OPR-E352-KR-24 Tangier Sound, MD Tangier Sound eTrac H13962 1 Nanticoke and Wicomico Rivers Maryland United States 20000 2024 David Neff, C.H. Basic Hydrographic Survey 2024-06-21 2024-07-06 2024-12-20 Multibeam Echo Sounder Multibeam Echo Sounder Backscatter Side Scan Sonar meters UTC Atlantic Hydrographic Branch All times are UTC. The purpose of this survey is to update existing NOS nautical charts. H13962 covers approximately 17.26 square nautical miles of Tangier Sound, Maryland. 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 18N, MLLW. All references to other horizontal or vertical datums in this report are applicable to the processed hydrographic data provided by the field unit. CC0-1.0 (NOAA Field Units) CC0-1.0 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode These data were produced by NOAA and are in the public domain within the United States. NOAA waives any potential copyright and related rights in these data worldwide through the Creative Commons Zero 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication (CC0). Contractor eTrac conducted hydrographic survey operations in Tangier Sound, Maryland. H13962 covers approximately 17.26 square nautical miles of survey area in the Nanticoke and Wicomico Rivers. 1679.31 linear nautical miles were acquired during the survey. Survey was conducted within these limits between July 6, 2024 (DN188) and December 20, 2024 (DN355). 38.63741530555556 76.13565397222223 38.195673388888885 75.60408627777777 All data were acquired in accordance with the requirements in the project instructions and specifications set forth in the Hydrographic Survey Specifications and Deliverables 2022 Edition (HSSD 2022). Survey Limits Overview (light blue area) file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_SurveyLimitsOverview.png Survey Limits (black line) file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_SurveyLimits.png The principal objective of the Tangier Sound project is manifold. This survey will provide NOAA's National Water Center with bathymetric data to support hydrodynamic modeling efforts. The data from this project will provide modern bathymetry for updating NOAA nautical charting products, improving the safety of maritime traffic and commerce, as well as supporting the Seabed 2030 global mapping initiative. This survey will also contribute to the ongoing underwater archaeological exploration and investigation efforts of the USACE Oyster Habitat Preservation and Restoration working group. The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data. Survey H13962 is accurate to International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Order 1a as required per the HSSD 2022. All waters in survey area Complete Coverage All waters in survey area 2 to 8 m water depth Sidescan Sonar Data may be aquired at an altitude of 6-20% of the range-scale Survey coverage was in accordance with the requirements listed above and in the HSSD 2022. Note: Survey coverage did not extend to the entire survey boundary as the Navigable Area Limit Line (NALL) was reached. Gaps in complete survey coverage exist due to the presence of transportation infrastructure that prevent the collection of data up to the NALL. Survey Coverage with combined MBES and SSS file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_MBESandSSS_SurveyCoverage.png Data Coverage Gap caused by Ferry Infrastructure file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_FerryCoverageGap.png Data Coverage Gap caused by Nanticoke River Movable Railroad Bridge file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_BridgeCoverageGap.png R/V Thunder 0.0 735.97 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Current 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 229.57 0.0 47.05 0.0 Pulse 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 648.37 0.0 18.35 0.0 0.0 735.97 0.0 0.0 0.0 877.94 0.0 65.4 0.0 4.05 8 0 0 0 17.26 2024-07-06 2024-07-07 2024-07-10 2024-07-11 2024-07-12 2024-07-13 2024-08-02 2024-08-03 2024-08-04 2024-08-05 2024-08-07 2024-08-17 2024-08-18 2024-08-23 2024-08-24 2024-08-31 2024-09-01 2024-09-02 2024-09-08 2024-09-18 2024-09-19 2024-09-20 2024-09-21 2024-09-23 2024-09-24 2024-09-25 2024-09-27 2024-09-28 2024-10-09 2024-10-10 2024-10-11 2024-10-12 2024-10-13 2024-10-15 2024-10-16 2024-10-17 2024-10-20 2024-10-21 2024-10-22 2024-10-23 2024-10-24 2024-10-25 2024-10-26 2024-10-31 2024-11-01 2024-11-04 2024-11-05 2024-11-06 2024-12-02 2024-12-03 2024-12-04 2024-12-05 2024-12-06 2024-12-07 2024-12-08 2024-12-09 2024-12-10 2024-12-12 2024-12-13 2024-12-16 2024-12-17 2024-12-19 2024-12-20 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. Current 7.6 0.6 Pulse 7.3 0.6 R/V Thunder 21.3 0.8 Current is a 7.6 meter ribbed safeboat equipped with a Universal Sonar Mount (USM) starboard multibeam pole mount and davit. Pulse is a 7.3 aluminum monohull equipped with a Universal Sonar Mount (USM) starboard multibeam pole mount and davit. The R/V Thunder is a 21.3 meter aluminum catamaran equipped with two Universal Sonar Mount High-Tower (USMHT) over-the-side sonar pole mounts. MBES R2Sonic 2022 MBES R2Sonic 2024 SSS EdgeTech 4125 Positioning System R2Sonic I2NS Positioning and Attitude System Applanix POS MV WaveMaster Positioning and Attitude System Applanix POS MV OceanMaster Sound Speed System AML Oceanographic BaseX2 Sound Speed System AML Oceanographic AML-3 LGR Sound Speed System AML Oceanographic MicroX SV Note: Current utilized a single head R2Sonic 2022 multibeam echosounder system (MBES), an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML Base.X2 for the sound speed system, an Applanix POSMV Ocean Master for the positioning and attitude system, and an EdgeTech 4125 side scan sonar (SSS). Beginning in October 2024 Current utilized an AML 3 LRG for the sound speed system. Pulse utilized a single head R2Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder system (MBES), an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML 3 LGR for the sound speed system, an Applanix POSMV Wave Master for the positioning and attitude system, and an EdgeTech 4125 side scan sonar (SSS). Beginning in late August 2024 Pulse utilized an R2Sonic I2NS for the positioning and attitude system in order to receive Applanix Real-time Centerpoint RTX corrections. Beginning in October 2024 Pulse utilized an R2Sonic 2022 MBES. R/V Thunder utilized a dual head R2Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder system (MBES), an AML Micro.X for the surface sound speed system, an AML Base.X2 for the sound speed system, and an Applanix POSMV OceanMaster for the positioning and attitude system. A beam-to-beam statistical analysis was performed using the Cross Check tool in Qimera. A 1 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. The percentage of crossline miles as compared to main scheme miles was 4.05% 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. H13962 Crossline Comparison file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_XLCompare.png ERS via VDATUM 0.1 Current 0.05 0.2 Pulse 0.05 0.2 R/V Thunder 0.05 0.2 The standard deviation uncertainty and the total vertical uncertainty (TVU) 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. In Qimera the user has the ability to export the Dynamic Surface to a Bathymetric Attributed Grid (BAG) with the TVU layer. Using this BAG, the percentage of nodes that fell within the TVU specification for each Dynamic Surface was calculated using the NOAA QC tools program. These results are shown in an image below. The TVU was also reviewed using the Colormap Range in the Qimera TVU surface layer. This image is also included below. Complete Coverage Option B MBES (Finalized 1m CUBE weighted Dynamic Surface in NOAA QC Tools) = 100% of nodes are within the allowable TVU. H13962 Finalized 1m MBES TVU Statistics file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_MB_1m_MLLW_Final_TVU.png H13962 Qimera TVU Colormap Range file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_Qimera_TVU_Colormap.png Depth differences between junctioning surveys were evaluated using the JunctionTrac program, developed in-house by eTrac. 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 1 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. H13965 20000 2024 eTrac SW The junction comparison between H13962 and H13965 was analyzed in the H13965 DR. Reference the H13965 DR for junction comparison results. H13966 20000 2024 eTrac W The junction comparison between H13962 and H13966 was analyzed in the H13966 DR. Reference the H13966 DR for junction comparison results. VA2203-TB-C 1 2023 Woolpert W VA2203-TB-C junctions with H13962 in all directions. The junction comparison was performed using all overlapping data between H13962 and the Topobathy Lidar. Below is a histogram of junction comparison statistics showing the difference between the junctioning surfaces and allowable TVU as well as difference statistics. 99.7989% of nodes were within allowable TVU. The Junction Comparison was performed at a 4m resolution due to the large size of the dataset, however the percentage of nodes within the allowable TVU should remain consistent and representative of the final 1m surface resolution. The difference statistic was performed on a 1m surface. 0.2011% outside of allowable TVU results from small THU discrepancies from the different collection methodology of Lidar and MBES, shown mostly on slopes, as well as interpolation between sparse data points in the Lidar and interpolation of MBES data in the NAVD88 product created as one of the additional deliverables. In some instances, features with a set custom hypothesis create a node with a difference greater than 0.5 m. H13962 - Topobathy Lidar Junction Comparison file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_JunctionTrac.png H13962 - Topobathy Lidar Difference Statistics file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_LidarGrids_Diff.png Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR. None Exist There were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness. None Exist There 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 Current, Pulse, and R/V Thunder 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 Evaluation In order to determine if the density of the data met the specified 5 soundings per node, data density was evaluated using the Grid Statistics tool in Qimera. H13962 Grid Statistic Histogram file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_Density.png All 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. eTrac verified coverage and general quality of the backscatter data collected daily. A beam intensity window was monitored in Qinsy during acquisition to ensure backscatter data collection. Raw backscatter data were viewed in QPS FMGeocoder (FMGT) to further confirm collection criteria had been met. After MBES data were fully processed and cleaned in Qimera, GSF files were exported and brought into FMGT and processed into backscatter mosaics grouped by acoustic frequency and survey system. NOAA Profile Version 2022 Feature Object Catalog, NOAA Profile Version 2022 was used only in CARIS. Qimera was used as the primary processing software. H13962_MB_1m_MLLW_Final BAG 1 0.09 17.61 NOAA_1m Complete MBES H13962_MBAB_2m_TH_400kHz_1of3 MB Backscatter Mosaic 2 N/A Complete MBES H13962_MBAB_2m_PU_400kHz_2of3 MB Backscatter Mosaic 2 N/A Complete MBES H13962_MBAB_2m_CU_400kHz_3of3 MB Backscatter Mosaic 2 N/A Complete MBES H13962_SSSAB_1m_400kHz_1of2 SSS Mosaic 1 N/A 100% SSS H13962_SSSAB_1m_400kHz_2of2 SSS Mosaic 1 N/A 200% SSS A 1m surface is provided meeting complete coverage MBES with backscatter specifications for H13962. A 1m mosaic is provided meeting complete coverage with 100% SSS specifications for H13962. A separate 1m mosaic is also provided meeting specifications for the 200% disproval radii. H13962 Finalized 1m CUBE Weighted Dynamic Surface Coverage file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_SurfaceCoverage.png H13962 Finalized 2m Backscatter Mosaic file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_MosiacCoverage_MBAB_2m.png H13962 Finalized 1m SSS Mosaic file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_MosiacCoverage_SSSAB_2m.png Additional Task: Final Data Submission - Grids An additional assigned task for this sheet was to include interpolated grids in Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) and North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) datum. Additional information discussing the interpolated grids for this survey can be found in the accompanying DAPR. Additional information discussing the vertical or horizontal control for this survey can be found in the accompanying HVCR and DAPR. Mean Lower Low Water ERS via VDATUM OPR-E352-KR-24_NAD83-MLLW.qgfvom In order to reference soundings to Mean Lower Low Water Datum, a separation model was applied to the Qinsy DB files via a .qgfvom separation file in the acquisition software. Note: The separation model nodes didn't extend fully to the tip of the boundary in the Nanticoke River. The area affected was less than 10 square meters. using the separation value of the adjacent node, data outside of the separation model extents were manually shifted in Qimera from NAD83(2011) to MLLW. Reference item number nine in project correspondence. North American Datum 1983 (2011) Projected UTM 18 RTX Applanix PosPac MMS was utilized to post process real time 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+ and G4+ carrier signal from the Marinestar Global Correction System maintained by Fugro, or over the Trimble Real-Time Centerpoint RTX carrier signal. Additional Task: Final Data Submission- Grids An additional assigned task for this project was to include interpolated grids in Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) and North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) datum. To accomplish this task, MLLW XYZ data were exported from Qimera and loaded into Hypack for interpolation. The MLLW interpolated grids were then exported from Hypack and brought back into Qimera. In order to reference soundings to NAVD88 Datum, a separation model was provided by NOAA and was applied to the gridded MLLW data within Qimera. Additional information discussing the interpolated grids for this survey can be found in the accompanying DAPR. A chart comparison was conducted for H13962 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 other charts were used to complete the chart comparison. Details of the ENCs used are listed below. US5MD23M, scale: 40000, edition: 21, update application date: 01/06/2022, issue date: 01/23/2025 US5VA21M, scale: 40000, edition: 28, update application date: 10/16/2024, issue date: 12/19/2024 Throughout survey operations sounding comparisons between the charted depths and the surveyed depths were analyzed to identify depth discrepancies. Using 1 meter CUBE weighted Dynamic surfaces, 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. Results of the chart comparison are included in the following sections. Generated Soundings used for Chart Comparison (US5MD23M) file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_ChartComparison_US5MD23M.png Generated Soundings used for Chart Comparison (US5VA21M) file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_ChartComparison_US5VA21M.png US5MD23M 40000 21 2022-01-06 2025-01-23 US5VA21M 40000 28 2024-10-16 2024-12-19 There were 13 DtoNs found in H13962, 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 1XXXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature. The DtoNs were submitted in the following Danger to navigation reports: H13962_DtoN_02-04 H13962_DtoN_05 H13962_DtoN_06-14 There were 117 charted features assigned to H13962 and 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 1XXXX). 56 of the charted features were evaluated using junctioning Lidar Grid DEM and or Lidar Point Cloud data and observations were included in the FFF. Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature. 79 new features were found in H13962, and were added to the FFF. Each feature in the FFF has been given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format 1XXXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature. Note: Some features identified in H13962 did not have reliable least depth values stemming from the inability to develop the features safely. Non-standard combinations of TECSOU and QUASOU have been used in these cases to most effectively represent these features. DtoNs are not included in the number of new features in this section. DtoNs can be found separately in section D.1.2. Nanticoke River Channel, Hawks Nest Shoal Channel, and two of five sections of the Wicomico River Reach were assigned as dredge areas. Nanticoke River Channel extending approximately 3.9 km from north of Nanticoke River Channel Light 63 to the Railroad Swing Bridge in Seaford, DE has a reported depth range value of 3.6 m MLLW. Surveyed depths along a profile traversing the middle of the channel identified depths shoaler than 3.6 m in multiple locations. The shoalest point along the profile traversing the middle of the channel is 2.5 m MLLW. An image of the profile is shown below. Our survey extents did not cover the entirety of the northernmost section of the Nanticoke River Channel. Hawks Nest Shoal Channel extends approximately 1.1 km in the Nanticoke river between Nanticoke River Channel Light 46 and the mouth of Broad Creek with a reported depth range value of 3.6 m MLLW. Surveyed depths along a profile traversing the middle of the channel identified depths shoaler than 3.6 m.The shoalest point along the profile traversing the middle of the channel is 3.5 m MLLW. An image of the profile is shown below. The first assigned section of the Wicomico River Reach extends approximately 10 km between Wicomico River Channel Daybeacon 41 and Salisbury, MD with a reported depth range of 2.8 m MLLW. No discrepancies were found within our survey extents along a profile traversing the middle of the channel. Our survey extents did not cover the entirety of the northernmost section of the Wicomico River Reach. The second assigned section of the Wicomico River Reach extends approximately 0.6 km between Wicomico River Channel Light 37 and Wicomico River Channel Light 38 with a reported depth range of 3.8 m MLLW. No discrepancies were found within our survey extents along a profile traversing the middle of the channel. The following sections of the Wicomico River Reach with controlling depths were not assigned but fell within the bounds of our survey. The first unassigned section of the Wicomico River Reach extends approximately 0.4 km between Wicomico River Channel Light 35 and Wicomico River Channel Light 37 with a reported depth range of 4.4 m MLLW. No discrepancies were found within our survey extents along a profile traversing the middle of the channel. The second unassigned section of the Wicomico River Reach extends approximately 1.4 km between Wicomico River Channel Light 32 and Wicomico River Channel Light 35 with a reported depth range of 4.1 m MLLW. No discrepancies were found within our survey extents along a profile traversing the middle of the channel. The third unassigned section of the Wicomico River Reach extends approximately 8.3 km between Wicomico River Channel Buoy 7 and Wicomico River Channel Daybeacon 24 with a reported depth range of 3.0 m MLLW. No discrepancies were found within our survey extents along a profile traversing the middle of the channel. Bivalve Harbor Channel, Bivalve Harbor Basin Channel, Nanticoke Cut River Channel, and Webster Cove Channel were not fully addressed as they were inshore of NALL. These areas were not included in the FFF following investigation requirements. Profile traversing the middle of Nanticoke River Channel. Red line in cross section of A-A' represents reported depth of 3.6 m MLLW. The shoalest point along the profile is 2.5 m and the deepest point along the profile is 5.3 m. file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_NanticokeRiverChannel_Discrep_1.png Profile traversing the middle of Hawks Nest Shoal Channel. Red line in cross section of A-A' represents reported depth of 3.6 m MLLW. The shoalest point along the profile is 3.5 m and the deepest point along the profile is 4.6 m. file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_HawksNestShoal_Discrep.png Nanticoke River Channel Light 54 was reported off station to US Coast Guard Navigation Center via their AtoN Discrepancy Report Form. Charted locations have not been updated as of January 2025. Nanticoke River East Channel Buoy 2 was reported to MCD via the MCD assist program as being charted incorrectly on US5MD23M and should be updated to match the location in the USCG Light List. Charted locations have not been updated as of January 2025. A charted special purpose buoy that was not found in the field was reported to MCD via the MCD assist program and removed from US5VA21M. No Maritime Boundary Points were assigned for this survey. 8 bottom samples were obtained in accordance with section 7.1 of the HSSD 2022 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 H13962_X). There were 9 overhead features assigned to H13962. 5 overhead cables were visually confirmed and no discrepancies found. 2 bridges were visually confirmed and no discrepancies found, 1 bridge was not addressed as it was inshore of NALL, and 1 bridge in the Wicomico Creek was found to not exist. The overhead features were not included in the FFF following investigation requirements. Assigned bridge not observed in Wicomico Creek. file:///B:/OPR-E352-KR-24/Surveys/H13962/01_HDR/Reports/Descriptive_Report/SupportFiles/H13962_OverheadFeatDiscrep.png 4 new pipelines were found in H13962. 2 were reported in H13962 Non-Dangerous Pipeline 01 by AHB. 2 were found in a charted pipeline corridor and per correspondence with COR and AHB they were not reported to NDB. All pipelines were reported to BSEE. Each feature in the FFF has been given a unique identifier in the "userid" field of the .000 S-57 file (format 1XXXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations for each feature. There was 1 offshore platform assigned to H13962 that is 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 1XXXX). Refer to the FFF for determinations and recommendations of each feature. There were 3 ferry routes assigned to H13962. Assigned ferry routes were visually confirmed and no discrepancies were found. The ferry routes were not included in the FFF following investigation requirements. 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 CUBE surfaces, 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. David Neff, C.H. Chief of Party 2025-02-17