Annex g8 Noise Impact Assessment Report

Annex G.
Noise and Vibration

Specialist Report
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the
Proposed Gamsberg Zinc Mine and Associated Infrastructure in
Northern Cape
NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Commissioned by:
ERM Consulting
Prepared by:
Demos Dracoulides
Arrey Ebot
CAPE TOWN
PO Box 60034, Table View 7439
Tel: +2721 551 1836
Fax: +2721 557 1078
DemosD@xsinet.co.za
Report No GAM-NVI-R02
March 2013
Noise Impact Assessment Report for the Proposed Gamsberg Zinc Mine in Northern Cape
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Introduction
Black Mountain Mining (Pty) Ltd intends to establish a 10 million tons per annum (Mtpa)
open pit zinc mine (beneficiation volume) at Gamsberg Inselberg in the Northern Cape
Province. In addition to the open pit zinc mine and associated infrastructure an office
complex and a zinc concentrator will be established to process the mined ore. The total
processing capacity of the zinc concentrator plant is approximately 10 million tons per year.
DDA Environmental Engineers (DDA) has been appointed by Environmental Resources

Management (Southern Africa) Pty Ltd (ERM) for the determination of the baseline noise
levels and the noise impact assessment for the proposed Zinc Mine.
2. Study Approach
The study approach incorporated noise measurements within the areas around the project
site, as well as noise calculations for the operational phase of the proposed mine and
associated infrastructure.
The noise modelling calculations for the proposed development were utilised for the
determination of the resulting noise levels due to the mining operations, the processing plant
and the ore transportation. The resulting noise levels were then used for the impact
assessment on the surrounding areas and sensitive receptors.
3. Impact Assessment
Based on the noise measurements and the noise modelling results, the following can be
concluded:
Baseline Noise Environment
The noise environment of the area bordering the Gamsberg mining area is that of
typical Rural districts with one major road (N14) and local secondary roads. The
daytime and night-time levels away from the above mentioned roads were within the
SANS guideline for Rural districts of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) respectively.
DDA i March 2013

The current noise levels at Aggeneys were above the guidelines for Rural but within
the SANS and WHO guidelines for Urban residential districts of 55 dB(A) and 45 dB(A)
for daytime and night-time respectively.
The main noise contributors within the extended area of the project were primarily the
vehicular traffic on the N14 and local roads. During night-time, most of these sources
were still the main contributors, however at certain locations the frog and insect activity
also contributed significantly to the local noise levels.
Construction Phase
The construction activities at receptors outside a 1,000 m zone from the main working
area will be noticeable but will not constitute a disturbing noise. For receptors located
at greater distances than a 1.5 km radius, the construction noise will be barely audible.
Since the closest receptor is more than 5 km away this impact is expected to be
Insignificant.
The vibration during the site construction is not considered to have a significant impact
on the surrounding receptors, as the closest one has a more than 5 km separation
distance from the site.
Operational Phase
During operation, the 45 dB(A) daytime and 35 dB(A) night-time noise levels will be
primarily contained within the Gamsberg concession area.
The daytime and night-time guidelines will not be exceeded in any of the scattered
farm houses around the mine nor the Aggeneys community, except for farm house
R05, which is situated within 300 m from the Loop 10 road.
Along the Loop 10 road, most of the scattered farm houses are located more than 500
m from the alignment, and as such the expected level contribution due to the trucks
will be below 34 dB(A), which is considered to be of Low significance.
The operational noise impact is considered Very Low and no additional mitigation
measures would be necessary.
The vibration levels are not expected to exceed the limit for structural damage beyond
a 400 m zone around blasting area, and the limit for sensitive or historical buildings
beyond a 600 m zone.
DDA ii March 2013

Based on the modelling results for the proposed mine operation and zinc beneficiation plant,
the impacts of construction and operation are summarised in the tables below.
Table 1. Noise and Vibration Impact Rating During Construction

Nature: Construction activities would result in a negative direct impact on the vibration levels and
noise environment around the plant.
Sensitivity/Vulnerability/Irreplaceability of Resource/Receptor Low

Sensitivity: The activity will increase the noise and vibration levels at areas in very close proximity to
the plant. However, the closest receptor is situated more than 5 km away.
Impact Magnitude Small

x Extent: The extent of the impact is local.
x Duration: The expected impact will be shortterm (i.e. for the duration of construction).
x Scale: The impact will not result in notable changes to the noise levels at any receptors around
the mining area.
x Frequency: The frequency of the impact will be periodic.
x Likelihood: The noise levels outside the concession area are unlikely to increase during the
construction period.
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE (NO MITIGATION REQUIRED) NEGLIGIBLE

Degree of Confidence: The degree of confidence is high.
Essential Mitigation Measures:

i. No specific mitigations will be required during construction.
Table 2. Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Rating

Nature: The mining and plant operation will result in a negative direct impact on the noise
environment around the mine.

the plant and mining pit. However, the closest receptor is situated more than 5 km away.

x Duration: The expected impact will be longterm (i.e. the duration of the operation).
x Scale: The impact will not result in notable changes to the noise levels at receptors situated
more than 2 km from the plant and mining pit.
x Likelihood: The noise and vibration levels during operation are possible to increase during the
operational period.


i. No specific mitigations will be required during operation.
DDA iii March 2013

4. Recommendations
Based on the noise and vibration study, the noise performance indicator to be adopted for
the rural area around the mine and plant should be that the noise levels at single dwellings
do not exceed 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) during day- and night-time respectively, due to the
mining and plant operations.
At Aggeneys the indicator should be that the noise levels should not exceed 55 dB(A) and
45 dB(A) during day- and night-time respectively.
The performance indicator for vibration should be that the ground vibration level at general
houses of proper construction do not exceed 25 mm/s and at houses of lesser proper
construction 12.5 mm/s.
The main recommendations of the noise and vibration study are:
Construction:
i. There are no specific mitigations that will be required during construction.
ii. Environmental noise monitoring should be performed by an independent specialist on

a 6-month basis at the boundaries of the site and at two selected locations at the
closest farm houses to the plant and mining pit. This monitoring should commence
prior to and during construction.
Operation:
i. There are no specific mitigations that will be required during the mining activities and
plant operation.
ii. Environmental noise and vibration monitoring should be performed by an

independent specialist on an annual basis along the site boundaries and at four
selected locations within the farm houses closest to the mine and Loop 10 road.
A public complaints and actions registry should be established, in order to capture public
perceptions and complaints with regard to noise impacts, track investigation actions and
introduce corrective measures for continuous improvement.
DDA iv March 2013

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................. i
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Study Area ................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Terms of Reference .................................................................................................. 1
2 NOISE BASICS GUIDELINES AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS .......................... 4

2.1 Noise Basics ............................................................................................................. 4
2.2 Noise Standards and Guidelines .............................................................................. 5
2.3 Blasting Basics ....................................................................................................... 10
3 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS ............................................................... 12

3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Monitoring Equipment ............................................................................................. 13
3.3 Noise Monitoring Points .......................................................................................... 14
3.4 Ambient Noise Measurements ............................................................................... 16

3.5 Noise-sensitive Receptors ...................................................................................... 19
4 NOISE AND VIBRATION MODELLING METHODOLOGY AND INPUT ........... 21

4.1 Noise During Construction and Decommissioning ................................................. 21
4.2 Noise Modelling of the Processing Plant and Mining Activities .............................. 22
4.3 Vibration During Construction and Operation ......................................................... 26
5 PREDICTED NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVELS............................................... 29

5.1 Construction and Decommissioning Noise Modelling Results ............................... 29
5.2 Proposed Mine and Plant Noise Levels .................................................................. 29
5.3 Noise Levels without the Plant (Year 2014) ........................................................... 33
5.4 Discrete Receptor Calculations .............................................................................. 36
5.5 Blast Vibration Modelling Results ........................................................................... 37
6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 38

6.1 Gamsberg Zinc Beneficiation Plant and Mining Activities....................................... 38
6.2 Vehicular Traffic Noise Impacts .............................................................................. 38
DDA v March 2013

6.3 Conclusions And Recommendations ...................................................................... 42

6.4 Recommendations .................................................................................................. 43
6.5 Impacts Rating ........................................................................................................ 45
Appendix A ............................................................................................................... 48

A.1 Impact Assessment Methodology for EIAs - Instructions to Specialists ................. 48
Appendix B ............................................................................................................... 52

B.1 Noise Monitoring Record Sheets ............................................................................ 52
B.2 Noise Survey Results for Continuous Monitoring at MP07 ..................................... 58
Appendix C ............................................................................................................... 65

C.1 Sound Power Ratings ............................................................................................. 65
Appendix D ............................................................................................................... 69

D.1 Suggested Changes to the Project Layout (15/04/2013) ........................................ 69
Appendix E ............................................................................................................... 71

E.1 Declaration of Consultants Independence ............................................................. 71
DDA vi March 2013

List of Figures page
Figure 1-1. Locality Map ........................................................................................................ 3

Figure 2-1. Typical Sound Levels (dB(A)) ............................................................................... 5
Figure 3-1. Locations of the Noise Monitoring Positions ...................................................... 15
Figure 3-2 Noise Levels at MP07 (16/08/2012-18/08/2012) ................................................. 19

Figure 3-3. Noise-Sensitive Receptors in Study Area .......................................................... 20
Figure 4.1. Gamsberg Mine and Processing Flow Diagram ................................................ 25
Figure 4-2. Gamsberg Mine Layout ..................................................................................... 26
Figure 5-1. Future Daytime Noise Contours Around the Gamsberg Mine ........................... 31
Figure 5-2. Future Night-ime Noise Contours Around the Gamsberg Mine ......................... 32
Figure 5-3. Existing Daytime Noise Contours Around the Gamsberg Mine ......................... 34
Figure 5-4. Existing Night-ime Noise Contours Around the Gamsberg Mine ....................... 35
Figure 6-1. Noise Level Differences of Plant and Q1 minus Existing: Day-time .................. 40
Figure 6-2. Noise Level Differences of Plant and Q1 minus Existing: Night-time ................ 41
Figure B-1. MP01 Images .................................................................................................... 52



Figure D-1. Suggested Changes to the Project Layout (15/04/2013) .................................. 69
DDA vii March 2013

List of Tables page
Table 1. Noise and Vibration Impact Rating During Construction .......................................... iii
Table 2. Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Rating ....................................................... iii
Table 2-1. WHO Guidelines for Ambient Sound Levels ......................................................... 6
Table 2-2. World Bank/IFC Ambient Noise Guidelines .......................................................... 7

Table 2-3. Typical Rating Levels for Ambient Noise .............................................................. 8
Table 2-4. Response Intensity and Noise Impact for Increases of the Ambient Noise .......... 9
Table 3-1. Sound Level Measurement Instrumentation ....................................................... 14
Table 3-2. Noise Guidelines and Noise Levels per Location ................................................ 16
Table 4-1. Gamsberg Mining Heavy Equipment Based on Peak Production ....................... 23
Table 4-2. Gamsberg Beneficiation Plant Construction Source Vibration Levels ................ 27
Table 5.1: Construction Noise at Various Distances from the Gamsberg Beneficiation Plant
....................................................................................................................................... 29
Table 5.2: Calculated Noise Levels at Discrete Receptors .................................................. 36

Table 5-3. Blasting Ground Vibration at Various Distances .................................................. 37
Table 6-1. Noise and Vibration Impact Rating During Construction .................................... 45
Table 6-2. Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Rating .................................................. 46
Table B-1: Noise Measurements Results ............................................................................ 56
Table C-1: Existing Plant Sound Power Emission Levels .................................................... 65
Table C-2: Construction Equipment Sound Power Emission Levels ................................... 68
DDA viii March 2013

Terminology, Acronyms and Definitions
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal
or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
A-weighted sound level A frequency weighting filter used to measure of sound pressure
level designed to reflect the acuity of the human ear, which does
not respond equally to all frequencies.
dB(A) Unit of sound level. The weighted sound pressure level by the
use of the A metering characteristic and weighting.
deciBel (dB) A measure of sound. It is equal to 10 times the logarithm (base

10) of the ratio of a given sound pressure to a reference sound
pressure. The reference sound pressure used is 20 micropascals,
which is the lowest audible sound.
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
Equivalent A-weighted A-weighted sound pressure level in decibels of continuous steady

sound level (LAeq) sound that within a specified interval has the same sound
pressure as a sound that varies with time.
Equivalent continuous Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq,T)
day/night rating level during a reference time interval of 24 h, including adjustments for
tonal character, impulsiveness of the sound and the time of day.
GPS Global Positioning System
IEC Independent Electoral Commission
IFC International Finance Corporation
Impulse time weighting A standard time constant weighting applied by the Sound Level
Meter.
ISO International Organisation Standardisation
LA10 The noise level exceeded 10% of the measurement period with
'A' frequency weighting calculated by statistical analysis.
LA90 The noise level exceeded 90% of the measurement period with
'A' frequency weighting calculated by statistical analysis. It is
generally utilized for the determination of background noise, i.e.
the noise levels without the influence of the main sources.
LWA Sound power level in dB(A), re 10-12 W.
DDA ix March 2013

Mtpa Million tonnes per annum
NSR Noise Sensitive Receivers.
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-ordination and Development
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
PPV Peak Particle Velocity. The peak signal value of an oscillating

vibration velocity waveform, usually expressed in mm/second.
PWL Power level in dB(A).
Residual noise Sound in a given situation at a given time that excludes the noise
under investigation but encompasses all other sound sources,
both near and far.
SA South Africa
SANS South African National Standard.
SLM Sound Level Meter
WBG World Bank Group
WHO World Health Organisation
DDA x March 2013

1 INTRODUCTION
Black Mountain Mining (Pty) Ltd (herein referred to as Black Mountain), which is part of the
global Vedanta mining group, intends to establish a 10 million tons per annum (Mtpa) open
pit zinc mine (beneficiation volume) at Gamsberg Inselberg in the Northern Cape Province.
In addition to the open pit zinc mine, associated infrastructure in the form of a tailings dam,
waste rock dump, water supply, laboratories, sewage works, an office complex and a zinc
concentrator will be established to process the mined ore. Due to the low grade zinc
reserve present in the region, the zinc ore would need to be concentrated before exporting to
global markets. The total processing capacity of the zinc concentrator plant is approximately
10 million tons per year.
DDA Environmental Engineers (DDA) has been appointed by Environmental Resources

Management (Southern Africa) Pty Ltd (ERM) for the determination of the baseline noise
levels and the noise impact assessment for the proposed Zinc Mine.
The present report describes the noise impact assessment, which form parts of the
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the proposed Gamsberg Zinc Mine
and associated infrastructure.
1.1 Study Area

The proposed mine and associated infrastructure is located in the Namakwa District,
between the town of Aggeneys and the town of Pofadder. It is approximately 120 km east of
Springbok, along the N14 (see Figure 1-1). The proposed site is commonly referred to as
Gamsberg, and is characterised by an oval shaped inselberg 220 meters above the
surrounding plains. The project area is situated over four properties, which are owned by
Black Mountain Mining (Pty) Ltd.
1.2 Terms of Reference
The proposed terms of reference for the baseline and noise and vibration impact
assessment study were:
x Establish the baseline noise levels around the proposed site.
x Determine thresholds of acceptable change and relevant noise standards to be

complied with.
DDA 1 March 2013

x Identify sensitive receptors that may potentially be impacted upon by the proposed
development.
x Build a 3-dimensional noise impact model, in order to predict the future noise levels
due to the construction and operation of the proposed project and generated
vehicular traffic for comparison with regulatory limits and international guidelines.
x Conduct a noise assessment related to mining activities, according to applicable

standards.
x Identify and predict the impacts of the proposed mine during the construction,
operation and decommissioning phases, as well as the assessment of significance
before and after mitigation.
x Propose mitigation measures.
x Propose a Noise Monitoring Programme and Management Plan for the proposed
mine impact.
DDA 2 March 2013

Figure 1-1. Locality Map
DDA 3 March 2013

2 NOISE BASICS GUIDELINES AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Noise Basics
Sound is created when an object vibrates and radiates part of that energy as acoustic
pressure or waves through a medium, such as air, water or a solid. Sound and noise are
measured in units of decibels (dB). The dB scale is not linear but logarithmic. This means,
for example, that if two identical noise sources, each producing 60 dB, operate
simultaneously they will generate 63 dB. Similarly, a 10-decibel increase in sound levels
represents ten times as much sound energy.
The human ear can accommodate a wide range of sound energy levels, including pressure
fluctuations that increase by more than a million times. The human ear is not equally
receptive to all frequencies of sound. The A-weighting of sound levels is a method used to
approximate how the human ear would perceive a sound, mostly by reducing the
contribution from lower frequencies by a specified amount. The unit for the A-weighted
sound levels is dB(A).
Small changes in ambient sound levels will not be able to be detected by the human ear.
Most people will not notice a difference in loudness of sound levels of less than 3 dB(A),
which is a two-fold change in the sound energy. A 10-dB(A) change in sound levels would
be perceived as doubling of sound loudness.
The level of ambient sound usually varies continuously with time. A humans subjective
response to varying sounds is primarily governed by the total sound energy received. The
total sound energy is the average level of the fluctuating sound, occurring over a period of
time, multiplied by the total time period.
In order to compare the effects of different fluctuating sounds, one compares the average
sound level over the time period with the constant level of a steady, non-varying sound that
will produce the same energy during the same time period. The average of the fluctuating
noise levels over the time period is termed Leq, and it represents the constant noise level that
would produce the same sound energy over the time period as the fluctuating noise level.
Percentile parameters (Ln) are also useful descriptors of noise. The Ln value is the noise
level exceeded for n percent of the measurement period. The Ln value can be anywhere
between 0 and 100. The two most common ones are L10 and the L90, which are the levels
exceeded for 10 and 90 percent of the time respectively. The L90 has been adopted as a
good indicator of the background noise level. The L10 has been shown to give a good
indication of peoples subjective response to noise.
DDA 4 March 2013

Noise Im
mpact Assess
sment Reporrt for the Prop
posed Gams
sberg Zinc M
Mine in Northe
ern Cape
Sound levels diminish with distance

d fro
om the sourrce because of disperrsion, and for
f point
ources the calculated sound
noise so s presssure is:
Lp2 = Lpp1 20 log(rr2/r1)
Where: Lp2 = sound prressure le

evel in dB at distance r2 in meterrs, and
Lp1 = so
ound pressu
ure level in dB at distan
nce r1 in me
eters
In the ccase of a line source the sound pre

essure is:
Lp2 = Lpp1 10 log(rr2/r1)
In simp
ple terms, fo urces, the d istance atte
or point sou enuation wo
ould be appproximately 6 dB(A)
ubling of distance
per dou d fro
om the so urce. Forr line sourc
ces the saame attenu
uation is
approximately 3 dB
B(A).
The atm
mospheric conditions,
c interference
i e from other objects an
nd ground eeffects also play an
importa
ant role in th
he resulting
g noise leve
els. For exa
ample, harrd ground, such as as
sphalt or
cementt transmits sound
s differently than soft groun
nd, such as
s grass. Thhe first grou
und type
promote
es transmisssion of sou
und, thus pro
roducing lou
uder sound levels farthher from the source.
In gene
eral terms, the
t above effects
e incre
ease with distance,
d an
nd the mag nitude of th
he effect
depend
ds upon the frequenc
cy of the ssound. The effects tend to bbe greater at high
frequen
ncies and le
ess at low fre
equencies.
Typical noise levels for variou

us environm
ments are sh
hown in the following figgure.
Fig
gure 2-1. Typ
pical Sound
d Levels (dB(A))
2.2 No
oise Standa
ards and Guidelines
In gene
eral, the sta
andards ap
pplied by th munity are ssimilar for different
he international comm
countrie
es. Interna
ationally, the
e current tre o apply morre stringentt criteria due to the
ends are to
deteriorrating noise
e climate.
DDA 5 March 2013

The noise impacts due to a proposed project are generally based on the difference between
the expected noise level increase and the existing noise levels in the area, as well as on
comparisons against area-specific noise guidelines.
2.2.1 International Guidelines
The available international guidelines are presented in the sections below and have taken
into consideration the following adverse effects of noise:
x Annoyance.
x Speech intelligibility and communication interference.
x Disturbance of information extraction.
x Sleep disturbance.
x Hearing impairment.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) together with the Organisation for Economic Co-
ordination and Development (OECD) have developed their own guidelines based on the
effects of the exposure to environmental noise. These provide recommended noise levels
for different area types and time periods.
The World Health Organisation has recommended that a standard guideline value for
average outdoor noise levels of 55 dB(A) be applied during normal daytime, in order to
prevent significant interference with the normal activities of local communities. The relevant
night-time noise level is 45 dB(A). The WHO further recommends that, during the night, the
maximum level of any single event should not exceed 60 dB(A). This limit is to protect
against sleep disruption. In addition, ambient noise levels have been specified for various
environments. These levels are presented in the table below.
Table 2-1. WHO Guidelines for Ambient Sound Levels

Environments Ambient Sound Level LAeq (dB(A))
Daytime Night-time
Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor
Dwellings 50 55 - -
Bedrooms - - 30 45
Schools 35 55 - -
DDA 6 March 2013

The WHO specifies that an environmental noise impact analysis is required before
implementing any project that would significantly increase the level of environmental noise in
a community (WHO, 1999). Significant increase is considered a noise level increase of
greater than 5 dB.
World Bank Group (WBG) International Finance Corporation (IFC) has developed a program
in pollution management so as to ensure that the projects they finance in developing
countries are environmentally sound. Noise is one of the pollutants covered by their policy.
It specifies that noise levels measured at noise receptors, located outside the projects
property boundary, should not be 3 dB(A) greater than the background noise levels, or
exceed the noise levels depicted in Table 2-2.
The Standard also refers to the WHO Guidelines for Community Noise (WHO, 1999) for the
provision of guidance to environmental health authorities and professionals trying to protect
people from the harmful effects of noise in non-industrial environments.
Table 2-2. World Bank/IFC Ambient Noise Guidelines

Maximum Allowable Ambient Noise Levels
1-hour LAeq (dB(A))
Receptor
Daytime Night-time
07:00 22:00 22:00 07:00
Residential, institutional, educational 55 45
Industrial, commercial 70 70
Note: No LAeq values are stipulated for rural areas.
2.2.2 SANS Codes of Practice and Guidelines
The SANS 10103 Code of Practice provides typical ambient noise rating levels (LReq,T) in
various districts. The outdoor ambient noise levels recommended for the districts are shown
in Table 2-3 below.
It is probable that the noise is annoying or otherwise intrusive to the community or to a group
of persons if the rating level of the ambient noise under investigation exceeds the applicable
rating level of the residual noise (determined in the absence of the specific noise under
investigation), or the typical rating level for the ambient noise for the applicable environment
given in Table 2-3 (Table 2 of SANS 10103)
DDA 7 March 2013

The expected response from the local community to the noise impact, i.e. the exceedance of
the noise over the acceptable rating level for the appropriate district, is primarily based on
Table 5 of SANS Code of Practice 10103 (SANS 10103, 2008), but expressed in terms of
the effects of impact, on a scale of NONE to VERY HIGH (see Table 2-4 below).
The noise monitoring of the baseline conditions within and around the site will provide the
rating level of the residual noise. The noise impact during construction and the noise
emission requirements will be determined by comparing:
x the ambient noise under investigation with the measured rating level of the residual
noise (background noise levels); and
x the ambient noise under investigation with the typical rating level for the ambient
noise for the applicable environment given in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3. Typical Rating Levels for Ambient Noise
Equivalent continuous rating level (LReq.T) for noise (dB(A))

Outdoors Indoors, with open windows
Type of district Day- Day- Night- Day- Day- Night-
night time time night time time
LR,dn1) LReq,d2) LReq,n2) LR,dn1) LReq,d2) LReq,n2)
a) Rural districts 45 45 35 35 35 25
b) Suburban districts
50 50 40 40 40 30
with little road traffic
c) Urban districts 55 55 45 45 45 35
d) Urban districts with
one or more of the
following: workshops; 60 60 50 50 50 40
business premises;
and main roads
e) Central business
65 65 55 55 55 45
districts
f) Industrial districts 70 70 60 60 60 50
DDA 8 March 2013

Table 2-4. Response Intensity and Noise Impact for Increases of the Ambient Noise
Increase Response Remarks Noise

(dB) Intensity Impact
0 None Change not discernible by a person None
3 None to little Change just discernible Very low
3d5 Little Change easily discernible Low
5d7 Little Sporadic complaints Moderate
7 Little Defined by South African National Noise Moderate

Regulations as being disturbing
7 d 10 Little - medium Sporadic complaints High
10 d 15 Medium Change of 10dB perceived as twice as Very high

loud, leading to widespread complaints
15 d 20 Strong Threats of community/group action Very high
2.2.3 Health and Safety
In South Africa, any operation that has the potential to generate noise should have a noise
survey done, in terms of the Noise Induced Hearing Loss Regulations of the Occupational
Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 (SA).
The regulations require an Approved Inspection Authority to conduct the surveys in

accordance with SANS 10083 and submit a report. All people exposed to an equivalent
noise level of 85 dB(A) or more must be subjected to audiometric testing. It is required that
all records of surveys and audiometric testing must be kept for 40 years.
The sound pressure threshold limits within workshops and plants that could affect
employees health, quality of life and quality of work are:
x Alert threshold 80 dB(A).
x Danger threshold 85 dB(A).
Site locations are required to meet the following levels of performance at all points
accessible by the employees on a regular basis:
x For workshop circulated areas, the maximum levels must not exceed 85 dB(A).
DDA 9 March 2013

x For work equipment, the maximum levels must not exceed 80 dB(A) at one meter
from the equipment and at 1.60 m high.
Exceptions may be considered for areas that should not be accessed on a regular basis.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) will be required to access those areas, and the noise
levels outside should comply with the above-mentioned thresholds.
The employer has a legal duty under the current Occupational Health Regulations (SA) to
reduce the risk of damage to his/her employees hearing. The main requirements apply,
where employees noise exposure is likely to be at or above the danger threshold limit of 85
dB(A). It should be noted that there is an international tendency to regard 80 dB(A) as an
informal warning level.
The action level is the value of daily personal exposure to noise (LEP,d). This depends on
the noise level in the working area and how long people are exposed to the noise. The
values take account of an 8-hour noise exposure over the whole working day or shift.
2.3 Blasting Basics
Blasting operations affect their surroundings in the form of ground vibration, air blast, fumes,
fly rock etc. Ground vibration is a natural result of blasting activities. The shock wave
energy that travels beyond the zone of rock breakage could cause damage and annoyance.
This energy is transmitted through the ground, creating vibration waves that propagate
through the various soil and rock strata to the foundations of nearby buildings. Once the
vibration reaches a building, it is transferred through the foundations into the structure. Any
structural resonances that may be excited will increase the effect of the vibration.
Factors influencing the ground vibration due to blasting are the charge mass per delay,
distance from the blast, the delay period and the geometry of the blast. These factors are
controlled by planned design and proper blast preparation.
The blast energy is transmitted to the ground, creating vibration waves that propagate
through the various soil and rock strata to the foundations of nearby buildings. Once the
vibration reaches a building, it is transferred through the foundations into the structure. Any
structural resonances that may be excited will increase the effect of the vibration.
Vibration can be described in terms of displacement, velocity or acceleration. For a vibrating

floor, the displacement is defined as the distance that a point on the floor moves away from
its static position. The velocity represents the instantaneous speed of the floor movement,
and acceleration is the rate of change of that speed.
DDA 10 March 2013

The most commonly used measures of vibration are the peak particle velocity (PPV) in
millimetres (mm), the velocity in metres per second (m/s) and acceleration in metres per
second squared (m/s2). The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or
negative peak of the vibration signal and is often used in monitoring the stresses that are
experienced by buildings.
The vibration levels can also be expressed as a logarithmic scale in decibels, similar to the
sound pressure levels for expressing noise. The relevant calculations for the velocity (Lv)
and the acceleration (La) levels are:
Lv = 20 log10(V/Vr), and
La = 20 log10(A/Ar)
where: Vr = 10-9 m/s and Ar = 10-6 m/s2 are the velocity and acceleration reference levels as
specified in ISO 1683.
In this report, when the vibration velocity levels are expressed in decibels, the reference
level defined above applies, and the unit is specified as dBV, in order to distinguish it from
dB(A), which is used for A-weighted noise levels.
DDA 11 March 2013

3 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS

3.1 Methodology
The baseline noise monitoring was based on noise measurements obtained via the use of a
Type 1 Precision Impulse Integrating Sound Level Meter, in accordance with international
standards for sound level meter specifications IEC 61672:1999, IEC 61260:1995 and IEC
60651., as well as ISO 19961:2003 and ISO 3095:2001 for the measurement and
assessment of environmental noise.
The most common noise metric used to assess the dose-response relationship has become
the LAeq based on the A-weighted sound level, although the L10 measured against the L90 is
also used (ISO 1999, 1990). LAeq is now widely utilised in standards and legislation
throughout the world as the basis on which to develop a dose-response relationship for
community noise annoyance. It is particularly useful where the noise is relatively steady and
broadband.
Because LAeq is defined in energy rather than straight numerical terms, it is not simply
related to the level of exceedance of a guideline value, but also provides information
regarding the nature and extent of the noise source. Other noise parameters such as the
L10, L50 and L90 also provide useful information. The L10 represents the higher noise levels
during the measurement interval and together with L50 and L90 are generally utilised for traffic
noise impacts. The L90 gives an indication of the underlying noise level, or the level that is
almost always there in between intermittent noisy events. It is generally utilized for the
determination of background noise, i.e. the noise levels without the influence of the main
sources.
An assessment of the site was performed during an initial site visit, and noise measurements
were performed in order to determine the existing noise environment and the selection of
representative monitoring points.
A total of 7 monitoring points were selected for the determination of the existing background
noise levels and the noise comparisons between the modelling and the measurements. The
number of the measuring points covered the assessment of the representative background
noise levels, the project site, as well as the sensitive receptors around the site.
The noise measurements were performed over a twenty-four hour period and were
categorised in terms of daytime (07:00-22:00) and night-time (22:00-07:00), in order to
generate results suitable for comparison to international guidelines.
At each location at least two measurements were performed for both daytime and night-time
periods. In each period the continuous A-weighted equivalent sound pressure level (LAeq) of
DDA 12 March 2013

at least a 10-minute duration was taken. Abnormal disturbances, such as loud noise
generation in close proximity or sudden noise bursts that affect the measurement, were
discarded.
In addition to the Leq, L10, L50, and L90, the occurring maximum (Lmax) and minimum levels
(Lmin) during the measurement period were also recorded. These measurements were
appropriate for the determination of:
a) The noise levels with existing and future operations in progress.
b) The background noise, i.e. when no activities are contributing to the ambient noise
levels.
c) The nature and extent of the noise.
All the noise measurements were performed in compliance with the weather condition
requirements specified by the SANS and ISO codes. Therefore, measurements were not
performed when the steady wind speed exceeded 5ms-1 or wind gusts exceeded 10 ms-1.
The wind speed was measured at each location with a portable meter capable of measuring
the wind speed and gusts in meters per second.
3.2 Monitoring Equipment

The measurements were performed via two 01dB DUO, which are Type 1 Data-logging
Precision Impulse Integrating Sound Level Meters (see Table 3-1). The Sound Level Meters
was calibrated before and after the measurement session with a 01dB Type 1, 94dB, 1 kHz
field calibrator. The above-mentioned equipment, i.e. sound level meters and calibrator,
have valid calibration certificates from the testing laboratories of the De Beer Calibration
Services and the manufacturer (calibration certificates are available on request), and comply
with the following international standards:
x IEC 651 & 804 Integrating sound level meters.
x IEC 942 Sound calibrators
DDA 13 March 2013

Table 3-1. Sound Level Measurement Instrumentation
Instrument Type Serial No.
1. Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter 01dB DUO 10372
2. Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter 01dB DUO 10373
3. Field Calibrator 01dB Cal01 CAL01 11243
All the noise measurements complied with the weather condition requirements, as specified
by the SANS Codes and the Noise Control Regulations:
x the SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL STANDARD - Code of Practice, SANS 10103:2008,

The measurement and rating of environmental noise with respect to land use, health,
annoyance and to speech communication;
x The Noise Control Regulations.
The coordinates of each monitoring point were recorded with the GARMIN iQue 3600, and
the local weather parameters were measured with an AZ 8910 portable weather meter.
3.3 Noise Monitoring Points

The noise measurements were performed intermittently from the 16th to 18th of August 2012
at 6 locations around the proposed mining site and continuously for 2 days at one location
within the Aggeneys town. These locations can be seen in Figure 3-1 further below and
were chosen for the following reasons:
x Representative of the current noise levels of the different areas where noise-sensitive
receptors are located.
x Areas in close proximity to the Gamsberg.
x Easy accessibility under the current conditions.
x Safety in terms of demining operations and possible night-time measurements.
x Likelihood of continuing to exist after the development of the site and therefore to be
used for future comparison purposes.
The selected monitoring points MP01 to MP06 around the mining site, and MP07 within
Aggeneys town were:
DDA 14 March 2013

MP01: Located in the north-eastern section of the project site and approximately 1 km
from the N14 road.
MP02: Located in the north-eastern section of the project site and approximately 2.6 km
south of the N14 road.
MP03: Located south east of the project site and approximately 5km from project
boundary.
MP04: Located south of the project site and approximately 500m away from project
boundary to the south.
MP05: Located south of the project site, in close proximity to the Loop 10 road.
MP06: Located in the western section of the project site and approximately 1 km from
the N14 road.
MP07: Located near Penge road in Aggeneys, approximately 10 km west of the project
site.
Figure 3-1. Locations of the Noise Monitoring Positions
DDA 15 March 2013

3.4 Ambient Noise Measurements
As outlined in Section 3.2, the noise measurements were performed intermittently at 6

locations (MP01 to MP06) around the proposed site and continuously at one location (MP07)
within Aggeneys town approximately 10km from the proposed site. The noise level (LAeq) for
each monitoring point and can be seen in Table 3-2. The additional parameters recorded
during the measurements, such as the Lmax, Lmin, L1, L10, L50 and L90 can be seen in Appendix
B.
Table 3-2. Noise Guidelines and Noise Levels per Location
Measurement Noise Level (dB(A))

Type of Area
Points Daytime Night-time
MP01 Rural 38.5 30.7
MP02 Rural 42.6 37.5
MP03 Rural 45.2 42.5
MP04 Rural 46.2 36.4
MP05 Rural 47.9 43.4
MP06 Rural 35.7 36.5
MP07 Residential 51.9 40.8
SANS Guidelines:
Rural districts: Daytime: 45 dB(A), Night-time: 35 dB(A)
Urban areas: Daytime: 55 dB(A), Night-time: 45 dB(A)
Industrial areas: Daytime: 70 dB(A), Night-time: 60 dB(A)
World Bank Guidelines:
Residential: Daytime: 55 dB(A), Night-time: 45 dB(A)
Industrial: Daytime: 70 dB(A), Night-time: 60 dB(A)
Based on the site visit observations and the measurement results, the following can be
indicated regarding the baseline noise environment at each monitoring location.
DDA 16 March 2013

1) MP01:
This point was located at the north-eastern section of the proposed mining site and
approximately 1 km from the N14. The noise sources were dominated by the traffic noise
from the N14 during the day and insert activity at night. The average noise levels during day-
and night-time were 38.5 dB(A) and 30.7 dB(A) respectively. The measured ambient noise
levels at this point were below the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) for daytime
and night time respectively
2) MP02:
This point was located at the north-eastern section of the proposed mine site and
approximately 2.6 km from the N14 and 850 m from receptor 4. The noise environment at
this point was dominated by insect activity during the night. The average noise levels during
day- and night-time were 42.6 dB(A) and 37.5 dB(A) respectively. The measured ambient
noise levels at this point was below the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A) during the day, and
marginally above SANS Guidelines of 35 dB(A) at night time.
3) MP03:
This point is located at the south-eastern side of the site, approximately 550 m from the
receptor 1. The noise environment at this point was dominated by the road traffic and insect
activity. The average noise levels measured during daytime and night-time were 45.2 dB(A)
and 42.5 dB(A) respectively The measured ambient noise levels at this point were
marginally above the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) for daytime and night time
respectively.
4) MP04:
This point is located at the south of the site, approximately 1.3 km from the mining pit. The
predominant noise sources at this point were the vehicular traffic from nearby road and bird
activity. The average noise levels measured during day- and night-time were 46.2 dB(A)
and 36.4 dB(A) respectively The measured ambient noise levels at this point were
marginally above the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) for daytime and night time
respectively.
DDA 17 March 2013

5) MP05:
This point is located near the southern corner of the site. It is approximately 1.3 km from the
proposed mine site, and about 2.3 km from receptor 5. The predominant noise sources
were traffic and insect activity. The average noise levels measured during daytime and
night-time were 47.9 dB(A) and 43.4 dB(A) respectively. The measured ambient noise
levels at this point were marginally above the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) for
daytime and night time respectively.
6) MP06:
This point was located west of the proposed mining site and approximately 1 km from the
N14. The noise sources were dominated by the traffic noise from the N14. The average
noise levels during daytime and night-time were 35.7 dB(A) and 36.5 dB(A) respectively. The
measured ambient noise levels at this point were below the SANS Guidelines of 45 dB(A)
and 35 dB(A) for daytime and night time respectively.
7) MP07:
This point was located at Aggeneys town about 10 km from the Gamsberg Site. The
measurement at this point was performed continuously over two days and nights. The
noise environment at this point was primarily dominated by human activities and the
vehicular traffic from nearby local roads. The average noise levels during daytime and night-
time were 51.9 dB(A) and 40.8 dB(A) respectively. The measured noise levels for the time
periods were below the SANS and the World Bank/IFC Ambient Noise Guidelines for urban
residential areas. The measured LAeq at this location averaged for each hour over the 2 days
can be seen in Figure 3-2. The additional parameters and the time series of the
measurements for each day can be found in Appendix B.
DDA 18 March 2013

Noise Im
mpact Assess
posed Gams
sberg Zinc M
Mine in Northe
ern Cape
Figure 3-2 Noise Leve ls at MP07 (16/08/2012-

( 18/08/2012)
3.5 Noise-sensiitive Recep

ptors
al noise-sensitive rece
Potentia eptors were
e identified during the site visit annd from GIS
S maps.
These rreceptors were
w mainly farm house
es and resid
dential area
as of Aggenneys. The re
eceptors
that are
e close to the project site are de
epicted in Figure 3-3 below. Thhe locations of the
baseline s are also included in
e measurement points n this figure
e. In ordeer to determ
mine the
expecte
ed noise co
ontribution of
o the mine s, discrete receptors w
e operations were placed at the
above-m
mentioned sensitive
s re
eceptors. Th
hese recepttors and the
e modelled nnoise levels
s can be
found in
n the noise modelling section
s furth
her below.
DDA 19 March 2013

Figure 3-3. Noise-Sensitive Receptors in Study Area
DDA 20 March 2013

4 NOISE AND VIBRATION MODELLING METHODOLOGY AND

INPUT
4.1 Noise During Construction and Decommissioning
The construction of the plant is expected to commence within 2013. The construction
activities of the proposed plant are likely to increase the local noise levels temporarily during
the construction period. The basis for the modelling methodology for construction noise was
the British Standard 5228: Part 1: 1984 Noise Control on Construction and Open Sites Part
1: Code of Practice for Basic Information and Procedures for Noise Control.
This standard was utilised for the calculation of noise from construction and the
determination of the sound level data from on-site equipment and site activities. The typical
sound power levels utilised in that standard were taken from measurements at various sites,
percentage on-times and power ratings for a wide range of construction plants. A typical mix
of excavators, bulldozers, front-end loaders, graders, cement mixers, compressors and
trucks were utilised for the noise modelling.
The following parameters and assumptions were used in the calculations:
x Average height of noise sources: 2 m.
x Construction operating hours: 24 hr.
x Typical construction stretch at a time: 200 m.
x No noise barriers in place.
x Construction site equipment:
1 Bulldozer
1 Excavator
1 Grader
2 Trucks
1 Compressor
1 Concrete mixer (unloading)
1 Concrete mixer equipment.
It was also assumed, as a worst-case scenario, that all the equipment would be operated
simultaneously at the construction site. The sound power levels of the construction
equipment are shown in Table C-2 of Appendix C.
DDA 21 March 2013

The equipment to be used for the decommissioning of the plant is expected to be similar to
the construction equipment. As such, the noise levels during the decommissioning
operations will be the same or similar to the construction related noise levels.
4.2 Noise Modelling of the Processing Plant and Mining Activities
Noise modelling was utilised for the sound propagation calculations and the prediction of the
sound pressure levels around the processing plant and mining pit. A modelling receptor grid
was utilised for the determination of the expected noise contours, as a result of the proposed
mining operations. In addition, the noise levels were estimated at several discrete receptors
placed at scattered farm houses and the residential area of Aggeneys.
The noise modelling was performed via the CADNA (Computer Aided Noise Abatement)
noise model. The latter was selected for the following reasons:
x It incorporates the ISO 9613 in conjunction with the CONCAWE noise propagation
calculation methodology.
x It provides an integrated environment for noise predictions under varying scenarios of
operation.
x The cumulative effects of line sources, such as roads and haul routes, as well as
point noise sources, can be determined in a three-dimensional environment.
x The ground elevations around the entire site can be entered into the model, and their
screening effects taken into consideration.
x The noise propagation influences of the meteorological parameters of a specific area
can also be accounted for.
The main assumptions adopted in the noise modelling were:
Acoustically semi-hard ground conditions: This assumes that partial attenuation

due to absorption at the ground surface takes place. This assumption represents
a somewhat pessimistic evaluation of the potential noise impact. It should be
noted that the area over the water was assigned zero ground absorption.
Meteorological conditions: For the noise propagation in the extended area, the
temperature and humidity for daytime was set in the model to 35oC and 50%
respectively, and for night-time 25oC and 70% respectively. The effects of
frequency-dependent atmospheric absorption were taken into consideration.
Screening effect of temporary stockpiles, buildings and other barriers: The effect
of these temporary structures on the noise climate has been ignored,
DDA 22 March 2013

representing a pessimistic evaluation of the potential noise impact. However, the

ground elevations of the entire area were utilised in the modelling set-up.
Worst-case operational noise level assumption: The highest noise level of mining
and plant equipment was used as the criterion value for the noise predictions of
the proposed project, representing a pessimistic evaluation of the potential noise
impact.
Worst-case operational assumption: All mining, handling and processing

equipment was assumed to operate simultaneously, which is considered a
pessimistic evaluation of the potential noise impact.
Two modelling scenarios were generated for the noise impact assessment. The first
considered the mine and plant in full operation. An additional modelling scenario without the
plant was also utilised, in order to determine the expected noise levels due to the road traffic
on the N14 for the year 2014, which is the operational year for the Gamsberg plant. These
two modelling scenarios were:
Scenario 1: Mine and plant in full operation.

Scenario 2: No plant in operation and projected 2014 road traffic on the main roads (No-go
alternative).
Based on the provided information, at peak production, the proposed mine will produce ore
from the open pit at a rate of 10 Mtpa and will generate waste rock at a rate reaching 90
Mtpa. For the mining activities, the number of heavy equipment was based on the peak
production capacity in accordance with the following table. The Gamsberg mine engineers
indicated that the mining activities and material hauling will only take place during daytime
and night-time. As a worst-case scenario, it was assumed that all equipment within the
mining pit and waste dumps operate simultaneously.
Table 4-1. Gamsberg Mining Heavy Equipment Based on Peak Production
Equipment Number
Electric Rope Shovels (45m3 Bucket) 4
Haul Truck 32
Drill Rig (Waste Drilling) 7
Drill Rig (Ore Drilling) 2
Water Carts (40/50 Kl) 3
Trackdozers (D11, D375 etc.) 4
DDA 23 March 2013

Equipment Number
Front End Loaders ( 992, WA900 etc.) 2
Motor Grader (24M,GD 825A-2 etc.) 2
Rock Breaker ( 375, PC200 etc.) 1
Rock Breaker Crusher 1
Backhoes/ Excavators (375,PC200 etc.) 2
Wheel Dozers (854/844) 2
Pre-Split Drills (115mm diameter) 3
Secondary Blasting Rig 2
Low Pad Trailors ( Lowbed 120t) 2
Based on the capacity of haul trucks to be used and the ore and waste quantities per
annum, the daily number of truck-trips to the waste dump were estimated to be 1,994 and to
the crusher 219.
The processed 1 million tons of zinc concentrate that will be produced is going to be trucked
to the Port of Saldanha via road using the N14 and N7 and via rail. The split between road
and rail will be equal and the rail portion is going to be trucked via the Loop 10 road to the
Transnet Railway siding, which is the transfer point to the Sishen-Saldanha Railway Line.
Utilising 32 ton trucks, the total trips per day were estimated to be 171.
The zinc concentrator processing plant area will consist of the following:
x Crusher plant
x Milling
x Flotation
x Filtration and concentrate storage
x Bulk reagent storage
x Plant bulk fuel and lubricant storage facilities
x Ore stockpile pads and silos
x Tailings facility (see tailings section below)
A block flow schematic diagram, for the ore extraction, processing and transportation is
shown in Figure 4.1 below.
The sound power data utilised in the noise modelling for the mining operations and
beneficiation plant can be found in Table C-1 of Appendix C. The layout and locations of the
noise sources can be seen in Figure 4-2. The plant and quarry positions were set up in the
DDA 24 March 2013

model and the noise sources positioned at the appropriate locations. In this manner, the
ground screening effects were taken into consideration.
Figure 4.1. Gamsberg Mine and Processing Flow Diagram
DDA 25 March 2013

Noise Im
mpact Assess
posed Gams
sberg Zinc M
Mine in Northe
ern Cape
Figure 4-2. Gamsberg Mine Layou

ut
The futture traffic on the loca

al road netw
work, as well
w as the traffic contrribution due
e to the
Gamsberg mine op
perations was ed in the specialist trafffic and transsport impac
w estimate ct study.
Based o
on the traffic study, the
e 2011 trafffic along the N14 was 1166 vehiccles per day
y, with a
heavy vvehicle perccentage of 7.2%.
7 With
h an assumed annual average
a trafffic increase
e on this
road of 3 %, the 20
014 traffic was ed to be 12
w estimate 274 vehicles
s per day.
he traffic stu
From th udy, the min
ne will gene
erate, in add
dition to the ore export trucks, 79 vehicles
per dayy (22 buses, 16 minbus
s-taxis and 41 cars). The
T resulting combinedd trips for th
he mine,
used in
n the cumulative scena
ario for N14
4, were 14
4 vehicles per
p hour wi th a heavy
y vehicle
percenttage of 65.4
4% and for the
t Loop 10
0 road, 4 ve
ehicles all off which werre trucks.
4.3 Vib
bration Durring Construction and
d Operatio
on
With respect to construction vibration,

v th
here are no standards that providee a methodology to
predict levels of vibration
v om construcction activities, other than
fro t that coontained within BS
5228: P
Part 4, which
h relates to percussive
e or vibratorry piling only
y.
DDA 26 March 2013

It is generally accepted that for the majority of people vibration levels of between 0.15 and
0.3 mm/s peak particle velocity are just perceptible. Table 4-2 below details the distances at
which certain construction and mining activities give rise to a just perceptible level of
vibration. These data are based on historical field measurements and BS 5228. The listed
activities and equipment below are the ones that typically generate the highest levels of
vibration on construction sites.
Table 4-2. Gamsberg Beneficiation Plant Construction Source Vibration Levels

Construction activity Distance from activity when vibration may
just be perceptible (m)
Excavation 10 - 20
Hydraulic breaker 15 - 20
Hydraulic vibratory pile hammer 50 - 100
Hydraulic impact pile hammer 40 - 60
Auger piling 20
None of the above-mentioned activities during construction and operation are likely to take
place outside the Gamsberg Mine site or closer than 100 m to the site boundaries. The
Threshold of Perception for Human Reaction level of 0.3 mm/s is not expected to be
exceeded outside the mining site. As such, the vibration impacts from construction and
operation activities, other than the blasting, are unlikely to impact negatively any sensitive
receptors in the study area, outside the site boundaries.
During the operational period of the Gamsberg mine, the most significant vibration source
will be the blasting for the ore extraction. For the prediction of the blast vibration, the scaled
distance prediction formula was utilised:
b
PPV = a (D / Q0.5) (4-1)
Where:
PPV: peak particle velocity (mm/s),
D: distance between the blast and the point of interest (m),
Q: the maximum charge per delay (kg), and
a, b: site constants. The conservative values of 534 and -1.65 were used in the
current study.
It has been estimated that around 250 holes will be drilled per day for blasting purpose.
Base on the expected blasting material usage per month as 3500 tons, approximately 685
kg of explosive will be filled in each hole.
DDA 27 March 2013

Assuming that five holes will be detonated simultaneously, the maximum charge was
calculated to be 3,425 kg.
DDA 28 March 2013

5 PREDICTED NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVELS

5.1 Construction and Decommissioning Noise Modelling Results
Table 5.1 below shows the noise levels of the typical construction activities at the Gamsberg
beneficiation plant. The noise levels further than 1 km away were found to be lower than 40
dB(A).
The plant is situated more than 5 km from the closest sensitive receptor. For receptors
located at greater distances than the 1 km radius, the construction noise will be barely
audible.
It should also be noted that the screening effects of the existing ground elevations may have
a small reduction effect on the actual noise levels generated during the construction phase.
The noise levels in Table 5.1 were estimated without any barrier effects and can thus be
considered a worst-case scenario.
Table 5.1: Construction Noise at Various Distances from the Gamsberg Beneficiation Plant
Receptor Modelled Modelled

Distance Day Night
(m) (dB(A)) (dB(A))
100 61.1 66.3
200 58.3 60.2
400 46.3 49.1
1000 37.1 41.0
Similar noise levels are expected to be generated by the decommissioning operations at the
plant. In addition, this impact is likely to be of short duration. As such, no significant noise
impacts are expected during the decommissioning phase of the plant.
5.2 Proposed Mine and Plant Noise Levels
Based on the noise modelling methodology and input data outlined in Section 0, the noise
contours around the mining pit, beneficiation plant and product routes were estimated for
day- and night-time conditions. For the noise modelling the worst-case scenario of 10 Mtpa
of ore throughput was utilised.
The noise impact assessment was carried out in accordance with the South African National
Standard - Code of Practice SANS 10103:2008 for rural districts, i.e. 45 dB(A) during
DDA 29 March 2013

daytime and 35 dB(A) during night-time. It should be noted that the guideline levels from the
WHO for residential areas is 55 dB(A) during daytime and 45 dB(A) during night-time.
The noise contours around the mining area, plant and roads can be seen in Figure 5-3 and
Figure 5-4 for day- and night-time respectively.
It is evident that for the daytime conditions, the 45 dB(A) contour extended approximately
1,000 m from the plant. The same contour was contained at a shorter distance around the
mining pit due to the local topography. The daytime rural daytime guideline will not be
exceeded beyond 330 m around the N14 and beyond 100 m around the Loop 10 road.
Under night-time conditions, the 35 dB(A) extended to a maximum of 2500 m around the
beneficiation plant. Around the N14 the night-time guideline will not be exceeded beyond
1100 m and along Loop 10 road beyond 450 m.
The daytime and night-time guidelines will not be exceeded in any of the scattered farm
houses around the mine nor the Aggeneys community, except for farm house R05, which is
situated within 300 m from the Loop 10 road.
The 45 dB(A) daytime and 35 dB(A) night-time noise levels will be contained within the
Gamsberg concession area and as such the operational noise impact is considered Very
Low and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary.
DDA 30 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
ssment Report forr the Proposed Ga
amsberg Zinc Mine in Northern Cap
pe
Figure 5-1. Future Daytime Noise Contours Around the Gam

msberg Mine
DDA 31 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
pe
Figure 5-2. F
Future Night-ime
e Noise Contours
s Around the Gamsberg Mine
DDA 32 March 2013

5.3 Noise Levels without the Plant (Year 2014)
In order to compare the differences in the resulting noise environment with and without the
mine and beneficiation plant, an additional scenario was modeled. The only noise sources
for this scenario were the vehicular traffic on the N14. Since the plant will only be in full
operation in 2014, the existing traffic counts were projected for that same year as described
in the methodology section. The noise contours without the plant for the year 2014, i.e. only
due to traffic on the N14 can be seen in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4 for day- and night-time
respectively.
It is evident that the daytime 45 dB(A) zone around the N14 will be contained within a 300
zone and the night-time guideline of 35 dB(A) within 750 m.
DDA 33 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
pe
Figure 5-3. E
Existing Daytime
e Noise Contours
s Around the Ga
amsberg Mine
DDA 34 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
pe
Figure 5-4. E
Existing Night-im
me Noise Contourrs Around the Ga
amsberg Mine
DDA 35 March 2013

5.4 Discrete Receptor Calculations
Several discrete receptors were placed at 6 farm houses around the mine and at the closest
community of Aggeneys, in order to assess the source contribution, compare the predicted
noise levels against the measured values and identify possible mitigation measures. The
location of the receptors can be seen in Figure 3-3. These calculations were performed for
Scenario 1, as well as the no-go alternative, i.e. the situation without the plant (Scenario 2).
Table 5.2 below shows the calculated values for each receptor and scenario. It can be seen
that at all locations the night-time noise levels without the mining operations and plant were
below 25 dB(A). This indicates that the existing traffic from the N14 is not expected to have
any contribution on the night-time noise levels at these locations. During daytime most of
the levels due to the N14 traffic were below 25 dB(A) and at Aggeneys the level reached 29
dB(A).
From the same table it is evident that the cumulative contribution of the modelled sources
was also below 25 dB(A) for night-time, except for farm house R05, where the it reached 38
dB(A), which is marginally above the rural guideline.
The noise levels at Aggeneys, due to the mining-related traffic, are expected to increase by
less than 1 dB, which is considered insignificant.
The crushing and beneficiation plant noise is not expected to have any impact on the
existing noise levels at any of the receptors examined. As such, the existing background
noise level at those positions will only be affected marginally or not at all by the plant, the
haul road, the mining pit or the traffic noise sources.
Table 5.2: Calculated Noise Levels at Discrete Receptors
ID Description Plant + Mine Without Mine (Year: 2014)

Daytime Night-time Daytime Night-time
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
01 Farm house <25 <25 <25 <25
02 Farm house <25 <25 <25 <25
03 Farm house <25 <25 <25 <25
04 Farm house 25.6 <25 25.6 <25
05 Farm house 38.0 38.0 <25 <25
06 Farm house <25 <25 <25 <25
07 Aggeneys 30.0 25.1 29.4 <25
DDA 36 March 2013

5.5 Blast Vibration Modelling Results

From Equation (4-1) and the information on the blast design, the expected ground vibration
levels were calculated for various distances from the blast area. Table 5-3 shows the
expected ground vibration levels (PPV) for various distances calculated for the estimated
charge mass. It should be noted that the assumed number of simultaneous detonation of
blastholes was five. If this number were to change, it would influence the resulting vibration
at the various distances. If the actual number is greater, then a larger zone of vibration
impact would be expected.
From Table 5-3, it is evident that the adopted PPV limit of 12.5 mm/s for architectural and
structural damage to structures in poor condition will not be exceeded beyond a 570 m zone
around the charge. Since local sensitive receptors are located more than 4 km away from
the mining pit, the vibration impact will be minimal at these receptors.
Table 5-3. Blasting Ground Vibration at Various Distances
Distance from Charge PPV

No
(m) (mm/s)
1 300 36.0
2 400 22.4
3 570 12.5
4 600 11.5
5 800 7.1
6 1000 4.9
7 1200 3.7
8 1400 2.8
9 1600 2.3
10 1800 1.9
11 2000 1.6
12 2500 1.1
13 3000 0.8
14 3500 0.6
15 4000 0.5
15 4500 0.4
DDA 37 March 2013

6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The noise impact assessment was focused on two issues related to the proposed Gamsberg
mining project. The first was the noise levels around the processing plant site, the mining pit
and the relevant overburden dumping. The second was the generated additional road traffic
due to the workers and processed zinc transportation.
6.1 Gamsberg Zinc Beneficiation Plant and Mining Activities
The proposed plant, as can be seen from Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2, generates daytime
noise levels that do not extend beyond the Gamsberg concession boundaries, i.e. the
daytime 45 dB(A) and the night-time 35 dB(A) noise contour is contained well inside the
boundaries. This is attributed primarily to the fact that the position of the plant and the
mining pit within the site is positioned at least 3 km from these boundaries, as well as the
ground formation around the pit.
The expected noise level increase above the rural district guideline of 45 dB(A) for daytime
and 35 dB(A) for night-time can be seen in the following Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-2
respectively.
It is evident that during daytime the expected 3 dB(A) increase above the 45 dB(A) level will
not reach any of the concession boundaries, and is well away the farm houses around the
mine and the town of Aggeneys (see Figure 6-1).
The noise increase due to the plants operation beyond a 1km zone will be below 1 dB for
the daytime. During night-time a 3 dB noise increase is expected to reach 2.5 km around
the plant. There are no sensitive receptors within these zones. This impact is considered
Insignificant.
6.2 Vehicular Traffic Noise Impacts
From Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4 without the plant, it can be seen that by the year 2014 the 45
dB(A) daytime noise levels around the N14 will extend 300 m. Under night-time weather and
traffic conditions, the 35 dB(A) zone will be approximately 750 m.
The introduction of the Gamsberg beneficiation plant and mine will introduce additional
vehicles on the N14 and Loop 10 roads. The noise impact of this additional traffic will be
minor, since the daytime noise level increase from the existing situation and the 45 dB(A)
guideline will be below 1 dB(A) along the N14 road (see Figure 5-1). The night-time
increase above the 35 dB(A) guideline is expected to be approximately 1 dB(A) within a 500
m zone (see Figure 5-2).
DDA 38 March 2013

Around Loop 10 the daytime increase above 45 dB(A) will be below one beyond a 100 m
zone around the road. The night-time noise level increase above the rural guideline of 35
dB(A) will reach 3 dB within 300 m from the road. Around loop 10 there are very few
scattered farm houses, with most of them situated at more than 600 m from the road. The
noise impact there due to the additional truck on Loop 10 is expected to be Very Low.
DDA 39 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
pe
Figure 6-1. No
oise Level Differe
ences of Plant an
nd Q1 minus Exis
sting: Day-time
DDA 40 March 2013

No
oise Impact Asses
pe
Figure 6-2. Noiise Level Differences of Plant and Q1 minus Exis

sting: Night-time
DDA 41 March 2013

6.3 Conclusions And Recommendations
6.3.1 Conclusions
The main conclusions of the baseline noise measurements were:
i. The noise environment of the area bordering the Gamsberg mining area is that of typical
Rural districts with one major road (N14) and local secondary roads. The daytime and
night-time levels away from the above mentioned roads were within the SANS guideline
for Rural districts of 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) respectively.
ii. The current noise levels at Aggeneys were above the guidelines for Rural but within the
SANS and WHO guidelines for Urban residential districts of 55 dB(A) and 45 dB(A) for
daytime and night-time respectively.
iii. The main noise contributors within the extended area of the project were primarily the
vehicular traffic on the N14 and local roads. During night-time, most of these sources
were still the main contributors, however at certain locations the frog and insect activity
also contributed significantly to the local noise levels.
Based on the modelling of the noise and vibration levels due to the proposed mining
operations, the main findings of the noise and vibration impact study were:
Construction:
i. The construction activities at receptors outside a 1,000 m zone from the main working
area will be noticeable but will not constitute a disturbing noise. For receptors located at
greater distances than a 1.5 km radius, the construction noise will be barely audible.
Since the closest receptor is more than 5 km away this impact is expected to be
Insignificant.
ii. The vibration during the site construction is not considered to have a significant impact
on the surrounding receptors, as the closest one has a more than 5 km separation
distance from the site.
DDA 42 March 2013

Operation:
i. The 45 dB(A) daytime and 35 dB(A) night-time noise levels will be primarily contained
within the Gamsberg concession area.
ii. The daytime and night-time guidelines will not be exceeded in any of the scattered farm
houses around the mine nor the Aggeneys community, except for farm house R05,
which is situated within 300 m from the Loop 10 road.
iii. Along the Loop 10 road, most of the scattered farm houses are located more than 500
m from the alignment, and as such the expected level contribution due to the trucks will
be below 34 dB(A), which is considered to be of Low significance.
iv. The operational noise impact is considered Very Low and no additional mitigation
measures would be necessary.
v. The vibration levels are not expected to exceed the limit for structural damage beyond a
400 m zone around blasting area, and the limit for sensitive or historical buildings
beyond a 600 m zone.
Decommissioning and Residual:
i. No significant noise impacts are expected during the Decommissioning Phase of the
proposed project. This impact is expected to be Very Low and of short duration.
ii. With the termination of the mining activities, the noise levels within and around the site
are expected to revert back to those that existed prior to the operations. Therefore, no
residual or latent noise impacts are expected.
6.4 Recommendations
Based on the noise and vibration study, the noise performance indicator to be adopted for
the rural area around the mine and plant should be that the noise levels at single dwellings
do not exceed 45 dB(A) and 35 dB(A) during day- and night-time respectively, due to the
mining and plant operations.
At Aggeneys the indicator should be that the noise levels should not exceed 55 dB(A) and
45 dB(A) during day- and night-time respectively.
DDA 43 March 2013

The performance indicator for vibration should be that the ground vibration level at general
houses of proper construction do not exceed 25 mm/s and at houses of lesser proper
construction 12.5 mm/s.
The main recommendations of the noise and vibration study are outlined below. The
essential mitigation measures are included in the impact tables.
Construction:
i. There are no specific mitigations that will be required during construction.
ii. Environmental noise monitoring should be performed by an independent specialist on

a 6-month basis at the boundaries of the site and at two selected locations at the
closest farm houses to the plant and mining pit. This monitoring should commence
prior to and during construction.
Operation:
i. There are no specific mitigations that will be required during the mining activities and
plant operation.
ii. Environmental noise and vibration monitoring should be performed by an

independent specialist on an annual basis along the site boundaries and at four
selected locations within the farm houses closest to the mine and Loop 10 road.
General recommendations for noise minimization and management during construction and
operation:
a. Maintenance of equipment and operational procedures: Proper design and

maintenance of silencers on diesel-powered equipment, systematic maintenance of
all forms of equipment, training of personnel to adhere to operational procedures that
reduce the occurrence and magnitude of individual noisy events.
b. Equipment noise audits: Standardised noise measurements should be carried out on

individual equipment at the delivery to site or at commissioning, in order to construct
a reference data-base and regular checks carried out to ensure that equipment is not
deteriorating and to detect increases, which could lead to an increase in the noise
impact over time and increased complaints.
c. Public complaints and actions registry: A formal recording system should be

introduced, in order to capture public perceptions and complaints with regard to noise
impacts, track investigation actions and introduce corrective measures for continuous
improvement.
DDA 44 March 2013

6.5 Impacts Rating
Based on the modelling results for the proposed mine operation and zinc beneficiation plant,
the impacts of construction and operation are summarised in the tables below.
The noise and vibration impact during construction is presented in Table 6-1 and is
considered to be NEGLIGIBLE.
For the operational phase, the noise and vibration impact can be seen in Table 6-2 further
below.
Table 6-1. Noise and Vibration Impact Rating During Construction

Nature: Construction activities would result in a negative direct impact on the vibration levels and
noise environment around the plant.

the plant. However, the closest receptor is situated more than 5 km away.

x Duration: The expected impact will be shortterm (i.e. for the duration of construction).
x Scale: The impact will not result in notable changes to the noise levels at any receptors around
the mining area.
x Likelihood: The noise levels outside the concession area are unlikely to increase during the
construction period.


i. No specific mitigations will be required during construction.
DDA 45 March 2013

Table 6-2. Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Rating

Nature: The mining and plant operation will result in a negative direct impact on the noise
environment around the mine.

the plant and mining pit. However, the closest receptor is situated more than 5 km away.

x Duration: The expected impact will be longterm (i.e. the duration of the operation).
x Scale: The impact will not result in notable changes to the noise levels at receptors situated
more than 2 km from the plant and mining pit.
x Likelihood: The noise and vibration levels during operation are possible to increase during the
operational period.


i. No specific mitigations will be required during operation.
DDA 46 March 2013

REFERENCES
British Standard 4142, (1997). Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential
and industrial areas.
Feasibility (FEL) Report (2010). Chapters 3 and 4: Risk analysis and affected environment;
Chapter 26: Health safety environment and communities.
IFC, (2007). General Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines.
ISO 1996-1, (2003). Acoustics Description, assessment and measurement of

environmental noise Part 1: Basic quantities and assessment procedures. Geneva,
Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, International Standard.
ISO 1996-2, (2000). Acoustics Description, measurement and assessment of

environmental noise Part 2: Determination of environmental noise levels. Geneva,
Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, International Standard.
ISO 1996-3, (1987). Acoustics Description and measurement of environmental noise --

Part 3: Application to noise limits. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for
Standardization, International Standard.
ISO 1999, (1990). Acoustics Determination of occupational noise exposure and estimation
of noise-induced hearing impairment. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization
for Standardization, International Standard.
OECD, (1996). Environmental Criteria for Sustainable Transport, Report on Phase 1 of the
Project on Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST), Organization for Economic
Co-Operation and Development, OCDE/GD(96)136. Paris, 1996.
South African National Standard SANS10103, (2003). The measurement and rating of
environmental noise with respect to land use, health, annoyance and to speech
communication.
WHO, (1999). Guidelines for Community Noise, Edited by Birgitta Berglund, World Heath
Organization, Thomas Lindvall, and Dietrich Schwela. Geneva, April 1999.
World Bank Group, (1998). Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, General
Environmental Guidelines. July 1998.
DDA 47 March 2013

Appendix A
A.1 Impact Assessment Methodology for EIAs - Instructions to Specialists

A definition of each impact characteristic is provided to contextualise the requirements. The
designations for each of the characteristics are defined below.
Table 1.1 Defining Impact Characteristics

Characteristic Definition Designation
Type A descriptor indicating the Direct - Impacts that result from a direct
relationship of the impact to interaction between the Project and a
the Project (in terms of cause resource/receptor (e.g., between occupation of
and effect). a plot of land and the habitats which are
affected).
Indirect - Impacts that follow on from the direct
interactions between the Project and its
environment as a result of subsequent
interactions within the environment (e.g.,
viability of a species population resulting from
loss of part of a habitat as a result of the Project
occupying a plot of land).
Induced - Impacts that result from other
activities (which are not part of the Project) that
happen as a consequence of the Project (e.g.,
influx of camp followers resulting from the
importation of a large Project workforce).
Duration The time period over which a Temporary (negligible/ pre-construction)
resource / receptor is affected. Shortterm (period of less than 5 years i.e.
production ramp up period)
Longterm (period of more than 5 years and
less than 19 years i.e. life of project)
Permanent (a period that exceeds the life of
the project i.e. irreversible.)
Extent The reach of the impact (i.e. On-site impacts that are limited to the project
physical distance an impact site.
will extend to) Local impacts that are limited to the project
site and adjacent properties.
Regional impacts that are experienced at a
regional scale, e.g. District or Province.
National impacts that are experienced at a
national scale.
Trans-boundary/International impacts that
are experienced at an international scale, e.g.
extinction of species resulting in global loss.
Scale The size of the impact (e.g. the 1 - functions and/ or processes remain
size of the area damaged or unaltered
impacted the fraction of a 2 - functions and/ or processes are notably
resource that is lost or altered
affected). 3 - functions and/ or processes are severely
altered
Frequency Measure of the constancy or 1 - Periodic
periodicity of the impact. 2 - Once off
The terminology and designations are provided to ensure consistency when these
characteristics are described in an Impact Assessment deliverable.
An additional characteristic that pertains only to unplanned events (e.g., traffic accident,
accidental release of toxic gas, community riot, etc.) is likelihood. The likelihood of an
DDA 48 March 2013

unplanned event occurring is designated using a qualitative (or semi-quantitative, where

appropriate data are available) scale.
Table 1.3 Definitions of likelihood

Likelihood Definition
Unlikely The event is unlikely but may occur at some time during normal operating
conditions.
Possible The event is likely to occur at some time during normal operating conditions.
Likely/ Certain The event will occur during normal operating conditions (i.e., it is essentially
inevitable).
Likelihood is estimated on the basis of experience and/or evidence that such an outcome
has previously occurred. It is important to note that likelihood is a measure of the degree to
which the unplanned event is expected to occur, not the degree to which an impact or effect
is expected to occur as a result of the unplanned event. The latter concept is referred to as
uncertainty, and this is typically dealt with in a contextual discussion in the Impact
Assessment deliverable, rather than in the impact significance assignment process.
Assessing Significance
Once the impact characteristics are understood, these characteristics are used (in a manner
specific to the resource/receptor in question) to assign each impact a magnitude. Magnitude
is a function of the following impact characteristics:
x Extent (a)
x Duration (b)
x Scale
x Frequency
x Likelihood
Magnitude essentially describes the degree of change that the impact is likely to impart upon
the resource/receptor. The magnitude designations are as follows:
x Positive
x Negligible
x Small
x Medium
x Large
The methodology incorporates likelihood into the magnitude designation (i.e., in parallel with
consideration of the other impact characteristics), so that the likelihood-factored magnitude
can then be considered with the resource/receptor sensitivity/vulnerability/irreplaceability in
order to assign impact significance.
The magnitude of impacts takes into account all the various dimensions of a particular
impact in order to make a determination as to where the impact falls on the spectrum from
(a) Important in defining extent is the differentiation between the spatial extent of impact (i.e. the physical distance of the
impact in terms of on-site, local, regional, national or international) and the temporal extent/ effect of an impact may have (i.e. a
localised impact on restricted species may lead to its extinction and therefore the impact would have global ramifications).
(b) Duration must consider irreversible impacts (i.e. permanent).
DDA 49 March 2013

negligible to large. Some impacts will result in changes to the environment that may be
immeasurable, undetectable or within the range of normal natural variation. Such changes
can be regarded as essentially having no impact, and should be characterised as having a
negligible magnitude.
In addition to characterising the magnitude of impact, the other principal step necessary to
assign significance for a given impact is to define the sensitivity/vulnerability/ irreplaceability
of the resource/receptor. There are a range of factors to be taken into account when defining
the sensitivity/vulnerability/ irreplaceability of the resource/receptor, which may be physical,
biological, cultural or human. Where the resource is physical (for example, a water body) its
quality, sensitivity to change and importance (on a local, national and international scale) are
considered. Where the resource/receptor is biological or cultural (for example, the marine
environment or a coral reef), its importance (for example, its local, regional, national or
international importance) and its sensitivity to the specific type of impact are considered.
Where the receptor is human, the vulnerability of the individual, community or wider societal
group is considered.
As in the case of magnitude, the sensitivity/vulnerability/ irreplaceability designations

themselves are universally consistent, but the definitions for these designations will vary on
a resource/receptor basis. The universal sensitivity/vulnerability/irreplaceability (c) of
resource/receptor is:
x Low
x Medium
x High
Once magnitude of impact and sensitivity/vulnerability/irreplaceability of resource/receptor

have been characterised, the significance can be assigned for each impact. The following
provides a context for defining significance.
Table 1.4 Context for Defining Significance

x An impact of negligible significance is one where a resource/receptor (including people) will essentially
not be affected in any way by a particular activity or the predicted effect is deemed to be imperceptible
or is indistinguishable from natural background variations.
x An impact of minor significance is one where a resource/receptor will experience a noticeable effect,
but the impact magnitude is sufficiently small (with or without mitigation) and/or the resource/receptor is
of low sensitivity/ vulnerability/ importance. In either case, the magnitude should be well within
applicable standards.
x An impact of moderate significance has an impact magnitude that is within applicable standards, but
falls somewhere in the range from a threshold below which the impact is minor, up to a level that might
be just short of breaching a legal limit. Clearly, to design an activity so that its effects only just avoid
breaking a law and/or cause a major impact is not best practice. The emphasis for moderate impacts is
therefore on demonstrating that the impact has been reduced to a level that is as low as reasonably
practicable (ALARP). This does not necessarily mean that impacts of moderate significance have to be
reduced to minor, but that moderate impacts are being managed effectively and efficiently.
(c) Irreplaceable (SANBI, 2013): In terms of biodiversity, irreplaceable areas are those of highest biodiversity value outside the formal
protected area network. They support unique biodiversity features, such as endangered species or rare habitat patches that do not occur
anywhere else in the province. These features have already been so reduced by loss of natural habitat, that 100% of what remains must be
protected to achieve biodiversity targets.
DDA 50 March 2013

x An impact of major significance is one where an accepted limit or standard may be exceeded, or large
magnitude impacts occur to highly valued/sensitive resource/receptors. An aim of IA is to get to a
position where the Project does not have any major residual impacts, certainly not ones that would
endure into the long-term or extend over a large area. However, for some aspects there may be major
residual impacts remaining even after all practicable mitigation options have been exhausted (i.e.
ALARP has been applied). An example might be the visual impact of a facility. It is then the function of
regulators and stakeholders to weigh such negative factors against the positive ones, such as
employment, in coming to a decision on the Project.
Based on the context for defining significance, the impact significance rating will be
determined, using the matrix below.
Table 1.5 Impact Significance Rating Matrix
Sensitivity/Vulnerability/Irreplaceability of Resource/Receptor
Low Medium High
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Magnitude
of Impact
Small Negligible Minor Moderate

Medium Minor Moderate Major
Large Moderate Major Major
Once the significance of the impact has been determined, it is important to qualify the
degree of confidence in the assessment. Confidence in the prediction is associated with
any uncertainties, for example, where information is insufficient to assess the impact.
Degree of confidence can be expressed as low, medium or high.
DDA 51 March 2013

Appendix B
B.1 Noise Monitoring Record Sheets
x Position MP01
Located northeast of the site, about 1km from the N14 road, Accessible from N14 road
GPS coordinates S 2916'59.30" E 19 3'46.28"
View North towards N14 road View Southeast
Figure B-1. MP01 Images
DDA 52 March 2013

x Position MP02
Located northeast of the site, about 1.5 km from MP01
GPS coordinates S2912'38.09" E191'1.90"
View North towards View South towards Gamsberg

x Position MP03
Located south east of the Gamsberg site about 550m form Receptor1 (R1)
GPS coordinates S 2911'50.02" E 19 0'41.45"
View West towards Gamsberg View North towards N14 road

DDA 53 March 2013

x Position MP04
Located south of the Gamsberg site about 6.5km and 2.3km from MP03 and R5 respectively
GPS coordinates S2916'31.08" E1859'48.19"
view North towards Gamsberg View West

x Position MP05
Located south of the Gamsberg site about 3.1 km and 2.6km from MP04 and R5
respectively GPS coordinates S2916'50.98" E1857'51.25"
View West View North towards Gamsberg

DDA 54 March 2013

x Position MP06
Located west of the Gamsberg site, about 1km from the N14 road, Accessible from N14 road
GPS coordinates S2915'5.83" E 1854'7.16"
view South View North towards N14 road
x Position MP07
Located in Aggeneys, with access from the road to Black Mountain Mine and then right into
Penge Road.
GPS coordinates S 2914'33.45" E 1850'22.77"
View West towards Black Mountain View Southwest towards Aggeneys

DDA 55 March 2013

Table B-1: Noise Measurements Results
Measurement WS LAeq,I LAmin LAmax L99 L50 L10

Date - Time Location Comments
Position (m/s) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)
16-08-12 22:37 MP01 Rural 0.2 25.6 15.7 44.5 15.7 16.0 25.8
17-08-12 12:07 MP01 Rural 3.9 39.3 23.8 51.5 24.8 36.1 42.9
17-08-12 20:09 MP01 Rural 0.2 33.4 23.8 52.2 23.8 24.4 32.7
TrafficnoisefromN14road
17-08-12 23:40 MP01 Rural 0.4 31.1 15.8 49.9 15.8 19.3 31.3
audible
18-08-12 11:21 MP01 Rural 4.0 47.6 29.7 60.3 31.4 44.0 51.3
18-08-12 16:49 MP01 Rural 1.6 33.7 19.6 45.8 20.2 29.2 37.7
18-08-12 22:12 MP01 Rural 0.0 35.3 15.9 57.9 15.9 16.6 22.6
17-08-12 0:51 MP02 Rural 1.7 39.2 20.4 60.8 20.4 30.2 40.7
Insectactivityaudible
17-08-12 1:04 MP02 Rural 1.3 37.5 19.1 58.7 19.0 22.0 31.0
17-08-12 12:46 MP02 Rural 4.2 46.6 24.7 63.4 27.2 42.3 49.2
18-08-12 12:25 MP02 Rural 3.2 44.1 30.7 55.2 32.5 41.6 47.4
18-08-12 16:02 MP02 Rural 3.2 37.1 18.2 56.5 18.3 22.6 35.2
18-08-12 22:51 MP02 Rural 0.2 35.9 15.8 56.1 15.9 22.8 27.2
17-08-12 1:30 MP03 Rural 5.1 45.4 34.9 57.0 36.2 43.4 48.5
17-08-12 1:51 MP03 Rural 4.2 46.1 35.5 58.2 35.8 43.7 49.5
17-08-12 13:14 MP03 Rural 4.0 54.8 27.0 80.3 27.5 39.0 48.1
Trafficnoiseandinsectactivity
17-08-12 21:43 MP03 Rural 3.7 40.6 26.3 54.7 27.0 34.0 44.5
audible
17-08-12 22:06 MP03 Rural 3.1 41.3 25.2 57.9 25.8 34.4 44.2
18-08-12 12:57 MP03 Rural 3.4 40.1 22.7 54.4 23.7 34.5 43.3
18-08-12 23:20 MP03 Rural 0.2 37.2 16.5 56.0 16.5 17.8 27.3
17-08-12 0:14 MP04 Rural 1.4 47.0 17.4 72.6 17.8 22.6 33.8 Birdandinsectactivityaudible
17-08-12 2:17 MP04 Rural 0.0 34.0 16.9 51.5 16.9 18.0 27.1
17-08-12 13:38 MP04 Rural 2.9 48.5 24.6 71.7 25.8 40.9 46.4
17-08-12 21:22 MP04 Rural 4.2 40.6 26.3 61.7 29.0 36.1 42.2
DDA 56 March 2013

Measurement WS LAeq,I LAmin LAmax L99 L50 L10

Date - Time Location Comments
Position (m/s) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)
17-08-12 22:29 MP04 Rural 2.0 33.4 23.8 52.2 23.8 24.4 32.7
18-08-12 13:41 MP04 Rural 3.2 42.0 22.8 58.0 25.3 38.1 44.9
18-08-12 14:22 MP04 Rural 1.7 53.8 16.6 78.9 16.7 22.3 37.7 Birdactivityaudible
18-08-12 23:44 MP04 Rural 0.4 31.3 16.1 51.4 16.2 17.4 20.1
16-08-12 23:50 MP05 Rural 0.8 46.9 16.4 71.5 16.5 18.5 28.0
17-08-12 2:39 MP05 Rural 1.1 40.7 16.3 65.3 16.3 17.2 19.4 Birdactivityaudible
17-08-12 13:54 MP05 Rural 2.4 39.9 25.0 56.7 25.7 35.5 42.4
17-08-12 21:05 MP05 Rural 3.2 58.7 25.9 83.7 26.1 28.1 43.3
18-08-12 13:22 MP05 Rural 4.0 39.9 18.5 58.0 19.0 29.0 42.5 Birdactivityandtrafficnoise
18-08-12 15:09 MP05 Rural 1.5 52.9 16.6 78.1 16.9 28.2 40.2 audible
18-08-12 0:02 MP05 Rural 0.2 42.5 16.6 65.6 16.8 18.1 23.3
16-08-12 23:18 MP06 Rural 1.7 37.0 19.2 82.2 19.6 24.7 30.6
17-08-12 3:09 MP06 Rural 1.2 37.0 15.8 59.0 15.8 16.8 29.1
17-08-12 20:43 MP06 Rural 0.5 36.7 25.9 54.7 27.1 32.9 37.0
18-08-12 14:08 MP06 Rural 4.0 33.4 19.1 49.4 19.4 28.8 36.4 TrafficnoisefromN14audible
18-08-12 14:21 MP06 Rural 2.8 36.8 17.9 58.0 18.0 28.7 37.7
18-08-12 15:35 MP06 Rural 1.0 36.0 17.2 56.0 17.3 26.4 36.2
18-08-12 0:25 MP06 Rural 0.4 35.6 20.9 56.3 21.3 24.0 26.5
DDA 57 March 2013

B.2 Noise Survey Results for Continuous Monitoring at MP07
x Day 1
Start 2012/08/1616:00
End 2012/08/1700:00
Weighting A
Datatype Impuls
Unit dB
Periodstart Leq Lmin Lmax L99 L95 L90 L50 L10 L1
2012/08/1616:00 54.5 29.3 78.3 32.4 34.9 36.6 44.6 54.2 67.2
2012/08/1617:00 48.0 29.9 66.7 32.9 35.3 37.0 43.0 50.2 59.4
2012/08/1618:00 51.3 28.1 76.5 31.3 34.5 36.5 43.7 51.3 62.5
2012/08/1619:00 46.0 28.1 67.7 30.6 33.7 35.6 41.3 47.3 55.1
2012/08/1620:00 45.6 28.8 69.1 29.9 31.3 32.6 39.9 47.8 54.8
2012/08/1621:00 45.4 23.9 68.6 25.4 27.2 28.7 36.3 45.7 56.5
2012/08/1622:00 43.9 23.2 68.8 24.2 25.2 25.8 36.8 43.7 53.4
2012/08/1623:00 42.5 21.9 66.7 22.6 24.4 25.2 30.3 39.6 52.2
Overall 49.0 21.9 78.3 24.6 26.4 29.2 40.0 48.9 60.7
DDA 58 March 2013

Gamsberg1-DUO #10372 Impuls 1s A 16-08-1223:59:59 49.7dB 8h56m33 SEL 94.7dB

80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
16h 17h 18h 19h 20h 21h 22h 23h 00h
Source
DDA 59 March 2013

x Day 2
Start 2012/08/1700:00
End 2012/08/1800:00
Weighting A
Datatype Impuls
Unit dB
2012/08/1700:00 36.5 20.8 51.8 21.2 22.4 22.9 32.8 40 46.2
2012/08/1701:00 33.6 20.4 50.9 21.1 21.9 22.4 25.3 37.9 41.1
2012/08/1702:00 37.8 21.4 64.1 21.9 22.6 23.1 26.8 38.3 46.4
2012/08/1703:00 38.6 20.9 61.5 21.5 22.5 23.3 32.7 40.9 48.5
2012/08/1704:00 48.4 21.7 77.3 22.1 23.8 24.7 31.7 41.4 54.2
2012/08/1705:00 46.9 24.9 69.4 27.7 29.7 31.0 39.6 49.7 56.9
2012/08/1706:00 52.6 25.8 71.8 30.0 32.5 35.6 46.6 55.0 63.5
2012/08/1707:00 54.0 31.8 76.3 36.4 40.3 42.1 48.1 54.0 66.9
2012/08/1708:00 49.4 32.0 70.1 34.7 36.5 37.9 43.7 50.3 61.5
2012/08/1709:00 50.8 36.5 71.3 38.5 39.7 40.7 44.8 51.2 63.1
2012/08/1710:00 51.9 35.2 70.2 37.6 40.5 41.8 45.1 52.6 64.6
2012/08/1711:00 58.3 33.7 83.6 37.0 39.4 40.6 45.5 57.7 69.7
2012/08/1712:00 51.1 32.6 72.9 34.4 36.0 37.0 42.2 50.2 64.5
2012/08/1713:00 50.9 34.5 71.2 35.9 37.8 39.1 43.9 51.4 63.9
2012/08/1714:00 51.5 34.7 69.3 36.0 37.8 38.9 44.1 52.8 64.3
2012/08/1715:00 58.3 33.1 87.2 34.3 36.2 37.6 44.5 57.2 68.5
2012/08/1716:00 49.2 30.9 73.4 33.0 35.2 36.7 41.9 48.6 61.1
2012/08/1717:00 50.9 28.0 73.2 31.5 33.9 35.8 43.0 51.7 63.8
2012/08/1718:00 45.2 26.7 64.0 29.3 32.3 33.8 40.3 47.5 55.9
2012/08/1719:00 46.0 26.1 70.6 29.6 31.5 32.7 38.3 45.8 57.2
2012/08/1720:00 43.8 26.4 64.2 27.8 29.7 30.8 36.9 45.5 55.4
DDA 60 March 2013

2012/08/1721:00 42.1 25.3 64.9 26.6 28.6 29.3 33.8 43.2 54.1
2012/08/1722:00 39.6 28.2 54.0 29.6 30.8 31.5 34.8 43.1 50.0
2012/08/1723:00 34.5 25.4 51.3 26.0 26.8 27.3 29.9 36.9 45.4
Overall 51.0 20.4 87.2 22.4 24.4 27.1 40.4 50.1 62.5
DDA 61 March 2013


90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
17/08/12 02h 17/08/12 08h 17/08/12 14h 17/08/12 20h
DDA 62 March 2013

x Day 3
Start 2012/08/1800:00
End 2012/08/1809:00
Weighting A
Datatype Impuls
Unit dB
2012/08/1800:00 38.3 22.7 59.0 23.6 24.8 25.5 29.9 40.2 50.1
2012/08/1801:00 38.3 25.0 59.9 26.7 28.1 28.8 31.3 36.7 50.5
2012/08/1802:00 41.8 26.8 67.1 27.4 28.8 29.7 33.1 39.8 51.0
2012/08/1803:00 35.7 25.3 56.8 26.7 27.4 27.8 30.4 36.0 47.7
2012/08/1804:00 37.9 24.9 65.6 26.2 27.4 28.1 31.2 34.8 41.9
2012/08/1805:00 46.6 25.8 74.5 27.2 28.5 29.4 33.4 44.2 55.3
2012/08/1806:00 43.0 24.9 66.2 26.7 28.1 28.9 33.4 44.5 54.2
2012/08/1807:00 60.5 31.9 74.8 33.7 35.9 37.2 48.0 64.6 72.3
2012/08/1808:00 65.7 35.3 81.3 40.0 43.6 45.4 55.6 68.1 78.7
Overall 57.4 22.7 81.3 25.3 27.3 28.4 33.3 55.0 69.9
DDA 63 March 2013


100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
00h 01h 02h 03h 04h 05h 06h 07h 08h 09h
Source
DDA 64 March 2013

Appendix C
C.1 Sound Power Ratings
Table C-1: Existing Plant Sound Power Emission Levels
POINTSOURCES
Id Source Type Sound Power Level Coordinates
Day Night X Y Z
(dB(A)) (dB(A)) (m) (m) (m)
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck in Pit 108.5 108.5 34302514 6764158 1076
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck in Pit for Waste 108.5 108.5 34302707 6764167 1055
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck in Pit for Waste 108.5 108.5 34302662 6764138 1047
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck at Crusher 108.5 108.5 34300765 6763694 1061
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck at Waste Dump 108.5 108.5 34299866 6764167 934
2_HAUL_TR Haul Truck at Waste Dump 108.5 108.5 34299734 6764217 924
2_BDZ_Pit Bulldozer in Pit 111.9 111.9 34302477 6764136 1072
2_BDZ_WD Bulldozer at WD 111.9 111.9 34299868 6764254 925
2_BDZ_WD Bulldozer at WD 111.9 111.9 34299707 6764156 929
2_DRL_Pit Drill in Pit 107.5 107.5 34302176 6764267 1111
DDA 65 March 2013


2_EXCAV_P Excavator in Pit 112.1 112.1 34302327 6764130 1081
2Stacker-Rec Stacker-Rec 104.7 104.7 34300760 6766233 925
2_Crusher Crusher in Pit 97.9 97.9 34300728 6763704 1064
2_SAGM SAG Mill 111.0 111.0 34301128 6766561 925
2_SAGM SAG Mill 111.0 111.0 34301108 6766593 925
2_SAGM SAG Mill 111.0 111.0 34301089 6766624 925
2_SAGM Ball Mill 111.0 111.0 34301133 6766571 925
2_SAGM Ball Mill 111.0 111.0 34301114 6766603 925
2_SAGM Ball Mill 111.0 111.0 34301094 6766634 925
2_SCREEN Screen 87.1 87.1 34301132 6766564 923
2_SCREEN Screen 87.1 87.1 34301112 6766596 923
2_SCREEN Screen 87.1 87.1 34301093 6766627 923
2_FLOPLA Flotation Plant 104.4 104.4 34300976 6766720 921
2_FLOPLAs Flotation Plant Smaller 103.0 103.0 34301168 6766742 921

DDA 66 March 2013

LINESOURCES
Id Source Type Sound Power Level Sound Power Level
Day Night Day Night
(dB(A)) (dB(A)) (dB(A)/m) (dB(A)/m)
2_CONV_CR_OP Conveyor Crusher to Ore P 122.1 122.1 88.2 88.2
2_CONV_OP Conveyor at Ore Pile 105.5 105.5 88.2 88.2
2_CONV_OP_SR Conveyor after Ore Pile 102.4 102.4 88.2 88.2
2_CONV_Mill Conveyor at Mill 107.9 107.9 88.2 88.2

ROADSOURCES
Id Source Type Sound Power Level Vehicles Number Heavy Vehicles Maximum Speed
Day Night Day Night Day Night Auto Heavy
(dB(A)/m) (dB(A)/m) (veh/hr) (veh/hr) (%) (%) (km/hr) (km/hr)
2RDLOOP Loop 10 Road 70.5 70.5 3.6 3.6 100 100 50 50
99Rd N14WL Existing N14 West of L10 77.2 70.6 72 16 7.2 7.2 103 86
99Rd N14EL Existing N14 East of L10 77.2 70.6 72 16 7.2 7.2 103 86
2R2Waste Haul to Waste 86.3 86.3 80.6 80.6 100 100 30 30
2R2Crush Haul to Crusher 76.8 76.8 9.1 9.1 100 100 30 30
2R2WCr Haul from Pit 86.8 86.8 89.7 89.7 100 100 30 30
2Rd N14WL Future N14 West of L10 68.4 68.4 10.2 10.2 5.3 5.3 103 86
2Rd N14EL Future N14 East of L10 66.1 66.1 13.7 13.7 6.5 6.5 30 30
DDA 67 March 2013

B2. Construction Equipment Sound Power Emissions
Table C-2: Construction Equipment Sound Power Emission Levels

Octave Band (Hz)
Equipment 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Sound Power Level (dB), re 1 pW
Bulldozer 88.0 118.0 111.0 109.0 107.0 103.0 97.0 67.0
Excavator 82.0 112.0 118.0 105.0 106.0 99.0 95.0 65.0
Grader 81.0 111.0 108.0 108.0 106.0 104.0 98.0 68.0
Haul truck 83.0 113.2 116.9 114.4 110.6 106.8 100.2 70.0
Concrete mixer unloading 71.0 101.0 103.1 97.5 95.1 92.2 87.4 57.4
Compressor 71.1 101.1 103.9 104.1 103.4 112.4 113.1 83.1
Concrete mixing equipment 76.8 106.8 100.9 101.2 99.0 94.1 87.3 57.3
DDA 68 March 2013

Appendix D
D.1 Suggested Changes to the Project Layout (15/04/2013)
Figure D-1. Suggested Changes to the Project Layout (15/04/2013)
DDA 69 March 2013

Based on recent discussions with the Applicant and design engineers, the following changes
to the project layout have been suggested. The changes are as follows (refer to Figure D-1):
1. Relocation of the explosives magazine area from the top of the inselberg to an area
located between the N14 and inselberg. Due to the impacts to three watercourses on
the inselberg, this relocation was requested by the Specialist Team.
2. Increase in size of the waste rock dump from to 270 hectares to 490 hectares. In order
to reduce the slope angle of the waste rock dump (i.e. from 450 350 degree
slope) ,the footprint of the waste rock dump has increased. This design refinement was
in response to DMR requirements for a waste rock dump.
The noise impact rating due to the above-mentioned changes in the mine layout is not
expected to change, and most of its aspects will remain the same. The noise levels around
the dump are going to be the same as those estimated in the modelling section, since the
utilised equipment will remain the same. The only change will be the extension of the impact
zone around the waste dump due to the increased area for the waste dumping. This
extension, however, will not affect the noise levels along the concession boundaries, nor at
the sensitive receptors around the site.
DDA 70 March 2013

Appendix E
E.1 Declaration of Consultants Independence
The author of this report, Demos Dracoulides, does hereby declare that he is an
independent consultant appointed by ERM and has no business, financial, personal or other
interest in the activity, application or appeal in respect of which he was appointed other than
fair remuneration for work performed in connection with the activity, application or appeal.
There are no circumstances that compromise the objectivity of the specialist performing such
work. All opinions expressed in this report are his own.
Demos Dracoulides:
April 2013
DDA 71 March 2013

Annex g8 Noise Impact Assessment Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Annex g8 Noise Impact Assessment Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Annex G.

Noise and Vibration

DDA Environmental Engineers (DDA) has been appointed by Environmental Resources

Baseline Noise Environment

DDA i March 2013

DDA ii March 2013

Table 1. Noise and Vibration Impact Rating During Construction

Sensitivity/Vulnerability/Irreplaceability of Resource/Receptor Low

Impact Magnitude Small

IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE (NO MITIGATION REQUIRED) NEGLIGIBLE

Essential Mitigation Measures:

Table 2. Operational Noise and Vibration Impact Rating

Sensitivity/Vulnerability/Irreplaceability of Resource/Receptor Low

Impact Magnitude Small

IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE (NO MITIGATION REQUIRED) NEGLIGIBLE

Essential Mitigation Measures:

DDA iii March 2013

The main recommendations of the noise and vibration study are:

i. There are no specific mitigations that will be required during construction.

ii. Environmental noise monitoring should be performed by an independent specialist on

ii. Environmental noise and vibration monitoring should be performed by an

DDA iv March 2013

2 NOISE BASICS GUIDELINES AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS .......................... 4

2.2 Noise Standards and Guidelines .............................................................................. 5

2.3 Blasting Basics ....................................................................................................... 10

3 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS ............................................................... 12

3.4 Ambient Noise Measurements ............................................................................... 16

4 NOISE AND VIBRATION MODELLING METHODOLOGY AND INPUT ........... 21

4.3 Vibration During Construction and Operation ......................................................... 26

5 PREDICTED NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVELS............................................... 29

5.5 Blast Vibration Modelling Results ........................................................................... 37

6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 38

DDA v March 2013

6.3 Conclusions And Recommendations ...................................................................... 42

6.5 Impacts Rating ........................................................................................................ 45

Appendix A ............................................................................................................... 48

Appendix B ............................................................................................................... 52

Appendix C ............................................................................................................... 65

Appendix D ............................................................................................................... 69

Appendix E ............................................................................................................... 71

DDA vi March 2013

List of Figures page

Figure 1-1. Locality Map ........................................................................................................ 3

Figure 3-1. Locations of the Noise Monitoring Positions ...................................................... 15

Figure 3-2 Noise Levels at MP07 (16/08/2012-18/08/2012) ................................................. 19

Figure B-1. MP01 Images .................................................................................................... 52

Figure B-3. MP03 Images .................................................................................................... 53

Figure B-5. MP05 Images .................................................................................................... 54

DDA vii March 2013

List of Tables page

Table 2-1. WHO Guidelines for Ambient Sound Levels ......................................................... 6

Table 2-2. World Bank/IFC Ambient Noise Guidelines .......................................................... 7

Table 5.2: Calculated Noise Levels at Discrete Receptors .................................................. 36

Table B-1: Noise Measurements Results ............................................................................ 56

DDA viii March 2013

Terminology, Acronyms and Definitions

deciBel (dB) A measure of sound. It is equal to 10 times the logarithm (base

Equivalent A-weighted A-weighted sound pressure level in decibels of continuous steady

GPS Global Positioning System

IEC Independent Electoral Commission

IFC International Finance Corporation

LWA Sound power level in dB(A), re 10-12 W.

DDA ix March 2013