OPR-B310-KR1-13New York Harbor and ApproachesLower New York HarborLeidos (formerly SAIC)H125861Offshore of Staten IslandNew YorkUnited States100002013Gary R. DavisBasic Hydrographic Survey2013-05-232013-08-302014-01-18Multibeam Echo SounderSingle beam Echo Sounder Side Scan SonarMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscattermetersUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)UTCAtlantic Hydrographic BranchContract: DG133C-08-CQ-0003 Contractor: Leidos 221 Third Street, Newport, RI 02840 USA Subcontractors: Alpine Ocean Seismic Survey, Inc., 155 Hudson Avenue, Norwood NJ 07648; Divemasters, Inc., 15 Pumpshire Road, Toms River, NJ 08753; Rotator Staffing Services, 25 Kennedy Blvd., East Brunswick NJ 08816 Leidos Doc 14-TR-014ContractorThe area surveyed was a section of the Lower New York Harbor off of New York, Offshore of Staten Island (Figure 1). 40.599916666774.241644444440.486444444474.04581111111H12586 Survey Boundsfile:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_1.jpgThe purpose of this project is to provide contemporary surveys to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charting products. This project covered approximately 49 square nautical miles (SNM) Critical and Priority 2 and 3 areas as identified in the 2012 NOAA Hydrographic Survey Priorities (NHSP) document. This project was in response to different user group needs following Hurricane Sandy landfall. Specifically these data will adjoin updated shoreline, address the need for updated bathymetry for inundation modeling, and help identify marine debris for potential removal. The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Leidos, formerly Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), warrants only that the survey data acquired by Leidos and delivered to NOAA under Contract DG133C-08-CQ-0003 reflects the state of the sea floor in existence on the day and at the time the survey was conducted. H12586 was surveyed in accordance with the following documents: 1. Project Instructions, OPR-B310-KR1-13, dated 23 May 2013 2. Tides and Water Levels Statement of Work OPR-B310-KR1-2013 New York Harbor and Approaches, NY and NJ, dated 13 March 2013 3. NOS Hydrographic Specifications and Deliverables, April 2013, Released 18 April 2013 (HSSD) Survey Limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.2Final Bathymetry Coverage for H12586file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_2.jpgSurvey Coverage was in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.2013-08-302013-08-312013-09-012013-09-022013-09-052013-09-062013-09-072013-09-082013-09-172013-09-182013-09-192013-09-202013-09-222013-09-232013-09-242013-09-252013-09-262013-09-272013-09-282013-09-292013-09-302013-10-012013-10-032013-10-062013-10-072013-10-132013-10-142013-10-152013-10-162013-10-182013-10-202013-10-212013-10-222013-10-232013-10-242013-10-252013-10-262013-12-122013-12-132013-12-182013-12-192013-12-202014-01-132014-01-142014-01-152014-01-18631200026.21M/V Atlantic Surveyor00000567.81042.620R/V Oyster Bay0000858.9353.64805.2983.580R/V Henry Hudson00000635.46045.5300000858.931256.91805.29169.7308.2Leidos used their ISS-2000 software on a Windows XP platform to acquire these survey data. Survey planning and data analysis were conducted using the Leidos SABER software on Red Hat Enterprise 5 Linux platforms. L-3 Klein 3000 side scan data and L-3 Klein 3900 side scan data were collected on a Windows XP platform using L-3 Klein’s SonarPro software. Subsequent processing and review of the side scan data, including the generation of coverage mosaics, were accomplished using SABER. A detailed description of the systems and vessels used to acquire and process these data is included in the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR) for OPR-B310-KR1-13, concurrently delivered with this Descriptive Report (DR) on 14 April 2014. There were no variations from the equipment configuration described in the DAPR. M/V Atlantic Surveyor1109R/V Oyster Bay303R/V Henry Hudson453The M/V Atlantic Surveyor was used to collect multibeam sonar (RESON 7125 SV), side scan sonar (L-3 Klein 3000), and sound speed data during twenty-four hours per day survey operations. Twelve hours per day survey operations were conducted from the R/V Oyster Bay and the R/V Henry Hudson. The R/V Oyster Bay was used to collect single beam (Odom Echo sounder, 26 September to 27 October), multibeam (RESON 8101 ER, 14 December 2013 to 18 January 2014), side scan sonar (L-3 Klein 3000), and sound speed data. The R/V Henry Hudson was used to collect multibeam (RESON 8101 ER) side scan sonar (L-3 Klein 3900, 18 September to 19 October 2013 and L-3Klein 3000, 23 October to 25 October 2013), and sound speed data. A detailed description of the vessels used is included in Section A of the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR). RESONSeaBat 7125 SVMBESRESON8101 ERMBESOdomCVMSBESL-3 Klein3000SSSL-3 Klein3900SSSApplanixPOS/MV 320Positioning and Attitude SystemTrimbleProbeaconPositioning SystemBrooke Ocean TechnologyMVP-30Sound Speed SystemSeabirdSBE-19Sound Speed SystemA detailed description of the equipment installed on each vessel is included in Section A of the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR).There were 169.73 linear nautical miles of cross lines and 2115.84 linear nautical miles of main scheme lines surveyed on H12586. This resulted in crossline mileage approximately 8.2% of the main scheme mileage which meets the requirement (Section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD) to achieve at least eight percent for a multibeam or single beam survey using set line spacing. For efficiency, the main scheme line orientation varied throughout the survey area. Cross lines were oriented between 45° and 90° of the main scheme lines and were spaced in order to result in linear mileage that was 8% of the main scheme mileage. In the field, hydrographers conducted daily comparisons of main scheme to near nadir crossline data to ensure that no systematic errors were introduced and to identify potential problems with the survey systems. After the application of all correctors and completion of final processing in the office, separate two-meter CUBE PFM grids were built. One grid contained the full valid swath (±60° from nadir) of main scheme multibeam or single beam data and the other included only the near nadir swath (±5° from nadir) or single beam crossline data. Separate main scheme and crossline grids were created for each vessel and sonar used for acquisition, M/V Atlantic Surveyor RESON 7125 SV multibeam, R/V Oyster Bay Odom single beam, R/V Oyster Bay RESON 8101 ER multibeam, and R/V Henry Hudson RESON 8101 ER multibeam. Difference grids were then generated by subtracting one grid from the other. The SABER Frequency Distribution tool was used to analyze the difference grids. All comparisons fell within the requirement defined in Section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD which states that at least 95% of the depth difference values are to be within the maximum allowable total vertical uncertainty. Figure 3 summarizes the results for each comparison. See Separates II for a complete discussion of the analysis and tabular results. 3Summary of Crossing Analysisfile:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_3.jpg The Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) model that Leidos has adopted had its genesis at the Naval Oceanographic Office (NAVOCEANO), and is based on the work by Rob Hare and others (“Error Budget Analysis for NAVOCEANO Hydrographic Survey Systems, Task 2 FY 01”, 2001, HSRC FY01 Task 2 Final Report). Once the TPU model is applied to the GSF bathymetry data, each beam is attributed with the horizontal uncertainty and the vertical uncertainty at the 95% confidence level. For specific details on the use and application of the SABER Total Propagated Uncertainty model, see Section B.1 in the DAPR. The vertical and horizontal uncertainty values that were estimated by the TPU model for individual multibeam and single beam soundings varied little across the dataset, tending to be most affected by beam angle in the multibeam data. During application of horizontal and vertical uncertainties to the GSF files, individual beams where either the horizontal or vertical uncertainty exceeded the maximum allowable IHO S-44 5th edition Order 1a specifications were flagged as invalid. As a result, all individual soundings used in development of the final CUBE depth surface had modeled vertical and horizontal uncertainty values at or below the allowable IHO S-44 5th edition, Order 1a uncertainty. During the creation of the CUBE surface, two separate vertical uncertainty surfaces are calculated by the SABER software. One surface contains the standard deviation of all soundings that are contributing to the CUBE hypothesis (Hyp. StdDev) and the other contains the average of the vertical uncertainty of all soundings contributing to the CUBE hypothesis (Hyp. AvgTPE). A third vertical uncertainty surface is generated from the larger value of these two uncertainties at each node and is referred to as the Hypothesis Final Uncertainty. For specific details on this process see Section B.2 of the DAPR. For H12586 two two-meter surfaces are being delivered; one, which contains all multibeam and single beam data while the other contains only the single beam data. Throughout this report, the two-meter with all multibeam and single beam is referenced as the final surface. The final two-meter PFM CUBE surface contained final vertical uncertainties that ranged from 0.270 to 0.988 meters. The IHO Order 1a maximum allowable vertical uncertainty was calculated to range between 0.500 to 0.539 meters, based on the minimum CUBE depth (0.070 meters) and maximum CUBE depth (15.532 meters). The SABER Check PFM Uncertainty function was used to highlight all instances in the Hypothesis Final Uncertainty surface where a given node exceeded the IHO Order 1a allowable vertical uncertainty for the CUBE depth at that node. The final two-meter PFM CUBE surface contained 983 individual CUBE nodes with final vertical uncertainties that exceeded IHO Order 1a allowable vertical uncertainty. The two-meter single beam only PFM CUBE surface contained 302 individual nodes with final vertical uncertainties that exceed the IHO Order 1a maximum allowable uncertainty. The nodes that exceed the IHO Order 1a allowable vertical uncertainty for the CUBE depth are located on steep slopes and around features where there is a high variability in the depth soundings. This is more prevalent in areas where only single beam data were acquired where the sparseness of the data combined with the variability of the depth yielded higher uncertainties. The SABER Check PFM Uncertainty function was also run on each of the 175 half-meter feature PFM Hypothesis Final Uncertainty surfaces. The results are listed in Figure 4 through Figure 11. As expected, there are higher numbers of nodes that exceed uncertainty limits due to the smaller node resolution and the high variability of sounding depths around features. The SABER Frequency Distribution tool was also used to review the Hypothesis Final Uncertainty surface within the final two-meter grids and 175 half-meter resolution PFM grids. The results show that in the final two-meter PFM, 99.83% of all nodes had final uncertainties less than or equal to 0.300. Review of the Hypothesis Final Uncertainty Surface for the two-meter single beam only PFM showed 99.81% of all nodes had final uncertainties less than or equal to 0.300 meters In the 175 individual feature PFM grids, at least 98.76% of all grid nodes contained total vertical uncertainties of 0.300 meters or less. 4Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 1 of 175 through 22 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_4.jpg5Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 23 of 175 through 44 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_5.jpg6Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 45 of 175 through 66 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_6.jpg7Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 67 of 175 through 88 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_7.jpg8Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 89 of 175 through 110 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_8.jpg9Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 110 of 175 through 132 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_9.jpg10Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 133 of 175 through 154 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_10.jpg11Number of Nodes Exceeding the Allowable IHO Order 1a Uncertainty in the Feature BAG Files 155 of 175 through 175of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_11.jpgAn analysis of H12586 junctions with contemporary surveys H11601, H11339, and H11709 was performed. Details for H11601, H11309, and H11709 are listed in Table 6. Figure 12 shows the general locality of H12586 as it relates to the sheets for which junctions were performed. See Separates II for a complete discussion of the junction results and tabular listings. Analyses of the junction with sheet H12587 was not conducted as the processing efforts for this sheet was still ongoing. 12General Locality of H12586 Junction Areas with Contemporary Surveys H11339, H11601, and H11709file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_12.jpgH11339100002007Navigation Response Team 5WH12586 junctions with H11339 to the West. 96% of the soundings differ by +/-0.60 meters. H11601200002006NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONNEH12586 junctions with H11601 to the Northeast. 96% of the soundings differ by +/-0.35 meters. H11709100002007NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONEH12586 junctions with H11709 to the East. 97% of the soundings differ by +/-0.55 meters. 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.On the M/V Atlantic Surveyor the MVP-30 was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were obtained at intervals frequent enough to meet depth accuracy requirements. Section 5.2.3.3 of the HSSD requires that if the sound speed measured at the sonar head differs by more than two meters/second from the commensurate profile data, then another cast shall be acquired. There were times when the sound speed values exceeded the two meters/second threshold due to the local temporal and tidal variability. During these times, several profiles were acquired and reapplied in an effort to reduce these effects. The product of this effort resulted in the final data bearing no significant artifacts due to sound speed differences. On the R/V Oyster Bay the Seabird CTD was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were acquired at least twice per day. Additional SSP data were obtained during the day as necessary to ensure that depth accuracy requirements were met. On the R/V Henry Hudson the Seabird CTD was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were acquired at least twice per day. Additional SSP data were obtained during the day as necessary to ensure that depth accuracy requirements were met. Additional information can be found in Section A.8 of the DAPR.On the M/V Atlantic Surveyor, the MVP-30 was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were obtained at intervals frequent enough to meet depth accuracy requirements. Section 5.2.3.3 of the HSSD requires that if the sound speed measured at the sonar head differs by more than two meters/second from the commensurate profile data, then another cast shall be acquired. There were times when the sound speed values exceeded the two meters/second threshold due to the local temporal and tidal variability. During these times, several profiles were acquired and reapplied in an effort to reduce these effects. The product of this effort resulted in the final data bearing no significant artifacts due to sound speed differences. On the R/V Oyster Bay, the Seabird CTD was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were acquired at least twice per day. Additional SSP data were obtained during the day as necessary to ensure that depth accuracy requirements were met. On the R/V Henry Hudson, the Seabird CTD was used to collect sound speed profile (SSP) data. SSP data were acquired at least twice per day. Additional SSP data were obtained during the day as necessary to ensure that depth accuracy requirements were met. Additional information can be found in Section A.8 of the DAPR. A total of 326 sound speed profiles were applied to online data for H12586. All profiles that were applied for online bathymetry data collection were acquired within the bounds of the survey area. Please refer to the DAPR for specific details regarding acquisition (Section A.8) and application (Section C.1.3) of sound speed profiles. Confidence checks of the sound speed profile casts were conducted periodically (approximately once per week) by comparing at least two consecutive casts taken with different SV and P Smart Sensors, an SV and P Smart Sensors and a CTD, or two different CTDs. Fourteen sound speed confidence checks were conducted during H12586 and the results can be found in Separates II within the “Comparison Cast Log” section. Sound speed profiles were obtained for four different survey purposes. The “Sound Speed Profile Log” section of Separates II is a cumulative report detailing each cast associated with H12586, as collected from the three different survey platforms. The log is separated by the purpose of the applied cast; with individual tables for “Used for Bathymetry” (online bathymetry), “Used for Comparison”, “Used for Lead Line”, and “Used for Closing”. Additionally, in a separate folder on the delivery drive (H12586/Data/Processed/SVP/CARIS_SSP), there are eight (.svp) files. Four files for CTD sound speed data and four files for MVP sound speed data. These eight files contain concatenated SSP data that has been formatted for use in CARIS. The CARIS SSP files are designated based on the purpose of the cast and their filenames match the tables within the sound speed profile log. All sound speed profile files are delivered with the H12586 delivery data and are broken out into sub-folders, which correspond to the purpose of each cast.All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.Coverage AnalysisThe Project Instructions specified coverage in depths greater than four meters as “200% SSS with concurrent Set Line Spacing, SBES or MBES with Backscatter, or Object Detection MBES with Backscatter” and in depths two to four meters as “100% SSS with concurrent Set Line Spacing, SBES or MBES with Backscatter, or Object Detection MBES with Backscatter”. To achieve this coverage: · The M/V Atlantic Surveyor used a towed L-3 Klein 3000 side scan sonar set to a 50-meter range in depths greater than approximately five meters. Main scheme line spacing was 40 meters. · The R/V Oyster Bay used a bow mounted L-3 Klein 3000 side scan sonar set to a 25- meter range in depths less than approximately five meters. Main scheme line spacing was 20 meters in depths to approximately four meters. Main scheme line spacing was 40 meters in depths less than approximately four meters. · The R/V Henry Hudson used a bow mounted L-3 Klein 3900 side scan sonar set to a 30-meter range or a bow mounted L-3 Klein 3000 side scan sonar set to a 25-meter range in depths less than five meters. Main scheme line spacing was 20 meters. This survey scenario provided a consistent 200% coverage to depths slightly less than four meters and 100% coverage in depths from two to four meters. This combination of line spacing and range settings resulted in up to 20 meters of overlap between adjacent lines in depths greater than four meters and up to five meters of overlap in depths less than four meters. The SABER Gapchecker routine was used to flag multibeam data gaps exceeding the allowable limit of three contiguous nodes. Additionally, the entire surface was visually scanned for holidays at various points during the data processing effort. Additional survey lines were run to fill any holidays that were detected. A final review of the CUBE Depth surface in the two-meter grid containing all multibeam and single beam showed that valid depths exist in 100% of the nodes and there were no areas where three or more nodes sharing adjacent sides lacked data. All grids were examined for the number of soundings contributing to the chosen CUBE hypotheses for each node by running SABER’s Frequency Distribution tool on the Hypothesis Number of Soundings (Hyp # Soundings) surface of the PFM grid. The Hyp # Soundings surface reports the number of soundings that were used to compute the chosen hypothesis. Analysis of the H12586 final two-meter containing all multibeam and single beam PFM grid revealed that 99.32% of all nodes contained three or more soundings; satisfying the requirements for set line spacing surveys, as specified in Section 5.2.2.3 of the HSSD. Analysis of the two-meter single beam only PFM grid revealed that 100% of all nodes contained three or more soundings. Analysis of the 175 half-meter PFM grids showed that all but three had at minimum of 96.04% of all individual nodes contained three or more soundings to meet object detection coverage (HSSD Section 5.2.2.1). These three are detailed below. H12586_features_area96_50cm_MLLW PFM used to generate the delivered BAG had 94.77%t of the nodes contained three or more soundings. This PFM was built around five individual features and includes a large amount of single beam data between the features. Each feature was covered with multibeam and analysis of the nodes in the multibeam coverage for each feature results in a minimum of 99.95% of the nodes contained three or more soundings. H12586_features_area48_50cm_MLLW PFM used to generate the delivered BAG had 92.56% of the nodes contained three or more soundings. This PFM was built around two individual features both covered with multibeam. The area has many nodes that are populated with the outer beams of the swath. Analysis of the nodes in the multibeam coverage for each feature, not including the outer beam data, results in a minimum of 99.95% of the nodes contained three or more soundings. H12586_features_area175_50cm_MLLW PFM used to generate the delivered BAG had 92.82% of the nodes contained three or more soundings. This PFM was built around a feature set in the single beam data. This feature was not covered by multibeam due to the shallow depths. The low percentage is a result of the sparseness of the single beam data. All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.In accordance with the April 2013 NOS HSSD and the Project Instructions, Leidos collected multibeam backscatter with all GSF data acquired by the RESON 7125 SV and RESON 8101 ER. The multibeam settings used for each system were checked to ensure acceptable quality standards were met and to avoid any acoustic saturation of the backscatter data. The multibeam backscatter data acquired by each system was written to the GSF in real-time by ISS-2000 and are delivered in the final GSF files for each sheet. NOAA Extended Attribute Files V5-2.H12586_MB_VB_2m_MLLWBAG20.07015.532N/AMBES TracklineSBES Set Line SpacingH12586_VB_2m_MLLWBAG20.07013.734N/AMBES TracklineSBES Set Line SpacingH12586_ss_1_100_mosaicSSS Mosaic1N/A100% SSSH12586_ss_2_100 mosaicSSS Mosaic1N/A200% SSSA PFM CUBE Depth surface was used to assess and document multibeam and single beam survey coverage. The CUBE depth is populated with either the node’s chosen hypothesis or the depth of a feature or designated sounding set by the hydrographer, which overrides the chosen hypothesis. The range of CUBE depths in H12586 was from 0.070 meters (0 feet, 0.290-meter uncertainty) to 15.532 meters (51 feet, 0.270-meter uncertainty). Section 5.2.2.3 of the HSSD requires a four-meter grid resolution for depths ranging from zero meters to 40 meters for set line spacing surveys. Due to the range of depths encountered on this project, Leidos requested and was granted permission to deliver all final grids at the higher two-meter node resolution. Therefore, the final CUBE surface for H12586 was generated at two-meter grid node resolution. Over significant features, CUBE surfaces were generated at half-meter grid node resolution to meet the object detection specifications defined in Section 5.2.2.1 of the HSSD. Three hundred and ninety significant features were identified in H12586 and 175 half-meter resolution PFM grids were generated to cover these 390 features. Data within the half-meter resolution CUBE PFM grids also remain in the two-meter CUBE PFM grid. Information about these additional surfaces are referenced in Figure 13 through Figure 17. The final gridded bathymetry data are delivered as Bathymetric Attributed Grids (BAG). The BAG files were exported from CUBE PFM grids as detailed in Section B.2.4 of the DAPR. As of the date of delivery of this DAPR, the hotfix for CARIS does not support version 1.5.1 BAGs with optional surfaces. Therefore, BAG version 1.1.0 files are delivered for each sheet. Since the BAG version 1.1.0 files only contain two surfaces, the standard CUBE Depth and Final Hyp. Uncertainty, BAGs will be delivered along with the additional surfaces delivered as supplemental non-standard BAG files. These additional BAG files were generated through the same process as the standard BAG files. The version 1.1.0 BAG format only allows for a Depth surface and an Uncertainty surface. Therefore, each of the non-standard BAG files were created with the CUBE Depth values populating the Depth surface of the BAG and each of the additional group surfaces listed below populating the Uncertainty surface of the BAG. Non-standard BAG files for this project are only delivered for the two-meter resolution grids. Please note when reviewing these additional, non-standard version 1.1.0 BAG files the file name designates the layer which populates the Uncertainty layer of the BAG (Figure 18). Please also note that when displayed the two layers of the BAG remain named Depth and Uncertainty. These non-standard BAGs are provided for review purposes only and are not intended to be used as archival products. These additional surfaces are referred to as Elevation Solution Group surfaces and Node Group surfaces. Note that by definition, BAG files contain elevations not depths however; many software packages display a BAG elevation surface as a depth (positive values indicating water depth). The Elevation Solution Group is made up of the following three surfaces: · shoal elevation - the elevation value of the least-depth measurement selected from the sub-set of measurements that contributed to the elevation solution. · number of soundings - the number of elevation measurements selected from the sub-set of measurements that contributed to the elevation solution. · stddev - the standard deviation computed from all elevation values which contributed to any hypothesis within the node. Note that the stddev value is computed from all measurements contributing to the node, whereas shoal elevation and number of soundings relate only to the chosen elevation solution. The Node Group is made up of the following two surfaces: · hypothesis strength - the CUBE computed strength of the chosen hypothesis · number of hypotheses - the CUBE computed number of hypotheses 13Half-Meter Feature BAG Files 1 of 175 through 35 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_13.jpg14Half-Meter Feature BAG Files 36 of 175 through 70 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_14.jpg15Half-Meter Feature BAG Files 71 of 175 through 105 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_15.jpg16Half-Meter Feature BAG Files 106 of 175 through 140 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_16.jpg17Half-Meter Feature BAG Files 141 of 175 through 175 of 175file:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_17.jpg18Summary of Non-standard H12586 BAG Filesfile:///M:/charlie/NOAA_Sandy_2013/H12586/DR_Working/H12586_Figure_18.jpgSide Scan Coverage AnalysisFor all details regarding side scan data processing, see Section B.3 of the DAPR. The Project Instructions required 200% side scan coverage with concurrent set line spacing multibeam or single beam data for depths greater than four meters and 100% side scan coverage with set line spacing multibeam or single beam for water depths of two to four meters. The 200% side scan coverage was verified by generating two separate 100% coverage mosaics at one-meter cell size resolution as specified in Section 8.3.1 of the HSSD. The first and second 100% coverage mosaics were independently reviewed using tools in SABER to verify data quality and swath coverage. Both coverage mosaics are determined to be complete and sufficient to meet the requirements contained within the Project Instructions. The mosaics are delivered as TIFF (.tif) images with accompanying world files (.tfw). · H12586_ss_1_100_mosaic · H12586_ss_2_100_mosaic Side scan sonar contacts were investigated and confirmed using SABER Contact Review. All side scan sonar contacts and accompanying images are delivered in one of two Side Scan Sonar Contacts S-57 files. The main side scan sonar contact S-57 file contains all side scan contacts with the exception of contacts identified as moorings. This S-57 file does contain a polygon delineating the extents of the mooring field. A separate supplemental S-57 file containing side scan contacts of individual moorings, as point objects, and the polygon delineating the extents of the mooring field is also delivered. No vertical or horizontal controls were established, recovered, or occupied during data acquisition for OPR-B310-KR1-13, which includes H12586. Therefore a Horizontal and Vertical Control Report was not required. Mean Lower Low WaterDiscrete ZoningSandy Hook, NJ85316808531680_verified_082013_012014.tidVerified ObservedB310KR12013CORP.zdfFinalNo final tide note was provided by the NOAA Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS). Leidos is not required to have a final tide note from CO-OPS for H12586 however, a final tide note has been provided by Leidos in Appendix I. The Tides Statement of Work specified NOAA tide station 8531680 Sandy Hook, NJ as the source for water level correctors. A full explanation of the tide zone assessment is detailed in Section C.4 of the DAPR. For H12586, 8531680 Sandy Hook, NJ was the source of all final verified water level heights for determining correctors to soundings. All data for H12586 were contained within five tide zones (NY1, NY3, NY7, NY8, and NY9) which were provided from NOAA. Leidos did not revise the delivered tide zones for tide station 8531680 Sandy Hook, NJ as the water level zoning parameters in the file B310KR12013CORP.zdf, provided by National Ocean Service (NOS) were deemed adequate for the application of observed verified water levels. As a result, they were accepted as final and applied to all H12586 bathymetry data. North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)UTM Zone 18, NorthSandy Hook, NJ (286 kHz)Moriches, NY (293 kHz)Please refer to the DAPR for details regarding all antenna and transducer offsets. Horizontal positioning of the multibeam or single beam transducer by the POS/MV was verified by frequent comparison checks against an independent Trimble DGPS system. During survey data acquisition, the ISS-2000 real-time system provided a continuous view of the positioning comparison between the POS/MV and the Trimble DGPS. An alarm was triggered within ISS-2000 if the comparisons were not within an acceptable range. Any soundings with total horizontal uncertainties exceeding the maximum allowable IHO S-44 5th Edition Order 1a specifications were flagged as invalid and therefore not used in the CUBE Depth calculations. Daily positioning confidence checks for H12586 were conducted several times throughout the day and a daily value is presented as a table within Separates I, “Daily Positioning Confidence Checks” for each vessel. Daily positioning confidence checks for the M/V Atlantic Surveyor were within 0.59 meters, the R/V Oyster Bay were within 0.74 meters, and the R/V Henry Hudson were within 0.99 meters. The chart comparisons were conducted using the Leidos SABER software to view the BSB raster charts with overlain data for H12586 such as the CUBE gridded surface, selected soundings, contacts, and features. Charting recommendations for depths follow Section 5.1.2 of the HSSD where depths and uncertainties are to be rounded by standard arithmetic rounding (round half up) and accompanying chart depth units are rounded using NOAA cartographic rounding (0.75 round up). All CUBE depths and uncertainty values are provided to millimeter precision. For ENC comparisons, a combination of Jeppesen’s dKart Inspector, SevenCs’ SeeMyDENC, and CARIS’ EasyView were used in conjunction with SABER. United States Coast Guard (USCG) District 1 Local Notice to Mariners publications were reviewed for changes subsequent to the date of the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions and before the end of survey (as specified in Section 8.1.4 of the HSSD). The Notice to Mariners reviewed were from week 22/13 (29 May 2013) until week 03/14 (21 January 2014). 12331224115000322010-012014-02-282014-03-01Chart 12331 covers the survey area from 40° 32’ 48.00”N 074° 08’ 20.00”W to 40° 29’ 11.20”N 074° 14’ 30.00”W. Note that the tabulated controlling depth for the East Reach Channel, Right Inside Quarter on this chart is 37.9 feet and on the adjacent chart 12402 it is 37.7 feet. Depths in the Raritan Bay East Reach Channel, Raritan Bay West Reach Channel, Sequine Point Bend Channel, Red Bank Reach Channel, and Ward Point Bend (East) Channel were generally 2-5 feet deeper than the tabulated controlling depths. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±3 feet of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (6-foot, 12-foot, 18-foot, and 30-foot) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 200 meters of their charted locations with the following exceptions. The 12-foot depth curve from approximately 40° 30’ 06.00”N 074° 12’ 21.75”W to approximately 40° 29’ 22.00”N 074° 12’ 03.50”W was found up to approximately 890 meters east of its charted position. The 18-foot depth curve from approximately 40° 29’ 54.55”N 074° 10’ 16.07”W to approximately 40° 29’ 19.13.60”N 074° 11’ 02.60”W was found up to approximately 490 meters east of its charted position. The 18-foot sounding and surrounding 18-foot depth curve in approximately 40° 30’ 21.13"N 074° 08' 17.02"W was not found. There is 100% multibeam coverage of area approximately 180 meters by 115 meters centered on the sounding. CUBE depths in this area were 19 to 20 feet. The 17-foot sounding and surrounding 18-foot depth curve in approximately 40° 30’ 20.30"N 074° 09' 09.65"W was not found. There is 100% multibeam coverage of area approximately 160 meters by 75 meters centered on the sounding. CUBE depths in this area were 19 to 20 feet. The Charted 7-foot Obstruction and danger circle in approximately 40° 29’ 15.25”N 074° 13 31.32”W was from Danger To Navigation Report 27. This report was based on multibeam and side scan data collected on 18 and 19 September 2013 (Julian Days 261 and 262). Additional multibeam data over the feature was collected on 15 October 2013 (Julian Day 288 ) which disproved the feature. The charted obstruction (K43.2 symbol) labeled Obstn PA in approximately 40° 29’ 36.60”N 074° 11’ 59.36”W was not found. The closest found object was an obstruction, Feature 74, with a least depth of 7 feet (2.298 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty) in 40° 29’ 42.52”N 074° 12’ 01.01”W, approximately 185 meters 247° from the charted obstruction. The charted exposed wreck labeled PA in approximately 40° 32’ 36.65”N 074° 07’ 46.36”W was not found. Side scan contacts from Julian Days 277, 288, and 290 in 2013 showed two submerged wrecks within approximately 30 meters of the charted exposed wreck. Investigation of the two wrecks with multibeam on Julian Day 014 in 2014 resulted in 100% multibeam coverage of an area approximately 75 meters by 60 meters centered on the exposed wreck disproved the wrecks found in the side scan data. The charted dangerous 3-foot obstruction labeled Obstn rep in approximately 40° 32’ 42.00”N 074° 08’ 07.50”W was found. An area with a radius of 12 meters around the feature was covered with 200% side scan and 100 % multibeam. An obstruction, Feature 336, with a least depth of 4 feet (1.244 meters, 0.270 meter uncertainty) was found approximately 8 meters 180° from the charted 3-foot sounding. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). 12401224615000112011-102014-03-112014-03-22Chart 12401 covers the survey area from 40° 31’ 00.00”N 074° 02’ 54.30”W to 40° 29’ 12.14”N 074° 08’ 20.00”W. Note that the tabulated controlling depth for the East Reach Channel, Right Inside Quarter on this chart is 37.7 feet and on the adjacent chart 12331 it is 37.9 feet. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±2 feet of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (12-foot, 18-foot, and 30-foot) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 300 meters of their charted locations with the following exception. The 18-foot sounding and surrounding 18-foot depth curve in approximately 40° 30’ 21.06"N 074° 08' 16.49"W was not found. The area was covered by 100% multibeam. CUBE depths in this area were 19 to 20 feet. Depths in the Raritan Bay East Reach Channel and Raritan Bay West Reach Channel were generally 2-5 feet deeper than the tabulated controlling depths. There were no charted soundings or objects labeled PA, ED, PD, or Rep within the common area of H12586 and chart 12401. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). 12402224715000122012-062014-03-112014-03-22Chart 12402 covers the survey area from 40° 35’ 59.70”N 074° 02’ 45.00”W to 40° 30’ 00.00”N 074° 08’ 48.00”W. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±3 feet of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (6-foot, 12-foot, 18-foot, and 30-foot) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 300 meters of their charted locations with the following two exceptions. The 16-foot sounding and surrounding 18-foot depth curve in approximately 40° 30’ 54.40"N 074° 04' 25.25"W was not found. This area was covered by 100% multibeam. CUBE depths in this area were 19 to 20 feet. The 18-foot sounding and surrounding 18-foot depth curve in approximately 40° 30’ 21.10"N 074° 08' 17.00"W was not found. There is 100% multibeam coverage of the area approximately 180 meters by 115 meters centered on the sounding. CUBE depths in this area were 19 to 20 feet. There were no federally maintained channels within the common area of H12586 and chart 12402. The charted exposed wreck labeled PA in approximately 40° 31’ 42.00”N 074° 07’ 17.40”W was not found. An area with a radius of 350 meters around the wreck was covered with 200% side scan and single beam. No significant features were found. The charted 4-foot sounding and danger curve labeled Rep (2012) in approximately 40° 34’ 01.65”N 074° 02’ 52.85”W was not fully investigated. An obstruction, Feature 299, with a least depth of 3 feet (0.996 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty) was found in 40° 34’ 03.22”N 074° 02’ 52.42”W, approximately 50 meters 342° from the charted 4-foot sounding. The charted pile in approximately 40° 33’34.27”N 074° 05’ 37.37” was found to be multiple submerged piles, see Features 389, 499, and 498. The charted wreck in approximately 40° 35’ 05.10”N 074° 03’ 03.10”W was not found. The area around the wreck was investigated with 200% side scan and single beam coverage. A wreck (AWOIS 14189), Feature 171, was found with a least depth of 8 feet (2.435 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty) was found in 40° 35’ 06.38”N 074° 03’ 08.06”W approximately 125 meters 289° from the charted wreck. The charted danger circle labeled Obstn in approximately 40° 35’ 01.55”N 074° 04’ 06.95”W was not found. An area with a radius of 20 meters around the charted obstruction was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting single beam coverage. The charted danger circle labeled Obstn in approximately 40° 34’ 12.63”N 074° 05’ 03.70”W was found. An obstruction, Feature 453, was found by side scan in 40° 34’ 12.61’N 074° 05’ 04.16”W. The area around the obstruction was investigated with 100% side scan and single beam coverage. No least depth was determined. The charted exposed wreck labeled PA in approximately 40° 32’ 36.75”N 074° 07’ 46.46”W was not found. Side scan contacts from Julian Days 277, 288, and 290 in 2013 showed two submerged wrecks within approximately 30 meters of the charted exposed wreck. Investigation of the two wrecks with multibeam on Julian Day 014 in 2014 resulted in 100% multibeam coverage of an area approximately 75 meters by 60 meters centered on the exposed wreck disproved the wrecks found in the side scan data. The charted dangerous 3-foot obstruction labeled Obstn rep in approximately 40° 32’ 42.00”N 074° 08’ 07.50”W was found. An area with a radius of 12 meters around the feature was covered with 200% side scan and 100% multibeam. An obstruction, Feature 336, with a least depth of 4 feet (1.244 meters, 0.270 meter uncertainty) was found in 40° 32’ 41.72”N 074° 08’ 07.50”W, approximately 8 meters 180° from the charted 3-foot sounding. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). US5NJ11M15000312014-02-122013-01-05falseChart US5NJ11M covers the survey area from 40° 32’ 48.00”N 074° 07’ 29.30”W to 40° 29’ 11.20”N 074° 14’ 30.00”W. Note that the depth range value 1 for the East Reach, RIQ, on this chart is 11.5 meters and on the ENC US5NY18M it is 11.4 meters. Depths in the East Reach, West Reach, Sequine Point Bend, Red Bank Reach, and Ward Point Bend (East) channels were generally 0.5-2.0 meters deeper than the minimum (Shoalest) depth range value for each dredged area. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±1 meter of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (1.8-meter, 3.6-meter 5.4-meter, and 9.1-meter) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 200 meters of their charted locations with the following exceptions. The 3.6-meter depth curve from 40° 30’ 06.01”N 074° 12’ 21.74”W to 40° 29’ 21.60”N 074° 12’ 03.56”W was found up to approximately 890 meters east of its charted position. The 5.4-meter depth curve from 40° 29’ 52.36”N 074° 10’ 15.76”W to 40° 29’ 19.13.16”N 074° 11’ 02.53”W was found up to approximately 490 meters east of its charted position. The 5.4-meter sounding and surrounding 5.4-meter depth curve in 40° 30’ 21.13"N 074° 08' 17.12"W was not found. There is 100% multibeam coverage of the area approximately 180 meters by 115 meters centered on the sounding. CUBE depths in this area were 5.950 to 6.454 meters. The 5.1-meter sounding and surrounding 5.4-meter depth curve in 40° 30’ 20.18"N 074° 09' 09.68"W was not found. There is 100% multibeam coverage of the area approximately 160 meters by 75 meters centered on the sounding. CUBE depths in this area were 5.706 to 6.060 meters. The charted submerged obstruction with a depth value of 2.1 meters in 40° 29’ 15.25”N 074° 13 31.35”W was from Danger To Navigation Report 27. This report was based on multibeam and side scan data collected on 18 and 19 September 2013 (Julian Days 261 and 262). Additional multibeam data over the feature was collected on 15 October 2013 (Julian Day 288) which disproved the feature. The charted submerged obstruction with depth unknown in 40° 29’ 36.60”N 074° 11’ 59.40”W was not found. The closest found object was an obstruction, Feature 74, with a least depth of 2.298 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty in 40° 29’ 42.52”N 074° 12’ 01.01”W, approximately 185 meters 247° from the charted obstruction. The charted exposed wreck in 40° 32’ 36.63”N 074° 07’ 46.33”W was not found. Side scan contacts from Julian Days 277, 288, and 290 in 2013 showed two submerged wrecks within approximately 30 meters of the charted exposed wreck. Investigation of the two wrecks with multibeam on Julian Day 014 in 2014 resulted in 100% multibeam coverage of an area approximately 75 meters by 60 meters, centered on the exposed wreck, disproved the wrecks found in the side scan data. The charted submerged obstruction with a depth value of 0.9 meters in 40° 32’ 41.97”N 074° 08’ 07.47”W was found. An area with a radius of 12 meters around the feature was covered with 200% side scan and 100% multibeam. An obstruction, Feature 336, with a least depth of 1.244 meters (0.270 meter uncertainty) was found in 40° 32’ 41.72”N 074° 08’ 07.50”W, approximately 8 meters 180° from the charted obstruction. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). US5NY18M15000312014-02-122013-12-13falseENC US5NY18M covers the survey area from 40° 31’ 05.51”N 074° 02’ 54.30”W to 40° 29’ 12.14”N 074° 08’ 25.16”W. Note that the depth range value 1 for the Raritan Bay: East Reach, RIQ on this chart is 11.4 meters and on the adjacent ENC US5NJ11M it is 11.5 meters. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±0.50 meters of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (3.6-meter, 5.4-meter, and 9.1-meter) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 300 meters of their charted locations with the following two exceptions. Depths in the Raritan Bay East Reach channel were generally 1.5 to 2.0 meters deeper than the minimum (shoalest) depth range value for each dredged area. There were no charted soundings or objects labeled PA, ED, PD, or Rep within the common area of H12586 and ENC US5NY18M. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). US5NY19M15000202014-02-122012-07-06falseENC US5NY19M covers the survey area from 40° 35’ 59.70”N 074° 02’ 45.00”W to 40° 30’ 49.65”N 074° 07’ 45.89”W. CUBE depths within sheet H12586 generally agreed within ±1 meter of the charted depths. The charted depth curves (1.8-meter, 3.6-meter, 5.4-meter, and 10.9-meter) throughout H12586 were generally found to be in agreement with the survey data. Most were found to be located within 300 meters of their charted locations. There were no federally maintained channels within the common area of H12586 and ENC US5NY19M. The charted exposed wreck in approximately 40° 31’ 42.00”N 074° 07’ 17.40”W was not found. An area with a radius of 350 meters around the wreck was covered with 200% side scan and single beam. No significant features were found. The charted submerged obstruction with a depth value of 1.2 meters in 40° 34’ 01.62”N 074° 02’ 52.78”W was not fully investigated. An obstruction, Feature 299, with a least depth of 0.996 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, was found in 40° 34’ 03.22”N 074° 02’ 52.42”W, approximately 50 meters at 342° from the charted obstruction. The charted pile in 40° 33’34.29”N 074° 05’ 37.35” was found to be multiple submerged piles, see Features 389, 499, and 498. The charted dangerous submerged wreck in 40° 35’ 05.03”N 074° 03’ 03.16”W was not found. The area around the wreck was investigated with 200% side scan and single beam coverage. A wreck (AWOIS 14189), Feature 171, was found with a least depth of 2.435 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, was found in 40° 35’ 06.38”N 074° 03’ 08”W approximately 125 meters 289° from the charted wreck. The charted submerged obstruction in 40° 35’ 01.55”N 074° 04’ 07.02”W was not found. An area with a radius of 20 meters around the charted obstruction was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting single beam coverage. The charted submerged obstruction in 40° 34’ 12.59”N 074° 05’ 03.69”W was found. An obstruction, Feature 453, was found by side scan in 40° 34’ 12.61’N 074° 05’ 04.16”W. The area around the obstruction was investigated with 100% side scan and single beam coverage. No least depth was determined. All AWOIS items on this chart are discussed in Section D.1.3. All new uncharted features found, assigned AWOIS items and charted feature updates are documented in the Final Feature File (S-57). AWOIS 7545 was not found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting multibeam coverage. No features inside the search area were found. AWOIS 7547, provided as information, was found. An area with a radius of 25 meters around the feature was covered with 200% side scan and 100% multibeam. There are numerous rocks in the area. The shoalest, Feature 426, has a least depth of 3.642 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, in 40° 30’ 27.94”N 074° 12’ 36.64”W, approximately 30 meters 285° from the charted position. AWOIS 10663 was not found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting multibeam coverage. No features inside the search area were found. AWOIS 10665 was not found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting multibeam coverage. No features inside the search area were found. AWOIS 11423 was not found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting multibeam coverage. No features inside the search area were found. AWOIS 11424 was found. Raritan Bay Light 52 is located in the coordinates for this AWOIS. The light is built upon rock rip rap. AWOIS 12534 was not found. The 200-meter search radius was covered by 200% side scan to approximately the 1.8-meter depth curve, 100% side scan from approximately the 3.6-meter depth curve to the 1.8-meter depth curve, single beam and multibeam into approximately the 3.6-meter curve. No wrecks were found. Two obstructions were found, Features 419 and 418, approximately 85m 318° and approximately 125 meters 358° respectively from the charted position. AWOIS 12555 was found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and resulting multibeam coverage. An obstruction, Feature 141, with a least depth of 3.941 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, in 40° 29’ 24.54”N 074° 13’ 41.57”W, approximately 73 meters 045° from the charted position. AWOIS 12963, provided as information, was found. An obstruction, Feature 51, with a least depth of 5.281 meters, 0.270 meter uncertainty, was found in 40° 30’ 15.87”N 074° 03” 14.85’W. AWOIS 12964 was not found. The 50-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan and 100% multibeam coverage. AWOIS 14188 was found. The 500-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan to approximately the 1.8-meter depth curve, 100% side scan coverage from the approximate 1.8-meter depth curve to approximately the 1.1-meter depth curve, and single beam. Seven significant obstructions were found and investigated with multibeam inside the search radius. Two side by side wrecks, Feature 308, were found with a least depth of 2.132 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, in 40° 35’ 26.70”N 074° 03’ 38.62”W, approximately 145 meters 224° from the charted position. AWOIS 14189 was found. The 200-meter search radius was investigated with 200% side scan, and single beam. The wreck was found in the side scan data and multibeam coverage over the contacts was collected. The wreck, Feature 171, has a least depth of 2.435 meters, 0.280 meter uncertainty, in 40° 35’ 06.38”N 074° 03’ 08.06”W, approximately 125 meters 289° from the charted position. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.All charted features labeled PA, ED, PD, or Rep not assigned as an AWOIS item and investigated are discussed in Section D.1 for each chart.See the S-57 Final Feature File for all the details and recommendations regarding new uncharted features investigated. 31h12586_dton1.0002013-10-07h12586_dton2.0002013-10-07h12586_dton3.0002013-10-11h12586_dton4.0002013-10-16h12586_dton5.0002013-10-31h12586_dton6.0002013-10-31h12586_dton7.0002013-10-31h12586_dton8.0002013-11-04h12586_dton9.0002013-11-04h12586_dton10.0002013-11-04h12586_dton11.0002013-11-04h12586_dton12.0002013-11-04h12586_dton13.0002013-11-04h12586_dton14.0002013-11-05h12586_dton15.0002013-11-05h12586_dton16.0002013-11-05h12586_dton17.0002013-11-05h12586_dton18.0002013-11-05h12586_dton19.0002013-11-08h12586_dton20.0002013-11-08h12586_dton21.0002013-11-08h12586_dton22.0002013-11-08h12586_dton23.0002013-11-08h12586_dton24.0002013-11-12h12586_dton25.0002013-11-12h12586_dton26.0002013-11-12h12586_dton27.0002013-11-13h12586_dton28.0002013-11-13h12586_dton29.0002013-12-18h12586_dton30.0002014-02-03h12586_dton31.0002014-02-03Leidos submitted thirty-one Danger to Navigation Reports (DTON) in S-57 format. Copies of the Atlantic Hydrographic Branch verification email and Atlantic Hydrographic Branch reports, in PDF format, submitted to the Nautical Data Branch (NDB)/Marine Chart Division are included in a sub-directory within Appendix I of this Data Report. No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.H12856 covered the Raritan Bay Channel (East Reach, West Reach, Sequine Point Bend, Red Bank Reach, and Ward Point Bend sections). Survey depths were generally two to five feet (1.5 to 2.0 meters) deeper than the tabulated controlling depths. A discrepancy was noted in the controlling depth for the East Reach, Right Inside Quarter between raster chart 12331 (37.9 feet) and chart 12402 (37.7 feet). A discrepancy was noted in the controlling depth for the East Reach, Right Inside Quarter between ENC US5NJ11M (11.5 meters) and ENC US5NY18M (11.4 meters). In accordance with both the Project Instructions and Section 7.1 of the HSSD, bottom characteristics were obtained for H12586. Bottom characteristics were acquired at the locations proposed in the Project Reference File (PRF) by NOAA. From the PRF, Leidos modified the position of one bottom sample, as the location within the PRF did not fall within the survey bounds; Leidos did not modify any other locations from the recommended locations provided by NOAA. Sixty-three samples were collected. Bottom characteristics are included in the H12586 S-57 Final Feature File, H12586_FFF.000, within the Seabed Area (SBDARE) object and are classified according to the requirements set forth in Appendix 10 of the HSSD. In addition to being maintained within the S-57 Final Feature File, bottom characteristic results are represented in Appendix I of this document. Bottom characteristics obtained for H12586 are sufficient to be used to update the respective charts. Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.The junction analysis with the contemporary 2006 and 2007 surveys H11399, H11601, and H11709 was conducted and the results are presented in section B.2.3 of this Report. Fifty Aids to Navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey. Each ATON was compared to the United States Coast Guard List Volume II Atlantic Coast, updated through LNM week: 01/14. The individual Feature Correlator Sheets are presented as JPEG files in the Multimedia folder (Feature 500 through Feature 549). During survey operations, Old Orchard Shoal Light was found in ruins and not serving its intended purpose therefore, Leidos submitted DTON 29 regarding Old Orchard Shoal. The DTON was submitted by AHB to MCD and the charts have since been updated. All other ATONs within H12586 were found to be serving each intended purpose in its charted location. Overhead features do not exist for this survey.Numerous insignificant sidescan contacts were made on what may be exposed cables inside the charted cable and pipeline area on chart 12402. None of the contacts were more than 100 meters in length.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No significant features exist for this survey.There is on-going Super Storm Sandy cleanup work inside Great Kills Harbor. This was evident by several wrecks that were identified in the side scan data on 04, 15, 17, and 21 October 2013 (JDs 277, 288, 290, and 294) that were later disproven during item investigated with multibeam on 20 and 21 December 2013 and 14 January 2014 (JDs 354, 355, and 014). The marina facilities on the south shore of Great Kills Harbor, charted as piers, on raster charts 12331 and 12402 and ENC US5NJ11M were destroyed by Super Storm Sandy and are currently being reconstructed. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District is planning to perform maintenance dredging of the Great Kills Harbor Federal Navigation Project. The project will remove approximately 250,000 cubic yards of sand with placement at the Historic Area Remediation Site (HARS) in the Atlantic Ocean in FY2014. The project is located on the south shore of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York. The project provides for a channel, 10 feet deep, 150 feet wide, from deep water in Lower New York Bay to the entrance of the harbor in the vicinity of the westerly end of Crooks Point, thence of same depth and width along the west side of the harbor. Length of the channel is approximately 1.9 miles. An anchorage area, 8 feet deep, covers 138 acres inside the harbor. Work is expected to start in March 2014 and last for several months. Designated SoundingsDesignated soundings were used to help better preserve the shallowest sounding relative to the computed depth surface. Separate flags exist in the Generic Sensor Format (version 3.04) for designated soundings and features. All depths flagged as features and designated soundings override the CUBE best estimate of the depth in the final BAG files. Both the designated soundings and features flags as defined within GSF are mapped to the same HDCS flag when ingested into CARIS (PD_DEPTH_DESIGNATED_MASK). Fourteen designated soundings for H12586 were set to preserve the least depth on non-significant objects. The difference between the least depth of these objects and the CUBE depth was more than one-half the maximum allowable total vertical uncertainty at that depth. Final Feature S-57 FileIncluded with H12586 delivery is the S-57 Final Feature File, H12586_FFF.000. Details on how this file is generated and quality controlled can be found in Section B.2.6 of the DAPR. The S-57 feature file delivered for H12586 contains millimeter precision for the value of sounding (VALSOU) attribute. As specified in Section 8.2 of the HSSD, the S-57 feature file is in the WGS84 datum and is unprojected with all depth units in meters. All of the features found in H12586 are retained within the S-57 Final Feature File. For each feature contained in the Final Feature File (S-57), the Feature Correlator sheet was exported as an image file (.jpg) and is included in the S-57 Final Feature File under the NOAA Extended Attribute field "images". The polygon that delineates the mooring field from the supplemental Mooring Buoy S-57 File is also included within this Final Feature S-57 File. Side Scan Sonar Contacts S-57 FileIncluded with H12586 delivery is the Side Scan Sonar Contact S-57 File, H12586_SSCon.000. Details on how this file is generated and quality controlled can be found in Section B.2.6 of the DAPR. As specified in Section 8.2 of the HSSD, the S-57 feature file is in the WGS84 datum and is unprojected with all depth units in meters. All side scan contacts with the exception of contacts identified as moorings are retained within the Side Scan Sonar Contact S-57 File. This file does contain a polygon delineating the extents of the mooring field. For each contact included in this S-57 file, a JPEG image of the side scan contact is included under the NOAA Extended Attribute field “images”. Mooring Buoy S-57 FileAs requested by AHB, Leidos also generated a supplemental S-57 file to present the side scan contacts based on the individual mooring buoys and a polygon that delineates the mooring field that was observed with H12586 (H12586_MORFAC.000). Details on how this file was generated, attributed, and quality controlled can be found in Section B.3.5 of the DAPR. For each contact included in this S-57 file, a JPEG image of the side scan contact is included under the NOAA Extended Attribute field “images”. This supplemental Mooring Buoy S-57 file is delivered in a sub-directory of the S-57_Features directory named, “Mooring_Field_Side_Scan_Sonar_Contacts”. 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.Gary R. DavisChief Hydrographer2014-04-14Data Acquisition and Processing Report2014-04-14Data Acquisition and Processing Report2014-04-14