OPR-P136-RA-17North Coast of Kodiak Island, AKNorth Coast of Kodiak Island, AKNOAA Ship RAINIERH130016Cape ChiniakAlaskaUnited States400002017John. J Lomnicky CDR/NOAANavigable Area2017-02-222017-06-092017-07-07Multibeam 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. 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 Sheet 6, Cape Chiniak in the Project Instructions. The survey area is north and east of Cape Chiniak, Alaska. The survey area is approximately 36 square nautical miles.57.7571722222152.23139166757.6179194444152.075747222H13001 assigned survey area.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001%20Survey%20Limit%20Over%20View.pngData were acquired within H13001 assigned survey limits as required in the Project Instructions and HSSD unless otherwise noted in this report.The area of Chiniak Bay supports the second busiest and third richest fisheries port in Alaska. In 2015, the Port of Kodiak was responsible for 514 million pounds of fish and $138 million dollars of product. Chiniak Bay is the gateway to Kodiak and has a survey vintage of 1933. This area has seen many groundings and near misses due to the number of dangers to navigation and pinnacles that exist in this area. While conducting survey operations a significant amount of local vessel traffic was noted transiting through the islands offshore of Cape Chiniak. This survey will serve to update the nautical charts with modern data to support the above need.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Data were acquired within assigned survey limits as required in the Project Instructions and HSSD unless otherwise noted in this report. Pydro QC Tools 2 Grid QA was used to analyze H13001 multibeam echosounder (MBES) data density. The submitted H13001 variable-resolution (VR) surface met HSSD density requirements.Pydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD density compliance of H13001 finalized variable-resolution MBES data.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_MB_VR_MLLW_Final.QAv5.density.pngAll waters in survey area except for H12997 and designated S-57 cvrage areas.Complete Coverage (refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.3). Note All MBES acquisition requires backscatter acquistion (refer to HSSD Section 6.2).Five holidays were created in the vicinity of nearshore rocks which were deemed too hazardous to approach. Three additional holidays are the result of acoustic shadows, and one more holiday was caused by noisy sonar data.Overview of all the holidays located in survey H13001.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Holiday%20Overview.pngThis holiday was caused by a blowout that was cleaned out after the NOAA Ship Rainier had left the survey area. The least depth found by the MBES was 14.18 meters, and the holiday is on the slope.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%204.pngThis holiday was caused by an acoustic shadow on the back side of a slope. The least depth is 14.15 Meters.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%205.pngThis holiday was caused by an acoustic shadow on the back side of a rock near the NALL, where it was too hazardous to acquire MBES coverage on the back sides of the rocks. Several similar holidays can be found around the NALL throughout H13001. The least depth is 6.17 meters.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%206.pngThis holiday was caused by an acoustic shadow around a diverse bottom. The least depth is 13.45 meters and the holiday is on the slope.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%207.pngHoliday on top of an area that was too shoal to acquire complete MBES coverage over safely with a launch, the least depth acquired around the rock was 3.28 meters. The final feature file was updated with a rock of unknown depth placed in the center of the holiday.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Unsafe%20to%20Navigation%20Fig%208.pngHoliday on top of an area that was too shoal to acquire complete MBES coverage over safely with a launch, the least depth acquired around the rock was 2.09 meters. The final feature file was updated with two rocks of unknown depth placed in the center of each holiday.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Unsafe%20to%20Navigation%20Fig%209.pngThe least depth acquired around this holiday by MBES was 3.56 meters. The final feature file was updated with a rock of unknown depth placed in the center of the holiday.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%2010.pngHoliday caused by an acoustic shadow on a rock near the NALL. The least depth of the rock southwest of the holiday is 1.45 meters. The final feature file was updated with a rock of unknown depth placed in the center of the holiday.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Acoustic%20Shadow%20Fig%2011.pngHoliday on top of an area near the NALL that was too shoal to acquire complete MBES coverage over safely with a launch. The shoalest depth acquired with MBES was 1.49 meters. The final feature file was updated with a rock of unknown depth placed in the center of the holiday.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Unsafe%20to%20Navigation%20Fig%2012.pngH13001 MBES coverage and assigned survey limits (Charts 16593, 16594)file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Survey%20Coverage%20Image.pngS221044.320000014.11028010130.78000000028020114.9000008.5602803026.2000000028040147.570000018.400463.770000041.0708.851060039.502017-06-092017-06-102017-06-112017-06-142017-06-152017-06-212017-06-222017-06-242017-06-252017-06-272017-07-012017-07-022017-07-062017-07-07There where four attempts made to get a bottom sample on July 1st 2016 on vessel 2802.WHBRefer 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.S22170.44.728038.81.128018.81.128028.81.128048.81.119075.70.3519055.70.35All the survey data for H13001 was acquired by survey launches 2801 RA-4, 2802 RA-5, 2803 RA-3, RA-6 2804, and the NOAA Ship RAINIER S221. The launches acquired the MBES soundings, sound velocity profiles and bottom samples. The skiffs (1907, 1905) conducted all shoreline verification surveys. NOAA Ship Rainier acquired 44.32 LNM of mainscheme MBES data and 14.11 LNM of MBES crossline data on survey H13001. KongsbergEM710MBESResonSeaBat 7125-BMBESResonSeaBat 7125 SV2MBESResonSVP70/ SVP71Surface Sound Speed ProbesSea-Bird ElectronicsSBE 19Plus SeaCat ProfilerConductivity, Temperature, and Deapth SensorApplanix POS M/V v5Positioning and Attitude SystemOdim Brooke OceanMVP 200 Moving Vessel ProfilerSound Speed SystemAn analysis of the difference between this surveys crosslines verses the mainscheme data was performed in CARIS during post processing of the survey data. The results showed that 99.29% of the depth differences between H13001 mainscheme and crossline data met HSSD TVU standards. The MBES data was reduced to Mean Lower-Low Water (MLLW) using Ellipsoidally Referenced Zoned (ERZT) methods. Table indicating the percentage of difference surface nodes between H13001 main scheme and crossline data that met HSSD allowable TVU standards. file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Crossline_IHOness_SpredSheet.pngH13001 crossline surface overlaid onto mainscheme tracklines.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Crosslin%20over%20view.png00.057ERS via ERZTS221N/A1.052801, 2802, 2803, 28043N/A0.15Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for survey H13001 were derived from a combination of fixed values for equipment and vessel characteristics, as well as from field assigned values for sound speed uncertainties. Tidal uncertainty was accounted for by examining the field generated 1,000-meter separation model and statistically determining a measured value. A measured uncertainty of 0.057 meters was entered to account for ERZT processing methods. See the 2017 DAPR 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 position were applied in CARIS HIPS using SBET / RMS files generated using POSPac software. The uncertainty values of submitted finalized grids were calculated in CARIS using "Greater of the Two" of uncertainty and standard deviation (scaled to 95%). Pydro QC tools 2 were used to analyze H13001 TVU compliance; a plot of the results is shown below. No significantly large areas of the survey had uncertainty levels higher than the IHO allowable levels. Plot derived from Pydro showing TVU compliance of H13001 variable resolution MBES data. file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_MB_VR_MLLW_Final.QAv5.tvu_qc.pngFour surveys junction with H13001, three of them are contemporary and part of project OPR-P136-RA-17. The fourth was conducted by NOAA Ship RAINIER in 1999.Overview showing all of the junctions with survey H13001. file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Junction%20overview%20all%20sheets.pngH10913100001999NOAA Ship RAINIERNWThe junction with survey H10913 covers approximately 0.59 square nautical miles along the North Western edge of H13001. An 8-meter surface of H10913 data was created with Caris Base Editor using the following steps: a point cloud was generated from the H10913.a93 file provided by NOAA's Operations Branch, a Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) model was created, long edges removed, then used to interpolate the surface. An 8-meter CUBE surface of H13001 data was created in Caris HIPS, and then a difference surface was derived between the two. A review of the 8-meter difference surface indicated that H13001 in an average of -0.6 meters shoaler than H10913 with a standard deviation of 1.7 meters. At the Northern end of the junction there is a discrepancy in the difference surface. This is likely caused by a cliff that is approximately 50 meters in height and runs for approximately 950 meters where the surface smooths out on sheet H10913. The last issue of note is located approximately 550 meters to the north of the start of the junction. There is a small gap in coverage with the H10913 surface. H13001 had between 40-45 meters of coverage past the sheet limits, the gap is approximately 25 meters long. H10913 is a 1999 vintage survey, acquired during a time when robust uncertainty calculation and documentation was not standard practice. Therefore it was not possible to conduct detailed IHO TVU compliance analysis for this junction. The hydrographer recommends that H13001 supersede H10913 in the common area. Overview of H13001 junction survey with H10912file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_H10913_Junction_Overview.pngView of area in junction with an approx. 25m gap.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_H10913_Junction_Gap_In_Coverage.pngView of sub sea cliff that is approx. 50 meters tall. It is highly likely that the sub sea cliff is the cause of the discrepancy in the difference between the two surfaces. file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_H10913_Junction_Gap_In_Junction_Coverage.pngH13002400002017NOAA Ship RAINIEREThe junction with H13002 encompassed a total of 3.48 square nautical miles along the western boundary of H13001. A comparison was made using a difference surface derived from the 4-meter CUBE surfaces of each survey. Analysis of the difference surface indicated that H13001 is an average of 0.15 meters shoaler than H13002 with a standard deviation of 0.137 meters. For the respective depths, the difference surface was compared to the allowable TVU standards specified in the HSSD. In total, 99.8% of the depth differences between H13001 and junction survey H13002 were within allowable uncertainties. Overview of H13001 junction survey with H13002file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_Junction_H13002_Overview_Screen_Shot.pngSummary table indicating percentage of nodes that met HSSD allowable TVU standards for the H13001 / H13002 junction.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_Junction_H13002_IHOness_results.pngH13003400002017NOAA Ship RAINIERNSee the H13003 Descriptive Report for the junction analysis. H13000400002017NOAA Ship RAINIERWSee the H13000 Descriptive Report for the junction analysis. 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.None ExistThere were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.Cast were taken every four hours during data acquisition, when there was a significant change in the surface sound speed observed, or when operating in a new area.Sound speed profiles were obtained using Sea-Bird 19plus SEACAT Profiles. All casts were concatenated into a master file and applied to MBES data using the "Nearest distance within time" (4 hours) profile selection method. The cast were also concatenated into a master file for each launch. One cast used was preformed outside of the survey area for H13001. The cast was preformed for the adjacent survey, but applicable to this one.Sound speed cast locationsfile:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/Cast%20locations.pngAll 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.Raw Backscatter was logged as a .7k file and has been sent to the Processing Branch. Backscatter was not processed by the field unit.CARISHIPS and SIPS10.2 10.3 10.3.1NOAA Extended Attribute Files V_5_5. The following Feature Object Catalog was used: NOAA Extended Attribute Files V_5_5.H13001_MB_VR_MLLWCUBE9990.256254.41N/AComplete MBESH13001_MB_VR_MLLW_FinalCUBE9990.195254.41N/AComplete MBESThe following Calder-Rice Variable Resolution surfaces and/or BAGs were submitted to the Processing Branch. A total of four H13001 soundings were designated: all four were DTONs included in the H13001_Final_Feature_File.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterKodiak Island, Womens Bay9457292TCARIH13001_TCARI_Features.tidFinal ApprovedP136RA2017.tcFinal2017-07-292017-08-07H113001 shoreline features were tide corrected using a .tid file created in Pydro utilizing the "TCARI TID file via S-57" function then loaded in CARIS Notebook. H13001 MBES data were reduced to MLLW using ERZT processing methods.ERS via ERZTH13001_NAD83_MLLW_SEP_1000m.scarEllipsoidally Referenced Zoned Tides (ERZT) methods were used to transform between the ellipsoid and water level data. A 1000-meter resolution separation model was computed between the ellipsoid and MLLW using real-time position measurements observed during the survey relative to the vessel water line and the TCARI tide file. "GPS tides" were then computed using the above separation model and the corrected GPS height-to water-level data (SBET). The 1000-meter resolution separation model was generated in NAD83 as were the SBETs. Refer to the Rainier 2017 DAPR for additional information.H13001 shoreline features were tide corrected using a .tid file created in Pydro utilizing the "TCARI TID file via S-57" function then loaded in Caris Notebook. H13001 MBES data were reduced to MLLW using ERZT processing methods. WBNorth American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 5 NorthSingle Base9715WoodyThe Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) was used for real-time horizontal control for this survey. "Single Base" was the sole method of horizontal control for this survey.The Wide Area Augmentation System ( WAAS) was used for real-time horizontal control for this suervey. " Single Base" was the sole method of horizontal control for this surveyA comparison was made between H13001 survey data and Electronic Navigation Charts (ENC) US4AK5OM, US4AK5PM, and US3AK5M using CUBE surfaces, selected soundings and contours created in CARIS.US4AK50M18000042015-10-052015-10-05falseSurvey H13001 coincided with sections of ENC US4AK50M. A comparison was made between H13001 derived contours and ENC US4AK50M with the following results. H13001 3-fathom and 10-fathom contours were in general agreement with the ENC charted depth contours. There were a few exceptions where the ENC charted 3-fathom curve was inshore of H13001’s 3-fathom contour. See below image for further details. There were also three areas where H13001’s 10-fathom contour plotted offshore of the ENC’s charted 10-fathom curve, again see below image for details. Four Dangers to Navigations (DTON) were identified in the H13001 survey area and submitted to Marine Chart Division’s (MCD) Nautical Data Branch. Refer to the H13001_DTON_Report for location and descriptions. ENC US4AK50M overlaid with H13001 survey contours.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_Survey_to_Charts_US4AK50M_10fthm_3ftm_contour_Overview_With%20annotations.pngThe Four DTON's that were submitted to MCD are already charted in the latest nautical charts. US4AK5PM180000112017-04-282017-07-30falseSections of H13001 survey data coincided with areas of ENCs US4AK50M and US4AK5PM. These areas were further offshore and included sections of both ENCs 50-fathom contour lines. The ENC’s charted 50-fathom curve was in general agreement with H13001’s derived 50-fathom contour. See image below for specific details. ENCs US4AK50M and US4AK5PM overlaid with H13001 survey contours.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_Survey_to_Charts_US4AK50M_US4AK5PM_50fthm_contour_Overview%20With%20annotations.pngUS3AK5KM1350000222017-01-192017-02-21falseA comparison was made between H13001 derived contours and ENC US3AK5KM with the following results. Only the 50 fathom contour line is of significance. The ENC’s charted 50 fathom curve was in general agreement with the 50 fathom contour derived in the H13001 survey. There are three shoal areas that are not represented by the 50 fathom depth curve on the ENC. See image below for more specific details. ENC US3AK5KM overlaid with H13001 survey contours.file:///M:/OPRP136RA17/Surveys/H13001/Compilation/Report/Components/SupportFiles/H13001_Survey_to_Chart_US3AK5M_Overview%20With%20annotations.pngNo Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.No charted features with the label PA, ED, PD, or REP exist for this survey. No new navigationally significant features were detected that were not included in the H13001 Final Feature File or elsewhere in this report.Features of navigational significance are discussed in the chart comparison sections above or are included in the H13001 Final Feature File submitted with this report.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.Four bottom samples were investigated for this survey; the results are included in the H13001 Final Feature File submitted with this report. Only one of the four attempts yielded results, the small sample that was collected indicated the bottom was composed of coral.Only one bottom sample is included in the deliverable ASCII file H13001_BottomSamplesLimited shoreline verification was conducted in accordance with applicable sections of NOAA HSSD and FPM using the Project Reference File (PRF) and Composite Source File (CSF) provided with the Project Instructions. In the field, all assigned features that were safe to approach, were addressed as required with S-57 attribution and recorded in the H13001_Final_Feature_File (FFF) to best represent the features at chart scale. This file also includes new features found in the field as well as recommendations to update, retain or delete assigned features.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.No ATONs were specifically assigned for this survey. Cape Chiniak Light, 120 feet above the water, is shown from a skeleton tower with a diamond-shaped red and white day mark on the northwest side of the island. While conducting shoreline the light was noted to be preforming its intended function. No overhead features exist for this survey.No submarine features exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.There are no significant features in the H13001 survey area that were not discussed elsewhere in this report.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.John J. Lomnicky CDR/NOAACommanding Officer, NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-02-14Scott Broo, LT/NOAAField Operations Officer, NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-02-14James B. JacobsonChief Survey Technician, NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-02-14William BlalockSheet Manager2018-02-14