Examination of Witnesses (Questions 4760
- 4779)
4760. Mr Taylor: I was going to set the
scene by showing the Committee again what we are committed to.
4761. Chairman: The Committee has had
an awful lot of noise about noise and we need to move on a little.
4762. Mr Taylor: I will take it very
briefly, sir. Mr Tilley, you are aware that in the Draft Construction
Code there is a commitment to use best practicable means in relation
to all construction activities to mitigate the effects of noise
and vibration?
(Mr Tilley) Yes, I think "endeavour to
ensure" is the phrase which we are concerned about.
4763. If you look at the screen in front of
you, paragraph 5.1.1 of the Draft Construction Code, and read
that paragraph, you will see the commitment that has been given.
(Mr Tilley) Yes, I have read that.
4764. That commits the Nominated Undertaker
to apply the most practicable means to all construction activities,
does it not?
(Mr Tilley) From that paragraph, yes.
4765. Given that that is the case it would mean
that, during the construction activities relating to Crossrail,
all that can be reasonably done to mitigate noise and vibration
will be done.
(Mr Tilley) I think it brings you back to the
point that in the other sections—and I do not have them
in front of me—the term "endeavour to ensure"
is used, which is of concern to us. If you are saying that that
section of the paragraph actually overrides that, then that does
give us greater comfort.
4766. Have you read that paragraph before, Mr
Tilley?
(Mr Tilley) I cannot confirm that I have definitely
read that before; I have read so many documents relating to this
whole process.
4767. Let us turn to Information Paper D10,
paragraph 2.7, and I think this is the paragraph that causes you
concern, page 3 of Information Paper D10.[13]
One can see in paragraph 2.7 that: "The Nominated Undertaker
will endeavour to ensure that the groundborne noise from the operation
of the temporary construction railway ... will not exceed levels
greater than those it is already subject to ... or the levels
listed in Table 1."
(Mr Tilley) Yes.
4768. It is the phrase "endeavour to ensure"
that gives rise to your concerns?(Mr Tilley) It
does.
4769. Your first undertaking, as you see it,
requires the provision of a particular form of mitigation, does
it not?
(Mr Tilley) Sorry, can you repeat that, please?
4770. Your first paragraph, your first undertaking
in relation to noise, requires the provision of a resilient ballast
mat, does it not?
(Mr Tilley) Yes.
4771. That is what you are after.
(Mr Tilley) Yes.
4772. If it were the case that there is a better
form of mitigation available you would presumably prefer that
to be used?
(Mr Tilley) The reason why we put that forward
was that that was the method of restricting noise that was actually
advised—actually brought up as being used by Crossrail to
actually combat this, and that is why we have actually included
that in the response.
4773. It is a method, is it not, but
it is not the only method?
(Mr Tilley) It is not the only method but this
is based upon the information that we received from Crossrail
themselves and the people that are actually responsible for dealing
with the reduction of noise generated from the Crossrail scheme.
4774. Why, given the commitment to do all that
can be reasonably done to mitigate noise and to endeavour to ensure
that groundborne noise does not exceed 30L(A)Max from groundborne
noise in the building, is it necessary to specify now the particular
mitigation that has to be provided?
(Mr Tilley) If that was the case then why cannot
that document change to "best endeavours" which, as
our barrister has actually said, is more of a legal term, to give
us comfort?
4775. I hear your question but I am afraid it
is my turn to ask the questions at the moment, Mr Tilley. I will
ask the question again and see if I can get an answer. Why is
it necessary to specify now the type of mitigation that has to
be provided in the context of the assurances to which I have just
drawn your attention?
(Mr Tilley) Because we are trying to protect
our business against noise intrusion.
4776. What track is the resilient ballast mat
to be laid under to secure your acceptance that proper mitigation
has been provided?
(Mr Tilley) I am not a railway expert so I
cannot answer that question.
4777. Has EMI taken advice on the length of
track it would have to go under?
(Mr Tilley) No, we have not but we have actually
spoken to Crossrail with regard to the measures which they have
in place and they have actually said that they have used this
resilient ballast mat in areas where noise could potentially be
a problem to the people that actually occupy the space above that
section of track.
4778. Chairman: Mr Taylor, I do apologise
again. I recognise that you have a very important job to do, but
time is moving on. You said that you were not there to answer
the questions; I am afraid you are to me, so I will ask you a
question to see if we may come to some agreement upon this which
allows us to take some coffee—forgive me for being so frivolous.
Are you willing to use the term "best endeavours" as
opposed to "endeavour to assure"?
4779. Mr Taylor: In the context of the
commitments that we have already given we are committed to applying
best practicable means, and in essence to go beyond that is completely
unnecessary. We are already committed to do all that can reasonably
be done, and it would appear, we would submit, that perhaps EMI
were unaware of that particular commitment given the answer that
I got from Mr Tilley about whether he had read that particular
paragraph.
13 Crossrail Information Paper D10-Groundborne Noise
and Vibration (LINEWD-IPD10-003). Back
| 
