OPR-Z394-KR-21Whitefish Bay, MIVicinity of Whitefish PointOcean SurveysH135254Please contact the PM and COR to confirm survey priority areas within sheetLittle Lake to Crisp PointMichiganUnited States50002021John R. BeanNavigable Area2021-06-022021-07-302021-08-22Multibeam Echo SounderMultibeam Echo Sounder BackscatterSide Scan SonarmetersUTCAtlantic Hydrographic BranchAny 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, LWD. All references to other horizontal or vertical datums in this report are applicable to the processed hydrographic data provided by the field unit.ContractorThis survey provides hydrographic data for Lake Superior waters in the vicinity of Whitefish Point. The general locations of the survey limits are presented in Table 1.46.91405785.46694846.71450885.250892Survey limits were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the Project Instructions and the HSSD.The following text is quoted from the Purpose and Location section of the Project Instructions: The survey area is located in Whitefish Bay, near the Southeast corner of Lake Superior. The total survey area is estimated to be around 300 SNM. Vessels entering or leaving Lake Superior must pass through the Soo Locks, located due East of Whitefish Point, making this survey area a very highly trafficked location. The survey area has reports of charting discrepancies and migrating shoals and the source data dates back to 1958 and predate modern survey methods. The data from this project will identify dangers to navigation and address a data gap in the National Bathymetric Source (NBS). The survey area was nominated as Shipwreck Coastal National Marine Sanctuary in 2017 and is known by the name "Shipwreck Coast". Whitefish Point remains one of the most dangerous shipping areas in the Great Lakes (1). Known as the graveyard of the Great Lakes (2), more vessels have been lost in the Whitefish Point area than any other part of Lake Superior. Commercial fishing is also very prevalent in this area and takes place year-round, except when ice conditions are prohibitive. Further development of this area may have navigational, cultural as well as commercial significance. This survey will provide contemporary data to update National Ocean Service (NOS) nautical charting products and services, improving the safety of the maritime traffic and services available to the area by reducing the current risk that is present due to outdated bathymetry. Sources: 1) Stonehouse, Frederick (1985, 1998). Lake Superior’s Shipwreck Coast, pp. 13 & 267, Avery Color Studios, Gwinn, Michigan, U.S.A. ISBN 0-932212-43-3 2) "Chapter 4: The Watery Boundary". United Divide: A Linear Portrait of the USA/Canada Border. The Center for Land Use Interpretation. Winter 2015.The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.The HydrOffice "QC Tools" application was used to calculate data density in the finalized surface for Survey H13525 and confirmed that the survey meets the HSSD data density requirements.Survey H13525 grid data density.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525_MB_VR_LWD_Final.QAv6.density.pngAll waters in survey areaComplete Coverage (Refer to HSSD Section 5.2.2.3)All waters in survey areaComplete a minimum of 4957 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.Crosslines for Survey H13525 were run over the full extent of the sheet in order to understand the bathymetry and determine what portion of the sheet would be surveyed to meet the LNM requirement. Approximately 54% of the potential sheet area was surveyed to complete coverage, but the project LNM total was met without including the excess crossline mileage. All crossline data are included in the survey deliverables. Survey H13525 MBES coverage.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525-Survey-Coverage.jpgMV Northstar Challenger0518.4000177.8052.40RV North Cove01.100070.602.00RV H.F. Stout043.300000000562.8000248.4054.406.7000043.72021-07-302021-07-312021-08-012021-08-022021-08-042021-08-052021-08-182021-08-192021-08-202021-08-212021-08-22Refer 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.MV Northstar Challenger282.6RV North Cove11.10.8RV H.F. Stout9.10.76MV Northstar Challenger configured for survey operations.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/CH-Overview.jpgRV North Cove configured for survey operations.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/NC-overview.jpgRV H.F. Stout configured for survey operations.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/ST-overview.jpgTeledyne RESONSeaBat T50-RMBESApplanixPOS MV 320 v5Positioning and Attitude SystemTrimbleNetR9Positioning SystemAML OceanographicMVP30Sound Speed SystemAML OceanographicMVP30-350Sound Speed SystemAML OceanographicAML-3 LGRSound Speed SystemAML OceanographicMicro SV-XchangeSound Speed SystemEdgeTech4200SSSCrosslines for Survey H13525 were run for final coverage determination, and so extend beyond the completed mainscheme coverage. The percentage of total crossline to mainscheme data was 6.7%, but when considering only crosslines within mainscheme survey coverage the percentage of crossline to mainscheme data was 3.6%. Agreement between crossline and mainscheme data was good, with a mean difference of 0.03 m. Greater differences were observed in outer beam data and in deeper water. A histogram of depth differences is shown below. H13525 crossline tracks overlaid on a coverage surface.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525-Crossline-Layout.jpgDepth differences between H13525 mainscheme and crossline data.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525-Main-2m-H13525-XL-2m_depth_delta.pngERS via VDATUM00.045MV Northstar Challenger41RV North Cove41RV H.F. Stout41The HydrOffice "QC Tools" application was used to calculate TVU QC, determined by a ratio of uncertainty to the allowable error per NOAA and IHO specifications. A variable resolution surface was finalized in CARIS HIPS using the "greater of the two" option to select the greater value of either the uncertainty or standard deviation for the uncertainty source. The surface passed the uncertainty check, with 99.5+% of nodes meeting the uncertainty standards.H13525 MBES surface uncertainty standards.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525_MB_VR_LWD_Final.QAv6.tvu_qc.pngTwo surveys junction with Survey H13525: 1 prior survey and 1 contemporary survey. The prior survey is a shoreline topobathy lidar project collected as part of the USACE National Coastal Mapping Program (NCMP).Survey junctions for Project OPR-Z394-KR-21.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/OPR-Z394-KR-21-Survey-Junctions.jpg2019 USACE NCMP02019JALBTCX LidarWOSI received a preliminary digital elevation model of a recent topobathy lidar dataset from the USACE National Coastal Mapping Program that was undergoing review at Coast Survey at the time of the PI. The dataset has since been made publicly available, and the published data downloaded for the junction comparison. The topobathy lidar data junctions with the southern end of Survey H13525 where the survey nears the shoreline. The junction area is approximately 2.5 SNM and shows a consistent bias of approximately 0.12 m, with H13525 survey data deeper than the topobathy lidar data. Greater discrepancies were observed near the center of the junction area, where undulations in the bathymetry suggest shifting sediment as the cause of the differences. Overall agreement was good, with 99% of nodes in the difference surface passing the allowable error fraction check.Survey H13525 to NCMP lidar junction area.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/Junction-H13525-NCMP-Lidar.jpgDepth differences between Survey H13525 and NCMP lidar.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525-2m-USACE2019_superior_dem_2_depth_delta.pngH1352350002021OSIEThe junction with contemporary survey H13523 is addressed in the DR for that survey.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.Thermal LayeringThermal stratification was observed throughout the survey area, causing sound speed variations that correlate to factors including the day, time, water depth, and bathymetric features such as slopes or sand waves. In data processing, sound speed profiles that did not adequately reflect the surrounding water mass were identified and removed, edited, or replaced. Sound speed casts were primarily applied using the CARIS HIPS "Nearest in Distance within Time" method, so removing a profile collected on a steep slope would allow deeper and shoaler casts on either side to be applied instead. Some shoal water casts that were applied along a downslope to deeper areas were edited by appending the lower portion of a cast from nearby deep water. Casts that were empirically found to represent a large water zone were added at additional locations within that zone to ensure proper corrections given the cast selection options available in the CARIS sound speed tools. Bathymetry, uncertainty, and standard deviation surfaces were used to direct editing and determine the accuracy of sound speed cast selection. MVP casts were taken at intervals of approximately 20 minutes on the MV Northstar Challenger and approximately 30 minutes on the RV North Cove. AML-3 casts were taken approximately every hour on the RV H.F. Stout.Hydrographers acquired more frequent sound speed profiles if high variability was noted in the surface sound speed from the AML Micro-X installed on the head of the transducer, or when the surface sound speed comparison threshold was exceeded (>2 m/s change) between the profile reading at the draft of the transducer and the Micro-X. On some occasions, the RV North Cove and RV H.F. Stout were operating in close proximity, in which case the MVP30 casts from the RV North Cove were used for both vessels. OSI submitted sound speed data in NetCDF format to the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) on Dec 7, 2021 via the SN2 tool.Locations of sound speed profiles measured in Survey H13525.file:///B:/OPR-Z394-KR-21/Surveys/H13525/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13525-Sound-Speed-Casts.jpgThe survey area has a wide range of depths and complex bathymetry. To efficiently achieve complete coverage, an adaptive TIN-based workflow was developed to create line plans with variable spacing. The tool was automated (with tweaks) and used charted data, crossline data, and mainscheme data as acquired to generate line plans as the survey progressed.All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.NOAA Profile Version 2021H13525_MB_VR_LWD_Final.csarCARIS VR Surface (CUBE)Variable Resolution4.204139.331NOAA_VRComplete MBESH13525_MB_VR_LWD.csarCARIS VR Surface (CUBE)Variable Resolution4.204139.331NOAA_VRComplete MBESH13525_SSSAB_1m_600kHz_1of1.tiffSSS Mosaic1N/A100% SSSAdditional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR.Low Water Datum IGLD-1985ERS via VDATUMOPR-Z394-KR-21_Whitefish_Bay_VDatumBuffer1282021_ 100m_NAD83_2011-LWD_IGLD85_Geoid18.csarA VDatum Separation Model (SEP) was provided by NOAA with the original project files and described in the PI. An updated SEP model to increase coverage area was requested and supplied during final data processing.North American Datum 1983Projected UTM 16Smart BaseLITTLE CURRENTLCURMICHIPICOTENMCHNSAULT STE MARIEMILSMIMQ MARQUETTEMIMQMUNISINGMIMUMINB NEEBISH ISLANDMINBMANISTIQUEMIQEST. IGNACEMISIPOINT IROQUOISPTIRROSSPORTROSSESCANABASUP2NEWBERRYSUP3ABRAMSWIABCRANDONWICROcean Surveys Whitefish PointOSWPUS4MI2QR8000012020-11-102020-11-10US4MI2RR8000012021-01-042021-01-04No shoals or potentially hazardous features exist for this survey.No charted features exist for this survey.An uncharted wreck was surveyed and is associated with the publicly available coordinates of an identified wreck. No other features were observed in Survey H13525.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. Recommended tracks not based on a system of fixed marks were present but not investigated. No aids to navigation (ATONs) exist for this survey.No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey.No bottom samples were required for this survey.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.No abnormal seafloor 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 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, and Letter Instructions. 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.John R. BeanChief of Party2021-12-16David T. SomersData Processing Manager2021-12-16