OPR-B370-TJ-12Eastern Long Island SoundLong Island SoundNOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONH1247914 NM South of Guilford Pt, CT ConnecticutUnited States100002012CDR Lawrence T. KreppNavigable Area2012-06-132012-10-022012-10-17Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscattermetersMean Lower Low WatermetersMean Lower Low WaterUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM) NAD83UTCAtlantic Hydrographic BranchThis survey was conducted in Eastern Long Island Sound in the vicinity of Guilford Point, CT .41.201313611172.644862541.201682222272.77966888891Survey extents of H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/SurveyLimits.pngThis project is being conducted in support of NOAA's Office of Coast Survey to provide contemporary hydrographic data in order to update the nautical charting products and reduce the survey backlog within the area. In addition, data from this project will support the Long Island Sound Seafloor Mapping Initiative in New York and Connecticut. This project will cover approximately 138 NM2 of which 120 NM2 are critical survey areas as designated in the NOAA Hydrographic Survey Priorities, 2011 edition.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Survey Limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.2Coverage Graphic For H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/SurveyOverviewB370.pngSurvey Coverage was in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.2012-10-022012-10-032012-10-042012-10-052012-10-062012-10-072012-10-162012-10-1700018.69HSL 31020303.880000015.600HSL 31010357.290000012.7100661.1760000028.31304.282Shoreline was investigated in accordance with the Project Instructions and the HSSD.No shoreline exists within the limits of H12479.ACSBottom Samples were acquired in accordance with the Project Instructions or the HSSD.No Bottom Samples were acquired within survey H12479.ACSRefer 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 deviation from the DAPR are discussed in the following sections.HSL 3101315.2HSL 3102315.2HSL 3101 and HSL 3102 acquired Multibeam data, Sound Velocity data, Positioning data and Attitude data.RESON7125 SV1MBESSeabirdSeacat 19+Conductivity, Temperature and Depth SensorApplanixPOS MVPositioning and Attitude SystemRESONSV-70Sound Speed SystemVessel configurations, equipment operations, and data acquisition & processing were consistent with specifications described in the DAPR.The Thomas Jefferson's hydrographic survey launches 3101 and 3102 collected 28.31 linear nautical miles of MBES crosslines, equating to 4.28% of mainscheme MBES data. Crosslines were compared to mainscheme using a difference surface, created in CARIS BathyData Base. Using the difference surface, every instance of overlap was evaluated. The mean was 0.006 m and the standard deviation was 0.056 m. Survey H12479 complies with section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD (2012 ed). Of 1,344,603 nodes, 72 varied by greater than 1 m. 3H12479 Crosslines overlaid on 2m gridfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Features/Hob_Files/Multimedia/BetterSnags/XL_vs_mainscheme.png0.1020HSL 3101 and 31024.00.2Total Propagated Uncertainty values for survey H12479 were derived from a combination of fixed values for equipment and vessel characteristics, as well as field assigned values for water level and sound speed uncertainties. Uncertainty stemming from survey equipment and vessel configuration were set by the field unit in accordance with the NOAA Field Procedure Manual (ed 2011), Appendix 4, table 4.9. Sound speed uncertainty was based on the frequency and location of CDT casts, in accordance with the guidance set by Appendix 4 of the FPM. Tidal uncertainties were provided by NOAA's Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS) and were applied to depth soundings using a Tidal Constituent and Residual Interpolator (TCARI) grid. TCARI automatically calculates the error associated with water level interpolation, which is then included in the CARIS HDCS lines. For this reason, no Tidal Uncertainties values were entered into the Tide Value section of the CARIS Compute TPU function. A cumulative uncertainty value was propagated to each CARIS grid node using the supplied sensor, vessel, water level, and sound speed uncertainties. During post-processing TCARI data was overwritten by IAPPK Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) solution. The tidal uncertainty above is associated with the SBET uncertainty. The entirety of survey H12479 was post-processed using ERS with the exception of line 454_1238 acquired on day number 278 by HSL 3101, which was processed using final verified tides. Total Propagated Uncertainty was then evaluated to ensure compliance with section 5.1.3 of NOAA's Hydrographic Survey Specification and Deliverables (HSSD). First the maximum allowable uncertainty for each node was calculated. Second the actual uncertainty for each node was subtracted from the maximum allowed uncertainty. The resulting 'IHOness' layer was filtered to show any areas where actual uncertainty exceeded the maximum allowed uncertainty. For the 50cm grids 13,811,302 nodes were evaluated and only seven nodes did not meet IHO Order 1 uncertainty requirements. For the 2m grid 58,181,043 nodes were evaluated and only 688 nodes did not meet IHO uncertainty requirements with the majority of those occurring in the rocky seabed area.There were a total of 5 contemporary surveys that junction with Survey H12479.H11043100002001NOAA Ship RUDEWThe mean difference between H11043 and this survey was 15.4cm with a standard deviation of 11.8cm.4H11043 Junctionfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/H11043_Junction.pngH11999100002008NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONSEThe mean difference between H11999 and H12479 was 15.8cm with a standard deviation of 7.9cm.5H11999 Junctionfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/H11999_Junction.pngH11252200002004NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONEAny significant difference between survey H12479 and H11252 could not be determined as the field unit could not open the provided BAG files.H12480200002012NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONSThe mean difference between survey H12479 and H12480 was 3 cm, and the standard deviation was 5.1 cm. Out of 278,743 of nodes only three were 1 meter or larger in difference.6H12480 Junctionfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/H12480%20_Junction.pngH12484100002012NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONNThe mean difference between survey H12479 and H12484 was 0.3 cm, and the standard deviation was 5.2 m. Out of 161,255 of nodes only 31 were 1 meter or greater in difference.7H12484 Junctionfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/H12484_Junction.pngSonar 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.Both hydrographic survey launches 3101 and 3102 acquired CTD casts at intervals of 2-3 hours. Sound speed profiles area analyzed for data quality, concatenated and then applied to the bathymetry using the "nearest in time" mode in CARIS HIPS and SIPS. Due to the well mixed nature of the area surveyed, CTD casts were planned primarily as a function of time, but a range of depths were generally obtained due to the nature of the line plan in relation to the bathymetric contours. No abnormal sound velocity issues were present in the data.8H12479 SVP cast locations from survey launches 3101 and 3102file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Features/Hob_Files/Multimedia/BetterSnags/H12479_SVP_dist.pngAll equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.HDCS sounding data were reduced to mean lower low (MLLW) primarily with a VDATUM solution. Select lines were processed using TCARI when issues with ERS processing did not allow for an SBET solution. See the Vertical and Horizontal Control Section for more information.ACSAll sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.Backscatter was logged as 7k files and submitted to the IOCM processing center and/or directly to NGDC, and is included with the data submitted to the Branch.NOAA Profile Field V 5.2H12479_50cm_MLLW_CUBE_FinalCUBE2.012.1120NOAA_0.5mObject DetectionH12479_2m_MLLW_CUBE_FinalCUBE2.01834.70NOAA_2mComplete MBESH12479_2m_Final_Combined_ MLLW_CUBECUBE0.512.1134.70N/AComplete MBESPer section 5.2.2.1 of the NOAA HSSD Manual (2012 ed), all MBES data was gridded according to depth: 0.5m resolution for depths ranging from 0 - 20m, and a 2m for depths 18m and greater.H12479 Additional Data Processing IssuesOne line in survey H12479, 454_1238 acquired on DN278 by Hydrographic Survey Launch 3101, would not accept SBET application. This issue was due to a delay in starting the logging of positioning data in reference to bathymetric data. Instead, line 454_1238 received final verified TCARI tide application.9Line 454_1238 of survey H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/LN454_1238.png10Vertical offset of line 454_1238 due to lack of ERS applicationfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/TCARIoffset.pngAdditional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterTCARINew London, CT8461490New Haven, CT84657058465705.tidFinal Approved8461490.tidFinal ApprovedB370TJ2012.tcFinal2012-10-262012-11-09VDatum2012_B370_VDatum_Ellip_MLLW.xyzCrosslines with and without SBETs applied were compared using Pydro's Time Series Comparison tool. Statistics for HSL 3101 crosslines were: N,mean,stdev = 35658,0.102,0.026. Statistics for 3102 crosslines were: N,mean,stdev = 51213,-0.014,0.037. See Appendix V for the interim deliverable memo and resulting VDATUM approval memo. The majority of H12479 was processed to the ellipsoid and used the OPS provided VDATUM separation model to reduce data to MLLW. 1 line file, 454_1238, from day number 278 from 3101 did not have GPS tides applied and instead were processed with TCARI tides.North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Smart BaseZNY1ZNY1MOR5MOR5CTGUCTGUNYRHNYRHCTNECTNENYCINYCICTDACTDACTGRCTGRMoriches, NY (293 kHz)Acushent, ME (306 kHz)12354222180000432010-092010-08-242010-09-04In general, surveyed soundings agree within 4-5 feet of charted depths. The eastern section of the sheet has the largest difference in depths (Figure 11).1112354 Eastern depth differencesfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/12354%20East.png12373216320000152005-072005-06-142005-06-18Soundings on the western section of the sheet generally agreed within 1-2 feet. Soundings on the eastern section of the sheet generally agreed within 4-5 feet with the largest difference being 10 feet.1212373 Eastern depth differencesfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/12373%20east.pngUS5CN15M2000092012-07-102013-01-15falseSee discussion of raster chart 12373.US4NY1GM80000202011-06-142012-05-03falseSee discussion of raster chart 1235450A total of 5 AWOIS items were investigated. AWOIS item numbers 15002, 15003, 15004, 1807, and 1820 were fully investigated. For a full discussion see the Final Feature File. It is recommended to update the AWOIS database.13AWOIS items of interest for survey H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/AWOISitems.png14AWOIS items of interest for survey H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/AWOIS4.png15AWOIS item of interest for survey H12479file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Report_Body/Images/AWOIS1.pngNo charted features exist for this survey. A previously uncharted wreck or obstruction was discovered. Also, a significant rock was found to be outside the AWOIS radius of item # 15004. For a full discussion, refer to the Final Feature File.No Danger to Navigation Reports were submitted for this survey.No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.No channels exist for this survey. There are no designated anchorages, precautionary areas, safety fairways, traffic separation schemes, pilot boarding areas, or channel and range lines within the survey limits.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.Prior survey comparisons exist for this survey, but were not investigated.Aids to navigation (ATONs) do not exist for this survey.Overhead features do not exist for this survey.Cable area, as charted, was investigated with no significant findings. Cables are assumed to be properly buried.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No significant features exist for this survey.There is no present or planned construction or dredging 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, Standing and 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.Allison StoneSheet Manager2013-03-07LT William WinnerField Operations Officer2013-03-07CDR Lawrence KreppCommanding Officer2013-03-07file:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Appendices/4_Tides_&_Water_%20Levels/ERS%20Memo/H12479%20ERS%20vs.%20TCARI%20Recommendation%20Memo.pdffile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Appendices/4_Tides_&_Water_%20Levels/OPR-B370-TJ-12_H12479_H12481_VDatum_Approval_Memo_signed.pdffile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Appendices/4_Tides_&_Water_%20Levels/Request_forTides/H12479_Tide_Request.pdffile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Appendices/4_Tides_&_Water_%20Levels/Request_forTides/H12479_Final_Tides.pdffile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN276_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN277_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN278_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN279_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN280_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN290_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_DN291_AcqLog.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN276_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN277_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN278_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN279_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN280_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Acquisition_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_DN281_AcqLog.xlsfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Processing_Logs/3101/H12479_3101_Checksheet_MB_V2.0.xlsmfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Processing_Logs/3102/H12479_3102_Checksheet_MB_V2.0.xlsmfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/Descriptive%20Report/Separates/I_Acquisition_&_Processing_Logs/Processing_Logs/H12479_SBET_QC_Log.xlsxfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/CARIS/SVP/3101/3101_SVP_Master.svpfile:///H:/Surveys/H12479/CARIS/SVP/3102/3102_SVP_Master.svpfile:///H:/Project%20Instructions/2012/OPR-B370-TJ-12/Project%20Instructions/Final_OMAO_TJ-12-04_AND_Hydro_Project_Instructions%20OPR-B370-TJ-12_signed.pdf