The wail of a train whistle sounding mournfully in the night has been romanticized in song and story since the first steam engine hit the rails. But people living along the PS&P rail line cutting northwest from Chehalis to Aberdeen might use a different word other than “romantic” to describe the sound of a modern freight train whistle cutting through the air, day or night.
A portion of the Environmental Impact Statement drafted for Contanda LLC’s proposed oil storage and transportation facility at the Port of Grays Harbor, which will rely on an increased number of rail cars taking that PS&P line, deals with the potential noise and vibration increases and their effect on life along the tracks.
During the initial construction of the facility the largest bringer of noise and vibration will be pile driving. That will go on for up to three months. However, since the nearest homes are about 500 yards from the site, and since this activity and all other construction will take place during daylight hours, the EIS finds little impact in its study.
The increase in train traffic and vessel traffic would not necessarily increase noise for those living near the facility itself, according to the study. In fact, according to Ecology, it’s likely the noises of the trains on the tracks and the loading and unloading from train to vessel will simply blend in with the noises already emanating from Port property’s day to day activities. And since vibrations are based on the speed of a train those effects would likely not be detectable to people regardless of proximity to the tracks.
When it comes to noise the only significant impacts will be for those living at or near the train crossings along the PS&P line, according to the EIS. The aforementioned horn blasts coming from an increased number of trains will of course add to the noise level at crossings like those near Montesano and Poynor Yard in Aberdeen, as well as for homes in the area between Satsop and Elma, and also homes near the rail line in Central Mark, Malone-Porter and Centralia, according to the EIS.
About the only option to lessen the impact of increased train noise on homes near the tracks is for Contanda to talk to representatives from PS&P and communities along the rail about creating “quiet zones” – areas where horns are not required to be sounded as long as safety requirements are met. Only public agencies like cities and counties can create these quiet zones, and they must be approved by the Federal Railroad Administration.
Noise levels for the study were measured in 28 places along the rail line and project site. Construction and operation noise was estimated based on current noise levels and existing data relating to activities like pile driving.
A fair amount of comment on the noise portion of the EIS was received by Ecology, by the general public and a few organizations. Maryanne Guichard, State Assistant Secretary of Environmental Health, wrote of the effects of noise on children in schools. She says studies “concluded that noise negatively impacts children’s performance at school, particularly reading scores. Aberdeen, Elma, and especially Hoquiam already have below average reading scores compared to the rest of the state. In Grays Harbor County alone, the cities of Hoquiam, Aberdeen, Cosmopolis, Montesano, Satsop, and Elma have schools within 1,500 feet of a railroad that would be impacted by this proposal. Using GIS and publicly available data, we found that schools across Washington that were within 1,500 feet of a railroad had 6 percent more students who did not meet standards on English Language Arts.”
Ecology replied that “Noise-sensitive land uses are identified within approximately 500 feet of the PS&P rail line for wayside noise and within 1,000 feet of grade crossings for train horn noise. No schools in the study area are within these distances. Because freight rail traffic does not run on a schedule, the analysis assumes rail events related to the proposed action would be evenly distributed over a 24-hour day. No moderate or severe impacts on sensitive receptors were identified for train wayside noise.”
Regna Merritt from Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility wrote, “Noise exposure increases the risks of cardiovascular disease, including increased blood pressure, arrhythmia’s, stroke and ischemic heart disease; cognitive impairment in children; sleep disturbance and resultant fatigue, hypertension, and increased rates of accidents and injuries; and exacerbation of mental health disorders such as depression, stress, anxiety, and psychosis. Furthermore, the adverse effects are worse when there is no control over the noise.”
Additionally, “There is no consideration of the extra adverse effects of intermittent high impact noise, such as in pile driving, which includes a fright component that adds to increased stress levels. The DEISs appear to make the assumption that living 1/4 to 1/2 mile away will mitigate the health and environmental impacts of noise. This is not correct; it would depend on what exists between the noise source and the person hearing the noise. For example, if there is open water or there are hills in the area, the noise could be magnified.”
Ecology replied, “While the addition of approximately one train pass per day on average under the proposed action would increase the average daily noise level from horn soundings at rail crossings, and in some cases result in the impacts described above, the actual horn noise associated with any given train passage would not increase under the proposed action.”
A number of comments referred to the impact of increased vessel and rail traffic on birds and marine mammals, especially some of the more rare migratory bird species and the humpback and gray whales that migrate through the area. Still others spoke of the larger burden carried by minority and low-income populations when it came to noise and other impacts associated with the Port project.
In each case, Ecology found no significant impacts related to the project.
