Raw Backscatter data were logged as .7k files for Teledyne RESON 7125 data. Kongsberg EM710 stores the backscatter data in the .all file. The data have been sent to the Pacific Hydrographic Branch for processing. One line per vessel per day of acquisition was processed by the field unit for quality control.H12972 data were reviewed in CARIS HIPS and SIPS for holidays in accordance with Section 5.2.2.3 of the HSSD. Eleven holidays which meet the 3 by 3 node definition were identified via Pydro QC Tools Holiday Finder tool. This tool automatically scans finalized surfaces for holidays as defined in the HSSD and was run in conjunction with a visual inspection of all surfaces by the Hydrographer. Three holidays were in shoal and/or rocky areas that were deemed unsafe to navigate, or the hydrographer was not able to reach due to heavy seas (Figure 17). Two of the holidays is a result of incomplete coverage (Figure 18). Six holidays are from acoustic shadowing from a rock in a downward sloping area in close proximity to shore, as seen in Figure 19. This shadow is formed due to a rapid drop in the seafloor in conjunction with poor geometry from the sonar head. These areas were investigated in CARIS Subset Editor to verify that the least depths were found (Figure 20). Although numerous apparent holidays were flagged by Holiday Finder, all were examined and many were determined to be from areas where an adjoining finalized surfaces covered the gap (e.g., a holiday in the 2 meter finalized surface was covered by the 1 meter finalized surface due to the area being shoaler than the depth range for the 1 meter surface) as shown in Figure 21. Holidays unable to be addressed due to weather and/or unsafe conditions.SupportFiles\H12972_Hazardous_Holidays.pngExample of holiday due to incomplete coverage.SupportFiles\missed_holiday_2808_DN305.pngExample of holiday due to acoustic shadowing.SupportFiles\H12972_Steap_Holiday_1m.pngAcoustic shadow holiday viewed in CARIS HIPS and SIPS subset editor.SupportFiles\H12972_1m_Holiday_Subsest.pngExample of an apparent holiday in the 2 meter finalized surface which is covered by the 1 meter finalized surface.SupportFiles\H12972_Apparant_Holiday2m.pngHolidaysTo verify that all data meets the accuracy specifications as stated in HSSD Section 5.1.3, a child layer titled “NOAA_Allowable_1” was created for each of the 1 meter, 2 meter, 4 meter, and 8 meter (72-100m) and "NOAA_Allowable_2" for the 8 meter (100-208m), and 16 meter finalized surfaces using the equations stated in Section C. 2.1 of the DAPR. These surfaces were then analyzed using the Pydro QC Tools Grid QA feature to determine what percentage of each surface meets specifications. Figure 22 shows an overview of the NOAA Allowable Uncertainty layers for all surfaces. Figure 23 shows the corresponding statistics for each individual surface. Overall, 97.21% of nodes with all surfaces meet or exceed NOAA Allowable Uncertainty specifications for H12972. For individual graphs per surface of density requirements, see the Standards and Compliance Review located in Appendix II.H12972 NOAA Allowable Uncertainty overview.SupportFiles\H12972_NOAAness_overview.pngH12972 NOAA Allowable Uncertainty statistics.SupportFiles\H12972_NOAAness.pngNOAA Allowable UncertaintyFinalized surfaces were analyzed using the Pydro QC Tools Grid QA feature and the results are shown in Figure 25. Density requirements for H12972 were achieved with at least 98.35% of finalized surface nodes containing five or more soundings as required by HSSD Section 5.2.2.3. The few nodes that did not meet density requirements are due to sparse data in the outer beams, especially near steep slopes and rocky areas where acoustic shadowing occurred, and at the edges of the survey limits as shown in Figure 24. For individual graphs (per surface) of density requirements, see the Standards and Compliance Review located in Appendix II. H12972 density overview.SupportFiles\H12972_Density_overview.pngH12972 density statistics.SupportFiles\H12972_density.pngDensityH12972 junctions with two adjacent surveys from this project, H12971 and H12973, as shown in Figure 8. Data overlap between H12972 and each adjacent survey was achieved. These areas of overlap between surveys were reviewed with CARIS HIPS and SIPS through surface differencing (at equal resolutions) to assess surface agreement. The junctions with H12972 are within the NOAA allowable uncertainty in their areas of overlap. For all junctions with H12972, a negative difference indicates H12972 was shoaler, and a positive difference indicates H12972 was deeper. Overview of H12972 surveys.SupportFiles\H12972_H12971_H12973_Junctions_Overview.pngSurface differencing in CARIS HIPS and SIPS was used to assess junction agreement between the 16 meter combined surface from H12972 and the 16 meter combined surface from H12971. The statistical analysis of the difference surface shows a mean of 0.15 meters with 95% of all nodes having a maximum deviation of +/- 3.54 meters, as seen in Figure 10. A detailed graphical overview can be seen in Figure 9. In addition, a comparison surface was created between the difference surface and the NOAA allowable uncertainty (See Figure 11). It was found that 98.58% of nodes are within NOAA allowable uncertainty (Figure 12). The largest differences are located on the eastern and western extremes, as well as in the middle of the junction in relatively rocky areas, as seen in Figure 11.Difference surface between H12972 (blue) and junctioning survey H12971 (pink).SupportFiles\H12972_H12971_16m_Difference.pngDifference surface statistics between H12972 and H12971 (16 meter surface).SupportFiles\H12972_H12971_Junction_Statistics.pngDifference surface compliance with regard to NOAA allowable uncertainty between H12972 (blue) and junctioning survey H12971 (pink).SupportFiles\H12972_H12971_16m_NOAAness.pngDifference surface statistics between H12972 and H12971 showing percentage of nodes meeting NOAA allowable uncertainty.SupportFiles\H12971_H12972_NOAAness_statistics.pngNNOAA Ship FAIRWEATHER20000H129712016Surface differencing in CARIS HIPS and SIPS was used to assess junction agreement between the 16 meter base surface from H12972 and the 16 meter base surface from H12973. The statistical analysis of the difference surface shows a mean of 0.31 meters with 95% of all nodes having a maximum deviation of +/- 4.45 meters, as seen in Figure 14. A detailed graphical overview can be seen in Figure 13. In addition, a comparison surface was created between the difference surface and the NOAA allowable uncertainty (See Figure 15). It was found that 99.34% of nodes are within NOAA allowable uncertainty (Figure 16). The largest differences are located on the eastern and western side of the junction in relatively rocky areas, as seen in Figure 15.Difference surface between H12972 (steel blue) and junctioning survey H12973 (brown).SupportFiles\H12972_H12973_16m_Difference.pngDifference surface statistics between H12972 and H12973 (16 meter surface).SupportFiles\H12972_H12973_Junction_Statistics.pngDifference surface compliance with regard to NOAA allowable uncertainty between H12972 (blue) and junctioning survey H12973 (brown).SupportFiles\H12972_H12973_16m_NOAAness.pngDifference surface statistics between H12972 and H12973 showing percentage of nodes meeting NOAA allowable uncertainty.SupportFiles\H12972_H12973_NOAAness.pngSNOAA Ship FAIRWEATHER40000H129732016There were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness.None ExistAll equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.In addition to the usual a priori estimates of uncertainty provided via device models for vessel motion, discrete zoning tides, ERZT, and Poor Man’s VDatum (PMVD), real-time and post-processed uncertainty sources were also incorporated into the depth estimates of survey H12972. Real-time uncertainties were provided via EM710 and Teledyne RESON 7125 MBES data, Applanix Delayed Heave RMS, and TCARI tides. Following post-processing of the real-time vessel motion, recomputed uncertainties of vessel roll, pitch, gyro and navigation were applied in CARIS HIPS and SIPS via a Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) RMS file generated in Applanix POSPac. 00TCARI0.10ERS via PMVDS2200.5N/A1280x (all launches)0.52N/ACrosslines were collected, processed and compared in accordance with Section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD. To evaluate crosslines, a 16 meter CUBE surface using strictly mainscheme lines, and a 16 meter CUBE surface using strictly crosslines were created. From these two surfaces, a difference surface (mainscheme - crosslines = difference surface) was generated at a 16 meter resolution (Figure 4), and is submitted in the Separates II Digital Data folder. Statistics show the mean difference between the depths derived from mainscheme and crosslines was -0.09 meters (with mainscheme being shoaler) and 95% of nodes falling within +/- 3.66 meters (Figure 5). For the respective depths, the difference surface was compared to the allowable NOAA uncertainty standards (Figure 6). In total, 98.73% of the depth differences between H12972 mainscheme and crossline data were within allowable NOAA uncertainties (Figure 7). Overview of H12972 crosslines.SupportFiles\H12972_XL_Diff_Image.PNGH12972 crossline and mainscheme difference statistics.SupportFiles\H12972_Crosslines_Diff_16m_Stats.pngDepth differences between H12972 mainscheme and crossline data as compared to NOAA allowable uncertainty standards for the associated depths.SupportFiles\H12972_XL_NOAAness_image.PNGCrossline surface statistics showing percentage of nodes meeting NOAA allowable uncertainty.SupportFiles\NOAAness_XL.pngCasts were conducted at a minimum of one every 4 hours during launch acquisition. Casts were conducted more frequently in areas where the influx of freshwater had an effect on the speed of sound in the water column and when there was a change in surface sound speed greater than two meters per second. MVP casts on S220 were conducted at an average interval of 17 minutes as recommended by Pydro’s CastTime software, which determines optimum cast frequency based on the observed sound speed variations from previous casts. All sound speed methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.There were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.None ExistThe equipment was installed on the survey platforms as follows: S220 utilizes the Kongsberg EM710 MBES, SVP 70 surface sound speed sensors, and Rolls Royce MVP for conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) casts. All launches utilize Teledyne RESON 7125 SV1 MBES, SVP71 surface sound speed sensors, and Sea-Bird Electronics 19plus CTD casts. Additionally, Launch 2806 is equipped with the Velodyne VLP-16 Lidar for shoreline feature acquisition. 7125 SV1MBESTeledyne RESONEM710MBESKongsberg19PlusConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorSea-Bird ElectronicsMVP 200Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorRolls RoyceSVP 70Sound Speed SystemTeledyne RESONSVP 71Sound Speed SystemTeledyne RESONPOS/MV V4Positioning and Attitude SystemApplanix VLP-16Lidar SystemVelodyne28058.641.1228068.641.1228088.641.12S22070.48.64Refer to the OPR-O393-FA-16 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.9.1.7HIPS and SIPSTeledyne CARISNOAA Extended Attribute Files V_5_45.4Fledermaus FMGTQPSIn order to prevent visual data gaps between the finalized surfaces, a waiver to extend the 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 meter surface depths and not submit a 32 meter surface was granted by the Hydrographic Surveys Division Operations Branch, and is located in Appendix II. The modified surface depth ranges are shown in Table 11. All finalized surface depth ranges were extended deeper by 6 times the surface resolution. To determine how much to expand the depth range, the largest gap in coverage that could be found was measured in CARIS HIPS and SIPS subset editor. The distance of the gap was divided by the resolution of the surface that would cover the gap to determine how many multiples of that resolution it would take to cover that gap. This number was then doubled to ensure that all gaps would be covered resulting in the extension of the surfaces by 6 times their resolution. Additionally, a waiver to extend the 1 meter surface depth shallower to include data collected at high tide above Mean Lower Low Water, i.e. negative numbers, was granted by HSD OPs and is located in Appendix II. The approved 1 meter finalized surface range was -3m to 26m. All surfaces still meet the density and NOAA uncertainty requirements for their expanded ranges as defined by the HSSD. The surfaces have been reviewed where noisy data, or "fliers," are incorporated into the gridded solutions causing the surface to be shoaler or deeper than the true sea floor. 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 by the hydrographer and the surface recomputed. Flier Finder v3, part of the QC Tools package within Pydro, was used to assist the search for spurious soundings following gross cleaning. This allowed Flier Finder to accurately and quickly identify gross fliers, but Flier Finder incorrectly flagged dynamic aspects of the seafloor such as steep drop offs and rocky areas as fliers resulting in hundreds of false positives. At this point, the hydrographer ceased using the tool and returned to manual cleaning for these dynamic regions of seafloor.CUBEH12972_MB_1m_MLLWComplete MBESNOAA_1m1CUBEH12972_MB_1m_MLLW_Final26-3Complete MBESNOAA_1m1CUBEH12972_MB_2m_MLLWComplete MBESNOAA_2m2CUBEH12972_MB_2m_MLLW_Final5218Complete MBESNOAA_2m2CUBEH12972_MB_4m_MLLWComplete MBESNOAA_4m4CUBEH12972_MB_4m_MLLW_Final10436Complete MBESNOAA_4m4CUBEH12972_MB_8m_MLLWComplete MBESNOAA_8m8CUBEH12972_MB_8m_MLLW_Final20872Complete MBESNOAA_8m8CUBEH12972_MB_16m_MLLWComplete MBESNOAA_16m16CUBEH12972_MB_16m_MLLW_Final640144Complete MBESNOAA_16m16Data acquisition and processing notes are included in the acquisition and processing logs, and additional processing such as final tide and sound speed application are noted in the H12972 Data Log spreadsheet. All data logs are submitted digitally in the Separates I folder. Data LogsThe TCARI grid provided by HSD OPS was misaligned with the shoreline due to an error in georeferencing the grid (see Figure 26). This caused some areas not covered by the grid to use extrapolated tidal data, however this issue did not prevent the use of ERZT and was resolved with the application of an updated PMVD model. See Appendix II for a copy of this correspondence. Misalignment of the TCARI grid observed in Project OPR-O393-FA-16. The most significant differences occurred in H12971, as shown.SupportFiles\Re_ O393 Behm Canal PMVD.bmpMisalignment of the TCARI GridAll data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.2016-10-182016-10-242016-10-262016-10-272016-10-292016-10-312016-11-012016-11-0203020.150S2206.73000000022.4828050000000065.5028060000000043.4328086.56000000049.6313.28007.3400000181.03The survey area is located in Behm Canal within the sub locality of Neets Bay. H12972 sheet limits (in blue) overlaid onto Chart 17422.SupportFiles\H12972_Coverage.png55.8403472222131.82600277855.7842888889131.498183333The entirety of H12972 was acquired with complete coverage, meeting the requirements listed above and in the HSSD. See Figure 3 for an overview of coverage. All waters in survey areaComplete coverage MBES with backscatterH12972 survey coverage (16m surface) overlaid onto Chart 17422.SupportFiles\H12972_Coverage_Data.pngData acquired in H12972 meet multibeam echo sounder (MBES) coverage requirements for complete coverage, as required by the HSSD. This includes crosslines (see Section B.2.1), NOAA allowable uncertainty (see Section B.2.10), and density requirements (see Section B.2.11). Additional compliance statistics can be found in the Standards and Compliance Review located in Appendix II of this report.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.This project will support safe navigation through the acquisition and processing of hydrographic survey data for updating National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charts and by the identification and dissemination of dangers to navigation as identified during the course of survey operations. Survey H12972 addresses 18 SNM of navigationally significant waters in accordance with the National Hydrographic Survey Priorities, 2012 Edition.Data were acquired to the survey limits, as shown in Figure 1, in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the March 2016 NOS Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD). In all areas where the 4 meter depth contour or the sheet limits were not met, the Navigable Area Limit Line (NALL) was defined as the inshore limit of bathymetry due to the risks of maneuvering the survey vessel in close proximity to the steep and rocky shoreline. An example of such an area is shown in Figure 2.H12972 Example of an area not acquired to the 4m Depth Curve due to inshore limit of safe navigation.SupportFiles\H12972_Inshore_Sheet_Limits.pngNOAA40000AlaskaUnited States2Neets BayH12972OPR-O393-FA-16Southeast Alaska, Behm CanalBehm CanalNOAA Ship FAIRWEATHERUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscattermetersNavigable AreaThe 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/.CDR Mark Van Waes, NOAA2016-10-142016-10-182016-11-022016Pacific Hydrographic BranchUTCNo new insets are recommended for this area.No overhead features exist for this survey.No present or planned construction or dredging exist within the survey limits.No submarine features exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No Aids to Navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No significant features exist for this survey.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.H12972 survey limits extended to the NALL (see Section A.1) and all features within these limits were addressed and attributed in the H12972 Final Feature File. All features inshore of the NALL were attributed in the Final Feature File with the description of “Not Addressed” and remarks of “Retain as charted, not investigated due to being inshore of NALL” as per HSSD Section 7.3.1. Annotations, information, and diagrams collected on DP forms and boat sheets during field operations are scanned and included in the Separates I Detached Positions folder. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.The charted soundings and contours of Chart 17422 are identical to those found on ENC US4AK43M. As such, all discussions regarding comparisons between surveyed soundings and charted depths are covered under the ENC US4AK43M discussion below. 174222017-02-071027302017-02-11793342015-03Soundings from H12972 are in a general disagreement with charted depths on ENC US4AK43M in deeper parts of the survey area and on some nearshore slopes (Figure 27), but agree with charted depths on ENC US4AK43M within 3-5 fathoms in the shallower regions of H12972. To more accurately visualize trends within these differences, a 16 meter TIN surface was interpolated from the ENC sounding layer. This surface was then differenced with a corresponding 16 meter surface from H12972 and visualized in Figure 28. In this difference surface red colors indicate H12972 was shoaler than the ENC US4AK43M, green colors indicate agreement, and blue colors indicate H12972 was deeper than ENC US4AK43M. Statistical analysis of the difference surface shows a mean of 25.04 m, with H12972 being deeper and 95% of all nodes having a maximum deviation of +/- 59.19 meters, as shown in Figure 29. Most of the differences indicate that H12972 is deeper than US4AK43M, particularly in the deeper areas of the survey where the charted depths are widely spaced and surveyed soundings are more dense. Contours from H12972 are in a general agreement with charted contours on ENC US4AK43M as shown in Figure 30. The largest differences are seen near the shoreline, where the 10 fathom contour is inshore of the previously charted contour (Figure 31). To facilitate electronic navigation, the hydrographer recommends the addition of contours at 20 and 30 fathoms (Figure 32). 42017-01-10US4AK43M793342017-01-10falseNearshore sounding discrepancy between H12972/US4AK43M.SupportFiles\nearshore sounding discprenacies.pngDifference surface between H12972 and interpolated TIN surface from US4AK43M.SupportFiles\H12972_16m_Combinded-Tin_Difference_Overview.pngDifference surface statistics between H12972 and interpolated TIN surface from US4AK43M.SupportFiles\H12972_16m_Combined-Tin_Difference_Stats.pngOverview of H12972 contour comparison with US4AK43M.SupportFiles\H12972_Contour_Overview.pngInshore contour discrepancy H12972.SupportFiles\H12972_Inshore_Contours.pngH12972 proposed additional contours.SupportFiles\Contour_proposal.pngAn uncharted shoal was observed during acquisition, prompting one Danger to Navigation Report to be submitted on 11/23/2016 (Figure 34). The DTON lies adjacent to a 15 fathom sounding and is outside of the charted 10 fathom contour. Small fishing vessels were observed in the area and appear to use the nearby islands for shelter during inclement weather.1Overview of DTON found in the northwestern head of Neats Bay.SupportFiles\DTON.png2016-11-23H12972 Danger to Navigation ReportThe DTON has been applied to the chart. The DTON report was not submitted by the field and is not attached.No bottom samples were required for this survey.No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey other than those addressed in the Dangers to Navigation section above. A reported 6 fathom sounding from 2007, south of Clam Island was disproved by MBES, as seen in Figure 33. The observed depth at the reported 6 fathom sounding was 44 fathoms. Reported 6 fm sounding was disproven by MBES.SupportFiles\Clam_island.pngSurvey H12972 has 23 new features that are addressed in the H12972 Final Feature File. Of these features, there are 9 Buoys (3 submitted as Detached Positions), 6 Piles, 2 Dolphins, 5 new positions of Underwater/Awash Rocks, and 1 new Underwater Rock which was submitted as a DTON, see Section D.1.6. A comparison was performed between survey H12972 and Chart 17422 as well as ENC US4AK43M using CARIS HIPS and SIPS sounding and contour layers derived from the 16 meter combined surface. The contours and soundings were overlaid on the charts to assess differences between the surveyed soundings and charted depths. ENCs were compared to a 16 meter combined grid by extracting all soundings from the chart and creating an interpolated TIN surface which could be differenced with the combined surface from H12972. All data from H12972 should supersede charted data. In general, surveyed soundings disagree with the charted depths. A full discussion of the disagreements follows below. 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.Vessel kinematic data were post-processed using Applanix POSPac processing software and Single Base Positioning methods described in the DAPR. Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) and associated error (RMS) data were applied to all MBES data in CARIS HIPS and SIPS. For further details regarding the processing and quality control checks performed, see the H12972 POSPAC Processing Logs spreadsheet located in the Separates folder. See also the OPR-393-FA-16 Horizontal and Vertical Control Report (HVCR), submitted under separate cover.Single BaseANDY9677World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84)Differential correctors from the US Coast Guard beacon at Annette Island, AK was used in real-time for acquisition when not otherwise noted in the acquisition logs, and were the sole method of positioning of detached positions (DP).Annette Island, AK - 323 kHz (100 BPS)UTM Zone 9 NorthERS methods were used as the final means of reducing H12972 to MLLW for submission. Data were initially reduced via traditional tidal means until an ERZT separation model could be calculated. This empirically derived model was then checked for consistency and compared to the Poor Man's VDatum (PMVD) separation model provided with the Project Instructions. The PMVD separation model was then vertically shifted such that the average difference between these two separation models is zero. This vertical shift de-biases the PMVD separation model, correcting for local offsets that cannot be effectively modeled by the PMVD. In areas where the PMVD model did not have sufficient coverage, such as near shore areas, the ERZT separation model was appended to the PMVD model creating the composite ERZT/PMVD separation model listed above and used to reduce H12972 to MLLW. For further information see the ERS Capability Memo, submitted under separate cover.The ERS Capability Memo is attachedERS via Poor Mans VDATUMO393FA2016_PMVD_EPSG6338_WGS84-MLLW_Composite.csar9450460KetchikanMean Lower Low WaterInitial reduction of acquired data to MLLW was accomplished via traditional tidal means using the Tidal Constituent And Residual Interpolation (TCARI) grid provided by Hydrographic Surveys Division - Operations Branch (HSD-OPS). Following the successful application of SBETs and computation of an Ellipsoidally Referenced Zone Tide (ERZT) separation model, ERS methods were used for reducing data to MLLW. After final tides were received, the final TCARI grids were applied to the data and used for reducing features to MLLW. The TCARI grid provided by HSD OPS was misaligned with the shoreline due to an error in georeferencing the grid. See section B.5.4 for more information. 2016-11-032016-11-15Final0393FA2016_Verified.tcFinal Approved9450460.tidThe Tide Note is attached.TCARIAdditional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.2017-03-01Chief Survey Technician2017-04-17Horizontal and Vertical Control Report2017-04-17Coast Pilot ReportChief of PartyCDR Mark Van Waes, NOAA2017-04-21Field Operations OfficerLT Bart Buesseler, NOAA2017-04-21Chief Survey TechnicianHCST Douglas Bravo2017-04-21Sheet ManagerHAST Roger Stillick2017-04-21Assistant Sheet ManagerHAST Rebekah Gossett2017-04-21Assistant Sheet ManagerHST Hannah Marshburn2017-04-21As 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 Specifications and Deliverables, Field Procedures Manual, Project Instructions, and all HSD Technical Directives, except as noted in this Descriptive Report. These data are adequate to supersede charted data in their common areas. This survey is complete and no additional work is required unless otherwise noted herein.