Rev2-18.Feb Safety Reliability Integrity Training Asset Support Design Support Troubleshooting

Transcription

1 KEYSBROOK ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE COMPLIANCE REPORTING Q MZI RESOURCES LTD Rev2-18.Feb Perth Brisbane Kuala Lumpur Bangkok Noise Vibration Corrosion Safety Reliability Integrity Training Asset Support Design Support Troubleshooting

2 DOCUMENT CONTROL & REVIEW INFORMATION Client: Client Contact: MZI Resources Ltd Marc Morris SVT Contact: SVT Office: Peter Glorie Perth SVT Job No: SVT Document No: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Rev Description Prepared Reviewed Date 2 Receptor List Updated Peter Glorie Jim McLoughlin 18.Feb Issued for Client Review Peter Glorie Wayne Seeto 15.Feb.2016 SVT Engineering Consultants ABN: SVT Perth (HEAD OFFICE) SVT Brisbane Office SVT Kuala Lumpur Office SVT Bangkok Office 112 Cambridge Street West Leederville WA 6007 Australia Level 5, 320 Adelaide St Brisbane, Queensland 4000 Australia SVT Engineering Malaysia Sdn Bhd No A-2-6, Jalan SS7/13B, Aman Seri, Kelana Jaya, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia SVT Engineering Consultants (Thailand) MD Tower Bangna Complex Bangna, Bangkok 10260, Thailand Tel: + 61 (0) Fax: + 61 (0) mailbox@svt.com.au Tel: +61 (0) Fax: +61 (0) mailbox@svt.com.au Tel: Fax: mailbox@svt.com.au Tel: Fax: mailbox@svt.com.au Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page I

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Keysbrook Leucoxene Pty Ltd (KLPL) operate their Keysbrook Mineral Sands Project under a Noise Management Plan (NMP) to ensure that the mining operations and production activities comply with the provided licence conditions. The licence conditions require quarterly reporting of noise monitoring, including assessment of compliance with assigned levels. Keysbrook operations commenced on the 22 nd October 2015, and therefore the first quarter of mining operations was from the 22 nd October 2015 to the 22 nd January SVT was commissioned by KLPL to undertake the required environmental noise reporting for this period. The objective of this assessment is to determine if the mining noise emissions have complied with the licence conditions. A BarnOwl noise logging station is located to the southwest of the mine site (across the road from the residence at Lot 20, Hopelands Rd) for monitoring and management of mining noise emissions. During the three months, the Barn Owl noise monitoring system was available and recording data for approximately 60% of the time. Of the total data set available, 6% of samples were identified where the directionality of the noise indicates a potential that the mine site was a cause of exceedance of the assigned levels. For these periods, recorded sound files (where available) were reviewed Of the sound files reviewed, there were no periods identified where mine site noise was the dominant audible source. Sound files were not available for a number of periods where a potential exceedance was identified based on the directional data. Most of these samples were identified as unlikely exceedances, as the wind direction was not in a favourable direction for minesite noise propagation towards the receptor. An attended measurement survey indicated that noise from fixed plant and mobile equipment contains tonal characteristics in the 80 Hz and 100 Hz third-octave bands. These have the potential to cause tonality at residences. However, it was not possible to assess the tonality of mining operations from the Barn Own noise monitoring system as the system does not currently record spectral data. SVT recommends that the BarnOwl noise monitoring system is setup to capture spectral data to: assist in identifying if mining noise is the cause of detected exceedances; and for the assessment of tonality. Noise modelling of a current representative mining scenario (mining on Lot 6) was also undertaken. Under worst-case meteorological conditions, predicted exceedances were identified at three northern receptors. However, SVT understands that KLPL have amenity agreements with these residents. Noise model predictions for all other residences, including the residence located at Lot 20, Hopelands Rd, indicate that compliance is achieved. The noise monitoring data available, combined with noise modelling, indicate that the Keysbrook mine site has achieved compliance in the first three months of operation. KLPL are currently in the process of implementing MaestroMine, a noise management planning tool that will enable them to better plan activities to achieve predicted noise compliance over varying Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page II

4 meteorological conditions. With MaestroMine in place, and with the continued use of the BarnOwl noise monitoring system, KLPL should be better able to manage their environmental noise emissions. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page III

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS DOCUMENT CONTROL & REVIEW INFORMATION... I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... II TABLE OF CONTENTS... IV 1. INTRODUCTION ASSIGNED NOISE LEVELS Corrections for Characteristic of Noise LOGGING NOISE DATA ANALYSIS Keysbrook Noise Logging Station Meteorological Data Methodology of Data Analysis Assessment of Logged Data NOISE MODELLING Noise Modelling Scenarios Meteorology Model Verification Modelling Results and Compliance Assessment ATTENDED MEASUREMENTS CONCLUSION DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX A MEASURED SOUND POWER LEVELS... A-1 APPENDIX B NOISE CONTOURS... B-1 APPENDIX C DIRECTIONAL MONITORING REPORT SAMPLE... C-1 Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page IV

6 1. INTRODUCTION Keysbrook Leucoxene Pty Ltd (KLPL) operate their Keysbrook Mineral Sands Project under a Noise Management Plan 1 (NMP) to ensure that the mining operations and production activities comply with the provided licence conditions 2,3. The licence conditions require quarterly reporting of noise monitoring, including assessment of compliance with assigned levels. The Keysbrook mine operates continuously, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The mine site is located approximately 70 km south of Perth. A BarnOwl noise logging station is located to the southwest of the mine site (across the road from a residence) for monitoring and management of mining noise emissions. Keysbrook operations commenced on the 22 nd October 2015, and therefore the first quarter of mining operations was from the 22 nd October 2015 to the 22 nd January SVT was commissioned by KLPL to undertake the required environmental noise reporting for this period. The objective of this assessment is to determine if the mining noise emissions have complied with the licence conditions. To achieve the objective the following activities have been undertaken: Review and assessment of three months of BarnOwl noise monitoring data and weather data; Undertake an attended noise measurement survey in accordance with the existing Noise Monitoring Plan 4 ; Undertake noise modelling of a representative current mining scenario (mining on Lot 6) and predict worst case noise levels received at nearby residential receptors; and Assess the compliance from both the modelling and monitoring data. Figure 2-1 presents an aerial view of the proposed mine site and surrounding area including the closest residences (lots) and the location of the BarnOwl noise monitoring station. 1 Keysbrook Mineral Sands Project Noise Management Plan, 20 October Ministerial Statement No. 810, 19 October 2009, Statement That a Proposal May Be Implemented Pursuant to the Provisions of the Environmental Protection Act Works Approval W5386/2013/1. 4 Noise Monitoring Plan, August 2011, b, Lloyd George Acoustics Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 5

7 2. ASSIGNED NOISE LEVELS Noise management in Western Australia is implemented through the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (the Regulations) which operate under the Environmental Protection Act The Regulation specify maximum noise levels (assigned noise levels) which are the highest noise levels that can be received at noise-sensitive (residential), commercial and industrial premises. Table 2-1 presents the L A10 site specific assigned noise levels for the nearest noise sensitive premises (as presented in the Noise Management Plan). There are only two neighbouring residences that have an influencing factor that are applied to the assigned level. The L A10 assigned level is quoted in the table as this is considered to be the most stringent for KLPL operations. A map presenting all nearby noise sensitive receptors is presented in Figure 2-1. Table 2-1: Assigned noise levels (LA10) in db(a) Assigned Noise levels (LA10) in db(a) Noise Sensitive Receptor NSR 14 NSR 1 Address Lot 104 Westcott Rd, Keysbrook Lot 20 Hopelands Rd, North Dandalup All other sensitive receptors Influencing Factor in db 0700 to 1900 hours Monday to Saturday 1900 to 2200 hours all days and 0900 to 1900 hours Sunday and public holidays 2200 hours on any day to 0700 hours Monday to Sunday and 0900 hours Sunday and public holidays The BarnOwl noise monitoring station ls located close to (across the road from) Lot 20 Hopelands Rd (see Section 3.1). Therefore, the assigned noise levels for this residence form the basis of the assessment of compliance for the monitoring data. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 6

8 Figure 2-1: Noise Sensitive Receptors (Google Maps) 2.1 Corrections for Characteristic of Noise Noise levels at the receiver are required to be adjusted if the noise exhibits intrusive or dominant characteristics, i.e. if the noise is impulsive, tonal, or modulating. Table 2-2 presents the adjustments incurred for noise that exhibits intrusive or dominant characteristics. That is, if the noise is assessed as having tonal, modulating or impulsive characteristics, then the measured or predicted noise levels are adjusted, by the amounts given in Table 2-2. The adjusted noise levels must now comply with the assigned noise levels. Regulation 9 sets out objective tests to assess whether the noise is taken to be free of these characteristics. Table 2-2: Adjustments for intrusive or dominant noise characteristics. Adjustment where noise emission is not music these adjustments are cumulative to a maximum of 15 db Where tonality is present Where modulation is present Where impulsiveness is present +5 db +5 db +10 db Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 7

9 3. LOGGING NOISE DATA ANALYSIS 3.1 Keysbrook Noise Logging Station The Keysbrook noise monitoring station utilises a directional noise logger, known as a BarnOwl. The BarnOwl 5 utilises a three microphone array that enables the system to approximately determine the direction of the sound source. Figure 3-1 indicates the location of the BarnOwl monitoring station, relative to the Wet Concentrator Plant (WCP) and the Mining Field Unit (MFU). Figure 3-1: Location of Keysbrook Logging Station (Google Maps) The logging period of the BarnOwl was set to 15 minutes. When the system detects an exceedance of the trigger level, a 30 second sound recording is captured and stored. The logged data available includes levels recorded for: Total All Sources Angle of Interest The total sound pressure level from a single microphone. The total noise level calculated by the directional system algorithm. The metric is a good indicator to use to see how well Leq is measuring and it excludes sources with no measureable direction, such as insect noise, or directly overhead aircraft noise. The noise level calculated by the directional system algorithm, including only noise from the direction of the minesite. 5 Supplied by SoundScience Pty Ltd Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 8

10 Limitations of the BarnOwl system include: The system does not record spectral data; The system does not meet the sound level meter requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997; The system cannot be calibrated by a NATA certified laboratory (although it is field calibrated); The directional system cannot distinguish between direct noise sources, and noise reflections; The directional system has a limited frequency range; and The system cannot filter out wind or rain noise. From the 18 th November to 16 th December 2015, the BarnOwl was disabled, and did not record data. During this period, a replacement non-directional noise monitor was utilised, which recorded data from the 27 th November to 15 th December However, this data is non-directional, and non-spectral, and therefore SVT cannot establish if exceedances are mine-site related. 3.2 Meteorological Data KLPL provided the weather data used in this assessment, which was recorded from the Keysbrook weather station located on the mining property. The weather data provides average levels recorded over a 15 minute period. 3.3 Methodology of Data Analysis In undertaking the noise assessment, SVT only included conditions likely to result in noise exceedences. Figure 3-2 presents the analysis flowchart. Detailed descriptions of steps (A) through to (F) are provided below. (A) Total Noise Levels LAS10 If the L AS10 is below the assigned noise levels, compliance is achieved. If the L AS10 exceeds the assigned noise levels, further filters will apply. (B) Wind Speeds If the wind speed exceeds 5m/s, the level is most likely dominated by wind induced noise, and therefore excluded from further analysis. (C) Noise Exceedance From Angle of Interest If noise from the direction of mine site (Angle of Interest) exceeds the assigned level, the period will be considered a potential exceedance, and audio will be reviewed (if available, see step (E)). If this condition does not occur, the data is not excluded yet as there is still the potential for a minesite related noise exceedance, where the noise characteristic is beyond the limits of the directional monitoring system. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 9

11 (D) Majority of Noise From Direction of Mine If the noise level within the Angle of Interest is within 3 db of the level from All Sources, this means that the majority of the noise captured is from the direction of the mine site. The period will be considered a potential exceedance, and audio will be reviewed (if available, see step (E)). (E) Audio and Directional Verification Where available, the audio recording will be reviewed. This entails listening to the alert generated sound recording to determine whether the noise was likely to have been generated from mining activities or whether the noise was more likely to have been generated locally (such as from birds or trees). Where equipment noise is audible, but may not be mine site related, the Barn Owl directional reports will be reviewed (a directional report sample is provided in Appendix C). (F) Favourable Wind Directions An additional criterion has been applied to periods where audio data is not available. If the wind direction is favourable for noise propagation from mining sources towards the receiver, the period is considered a possible exceedance. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 10

12 Figure 3-2: Process of Analysis of Logged Data. 3.4 Assessment of Logged Data Fifteen minute data samples provided by KLPL from the Keysbrook noise logging station, from 22 nd October 2015 to 22 nd January 2016, were assessed according to the methodology described in section 3.3. A summary of the assessment and data filtering steps is provided in Table 3-1. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 11

13 Table 3-1 : Data sample breakdown of assessment Filter Step Total number of samples for time period from 22 nd October 2015 to 22 nd January 2016 Number of Samples Remaining After Filter Step 5294 (A) Total Noise Level Exceed Assigned Levels 3036 (B) Wind speeds greater than 5m/s 2939 (C) Noise From Angle of Interest Exceed Assigned Levels 169 (D) Majority of Noise From Direction of Mine 163 Audio Available 65 (E) Positive Verification of Mining Noise 0 (F) Favourable Wind Direction 154 No Exceedance 4962 Potential Exceedance But Unlikely 178 Potential Exceedance 154 Verified Exceedance 0 Table 3-2 lists the interval samples where sound files were reviewed. It was found that of the 65 samples (35 periods) assessed, only one period (03:45 04:15 on 08/01/2016) contains truck noise that could be mine site related. However, a review of the directional report for this period indicates a high level of noise to the west, demonstrating that the truck was likely travelling on the adjacent driveway or Hopelands Road (see directional report provided in Appendix C). Table 3-2: Audio verification samples Date Time Period LA10 In dba Condition (C) or (D) SVT Comments MZI Comments 22/10/ :30 05: C Birds Birds 22/10/ :00 07: C Birds and road traffic Birds, wind and tyre roar 23/10/ :00 06: C Birds Birds 25/10/ :45 01: C Wind with gusts Wind Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 12

14 Date Time Period LA10 In dba Condition (C) or (D) SVT Comments MZI Comments 25/10/ :45 03: C Wind with gusts Wind 25/10/ :45 05: C Wind with gusts Wind 25/10/ :30 07: C Wind and birds Wind and birds 25/10/ :45 08: C Wind & road traffic Wind and motor bike 25/10/ :30 09: C Wind & birds Wind and birds 25/10/ :15 18: C Birds Birds and Vehicle 26/10/ :15 06: C Birds 27/10/ :00 05: C Wind with gusts Wind 28/10/ :15 03: C Wind Wind 28/10/ :00 05: C Wind and birds Wind and birds 29/10/ :00 06: C Birds 30/10/ :30 06: C Birds 31/10/ :00 06: C Birds 3/11/ :00 06: C Birds 4/11/ :45 06: C Birds 4/11/ :45 06: C Birds 27/11/ :00 12: C Wind & Traffic 8/1/ :30 00: D Wind Wind and trees 8/1/ :00 01: D Wind Trees and Plant 8/1/ :00 03: D Wind and birds Wind and trees 8/1/ :45 04: D Wind and truck Truck and wind 8/1/ :00 05: D Birds and thunder Birds and thunder 8/1/ :45 06: D Birds and thunder Birds and thunder 8/1/ :45 08: D Birds and thunder Birds and trees 8/1/ :45 12: D Wind and birds 8/1/ :45 02: D Birds and thunder 9/1/ :45 07: C Birds 14/1/ :30 00: C Wind and birds Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 13

15 Date Time Period LA10 In dba Condition (C) or (D) SVT Comments MZI Comments 14/1/ :15 02: C Wind and birds 14/1/ :00 04: C Wind and birds 14/1/ :45 06: C Wind and birds Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 14

16 4. NOISE MODELLING An acoustic model developed using the SoundPlan v7.4 program was built based on the recent sound power measurements 6,7 and verified using measurement data presented in section 5. The CONCAWE 8,9 prediction algorithm was selected for this study. The acoustic model does not include noise emissions from any source other than the mining operations. Therefore, noise emissions from road traffics, animals, domestic sources, etc are excluded from the modelling. 4.1 Noise Modelling Scenarios During the first three months of mine site operation, mining activities occurred in Lot 6. Along with fixed plant, the following mobile equipment was included in the noise model: 1 X Excavator; 3 X Haul Trucks; 1 X Loader; and 1 X Watercart. The measured sound power levels of the mobile equipment and fixed plant are presented in Appendix A. 4.2 Meteorology SoundPlan calculates noise levels for defined meteorological conditions. In particular, temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction data are required as input to the model. For the noise modelling SVT has used the worst case meteorological conditions suggested by the EPA Guidance note No 8 for assessing noise impact from new developments as the upper limit of the meteorological conditions investigated. Table 4-1 presents the worst-case meteorological conditions for noise emission from the mine site. 6 Sound Power Measurement of Mobile equipment, SVT Report , 16 November Sound Power Measurement of Fixed equipment, SVT Report , 16 November CONCAWE (Conservation of Clean Air and Water in Europe) was established in 1963 by a group of oil companies to carry out research on environmental issues relevant to the oil industry. 9 The propagation of noise from petroleum and petrochemical complexes to neighbouring communities, CONCAWE Report 4/81, 1981 Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 15

17 Table 4-1: Worst-case meteorological conditions for noise emission from the mine site. Time of day Temperature Celsius Relative Humidity Wind speed Pasquill Stability Category Day ( ) 20º Celsius 50% 4 m/s E Evening ( ) 20º Celsius 50% 4 m/s E Night ( ) 15º Celsius 50% 3 m/s F 4.3 Model Verification The acoustic model has been verified based on the measurement data presented in section 5. The level difference between the predicted and measured noise levels ranges from -1.4 db to 4.0 db, with an average of 1.6 db, at selected attended measurement locations surrounding the mine site. A positive level difference means that the prediction is higher than the measured noise level, and therefore slightly conservative. 4.4 Modelling Results and Compliance Assessment Table 4-2 presents the results of noise modelling for worst-case meteorological conditions. The table also provides the assigned levels, and indicates where exceedances are predicted. Note that as the meteorological conditions are identical for daytime and evening time, and that no exceedances were identified for the daytime period, only the evening and night columns are presented. Full compliance is predicted for day-time operations. Worst-case predicted noise levels exceeding the assigned noise levels are expressed in bold italic. Exceedances have been predicted at three residences: Lot 101, 104 and 105 Hopelands Rd. These residents may experience evening-time exceedances of up to 2.5 db, and night-time exceedances of up to 7.7 db. Predictions indicate that the Lot 20 Hopelands Rd residence is compliant. Figure 3 in Appendix C presents the worst-case night-time noise level contours. Table 4-2: Compliance assessment. Noise Sensitive Receptor Address LA10 Assigned Noise Levels in db(a) Predicted Worst-case Noise Levels in db(a) Evenings Nights Evenings Nights NSR 1 Lot 20 Hopelands Rd NSR 2 Lot 211 Hopelands Rd NSR 3 Lot 212 Hopelands Rd NSR 4 Lot 505 St Blaise Grove NSR 5 Lot 506, St Blaise Grove Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 16

18 Noise Sensitive Receptor Address LA10 Assigned Noise Levels in db(a) Predicted Worst-case Noise Levels in db(a) Evenings Nights Evenings Nights NSR 6 Lot 508, St Blaise Grove NSR 7 Lot 1, Readheads Rd NSR 8 Lot 12 Readheads Rd NSR 9 Lot 100, Atkins Rd NSR 10 Lot 301 Atkins Rd NSR 11 Lot 104 Atkins Rd NSR 12 Lot 52, Westcott Rd NSR 13 Lot 101, Westcott Rd NSR 14 Lot 104 Westcott Rd NSR 15 Lot 105 Westcott Rd NSR 16 Lot 57 Elliott Rd NSR 17 Lot 64 Hopelands Rd Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 17

19 5. ATTENDED MEASUREMENTS The Noise Monitoring Plan 10 prepared for the Keysbrook operation details a measurement procedure for daytime measurement of mining operations. The procedure includes noise measurement at numerous positions surrounding equipment, to capture noise levels in varying wind conditions. Measurement locations specified are between 50m and 1500m from operations. Appendix D contains the plan of the nominal noise measurement locations. This attended measurement survey was completed on the 29 th January Weather conditions on the day were fine, with south-easterly winds in the morning and early afternoon, and southwesterly winds later in the afternoon. During the attended measurements, all fixed plant equipment was operating, and the following operating mobile equipment was observed: 1 X Excavator; 2 X Haul Trucks; 1 X Loader; and, 1 X Watercart. Table 5-1 presents a summary of the noise measurements undertaken, and Figure 5-1 presents a map showing the measurement locations. SVT has reviewed the spectral content of the measurements, and has found that noise from fixed plant, and mobile equipment, does contain tonal characteristics, particularly in the 80 Hz and 100 Hz 1/3 Octave bands. These characteristics have the potential to cause tonality (as defined by the regulations) at residences. Table 5-1: Summary of Attended Measurements Measurement Number Nominal Location Comments Wind Conditions LAS10 LAS90 1 WCP 250m NW WCP audible and clear. Mobile equip also audible m/s SE Wind WCP 250m NE Dominant source was nearby booster pump. Workshop radio also audible m/s SE Wind WCP 250m SE WCP audible and clear. Birds m/s SE Wind WCP 250m SE Floc plant running and audible 2.5-4m/s SE Wind WCP 250m SW WCP audible and clear. Planes operating in area. Insects. 6 WCP 750m SW WCP audible, but very distant. Birds. 7 WCP 750m SE WCP in-audible. Mining noise more prominent. Calm Calm during measurement m/s SE Wind Noise Monitoring Plan, August 2011, b, Lloyd George Acoustics Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 18

20 Measurement Number Nominal Location Comments Wind Conditions LAS10 LAS90 8 MFU 1500m SW Mining barely audible. Trees rustling m/s SE Wind WCP750m NE WCP, Mining and Pump just audible. Changing wind between SE and SW WCP 750m NW WCP audible, truck loading in progress too. Birds, Crows 2-3.5m/s SE MFU 50m SW MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 150m SW MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 150m SE MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 50m SE MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 50m NE MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 150m NE Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 150m NW Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 50m NW MFU, Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 0-2m/s SE MFU 250m NE Loader on ROM, Truck on ROM 1-3m/s SE m from Excavator Excavator working on bench 1-3m/s SE MFU 500m NE Mining barely audible m/s SE MFU 750m NW Excavator dominant m/s SE MFU 500m NW Excavator dominant m/s SE MFU 250m SW MFU just audible over wind noise m/s SW MFU 500m SW Wind noise only m/s SW MFU 1000m NE MFU just audible over wind noise 6-8m/s SW MFU 1500m NE Wind noise only 6-8m/s SW MFU 1000m SW Wind noise only (no measurement taken) m/s SW - - Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 19

21 Figure 5-1 Map of Attended Measurement Locations Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 20

22 6. CONCLUSION For the first three months of operation at Keysbrook (22 nd October 2015 to the 22 nd January 2016), the Barn Own noise monitoring system was available and recording data for a total of 1324 hours, approximately 60% of the time. The total data set included 5, minute samples, for which 332 samples were identified where the directionality of the noise indicates potential that the mine site was a cause of exceedance of the assigned levels. For these periods, recorded sound files (where available) were reviewed. Of the 65 sound files reviewed, there was no periods identified where mine site noise was the dominant audible source. Sound files were not available for the remainder of periods where a potential exceedance was identified based on the directional data. Most of these samples were identified as unlikely exceedances, as the wind direction was not in a favourable direction for minesite noise propagation towards the receptor. The attended measurement survey indicated that noise from fixed plant and mobile equipment contains tonal characteristics in the 80 Hz and 100 Hz third-octave bands. These have the potential to cause tonality at residences. However, it was not possible to assess the tonality of mining operations from the Barn Own noise monitoring system as the system does not currently record spectral data. Noise modelling of a current mining scenario (mining on Lot 6) was also undertaken. Under worstcase meteorological conditions, predicted exceedances were identified at three northern receptors. However, SVT understands that KLPL have amenity agreements with these residents. Noise model predictions for all other residences, including the residence located at Lot 20, Hopelands Rd, indicate that compliance is achieved. Statement of Compliance The noise monitoring data available, combined with predictions from noise modelling, indicate that the Keysbrook mine site has achieved compliance in the first three months of operation. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 21

23 7. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Whilst the conclusions of this report indicate that compliance has been achieved in the first quarter of operations (Q1 2016), it is likely that noise management and achieving compliance, may be more difficult during the autumn and winter months, as meteorological conditions become more favourable for noise propagation, particularly at night time. Additionally, as mining progresses towards the south, noise sources will be closer to the Lot 20, Hopelands Rd residence. KLPL are currently in the process of implementing MaestroMine, a noise management planning tool that will enable them to plan activities to achieve predicted noise compliance over varying meteorological conditions. With MaestroMine in place, and with the continued use of the BarnOwl noise monitoring system, KLPL should be better able to manage their environmental noise emissions. However, SVT recommend that the BarnOwl noise monitoring system is setup to capture spectral data, to assist in identifying if mining noise is the cause of detected exceedances, and for the assessment of tonality. Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page 22

24 APPENDIX A MEASURED SOUND POWER LEVELS Measured sound power levels for fixed plant and mobile equipment. Equipment Octave Band Sound Power Levels in db(l) k 2k 4k 8k Fixed Plant O/A db(a) Wet Plant MFU MFU Booster Pump Discharge Point Process Water Pumps Production Bore Pump Production Bore Pump Raw Water Pump Slimes Discharge Point Slimes Return Pump Tails 1 Booster Pump Tails 2 Booster Pump Tails Return Pump Tails Return Pump Mobile Equipment Watercart AWC Excavator PC1250SP Haul Truck Haul Truck Haul Truck Loader LDW Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page A-1

25 APPENDIX B NOISE CONTOURS Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page B-1

26 Noise Levels in db(a) = 25 = 30 = 35 = 40 = 45 = 50 = 55 = Figure 3: Worst-case night-time noise level contours.

27 APPENDIX C SAMPLE DIRECTIONAL MONITORING REPORT Doc: Rev2-18.Feb.2016 Page C-1

28 Directional Noise Alert at BarnOwl of 1 18/02/2016 3:08 PM Directional Noise Alert Report Location BarnOwl 1 Time 08/01/ :00:00 Alert Info Start Time End Time Alert Value Threshold Severity Activity 08/01/ :00:00 08/01/ :00: db 35 db Exceedance 99 % Alert Values L eq (db) L 10 (db) L 50 (db) Total All Sources L 90 (db) Activity Angle Of Interest % Directional Noise View The plot shows noise source values (in db) and there angular direction. The angle of interest is indicated by yellow lines. The sources inside the angle of interest are shown in red lines. The other sources are shown in green lines. Range of Access Road Range of Mining Processing Trees Hopelands Road (Truck) Trees Wind 2m/s