S-J910-NRT1-14Panama CityPanama City,FLNavigation Response Team 1H123763FinalBear Point to Hathaway BridgeFloridaUnited States25002014Mark McMannNavigable Area2014-04-242013-09-102014-07-13Singlebeam Echo Sounder Multibeam Echo SounderSide Scan SonarmetersUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)UTC-6Pacific Hydrographic BranchThe purpose of this survey is to provide contemporary surveys to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charts. All separates are filed with the hydrographic data. Any revisions to the Descriptive Report (DR) generated during office processing are shown in bold, red italic text. The processing branch maintains the DR as a field unit product, therefore, all information and recommendations within the body of the DR are considered preliminary unless otherwise noted. The final disposition of surveyed features is represented in the OCS nautical chart update products. All pertinent records for this survey, including the DR, are archived at the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) and can be retrieved via http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/.NOAABear Point to Hathaway Bridge, Panama City, FL30.285.766666666730.1585.7166666667Survey Limitsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_survey_limits.jpgSurvey Limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD. A request through the Regional Navigation Manager has requested a hydrographic survey in St. Andrews Bay and West Bay. There are reports of high spot in the Pass west of the channel and east of the western jetty. The approach to the Port and through St Andrews Pass needs validation of the charted depths. In Grand Lagoon, there is shoaling in the channel and changing channel course. Also, to survey and validate the charted depths and features in West Bay, West Bay Creek and the depths along the GIWW. Panama City is one of the MTS ports and an ENC Verification is needed. It is the intent of this survey to supersede all bathymetry, seafloor features, and bottom characteristics within the assigned survey area as defined by these instructions for updating of NOAA charts 11390 and 11391. The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Some areas were not adequately surveyed in order to supersede the charted depths and contours. Survey Coverage was in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.Survey Limit (general)file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_survey_limits_large.jpg300100000097.265.72000000097.265.72011.7615000032013-09-102014-05-282014-06-032014-06-042014-06-052014-06-162014-06-172014-06-18Percent of XL equals 11.76% of 1/2 of total 200% MS mileageCrossline mileage is 5.88% of the total main scheme mileage. The final date of survey was 07/13/2014.Refer to the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR) for a complete description of data acquisition and processing systems, survey vessels, quality control procedures and data processing methods. Additional information to supplement sounding and survey data, and any deviations from the DAPR are discussed in the following sections.S30049.150.5S30019.150.5Survey Vessel S3004 Schematicsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/S3004schematics.jpgSurvey Vessel S3001 Schematicsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/S3001schematics.jpgOdomCV200SBESReson8125MBESKlein5000SSSEdgetech4125SSSTrimble ApplanixPOS MV 4Positioning and Attitude SystemTrimble ApplanixPOS MV 5Positioning and Attitude SystemSBESB19 Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorOdomDigibarSound Speed SystemKlein 5000 side scan sonar was not used for data acquisition during this survey. X-lines equal 11.76% of 1/2 mainscheme mileage.The Crossline comparison shows excellent agreement with the Mainscheme dataset. Additional Quality Control surface comparisons were done: Caris Base 'Compute Statistics' comparison between the following surfaces were done: - SBES MS and Xline SBES surfaces difference (Std Dev=0.114m) - SBES MS and MBES surfaces difference (Std Dev=0.369m). Points with the highest Standard Deviation were found around the ruined bridge pillars and were not found an hindrance to general survey quality (see graphic illustration). - Xline SBES and MBES surfaces difference (Std Dev=0.439m). Points with the highest Standard Deviation were found on an abrupt slope near a 8 ft shoal located at 30d 10.95N and 85d 44.03W and were not found an hindrance to general survey quality (see graphic illustration). The crossline quality control is conclusive for sheet H12376. Caris Base surface difference: M/S vs. XL statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SB_vs_XL_surfaces_Difference_stats.jpgCaris Base surface difference: SB M/S vs. MBES statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SB_vs_MB_surfaces_Difference_stats.jpgCaris Base surface difference: SB M/S vs. MBES graphic illustration of high Std Dev pointsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SB_vs_MB_surfaces_Difference_above%2051cm%20pic.jpgCaris Base surface difference: SB Xlines vs. MBES statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_XL_SB_vs_MB_surfaces_Difference_stats.jpgCaris Base surface difference: SB Xlines vs. MBES graphic illustration of high Std Dev pointsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_XL_SB_vs_MB_surfaces_Difference_above%2020cm%20pic.jpgCrossline mileage is 5.88% of the total main scheme mileage. Uncertainty values returned from MBES surface were excellent. 10798 points out of 737929 total points are above 50cm of uncertainty (1.46%).IHOness for H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgAnalysis during office review showed that 99.21% of the nodes from the multibeam surface were within the NOS standards for Total Vertical Uncertainty. No contemporary junction surveys available.Survey H12376 junctions with survey H12358 (S-J910-NRT1-12) to the north of the survey limit and H12357 (S-J910-NRT1-12) to the south of the survey limit. A depth comparison between H12358 and H12376 during office review showed good agreement between the two surveys with an average depth difference of -0.14 m (SD: 0.08). Data from H12357 was not available for comparison at the time of office review. Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.None ExistThere were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness.None ExistThere were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.Daily CTD casts for mainscheme survey, every 4 hours maximum during MBES investigationsAll equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.MBES surface DensityMBES surface Density was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed a density of 5 or above. 52583 points out of 737929 total points showed a density under 5 (7.12%). These points were analyzed and found to be concentrated in the debris covered area south of the Hathaway bridge and the MBES outer beams. This was not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgMBES Density under 5.file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_MB_surface_Density_Under_5.jpgAnalysis during office review showed that 95.3% of nodes meet sounding density requirement. SBES surface DensitySBES surface Density was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed a node density of 5 or above. 710 points out of 90079 total points showed a density under 5 (0.78%). These points were analyzed and not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgThe surface density requirement for SBES with 200% side scan sonar coverage is 3 soundings per node (for at least 95% of all nodes). MBES surface Node Hypothesis Count MBES surface Node Hypothesis Count was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed an Hypothesis Count of 2 or below. 1518 point out of 737914 total points showed an Hypothesis count above 2 (0.20%). These points were analyzed and not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgMBES surface Node Hypothesis StrengthMBES surface Node Hypothesis Strength was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed an Hypothesis Strength under 0.01. 911 point out of 737914 total points showed an Hypothesis Strength under 0.01 (0.12%). These points were analyzed and not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgSBES surface Standard DeviationSBES surface Standard Deviation was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed a Standard Deviation under 50cm. 149 points out of 90079 total points showed a Standard Deviation under 50 cm (0.16%). These points were analyzed and not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgSBES surface UncertaintySBES surface Uncertainty was controlled during data processing. The great majority of nodes showed an Uncertainty under 50cm. 561 points out of 90079 total points showed an Uncertainty above 50 cm (0.62%). These points were analyzed and not characterized as an hindrance to overall survey data quality. IHOness table, H12376file:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/IHOness%20table%20H12376.jpgSide Scan Sonar holidaysTwo small holidays were found in the SSS 100% coverage. Two holidays in SSS 100% coveragefile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SSS_Holidays_100.jpgThe size of the holidays are insignificant (4x6 m) and are also filled in by 200% side scan sonar coverage. All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.A new patch test is conducted every time the MBES is installed on the side arm.MBES patch test, S30012013-03-19MB installed (for MB multi surface Settlement and Squat measurement purpose)MBES patch test, S30012013-08-21MB installed (for MB multi surface Settlement and Squat measurement purpose)MBES patch test, S30012014-04-10MB installed for contacts investigations and MB multi surface Settlement and Squat measurement purpose.MBES patch test, S30012014-06-17MB installed for contacts investigations.Backscatter was not collected for this survey.NOAA Profile V_5_3H12376_MBES_50cmCUBE0.52.6215.02NOAA_0.5mComplete MBESH12376_SBES_Base_4mBASE Uncertainty41.0215.33NOAA_4mSBES Set Line SpacingH12376_100_1mSSS Mosaic100NOAA_1m100% SSSH12376_200_1mSSS Mosaic100NOAA_1m200% SSSH12376_Xline_Base_4mBASE Uncertainty41.6514.91NOAA_4m100% SSSCaris surfaces were generated following the Field Procedure Manual and the Specifications and Deliverables guidance. One MB Cube surface was generated at a 50cm resolution, One SB Base surface was generated at a 4m resolution, One SB-Crossline Base surface was generated at a 4m resolution, and a 1m resolution Mosaic was created for each 100% and 200% coverage for the Side Scan Sonar data. On the 100% SSS Mosaic, 2 small holidays were found. No Holidays were found in the 200% SSS mosaic. NOTE: There was a CARIS issue with creating mosaics from Edgetech SSS sonar data. The mosaics were created, but there was a gain issue in the rendering of the mosaics (see Caris ticket #01401406). Reviewer can manually change gain or change color scheme in properties layer. Issue has been elevated to Caris development team and will be addressed.H12376_MBES_50cm Depth Statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_MB_surface_Depth_stats.jpgH12376_SBES_Base_4m Depth Statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SB_surface_Depth_stats.jpgH12376_SBES_Xline_Base_4m Depth Statisticsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_XL_SB_surface_Depth_stats.jpgH12376 100% SSS Mosaic Holidaysfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_SSS_Holidays_100.jpgAdditional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterDiscrete ZoningPanama City, FL87291088729108.tidFinal ApprovedJ910NRT12014CORP.zdfFinalJ910NRT12013CORP.zdfPreliminary2014-07-142014-08-01No changes made in Final Tides. J910NRT12014CORP.zdf file was approved by COOPS as Final and applied to dataset.See attached Tide Note dated July 21, 2014North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)UTM 16NSite ID 812 Chart comparison for soundings was accomplished by examining discrepancies between the largest scale chart and the bathymetric table created with current survey data. Sounding agreement was good and generally within one to three feet.1139014140000252012-102013-11-022013-11-02Sounding agreement was good and generally within one to three feet.Sounding comparison with chart 11390 is not relevant since only a very small portion of the survey overlaps an area of the chart that is not already covered by larger scale raster charts 11391 and 11392.1139114025000252013-012013-11-022013-11-02Sounding agreement was good and generally within one to three feet.11392148500072005-112013-10-262013-10-26Sounding agreement was good and generally within one to three feet.US5FL67M5000102011-09-152011-09-15falseSounding agreement was good and generally within one to three feet.ENC US5FL67M only covers the southern section of the survey area. ENC US5FL66M (1:25,000) covers the northern section of the survey area. The soundings between US5FL66M and H12376 are in good agreement. Awois numbers 4672, 3165 and 3164 are common with sheet registry H12357 and were addressed in sheet H12357. No other AWOIS items were assigned for this survey sheet. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.Charted features within survey sheet were covered by 200% SSS. Significant items found in SSS record were investigated with a MBES when possible and safe. -1 Charted feature "PA", located next to Buoy G "13" was investigated. No wreck was detected during the investigation. -1 Charted feature "PA", located at 30d 11.0N and 85d 44.0W is now under a marina dock and could not be investigated. -1 FT 1984 located at 30d09.84N and 85d44.14W could not be safely investigated.Wreck PA near Buoy G "13" Fl G 2.5sfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_PA_removal.jpg0_1529A Subm bridge ruins MBES investigationfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1529A.jpg Significant contacts seen in 200% SSS record were investigated with a MBES when possible and safe. 7 uncharted features were investigated. Please see details in Final Features File.0_1423_Wreck_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1423.jpg0_1436_Wreck_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1436.jpg0_1356_Wreck_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1356.jpg0_1411_Obstruction_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1411.jpg0_1407_Obstruction_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1407.jpg0_1403_Obstruction_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1403.jpg0_1646_Obstruction_Unchartedfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_3D_0_1646.jpgNo Danger to Navigation Reports were submitted for this survey.1 shoal area was investigated at reduced line spacing with a MBES within the survey sheet: An 8 foot shoal south of Sulphur Pt. generally located at 30d10.94N and 85d44.05W was investigated with a Multi Beam Sonar. Results of the investigation showed that the shoal moved slightly to the East, and a least depth was recorded on the shoal. Update shoal with current depths and location.Investigated 8 foot shoalfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/8_foot_shoal_invest.jpgThe shallowest depth (8.596 ft) on the shoal is located 50 m NE of the charted 8 ft sounding.The ICWW channel was found to be in general agreement or deeper than the USACE tabulated depths. 15 Bottom samples were acquired on this sheet. A majority of samples taken did not agree with the charted bottom characteristics and need to be updated. Please see S-57 attribution in Caris Base for details.H12376 Bottom Samples locationsfile:///M:/SJ910NRT112/Surveys/H12376/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H12376_BottomSamples.jpgSurveyed bottom characteristics will supersede charted bottom characteristics.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.Limited shoreline verification was required by the Project Instructions and 30 features were specifically assigned to be addressed by the hydrographer. The results of the investigations are included in the Final Feature File that is filed with hydrographic records. No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.Aids to navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey, but were not investigated.HATHAWAY FIXED BRIDGE HOR CL 287 FT VERT CL 65 FT was visually inspected and exists at location. No submarine features exist for this survey.A submerged cable area is located in the vicinity of the Hathaway Fixed Bridge, however no cables were observed. It is possible they are buried in the sediment.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.-An elongated area "Subm bridge ruins" on the south side of the Hathaway bridge was investigated with a MBES at reduced line spacing. A multitude of debris, former bridge pillars and obstructions were confirmed at location and the least depth found in the area was 2.69m. -A Mooring Buoy located at 30d 10.25N and 85d 44.19W was found to be on location.No present or planned construction or dredging exist within the survey limits.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.No new insets are recommended for this area.As Chief of Party, Field operations for this hydrographic survey were conducted under my direct supervision, with frequent personal checks of progress and adequacy. I have reviewed the attached survey data and reports.All field sheets, this Descriptive Report, and all accompanying records and data are approved. All records are forwarded for final review and processing to the Processing Branch.The survey data meets or exceeds requirements as set forth in the NOS Hydrographic Surveys and Specifications Deliverables Manual, Field Procedures Manual, Letter Instructions, and all HSD Technical Directives. These data are adequate to supersede charted data in their common areas. This survey is complete and no additional work is required with the exception of deficiencies noted in the Descriptive Report.Reviewers of sheet H12376 will find deliverables in Caris Base format and the Final Feature File is a .000 file.Mark J. McMannTeam Lead NRT-12014-08-05