OPR-Y390-KR-21Southern Green Bay, WIGreen Bay, WIeTracH134715Vicinity of OcontoWisconsinUnited States100002021David Neff, C.H.Navigable Area2021-04-262021-06-032021-09-03Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscattermetersUTCAtlantic Hydrographic BranchAll times are UTC. The purpose of this survey is to update existing NOS nautical charts. H13471 covers approximately 49 square nautical miles in the vicinity of Oconto, Wisconsin.Any revisions to the Descriptive Report (DR) applied during office processing are shown in red italic text. The DR is maintained as a field unit product, therefore all information and recommendations within this report are considered preliminary unless otherwise noted. The final disposition of survey data is represented in the NOAA nautical chart products. All pertinent records for this survey are archived at the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and can be retrieved via https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/. Products created during office processing were generated in NAD83 UTM 16N, Low Water Datum IGLD-1985. All references to other horizontal or vertical datums in this report are applicable to the processed hydrographic data provided by the field unit.ContractoreTrac Inc. conducted hydrographic survey operations in the vicinity of Oconto, Wisconsin. H13471 covers approximately 49 square nautical miles of survey area. 499.70 linear nautical miles were acquired during the survey. Survey was conducted within these limits between June 03, 2021 (DN154) and September 03, 2021 (DN246).44.920758333387.920555555644.755691666787.6770555556Survey Limits Overview (light blue area) SupportFiles\H13471_SurveyLimits_Overview.PNGSurvey Limits (black line)SupportFiles\H13471_SurveyLimits.PNGAll data were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and specifications set forth in the Hydrographic Survey Specifications and Deliverables 2021 Edition (HSSD 2021). The purpose of this survey is to update existing National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charts. The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.Survey H13471 is accurate to International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Order 1a as required per the HSSD 2021.All water in survey areaComplete 8370 LNM. Transit mileage, system calibration mileage and data which do not meet HSSD specifications shall not count towards the completion of the LNM requirement. Notify the COR/Project Manager upon nearing completion of LNM requirement. The final survey area shall be squared off and ensure the full investigation of any features within the surveyed extent.Sheets 2, 3, and 5Set Line Spacing MBES at 200m at an oblique angle to the contours, complete coverage on all significant shoals and features in waters less than 20m. ACHARE area within sheet 5 (Oconto Reach)Set Line Spacing MBES at 35m at an oblique angle to the contours, complete coverage on all significant shoals and features in waters less than 20m.Inshore LimitThe Inshore Limit is the Navigable Area Limit Line (Refer to HSSD 1.3.2), except for the ACHARE-identified area in Sheet 5. The inshore limit for the ACHARE-identified area in Sheet 5 is the the surveyed 1.9 m depth contour or the inshore limit of safe navigation, whichever is further offshore.Survey coverage was in accordance with the requirements listed above and in the HSSD. Within the assigned the ACHARE-identified area, data acquisition could not be collected at an oblique angle to the contour due to safety. Additionally, the 1.9m depth contour could not be fully met due to safety. Note: Survey coverage did not extend to the entire assigned survey boundary as the Navigable Area Limit Line (NALL) was reached.Survey CoverageSupportFiles\H13471_SurveyCoverage.PNGSurvey Coverage with 3.5m NALL displayedSupportFiles\H13471_SurveyCoverage_NALL.PNGSurvey Coverage with 1.9m and 3.5m NALL displayed in ChannelSupportFiles\H13471_SurveyCoverage_NALL_1p9_3p5.PNGR/V Endeavor00.540000010.150R/V Rapid084.220000000R/V Voxel0377.210000027.5700462000003808.171400002021-06-032021-06-042021-06-092021-06-112021-06-122021-06-132021-06-142021-06-152021-06-162021-07-042021-07-052021-07-062021-07-112021-07-122021-07-132021-07-222021-07-232021-08-042021-08-052021-09-03Refer 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.R/V Endeavor13.40.8R/V Rapid8.50.6R/V Voxel14.00.6The R/V Endeavor is a 13.4 meter aluminum catamaran equipped with an over-the-side Pitman Arm with secondary tie point. The R/V Rapid is a 8.5 meter aluminum monohull equipped with both a Universal Sonar Mount (USM) starboard and port multibeam pole mount. The R/V Voxel is a 14.0 meter aluminum catamaran equipped with an electro hydraulic actuated moonpool accessed adjustable aluminum and stainless steel custom mount.R2Sonic2024MBESR2SonicI2NSPositioning and Attitude SystemApplanixPOS MV 320 v5Positioning and Attitude SystemAML OceanographicSmartXSound Speed SystemAML OceanographicBaseX2Sound Speed SystemAML OceanographicMicroX SVSound Speed SystemNote: R/V Endeavor utilized a dual head R2Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder system, an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML/eTrac MVP-X for the sound speed system, an AML Base.X2 as a spare for the sound speed system, and a POS MV 320 V5 for the positioning and attitude system. R/V Rapid utilized a dual head R2Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder system, an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML Base.X2 for the sound speed system, and a R2Sonic I2NS for the positioning and attitude system. R/V Voxel utilized a single head R2Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder system, an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML Smart.X for the sound speed system, and a POS MV 320 V5 for the positioning and attitude system.A beam-to-beam statistical analysis was performed using the Cross Check tool in Qimera. A 4 meter Combined Uncertainty and Bathymetric Estimator (CUBE) weighted dynamic surface was created incorporating only the mainscheme lines and excluded crosslines. The Cross Check tool was used to perform the beam-by-beam comparison of the crossline data to the mainscheme surface. Comparisons showed excellent agreement, well above 95% of the allowable TVU. Note: This surface was created for QC only and is not submitted as a surface deliverable. Below is a histogram of the crossline comparison statistics showing IHO Order 1a compliance per beam.H13471 Crossline ComparisonSupportFiles\H13471_CrossCheck.pngERS via ERTDM0.045R/V Endeavor0.050.2R/V Rapid0.050.2R/V Voxel0.050.2Standard deviation and uncertainty layers of the Dynamic Surface were utilized during data processing to search for features, water column noise, and systematic errors. IHO Order 1a uncertainty specification was met by 100% of the nodes. The final Bathymetric Attributed Grid (BAG) surface's uncertainty was generated through the NOAA QC Tools and an image of the results is located below. For H13471 the following percentages represent the results of the TPU calculation: Set Line Spacing MBES (Finalized 4m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface in NOAA QC Tools) = 100% of nodes are within the allowable TVU. Complete Coverage MBES (Finalized 1m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface in NOAA QC Tools) = 100% of nodes are within the allowable TVU.H13471 Finalized 4m Set Line Spacing MBES TVU StatisticsSupportFiles\H13471_MB_4m_LWD_Final_TVU.pngH13471 Finalized 1m Complete Coverage MBES TVU StatisticsSupportFiles\H13471_MB_1m_LWD_Final_TVU.pngSurvey specific sound speed TPU values reported in Table 8 are inconsistent with those applied to the processed sounding data. Both measured and surface sound speed uncertainty vary from 0.03 to 0.05 m/ sec. The Qimera-exported BAG uncertainty values originate solely from the standard deviation of the soundings that contributed to each CUBE hypothesis, scaled to the 95% confidence interval, and do not use total propagated vertical uncertainty estimates in this calculation.Depth differences between junctioning surveys were evaluated using the JunctionTrac program, developed in-house by eTrac Inc. For each junction, each CUBE weighted dynamic surface's nodes were exported to an ASCII CSV file where the fields were (Easting, Northing, Depth) for each node. A 4 meter difference surface between the junctioning datasets was also created and exported to an ASCII CSV file where the fields were (Easting, Northing, Diff) for each node. The three ASCII CSV files were then loaded into the JunctionTrac program and junction statistics were computed. A file was also created in this process to locate any nodes from the difference surface that exceed the allowable TVU, which was imported into Qimera and any identified points from JunctionTrac were analyzed. Note: the difference surfaces were created for comparison efforts only and are not submitted as surface deliverables.H134681000002021eTracSWThe junction comparison was performed using all overlapping data between H13468 and H13471. Below is a histogram of junction comparison statistics showing the difference between the junctioning surfaces and allowable TVU as well as difference statistics. 100% of nodes were within allowable TVU. H13471 - H13468 Junction ComparisonSupportFiles\H13471_H13468_Junctions_JunctionTrac.PNGH13471 - H13468 Difference StatisticsSupportFiles\H13471_H13468_Junctions_DiffTrac.PNGH13470200002021eTracENote: The junction comparison between H13470 and H13471 will be submitted with the H13470 DR.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.SVP casts were generally taken every 2 hours. Occasionally casts would exceed a 2 hour frequency, however would never exceed a 4 hour frequency. On R/V Endeavor, R/V Rapid, and R/V Voxel casts were applied in QPS Qinsy acquisition software at the time of the cast. Surface SVP measured at 1Hz was compared to surface speed from the current profile in real-time. If the surface velocity comparison was in excess of 2m/s at any time during survey operations, a new cast was taken. Surface sound speeds were compared in real-time and profile to profile for each cast on the vessel. Additionally, the processor reviewed profiles in Qimera to remove spurious readings within a cast, compare day-to-day casts, and to check distribution over the surveyed area, in order to better understand trends for efficient acquisition planning.All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.Data Density EvaluationIn order to determine if the density of the data met the specified 5 soundings per node, data density was evaluated using DensityTrac in the AmiTrac program, developed in-house by eTrac Inc. Each finalized CUBE weighted dynamic surface's nodes were exported to a BBH file. The BBH file was then loaded into the DensityTrac program and density statistics were computed. For H13471 the following percentages represent the results of the density query: Set Line Spacing MBES (Finalized 4m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface ) = 99.6958% of nodes are composed from at least 5 soundings. Complete Coverage MBES (Finalized 1m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface ) = 99.8561% of nodes are composed from at least 5 soundings.H13471 Finalized 4m Set Line Spacing MBES Density DistributionSupportFiles\H13471_Density_4m.PNGH13471 Finalized 1m Complete Coverage MBES Density DistributionSupportFiles\H13471_Density_1m.PNGAll data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.Backscatter data were collected throughout the survey and are retained in the raw DB files. Every effort was made in the field to collect quality backscatter data while maintaining the primary mandate of high quality bathymetric data. While no processing or analysis of backscatter was required, eTrac Inc. verified coverage and general quality of the backscatter data collected. A beam intensity window was monitored in Qinsy during acquisition to ensure backscatter data collection. Raw backscatter data were viewed in QPS FMGeocoder to further confirm collection criteria had been met. Shown below is an example of the unprocessed backscatter mosaic from H13471 DN187 (R/V Voxel).Raw Backscatter from R/V Voxel (DN187)SupportFiles\H13471_Backscatter.PNGNOAA Profile Version 2021Feature Object Catalog, NOAA Profile Version 2021 was used only in CARIS. Qimera was used as the primary processing software.H13471_MB_4m_LWD_FinalBAG40.6822.77NOAA_4mMBES Set Line SpacingH13471_MB_1m_LWD_FinalBAG13.822.79NOAA_1mComplete MBESA 4m surface is provided meeting Set Line Spacing MBES with backscatter specifications for H13471. A 1m surface is provided meeting Complete Coverage MBES backscatter specifications for H13471. This surface is created for the significant shoals that were developed in waters less than 20m deep per our Project Instructions. Note: Both surfaces' depth ranges were extended past 20m to include the remaining deeper values beyond 20m to avoid creating superfluous surfaces at a lower resolution.H13471 Finalized 4m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface CoverageSupportFiles\H13471_SurfaceCoverage_1m.PNGH13471 Finalized 1m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface CoverageSupportFiles\H13471_SurfaceCoverage_4m.PNGAdditional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR and DAPR.Mean Lower Low WaterERS via VDATUMOPR_Y390_KR_21_NAD83_to_LWD_IGLD85.qgfvomSurvey data were vertically referenced to the ellipsoid. A time dependent, 7 parameter transformation from ITRF-2014 to NAD83_2011 was performed in QPS Qinsy. Using VDatum, a vertical separation model was created to transform the ellipsoidally referenced data from NAD83_2011 to LWD_IGLD85. The transformation and the separation model were applied in QPS Qinsy on the vessels in real-time to achieve LWD_IGLD85 in the field.North American Datum 1983Projected UTM 16RTXApplanix PosPac MMS was utilized to post process realtime positioning data utilizing Trimble's PP-RTX implementation of Trimble CenterPoint RTX to create a Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET).GNSS satellite corrections were received on each vessel using the G2+ carrier signal from the Marinestar Global Correction System maintained by Fugro. A chart comparison was conducted for H13472 using Pydro CA tools, Qimera, and Caris HIPS and SIPS. Survey data were compared against the largest scale ENC to accomplish the chart comparison. The largest scale ENC does not cover the entire survey boundary so a second chart was used to complete the chart comparion. Details of the ENCs used are listed below. US5WI03M, scale: 20000, edition: 4, update application date: 01/06/2021, issue date: 01/06/2021 US4WI03M, scale: 80000, edition: 25, update application date: 09/01/2021, issue date: 09/01/2021 Throughout survey operations sounding comparisons between the charted depths and the surveyed depths were analyzed to identify depth discrepancies. Using the 4 meter CUBE weighted Dynamic surface soundings were generated in the "Sounding Selection" tab of Pydro CA tools. Soundings were displayed against the charted soundings and a visual comparison was made in Caris HIPS and SIPS. Additionally, potential DtoNs and discrepancies were generated using the "DTM vs Chart" tab of Pydro CA tools. The results were displayed through CA tools and investigated in CARIS HIPS and SIPS and Qimera. An overview image of the generated soundings on each chart is included below. Additionally, a detailed example image of the generated soundings on the charts is included below. Lastly, an overview of the identified DtoN's location is included. Results of the chart comparison are included in the following sections.Generated Soundings used for Chart Comparison (US5WI03M)SupportFiles\H13471_ChartComparison_US5WI03M.PNGGenerated Soundings used for Chart Comparison (US4WI03M)SupportFiles\H13471_ChartComparison_US4WI03M.PNGUS5WI03M2000042021-06-012021-06-01US4WI03M80000182021-08-302020-11-04There were 3 DtoNs found in H13471, and added to the Final Feature File (FFF). Each feature in the FFF has been given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format 71XXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature. The DtoNs were submitted in the following Danger to navigation reports: H13471_DtoN_01 H13471_DtoN_02_03 H13471_DtoN_01 contains 7 soundings; H13471 DtoN_02 contains 1 sounding; H13471_DtoN_03 contains 1 sounding.There were 29 charted features assigned to H13471 that are included in the Final Feature File (FFF). Each feature in the FFF has been given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format 71XXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature.1 new feature was found in H13471. Note: DtoNs are not included in the number of new features in this section. DtoNs can be found separately in section D.1.2.Oconto Harbor is maintained channel and has a charted controlled depth of 1.0m and 1.10m. Dredge Area controlled depths in Oconto Harbor were compared against soundings derived from our 4m surface as described in section D.1. Pensaukee Harbor is a channel with a depth range value of 0.10m. This channel was not addressed due to be inshore of NALL. No discrepancies were found. Per investigation requirements the features were not included in the FFF.There were 17 charted AtoNs assigned in H13471. Each feature was given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format 71XXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations of each feature. Note: All AtoNs were included in the number of charted features within section D.1.3. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.14 bottom samples were obtained in accordance with section 7.1 of the HSSD 2021 in areas designated by the field through discussions with our COR. Detailed information and images of the bottom samples are located in the Final Feature File (FFF). Each bottom sample has been given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format EX).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.In some regions, marine vegetation was picked up by the MBES. The vegetation was investigated by collecting additional lines in various directions in a few different areas throughout OPR-Y390-KR-21. The overlap of the vegetation throughout the investigation lines was not consistent and therefore could be determined to be marine vegetation moving in the water column. After the investigation was complete, the marine vegetation was rejected from the dataset by data processors. Below is an example where this occurred in this survey. No data gaps were observed in the delivered surfaces from rejecting the marine vegetation in this survey. Marine Vegetation RejectedSupportFiles\H13471_Abnormal_Environmental_Conditions.JPGThere were 3 Dredge Areas assigned in H13471. 2 dredge areas had no discrepancies from the chart. 1 dredge area was not addressed due to being inshore of NALL. Per investigation requirements the features were not included in the FFF. There were 2 Shoreline Construction Features assigned in H13471. Note: The Shoreline Construction Features were included in the FFF and were included in the number of charted features within section D.1.3. Refer to the FFF for determinations of each feature.No new surveys or further investigations are recommended for this area.No new ENC scales 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.David NeffChief of Party2021-09-24