OPR-M367-RA-18Cascadia MarginOffshore OregonNOAA Ship RainierH131183Offshore Coos BayOregonUnited States800002018Benjamin K. Evans, CDR/NOAANavigable Area2018-06-272018-08-172018-08-20Multibeam 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 H13118, "Offshore Coos Bay" (Sheet 3) within the Project Instructions. The initial assigned area encompasses 968 square nautical miles. However, the assigned area was reduced to 437.2 square nautical miles due to shifting priorities and time constraints. Of that area, a total of 370.0 square nautical miles was completed in the time available.43.8752777778125.1643.3788888889124.828333333H13118 Survey Area with MBES Coverage, and Initially Assigned and Revised Sheet Limits (Chart 18580)SupportFiles\Outline.PNGData were acquired within survey limits as required in the Project Instructions and HSSD unless otherwise noted in this report.H13118 is part of the larger "Cascadia Margin" campaign, which is a collaboration of NOAA's Office of Coast Survey (OCS) and the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP) covering large portions of the continental margin offshore of Washington, Oregon, and California. The primary objective of this seafloor mapping project is to provide multibeam bathymetry, acoustic backscatter data and water column data to address USGS Hazard Mission Area objectives by providing key offshore constraints that feed directly into earthquake, tsunami, and landslide hazard assessments and situational awareness products. Additionally, the survey supports NOAA's Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping program and updates NOAA's nautical charting products.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Pydro QC Tools 2 Grid QA was used to analyze H13118 multibeam echosounder (MBES) data density. The submitted H13118 variable-resolution (VR) surface met HSSD density requirements.QC Tools derived histogram plot showing HSSD density compliance of H13118 finalized variable-resolution MBES dataSupportFiles\H13118_VR_MLLW_FINAL.QAv5.density.pngAll waters in survey areaComplete coverage MBES data, backscatter data and water column data. Refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.3. Survey coverage was in accordance with the requirements listed above and in the HSSD. Figure 1 details the assigned survey area and MBES coverage.S2210519.8500000000519.85000000000000370.012018-08-202018-08-192018-08-182018-08-17Refer 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.S22170.44.7All data for H13118 were acquired by NOAA Ship RAINIER (S221). The vessel acquired depth soundings, backscatter imagery and sound speed profiles.ApplanixPOS MV 320 v5Positioning and Attitude SystemKongsberg MaritimeEM 710MBESTeledyne RESONSVP 70Surface Sound Speed SensorSippican Inc.XBT Deep BlueTemperature SensorThe priority for this project was to maximize overall MBES coverage during the short duration of acquisition. Given this priority and the deep, offshore nature of the survey area, crosslines were not acquired. This deviation was verbally approved by the project manager during the survey, and a waiver from HSD Operations Branch has been granted, please see Appendix II (Supplemental Correspondence), for additional information.00.173ERS via VDATUMS221N/AN/A0.05Expendable Bathythermographs (XBT) were used in lieu of a CTD or MVP due to the survey depth. The measured XBT sound speed uncertainty used for H13118 was 4 m/s. Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU) values for survey H13118 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 zoning uncertainty of 0.173 meters was provided in the Project Instructions as part of VDatum. See the 2018 DAPR for further information. In addition to the usual a priori estimates of uncertainty, some real-time and post-processing uncertainty sources were also incorporated into the depth estimates of this survey. Real-time uncertainties from Kongsberg MBES sonars were recorded and applied in post-processing. Applanix TrueHeave (POS) files, which record estimates of heave uncertainty, were applied during post-processing. Finally, the post processed uncertainties associated with vessel roll, pitch, yaw, and position were applied in Caris HIPS using SBET and RMS files generated using POSPac MMS software. Uncertainty values of the submitted finalized grid was calculated in Caris using "Greater of the Two" of uncertainty and standard deviation (scaled to 95%). Grid QA v5 within Pydro QC Tools 2 was used to analyze H13118 TVU compliance.Pydro derived plot showing TVU compliance of H13118 finalized multi-resolution MBES data.SupportFiles\H13118_VR_MLLW_FINAL.QAv5.tvu_qc.pngNo junctions were performed on sheet H13118.Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.Sonar Ping ModeSurvey H13118 was acquired to produce bathymetric data and high quality backscatter data. In order to acquire high quality backscatter, minimal changes to the sonar's operating mode were required. Instead of operating sonar ping mode automatically, it was manually switched between "shallow", "medium", "deep", "very deep", and "extra deep" where appropriate. The hydrographer monitored the effects of these manual changes out in the field and found no issues with the resulting data.None ExistThere were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.At least once every four hours.Additional casts were taken when significant changes to surface sound speed were observed or when operating in a new area. Sound speed profiles were acquired using Sippican Deep Blue XBT Profilers. All casts were concatenated into a master file and applied to MBES data in Caris HIPS using the nearest in distance within time 4 hours profile selection method. The first cast was taken before starting the first line of MBES acquisition to give the sonar system an SVP profile. Figure 4 shows locations of all XBT casts overlaid on the MBES coverage.H13118 MBES Coverage With Overlaid Cast Locations (Black Crosshairs)SupportFiles\H13118_CastLocs.PNGAll equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.Detect FliersPydro QC Tools 2 Detect Fliers was used to find fliers in the finalized VR surface. The following are the settings used for Detect Fliers: (1) Force flier heights left blank (2) Checks - #1 and #6 unchecked, #2 #3 #4 and #5 checked (3) Filters - Distance <= 1.0 nodes, Delta Z <= 0.01 meters, #1 and #2 unchecked. Obvious noise was rejected by the hydrographer in Caris subset editor. After data cleaning, Detect Fliers listed 59 potential fliers. All potential fliers were investigated by the hydrographer in CARIS subset editor and are located on the outer boundaries of the data. They were all found to be false positives, edge fliers, or caused by the down slope of the sea floor. The results of the Detect Fliers tool are included as a .000 file in Appendix II of this report. An example of a typical detected flier is included in figure 5.Example of typical edge flier with Caris subset editor examination.SupportFiles\FlierSubset.pngAll 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 .all files logged during MBES operations and subsequently processed by personnel aboard Rainier. One mosaic has been delivered with this report. All backscatter processing procedures utilized follow those detailed in the DAPR.CarisHIPS/SIPS10.3.3FledermausFledermaus Geocoder Toolbox (FMGT)7.8.1NOAA Profile V_5_7H13118_MB_VR_MLLW_FinalCARIS VR Surface (CUBE)Variable Resolution316.01632.8NOAA_VRComplete MBESH13118_MB_VR_MLLWCARIS VR Surface (CUBE)Variable Resolution316.01632.8NOAA_VRComplete MBESSubmitted surfaces were generated using the recommended parameters for "Ranges" style variable resolution bathymetric grids as specified in HSSD 2018. No soundings were designated in this survey and no Dangers to Navigation (DTONs) were detected throughout the survey area.Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Mean Lower Low WaterERS via VDATUMshapefile_xyNAD83-MLLW_geoid12b.csarNorth American Datum 1983Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 10 NorthPrecise Positioning-Real Time Extended (PP-RTX) processing methods were used in Applanix POSPac MMS 8.1 software to produce Smooth Best Estimates of Trajectory (SBETs) for post-processing horizontal correction.Missing SBET DataOn Line 54 of DN 230, the SBET data was corrupted by an error in the Inertial Measurement Unit of the POS M/V system referenced in Table 6. This resulted in a loss of SBET data from 1748:51 to 1749:21 UTC of DN 231. Though the data was collected on DN 231 UTC, the raw and processed line is named using the naming convention for DN230. This 30 second gap does have real-time position and attitude data applied to it. In Caris navigation editor, the navigation data through the gap appears unaffected by the gap other than a nearly instantaneous spike (<0.5 S) at the end of the gap. The SBET data was applied to the remainder of the line, and the bathymetry data was analyzed in Caris subset editor for continuity with surrounding lines. There was no discernible effect on the individual soundings, the uncertainty, or the surface.A comparison was made between H13118 survey data and Electronic Navigation Chart (ENC) US3OR02M. This was accomplished by creating CUBE surfaces and contours in Caris and comparing the surveyed contours with the charted depth curves on chart US3OR02M. The chart used is the most recent edition.US3OR02M191730272017-10-192018-11-16falseMost surveyed contours generally agree with the charted ENC depth curves, with some disagreements in different areas. In the northern part of the survey, the 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600-fathom survey contours are well represented by the charted ENC depth curves. The 700-fathom survey contour does diverge from the corresponding ENC depth curve by a maximum of almost 5,000 meters in some sections. The 800-fathom survey contour generally agrees with the charted depth curve aside from an area near the center of the west side of the survey. In the southern portion of the survey, the 300-fathom survey contour shows some divergence to seaward from the ENC contour. The 400 and 500-fathom survey contours generally agree with the charted depth curves, aside from the enclosed 400-fathom survey contour in the center of the survey being shifted slightly east of the charted location. The 600-fathom survey contour data shows some divergence in the central and southern parts of the survey, but still follows the general trend of the charted depth curves. The 700 and 800-fathom survey contours generally agree with charted data, except for a slight shift to the east of the 800-fathom survey contour in the southwest corner of the survey.H13118 Survey Contours, Compared with US3OR02M Depth Curve LocationsSupportFiles\Chart Comparison Discussion.pngNo Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.One charted feature exists in the form of a submarine cable in the northern part of the survey. Please see section D.2.5 for additional information.No uncharted features exist for this survey.No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.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.No bottom samples were required for this survey.Shoreline was not assigned in the Hydrographic Survey Project Instructions or Statement of Work.No prior survey comparisons exist for this survey.No aids to navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey.No overhead features exist for this survey.A submarine cable is depicted on the ENC and Raster Nautical Chart (RNC) in the northern area of the survey coverage. No evidence of the cable was identified in H13118 MBES data. The "Investigation Requirements" attribute field of this feature in the Composite Source File dictates that this feature is not to be included in the Final Feature File. Because this is the only assigned feature in the survey area, no Final Feature File is included with H13118. The hydrographer recommends retaining the cable as charted.H13118 Coverage With Charted Submarine Cable SupportFiles\FFF_Image.pngNo platforms exist for this survey.No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.No abnormal seafloor and/or environmental conditions exist for this survey.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 Specifications and Deliverables, 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 K. Evans, CDR/NOAAChief of Party2019-01-30James B. JacobsonChief Survey Technician2019-01-30Andrew R. Clos, LT/NOAAField Operations Officer2019-01-30Nicholas J. Azzopardi, ENS/NOAASheet Manager2019-01-30