Raw Backscatter was logged in the .all file and has been sent to the Processing Branch. Backscatter was only processed by the field unit for the purpose of bottom sample classification.Kongsberg MaritimeMBESEM 2040ApplanixPositioning and Attitude SystemPOS MV5SonTekConductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorCastAway-CTDKongsberg MaritimeMBESEM 3002ValportSound Speed SystemMini SVSAML OceanographicSound Speed SystemMicro XRefer to each vessel 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.All data for survey H13022 was acquired by NOAA R/V Bay Hydro II and NRT 5 Survey Launch S3002. The vessels acquired multibeam depth soundings, backscatter data, sound speed profiles, and bottom samples.S540117.31.8S30029.1440.5All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.The depth range for the H13022_MB_50cm_MLLW surface is 0.013 - 56.292 meters.NOAA_0.5m0.0921.72Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_50cm_MLLW0.50NOAA_0.5m020Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_50cm_MLLW_Final0.50NOAA_1m0.153.9Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_1m_MLLW1.00NOAA_1m1840Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_1m_MLLW_Final1.00NOAA_4m0.253.8Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_4m_MLLW4.00NOAA_4m3680Object DetectionCUBEH13022_MB_4m_MLLW_Final4.00The surfaces were reviewed where noisy data, or 'fliers'', were incorporated into the gridded solution, causing the surface to be shoaler or deeper than the true sea floor. Where these erroneous soundings cause the gridded surface to be shoaler or deeper than the reliably measured seabed by greater than maximum allowable vertical uncertainty at that depth, the noise was rejected and the surface recomputed. Soundings from anthropogenic features, such as piers, seawalls, and bridge pilings were rejected to a point where the natural sea floor was not effected. In some cases, Flier Finder identified fliers in these areas, however, they were deemed to be on valid data surrounding the anthropogenic features.NOAA Profile V_5_6All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR, with the addition of RTK corrections for positional data. SupportFiles\H13022_MB_50cm_MLLW.QAv2b.tvu_qc.pngAnalytical graph shows the percentage of nodes that satisfy the IHO accuracy level.Uncertainty values themselves were not calculated in Pydro QC Tools. Pydro QC Tools was used to assess the number of nodes in agreement with the uncertainty requirements specified in the HSSD.S54010.52N/AS30020.52N/AERS via VDATUM0.094Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for H13022 were derived from a combination of fixed values for equipment and vessel characteristics, as well as field assigned values for sound speed uncertainties. 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 the Kongsberg MBES sonars were incorporated and applied during post processing. Uncertainties associated with vessel roll, pitch, gyro, and navigation were applied real-time, because H13022 used a real-time kinematic (RTK) positioning service. The recorded delayed heave Applanix files included an estimate of the heave uncertainty and were applied during post-processing. All of the aforementioned uncertainties were applied in CARIS. As stated, H13022 is an ellipsoidally referenced survey (ERS) and the tidal component was accomplished with a separation model. Additional information about RTK and the separation model is located in section C.1 and C.2 of this document. Uncertainty values of the submitted finalized surface were calculated in Pydro QC Tools. (Figure 6). Overall, 99.5% by node of H13022 met the accuracy requirements stated in Section 5.1.3 of the HSSD.Cellular network dropoutsSupportFiles\SBET offset 1.4m.PNGSubset image of rejected data after SBET application, 1.4m deeper than surrounding data.The RTK corrections were acquired with the use of an NTRIP caster (Networked Transport of RTCM via Internet Protocol) which required continuous, stable Internet connection to receive the RTK corrections. The survey teams had a 4G LTE wireless hotspot (NRT5) and a Sierra Wireless cellular Internet Wi-Fi modem (BHII), but there were specific occasions during survey operations that wireless Internet connectivity was limited, which inhibited RTK corrections to be imported. The dropouts resulted in survey line depths that were significantly different from surrounding data (Figure 9). If the dropout was recognized during acquisition, acquisition on the line ended and the data was reacquired once the signal returned. When the anomaly was identified during processing, data was rejected and a new line was later acquired to ensure object detection MBES coverage was achieved. In cases where the line was unable to be reacquired, the field unit applied post-processed SBETs. This application of SBETs resolved many of the vertical drift issues, however, several lines were unable to be corrected via RTK real-time or post-processed SBETs. These lines were either deleted from the project, if doing so did not result in a holiday; or retained and can be seen in the surfaces.Navigation Response Team 52017S5000H13023See Junction Analysis discussion from H13023 Descriptive Report.SupportFiles\H13022_Junction stats_H12874.PNGDifference surface statistics between H13022 and H12874.SupportFiles\Junction_diff_surface.PNGDifference surface between H13022 (purple) and junction survey H12874 (gray) overlaid onto Chart 12343.Navigation Response Team 52016N5000H12874A difference surface between the 50cm resolution H13022 surface and the 50cm resolution H12874 surface show a strong depth agreement. The difference range is -1.3 to 1.4 meters with a mean of 0.2 meters (H12874 being deeper) and a standard deviation of 0.1 meters (Figure 7). Figure 8 shows the area and magnitude of overlap for the junction surface of approximately 0.09 square nautical miles of overlap.H13022 junctions with one prior and one current survey. H13023 junctions to the south as part of the same project. H12874 junctions to the north as part of OPR-E396-NRT5BH2-16.None ExistThere were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.Sound speed casts were acquired via CTD with a SonTek CastAway on both Bay Hydro II and NRT5. Casts were collected at the beginning, during, and end of the survey day to ensure accurate representation for the survey area. Cast frequency was increased if survey area was large or sectioned. These methods resulted in a cast every three to four hours as outlined in the HSSD Section 5.2.3.3 (Speed of Sound Corrections). The distribution of sound speed casts are shown below (Figure 10). Casts were applied using the "nearest in distance within time" within three hours. The hydrographer found this method to more accurately represent the sound speed within the survey limits of H13022.Surface sound speed was collected real-time and integrated into the bathymetric data for both the Kongsberg EM2040 on Bay Hydro II and the Kongsberg EM3002 on NRT5.SupportFiles\H13022_SVP_overview.PNGSound speed profiles (red) acquired for H13022 (navy blue) overlaid onto Chart 12343.SupportFiles\H13022_MS_XL_diff_stats.PNGCrossline comparison with mainscheme lines.SupportFiles\H13022_XL_IHO_Compliance.PNGSummary table indicating percentage of difference surface nodes between H13022 mainscheme and crossline data that met HSSD allowable TVU standards.Multibeam crosslines were acquired using S3002. Crosslines were collected, processed, and compared in accordance with Section 5.2.4.3 of the HSSD. Crossline totals were 56.3 LNM and 5.9% of mainscheme coverage; this coverage exceeds the 4.0% requirement for object detection MBES. A 50cm CUBE surface was created using only mainscheme lines and a second 50cm surface was created using only crosslines. Using the two surfaces, a difference surface (mainscheme - crosslines = difference surface) was generated at a 50cm resolution. Statistics show the mean difference between the depths derived from the mainscheme and crosslines was -0.06 meters (crosslines being deeper) with a standard deviation of 0.15 meters (Figure 4). The difference surface was also compared to the IHO allowable total vertical uncertainty (TVU) standards. In total, 99.4% of the depth differences between H13022 mainscheme and crossline data met HSSD TVU standards (Figure 5).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.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.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.Chief of Party2017-12-08LTJG Sarah L. ChappelNorth American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)18NHorizontal control used Real Time Kinematic (RTK) corrections using CORS stations maintained by New York Department of Transpiration (NYDOT) as part of the New York State Spatial Reference Network (NYSNet). Horizontal network datum for NYSNet correctors is NAD83 (CORS96). Additional information regarding the NYSnet system can be found at http://cors.dot.ny.gov/spiderweb/frmIndex.aspx. In order to use the NYSnet correctors, a stable Internet connection and computer software are needed to receive the CORS corrections. The field unit used NTRIP (Network Transport of RTCM data over IP) which is a protocol for transmitting RTK correction data from the base station to the rover (survey vessel) using the Internet. Vessels were equipped with a 4G LTE wireless hotspot (NRT5) and a Sierra Wireless cellular Internet Wi-Fi modem (BHII) to provide internet to connect to the RTK network. Lefebure (NTRIP) software configured on an acquisition laptop to receive the correction data was transmitted to the POS MV5 via serial cable. During survey acquisition, the Lefebure window shows the status of the incoming data stream. This was monitored to ensure continuous reception of RTK. In addition, confirmation was attained when vertical and horizontal accuracies of the POS MV5 were less than 5cm.Hudson Falls, NY (324 kHz)The separation file was provided to the field party from the project manager. This survey is referenced to Mean Lower Low Water.ERS via VDATUMOPR-B396-NRB-17_xyNAD83-MLLW_geoid12b.csarMean Lower Low WaterSee attached ERS Capability Memo and Tide Note.RTK was used for vertical control and the real time solution was written directly to the POSPac file. In CARIS, a GPS tide was applied in reference to the ellipsoid. A VDatum separation model was applied to reduce the data to MLLW. The associated RTK memo is located in Appendix II.RTK Signal Dropouts and UnavailabilityOverhead features greatly compromised the quality of the RTK signal. In areas where RTK "dropouts" occurred, the hydrographer ceased acquisition and attempted to resurvey the same area. Acquisition under and adjacent to the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge proved exceptionally difficult. In areas where RTK drifted or dropped out, the hydrographer rejected the data. However, the rejection of all data with compromised or no RTK signal would result in egregious holidays near the bridge. Thus, the hydrographer applied post-processed SBETs to the data to mitigate some of the drift. The SBET application resolved much of the vertical drift, however, it did not completely remove all vertical offsets related to RTK or PPK application. These areas are evident in the surfaces and were examined for hazards and contacts.Present and/or planned construction or dredging exists within the survey limits, but was not investigated.RWMAn assigned, charted dredged area exists inshore of the pier at the Danskammer Point Power Plant. This area is charted as having a 7.9m depth throughout, however, that depth was only found at the most offshore edge. The area was only partially investigated, from the most offshore edge, inshore to the 12ft curve.Additional information from the field unit: An assigned, charted dredged area exists inshore of the pier at the Danskammer Point Power Plant. This area is charted as having a 7.9m depth throughout, however, that depth was only found at the most offshore edge. The area was only partially investigated, from the most offshore edge, inshore to the 12ft curve.No new insets are recommended for this area.Ferry routes and/or terminals exist for this survey, but were not investigated.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey. All ATONs are referenced and attributed in the digital data of the submitted Final Feature File.Sixty-five total ATONs were assigned for investigation and 62 of the 65 were addressed during the survey. One was found to be off-station in relation to the charted position, but upon further examination, there appears to be a horizontal shift in the chart as compared to satellite imagery, therefore, a DTON was not submitted. Several ATONs appear to have duplicate features on the ENC, but those are instances where the structure is changed on a seasonal basis.Overhead features exist for this survey, but were not investigated.The bridges and overhead cable were observed during field operations, but no further verification was conducted.No Significant Features exist for this survey.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.Shoreline verification was assigned in the PI and the field unit received a CSF file with assigned features. The field unit conducted the required investigations and submitted a final feature file.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.No platforms exist for this survey.There was a charted platform located within the survey area and it was addressed by the field unit.No submarine features exist for this survey.There are cable areas and pipelines throughout the survey area.SupportFiles\Bear Mountain Shoal.pngCharted shoal offshore of Bear Mountain, H13022 soundings (blue), 30ft contour (dark blue), and 18ft contour (green) overlaid onto US5NY40M.SupportFiles\Con Hook Shoal.pngCharted shoal offshore of Con Hook, H13022 soundings (blue, aqua, & orange), 30ft contour (dark blue), and 18ft contour (green) overlaid onto US5NY40M.SupportFiles\Contitution Island Shoal.pngCharted shoal northwest of Constitution Island. H13022 soundings (blue and red), 30ft contour (blue), 18ft contour (green), 6ft contour (red), compared with soundings and charted contours from US5NY40M (gray). Three major shoal areas were exist within H13022 and were investigated with MBES coverage up to the 12ft contour, as required in the Project Instructions. The shoals at Bear Mountain and Con Hook are still identified in the data, however, they indicate significant scouring (Figures 22 & 23). The data over the shoal on the eastern side of the river, north of Constitution Island, indicates that it is migrating east, and shoaling slightly (Figure 24). This shoaling is not considered to be a danger to navigation due to its proximity to the northeastern edge of Constitution Island.Coverage up to and including the 12ft contour was not achieved in all areas of the survey as required in the Project Instructions. All survey features are referenced and attributed in the digital data of the submitted Final Feature File.SLCThe FFF contains two large rock outcropping areas. The hydrographer identified these areas as such because they protrude from the shoreline into what is considered navigable water. Although most of the rocky area is deeper than the inshore area, several obstructions (>1m from surrounding area) exists within the outcropping. Thus, the hydrographer and branch cartographer agreed the area was best represented by a SBDARE, rather than individual obstructions.Additional information from the field unit: The FFF contains two large rock outcropping areas. The hydrographer identified these areas as such because they protrude from the shoreline into what is considered navigable water. Although most of the rocky area is deeper than the inshore area, several obstructions (>1m from surrounding area) exists within the outcropping. Thus, the hydrographer and processing branch cartographer agreed the area was best represented by a SBDARE, rather than individual obstructions.SupportFiles\Backscatter.pngBackscatter example showing rocky bottom (lighter gray) as compared to silt and mud (darker gray).Nine bottom samples were acquired in accordance with the Project Instructions and supplemental project correspondence for survey H13022. All bottom samples were entered in the H13022 Final Feature File. To attribute bottoms samples, the crews of Bay Hydro II and NRT 5 collected and processed multibeam data to create a backscatter mosaic for each boat day using Caris HIPS and SIPS 10.3. NRT5 collected the nine ground truthing bottom samples, representing approximately 9% of the total assigned samples. Using backscatter intensity values like those seen in Figure 26, and the known ground truthing samples, the hydrographer was able to attribute the remaining 72 bottom samples by comparison. In areas where the ground truth samples and backscatter data indicated no change in bottom type, the assigned bottom sample was attributed as "retain." For assigned bottom samples where the backscatter and ground truthing indicated a change, the assigned bottom sample was updated and the remarks indicate the rationale for the change. SupportFiles\Verplank_Obstrn_rep_Inshore of NALL.pngCharted "Obstns rep" south of Verplank Point were not addressed, inshore of NALL. H13022 MBES coverage shown in plum.SupportFiles\26ft_Rep_1972_Image.pngCharted "26ft rep 1972" area due east of Roseton, NY. H13022 MBES coverage deeper than 26ft (green) and 26ft and shoaler (red). SupportFiles\Cornwall-on-Hudson_Shoaling.pngCharted "Shoaling rep 1981" with H13022 MBES coverage overlaid on Chart 12343. Orange coverage shoaler than 18ft, teal coverage 18-30ft, purple coverage deeper than 30ft. SupportFiles\Haverstraw Marina Approach.pngCharted approach to Haverstraw Marina with H13022 MBES coverage overlaid. Teal coverage shoaler than 30ft, purple coverage deeper than 30ft.In total, H13022 had five areas/features with a label containing PA, ED, PD, or Rep on the associated charts that are not addressed individually in the FFF. Charted obstructions south of Verplank Pt were not addressed, inshore of the NALL (Figure 18). The charted "26ft rep 1972" area east of Roseton, NY is proven by MBES coverage, but only to the NALL (Figure 19). Charted shoaling at Cornwall-on-Hudson disproved by MBES (Figure 20). The 3ft reported in Haverstraw Marina was not addressed, inshore of NALL. The "30ft rep 2002" channel approach to Haverstraw Marina was disproved by MBES; the entire approach is shoaler than 30ft (Figure 21).No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.Chart comparisons were conducted for ENC US5NY40M using a Caris CUBE surface and selected soundings. The soundings and contours were visually inspected to identify any discrepancies. Overall, comparisons between H13022 and U5NY40M showed good agreement with the exception of a few egregious areas. H13022 sounding data was approximately 1-2 feet shoaler than charted soundings in the majority of the surveyed area. The following section highlights several examples of significant differences identified between H13022 data and charted soundings and contours.SupportFiles\Haverstraw Bay Channel.pngH13022 coverage deeper than 32ft (green) and shoaler than 32ft (red) in Haverstraw Channel overlaid on US5NY40M.The Hudson River maintained channel near Haverstraw Bay was assigned as part of sheet H13022 (Figure 25). In this section, H13022 data is 1-4ft deeper than the channel's tabulated depth of 32ft.SupportFiles\Shoaling off of Little Stoney Point.pngH13022 soundings (blue) northwest of Little Stoney Point, compared with sounding from ENC US5NY40M (gray).SupportFiles\Shoaling offshore of Little Stoney Point.pngH13022 soundings (blue) offshore of Little Stoney Point, compared with sounding from ENC US5NY40M (gray).SupportFiles\Shoaling offshore of Target Point.pngH13022 soundings (blue) offshore of Target Point, compared with sounding from ENC US5NY40M (gray).SupportFiles\Shoaling offshore of Balmville.pngH13022 soundings (blue) offshore of Balmville, compared with sounding from ENC US5NY40M (gray).SupportFiles\Garrison shoreline migration.pngH13022 soundings (blue, green, and red) and 30ft contour (dark blue), compared with soundings and 100ft contour from ENC US5NY40M (gray). Red arrow indicates shore ward contour migration.SupportFiles\Mystic Point shoreline migration.pngH13022 soundings (blue, green, and red) and 30 ft. contour (dark blue), compared with charted sounding from ENC US5NY40M (gray). SupportFiles\Montrose Point shoreline migration.pngH13022 30ft contour (dark blue), compared with charted 30ft contour from ENC US5NY40M (gray). Red arrows indicates offshore contour migration. false400002017-10-312017-05-23US5NY40M15There were multiple areas where charted soundings differed greatly from H13022 soundings. 1. Little Stoney Point indicates significant shoaling offshore of the 30ft contour. Northwest of the Point, H13022 soundings were up to 21ft shoaler than charted (Figure 11); and west of the Point, H13022 soundings were up to 36ft shoaler than charted (Figure 12). 2. Target Point indicates significant shoaling west of the center line of the river (Figure 13). H13022 soundings were 10ft shoaler than charted. 3. The area east of Balmville indicates significant shoaling in the nearshore (Figure 14). The charted contours generally represent the data from H13022, however, there are three areas where the 30 ft contour is significantly different. 1. On the eastern bank of the river, at Garrison, NY, H13022 data indicates the 30ft contour is approximately 50 meters farther inshore of the charted 100ft contour (Figure 15). 2. Along the northern edge of Mystery Point, H13022 data disproves the charted 14ft shoal. (Figure 16). 3. H13022 indicates shoaling offshore of Montrose Point the 30 ft contour has migrated approximately 150m offshore, on average (Figure 17).New York5000H130221United StatesNorth Haverstraw Bay to Danskammer PointNOAANavigation Response Team 5 and Bay Hydro IIHudson RiverHudson RiverOPR-B396-NRT5BH2-172017LTJG Sarah L ChappelMultibeam Echo Sounder2017-05-17The 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/.metersUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)UTCNavigable Area2017-08-092017-06-05Pacific Hydrographic BranchSurvey limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.During office review, it was found that the project covers approximately 13 SNM.The intent of this survey is to supersede all bathymetry, seafloor features, and bottom characteristics within the assigned survey area as defined by these instructions for updating of NOAA US5NY40M. This project covers approximately 17 SNM of critical survey area as designated in NOAA Hydrographic Survey Priorities. The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.SupportFiles\Density stats.PNGSummary table showing the percentage of nodes satisfying the five sounding density requirements for H13022. Data acquired in H13022 meet multibeam echo sounder (MBES) coverage requirements for object detection, including the five soundings per node data density requirements in section 5.2.2.2 of the Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (HSSD). In order to extract descriptive statistics of the data density achievements, the finalized surface is examined in HydrOffice QC Tools (Figure 2). Overall, the required data density was achieved in 99.5% of the nodes.SupportFiles\H13022_google earth_overview.PNGGeneral location of H13022 overlaid on satellite imagery, subset and map star indicate approximate location of Newburgh, NY.Survey coverage was in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD with the exception of holidays present as a result of acoustic shadowing within the limits provided by HSD, sheet limit holidays that are covered by the junction survey H12874, and true line spacing holidays. All cases were investigated to ensure there is no threat of an obstruction and holidays are identified in an associated Holiday .hob file.Survey data inside Haverstraw Marina was rejected because the ERS separation model did not extend inside the marina. See attached correspondence.Object Detection Coverage accomplished using either: A) Object detection MBES, or B) 200% SSS coverage with concurrent set line spacing SBES or MBES. Refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.1All waters in survey area41.575811111173.961716666741.215173.9368SupportFiles\Survey Area Overview.pngH13022 survey limits on Hudson River, overlaid on Chart 12343.The survey area is located in the central portion of the Hudson River between North Haverstraw Bay, NY and Danskammer Point, NY. An overview of the geographic location of H13022 is shown in Figure 1.912.980002017-06-052017-06-062017-06-072017-06-082017-06-132017-06-142017-06-152017-06-162017-06-192017-06-202017-06-212017-06-222017-06-272017-06-282017-06-292017-06-302017-07-032017-07-042017-07-052017-07-062017-07-112017-07-122017-07-132017-07-172017-07-182017-07-202017-07-272017-07-282017-08-09S54010000374.930000S30020000580.34056.29000000955.2705.956.2900