OPR-D332-TJ-13Delaware Bay and ApproachesDelaware BayNOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONH126058Offshore North Cape HenlopenDelawareUnited States200002013Commander Lawrence T. Krepp, NOAABasic Hydrographic Survey2013-05-032013-06-182013-06-29Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscatterSide Scan SonarmetersUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)UTCAtlantic Hydrographic BranchNOAAThis survey was conducted at the entrance of Delaware Bay, in the vicinity of Cape Henlopen, DE.38.959555555675.178666666738.809972222275.02669444441H12605 Survey Limitsfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/survey_limits.jpgThe purpose of this survey is to provide contemporary bathymetric and hydrographic data in support of National Ocean Service (NOS) projects to update nautical charting products in response to Hurricane Sandy. The project which this survey supports will cover approximately 385 square nautical miles addressing approximately 31 square nautical miles of the NHSP critical area and 273 square nautical miles of the NHSP of re-survey. This specific survey covers an area of approximately 39 square nautical miles.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.2H12605 Coveragefile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/coverage_graphic_4.jpgSurvey Coverage requirements were modified after dissemination of Final Project Instructions for project OPR-D332-TJ-13. See Appendix II for further information. One holiday exists in the 100% side scan coverage around the Yellow "A" buoy located at position 38-53-50.5 N and 075-08-10.73 W. No backscatter data was collected by S222 during the course of the survey due to a malfunction in the RESON 7125-ROV topside unit.Survey Coverage requirements were modified after dissemination of Final Project Instructions for project OPR-D332-TJ-13. See Appendix II for further information.CJW2013-06-182013-06-192013-06-202013-06-212013-06-222013-06-242013-06-252013-06-262013-06-272013-06-282013-06-2902000038.7905.00001271.800110.8409Refer to the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR) for a complete description of data acquisition and processing systems, survey vessels, quality control procedures and data processing methods. Additional information to supplement sounding and survey data, and any deviations from the DAPR are discussed in the following sections.3102315.23101315.2S22220815All vessels acquired Multibeam, Side Scan Sonar, Surface Sound Speed, Sound Velocity, and Attitude data in the course of survey operations. S222 collected Sound Speed Data using a Moving Vessel Profiler and winch system. HSL 3101 and 3102 acquired Sound Speed Data using Seabird Conductivity-Temperature-Depth (CTD) sensors. AML OceangraphicAML Smart SV&PSound Speed SystemKlein5000 v2Side Scan Sonar (SSS)Reson7125 ROVMultibeam Echo Sounder (MBES)Reson7125 SV1Multibeam Echo Sounder (MBES)SeabirdSBE Seacat 19+ Series CTDConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorApplanixPOS M/V v4Positioning and Attitude SystemBrook Ocean TechnologyMVP 100Sound Speed SystemAML OceangraphicAML SV&T Sound Speed ProbeSound Speed SystemVessel configurations, equipment operations, and data acquisition & processing were consistent with specifications described in the DAPR.S222, HSL 3101, and HSL 3102 collected combined totals of 1264.12 linear nautical miles of mainscheme MBES lines and 110.85 linear nautical miles of MBES crosslines, equating to a survey-wide crosslines-mainscheme ratio of 0.09. Crosslines were compared to mainscheme lines using a difference surface, created in CARIS BASE Editor. Two 4m CUBE Surfaces were created, both in CARIS HIPS, one using only mainscheme MBES lines and the other using only crossline MBES lines. The two CUBE surfaces were then differenced in CARIS BASE Editor. Statistical analysis of the resultant surface was conducted using CARIS Surface Statistic tools included in BASE Editor. Analysis yielded a mean difference value of 0.1 m and a standard deviation of 0.1 m. These values comply with section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD (2013 ed).00.14000.085HSL 31014N/A0.2HSL 31024N/A0.2S222110.2The values used to calculate Total Propagated Uncertainty values for survey H12605 varied based on the method used to reduce soundings to chart datum. For data reduced via a separation mode, Total Propagated Uncertainties were derived using a combination of: real time uncertainties for vessel motion; a priori values for equipment and vessel characteristics; an a priori value for the separation model; and field assigned values for sound speed uncertainties. The real time uncertainties for vessel motion include roll, pitch, gyro, navigation, and elevation. The uncertainties in these measurements were recorded as part of the POSPac IAPPK 3D positional solution and were applied to the soundings via an SBET RMS file generated by Applanix POSPac. Uncertainties for sonar mounting and vessel speed were assigned using the a priori values found in Appendix 4, table 4.9 of the NOAA Field Procedures Manual (FPM, ed 2013), and applied to the data via the CARIS HIPS Hydrographic Vessel File. The uncertainty associated with the VDatum separation model was supplied by the Hydrographic Services Division’s Operations Branch. Finally, the uncertainty associated with sound speed measurements is based on the frequency and location of CDT casts, in accordance with the guidance set by Appendix 4 of the FPM (ed 2013). For data reduced via water level modeling, Total Propagated Uncertainties used a POSPac IAPPK solution for horizontal positioning, but used a zoned tide grid for vertical positioning. Uncertainty values for real time roll, pitch, gyro, and navigation remain the same, as do uncertainties from sonar mounting, vessel speed, and sound speed measurements. However, uncertainties for tide gauge measurement, tidal datum computation error, and tidal zoning error were provided by the Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS). The CO-OPS uncertainty value was provided at the 95% confidence interval. It was divided by 1.96 to provide the 1-sigma value needed by CARIS. Total Propagated Uncertainty values were evaluated to ensure compliance with section 5.1.3 of NOAA Hydrographic Survey Specification and Deliverables (HSSD). Maximum allowable uncertainty for each node was calculated in CARIS BASE Editor. The resultant 'iho_order1_compliance' layer was inspected for any areas where calculated uncertainty values exceeded the maximum allowed uncertainty. Uncertainty values for all 7,404,041 nodes evaluated on the 4m finalized grid were within IHO uncertainty requirements. Total Propagated Uncertainty values for 41 total survey lines were computed using Vessel Uncertainity Settings instead of ERS derived RMS Values. These lines are listed in the file titled 'H12605_norms.pdf' in Appendix II of this report. 3H12605 Uncertainty Statisticsfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_ihouncertaintystandards.tifThree contemporary surveys junction with Survey H12605. Surveys H12468, H12469, and H12570 were conducted during the same field season and as part of the same project as H12605. Survey H11647 was conducted by SAIC in 2007; however, surfaces for this survey were not available for direct comparison. H11647200002007SAICSBathymetric surfaces and/or data were not available for direct junction comparison for Survey H11647.H12470200002013NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONSThe difference values between surveys H12605 and H12470 ranged from -5.748 m and 4.451 m. The mean difference was 0.007 m and the standard deviation was 0.197 m. The maximum and minimum difference values were examined and determined to be the result of noise (fliers). Evidence of sand wave migration was present in the junction comparison. Differences of up to approximately 8 ft were observed as the result of the migration of the peaks of sand waves. H12469200002013NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONEThe difference values between surveys H12605 and H12469 ranged from -5.941 m and 1.825 m. The mean difference was 0.007 m and the standard deviation was 0.131 m. The maximum and minimum difference values were examined and determined to be the result of noise (fliers) in the junction portion of Survey H12469. H12468200002013NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONEThe difference values between surveys H12605 and H12468 ranged from -0.674 m and 4.204 m. The mean difference was -0.002 m and the standard deviation was 0.123 m. The maximum and minimum difference values were examined and determined to be the result of noise (fliers) in the junction portion of Survey H12468. 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.Errors Due to Sound Velocity A refraction artifact appears in the MB data collected by S222 RESON 7125 for H12605. The refraction error appears as either upward or downward bowing of the MB swath, which has caused vertical jumps in the CUBE reference surface as well as a striping effect in the standard deviation child layer.Errors Likely Due To Issues in MBES Beam FormationAn artifact of unconfirmed cause appears in the MB data collected by the S222 Reson 7125 ROV unit. The artifact has two distinct characteristics; the first appears as a sharp upward or downward spike on the starboard edge of the MB swath, the second appears as an elongated ‘S’ shape across the swath. Figure 4 shows a typical example. The field unit has encountered the ‘S’ shape in previous projects, and has historically attributed the artifact to an error in the 7125’s sectoring and beam steering algorithm. The outerbeam spike has not been observed before, but the periodic appearance across several different projects leads the field to believe it also stems from a systemic error in the 7125’s beam formation. Both types of beam forming errors have caused vertical jumps in the CUBE surface.4S222 MBES Artifactsfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/h12605_mbesartifacts.jpgDelayed Heave IssuesA total of three lines were processed without Delayed Heave applied. This was due to insufficient SBET coverage. Reference the file titled 'H12605_notrueheave.pdf' in Appendix II of this report for additional information.GPS Tide IssuesA total of 41 lines were processed using Zoned Tide correctors (in lieu of ERS correctors) due to either insufficient ERS SBET coverage or the existence of unresolved issues with the SBET solutions. Reference the file titled 'H12605_ zonedtides.pdf' in Appendix II of this report for additional information.Casts were conducted in such a manner as to comply with the procedures outlined in the DAPR. Several lines in Survey H12605 deviated from the casting frequency requirements outlined in the DAPR. These lines are listed in the file titled 'H12605_castndwtdeviations.pdf' in Appendix II of this report. No adverse effects in overall data quality were noticed upon examination of the lines affected. Sound speed casts were applied to the data using nearest in distance within time.All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.Density Requirements for Survey H12605Density requirements for H12605 were analyzed using NOAA’s Standards Compliance Review script. It was found that 99.9% of finalized surface nodes contain five or more soundings.5H12605 Density Requirementsfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_objectdetectioncoverage.tifSand Wave Migration in the vicinity of Brown ShoalPoor correlation of sandwaves in the vicinity of the southern point of Brown Shoal was observed in data collected between DN 171 and DN 179. The phenomenon is particularly evident south of the 13ft sounding located at 38-56-13.15 N and 075-07-12.97 W. The phenomenon is assessed to be the result of dynamic sandwave formation caused by an active local submarine geomorphology. Brown Shoal obstructs the movement of large volumes of the water moving in and out of Delaware Bay and large currents were observed in the area. The lack of correlation of sandwaves in the area was assessed to be the result of these conditions.6H12605 Sand Wavesfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/h12605_brownshoalmigrations.jpgAll data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.Raw Backscatter was logged as a .7k file and has been sent to the Processing Branch. One line of backscatter data per vessel per day was processed by the field unit. Backscatter data collected with S222 was unusable due to a malfunction in the 7125 ROV topside unit used to collect MBES bathymetric data.CarisHIPS/SIPS8.0.6N/AN/A2014-03-20ProcessingV5.3.2Caris HIPS 8.0.6 was used to process bathymetric data. Caris HIPS was updated in the course of survey operations. Updated versions of Caris HIPS were not used in the interest of consistency in data processing.H12605_MB_1m_MLLW_combined.csarCUBE1.02040NOAA_1mObject DetectionH12605_MB_50cm_MLLW_combined.csarCUBE0.53.447.6NOAA_0.5mObject DetectionH12605_MB_4m_MLLW_final.csarCUBE4.03.447.6NOAA_4mMBES TracklineSBES Set Line SpacingH12605_sss_100%.csarSSS Mosaic1.000N/A100% SSSH12605_sss_200%.csarSSS Mosaic1.000N/A200% SSSThis survey was processed using the Combined Uncertainty and Bathymetry Estimator (CUBE) algorithm. Per section 5.2.2.1 of NOAA HSSD Manual (2013 ed), MBES surfaces were gridded according to the Project Instructions for OPR-D332-TJ-13 guidelines for 200% side scan sonar with set multibeam line spacing. Side Scan coverage mosaics were created at 1m resolution. Combined Surfaces were generated for features and developments, in accordance with arrangements made with personnel from Atlantic Hydrographic Branch.No Horizontal and Vertical Control Report has been generated for Survey H12605.Mean Lower Low WaterDiscrete ZoningCape May, NJ8536110Lewes, DE85573808536110Final Approved8537121Final Approved8557380Final ApprovedD332TJ2013CORPFinal2013-07-172014-07-30Preliminary zoning was accepted as the final zoning for project OPR-D332-TJ-2013 after analysis by CO-OPS. VDatum2013_D332_VDatum_Ellip_MLLWNorth American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)18NSmart BaseVAWIVAMIMOR5MOR5COVXCOVXNJCMNJCMNJGTNJGTNCBXNCBXDEMIDEMINJBRNJBRMOR6MOR6DNRCDNRCNJCMNJCMDEDODEDORED5RED5Reedy Point (309 kHz)Sandy Hook (286 kHz)The Reedy Point DGPS station was used as the primary DGPS beacon. The Sandy Hook DGPS station was used at times of outages or poor signal reception with the primary DGPS beacon.Vertical Offset Connected To Dynamic Draft of S222A vertical offset was observed in several lines of data collected on several days at or around times of maximum local currents. Survey lines were planned and executed in patterns which roughly aligned with local current patterns. This line plan alleviated the affects of cross current but increased the difference in vessel speed-through-the-water when surveying with and against the local current. The difference in speed may have been as great as 5.0 kts. Figure 7 contains an example of the phenomena. While the effect did not manifest in violations of IHO requirements for Total Propagated Uncertainty for surfaces, the effect my have caused offsets as great as 0.5 m and was apparent when depths were processed with both ERS and Discrete Zone tide correctors.7Vertical Offset Likely Caused By Issues Connected Dynamic Draft Correctors for S222.file:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_dynamicdraftissue.jpgChart comparisons for survey H12605 were conducted by visual comparison and by using a difference surface of the 4m final grid differenced against an interpolated TIN surface of ENC soundings. Two areas showed signs of significant deviance from charted depths: an area in vicinity of 38-54.76 N and 075-08.86 W; and the charted disposal area 1.5 NM North-east of Brown Shoal Light. Figure 8 represents the results of the chart comparison, generated as described above. Areas shoaler than the interpolated surface are represented by red while areas deeper than the interpolated surface are represented by blue. 8Charted Soundings vs. Actual Depth Difference Surfacefile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_chartcomparison4.tif123049980000462011-052011-05-102011-05-14It is recommended that Survey H12605 supersede all charted depths on chart 12304.122149980000492010-112010-11-022010-11-06It is recommended that Survey H12605 supersede all charted depths on chart 12214.US4DE11M80000272013-01-102013-02-13falseIt is recommended that Survey H12605 supersede all charted depths on chart US4DE11M.US5DE10M40000152013-01-092013-01-09falseIt is recommended that Survey H12605 supersede all charted depths on chart US5DE10M.US5NJ24M10000102013-01-152013-01-15falseIt is recommended that Survey H12605 supersede all charted depths on chart US5NJ24M. A total of 20 AWOIS items were assigned in Survey H12605. Reference the Final Feature File for additional details.No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey. A total of 9 charted significant features were verified in Survey H12605. Reference the Final Feature File for additional details. A total of 16 uncharted significant features were found in Survey H12605. Reference the Final Feature File for additional details.1One Danger to Navigation was found at the charted disposal area 1.5 NM North-east of Brown Shoal Light. Danger to Navigation Reports are included in Appendix II of this report. An area of potentially hazardous shoaling was identified at the 30ft disposal area located at latitude 38-56-48.6 N and longitude 075-05-06.01 W. Reference the the Danger to Navigation Report included in Appendix II for further information.The Brandywine Range portion of the Delaware River Channel extends into the northern section of Survey H12605. The minimum published depth for the maintained portion of this portion of the channel is 39.8 ft (left outside quarter). The minimum published depth in the channel agrees with surveyed depths to within a tenth of a foot (0.10 ft). Least depth found in the channel was 39.74 ft. Reference figure 8 for further details.9Least Depth Surveyed in Brandywine Rangefile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_chartcomparison_channel2.jpgNo bottom samples were required for this survey.No shoreline existed within the extents of the Sheet Area.Prior survey comparisons exist for this survey, but were not investigated.Four Aids to Navigation are located within the survey area. Each Aid to Navigation within the extents of the Survey Area was found to be in place and serving its intended purpose.No overhead features exist for this survey.No submarine features exist for this survey.Ferry routes exist in the Survey Area. Ferries operate from terminals located in Lewes, DE and Cape May, NJ. Established and frequently used ferry routes cross the southern portion of the Survey Area in a generally Southeast to Northwest direction. No ferry terminals existed within the survey sheet limits.No platforms exist for this survey.Large sand waves with peak-to-trough heights of over 10m were observed in the southern portion of the survey area.10H12605 Sand Wavesfile:///Z:/H12605/Data/Descriptive_Report/Report/DR%20images/H12605_sandwaves_sideview.pngNo present or planned construction or dredging exist within the survey limits.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.No new insets are recommended for this area.As Chief of Party, Field operations for this hydrographic survey were conducted under my direct supervision, with frequent personal checks of progress and adequacy. I have reviewed the attached survey data and reports.All field sheets, this Descriptive Report, and all accompanying records and data are approved. All records are forwarded for final review and processing to the Processing Branch.The survey data meets or exceeds requirements as set forth in the NOS Hydrographic Surveys and Specifications Deliverables Manual, Field Procedures Manual, Letter Instructions, and all HSD Technical Directives. These data are adequate to supersede charted data in their common areas. This survey is complete and no additional work is required with the exception of deficiencies noted in the Descriptive Report.CDR James Crocker, NOAACommanding Officer2014-04-25LT Megan Guberski, NOAAField Operations Officer2014-04-25LTJG Charles Wisotzkey, NOAASheet Manager2014-04-25