OPR-C308-KR-13 New Jersey Coast and Vicinity, NJ New Jersey Coast and Vicinity, NJ David Evans & Associates, Inc. H12597 2 Vicinity of Little Egg Inlet New Jersey United States 40000 2013 Jonathan L. Dasler, PE, PLS, CH Basic Hydrographic Survey 2013-07-27 2013-08-24 2014-04-02 ODOM CV-100 and RESON 8101 EdgeTech 4200-HF meters Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) UTC Atlantic Hydrographic Branch NAD83, UTM Zone 18, Meters, Times are UTC. The purpose of this contract is to provide NOAA with modern, accurate hydrographic survey data with which to update nautical charts of the assigned area. Contractor David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) conducted hydrographic survey operations in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet, New Jersey. Survey H12597 was conducted in accordance with the Statement of Work (June 20, 2013) and Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions (June 27, 2013). The Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions reference the 2012 Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD) as the technical requirements for this project. To better align with the Hydrographic Surveys Division (HSD) advancements in standards, project OPR-C308-KR-13 surveys were performed using the 2013 HSSD. This modification was approved by HSD staff. 39.559893 74.364813 39.375850 74.221047 1 OPR-C308-KR-13 Assigned Survey Areas SupportFiles/H12597_AssignedSurveyAreas.png The purpose of this survey is to provide National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) with modern, accurate hydrographic survey data with which to update nautical charts of the assigned area. 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. 2 H12597 Survey Outline SupportFiles/H12597_SurveyOutline.png The survey consisted of 200% side scan sonar coverage with concurrent single beam in all waters 4 meters and deeper; and 100% side scan sonar coverage with concurrent single beam in depths between 2 meters and 4 meters in waters inside the polygon DEA_2m_region.shp provided by HSD staff. For survey H12597, this polygon encompassed Little Egg Inlet and its approaches. The survey polygon depicted in the Project Reference File (PRF) OPR-C308-KR-13_PRF.000, which was included with the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions (June 27, 2013), was used to define the limits for each survey. The survey was conducted over 80-meter set line spacing per 100% coverage (50-meter side scan sonar range) with additional lines spaced to fill holidays created when effective range was reduced in shallow waters. Automated Wreck and Obstruction Information System (AWOIS) items identified by side scan sonar and significant side scan sonar contacts were developed with multibeam sonar to meet Object Detection coverage requirements for multibeam surveys. The coverage area totaled 18.1 square nautical miles using a combination of side scan, single beam and multibeam survey methods. 2013-08-24 2013-08-25 2013-08-28 2013-08-29 2013-08-30 2013-09-02 2013-09-03 2013-09-04 2013-09-07 2013-09-08 2013-09-11 2013-09-14 2013-09-15 2013-09-16 2013-09-18 2013-09-19 2013-09-20 2013-09-21 2013-09-25 2013-09-26 2013-10-01 2013-10-02 2013-10-03 2013-10-04 2013-10-05 2013-10-06 2013-10-16 2013-10-17 2013-10-19 2013-10-21 2013-10-30 2014-02-20 2014-02-21 2014-02-22 2014-02-23 2014-03-11 2014-03-11 2014-04-01 2014-04-02 14 5 0 0 0 18.1 R/V Chinook 0 0 0 0 0 995.9 0 82.6 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 995.9 0.0 82.6 0.0 8.3 The OPR-C308-KR-13 Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR) submitted under a separate cover, details equipment and vessel information as well as data acquisition and processing procedures used during this survey. There were no vessel or equipment configurations used during data acquisition that deviated from those described in the DAPR. R/V Chinook 28 2 3 R/V Chinook SupportFiles/RV Chinook.png ODOM CV 100 SBES RESON 8101 MBES Edgetech 4200-HF SSS AML SV Pulse V2 Primary Sound Speed Profiler Sea-Bird SEACAT SBE-19 CTD Profiler Secondary Sound Speed Profiler AML SV Plus V2 Secondary Sound Speed Profiler Applanix POS/MV 320 v4 Positioning & Attitude Single beam crosslines were run in a direction perpendicular to main scheme lines across the entire surveyed area, providing a good representation for analysis of consistency. All crosslines were used for crossline comparisons. Crossline analysis was performed using the CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) Quality Control (QC) Report tool, which compares crossline data to a gridded surface and reports results. Crosslines were compared to a 4-meter CUBE surface encompassing mainscheme data for the entire survey area. The QC Report tabular output is included in Separate II Digital Data. The results of the analysis meet the requirements as stated in the 2013 HSSD. Additional crossline analysis was performed by computing a 4-meter CUBE surface from the crossline data. The surface was then differenced from a 4-meter CUBE surface comprised of all mainscheme, fill, and investigation data. The resultant difference surface was exported using the Base Surface to American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) function and statistics were compiled on the ASCII data. The crossline analysis included 9,513 node comparisons with an average difference of 0.02 meters and standard deviation of 0.146 meters. Maximum deviations appear in areas adjacent to steep slopes where resolving depth differences using a 4-meter CUBE surface can be problematic. 0 0.097 R/V Chinook 2.000 n/a 0.500 Additional discussion of these parameters is included in the DAPR. During surface finalization in HIPS, the "greater of the two” option was selected, where the calculated uncertainty from total propagated uncertainty (TPU) is compared to the standard deviation of the soundings influencing the node, and where the greater value is assigned as the final uncertainty of the node. The uncertainty of the finalized surfaces increased for nodes, where the standard deviation of the node was greater than the total propagated uncertainty. The resulting calculated uncertainty values of all nodes in the finalized 4-meter single beam surface range from 0.235 meters to 0.631 meters with a standard deviation of 0.013 meters. The uncertainty values of all nodes in the finalized 1 meter Complete Coverage multibeam surface range from 0.222 meters to 1.421 meters with a standard deviation of 0.072 meters. The uncertainty values of all nodes in the finalized 50-centimeter Object Detection multibeam surfaces range from 0.223 meters to 1.686 meters with a standard deviation of 0.027 meters. To determine if surface grid nodes met International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Order 1 specification, a ratio of the final node uncertainty to the allowable uncertainty at that depth was determined. As a percentage, this value represents the amount of error budget utilized by the uncertainty value at each node. Values greater than 100% indicate nodes exceeding the allowable IHO uncertainty. For the 4-meter single beam surface the allowable uncertainty utilized ranges from 46% to 123%. The mean allowable uncertainty for the surface is 47% with a standard deviation of 0.024. In total 108 nodes out of 699,790 fail to meet specification. For the 1 meter Complete Coverage multibeam surface the allowable uncertainty utilized ranges from 43% to 278%. The mean allowable uncertainty for the surface is 48% with a standard deviation of 0.142. In total 9,513 nodes out of 435,846 fail to meet specification. For the 50-centimeter Object Detection multibeam surface the allowable uncertainty utilized ranges from 43% to 333%. The mean allowable uncertainty for the surface is 43% with a standard deviation of 0.100. In total 18,428 nodes out of 475,319 fail to meet specification. Nodes that were reported out of specification were coincident with areas of high depth standard deviation such as steep terrain, areas of overlap where the bottom had significantly changed, or over features. All uncertainty values were within allowable specification prior to surface finalization when standard deviation was incorporated into the solution when it was greater than the node uncertainty. Survey H12597 junctions with H12598 from project OPR-C308-KR-13 also performed by David Evans and Associates, Inc. H12598 40000 2013 David Evans and Associates, Inc. S At the time of writing, junction analysis with survey H12598 had not been completed. Junction analysis between H12597 and H12598 will be discussed in the H12598 Descriptive Report. Quality control is discussed in detail in Section B of the DAPR. Results from weekly position checks and weekly multibeam and single beam bar checks are included in Separate I Acquisition and Processing Logs. The weekly sound speed checks can be found in Separate II Sound Speed Data Summary of this report. Sounding data were reviewed at multiple levels of data processing including: CARIS HIPS conversion, single beam editing, subset editing, and analysis of anomalies revealed in CUBE surfaces. Submerged significant features identified during survey operations were noted in the acquisition logs, saved to Isis cursor log files, and then displayed during HIPS editing to act as a check during feature compilation. In addition to the field interpretation of side scan contacts, two independent post-processing reviews of the side scan data were conducted, and all significant contacts or potentially significant contacts tracked in a custom database. Timing Latency A timing latency and associated heave artifact has been removed from the last three single beam survey lines (2013CH2451757, 2013CH2451844, and 2013CH2451938) collected on September 2, 2013. Inspection of the Hypack raw files revealed that the echosounder timing and secondary GPS timing, which use the Hypack Veritime clock, were approximately 3.3 seconds behind the times of the primary GPS and attitude data coming from the POS M/V, which use UTC timing. This was confirmed by comparing the times of the Hypack position quality strings for the primary and secondary GPS sensors which included both Hypack Veritime time (seconds after midnight) and UTC. The latency started during acquisition of line 2013CH2451757 with a 3.3 second backwards jump in the echosounder time which occurred at 18:07:37.8. The latency was removed from these lines by adding an echosounder latency (-3.3 seconds) in the HIPS vessel file swath1 entry from 18:07 to 23:59 on DN245. The fix required splitting the Hypack raw file for 2013CH2451757 into a section without the latency (2013CH2451757_1.raw) and section with the latency (2013CH2451757_2.raw). No other timing errors were observed during the survey. This latency may have been caused by a memory allocation issue on the Hypack computer. None Exist There were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings. Approximately 90-minute intervals. An AML Oceanographic SV Plus V2 was the primary instrument used to acquire sound speed readings during the survey. Sound speed readings were measured at approximately 90-minute intervals during survey single beam operations and at each investigation site during multibeam acquisition. Additional discussion of sound speed methods can be found in the DAPR. Survey speeds were maintained to meet or exceed along track coverage requirements throughout the survey. Where 200% side scan coverage was required, demonstration of 200% coverage was achieved by producing two separate 100% 1 meter resolution mosaics. Mosaics were thoroughly reviewed for holidays and areas of poor quality coverage due to biomass, vessel wakes, or other factors. A fill plan was created in order to acquire side scan data where holidays and significant poor quality coverage existed. Significant side scan sonar contacts were developed with multibeam sonar to obtain least depths on contacts using multibeam Object Detection coverage requirements. Density The requirement that 95% of all Complete Coverage and Object Detection surface nodes must be populated with at least five soundings was verified by exporting the density child layer of each CUBE surface to an ASCII text file and compiling statistics on the density values. More than 98% of all the CUBE surface nodes of the 1 meter Complete Coverage multibeam surface contained five or more soundings. Two of the 24 individual investigation surfaces which use Object Detection requirements failed to meet the sounding density requirement. Investigation surfaces 278-133025-P and 278-203815-P have 94% of all nodes populated with five or more soundings which is just out of specification and results from the survey line orientation of the investigation plans producing a high percentage of edge. Nodes along these edges were only populated with beams from the outer swath which yielded a low node density. All nodes over features exceed density requirements and least depths of all features have been determined with designated soundings from reliable data. Data reduction procedures for survey H12597 are detailed in the DAPR. The multibeam and single beam summary processing logs are included Separate I Acquisition and Processing Logs of this report. The H12597 survey was still active at time of DAPR submission. A revision to DAPR Appendix II, which includes these additional calibration tests and results from new weekly bar checks has been submitted with the survey deliverables. MBES 2014-03-11 Routine calibration test MBES 2014-03-14 Routine calibration test MBES 2014-03-24 Routine calibration test MBES 2014-04-02 Routine calibration test Multibeam backscatter was logged during side scan contact investigations in Hypack 81X format and is included with the H12597 digital deliverables. Data were processed periodically in CARIS HIPS to evaluate backscatter quality but the processed data is not included with the deliverables. 5.3.2 H12597_SB_4m_MLLW CUBE 4.0 0.04 19.33 NOAA_4m Set Line Spacing Coverage H12597_SB_4m_MLLW_Final CUBE 4.0 0.04 19.33 NOAA_4m Set Line Spacing Coverage H12597_MB_1m_MLLW CUBE 1.0 0.12 14.74 NOAA_1m Complete Multibeam Coverage H12597_MB_1m_MLLW_Final CUBE 1.0 0.12 14.74 NOAA_1m Complete Multibeam Coverage H12597_MB_50cm_MLLW_combined CUBE 0.5 1.87 13.76 NOAA_0.5m Object Detection Coverage H12597_MB_50cm_MLLW_combined_Final CUBE 0.5 1.26 13.76 NOAA_0.5m Object Detection Coverage H12597_100Percent Mosaic 1.0 N/A First 100-percent coverage H12597_200Percent Mosaic 1.0 N/A Second 100-percent coverage Bathymetric grids were created relative to Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) in CUBE format using Set Line Spacing, Complete Coverage and Object Detection resolution requirements as described in the National Ocean Surveys (NOS) HSSD (April 2013). A 1 meter resolution surface using the Complete Multibeam Coverage requirement was created for all multibeam data. This surface was created as a repository for ancillary multibeam data acquired in support of the survey, or multibeam data acquired during investigations that do not fall within the individual field sheets which surround significant features. The 50-centimeter combined surface includes investigation data at Object Detection resolution over significant features. In addition, field sheets and surfaces were submitted for all significant individual investigations. The name of the investigation field sheets correspond to the primary side scan sonar contact name. Least depths for all significant contact investigations were added to the final surface with a designated sounding. Additional designated soundings were added to depth surfaces as necessary in order to accurately represent the seafloor in accordance with the NOS HSSD. A bug in HIPS 7.1.1 Service Pack 1 Hotfix 1 caused incorrect survey line names to be listed in the combined surface metadata. A complete description of the horizontal and vertical control for survey H12597 can be found in the OPR-C308-KR-13 Horizontal and Vertical Control Report (HVCR), submitted under a separate cover. A summary of horizontal and vertical control for this survey follows. Mean Lower Low Water Discrete Zoning Atlantic City, NJ 8534720 8534720.tid Verified Observed C308KR2013CORP_rev.zdf Final North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) NAD83 UTM Zone 18 North Sandy Hook, NJ (286 kHz) Moriches, NY (293 kHz) During survey operations, some Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) outages from the primary beacon (286 kHz) occurred. The system was set up to automatically switch to the secondary beacon (293 kHz) when the primary signal was lost. The majority of the chart comparison was performed by comparing H12597 depths to a digital surface generated from electronic navigational charts (ENCs) covering the survey area. A 50-meter product surface was then generated from a triangular irregular network (TIN) created from the soundings, depth contours, and depth features for each ENC scale. An additional 50-meter HIPS product surface of the entire survey area was generated from the finalized Multibeam Echo Sounder (MBES) and SBES CUBE surfaces. The chart comparison was conducted by creating and reviewing the resultant difference surface. The chart comparison also included a review of the presence and adequacy of all assigned charted features within the survey area. The raster chart comparison was performed by comparing the raster navigational charts (RNCs) covering the survey area to the corresponding ENCs which were subsequently compared to H12597 using difference surface techniques. The electronic and raster versions of the relevant charts used during the comparison were reviewed to ensure that all US Coast Guard (USCG) Local Notice to Mariners (LNM) issued during survey acquisition, impacting the survey area, were applied and addressed by this survey. 12316 674 40000 35 2012-10 2014-04-29 2014-04-26 Small Craft Route Chart 12316 was compared to US5NJ20M within the H12597 survey area. No differences between the RNC and ENC were observed other than minor differences in the placement of some contours. Charted differences determined by comparing surveyed depths to a digital surface of US5NJ20M are discussed in Section D.1.2. 12318 680 80000 45 2010-04 2014-04-22 2014-04-26 Coastal Chart 12318 was compared to US4NJ22M within the H12597 survey area. Several minor differences in the placement of contours and soundings were observed during this comparison. 12323 682 80000 26 2012-12 2014-04-15 2014-04-26 Coastal Chart 12323 was compared to US4NJ22M and US4NJ23M within the H12597 survey area. Only minor differences in the placement of contours and soundings were observed during this comparison. US5NJ20M 40000 14 2013-12-27 2014-03-26 false In general depths are between 2 feet shoaler to 5 feet deeper than charted, though considerable change has occurred within the survey area since it was last surveyed. The recent application of H12597 Danger to Navigation (DtoN) 4 to the charts addressed much of this change in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet. Significant deepening is still apparent when comparing the H12597 surveyed depths to US5NJ20M in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet and Shooting Thorofare as a result of excluding the 18-foot and 30-foot contours from the chart. Differences approaching 39 feet are apparent when comparing the ENC TIN surface to the survey. Areas in the Atlantic south of Little Egg Inlet are up to 8 feet shoaler and 16 feet deeper than charted due to the migration of numerous small shoals, including charted Brigantine Shoal and the retreat of the shoal at the approaches to Brigantine Inlet. Depths north of Little Egg Inlet are up to 7 feet shoaler and 12 feet deeper than charted as a result of the migration of the 18-foot and 30-foot contours. Depths along the western edge of the survey area south of Holgate, NJ are as much as 15 feet deeper as a result of shoreline retreat. 4 Depth Difference between H12597 and chart US5NJ20M SupportFiles/H12597_ChartComp_US5.png US4NJ22M 80000 14 2013-01-10 2013-04-03 false Chart comparison with US4NJ22M shows similar results to the comparison with US5NJ20M. 5 Depth Difference between H12597 and charts US4NJ22M and US4NJ23M SupportFiles/H12597_ChartComp_US4.png US4NJ23M 80000 11 2013-01-22 2013-04-03 false Chart comparison with US4NJ23M shows similar results to the comparison with US5NJ20M. Five (5) AWOIS items were assigned for investigation within the survey H12597 area. 2754 AWOIS Item #2754 is currently charted as a wreck with a 20-foot least depth. The 200-meter search radius was surveyed with 200% side scan sonar coverage and followed by multibeam investigation of a cluster of three contacts located within the radius. A wreck was found approximately 8 meters from the location of AWOIS Item #2754. The charted wreck as depicted in the Composite Source File (CSF) has been included in the Final Feature File (FFF) with a description of ‘Delete’. A wreck depicting AWOIS #2754 as surveyed is included in the FFF with a description of ‘New’. 11195 AWOIS Item #11195 is listed in the AWOIS database as a 19-foot outboard vessel reported in Local Notice to Mariners 27/76. This item is currently charted as a submerged dangerous wreck, Position Approximate (PA). A full search of the assigned 200-meter search radius has disproved this item with 200% side scan coverage. It is recommended that the AWOIS database be updated with findings from the H12597 survey. The charted wreck as depicted in the CSF has been included in the FFF with a description of ‘Delete’. 11196 AWOIS Item #11196 is listed in the AWOIS database as the 36 foot tug Vinnie V. which was reported sunk on July 11, 1986. This item is currently charted as a submerged dangerous wreck, depth unknown, Position Approximate (PA). The search radius was surveyed with 200% side scan sonar coverage and followed by multibeam investigation of four contacts located within the radius. The multibeam investigations disproved two of the contacts and located one wreck and one obstruction. The investigated wreck, which is believed to be AWOIS Item #11196, was found approximately 150 meters from its charted position. The charted wreck as depicted in the Composite Source File (CSF) has been included in the FFF with a description of ‘Delete’. A wreck depicting this feature (AWOIS #11196) as surveyed is included in the FFF with a description of ‘New’. A feature depicting the new uncharted obstruction found within the AWOIS #11196 search radius has been included in the FFF with a description of ‘New’. 11199 AWOIS Item #11199 is listed in the AWOIS database as the 65-foot schooner Sadie and Edgar. The most recent AWOIS entry for this feature from January 2002 reported that four feet of mast was visible above water. This item is currently charted as a submerged dangerous wreck, depth unknown. Partial 200% side scan sonar coverage within the assigned 500-meter search radius was performed. The search radius extended inshore of the surveyed 4-meter inshore limit and beyond the inshore limit of safe navigation. No evidence of the AWOIS item was seen in the data. The charted wreck as depicted in the Composite Source File (CSF) has been included in the FFF with a description of ‘Retain’. 11202 AWOIS Item #11202 is listed in the AWOIS database as a stranded wreck which was reported in NM 17/70. The charting status of this feature changed to a dangerous sunken wreck PA in 2002. The search radius extended inshore of the surveyed 4-meter inshore limit and beyond the inshore limit of safe navigation resulting in partial 200% side scan sonar coverage within the assigned 500-meter search radius. No evidence of the AWOIS item was seen in the data. The charted wreck as depicted in the CSF has been included in the FFF with a description of Retain. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey. Three Wreck PA features are charted within the assigned survey area. These features correspond to AWOIS Items 11195, 11196 and 11202 which have been discussed in Section 1.3. An Unexploded Ordnance obstruction (rep 1989) is charted inshore of the surveyed 4-meter inshore limit and beyond the inshore limit of safe navigation. The charted obstruction as depicted in the Composite Source File (CSF) has been included in the FFF with a description of ‘Not Addressed’. The survey area does not contain any charted features labeled as Position Doubtful (PD) or Existence Doubtful (ED). Charted features assigned in the CSF are portrayed in the H12597 File Feature File as surveyed and denoted with the Assignment Flag of ‘Assigned’. All uncharted features are portrayed in the FFF as surveyed and attributed with the description of ‘New’. 5 Five (5) DtoNs were reported for this survey using preliminary survey data. All DtoNs are currently applied to the charts. H12597 DtoN 1 represents a 60 meter long wreck that was uncharted at time of survey. Inquiries were made to AHB and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) about possible historic significance of this wreck. During initial review the wreck was found to have no known historic significance. Correspondence with the SHPO is included with the Danger to Navigation Reports in Appendix II. A new obstruction located approximately 50 meters northeast of H12597 DtoN 1 was investigated after the danger was reported and charted. This new obstruction, which is included in the FFF, is approximately 2 feet shoaler than DtoN 1. H12597 DtoN 2 is a stranded wreck with approximate length of 40 meters which was uncharted at time of survey. This wreck is included in the FFF with a slight adjustment in the baring height after applying verified water levels to the height above water estimated in the field. H12597 DtoN 3 is a United States Geological Survey (USGS) scientific platform which was uncharted when it was discovered while the survey vessel was transiting outside of the survey area. This feature is included in the FFF though it falls outside of the survey M_COVR area. H12597 DtoN 4 was a nonstandard submission in .000 format containing preliminary SBES soundings which depicted shoaling in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet. AHB staff used this submission to generate soundings, chart interval depth contours, and a bounding polygon which were sent to the Nautical Data Branch (NDB) and have since been used to update the charts. H12597 DtoN 4 was compiled from preliminary soundings and incomplete coverage acquired through October 6, 2013. The shoaling represented by the DtoN is more accurately depicted in the bathymetric grids submitted with this survey therefore the soundings and contours generated by AHB are not included in the FFF. H12597 DtoN 5 is an obstruction found in the area impacted by the H12597 DtoN 4 chart update. As previously mentioned, H12597 DtoN 4 was submitted to address significant shoaling and change in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet. The H12597 survey area encompasses Little Egg Inlet, Beach Haven Inlet, and the approaches to Brigantine Inlet. As noted on the charts, buoys are not charted within the inlets because they are frequently relocated or removed when shoaling prohibits navigation with the inlet. Fourteen (14) bottom samples were acquired on October 22, 2013 (DN 295), January 30, 2014 (DN 030), and February 23, 2014 (DN 054). The final sampling plan followed suggested sample locations included in the PRF provided by the Hydrographic Surveys Division. A limited shoreline investigation was assigned in the OPR-C308-KR-13 Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions. None of the assigned shoreline features included in the CSF are charted within the H12597 survey area. In some instances baring features shoreward of the inshore limit were captured in the side scan data. HSD and AHB staff provided guidance on how to handle these features during data processing and reporting. If contacts were created on these features they have been classified as insignificant in the Side Scan Sonar Contact File and denoted with the comment, “Target is a baring feature outside the limits of survey and will be further resolved by forthcoming RSD imagery”. This includes the ends of several charted jetties, which extend into the H12597 survey area. Side scan contacts depicting the submerged end point at the base of these jetties are included in the Side Scan Sonar Contact File. No comparisons with prior surveys were conducted. Several public aids to navigation are charted within the H12597 survey area. Notes on the charts covering the area indicate that additional aids to navigation located within inlets are frequently moved and therefore not included on the charts. All charted public aids to navigation were found to be serving their intended purpose. There were no overhead bridges, cables, or other structures which would impact overhead clearance in the survey area. The termini of several charted jetties extend into the H12597 survey area. It is recommended that all charted jetties be retained as charted. Five (5) submarine cables are charted within the survey area. None of these cables were observed in the H12597 data. There were no ferry routes or terminals within the survey area. A USGS scientific platform located outside of the survey area was submitted as H12597 DtoN 3. No platforms were charted or located within the H12597 survey area. Water turbulence features denoting the location of breakers observed during survey operations have been included in the FFF. Sediment migration is apparent when comparing data acquired over multiple days in the vicinity of Little Egg Inlet and Shooting Thorofare. As noted on the charts, areas adjacent to inlets such are subject to frequent change. No construction or dredging activities were observed during survey operations. 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, Statement of Work, and Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions. 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. Jonathan L. Dasler, PE, PLS, CH NSPS/THSOA Certified Hydrographer, Chief of Party 2014-07-28 Jason Creech, CH NSPS/THSOA Certified Hydrographer, Lead Hydrographer 2014-07-28 Data Acquisition and Processing Report 2014-03-21