OPR-P377-RA-17Cold BayCold BayNOAA Ship RAINIERH130241King CoveAlaskaUnited States400002017Benjamin Evans, CDR/NOAANavigable Area2017-06-072017-07-162017-08-28Multibeam 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 survey area is referred to as "King Cove" (sheet 1) within the Project Instructions. The area encompasses approximately 22 square nautical miles extending from Vodapoini Pt through King Cove Harbor and east past Bold Cape. Included within the survey is an area that requires object detection coverage as shown in the figure below; it coincides with the extents of ENC US5AK55M.55.0610944444162.42246944454.9923611111162.1202H13024 assigned survey area including object detection coverage area. SupportFiles\DR Sheet Limits 1A.PNGSurvey limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.This navigationally significant area from Unga Strait to the northeast and the north side of
Sanak Island to the southwest provides the much needed and only protected waters for vessels
transiting from areas to the east in the Gulf of Alaska and Shelikof Strait to the very busy Unimak
Passage which is the gateway to the Bering Strait utilized by cargo, fishing, and trans-pacific
vessels. This passage and area is specifically utilized by the fishing fleet in Bristol Bay and the
Bering Sea and the tug and tow traffic delivering goods to the Aleutian Islands, western Alaska,
and the Arctic.The village of King Cove is the site of one of the largest operating canneries in North America, owned by Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., and processes a variety of catch year round. This project area was last surveyed between 1911 and 1941. Survey data from this project is intended to supersede all prior survey data in the common area.
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 H13024 multibeam echosounder (MBES) data density. The submitted H13024 variable-resolution (VR) surfaces met 2017 HSSD density requirements.Pydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD density compliance of H13024 finalized variable-resolution complete coverage MBES data.SupportFiles\H13024_MB_VR_MLLW_Final.QAv5.density.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing HSSD density compliance of H13024 finalized variable-resolution object detection MBES data.
SupportFiles\H13024_MB_VR_MLLW_OD_Final.QAv5.density.pngAll waters in survey areaComplete Coverage (refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.3)Extents of 1:2500 US5AK55M within H13024 King CoveObject Detection Coverage (refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.2)Complete multibeam echosounder (MBES) coverage was acquired to the inshore limit of hydrography,
the Navigable Area Limit Line (NALL). In areas where survey coverage did not reach the 4-meter depth
contour nor the assigned sheet limits, it was due to the survey vessel reaching the inshore extent of safe
navigation as shown in the figure below. These areas were generally located very near shore, were subject to
dangerous wave action and other hazards.
Despite a thorough cleaning of the MBES data, QC Tools Flier Finder identified 11 fliers in the finalized VR grid. All 11 remaining fliers have been determined to be legitimate data in areas of high relief.Examples of H13024 NALL determination.SupportFiles\NALL_limit.PNGH13024 MBES coverage and assigned survey limits (Chart 16549). SupportFiles\DR Coverage-1.PNG28010112.2000000028020119.50000000280305.30000031.8028040109.60000000S2210111.300000000457.90000031.8074039023.192017-07-152017-07-162017-07-172017-07-182017-08-162017-08-172017-08-182017-08-192017-08-202017-08-222017-08-252017-08-29Refer 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.S22170.44.728018.81.128028.81.128038.81.128048.81.119055.70.3519075.70.35NOAA Ship RAINIER near King Cove with survey launches 2801 and 2804 in view. SupportFiles\Rainier_King_Cove.jpgAll data for H13024 were acquired by NOAA Ship RAINIER and survey launches 2801, 2802, 2803 and 2804. The vessels acquired depth soundings, backscatter imagery and sound speed profiles. Shoreline feature verification was conducted from RAINIER skiffs 1905 and 1907.KongsbergEM710MBESReson SeaBat 7125 SV2MBESResonSeaBat 7125-BMBESResonSVP70 / SVP71Surface Sound Speed ProbesApplanixPOS-MV V5Positioning and Attitude SystemSea-Bird Electronics, Inc.SBE 19plus SEACAT Profiler Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth SensorOdim Brooke OceanMVP 200 Moving Vessel Profiler/AML Micro CTDSound Speed SystemMultibeam crosslines were acquired using Rainier launch 2803 across all depth ranges, water masses and boat days that were practical; they are adequate for verifying and evaluating the internal consistency of survey data. A 2-meter CUBE surface was created using only H13024 mainscheme lines, and a second 2-meter surface was created using only crosslines. A difference surface was then generated in Caris from which statistics were derived. For its respective depths, the difference surface was compared to IHO allowable Total Vertical Uncertainty (TVU) standards. In total, 99.5% of the total number of nodes pass the TVUmax test between H13024 mainscheme and crossline data (Figure 7). The analysis was performed on H13024 MBES data reduced to Mean Lower-Low Water (MLLW) using Ellipsoidally Referenced Zone Tides (ERZT) methods.H13024 crossline surface overlaid on mainscheme
tracklines showing good temporal and geographic distribution.SupportFiles\XL Coverage.PNGHistogram plot utilizing the magnitude (absolute value) of the Allowable Error Fraction to show the indication of what percentage of the total number of comparisons pass the TVUmax test.SupportFiles\XL_Analysis.PNGPydro derived plot showing node depth vs. allowable error fraction of H13024 mainscheme to crossline data.SupportFiles\H13024_MS_diff_XL_2m_fracAllowErr_vsDepth.png00.0034725ERS via ERZTS2211.052801, 2802, 2803, 28043.15Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for survey H13024 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 one hundred-meter
resolution separation model and statistically determining a measured value. A measured uncertainty of
0.0034725 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 using SBET /
RMS files generated using POSPac software.
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 H13024 TVU
compliance; histogram plots of the results are shown below.Pydro derived histogram plot showing TVU compliance of H13024 finalized multi-resolution complete coverage MBES data.SupportFiles\H13024_MB_VR_MLLW_Final.QAv5.tvu_qc.pngPydro derived histogram plot showing TVU compliance of H13024 finalized multi-resolution object detection MBES data.
SupportFiles\H13024_MB_VR_MLLW_OD_Final.QAv5.tvu_qc.pngThree surveys junction with H13024, two are contemporary and part of project OPR-P377-RA-17. The third was conducted by NOAA ship RAINIER in 2008. H13024 junction surveys. SupportFiles\Junction_overview_F.PNGH13027400002017NOAA Ship RAINIERSWSee the detailed report from survey H13027 for junction analysis.H13031400002017NOAA Ship RAINIERSESee the detailed report from survey H13031 for junction analysis.H11904100002008NOAA Ship RAINIEREThe junction with survey H11904 encompassed 0.46 square nautical miles along the eastern boundary of H13024. A comparison was made using a difference surface derived from the 4-meter CUBE surfaces of
each survey using Pydro Surfaces Compare Grids tool. Analysis of the difference surface indicated that H13024 is 0.11 meters shoaler than H11094 with a standard deviation of 0.13 meters. H13024 and H11094 junction showing TVU compliance.SupportFiles\H13024-H11094_Junction.PNGHistogram plot utilizing the magnitude of the Allowable
Error Fraction indicate that 99.5% of the nodes pass the TVU test.SupportFiles\H13024-11094_fracAllowErr_Freq.pngA depth-dependent plot detailing the Allowable Error Fraction, where values between-and-
including +/- 1 represent "passing comparisons" for the H13024 and H11094 junction analysis.SupportFiles\H13024_4m_DN293-H11904_fracAllowErr_vsDepth.pngPydro derived plot showing H13024 / H11904 comparison statistics.SupportFiles\H13024_4m_DN293-H11904_4m_Combined_MLLW_4of4_depth_delta.pngSonar 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.Every 4 hoursSound Speed Cast Frequency: Fifty-eight sound speed profiles were acquired for this survey at discrete locations within the survey area at least once every four hours, when significant changes in surface sound speed were observed, or when operating in a new area. Sound speed profiles were acquired using Sea-Bird 19plus SEACAT Profilers and MVP 200 Moving Vessel Profiler/ AML Micro CTD. All casts were concatenated into a master file and applied to MBES data using the "Nearest distance within time" (4 hours) profile selection method.
MBES data from two lines, 0007_20170817_212116_Rainier, 0004_20170818_003042_Rainier, received sound speed data from a method other than "nearest in distance within time (4 hours)." In each case, a more appropriate cast was selected after noticing sound speed artifacts in the generated surface. It was determined that the more appropriate casts were not the nearest, but rather the closest in time.H13024 sound speed cast locations. SupportFiles\SVP_Casts.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 acquired as .7k files logged during MBES operations and subsequently processed by RAINIER personnel. One mosaic per vessel per frequency was created; backscatter processing procedures are detailed in the DAPR.NOAA Profile V_5_6H13024_MB_VR_MLLWCUBE9990.17141.04VRComplete MBESH13024_MB_VR_MLLW_FinalCUBE9990.17141.04VRComplete MBESH13024_MB_VR_MLLW_ODCUBE9991.0637.35VRObject DetectionH13024_MB_VR_MLLW_OD_FinalCUBE9991.0637.35VRObject DetectionSubmitted surfaces were generated using the recommended parameters for depth-based (Ranges) Caris variable-resolution bathymetric grids as specified in HSTD 2017-2. "H13024_MB_VR_MLLW.csar" represents the entire H13024 survey area using complete coverage guidelines, whereas "H13024_MB_VR_MLLW_OD.csar" includes only the Object Detection coverage area specified in the Project Instructions.
The resolution values indicated in the table above are not accurate: the XML-DR schema used to generate this report did not accommodate variable-resolution grids. The "999" value was entered merely as a place holder.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterKing Cove, AK9459881TCARIH13024_TCARI_Features.tidFinal ApprovedP377RA2017.tcFinal2017-08-262017-09-13H13024 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. H13024 MBES data were reduced to MLLW using ERZT processing methods.North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 3 NorthSingle Base9715FoxyPACD Cold Bay AlaskaA comparison was made between H13024 survey data and Electronic Navigation Charts (ENC) US4AK55M and US5AK55M using Cube surfaces, selected soundings and contours created in Caris. US5AK55M500022016-12-072016-12-07falseNo significant discrepancies were identified between US5AK55M and the H13024 derived contours and soundings. US4AK55M80000192017-01-102017-01-10falseH13024 survey data coincided with sections of ENC US5AK55M and US4AK55M. The H13024 3-fathom contour was in general agreement with the ENC with the exception of the western most area being significantly offshore (Figure 18). The H13024 10-fathom contour was found to be generally inshore of the ENC with some larger discrepancies on the northeast portion of ENC US4AK55M (Figure 19). H13024 data identified many inconsistencies with the 30-fathom and 50-fathom contours (Figure 20) when compared to the ENC.
ENC US5A55M overlaid with H13024 derived contours. H13024 3-fathom contour showing significant difference. SupportFiles\3-fathom.PNGH13024 10-fathom contour showing several discrepancies with ENC US4AK55M. SupportFiles\10FATHOM.PNGH13024 derived 30-fathom and 50-fathom contours identifying inconsistencies with ENC US4AK55M. SupportFiles\50_30FATHOM.PNGNo Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.No charted features exist for this survey.No uncharted features exist for this survey. Features of navigational significance are discussed in the chart comparison sections above or are included in the H13024 Final Feature File submitted with this report. King Cove Harbor is charted to have a controlling depth of 14 feet (2010). According to the Coast Pilot, King Cove's South Harbor has a dredged entrance channel with a controlling depth of 16 feet (2001). H13024 survey soundings in both harbors were found to be as charted.Four bottom samples were acquired for this survey; the results are included in the H13024 Final Feature File submitted with this report. Limited shoreline verification was conducted in accordance with applicable sections of NOAA 2017 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 H13024_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.Prior surveys exist for this area, but comparisons were not performed. No ATONs were specifically assigned for this survey in the Project Instructions. Morgan Point Light, on the west side of the entrance to King Cove, was observed to be serving its intended purpose. Five private ATONs located in King Cove Harbor were also noted and appeared to be serving their intended purpose with the exception of the southern King Cove deepwater dock light, which was not seen.A fixed bridge crosses the entrance channel in the northwest corner of King Cove to King Cove Lagoon. Bridge extents were not further investigated. No submarine features exist for this survey.No platforms exist for this survey.No ferry routes are charted in this survey area, however a ferry does service King Cove twice a month from May through September. No Significant Features exist for this survey.No construction or dredging was present at the time of the survey.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.Benjamin Evans, CDR/NOAACommanding Officer. NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-01-10Scott Broo, LT/NOAAField Operations Officer, NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-01-10James Jacobson Chief Survey Technician, NOAA Ship RAINIER2018-01-10Timothy WilkinsonPhysical Science Technician, NRT3 2018-01-10