file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Lack%20of%20VDatum%20Coverage.pngA small bay on the western side of the Hudson River lacked coverage by the VDatum model provided.Lack of VDatum Coverage in BayA bay on the west side of the Hudson River lacked sufficient coverage from the VDatum model OPR-B396-NRB-17_xyNAD83-MLLW_geoid12b (Figure 13). The lines in the bay could not use the provided model when computing GPS tides. The project manager and NRB approved of applying a static value of to those lines using the nearest value provided by the model (-32m). See the Hudson River VDatum Coverage Fix email discussion in the Supplemental Correspondence for futher information. Once applied, a visual inspection of the data confirmed the fix resulted in a better solution.RTK Signal DropoutsDuring survey operations internet connection sometimes cut out, resulting in the loss of CORS corrections being fed to the POS MV5. Once noticed, the field unit would stop logging, regain internet connection and CORS feeding corrections to the POS MV5, and start surveying where connection was first lost. On days that had connection issues, SBETs were created and applied to the data. The application of SBETs resolved much of the vertical drift between RTK and PPK applied lines, but not completely. These areas were examined for hazards and contacts and none were found.Vertical offset between NRT5 DN200 and other daysThere is a 0.2m offset between lines acquired on DN200 by NRT5 and adjacent lines from DN198 and 195 from BHII, and DN206, 207, and 221 from NRT5. Several tests were done, including applying a SBET and applying TCARI tides. The application of these other methods either made the data appear worse or had no significant effect. The lines used in testing had GPS Tides recomputed, some have SBETs still applied, and the offset remains.Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 18 NorthNorth American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Smart BaseReal Time Kinematic (RTK) corrections were used using CORS stations maintained by the New York Department of Transportation (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. To receive the corrections, a stable internet connection using NTRIP (Network Transport of RTCM data over IP) software was used on a laptop. A serial connection was then connected to the POS MV5 to transmit the corrections. The program could be visually monitored on the laptop to watch for connection dropouts, and if that happened the survey line could either be re-run or have an SBET applied during post processing. Two CORS stations were used, which were NEWBURGH (NYNB) and VALHALLA (NYVH).Mean Lower Low WaterERS via VDATUMOPR-B396-NRB-17_xyNAD83-MLLW_geoid12b.csarField installed tide or GPS stations were not utilized for this survey, so no HVCR report is included. 5000H13023Tappan Zee Bridge to HaverstrawNew York2Survey shoreward to the extent necessary to support charting an updated 12 foot contour.United StatesOPR-B396-NRT5BH2-17Hudson RiverHudson RiverNavigation Response Team 5 and Bay Hydro II2017-08-092017-07-13Pacific Hydrographic BranchUTCNavigable Area2017LTJG Dylan Kosten2017-05-31metersThe 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/. Multibeam Echo Sounder BackscatterMultibeam Echo SounderUniversal Transverse Mercator (UTM)NOAAObject Detection Coverage (refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.2)All waters in survey areafile:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Survey%20Coverage%20Facility.PNGLack of survey coverage due to facility on the water.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Survey%20Coverage%20Holiday%20ATON%20and%20shoal.PNGHolidays from a shoal area and an ATON.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Survey%20Coverage%20Holiday%20Exploratory%20Lines.PNGHolidays created from lines exploring transit paths to deeper areas.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Survey%20Coverage%20Holiday%20Deep.PNGHoliday located in deeper waters.Complete multibeam coverage was achieved within the limits of hydrography as defined in the Project Instructions with some exceptions. The following are examples of areas that do not meet the coverage requirement. Towards the northwest of the sheet there is a facility with piers and dolphins that blocked access to the 12 foot contour (Figure 3). Efforts were made to collect data as close to the facility as possible. There are multiple small areas that do not reach the 12 foot contour, primarily due to working right next to the shore. For these situations, safety was the concern. There are some holidays in the sheet. The majority are surrounding ATONs, shoal areas, or between exploratory lines to or from an isolated deep spot (Figures 4 and 5). One holiday located towards the middle of the river does not fall under any of those categories (Figure 6).The Hudson River Pilots Association is requesting updated survey data in the Hudson River from the Tappan Zee Bridge up to Albany, NY. Ship traffic to the facilities in Albany and along this section of the Hudson River is steadily increasing and the maximum draft of the vessels calling on the port is getting deeper. Existing chart data outside the federal channels in this area dates from prior to 1939 and in many cases pre-1900 surveys. The federal channel in this area is only 400-ft wide and the size of ships is exceeding 600-ft in length, which necessitates maneuvering outside of the federal channel. The pilots feel more recent survey data is warranted in this area, especially given the heavy storm activity that has occurred in the past several years, and the increased shipping traffic carrying hazardous cargoes, such as crude oil.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/H13023_MB_50cm_MLLW_FINAL_Density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD object detection compliance of H13023 MBES data within the 50cm finalized CUBE surface.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.The Finalized CSAR QA tool within Pydro Explorer was used to analyze multibeam echosounder (MBES) data density. The finalized surface met the HSSD data density requirement (Figure 2).2017-07-132017-07-142017-07-172017-07-182017-07-192017-07-252017-07-262017-07-272017-07-282017-07-312017-08-012017-08-022017-08-032017-08-072017-08-082017-08-095.570090024.91900274.0580000S30020000309.3650000S540104.2724.91900583.4230000file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/A1%20Survey%20Limits.PNGExtent of survey coverage with sheet limits shown in black.73.96141.21673.87741.137This survey was conducted at the request of the Hudson River Pilots Association to update nautical charts on the Hudson River. Acquisition for survey H13023 began south of Grassy Point near Haverstraw, NY, and ended near Scarborough, NY.Data were acquired within survey limits in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.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.Chief of PartyLTJG Dylan Kosten2017-12-20Sheet ManagerPST Michael Bloom2017-12-20All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Backscatter.PNGCoverage of backscatter mosaics.Raw Backscatter was logged in the .all file and will be sent to the Processing Branch. Backscatter was processed by the field unit for the purpose of bottom sample classification (Figure 12).None ExistThere were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.H130225000NNOAA R/V BAY HYDRO II2017file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Junction%20H13022%20Statistics.PNGAbsolute difference statistics between H13023 and H13022.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Junction%20Abs%20Diff%20surface.PNGA region of greater vertical difference between H13023 and H13022 occurs toward the eastern side of the river.Overlap between H13022 and H13023 was approximately 200 meters. In CARIS HIPS a difference surface was made using 50cm surfaces and statistics computed (Figure 10). The mean difference was 0.077, with a standard deviation of 0.059. An area of greater disagreement was present on the east side of the river (Figure 11)H130925000SNavigation Response Team 52017Junction analysis between H13023 and H13092 is located in the DR of H13092.There are two surveys that junction with H13023, both acquired in the same season as part of the same project. To the north, H13022 was processed by Bay Hydrographer II and consisted of data from S5401 and S3002. To the south, H13092 was processed by NRT5 and consisted of data from S5401, S3002, and S3007.SVP casts were taken at least once every four hours in the deepest water nearest to the survey area being worked on. The SVP casts were applied to the MBES lines in CARIS using the "nearest in distance within time of 4 hours" method.00.094ERS via VDATUM020.5S3002020.5S5401file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/H13023_MB_50cm_MLLW_FINAL_TVU_QC.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD uncertainty standards compliance of H13023 0.5m finalized surface.The uncertainty statistics (Figure 9) were calculated using Pydro Explorer's Finalized CSAR QA tool. Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for H13023 were derived from a combination of fixed values for equipment and vessel characteristics, as well as field assigned values for sound speed uncertainties. The uncertainty for the VDatum model was provided to the field units. A visual inspection of the Uncertainty layer revealed the areas of higher uncertainty occur in the outer beams, and a visual inspection of the Density layer revealed the areas of lowest density are on the outside border of the survey coverage. 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 H13023 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, H13023 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.Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/XL%20Compute%20Statistics.PNGStatistics from the difference between the crosslines and mainscheme lines.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Crossline%20Separation.PNGSubset showing roughly 0.2m offset between NRT5 crossline and BHII mainscheme line.Multibeam crosslines were acquired by S3002. A 50cm CUBE surface was created using only mainscheme lines, and a second 50cm CUBE surface was created using only crosslines. A difference surface was generated from these two surfaces in CARIS HIPS and SIPS, and then statistics computed using the Diff sublayer (Figure 7). The mean was 0.12m and the standard deviation was 0.08m. The areas of highest difference were typically between the crosslines, which were acquired solely by S3002, and mainscheme data acquired by S5401 (Figure 8).Cellular network dropoutsThe use of the New York State Spatial Reference Network (for RTK corrections) required a stable internet connection, which the field units (BHII and NRT5) connected to using a Sierra Wireless cellular Internet Wi-Fi modem. Both teams had RTK dropouts when internet connection failed. If the dropout was noticed quickly, the teams would reacquire the data once RTK corrections were once again being fed to the POS MV5. In the cases where data could not be reacquired, SBETs were created. Vertical offsets could be partly reduced once SBETs were applied and meet HSSD specifications. All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.NOAA Profile V_5_610.3.3HIPS/SIPSCARIS0.5Object DetectionCARIS Raster Surface (CUBE)0.0215.93H13023_MB_50cm_MLLWNOAA_0.5m0.5Object DetectionCARIS Raster Surface (CUBE)015.9H13023_MB_50cm_MLLW_FINALNOAA_0.5mThe survey was carried out to meet the Object Detection MBES Coverage requirements as defined by section 5.2.2.2 of the Hydrographic Surveys Specifications and Deliverables (2017 ed). QC Tools in PydroExplorer was used to analyze the surfaces for fliers. There were 19 fliers, and upon review were found to be located on a man-made pipe feature and piles from a pier. The pipe is well defined by other soundings and the pier is charted, so no fliers were found to be of concern.2.533S3002657S5401All data for survey H13023 was acquired by S3002 and S5401. The vessels acquired multibeam depth soundings, backscatter data, sound speed profiles, and bottom samples.Refer 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.Positioning and Attitude SystemApplanixPOS M/V V5Sound Speed SystemAMLMicro XMBESKongsbergEM3002Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorSonTekCastaway-CTDPositioning SystemTrimbleSPS361Sound Speed SystemValeportminiSVSMBESKongsbergEM 204040000US5NY40M142017-03-08false2016-12-06file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Chart%20Comparison%20No%20Soundings%20Bay.PNGBay with no soundings was surveyed. file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Chart%20Comparison%20Ferry%20Terminal.PNGFerry terminal with multiple sounding discrepancies.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Chart%20Comparison%20charted%2015%20ft.PNGCharted 15ft sounding is seven feet different than the H13023 sounding.H13023 and ENC US5NY40M show general agreement between soundings and contours in most areas. The largest differences are near the shore on the northwest side of the sheet, where some H13023 soundings are shoaler than charted by around 7-10 feet and the 12ft and 6ft contours are further offshore. One bay had no charted soundings (see Figure 14), and has charted soundings outside its entrance of 16ft and 13ft, about 7 feet different than H13023 soundings. A ferry terminal (see Figure 15) has multiple charted soundings that differ by 6 to 10 feet from H13023 soundings, and another sounding further north (Figure 16) differs by 7 feet between the two sets of data.The chart comparison was made using a CARIS sounding and contour layer derived from a 50cm CUBE surface. The contours and soundings were overlaid on the chart and compared for general agreement and to identify areas of significant change.Several new features were found and are detailed in the Final Feature File.SAR: Though documented in section DR section D1.1, the three Dangers to Navigation submitted on Dec 18th are shoals and hazardous. The chart containing these three shoals have been updated with the surveyed least depths as of May 22, 2018No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.The northern portion of the sheet has a maintained channel. Soundings from H13023 data found the channel depth to be greater than or equal to the stated channel depth on the chart.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Charted%20Feature%20Rk%20rep.PNGRk rep feature found to be correctly located (Chart 12343_1) .file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/Charted%20Feature%20PD.PNGPD feature not seen (Chart 12343_1).There were two charted features for this survey. The Rock Reported feature (see Figure 17) was found to be correctly placed and is attributed as part of the Final Feature File. The Position Doubtful feature, which was assumed to be referencing the charted 11ft shoal (see Figure 18), was not seen in the data and should be removed. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.The field processed backscatter to create mosaics, which were examined to determine areas of similar and different seafloor bottom types. Nine sample sites were selected and acquired. While backscatter can't tell the user exactly what the bottom type is, it's ability to differentiate between different bottom types proved successful in selecting bottom sample locations and should be used for future surveys.Shoreline investigation was conducted for this entire survey area. At low tide, the vessel operator transited slowly along the shoreline while the hydrographer took photographs and notes of visible shoreline features. These notes and photographs were compared to the assigned features found in the Composite Source File. Additionally, efforts were made to confirm (photograph) any assigned features inshore of the NALL. These results were compiled to the Final Feature File submitted with this survey. Feature Scan within QC Tools was used to verify features had correct attributions. Of note is a missing picture for Hudson River light 21. The hydrographer recalls seeing the light, working as intended, and a holiday is associated with the location of the light. There are some features that were tagged as redundant. Upon review these features were located by ATONs, and are due to environmental conditions that require the USCG to switch out the equipment during the winter months. These features were provided to the field units in the CSF and were not removed. Lastly, there is an obstruction that is missing a VALSOU. The height of the obstruction was not noted in the field.file:///M:/OPRB396NRT5BH217/Surveys/H13023/Compilation/Report/Components/DR%20pics/IMG_20170802_093248.jpgFerry at Haverstraw, NY.A ferry exists that goes from Haverstraw, NY to Ossining, NY. The route the ferry takes was observed visually in the field and found online, see http://web.mta.info/mnr/html/raillink/schedules/haverstraw_start.htm. The route has been attributed in the final feature file. No aids to navigation (ATONs) were assigned for positioning. Over the course of the survey, all ATONs were observed to be on station and serving their intended purpose.Abnormal seafloor and/or environmental conditions were not observed for this survey.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.Present and/or planned construction or dredging exists within the survey limits, but was not investigated.A submerged pipe exists by the facility on the west side of the Hudson River. There are a couple of buoys that warn mariners of dangers nearby. See the Final Feature File for more details.No overhead features exist for this survey.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.No new insets are recommended for this area.