OPR-S327-RA-15Kotzebue Sound, AKKotzebue Sound, AKNOAA Ship RainierH1282918Commence survey when gauge 94BBBBB is operational. Coordinate with HSD-OPS.2 Miles NW of EspenbergAlaskaUnited States400002015Edward J. Van Den Ameele, CDR/NOAANavigable Area2015-05-282015-08-062015-08-12Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscatterSide Scan SonarmetersUniversal 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. 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/.NOAAThe project area is referred to as H12828 "2 Miles NE of Espenberg" (Priority 17) and H12829 "2 Miles NW of Espenberg" (Priority 18) within the Project Instructions. The area is directly north of Espenberg, AK (Figure 1). 66.6875706944164.28689866.5901216111163.717958111H12829 and H12828 combined survey area as assigned in Project Instructions dated May 28, 2015 (Chart 16005).SupportFiles\Original survey area.jpgOutline of area surveyed as part of H12829.SupportFiles\Survey_Outline.pngOn August 7, 2015 H12829 and H12828 were combined and given the registry number H12829. Details are included in "RA Combine Sheets H12828 and H12829.pdf" located in the supplemental correspondence folder. Additional fixed-line spacing mainscheme lines were run with Rainier launch 2801 south of the survey limits to provide preliminary information regarding the contouring of Kotzebue Sound near the town of Espenberg, AK.See attached correspondence regarding revisions to sheet limits and coverage requirements.The purpose of this survey is to provide contemporary data to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charting products. Information for survey priorities was collected from a number of users/customers in the region including: Alaska Marine Pilots, USCG D17 & buoy tender Hickory, Crowley Tug & Barge, as well as field reports from USCG and NOAA personnel.The survey is partially adequate to supersede previous data.H12829 data collected with 100% side scan sonar and concurrent multibeam met NOS Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD) May 2015 quality requirements and Project Instruction coverage standards with exceptions as noted in this report. The finalized CSAR surface IHO compliance tool within Pydro was used to analyze H12829 MBES data. The results showed that 99.3% of MBES nodes on the 1 meter surface and 99.4% of MBES nodes on the 2 meter surface of H12829 met HSSD object detection coverage requirements. Data collected with only multibeam is adequate to supersede previous data only when shoaler than previously charted. (Figures 3, 4, 5). SSS data were qualitatively examined by the hydrographer utilizing a SSS mosaic in accordance with the DAPR. Summary table showing the percentage of nodes satisfying the HSSD 5 soundings density requirements, sub-divided by the appropriate depth ranges.SupportFiles\Density_Report.jpgPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of 1-meter surface of H12829 MBES data.SupportFiles\H12829_MB_1m_MLLW_FINAL_Density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of 2-meter surface of H12829 MBES data.SupportFiles\H12829_MB_2m_MLLW_FINAL_Density.pngInshore limit to 8 meters water depth300 meter spaced Set Line Spacing SBES or MBES with backscatter. Please ensure the following: 1) Indications of shoaling falling between set line spacing main scheme lines must be investigated 2) Set Line Spacing Line orientation should be approximately perpendicular to iosbaths whenever possible.8 meters to 20 meters water depthEither 1) 100% SSS with concurrent set line spacing SBES or MBES with backscatter, or 2) complete MBES with backscatter. Note: Complete MBES is sufficient for both determination of least depth identified with SSS and for disproving a feature - 100% SSS is insufficient to disprove a feature. Refer to Section 6.1.2 of the HSSD to confirm proper SSS acquisition paramters. Gaps in SSS coverage should be treated as gaps in MBES coverage and addressed accordingly.Greater than 20 meters water depthComplete MBES coverage with backscatterOn July 10, 2015 NOAA Hydrographic Survey Division (HSD) Operations Branch altered the coverage requirements for Kotzebue Sound surveys. For specific changes, refer to "OPR-S327-RAFA-15 Updated Coverage Requirements.pdf" located in the supplemental correspondence folder included in the report. On July 14, 2015 NOAA HSD further altered coverage requirements for Kotzebue Sound surveys. Specific details are included in "Second Change OPR-S327-RAFA-15 Updated Coverage Requirements2.pdf" located in the supplemental correspondence folder. An earlier than expected departure on August 12, 2015 prevented further investigation, at fixed line-spacing, of the area from the assigned corridor north to the original sheet limits. H12829 data was acquired by S221 with set 160m line spacing which provided 100% SSS coverage with concurrent multibeam within the corridor and with some expansion out to the original survey limits. Multibeam crosslines were acquired within the limits of the corridor by launch 2803. Additional fixed line-spacing multibeam lines were acquired outside of the sheet and corridor limits by launches 2803 and 2801 (Figure 6). Complete side scan and multibeam coverage was not achieved as specified in the project instructions due to the unplanned early departure of the ship before the project could be completed. Holidays in the side scan data (Figure 7) due to refraction, software setting errors, and ship's heading (Figure 8) could not be resolved before leaving the project area and are detailed in the H12829_Holidays_SSS.hob file. They were identified by examining the imagery in the SSS editor, identifying areas of potential holidays, and comparing with adjacent lines. Areas determined to be holidays were digitized in a .hob file. Potential contacts detected by side scan were not investigated (Figure 9 and Figure 10) and are included in the H12829_Contacts.hob file. Potential contacts were identified by examining the length of shadow and, if the shadow indicated over 1 meter in height, digitized into a .hob file. Limited multibeam holidays were observed due to sonar data blowouts (Figure 11) or acoustic shadowing. Instances of acoustic shadowing occurred in the 18-20m range and only impacted the 1m surface. The 2m surface did not experience shadowing. Where multibeam holidays occurred the side scan data was examined to identify potential dangers or features. No coincidental features were noted. Lines 0034_20150807_105548_Rainier and 0000_20150808_000831_Rainier were determined to be ERS holidays due to unresolvable SBET issues and were excluded from submitted surfaces. The data remains available and is reduced to MLLW via ERZT methods. The multibeam data and associated side scan were examined for hazards and contacts but was not included in the bathymetry. More detail is available in the Vertical and Horizontal Control section of this report. H12829 Mixed Coverage Survey Outline with revised transit corridor outlined in black overlaid on Chart 16005.SupportFiles\Mixed coverage map.pngSSS holidays overlaid on the mosaic.SupportFiles\SSS holidays overlaid on mosaic.pngSSS and MBES Holidays caused by transition to JSF file format and ship's heading errors.SupportFiles\Sidescan and MBES whole due to JSF.pngOverview of contacts detected with SSS.SupportFiles\Side scan contacts.pngAn inspection of a single contact along with the >1m shadow measurement.SupportFiles\SSS contact.pngMBES blowout leading to holiday production.SupportFiles\MBES blowout.pngSee attached correspondence regarding revisions to sheet limits and coverage requirements. The H12829_Holidays_SSS.hob file is not appended to this report.OPR-S327-RA-15 altered coverage requirements, July 14, 2015.SupportFiles\Full corridor survey requirements.png2801023.800000002803000000070.30S22107.1000492.0000030.9000492.0070.3013.4100044.22015-08-062015-08-072015-08-082015-08-12Refer to the 2015 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.28018.81.128038.81.1S22170.44.7NOAA Ship Rainier S221 steams away after deploying a launch.SupportFiles\S221 during acquisition and launch deployment.jpgLaunch 2802 returns to S221 (all launches are identical).SupportFiles\Launch 2802 returns to the ship.jpgAll data for survey H12829 was acquired by NOAA Ship Rainier and its survey launches 2801 and 2803. The vessels acquired MBES depth soundings, backscatter data, side scan sonar imagery, and sound speed profiles.ApplanixPOS M/V v4Positioning and Attitude SystemApplied MicrosystemsMicroCTDConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorOdim Brooke OceanMoving Vessel Profiler 200Sound Speed SystemSeabirdSBE 19 and 19Plus V2 SeaCAT ProfilerConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorResonSVP71Surface Sound Speed ProbeResonSVP70Surface Sound Speed ProbeKongsbergEM710MBESEdgetech4200SSSResonSeabat 7125-BMBESMultibeam crosslines were acquired using Rainier launch 2803. A 1-meter CUBE surface was created using only H12829 mainscheme lines and a second 1-meter surface was created using only crosslines. A 1-meter difference surface was then generated in CARIS from which statistics were derived. The difference surface was compared to the IHO allowable total vertical uncertainty (TVU) standards. In total 99.999% of the depth differences between H12829 ERZT mainscheme and crossline data met HSSD TVU standards (Figure 15). This analysis was performed with final tides applied and reduced to MLLW using ERZT methods. A mainscheme to crossline comparison between H12829 data reduced to MLLW using traditional TCARI methods and ERZT methods was conducted (Figure 16). TCARI mainscheme to crossline data differed by an average of -0.026 meters with a standard deviation of 0.156 meters. ERZT mainscheme to crossline data differed by an average of -0.02 meters with a standard deviation of 0.082 meters.Summary table indicating percentage of difference surface nodes between H12829 mainscheme and crossline data that met HSSD allowable TVU standards.SupportFiles\Crossline statistics_ERZT.pngH12829 mainscheme to crossline comparison statistics using TCARI (left) and ERZT (right) methods.SupportFiles\TCARI vs ERZT stats.jpg0.0303980ERZTS22110.052801, 280330.15Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for H12829 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 accounted for by examining the created 1000 meters separation model and statistically determining a measured uncertainty. The measured tide uncertainty value of 0.030398 meters was entered to account for ERZT processing methods. See the OPR-S327-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 the survey. Real-time uncertainties from Reson and Kongsberg MBES sonars were incorporated 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 surfaces were analyzed using the Pydro Finalized CSAR Surface IHO Compliance showing >99.9% of the nodes met HSSD uncertainty requirements (Figure 17). Pydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD uncertainty standards compliance of H12829 MBES data.SupportFiles\uncertainty standards.pngSee attached ERZT Capability Memo.H12829 junctions with two other surveys which were part of the same project. H12830 lies to the west of this survey and was conducted by NOAA Ship Fairweather. Sheet 12827 lies to the east and was conducted by NOAA Ship Rainier. H12830400002015NOAA Ship FAIRWEATHERWJunction analysis will be completed at the Pacific Hydrographic Branch.The junction analysis between H12830 and H12829 has been completed during office review. The two surveys junction very well, with a mean surface difference of 0.02m and a 2-sigma std dev of 0.2m. This junction covers a depth range of 12.4m to 19.5m.H12827400002015NOAA Ship RAINIEREDetails related to the junction comparison made with this sheet are contained in the descriptive report for H12827. From the H12827 DR: Overlap with survey H12829 was approximately 660 meters wide along the western boundary of H12827. Depths in the junction area range from 8.0 to 23.6 meters. For the respective depths, the 2-meter difference surface was compared to the allowable TVU standards specified in the HSSD. Analysis of the 2-meter difference surface indicated a mean difference of -0.005 meters with a standard deviation of 0.166 meters. In total, 99.5% of the depth differences between H12827 and junction survey H12829 are within allowable uncertainties. These results were confirmed during the survey review for H12829.Ice scours present in the survey area were utilized to periodically assess effectiveness of SSS imagery during acquisition in an effort to comply with HSSD confidence check requirements. Effective swath coverage was noted in acquisition logs.Side Scan Navigation DataErrors in SSS heading, velocity, speed, and navigation data were prolific throughout the survey in ship (S221) towed data and created "smeared" regions in the SSS mosaic. The source of these errors is unknown. Due to the large number of these errors, they have not been edited from the data (see Appendix II, Supplemental Survey Records & Correspondence document "Proceeding on RA Kotzebue Surveys.pdf"). These errors only affect the appearance and quality of the mosaic; all SSS data were examined in SIPS to ensure that all significant contacts were detected. Very few contacts were detected throughout this survey, and where contacts were found, navigation data were examined to ensure that an accurate position was calculated for each contact. Refraction affecting the quality of the outer edges of the SSS range scale was also frequent throughout the SSS data and is detailed further in B.2.6 Factors Affecting Soundings.Despite this report, the final mosaic submitted to the branch contained no such navigational errors and met the survey requirements where collected.Side Scan Sonar RefractionThe presence of a strong pycnocline (a marked difference in water density) sometimes caused refraction of side scan sonar imagery, reducing the effective range of SSS data for object detection. The SSS was adjusted in height as needed to minimize the refraction and adjacent lines were examined to determine appropriate quality overlap. Sound speed profiles were acquired on Rainier's launches 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. For operations conducted on S221 (Rainier), sound speed profiles were acquired using the Rolls Royce MVP200 approximately every fifteen minutes, when SIS indicated the surface sound speed varied from the previous cast by > 5.0m/s or when recommended by "Cast Time," a cast frequency program developed at the University of New Hampshire. Ninety six MVP and CTD casts were concatenated into a master file and applied to H12829 MBES data using the "Nearest in distance within time (4 hours)" profile selection method. All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.MBES backscatter data, logged as .7k files for launch acquired data and .ALL for ship acquired data, was 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).CarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.19CarisHIPS/SIPS9.0.19NOAA Profile V_5_3_3H12829_MB_1m_MLLWCUBE13.5724.32NOAA_1mSSS with Concurrent MBESH12829_MB_1m_MLLW_FINALCUBE13.5720.0NOAA_1mSSS with Concurrent MBESH12829_MB_2m_MLLWCUBE23.3824.31NOAA_2mSSS with Concurrent MBESH12829_MB_2m_MLLW_FINALCUBE218.024.31NOAA_2mSSS with Concurrent MBESH12829_SSS_MosaicSSS Mosaic10.025.0N/A100% SSSAll Caris CUBE surfaces were created with lines reduced to MLLW via ERZT methods except as noted below. Lines 0034_20150807_105548_Rainier and 0000_20150808_000831_Rainier were excluded from all surfaces due to their designation as ERS holidays. Additional details are included in the "H12829 H12821 H12820 ERS ERZT Report.pdf" in the supplemental correspondence folder and in the Vertical and Horizontal Control section of this report. No soundings were designated for this survey.See attached ERZT Capability Memo.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterERZTRed Dog Dock9491094Kotzebue9490424Good Hope Bay94698339469833Final Approved9490424Final Approved9491094Final ApprovedS327FARA2015_Final.tcFinal2015-09-032016-01-28See attached Tide Note dated January 28, 2016.H12829_Ellipse-to-MLLW_Separation_Model_1000m_PostInterp2.csarEllipsoidally 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 real-time position measurements observed during the survey relative to the water line and the load TCARI tide file. "GPS tides" were then computed using the above separation model and the corrected GPS-height-to-water level data (SBET). For additional information see "H12829 H12821 H12820 ERS ERZT Report.pdf" in the supplemental correspondence folder . The 1000 meter resolution separation model excluded line 0034_20150807_105548_Rainier due to issues with the SBET offsets and difficulties in interpolation. See attached ERZT Capability Memo.North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 3 North.Single Base9715Tern Tower1066Bear Nestity9677ErnieVessel kinematic data (POS files) were post-processed with Applanix POSPac and POSGNSS software using Single Base processing methods described in the DAPR. SBET and RMS data was applied to all survey lines. Line 0025_20150807_034959 had a gap in the Delayed Heave file which prevented application of the file in accordance with the DAPR. The Maximum Allowable Gap was changed to seven seconds during application which permitted Delayed Heave to be applied to the line. This error propagated into the SBET and RMS files necessitating creation of two SBET and RMS files to cover the timespan. A thirty second Maximum Allowable Gap was necessary to apply the SBET and RMS files to the line. A change to the Output Rate for the RMS file was also necessary to 1.0173. All SBETs were exported in WGS84 and applied to lines. Surfaces were created in NAD83. Further details are included in "H12829 H12821 H12820 ERS ERZT Report.pdf" in the supplemental correspondence folder. See attached ERZT Capability Memo.SBET InterpolationSBETs were examined through comparison of a 100 meter resolution separation model, ERS-to-MLLW difference surface, and visual inspection of surfaces. Lines with vertical offsets were further examined in the Pydro POSPac Automated QC tool. Large time spans of up to an hour on SBETs for DN 218 and DN 219 had vertical offsets of up to 1 meter. These areas were examined, interpolated, and exported in the AutoQC tool. Lines 0013_20150806_141721_Rainier, 0012_2015_0806_131721_Rainier, 0038_20150807_141649_Rainier, 0039_20150807_151649_Rainier, 0009_20150806_112336_Rainier, and 0010_20150806121044_Rainier were impacted by the interpolation. Line 0034_20150807_105548_Rainier was also identified as a candidate for interpolation however, upon examination in Pydro's POSPac AutoQC tool, it was determined that interpolation would not be possible for this line (Figure 18). Application of the SBET for Line 0000_20150808_000831_Rainier resulted in a significant horizontal offset. Attempts to resolve the issue were unsucessful. The SBET was removed and the horizontal offset was eliminated.Line 0034_20150807_105548_Rainier SBET both pre and post interpolation shows similar results.SupportFiles\Bad sbet interp.pngThe data is adequate for charting despite the use of interpolated SBETs.A comparison was made between H12829 survey data, ENC US2AK92M, ENC US1AK90M, and Chart 16005 using a Caris CUBE surface and selected soundings.160051700000112015-052015-11-252015-11-25H12829 sounding data coincides with two charted depths as shown in Figure 19. H12829 soundings agree to within two fathoms over the 9 fathom depth and to within three fathoms over the charted 13 fathom depth. The 10 fathom depth contour identified by H12829 data was located between 800m and 2450m north (offshore) of the currently charted position (Figure 20).H12829 Soundings overlaid with Chart 16005. (ENC US2AK92M depths circled in blue)SupportFiles\Sounding to Charted Depth.pngLocation of H12829 10 fathom depth contour to the north of charted (16005) positionSupportFiles\Contour line offsets.pngUS2AK92M70000072011-05-022014-11-13falseIn the area of survey H12829, Electronic Navigation Chart (ENC) US2AK92M coincides with Chart 16005, therefore a comparison between H12829 and US2AK92M is equivalent to the preceding comparison with Chart 16005.US1AK90M1587870102015-03-082015-03-08falseAn offset between ENS US1AK90M and both Chart 16005 and ENC US2AK92M of approximately 750 meters was observed (Figure 21). Only one sounding on ENC US1AK90M existed in the survey. H12829 soundings agreed to within 1 1/2 fathoms on the 9 fathom depth on ENC US1AK90M. The 10 fathom depth contour identified by H12829 data had some overlap with the 10 fathom contour on US1AK90M (Figure 22). Separation between the two contours differed by a range of 0 m to 1200 m with the data from H12829 residing further to the north (offshore) than US1AK90M.Separation between soundings on Chart 16005, ENC US2AK92M, and ENC US1AK90M.SupportFiles\ENC sounding offset.pngComparison of ENC US1AK90M 10 fathom depth contour to H12829 10 fathom contour.SupportFiles\US1AK90M contour.pngNo 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.One bottom sample was acquired for this survey and is detailed in the Final Features File accompanying this report. A second assigned bottom sample was not acquired due to an earlier than anticipated departure from the project area.The final feature file is not appended to this report.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.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.Several side scan sonar contacts were identified but not investigated due to an ordered earlier than scheduled departure from the project area. Ice scours were common throughout the survey area.No present or planned construction or dredging exist within the survey limits.Further investigation of the SSS contacts detailed in the H12829_Contacts.hob file is recommended.The H12829_Contacts.hob file is not appended to this report.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.Edward J. Van Den Ameele, CDR/NOAACommanding Officer, NOAA Ship Rainier2016-07-14Steven Loy, LT/NOAAField Operations Officer, NOAA Ship Rainier2016-07-14James B. JacobsonChief Survey Technician, NOAA Ship Rainier2016-07-14Christopher M. WoodJunior Officer, NOAA Ship Rainier2016-07-14