North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Univeral Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 5 NorthKodiak, AK (313 kHz)AKHIOKCORP AK2005AC02OLDHARBOR_AK2006AC34QUARTZ_CRK AK2005AC38SHUYAKISSP AK2006AC39PILLARMTN_AK2006AC67KODIAK 6KOD6Smart BaseMean Lower Low Water2015-12-102015-11-27945-7292Kodiak IslandP136RA2015_Rev2_CORP.zdfFinal9457292.tidFinal ApprovedSee attached Tide Note dated December 10, 2015.ERZTH12688_WGS84_MLLW_SEP_1000mSee attached ERZT Capability Memo dated July 12, 2016.Ellipsoidally Referenced Zoned Tides (ERZT) methods were used to transform between the ellipsoid and water level data. A 1000-meter resolution separation model between the ellipsoid and MLLW was computed using the real-time position measurements observed during the survey relative to the water line and the loaded zoned tide file (ZDF). "GPS tides" were then computed using the above separation model and the corrected GPS-height-to-water level data (SBET). For additional information see the OPR-P136-RA-15 ERZT memo submitted separately.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.40000AlaskaH12688United States1Kizhuyak BayOPR-P136-RA-15NOAA Ship RAINIERNorth Coast of Kodiak IslandNorth Coast of Kodiak Island, AKUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)Edward J. Van Den Ameele, CDR/NOAA2015-09-09UTC2015Navigable AreaPacific Hydrographic Branch2015-09-302015-09-23Multibeam Echo Sounder BackscatterMultibeam Echo SounderThe purpose of this survey is to provide contemporary surveys to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charts. All separates are filed with the hydrographic data. Any revisions to the Descriptive Report (DR) generated during office processing are shown in bold, red italic text. The processing branch maintains the DR as a field unit product, therefore, all information and recommendations within the body of the DR are considered preliminary unless otherwise noted. The final disposition of surveyed features is represented in the OCS nautical chart update products. All pertinent records for this survey, including the DR, are archived at the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and can be retrieved via http://www.ncei.noaa.gov/.metersNOAAInshore limit to 8 meters water depth100m spaced Set Line Spacing, Single Beam Echosounder (SBES), or Multibeam Echosounder (MBES) with concurrent backscatterGreater than 8 meters water depthMBES with concurrent BackscatterComplete multibeam echosounder coverage was achieved within the assigned survey area except where noted. Eight holidays measuring approximately 3 by 20 meters are located near the northeast shoreline of the survey (Figure 7). The holidays were examined to ensure that no navigationally significant features were evident in the surrounding data.\SupportFiles\H12688_Holiday_with_Inset.jpgH12688 complete coverage holidays.The purpose of this project is to provide contemporary data to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charting products, which will support Kodiak's large fishing fleet and increasing levels of passenger vessel traffic.Survey H12688 met data quality standards as outlined in NOS Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD) May 2015, including the 5 soundings per node density requirement. In order to extract statistics of the density achieved, the density layer of each finalized surface was queried within Caris then examined in Excel. Overall, the required data density was achieved in 99.96% of nodes (Figure 3). The finalized CSAR surface IHO compliance tool within Pydro was used to analyze H12688 MBES data; the results showed that an average of 99.98% of H12688 nodes met HSSD object detection requirements (Figures 4-6).The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.\SupportFiles\H12688_GPS_Density_Stats.pngSummary table showing the percentage of nodes satisfying the 5 soundings density requirement, subdivided by depth range.\SupportFiles\H12688_MB_1m_GPS_Tides_Final_Density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of H12688 1-meter resolution MBES data.\SupportFiles\H12688_MB_2m_GPS_Tides_Final_Density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of H12688 2-meter resolution MBES data.\SupportFiles\H12688_MB_4m_GPS_Tides_Final_Density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of H12688 4-meter resolution MBES data.7.3700102015-09-232015-09-242015-09-292015-09-3000207.79000013.556.500024.4200002.38028010071.4100000028020037.0400000028030074.92000011.1702804\SupportFiles\H12688_Survey_Coverage.jpgH12668 survey coverage (Chart 16594).57.44152.557.5152.55This survey is referred to as "Kizhuyak Bay" (priority 1) within the Project Instructions. The area covers approximately seven square nautical miles of the southern half of Kizhuyak Bay on the north coast of Kodiak Island, Alaska (Figure 1).\SupportFiles\Survey_Area.pngOverlay of H12688 acquired survey coverage on Chart 16594.Deteriorating weather conditions necessitated an earlier than planned departure from the project area resulting in a deviation from the assigned sheet limits (Figure 2). A small area along the western shoreline of Kizhuyak Bay was not surveyed as assigned.\SupportFiles\HypackScreenGrab_with_Label.jpgH12688 deviation from assigned sheet limits.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.2016-05-06Commanding Officer, NOAA Ship RainierEdward J. Van Den Ameele, CDR/NOAA2016-05-06Field Operations Officer, NOAA Ship RainierSteven Loy, LT/NOAA2016-05-06Chief Survey Technician, NOAA Ship RainierJames B. Jacobson2016-05-06Junior Officer, NOAA Ship RainierSamuel W. McKay, ENS/NOAAAll sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.Backscatter data, logged as .7k files, were acquired but not formally processed by Rainier personnel. Sample backscatter lines were reviewed on Rainier for quality control purposes. The data was submitted directly to the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI).There were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.None Exist40000H12512NOAA Ship RAINIER2012NThe overlap with survey H12512 encompassed approximately 0.32 square nautical miles along the northern boundary of H12688. A comparison was made using a difference surface derived from the H12688_MB_GPS_Tides_4m_Combined CUBE surface and the H12512_MB_MLLW_8m_Combined CUBE surface. Analysis of the difference surface indicated that H12688 is an average of 0.1 meter shoaler than H12512 with a standard deviation of 0.3 meters. The difference surface was compared to the allowable TVU standards specified in the HSSD. 94.00% of the depth differences between H12668 and H12512 were within the allowable uncertainties. This difference is likely due to the dynamic nature of the bottom in the overlapping area. Horizontal differences between WGS84 and NAD83 could contribute to these disagreements.\SupportFiles\JunctionOverview.pngH12688 Junction Overview\SupportFiles\JunctionAgreement.pngH12688 Junction AgreementSince both surveys were processed in NAD83, a difference in horizontal datum would not cause the disagreements noted in the junction area.A junction comparison was conducted between H12688 and 2012 Rainier survey H12512.For survey H12688, 29 sound speed profiles were acquired using SBE 19plus CTD probes at discrete locations within the survey area at least once every four hours, when significant changes in surface sound speed were observed, or when surveying in a new area. All casts were concatenated into a master file and applied to survey data using the "Nearest in distance within time (4 hours)" profile selection method.0.020456ERZT032801, 2802, 2803, 28040.15Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for survey H12688 were derived from a combination of fixed values for equipment and vessel characteristics, as well as field assigned values for sound speed uncertainties. Tidal uncertainties were provided by NOAA's Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS). The Zoned Tides were not directly used in reducing the soundings to MLLW. Therefore, no tidal uncertainty values were entered into the tide value section of the Caris compute TPU function related to ZDF; however, a measured tide uncertainty value of 0.020456 meters was entered to account for ERZT processing methods. See the OPR-P136-RA-15 ERZT memo included in Supplemental Correspondence for further information. In addition to the usual a priori estimates of uncertainty, some real-time and post processed uncertainty sources were also incorporated into the depth estimates of this survey. Real-time uncertainties from Reson MBES sonars were recorded and applied during post processing. Applanix TrueHeave (POS) files, which record estimates of heave uncertainty, were also applied during post processing. Finally, the post processed uncertainties associated with vessel roll, pitch, yaw and navigation, were applied in Caris HIPS using SBET / RMS files generated using POSPac software. Uncertainty values of submitted finalized grids were calculated in Caris using the "Greater of the Two" of uncertainty and standard deviation (scaled to 95%). The finalized CSAR IHO compliance tool within Pydro was used to analyze H12688 MBES data. The results showed that 99.99% of H12688 nodes across all depth ranges, met HSSD TVU uncertainty requirements (Figures 12-14). \SupportFiles\H12688_MB_1m_GPS_Tides_Final_TVU_QC.pngPydro histogram plot showing HSSD uncertainty compliance of H12688 1-meter resolution grid.\SupportFiles\H12688_MB_2m_GPS_Tides_Final_TVU_QC.pngPydro histogram plot showing HSSD uncertainty compliance of H12688 2-meter resolution grid. \SupportFiles\H12688_MB_2m_GPS_Tides_Final_TVU_QC.pngPydro histogram plot showing HSSD uncertainty compliance of H12688 4-meter resolution grid. Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.Multibeam crosslines were acquired by Rainier launches 2801 and 2804. A 2-meter CUBE surface was created using only H12688 mainscheme lines, and a second 2-meter surface was created using only crosslines. A 2-meter difference surface was then generated in Caris from which statistics were derived. The difference surface was compared to the HSSD allowable total vertical uncertainty (TVU) standards. The results showed that 99.98% of depth differences between H12688 mainscheme and crossline data met HSSD TVU standards (Figure 10).\SupportFiles\H12688_XLs.jpgH12688 crosslines (mainscheme lines shown in gray).\SupportFiles\H12688_Crossline_HSSD_Compliance.pngSummary table indicating percentage of difference surface nodes between H12688 mainscheme and crossline data that met HSSD allowable TVU standards.\SupportFiles\CrosslineStatsComparison.pngH12688 mainscheme to crossline comparison statistics using ERZT (left) and ZDF (right) methods.There were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness.None ExistAll equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.NOAA Profile V_5_3_3.9.0.19HIPS and SIPSCaris1NOAA_1mH12688_MB_1m_GPS_Tides61.5-0.3CUBEComplete MBES2NOAA_2mH12688_MB_2m_GPS_Tides61.5-0.3CUBEComplete MBES4NOAA_4mH12688_MB_4m_GPS_Tides61.5-0.3CUBEComplete MBES1NOAA_1mH12688_MB_1m_GPS_Tides_Final20-1CUBEComplete MBES2NOAA_2mH12688_MB_2m_GPS_Tides_Final4018CUBEComplete MBES4NOAA_4mH12688_MB_4m_GPS_Tides_Final61.536CUBEComplete MBESAll Caris CUBE surfaces were created with lines reduced to MLLW via ERZT methods. 1 sounding was designated in accordance with HSSD requirements.8.81.128018.81.128028.81.128038.81.12804Refer 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.Positioning and Attitude SystemPOS M/V v4ApplanixMBESSeaBat 7125 SV2ResonMBESSeaBat 7125-BResonSound Speed SystemSVP71ResonConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorSBE 19plus SEACAT ProfilerSea-Bird ElectronicsENC US4AK5PM coincides with raster 16594 with the exception of the 29-fathom depth in the northwestern corner of the surveyed area (Figure 19).\SupportFiles\RasterENCDifference.pngUS4AK5PM overlaid on 16594 with soundings.789002015-11-06false2015-11-065US4AK5PMThe comparison of soundings from Chart 16594 and H12688 showed general agreement within 1 fathom. The exceptions were noted and varied from 4 to 7 fathoms in difference (Figure 17).\SupportFiles\FullComparison.png16594 with sounding and depth differences highlighted.\SupportFiles\FinalContours.png16594 overlayed with H12688 contours.7890025532015-0116594142015-11-172015-11-21Chart comparisons were performed using a Caris sounding layer and a contour layer based on the 4m combined surface. The contours and soundings were overlaid on the charts and compared for general agreement and to identify areas of significant change.No channels exist for this survey. There are no designated anchorages, precautionary areas, safety fairways, traffic separation schemes, pilot boarding areas, or channel and range lines within the survey limits.All shoal and hazardous features were investigated in accordance with the Project Instructions and the HSSD, and are addressed in the Final Feature File submitted with this report.Several new features were found during shoreline verification. The new features were addressed as required with S-57 attribution and recorded in the H12688 Final Feature File.No charted features that contain the label PA, ED, PD or Rep exist for this survey.No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.One bottom sample was acquired for this survey, and is detailed in the Final Features File accompanying this report. The assigned bottom samples for this survey were not acquired due to an earlier than planned departure resulting from deteriorating weather conditions.The Final Feature File is not appended to this report.No Danger to Navigation Reports were submitted for this survey.Shoreline verification was conducted near predicted mean lower low water in accordance with applicable sections of the FPM and HSSD. There were 47 features for this survey. All assigned features were addressed as required with S-57 attribution and recorded in the H12688 Final Feature File to best represent the features as chart scale.There were 48 features submitted for this survey.No significant features exist for this survey.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No Aids to navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey.Prior survey comparisons exist for this survey, but were not investigated.No platforms exist for this survey.No present or planned construction or dredging exist within the survey limits.No submarine features exist for this survey.No overhead features exist for this survey.It is recommended that the area between the sheet limits and the area surveyed be investigated.Section D.2.10 refers to the area described in Section A.1 of this report, which was not surveyed due to deteriorating weather conditions.No new insets are recommended for this area.