as follows; 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Monday to Thursday and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Friday. As the facility is operational during the day time only, it was not deemed necessary to undertake noise monitoring during the night time period. The activities at the time of the survey were representative of current production practices at the PPI facility. All potentially significant noise sources at the facility were operational during the time of monitoring. The main aims of this Noise Impact Assessment included: 1. Description of noise and the noise meter to be used. 2. Detailing the locations for noise monitoring stations. 3. Detailing the noise measurements obtained. 4. Discussion & Recommendations. 4

5 2.0 EQUIPMENT USED NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT The equipment used for the noise monitoring was a Cirrus CR:811C and a Cirrus CR:171C Sound Level Meter, which conform to BS EN 60804: 1994 and IEC804: The meters were calibrated at the start and end of each measurement session. The calibrator is a Class 0 grade, which conforms to BS 7189: 1989 and IEC942: The CR:811C noise meter and calibrator were calibrated externally on 24 th August The CR:171C noise meter was calibrated externally on 08 th October Monitoring was conducted by Martin O Looney and Maria Ward of Panther Environmental Solutions Ltd. A calibration check was carried out on the instrument to 94 db(a), before and after each monitoring location. Measurement and was found to be satisfactory. Measurement periods were appropriate to establish a typical noise level reading at each location in order to establish a db(a) L aeq (15 minutes) reading as per condition 7.1 of the sites IPPC licence. 5

6 3.0 MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS The parameters used to assess the noise are as follows: Leq(15): The noise values recorded continuously at every instant during the 15 minute sampling period are integrated by the noise metre to give a single value that represents the continuous equivalent sound level over the 15 minute period during this survey. L 10 and L 90 : are both statistical noise levels. L 10 indicates that for 10% of the monitoring period the sound levels were greater than the quoted value. L 90 indicates that for 90% of the monitoring period, the sound levels were greater than the quoted value. L 10 is used to express event noise. L 90 is used to express background noise, usually filtering out load, and intermittent interferences such as traffic noise. Continuous: noise produced without interruption. Intermittent: noise that is punctuated with interruptions e.g. equipment operating in cycles or events such as single passing vehicle or aircraft. Impulsive: a noise of short duration (typically less than one second), the sound pressure of which is significantly higher than the background; brief and abrupt. Tonal: noise which contains a clearly audible tone i.e. a distinguishable, discrete or continuous note (whine, hiss, hum or screech etc). For the purpose of this noise assessment, a tonal characteristics incur a penalty of +5dB(A) in accordance with Section 4.3 of the EPA 2012 IPPC Licensing Guidance Note for Noise in Relation to Scheduled Activities. In order for a tone or impulsive element to warrant a penalty, it should be clearly noticeable and audible. Situations in which a 5 db penalty applies include the following: The noise contains a distinguishable, discrete continuous note (whine, hiss, screech, hum etc). The noise contains distinct impulses (bangs, clicks, clatters, or thumps). The noise is irregular enough to attract attention. The level in a 1/3 rd octave band is 5 db (or more) higher than the level in the two adjacent bands and the tonal components are clearly audible. As per top-right-hand corner of each table 1-5: NP indicates No Penalty for tonal noise. P indicates Penalty for tonal noise. The noise measurements were A weighted (to equate to human ear hearing) and the time-weighting Fast was applied. 6

7 4.0 METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Weather conditions during the survey were very dry and calm with wind speeds of less than 5 m/s (the preferred limit for taking measurements). The Sound Level Meter was also fitted with a windshield to minimise interference from meteorological conditions. 5.0 MONITORING STATIONS The monitoring locations were the same as those utilised in previous surveys, as illustrated in appendix 1. The monitoring locations were chosen to represent those most affected by the facility s noise emissions. NM5 was chosen to represent the noise environment at the nearest noise sensitive receptors to the PPI facility in Woodlawn Grove. There are four measurement locations at the site boundary, referenced NM1 NM4 and one at the noise sensitive location, referenced NM5. The noise sensitive location was based on recognised noise measurement criteria to give an accurate view and indication of the level of noise to which noise sensitive areas are exposed, such as dwelling houses and public areas. All measurements were taken at: m height above local ground level 1 5 m away from reflective surfaces 6.0 MEASUREMENT RESULTS The tables below show the day-time measurement results for the five monitoring locations at the site. Associated particulars such as a description of the noise, the equipment operational/audible in each location and any interferences/background noise recorded are also provided in the table. For this assessment, daytime monitoring was carried out on Tuesday 19 th July 2016 between 10:11 am and 11:00 am. 7

8 Day-Time Results: Tables 1-5 Table 1 Noise Assessment Table for NM1 North Eastern site boundary Reference Number Noise Location NM1 North eastern boundary opposite entrance to coating dept. Noise Assessment Table Result L eq(15) 62 NP L Time 10:48 am L Equipment Audible Thermal oxidiser extractor fans Interferences/ Background Noise Meteorological Data Assessment 1 car during monitoring Banging at construction site nearby. Dry, sunny, wind speeds <5m/s. Description of Noise Continuous fan noise This monitoring location is situated on the north eastern boundary at the entrance to the coating department. Noise levels have reduced at this point compared to previous years, due to adjoining business units to this monitoring point having closed down in the intervening period and also the local road traffic is considerably less than previous surveys. The ground level fans of the site thermal oxidiser were the predominant noise sources. The L eq15 and L 10 were very similar which demonstrated continuous noise levels during the monitoring period which were related to the site thermal oxidizer. The L 90 which may be used to give an indication of the actual noise from the factory was determined to be 61 db(a). Factory noise at this location does not appear to constitute a nuisance, as there are no noise sensitive locations near this monitoring point, which is located within the industrial estate. The L eq15 is higher than the EPA daytime limit for noise at this location. 8

9 Table 2 Noise Assessment Table for NM2 North Western site boundary, 17m from thermal oxidiser. Reference Number Noise Location Noise Assessment Table NM2 North western site boundary approx 17m from thermal oxidiser. Result L eq(15) 58 NP L Time 10:30 am L Equipment Audible Thermal oxidizer extraction fan Interferences/ Background Noise Meteorological Data Assessment Description of Noise Continuous fan type sound Traffic passing by on adjacent industrial estate road. Dry, sunny, wind speeds <5m/s. This monitoring location at the north-western site boundary approximately 17 metres from the thermal oxidiser. The fans on the thermal oxidizer were the most dominant noise source. Noise at this location is slightly lower than that recorded during the previous noise assessment, which may be due to less traffic or a difference in monitoring position between both surveys (2016 monitoring location located to avoid façade reflection). The L eq15 and L 10 were similar which demonstrated continuous noise levels during the monitoring period which were related to the site thermal oxidizer. The L 90 which may be used to give an indication of the actual noise from the factory which was determined to be 57 db(a). Factory noise at this location does not appear to constitute a nuisance, as there are no noise sensitive locations near this monitoring point, which is located within the industrial estate. The L eq15 is higher than the EPA daytime limit for noise at this location. 9

10 Table 3 Noise Assessment Table for NM3 Western site boundary Reference Number NM3 Noise Assessment Table Noise Location Western site L boundary Time 10:15 am Result L Equipment Audible Thermal oxidizer extraction fan Interferences/ Background Noise Meteorological Data Assessment L eq(15) 51 NP Description of Noise Continuous low fan type sound Passing Traffic on N25 back-ground noise during monitoring period. Angle grinding noise in adjacent premises which was intermittent during monitoring. Seagulls peaking at 65 db(a). Dry, sunny, wind speeds <5m/s. This monitoring location is located on the western site boundary. The dominant related continuous type noise source was the thermal oxidiser from the PPI site. Traffic on the N25 was also a significant noise source at this location, with the Leq and L 10 being elevated due to the busy traffic noise coming from the main road, N25. The L 90 which may be used to give an indication of the actual back-ground noise was determined to be 48 db(a). Factory noise at this location does not appear to constitute a nuisance, as there are no noise sensitive locations near this monitoring point, which is located within the industrial estate. The L eq15 is lower than the EPA daytime limit for noise at this location. 10

11 Table 4 Noise Assessment Table for NM4 Southern site boundary at site entrance. Reference Number NM4 Noise Assessment Table Noise Location Entrance to PPI L facility Time 10:11 am Result L Equipment Audible Alarm ringing from inside the PPI facility. Banging from inside the PPI facility. Interferences/ Background Noise Meteorological Data Assessment L eq(15) 61 NP Description of Noise Very low short duration alarm noise occurring twice during monitoring. Intermittent low levels banging noise. Passing traffic on N25 and on industrial estate adjacent to monitoring point. Birds singing in nearby trees. Dry, sunny, wind speeds <5m/s. This monitoring location is situated at the southern site boundary at the site entrance. Passing traffic on the N25 Cork Road was the predominant noise source. Passing traffic on the industrial estate road was also audible. The only activity that was audible from the facility was intermittent low level banging noise and two low level short period alarm noise events. The traffic on the N25 was busy during the monitoring period and dominated the noise environment at this location. The L eq15 and L 10 were similar which demonstrated continuous noise levels during the monitoring period which was related to the nearby traffic on the N25. The L 90 which may be used to give an indication of the actual noise was determined to be 53 db(a). The L eq15 is higher than the EPA daytime limit for noise at this location, which is due to the N25 traffic. Factory noise at this location does not therefore appear to constitute a nuisance. 11

12 Table 5 Noise Assessment Table for NM5 Woodlawn Grove, closest noise sensitive receptor to the PPI facility, approximately 100m from the southern site boundary. Reference Number NM5 Noise Assessment Table Noise Location Woodlawn Grove L Time 10:35 am Result L Equipment Audible L eq(15) 67 NP Description of Noise None Interferences/ Background Noise Meteorological Data Assessment Passing traffic on N25. Cars Beeping. Banging from nearby house. Dry, calm and cloudy, wind speeds <5m/s. This monitoring location is situated approximately 100m from the southern site boundary. Busy passing traffic on the N25 Cork Road was the dominant noise source. Some intermittent traffic on the local road was also audible. Activities at the PPI facility were not audible at this location. The L 90 which may be used to give an indication of the actual background noise was determined to be 51 db(a) during the monitoring period. The L eq15 is higher than the EPA daytime limit for noise sensitive locations at this location due to traffic on the N25. Factory noise at this noise sensitive location does not therefore appear to constitute a nuisance. 12

13 7.0 DISCUSSION The PPI facility is surrounded by industrial facilities to the north, west and east, and by the busy N25 road to the south, all of which contribute to the background noise levels at the site monitoring points, in particular at NM4 and NM5. Noise levels at all monitoring points during this survey were similar to the findings of the previous noise surveys carried out between , as per table A below. As per the findings of this report, it can be concluded that there are no significant impacts on noise sensitive receptors as a result of operations at the PPI facility. The nearest sensitive receptor, monitoring point NM5 is located in Woodlawn Grove, approximately 100 meters from the southern site boundary on the opposite side of the N25 Cork Road. The noise environment in the area is dominated by passing traffic on the N25, which appeared to be heavier during this year s survey, compared to other years which resulted in a higher reading. Noise levels related to activities at the PPI facility were not audible at this location. No complaints regarding noise have ever been received by the company. Below is a summary table detailing the assessment findings compared to previous years: 13

14 Table A: Summary Table Ref. No. Location 2010 LAeq. 15 minutes 2011 LAeq. 15 minutes 2012 LAeq. 15 minutes 2013 LAeq. 15 minutes 2014 LAeq. 15 minutes 2015 LAeq. 15 minutes 2016 LAeq. 15 minutes NM1 NM2 North eastern boundary opposite entrance to coating department North western site boundary approx. 17m from the thermal oxidiser NM3 Western site boundary NM4 Southern site boundary at entrance to PPI facility NM5 Woodlawn Grove

15 Appendix A NOISE METER CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE

16 16

17 17

18 Appendix B NOISE HISTORY- 18

19 Table B: Noise History Graph NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Table C: Noise History Data Units 5-6 Ref No NMP1 LAeq L L NMP2 LAeq L L NMP3 LAeq L L NMP4 LAeq L L NMP5 LAeq L L

20 Appendix C SITE MAP - 20

21