Vol 2 Section 5 Noise - Alberta · 2019-02-14 · 5.2 Study Area 5.2.1 Spatial Boundaries AER Directive 038 is a receptor-based noise regulation that defines a noise receptor as any

Suncor Energy Inc. Lewis In Situ Project Volume 2 – Environmental Impact Assessment February 2018

Table of Contents – Page i

SECTION 5.0 – NOISE TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

5.0 NOISE ............................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Study Area .......................................................................................................... 5-1

5.2.1 Spatial Boundaries .............................................................................. 5-1 5.2.2 Temporal Boundaries .......................................................................... 5-3

5.3 Assessment Approach ....................................................................................... 5-3 5.3.1 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................ 5-4 5.3.2 Issues .................................................................................................. 5-5 5.3.3 Applicable Sound Level Limits ............................................................. 5-5 5.3.4 Assessment Criteria ............................................................................ 5-6

5.4 Methods .............................................................................................................. 5-6 5.5 Baseline Case .................................................................................................... 5-7

5.5.1 Baseline Case Sound Sources ............................................................ 5-7 5.5.2 Baseline Case Noise Level Predictions ............................................... 5-7

5.6 Application Case ................................................................................................ 5-7 5.6.1 Mitigation ............................................................................................. 5-7 5.6.2 Sound Sources .................................................................................... 5-8 5.6.3 Modelling Results ................................................................................ 5-8 5.6.4 Low Frequency Noise Assessment ..................................................... 5-8 5.6.5 Summary ........................................................................................... 5-10

5.7 Planned Development Case ............................................................................. 5-10 5.7.1 Summary ........................................................................................... 5-11

5.8 Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 5-11 5.9 Summary .......................................................................................................... 5-12 5.10 References ....................................................................................................... 5-12


Table of Contents – Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d)

PAGE LIST OF TABLES

Table 5.2-1: Location of Receptors and Spatial Locations from the Lewis Project ................. 5-3 Table 5.3-1: Permissible Sound Levels .................................................................................. 5-5 Table 5.3-2: Summary of Impact Assessment Descriptors for Noise ..................................... 5-6 Table 5.5-1: Baseline Case Noise Levels ............................................................................... 5-7 Table 5.6-1: Application Case Noise Levels ........................................................................... 5-8 Table 5.6-2: Low Frequency Noise Assessment .................................................................. 5-10 Table 5.7-1: Planned Development Case – Maximum Allowable Sound Level .................... 5-11 Table 5.9-1: Application Case Effects Summary .................................................................. 5-12

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5.2-1: Noise Local Study Area and Receptor Locations ............................................... 5-2 Figure 5.6-1: Noise Contour – Nighttime ................................................................................. 5-9


Page 5-1

5.0 NOISE

5.1 Introduction

This section of the assessment evaluates the noise impact of the proposed Lewis In Situ Project (Lewis Project). The Lewis Project involves the construction of four central processing facilities (CPF) and an initial 180 well pads (11 of which are contingent).

This assessment was prepared in support of the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) application for the proposed Lewis Project and was conducted in accordance with AER Draft Directive 023: Oil Sands Project Applications (AER 2013). Under this Directive, facilities that contain continuous noise sources require a noise impact assessment (NIA). The NIA was completed according to the requirements of AER Directive 038: Noise Control (AER 2007).

5.2 Study Area

5.2.1 Spatial Boundaries

AER Directive 038 is a receptor-based noise regulation that defines a noise receptor as any permanent or seasonally occupied dwelling that may be affected by the Lewis Project. In areas where there are no nearby receptors, AER Directive 038 sets limits on the noise levels at a distance of 1.5 km from the facility fence line. For the purposes of this assessment, the “facility fence line”, as termed in AER Directive 038, is the Lewis Project Area boundary. The Local Study Area (LSA) consists of a 1.5 km wide zone around the perimeter of the Lewis Project Area.

In addition to the need to identify receptors, AER Directive 038 outlines a cumulative approach to noise where other noise regulated facilities must be identified and assessed. The LSA is, therefore, defined to include the identification of both potential receptors and third party facilities.

No permanent residences or dwellings are located within the LSA; therefore, the assessment of compliance with AER Directive 038 is performed solely along the LSA boundary.

The LSA overlaps several leases where there are approved projects regulated under AER Directive 038. Suncor’s Base Operation and Oak Point Energy Lewis Steepbank lease boundaries are located adjacent to the west and north, respectively, of the Lewis Project Area. The AER Directive 038 criteria do not apply inside the 1.5 km boundaries of neighbouring facilities. Therefore, the sections of the LSA where there is no overlap is the portion used to assess compliance with AER Directive 038 and is referred to as the Noise Criteria Boundary.

Receptors along the Noise Criteria Boundary representing cumulative effects locations with the adjacent facilities and the point of maximum predicted Lewis Project contribution were chosen to assess the noise effect. The locations of these receptors are displayed in Table 5.2-1. The receptors, LSA and Noise Criteria Boundary are shown in Figure 5.2-1.

Jackpin

e

East CreekJackpine

North

Stee

pban

k

Steepbank River

ClarkeCreek

Creek

River

R5

R4R3

R2

R1

489000 498000 507000

6296000

6305000

6314000

6323000

R6R7R8

T90

T91

T92

T93

1 0 1 2

Kilo m etres1:140,000

S:\Gis\Projects\CE\Suncor_Lewis\CE04536_EIA\ArcGIS\_Report Figures\Vol 2 Sec 05 - Noise\Fig 05.02-01 Receptor NLSA.mxd ANALYST: jackie.hoglund 18-01-31 2:55:49 PM

Figure 5.2-1

Fina l Ma pping: Co m pleted b y Am ec Fo ster WheelerP ro jec tio n: UTM Zo ne 12 NAD83QA/QC: KW MJ MJSo urc es: RWDI- Co nta ins info rm a tio n lic ensed und er the Open Go vernm ent lic enc e – Alb erta ,Ca na d a .

No ise Criteria Bo und a ry1.5 km P ro jec t Bo und a ry/No ise LSALewis P ro jec t AreaOpera ting a nd Appro vedOil Sa nd s Develo pm entBa seline Disturb a nc eHo rse River Wild fireWa terb o d yWa terc o urse - Defined Cha nnelWa terc o urse - Und efined Cha nnelDitc hRec epto rs

January2018

Noise Local Study Area andReceptor Locations

W4

LewisProject


Page 5-3

Table 5.2-1: Location of Receptors and Spatial Locations from the Lewis Project

Receptor ID

UTM Coordinates (NAD 83, Zone 12V) Distance from

Lewis Project (m)

Direction from Lewis Project Easting

(m) Northing

(m) R1 488475 6301657 1,500 Southwest R2 483933 6320392 1,500 Northwest R3 494723 6323332 1,500 North R4 497770 6323403 1,500 North R51 498428 6312935 1,500 East

Notes: 1 Location of greatest predicted Lewis Project influence along Noise Criteria Boundary.

5.2.2 Temporal Boundaries

Lewis Project effects are examined using a maximum disturbance approach that assumes all development will occur at the same time, over the entire footprint, representing a full-field development assessment (Volume 2, Section 3.4). The duration of the engineering and construction phase will be approximately 10 years, from 2020 to 2030. The duration of the operations phase will be 40 years beginning in 2027 (three years overlap with the engineering and construction phase). At the end of the Lewis Project life, well pads, access roads, plant facilities, and associated infrastructure will be reclaimed. Final reclamation work is expected to be completed within 25 years of the end of operations.

The focus of the noise assessment is on the operations phase.

5.3 Assessment Approach

Noise from the proposed Lewis Project was estimated using predictive modelling to determine the sound level at the receptors. The assessment was completed by:

identifying receptors and respective permissible sound levels (PSLs) per AER Directive 038

determining existing ambient conditions per AER Directive 038

estimating sound emissions from existing or approved nearby facilities

estimating sound emissions from the proposed Lewis Project

modelling the sound emissions to predict noise levels at receptors

comparing the predictions to the AER Directive 038 PSL

evaluating the impacts.

AER Directive 038 prescribes that effects from operational sound levels due to all regulated facilities are evaluated at sensitive receptors near the site or at a 1.5 km distance from the Lewis Project boundary. Noise from construction and reclamation is not specifically addressed through AER Directive 038.


Page 5-4

During construction and reclamation, heavy equipment is expected to be in operation and will create noise, including:

bulldozers

haul trucks

excavators

loaders

drills

pumps

generators.

However, construction and reclamation noise is expected to be temporary and the resulting sound levels will be less than that of the operation sound levels. Because of this, only noise from operations is assessed as required by AER Directive 038.

5.3.1 Regulatory Framework

5.3.1.1 AER Draft Directive 023 and AER Directive 038

AER Draft Directive 023 requires applicants seeking approval for oil sands projects to comply with AER Directive 038.

Noise from oil and gas activity in Alberta is regulated by the AER, through AER Directive 038. This regulation outlines specific requirements for the content of NIAs, assessment methods, and noise monitoring requirements. The regulation defines noise sensitive receptors as residences or dwellings, and details specific criteria to be met at noise sensitive receptors. AER Directive 038 also requires that noise be controlled even when no receptors are present and sets criteria to be met at distance from a facility (i.e., LSA).

AER Directive 038 applies to noise from operations and does not specifically regulate noise from construction although the expectation that construction related sound levels will be managed is stated.

5.3.1.2 Terms of Reference

The Lewis Project Terms of Reference, Section 3.1.2 [C] (Volume 3, Appendix A) requires the noise assessment to:

identify the nearest receptor used in the assessment

discuss the design, construction and operational factors to be incorporated into the Project to comply with the AER Directive 38.


Page 5-5

5.3.2 Issues One issue that influenced the assessment is the concern regarding the increasing noise levels in the region expressed by the Fort McKay First Nation on other oil sands projects (FMA Heritage 2006). The concern is that while compliance with the AER criteria is discussed, that criteria allows change in the environment, the assessment does not directly answer the question of where existing sound levels change. This concern is addressed in this assessment through the extent of sound level contours. The contours are determined using octave band data, so the character of sound is incorporated into the assessment. The resulting contours reflect the nature of the sound being generated.

Sound level contours will be extended beyond a general criteria comparison to 10 dBA below the ambient sound level, 25 dBA in the case of the Lewis Project. Sound at or below this level may be distinguishable at times, but would generally not be measurable.

5.3.3 Applicable Sound Level Limits AER defines sound level limits at receptors or at 1.5 km from the facility fence line by calculating PSLs according to the procedures in AER Directive 038. The PSL is used to assess if the cumulative sound level at a receptor is acceptable. For this assessment, there are no receptors within 1.5 km of the Lewis Project footprint and the cumulative sound levels are assessed for compliance at the valid portion of the LSA boundary only (i.e., the Lewis Project Criteria Boundary). The cumulative sound level at the 1.5 km Criteria Boundary may not exceed 50 dBA (Leq) during the daytime and 40 dBA (Leq) during nighttime hours. The PSL for the Lewis Project are presented in Table 5.3-1.

Table 5.3-1: Permissible Sound Levels

Receptor ID

PSL1 (dBA Leq)

Daytime2 (07:00-22:00)

Nighttime (22:00-07:00)

R1 50 40 R2 50 40 R3 50 40 R4 50 40 R5 50 40

Notes: 1 PSL determined based on AER Directive 038, Table 1. 2 Daytime PSL includes a 10 dBA correction from the nighttime PSL.

With respect to low frequency noise (LFN), AER Directive 038 states that a LFN complaint condition may exist where the difference between the time weighted average dBA and dBC levels is equal to or greater than 20 dB, and where a clear tonal component exists at a frequency below 250 hertz (Hz). A full determination of compliance with LFN conditions is only required in a complaint assessment. However, an analysis of the dBC-dBA component is generally desired by the AER to estimate the potential for LFN issues, as control of LFN is best addressed prior to finalization of the Lewis Project design. An evaluation of dBC-dBA is provided and the potential for an LFN condition discussed.


Page 5-6

5.3.4 Assessment Criteria

The environmental noise effects of the Lewis Project are classified using quantification criteria to determine environmental consequence. Each effect is described in terms of the following criteria: direction, magnitude, geographic extent, duration, and frequency. The residual impact is then described in terms of the descriptors provided in Table 5.3-2.

Table 5.3-2: Summary of Impact Assessment Descriptors for Noise

Criteria Definitions

Direction Positive: The sound level is expected to decrease. Neutral: The sound level is expected to remain the same. Negative: The sound level is expected to increase.

Geographic Extent

Immediate Area: The expected measurable changes are within 1.5 km of Lewis Project infrastructure. Local: The expected measurable changes extend beyond 1.5 km. Regional: The extended measurable changes extend beyond the LSA.

Magnitude

Negligible: The expected sound level complies with the PSL and the change from baseline is expected to be less than 3 dBA. Low: The expected sound level complies with the PSL but change is expected to be greater than 3 dBA. Moderate: The expected sound level change is expected to exceed the nighttime PSL but will comply with the daytime PSL. High: The expected sound level change exceeds the night and day PSL values.

Duration

Short-term: Predicted impact persists no longer than a few days. Medium-term: Predicted impact is measurable until the end of the operational life of the Lewis Project. Long-term: Predicted impact continues past closure.

Frequency Once: Event occurs once. Infrequent: Event occurs a few times during the life of the Lewis Project. Continuous: Event occurs on an ongoing basis.

Confidence

Low: No clear understanding of cause and effect because of a lack of relevant information base and opportunity for rigorous data collection. Moderate: Moderate understanding of cause and effect from existing knowledge base, but potential for site and time-specific variability, and moderate site-specific data availability. Limited predictive ability because of variability over time and/or space. High: High understanding of cause and effect from existing knowledge base and/or high quality site-specific data availability. Limited potential for site and time-specific variability.

5.4 Methods

Noise levels predicted for the assessment were determined using methods consistent with AER Directive 038 requirements. The CadnaA model used for the predictions implemented environmental sound propagation calculation methods prescribed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard 9613 (ISO 1993, 1996). Details of the methods, model, input parameters and attenuation factors are provided in Volume 3, Appendix C.


Page 5-7

5.5 Baseline Case

5.5.1 Baseline Case Sound Sources The Baseline Case noise levels are established as the AER Directive 038’s ambient noise level (ASL). According to AER Directive 038, “the average rural ambient sound level in Alberta is about 35 dBA Leq at night”. The Baseline Case considers the cumulative effects from the third-party contributions from Suncor’s Base Operation and the approved Oak Point Energy Lewis Steepbank project.

The third-party contributions from the Suncor’s Base Operation and Oak Point Energy Lewis Steepbank projects are interpreted from noise contours contained in the respective assessments. The Suncor’s Base Operation noise contour is provided as Figure 5.5-1 in Voyageur South Project Volume 3: Environmental Health, Noise and Aquatic Resources (Suncor 2007), while the Oak Point Energy Lewis Steepbank noise contour is provided as Figure 2 in Application for Approval of the Lewis SAGD Pilot Project (Oak Point Energy 2011). Where noise contours did not extend to the LSA, extrapolation was used to estimate the noise levels.

5.5.2 Baseline Case Noise Level Predictions Table 5.5-1 shows the Baseline Case noise levels at the receptor locations. Based on the noise contours, the Baseline Case complies with AER PSLs.

Table 5.5-1: Baseline Case Noise Levels

Receptor ID

ASL2 Adjacent Facility Sound Level

Cumulative Baseline Sound Level3 PSL Complies

with AER Directive

038? (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime R1 45 35 16.0 45.0 35.1 50 40 Yes R2 45 35 22.0 45.0 35.2 50 40 Yes R3 45 35 37.4 45.7 39.4 50 40 Yes R4 45 35 37.4 45.7 39.4 50 40 Yes R51 45 35 25.6 45.0 35.5 50 40 Yes

Notes: 1 Location of greatest predicted Lewis Project influence along Noise Criteria Boundary. 2 ASL calculated in accordance with AER Directive 038. 3 Logarithmic sum of all adjacent facilities, Baseline Case Lewis Project contributions and AER mandated ambient.

5.6 Application Case

5.6.1 Mitigation The modelling conducted for the assessment included the following design elements which also provide noise attenuation:

buildings act as barriers to exterior sound

building walls and roof panels attenuate sound from enclosed equipment.

No additional mitigation is required to meet the PSLs.


Page 5-8

5.6.2 Sound Sources

In this assessment, the Lewis Project CPFs and well pads were modelled in Cadna/A to represent the planned equipment and layout on site. The CPFs have similar layouts with slight differences in associated buildings and outdoor equipment. All well pads were assumed to have the same equipment layout. Associated buildings and outdoor equipment for the CPFs and well pads are summarized in Volume 3, Appendix C. Sound emissions included in the Application Case and the associated sound spectra are listed in Volume 3, Appendix C.

5.6.3 Modelling Results

Table 5.6-1 shows the predicted Lewis Project sound contributions, Baseline Case, and resulting Application Case cumulative sound levels (including adjacent facility and AER mandated ambient sound levels) at the identified receptor points. The Application Case sound levels indicate that the Lewis Project will meet the PSL values at receptor points along the Criteria Boundary. Based on the assumption of very conservative values for the Suncor’s Base Operation and Oak Point Energy Lewis Steepbank facilities’ sound contributions, all predicted cumulative levels indicate compliance with AER Directive 038.

Table 5.6-1: Application Case Noise Levels

Receptor ID

Cumulative Baseline Sound Level2

Lewis Project Contribution3

Cumulative Sound Level4 PSL Complies

with AER Directive

038? (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime R1 45.0 35.1 21.4 45.0 35.2 50 40 Yes

R2 45.0 35.2 28.7 45.1 36.1 50 40 Yes

R3 45.7 39.4 24.2 45.7 39.5 50 40 Yes

R4 45.7 39.4 25.8 45.7 39.6 50 40 Yes

R51 45.0 35.5 30.9 45.2 36.8 50 40 Yes

Notes: 1 Location of greatest predicted Lewis Project influence along LSA. 2 Cumulative baseline results calculated from Table 5.5-1. 3 Contribution from the Lewis Project sound sources. 4 Logarithmic sum of all contributions from the Lewis Project, adjacent facilities and AER mandated ambient (ASL).

Figure 5.6-1 shows the predicted nighttime noise contours, extended to 25 dBA as a zone of potential Lewis Project influence on ambient sound levels. The sound level contours do not include the nighttime ASL of 35 dBA or the adjacent facility noise contributions.

5.6.4 Low Frequency Noise Assessment

AER Directive 038 describes that a potential LFN condition may exist when:

the dBC – dBA value for the measured daytime or nighttime period is equal to or greater than 20 dB

a clear tonal component exists at a frequency below 250 Hz.

Jackpin

e

East CreekJackpine

North

Stee

pban

k

Steepbank River

ClarkeCreek

Creek

River

R5

R4R3

R2

R1

489000 498000 507000

6296000

6305000

6314000

6323000

R6R7R8

T90

T91

T92

T93

1 0 1 2

Kilom e tre s1:140,000

S:\Gis\Projects\CE\Suncor_Lewis\CE04536_EIA\ArcGIS\_Report Figures\Vol 2 Sec 05 - Noise\Fig 05.06-01 Contours NLSA.mxd ANALYST: jackie.hoglund 18-01-31 2:54:43 PM

Figure 5.6-1

Final Map p ing: Com p le te d b y Am e c Foste r Whe e le rProje ction: UTM Zone 12 NAD83Q A/Q C: KW MJ MJSourc e s: RWDI- Contains inform ation lic e nse d und e r the Op e n Gove rnm e nt lic e nc e – Alb e rta,Canad a.

Noise Crite ria Bound ary1.5 km Proje ct Bound ary/Noise LSALe wis Proje ct Are aOp e rating and Ap p rove dOil Sand s De ve lop m e ntBase line Disturb anc eWate rb od yWate rc ourse - De fine d Channe lWate rc ourse - Und e fine d Channe lDitc hRe c e p tors

Noise Con tour (dBA)25-3030-3535-4040-4545-5050-5555-6060-6565-7070-7575-80

Jan uary2018

Noise Con tour – Nighttime

W4

LewisProject


Page 5-10

The predicted C-Weighted sound level (dBC) results from the Lewis Project alone have been reviewed at the receptors to determine if there is potential for LFN effects. Table 5.6-2 summarizes the dBC values and the difference between dBC and dBA levels at the point with the highest predicted cumulative noise level.

Table 5.6-2: Low Frequency Noise Assessment

Receptor ID

C-Weighted Sound Level (dBC)

A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA)

Difference dBC – dBA

(dB) Potential LFN

Condition?

R1 45.5 21.4 24.1 Yes R2 50.1 28.7 21.4 Yes R3 47.2 24.2 23.0 Yes R4 48.3 25.8 22.5 Yes R5 51.6 30.9 20.7 Yes

The results indicate that the difference between the dBC and dBA values is higher than 20 at all receptors. Regardless, the potential for LFN effects is considered to be low due to the absence of dwelling receptors.

In addition, the overall predicted dBC contribution at the receptor point is 51.6 dBC at night, less than the implied ceiling of 60 dBC. This ceiling is based on the PSL of 40 dBA at night (40 dBA plus 20 dB difference gives 60 dBC). There are no permanent dwellings or human receptors in the area to be affected. Due to the C-weighted values being below 60 dBC and the absence of dwellings nearby, the potential for an LFN issue or complaint is considered low.

Tonal issues are not expected due to the multiple types of noise sources assessed. Facilities with large numbers of mechanical equipment typically experience masking of the various differences in individual source spectra. If a complaint is received regarding the Lewis Project, the LFN assessment would be completed using 1/3 octave measurements in order to perform a tonality analysis, as required by AER Directive 038.

5.6.5 Summary

The Lewis Project will alter the existing sound levels in the region due to the introduction of the CPFs and well pads. The effects at the Lewis Project Criteria Boundary are negligible in magnitude, based on the results in Table 5.6-1. The direction is considered negative due to the increase in noise levels. The effects are local in nature and will occur only during the operations phase. Noise from operations is expected to be continuous through the life of the Lewis Project. The residual impact is low.

5.7 Planned Development Case

The Planned Development Case examines the potential for compliance based on future neighbouring facilities. The requirements of AER Directive 038 indicate that any future developments must consider the noise contributions from the Lewis Project in their cumulative


Page 5-11

assessments so noise levels at receptors or 1.5 km criteria boundaries comply with PSLs. However, a future development scenario is evaluated for discussing a Planned Development condition.

In the absence of future development data from planned facilities, a conservative assumption would be that they contribute the maximum allowed amount of sound at the receptor locations that still result in compliance with the PSLs.

Table 5.7-1 outlines the maximum allowable sound emissions for future facilities at the receptor locations. The analysis shows that further development is possible while maintaining compliance for sound levels at all receptors.

Table 5.7-1: Planned Development Case – Maximum Allowable Sound Level

Receptor ID

Ambient Sound Level

(dBA)

Predicted Lewis

Project Emissions

(dBA)1

Existing or Approved Adjacent Facilities (dBA) 2

Maximum Allowable

Future Facility Sound

Contributions (dBA)3

Cumulative Planned

Development Case

(dBA)4

PSL (dBA)5

Application Case – Year 2027 to 2067 R1 35 21.4 16 38.2 40 40 R2 35 28.7 22 37.7 40 40 R3 35 24.2 37 30.3 40 40 R4 35 25.8 37 29.8 40 40 R5 35 30.9 26 37.2 40 40

Notes: 1 Lewis Project emissions include proposed Lewis Project noise emissions. 2 Existing emissions include the existing Suncor’s Base Operation and the approved Oak Point Energy Lewis

Steepbank project. 3 Maximum allowable sound contribution from future facilities. 4 Cumulative sound from the Lewis Project emissions, adjacent facilities, maximum allowable future facilities and

AER mandated ambient. 5 PSL as outlined by AER.

5.7.1 Summary The effects on LSA noise levels due to the Planned Development Case will remain negligible in magnitude assuming future developments comply with the allowable contributions shown in Table 5.7-1. Compliance with the allowable contribution indicates compliance with AER PSLs. The direction is considered negative due to the increase in noise levels. The effects are local in nature and will occur only during the operations phase. Noise from operations is expected to be continuous through the life of the Lewis Project. The residual impact is low.

5.8 Monitoring The results of the assessment indicate that no additional monitoring is needed. AER Directive 038 requires that licensees conduct a noise investigation upon receiving a noise complaint. Section 4 of AER Directive 038 provides a detailed noise investigation procedure. If a noise complaint is received, Suncor Energy Inc. (Suncor) will conduct a noise investigation as per AER Directive 038.


Page 5-12

5.9 Summary

The results from this assessment (as summarized in Table 5.5-1) indicate that the cumulative sound levels at the 1.5 km boundary locations due to the Lewis Project are expected to comply with PSLs and that residual impacts are considered low. The summary of Application Case effects is presented in Table 5.9-1.

Table 5.9-1: Application Case Effects Summary

Indicator Project Phase Direction Geographic

Extent Magnitude Duration Frequency Confidence Residual Impact

Sound levels Operation Negative Local Negligible Medium-

term Continuous High Low

The summary of Planned Development Case effects is the same as the Application Case.

5.10 References

Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). 2007. Directive 038: Noise Control. Prepared by the Alberta Energy and Utility Board. Calgary, AB. Available at: aer.ca/documents/directives/ Directive038.pdf. Accessed 13 April 2017.

Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). 2013. Draft Directive 023: Oil Sands Project Applications. Prepared by the Alberta Energy and Utility Board. Calgary, AB. Available at: aer.ca/documents/directives/DraftDirective023_20130528.pdf. Accessed 13 April 2017.

FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. (FMA Heritage). 2006. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use Report for the Joslyn North Mine Project.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1993. International Standard ISO 9613-1, Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors – Part 1: Calculation of Absorption of Sound by the Atmosphere. Geneva, Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1996. International Standard ISO 9613-2, Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors – Part 2: General Method of Calculation. Geneva, Switzerland.

Oak Point Energy Ltd. 2011. Application for Approval of the Lewis SAGD Pilot Project. Submission to Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, AB.

Suncor Energy Inc. (Suncor). 2007. Suncor Energy Inc. Voyageur South Project Volume 3: Environmental Health, Noise and Aquatic Resources. Submission to Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Fort McMurray, AB.

Documents

Vol 2 Section 5 Noise - Alberta · 2019-02-14 · 5.2 Study Area 5.2.1 Spatial Boundaries AER Directive 038 is a receptor-based noise regulation that defines a noise receptor as any