OPR-P183-FA-15Shumagin IslandsShumagin IslandsNOAA Ship FAIRWEATHERH1278048 NM East of Simeonof IslandAlaskaUnited States400002015CDR David J. Zezula, NOAANavigable Area2015-04-062015-05-252015-05-29Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscattermetersUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)UTCPacific Hydrographic BranchThe 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. Notes in red were generated during office processing. The processing branch concurs with all information and recommendations in the DR unless otherwise noted. Page numbering may be interrupted or non-sequential. All pertinent records for this survey, including the Descriptive Report, are archived at the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and can be retrieved via http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/.NOAAThe survey areas is located in the Shumagin Islands, 8 NM East of Simeonof Island, Alaska.55.0108969444159.1098254.8024925158.940514139Survey limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the National Ocean Service Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD) dated approved April 2014. The purpose of this project is to provide contemporary surveys to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charting products. This area is considered navigationally significant and of critical survey priority. In addition, soundings will support a new, larger scale navigation chart.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Survey coverage was in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.H12780 Survey OutlineSupportFiles\SurveyOutline.png2805000000014.3430280600.9930000011.5470280800000005.7180S2200633.32400000000634.270000031.4904.903000070.542015-05-252015-05-262015-05-272015-05-282015-05-29Refer 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.28058.641.1228068.641.1228088.641.12S22070.44.7ApplanixPOS/MV V4Positioning and Attitude SystemRESONSVP71Sound Speed SystemSea-BirdSBE 19plusConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorRESONSVP70Sound Speed SystemRESON7125MBESKongsbergEM710MBESRolls-RoyceMVP 200Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorCrosslines were collected, processed and compared in accordance with section 5.2.4.3 of the Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD), approved April 2014. Surface differencing in CARIS Bathy DataBASE was used to assess crossline agreement with main-scheme lines. Figure 3 depicts a difference surface between an 8-meter surface made with main scheme lines only and an 8-meter surface made with crosslines only. This difference surface is submitted digitally in the Separates II folder. The two surfaces agree within 0.5 meters, therefore crosslines agree with main scheme lines within the total allowable vertical and horizontal uncertainty in their common areas.Statistical information for differences between cross lines and mainschemeSupportFiles\H12780_Crossline_DifferenceSurface.pngGraphical representation of difference between crossline and mainscheme surfacesSupportFiles\Crossline_Differencing_Surface.png0.010.08S22010.5280520.5280620.5280820.5The areas of overlap between surveys were reviewed in CARIS HIPS by surface differencing eight meter and 16 meter combined surfaces to assess surface agreement. Statistics were calculated in Pydro64. Adequate data overlap between all surveys was achieved.All survey junctions with H12780SupportFiles\JunctionOutline.pngH12759400002015NOAA Ship FAIRWEATHERNWSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12759 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.37 m and -0.37 m.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12759SupportFiles\H12759_H12780_Difference.pngStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12759SupportFiles\H12759_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngH12760400002015NOAA Ship FAIRWEATHERNSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12760 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.24 m and -0.24 m.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12760SupportFiles\H12760_H12780_Difference.pngStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12760SupportFiles\H12760_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngH12781400002015NOAA Ship RAINIERSSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12781 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.30 m and -0.30 m.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12781SupportFiles\H12781_H12780_DifferenceNEW.jpgStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12781SupportFiles\H12781_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngH12474100002012NOAA Ship RAINIERWSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12474 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.23 m and -0.23 m.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12474SupportFiles\H12474_H12780_DifferenceNEW.jpgStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12474SupportFiles\H12474_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngH12475400002012NOAA Ship RAINIERWSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12475 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.36 m and -0.36 m. There were notable differences in the Northern end of the junction due to the rocky nature of the overlapping area.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12475SupportFiles\H12475_H12780_DifferenceNEW.jpgStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12475SupportFiles\H12475_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngH12595400002013NOAA Ship RAINIERSWSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS was used to assess junction agreement between H12595 and H12780. The difference between surfaces was generally between 0.37 m and -0.37 m.Graphical representation of difference between junction H12780 and H12595SupportFiles\H12595_H12780_DifferenceNEW.jpgStatistical information for junction comparison between sheet H12780 and H12595SupportFiles\H12595_H12780_DifferenceStats.pngSonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.None ExistThere were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness.Sea State IssuesDuring acquisition on H12780 multiple weather events occurred off the coast of the Shumagin Islands causing large swell conditions in the working area. All MBES data for H12780 was collected in three to six foot sea surface swells. Due to the swell, significant roll of 4 to 6 degrees with a peak magnitude of 7 degrees and with pitch and heave of 1 to 3 degrees was experienced. In some cases, the rolling pitching caused the Kongsberg EM-710 to partially lose bottom tracking. In many cases, rolls caused the Kongsberg EM-710 to periodically lose bottom tracking producing significant noise resulting in the loss of reliable soundings in the outer beams. The data was cleaned out where erroneous fliers were produced.Pitch and Roll in Attitude EditorSupportFiles\Pitch_Roll.pngPitch and Roll in SubsetSupportFiles\Pitch_Roll_forDR.jpgBlowout in SubsetSupportFiles\Blowout_2.jpgBlowout in SubsetSupportFiles\Blowout_Pitch_Roll_forDR.pngCasts were conducted every 10-20 minutes while towing the Moving Vessel Profiler during ship acquisition. During launch acquisition casts were conducted approximately ever 2 hours.Sound speed measurements were conducted as discussed in the Data Acquisition section of the DAPR.All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.IHO UncertaintyIt was found that 99.93% of nodes in the H12780_4m_MLLW.csar and 99.99% of nodes in the H12780_8m_MLLW_Final.csar meet or exceed IHO Order 1 specifications for all survey soundings of survey H12780. See Figures 21-23, and Standards Compliance Review in Appendix II. To assess vertical accuracy standards, a child layer titled "IHO1" was created for each of the four meter and eight meter and "IHO2" for eight meter finalized surface using the equations as stated in C.2.1 of the DAPR.IHO 1 Uncertainty LayerSupportFiles\IHO1.pngUncertainty standards for 4m finalized surfaceSupportFiles\H12780_4m_MLLW_Final_TVU_QC.pngUncertainty standards for 8m finalized surfaceSupportFiles\H12780_8m_MLLW_Final_TVU_QC.pngDensityDensity requirements for H12780 were achieved with at least 99.97% of finalized surface nodes containing five or more soundings, see Standards Compliance Review in Appendix II.Density LayerSupportFiles\Density.pngObject detection coverage for 4m finalized surfaceSupportFiles\H12780_4m_MLLW_Final_Density.pngObject detection coverage for 8m finalized surfaceSupportFiles\H12780_8m_MLLW_Final_Density.pngHoliday AssessmentSurvey H12780 contained no holidays. Holidays were assessed according to the May 2015 HSSD. See project correspondence folder from HSD OPS.All 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 .7k file for Reson 7125 data. Kongsberg EM710 stores the backscatter data in the .all file. The data was submitted directly to NGDC to be archived and to PHB where the data will be processed. One line per day of backscatter was processed in the field by the field unit. CarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.12N/AN/A2015-04-15ProcessingCarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.13N/AN/A2015-06-17ProcessingCarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.14N/AN/A2015-06-17ProcessingCarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.16N/AN/A2015-07-11ProcessingCarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.17N/AN/A2015-08-15ProcessingApplanixPosPAC7.11N/A2015-03-06ProcessingApplanixPosPAC7.12N/A2015-06-15ProcessingNOAAPydro14.6N/AN/A2015-07-09ProcessingNOAAFledermaus7.4.3N/AN/A2015-07-12ProcessingNOAA Profile V_5_3_3H12780_MB_4m_MLLWCUBE4NOAA_4mComplete MBESH12780_MB_8m_MLLWCUBE8NOAA_8mComplete MBESH12780_MB_4m_MLLW_FinalCUBE43680NOAA_4mComplete MBESH12780_MB_8m_MLLW_FinalCUBE872160NOAA_8mComplete MBESH12780_MB_8m_MLLW_CombinedCUBE8NOAA_8mComplete MBESThe NOAA CUBE parameters mandated in HSSD were used for the creation of all CUBE BASE surfaces in Survey H12780. The surfaces have been reviewed where noisy data, or ‘fliers’ are incorporated into the gridded solution causing the surface to be more shoal or deeper than the true seafloor. Where these spurious soundings cause the gridded surface to be shoaler or deeper than the reliably measured seabed by greater than the maximum allowable Total Vertical Uncertainty at that depth, the noisy data have been rejected and the surface recomputed.Data LogsData acquisition and processing notes are included in the acquisition and processing logs, and additional processing such as final tide and sound velocity application is noted in the H12780 Data Log spreadsheet. All data logs are submitted digitally in the Separates I folder.Critical SoundingsDesignation of soundings followed procedures as outlined in section 5.2.1.2 of the HSSD. Survey H12780 contained 38 critical soundings which were designated in CARIS HIPS. These soundings were used to draw the CUBE surface to the sounding which most accurately represented the sea floor in cases where the surface deviated from the sounding more than the vertical IHO requirements allowed. In general, all designated soundings were found to be located in the rocky areas.Diabled Beams During CARIS ConversionDuring Conversion some beams were automatically disabled causing some areas of low density. It these areas rejected soundings were re-accepted. The surface accurately represents the sea-floor with no density holidays.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterDiscrete ZoningERZTSand Point, AK94594509459450.tidFinal ApprovedP183FA2015CORP_Reg.zdfFinal2015-06-082015-06-17The ERZT model file was applied in accordance with the FPM. Separation model was used for the vertical transformation of ellipsoid-referenced data to MLLW and is applied for data submission. Soundings were merged in CARIS HIPS and SIPS using the Apply GPS Tide function, and TPU was computed with the new separation model uncertainty value. See correspondence in Appendix II for additional information on separation model use and approval.The hydrographer was provided two vertical control assignments including the traditional tides product of surveyed soundings reduced to MLLW using .tid and .zdf files above. The hydrographer was successful in creating an ellipsoidally referenced zoned tides (ERZT) model to transform ellipsoidal survey heights to MLLW as their final vertical control product, rendering the traditional vertical control products superfluous. The ERZT surface is named OPR-P183-FA-ERZT_Separation_Model.csarTide file is appended to this report.North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)UTM Zone 4NorthSingle Base9677ForsmanVessel kinematic data were post-processed using Applanix POSPac processing software and Single Base Positioning method described in the DAPR. Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) and associated error (RMS) data were applied to all MBES data in CARIS HIPS. For further details regarding the processing and quality control checks performed see the H12780 POSPAC Processing Logs spreadsheet located in the SBET folder with the GNSS data. See also the OPR-P183-FA-15 Horizontal and Vertical Control report, submitted under separate cover.Cold Bay, AK (289kHz)A comparison was performed between survey H12780 and chart 16540 using CARIS sounding and contour layers derived from the 8 meter surface. All data from H12780 should supersede previous charted data.165402528300000132010-102015-03-032015-02-14Soundings from survey H12780 generally agreed within 2 fathoms with charted depth on chart 16540. Due to the small scale of 16540, there were not many soundings to compare. One notable exception was observed in the SW corner of the sheet over a charted 57 fathom sounding, see Figure 27. Chart 16540 contains 30, 50, and 100 fathom contours. Sheet H12780 contains mostly depths between 50 and 100 fathoms. It is recommended to add a 40 fathom contour to accurately depict bottom contours on H12780.Disagreement with charted depths on south end of sheet H12780SupportFiles\ChartComparison.jpgDepiction of 40 and 50 fathom contours on sheet H12780SupportFiles\Contours.pngUS3AK50M300000172014-04-092014-04-09falseSoundings from survey H12780 generally agree within two fathoms of the soundings on chart US3AK50M. Contours in CARIS HIPS closely approximated the charted contours. See comments from Rastor Chart 16540 for more information.No AWOIS items were assigned for this survey.No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.No charted features exist for this survey.No uncharted features exist for this survey.No Danger to Navigation Reports were submitted for this survey.No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.No channels exist for this survey. There are no designated anchorages, precautionary areas, safety fairways, traffic separation schemes, pilot boarding areas, or channel and range lines within the survey limits.Three bottom samples were assigned, investigated, and included in the H12780 Final Feature File.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.Prior survey comparisons exist for this survey, but were not investigated.No Aids to navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey.No overhead features exist for this survey.No submarine features exist for this survey.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No significant features exist for this survey.No 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 David J. ZezulaChief of Party2015-08-31LT Ryan A. WartickField Operations Officer2015-08-31LT Matthew M. ForneyField Operations Officer2015-08-31HCST Douglas A. BravoChief Survey Technician2015-08-31ENS Alisha M. FrielSheet Manager2015-08-31Data Acquisition and Processing Report2015-09-01Horizontal and Vertical Control Report2015-09-01Coast Pilot Report2015-08-25