descriptive report h12421

LOCALITY

H12

421

VirginiaState:

NOAA Form 76-35A

U.S. Department of CommerceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Ocean Survey

DESCRIPTIVE REPORT

Type of Survey:

2012

CHIEF OF PARTYCDR Lawrence T. Krepp

Southern Chesapeake Bay, VA

Approaches to Cherrystone Inlet

General Locality:

Sub-locality:

Registry Number:

Navigable Area

H12421

LIBRARY & ARCHIVES

Date:

NOAA FORM 77-28(11-72)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION

REGISTRY NUMBER:

H12421HYDROGRAPHIC TITLE SHEET

INSTRUCTIONS: The Hydrographic Sheet should be accompanied by this form, filled in as completely as possible, when the sheet is forwarded to the Office.

State:

General Locality:

Sub-Locality:

Scale:

Dates of Survey:

Instructions Dated:

Project Number:

Field Unit:

Chief of Party:

Soundings by:

Imagery by:

Verification by:

Soundings Acquired in:

Virginia

Southern Chesapeake Bay, VA


20000

04/04/2012 to 05/01/2012

03/28/2012

OPR-E350-TJ-12

NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson

CDR Lawrence T. Krepp

Multibeam Echo Sounder Singlebeam Echo Sounder

Side Scan Sonar

Atlantic Hydrographic Branch

meters at Mean Lower Low Water

Remarks:

The 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 Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) and can be retrieved via http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/.

i

Table of ContentsA. Area Surveyed................................................................................................................................ 1A.1 Survey Limits................................................................................................................................1A.2 Survey Purpose............................................................................................................................. 3A.3 Survey Quality.............................................................................................................................. 3A.4 Survey Coverage........................................................................................................................... 3A.5 Survey Statistics............................................................................................................................ 5A.6 Shoreline.......................................................................................................................................6A.7 Bottom Samples............................................................................................................................ 6B. Data Acquisition and Processing.......................................................................................................6B.1 Equipment and Vessels.................................................................................................................. 6B.1.1 Vessels....................................................................................................................................... 7B.1.2 Equipment.................................................................................................................................. 7B.2 Quality Control..............................................................................................................................8B.2.1 Crosslines................................................................................................................................... 8B.2.2 Uncertainty................................................................................................................................. 8B.2.3 Junctions.................................................................................................................................... 9B.2.4 Sonar QC Checks......................................................................................................................10B.2.5 Equipment Effectiveness............................................................................................................10B.2.6 Factors Affecting Soundings...................................................................................................... 10B.2.7 Sound Speed Methods............................................................................................................... 11B.2.8 Coverage Equipment and Methods............................................................................................. 11B.3 Echo Sounding Corrections.......................................................................................................... 11B.3.1 Corrections to Echo Soundings.................................................................................................. 11B.3.2 Calibrations.............................................................................................................................. 11B.4 Backscatter..................................................................................................................................11B.5 Data Processing........................................................................................................................... 11B.5.1 Software Updates...................................................................................................................... 11B.5.2 Surfaces....................................................................................................................................11B.5.3 Hysweep Outage....................................................................................................................... 12C. Vertical and Horizontal Control......................................................................................................13C.1 Vertical Control...........................................................................................................................13C.2 Horizontal Control....................................................................................................................... 14D. Results and Recommendations....................................................................................................... 15D.1 Chart Comparison........................................................................................................................15D.1.1 Raster Charts............................................................................................................................ 15D.1.2 Electronic Navigational Charts...................................................................................................17D.1.3 AWOIS Items...........................................................................................................................17D.1.4 Charted Features....................................................................................................................... 17D.1.5 Uncharted Features................................................................................................................... 17D.1.6 Dangers to Navigation...............................................................................................................18D.1.7 Shoal and Hazardous Features................................................................................................... 18D.1.8 Channels.................................................................................................................................. 19D.2 Additional Results....................................................................................................................... 19

ii

D.2 Construction and Dredging...........................................................................................................20D.2.1 Shoreline.................................................................................................................................. 19D.2.2 Prior Surveys............................................................................................................................19D.2.3 Aids to Navigation....................................................................................................................19D.2.4 Overhead Features.................................................................................................................... 19D.2.5 Submarine Features...................................................................................................................19D.2.6 Ferry Routes and Terminals.......................................................................................................19D.2.7 Platforms..................................................................................................................................19D.2.8 Significant Features...................................................................................................................20E. Approval Sheet..............................................................................................................................21F. Table of Acronyms........................................................................................................................ 22

List of TablesTable 1: Survey Limits.........................................................................................................................1Table 2: Hydrographic Survey Statistics................................................................................................ 5Table 3: Dates of Hydrography............................................................................................................. 6Table 4: Vessels Used..........................................................................................................................7Table 5: Major Systems Used............................................................................................................... 7Table 6: Survey Specific Tide TPU Values............................................................................................ 8Table 7: Survey Specific Sound Speed TPU Values................................................................................8Table 8: Junctioning Surveys................................................................................................................ 9Table 9: CARIS Surfaces................................................................................................................... 12Table 10: NWLON Tide Stations........................................................................................................13Table 11: Water Level Files (.tid)....................................................................................................... 14Table 12: Tide Correctors (.zdf or .tc)................................................................................................. 14Table 13: USCG DGPS Stations......................................................................................................... 14Table 14: Largest Scale Raster Charts................................................................................................. 15Table 15: Largest Scale ENCs............................................................................................................ 17Table 16: DTON Reports................................................................................................................... 18

List of FiguresFigure 1: H12421 Survey Limits...........................................................................................................2Figure 2: Gap Between Junctions..........................................................................................................3Figure 3: H12421 Within the Project Area.............................................................................................4Figure 4: H12421 Junctions................................................................................................................ 10Figure 5: Hysweep Outages................................................................................................................ 13Figure 6: H12421 Inshore Changes..................................................................................................... 15Figure 7: Southern Shoal.................................................................................................................... 16Figure 8: Deepening north of fish haven..............................................................................................17Figure 9: H12421 Charted Shoal.........................................................................................................18

H12421 NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson

1

Descriptive Report to Accompany Survey H12421

Project: OPR-E350-TJ-12

Locality: Southern Chesapeake Bay, VA

Sublocality: Approaches to Cherrystone Inlet

Scale: 1:20000

April 2012 - May 2012

NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson

Chief of Party: CDR Lawrence T. Krepp

A. Area Surveyed

This survey was conducted within the approaches to Cherrystone Inlet.

A.1 Survey Limits

Data was acquired within the following survey limits:

Northeast Limit Southwest Limit37.3627194444 N76.0061 W

37.2503666667 N76.0836611111 W

Table 1: Survey Limits


2

Figure 1: H12421 Survey Limits

The survey limits were modified to include an area between this survey and previous survey H11529 tocreate overlap within the junction of the two.


3

Figure 2: Gap Between Junctions

A.2 Survey Purpose

The purpose of this project is to provide contemporary surveys to update National Ocean Service (NOS)nautical charting products.

A.3 Survey Quality

The entire survey is adequate to supersede previous data.

A.4 Survey Coverage


4

Figure 3: H12421 Within the Project Area

Due to time constraints, the inshore limit of the NALL was not reached.


5

A.5 Survey Statistics

The following table lists the mainscheme and crossline acquisition mileage for this survey:

HULL ID S222 3101 3012 Total

SBES Mainscheme 0 0 0 0

MBES Mainscheme 15.42 33.75 16.73 65.9

Lidar Mainscheme 0 0 0 0

SSS Mainscheme 0 0 0 0

SBES/MBESComboMainscheme

0 0 0 0

SBES/SSS ComboMainscheme 0 6.86 14.93 21.79

MBES/SSS ComboMainscheme 186.01 102.73 182.23 470.97

SBES/MBESCombo Crosslines 0.93 37.86 0 38.79

LNM

Lidar Crosslines 0 0 0 0Number of BottomSamples 14

Number of DPs 16

Number of Items ItemsInvestigated by Dive Ops 0

Total Number of SNM 20Table 2: Hydrographic Survey Statistics


6

The following table lists the specific dates of data acquisition for this survey:

Survey Dates04/04/201204/06/201204/07/201204/08/201204/09/201204/10/201204/11/201204/12/201205/01/2012

Table 3: Dates of Hydrography

It should be noted that this survey has two different coverage types with different requirements forcrosslines. The greater than twenty meter area was covered with complete multibeam. This has 8%crosslines. The four to twenty meter area has set line spacing with side scan sonar and concurrentbathymetry. This has 7.7% crosslines.

A.6 Shoreline

Due to time constraints, we were not able to investigate the entire area offshore of the NALL.

A.7 Bottom Samples

Bottom Samples were acquired in accordance with the Project Instructions or the HSSD.

B. Data Acquisition and Processing

B.1 Equipment and Vessels

Refer to the Data Acquisition and Processing Report (DAPR) for a complete description of data acquisitionand processing systems, survey vessels, quality control procedures and data processing methods. Additionalinformation to supplement sounding and survey data, and any deviations from the DAPR are discussed in thefollowing sections.


7

B.1.1 Vessels

The following vessels were used for data acquisition during this survey:

Hull ID S222 3101 3102LOA 208 feet 31 feet 31 feetDraft 4.6 meters 0.8 meters 0.8 meters

Table 4: Vessels Used

Data were acquired by NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson and Hydrographic Survey Launches 3101 and3102. NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson acquired Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder soundings, Klein 5000side scan sonar imagery, sound velocity profiles, and bottom samples. Launch 3101 acquired Klein 5000side scan sonar imagery, Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder soundings, Odom ETCV200 vertical beamechosounder soundings, and sound velocity profiles. Launch 3102 acquired Klein 5000 side scan sonarimagery, Reson 7125 multibeam echsounder soundings, Odom ETCV200 vertical beam echosoundersoundings, sound velocity profiles, and bottom samples.

B.1.2 Equipment

The following major systems were used for data acquisition during this survey:

Manufacturer Model TypeApplanix POS/MV Vessel Attitude SystemSeabird Seacat 19+ Sound Speed System

Brook Ocean Technology MVP 100 Sound Speed SystemKlein 5000 SSSReson 7125 ROV MBESReson 7125 SV1 MBESOdom ETCV200 SBES

Table 5: Major Systems Used


8

B.2 Quality Control

B.2.1 Crosslines

To meet the requirements of section 5.2.4.3 of the 2012 HSSD the quality control check was done using thestandard deviation layer of the survey's combined surface. Areas of unusually high standard deviation wereinvestigated and resolved in processing, except where caused by areas of high bathymetric relief or features.This value does not exceed 0.14 meters.

B.2.2 Uncertainty

The following survey specific parameters were used for this survey:

Measured Zoning0meters 0meters

Table 6: Survey Specific Tide TPU Values

Hull ID Measured - CTD Measured - MVP SurfaceS222 4meters/second 1meters/second 0.2meters/second3101 4meters/second N/Ameters/second 0.2meters/second3102 4meters/second N/Ameters/second 0.2meters/second

Table 7: Survey Specific Sound Speed TPU Values

NOAA National Ocean Service (NOS), Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services(COOPS) provides tide uncertainty values for NOAA hydrographic surveys. The CO-OPS provided valueis a combination of uncertainty from the tide measurement at the tide stations and the uncertainty of zoning.The combined uncertainty value is provided to the field units at the 95% confidence interval, or 2-sigmastandard deviations. CARIS HIPS processing software calculates uncertainty values at 1-sigma standarddeviation, therefore, the standard practice aboard NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson is to divide the CO-OPSprovided values by 1.96 and to enter the value into the zoning uncertainty field when calculating TotalPropagated Uncertainty (TPU).

TPU is calculated and written to each line's HDCS file (CARIS processed data format). When surfacesare created, an uncertainty child layer is created. This child layer represents the amount of uncertainty forindividual nodes in the surface based on a combination of a priori values from equipment vendors, valuesdetermined from environmental observation in the field, and from automated empirical analysis of data inreal-time. Once all investigated features have been reviewed and least depths have been designated, surfacesare finalized. In finalization, the standard deviation for each node in the surface is multiplied by 1.96 toprovide the 95% (2-sigma) confidence value for the node. This 2-sigma standard deviation is compared tothe computed Total Vertical Uncertainty (TVU) for each node. The larger of the two values is retained as thefinalized Uncertainty for each node. Uncertainty is reported in meters.


9

IHO has established allowable TVU values for each order of survey. This survey meets IHO Order I TVUrequirements in 98% of nodes in the final surface. Statistical distribution of nodes that meet or exceed theIHO TVU requirements (Zero and Positive values indicate that IHO Order 1 requirements were met).

B.2.3 Junctions

The following junctions were made with this survey.

The following junctions were made with this survey:

RegistryNumber Scale Year Field Unit Relative

LocationH12181 1:20000 2010 NOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSON SH11407 1:10000 2005 NOAA Ship Rude WH11530 1:10000 2006 NOAA Ship Rude NW

Table 8: Junctioning Surveys

H12181

The average difference between these two sheets was 2.4mm with a standard deviation of 14.2cm. Theresult is that 95% of the soundings agree within 27.8cm.

H11407

The BAG files supplied with this survey would not open. Being that this survey is older than three years it isassumed that the soundings are reflected on the chart. See the chart comparison section for further details.

H11530

The BAG files supplied with this survey would not open. Being that this survey is older than three years it isassumed that the soundings are reflected on the chart. See the chart comparison section for further details.


10

Figure 4: H12421 Junctions

B.2.4 Sonar QC Checks

Sonar system quality control checks were conducted as detailed in the quality control section of the DAPR.

B.2.5 Equipment Effectiveness

B.2.5.1None Exist

There were no conditions or deficiencies that affected equipment operational effectiveness.

B.2.6 Factors Affecting Soundings

B.2.6.1 None Exist

There were no other factors that affected corrections to soundings.


11

B.2.7 Sound Speed Methods

Sound Speed Cast Frequency: Sound Speed Cast Frequency: MVP casts were taken by the shipapproximately every thirty minutes. CTDs were taken once a week for comparison. 3101 and 3102 tookCTDs about every four hours.

No Sound Speed Zoning was required for this survey.

B.2.8 Coverage Equipment and Methods

All equipment and survey methods were used as detailed in the DAPR.

B.3 Echo Sounding Corrections

B.3.1 Corrections to Echo Soundings

All data reduction procedures conform to those detailed in the DAPR.

B.3.2 Calibrations

All sounding systems were calibrated as detailed in the DAPR.

B.4 Backscatter

Backscatter was logged as a s7k file using Datagram 2 from Hypack and submitted to the IOCM processingcenter and/or directly to NGDC, and is not included with the data submitted to the Branch.

B.5 Data Processing

B.5.1 Software Updates

There were no software configuration changes after the DAPR was submitted.

The following Feature Object Catalog was used: NOAAProfileField.xml

B.5.2 Surfaces


12

The following CARIS surfaces were submitted to the Processing Branch:

Surface Name Surface Type Resolution Depth Range SurfaceParameter Purpose

H12421_Mosaic_100_1m SSS Mosaic 1 meters 0 meters - 0 meters N/A 100% SSS

H12421_Mosaic_200_1m SSS Mosaic 1 meters 0 meters - 0 meters N/A 200% SSS

H12421_CUBE_MLLW_2m_Final CUBE 2.0 meters 2.62 meters - 39.19 meters NOAA_2m MBES Set

Line Spacing

2421_Fish_Haven_CUBE_MLLW_Fi CUBE 0.5 meters 3.56 meters - 14.38 meters NOAA_0.5m Object

Detection

H12421_Uncertainty_MLLW_4m_FinaBASE

Uncertainty 4 meters 2.43 meters - 9.59 meters N/A SBES Set

Line Spacing

_Development_1_CUBE_MLLW_50c CUBE 0.5 meters 12.81 meters - 15.01 meters NOAA_0.5m Object

Detection


Detection


Detection


Detection

H12421_Final_Combined_CUBE_2m CUBE 2 meters 2.62 meters - 39.11 meters N/A

MBESTracklineSBES

Set LineSpacing

Table 9: CARIS Surfaces

B.5.3 Hysweep Outage

On 1 May 2012 there was a Hysweep setting that was changed. This caused Hysweep to freeze or havedata outages. Later in the day the settings were changed to what they had been previously and the problemstopped. We left the area that day and were not able to re-acquire over the missing areas.


13

Figure 5: Hysweep Outages

C. Vertical and Horizontal Control

As per FPM section 5.2.3.2.3 a HCVR was not filed as no horizontal or vertical control stations wereestablished by the field party for this survey. A summary of horizontal and vertical control for this surveyfollows.

C.1 Vertical Control

The vertical datum for this project is Mean Lower Low Water.

Standard Vertical Control Methods Used:

TCARI

The following National Water Level Observation Network (NWLON) stations served as datum control forthis survey:

Station Name Station IDChesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel, VA 8638863

Windmill Point, VA 8636580Yorktown USCG Training Center, VA 8637686

Table 10: NWLON Tide Stations


14

File Name Status8638863.tid Final Approved8636580.tid Final Approved8637689.tid Final Approved

Table 11: Water Level Files (.tid)

File Name StatusE350TJ2012 Final

Table 12: Tide Correctors (.zdf or .tc)

A request for final approved tides was sent to N/OPS1 on 05/03/2012. The final tide note was received on05/09/2012.

Preliminary zoning was accepted as final.

C.2 Horizontal Control

The horizontal datum for this project is North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).

The following DGPS Stations were used for horizontal control:

DGPS StationsDriver, VA (289 kHz)

Table 13: USCG DGPS Stations


15

D. Results and Recommendations

D.1 Chart Comparison

D.1.1 Raster Charts

The following are the largest scale raster charts, which cover the survey area:

Chart Scale Edition Edition Date LNM Date NM Date12224 1:40000 25 04/2011 04/04/2011 04/09/2011

Table 14: Largest Scale Raster Charts

12224

In general the soundings agree within two feet. In the southeast of the sheet, the 18 ft contour has shiftedapproximately 150m to the west and the 12ft contour has shifted inshore. An 18ft charted shoal in the southof the sheet has deepened by a couple of feet. The largest area of change is an area north of the fish havenwhere charted depths have deepened on average by 4-6ft.

Figure 6: H12421 Inshore Changes


16

Figure 7: Southern Shoal


17

Figure 8: Deepening north of fish haven

D.1.2 Electronic Navigational Charts

The following are the largest scale ENCs, which cover the survey area:

ENC Scale EditionUpdate

ApplicationDate

Issue Date Preliminary?

US5VA14 1:40000 19 02/02/2012 02/02/2012 NOTable 15: Largest Scale ENCs

US5VA14

In general the soundings agree within 1 meter. See analysis for comparison with chart 12224.

D.1.3 AWOIS Items

Number of AWOIS Items Addressed: 1Number of AWOIS Items Not Addressed: 2

Consult the H12421_FFF.hob for information about the AWOIS items in the survey area.

D.1.4 Charted Features

5 charted items were addressed. 12 charted features were not addressed. Consult the H12421_FFF.hob formore information about the charted features in the survey area.

D.1.5 Uncharted Features

3 non-seabed area features were found during this survey. Consult the H12421_FFF.hob for moreinformation about the uncharted features in the survey area.


18

D.1.6 Dangers to Navigation

The follwing DTON reports were submitted to the processing branch:

DTON Report Name Date SubmittedH12421_DTON_1 2012-04-27

Table 16: DTON Reports

Danger to Navigation Reports are included in Appendix I of this report.

D.1.7 Shoal and Hazardous Features

There is a charted shoal to the south. The soundings in that area are deeper. Two lines over the shoal aremissing.

Figure 9: H12421 Charted Shoal


19

D.1.8 Channels

This survey contains part of the Cherry Stone Channel that runs to the harbor basin. All soundings in thechannel are deeper than the controlling depths.

D.2 Additional Results

D.2.1 Shoreline

Limited shoreline was assigned for this survey, however no shoreline as defined by the limit of water atMHW was assigned.

D.2.2 Prior Surveys

Results of prior surveys are represented by charted features and soundings as discussed in chart comparisonsabove.

D.2.3 Aids to Navigation

All ATONs were found to be on station and serving their intended purpose.

D.2.4 Overhead Features

Overhead features do not exist for this survey.

D.2.5 Submarine Features

Submarine features do not exist for this survey.

D.2.6 Ferry Routes and Terminals

No ferry routes or terminals exist for this survey.

D.2.7 Platforms

No platforms exist for this survey.


20

D.2.8 Significant Features

No significant features exist for this survey.

D.2 Construction and Dredging

There is no present or planned construction or dredging within the survey limits.


E. Approval Sheet

As Chief of Party, Field operations for this hydrographic survey were conducted under my directsupervision, with frequent personal checks of progress and adequacy. I have reviewed the attached surveydata and reports.

All field sheets, this Descriptive Report, and all accompanying records and data are approved. All records areforwarded for final review and processing to the Processing Branch.

The survey data meets or exceeds requirements as set forth in the NOS Hydrographic Surveys andSpecifications Deliverables Manual, Field Procedures Manual, Standing and Letter Instructions, and all HSDTechnical Directives. These data are adequate to supersede charted data in their common areas. This surveyis complete and no additional work is required with the exception of deficiencies noted in the DescriptiveReport.

Approver Name Approver Title Approval Date SignatureCDR Lawrence T. Krepp Commanding Officer 10/10/2012

LT William Winner Field Operations Officer 10/10/2012ST Kimberly Glomb Sheet Manager 10/10/2012

F. Table of Acronyms

Acronym DefinitionAFF Assigned Features FileAHB Atlantic Hydrographic BranchAST Assistant Survey TechnicianATON Aid to NavigationAWOIS Automated Wreck and Obstruction Information SystemBAG Bathymetric Attributed GridBASE Bathymetry Associated with Statistical ErrorCO Commanding OfficerCO-OPS Center for Operational Products and ServicesCORS Continually Operating Reference StaitonCTD Conductivity Temperature DepthCEF Chart Evaluation FileCSF Composite Source FileCST Chief Survey TechnicianCUBE Combined Uncertainty and Bathymetry EstimatorDAPR Data Acquisition and Processing ReportDGPS Differential Global Positioning SystemDP Detached PositionDR Descriptive ReportDTON Danger to NavigationENC Electronic Navigational ChartERS Ellipsoidal Referenced SurveyERZT Ellipsoidally Referenced Zoned TidesFOO Field Operations OfficerFPM Field Procedures ManualGAMS GPS Azimuth Measurement SubsystemGC Geographic CellGPS Global Positioning SystemHIPS Hydrographic Information Processing SystemHSD Hydrographic Surveys DivisionHSSDM Hydrographic Survey Specifications and Deliverables Manual

Acronym DefinitionHSTP Hydrographic Systems Technology ProgramsHSX Hypack Hysweep File FormatHTD Hydrographic Surveys Technical DirectiveHVCR Horizontal and Vertical Control ReportHVF HIPS Vessel FileIHO International Hydrographic OrganizationIMU Inertial Motion UnitITRF International Terrestrial Reference FrameLNM Local Notice to MarinersLNM Linear Nautical MilesMCD Marine Chart DivisionMHW Mean High WaterMLLW Mean Lower Low WaterNAD 83 North American Datum of 1983NAIP National Agriculture and Imagery ProgramNALL Navigable Area Limit LineNM Notice to MarinersNMEA National Marine Electronics AssociationNOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNOS National Ocean ServiceNRT Navigation Response TeamNSD Navigation Services DivisionOCS Office of Coast SurveyOMAO Office of Marine and Aviation Operations (NOAA)OPS Operations BranchMBES Multibeam EchosounderNWLON National Water Level Observation NetworkPDBS Phase Differencing Bathymetric SonarPHB Pacific Hydrographic BranchPOS/MV Position and Orientation System for Marine VesselsPPK Post Processed KinematicPPP Precise Point PositioningPPS Pulse per second

Acronym DefinitionPRF Project Reference FilePS Physical ScientistPST Physical Science TechnicianRNC Raster Navigational ChartRTK Real Time KinematicSBES Singlebeam EchosounderSBET Smooth Best Estimate and TrajectorySNM Square Nautical MilesSSS Side Scan SonarST Survey TechnicianSVP Sound Velocity ProfilerTCARI Tidal Constituent And Residual InterpolationTPU Total Porpagated ErrorTPU Topside Processing UnitUSACE United States Army Corps of EngineersUSCG United Stated Coast GuardUTM Universal Transverse MercatorXO Exectutive OfficerZDA Global Positiong System timing messageZDF Zone Definition File

APPENDIX I TIDES AND WATER LEVELS

UNITED STATES DEPARMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

HYDROGRAPHIC BRANCH: AtlanticOPR-E350-TJ-2012

LOCALITY:

H12421

Approaches to Cherrystone Inlet, Southern Chesapeake Bay, VAApril 04 - May 01, 2012

TIDE STATION USED:

Refer to attachments for grid information.

HYDROGRAPHIC PROJECT:HYDROGRAPHIC SHEET:

DATE :

TIME PERIOD:

May 07, 2012

Windmill Point, VA 863-6580Lat. Long.37° 37.0’ N 76° 17.4' W

PLANE OF REFERENCE (MEAN LOWER LOW WATER): 0.000 metersHEIGHT OF HIGH WATER ABOVE PLANE OF REFERENCE: 0.384 meters

Note 1: Provided time series data are tabulated in metric units(meters), relative to MLLW and on Greenwich Mean Time on the 1983-2001 National Tidal Datum Epoch (NTDE).

CHIEF, PRODUCTS AND SERVICES BRANCH

TIDE STATION USED:Lat. Long.

PLANE OF REFERENCE (MEAN LOWER LOW WATER): metersHEIGHT OF HIGH WATER ABOVE PLANE OF REFERENCE: meters

76° 28.7' W37° 13.6' N0.000

0.727

Tide STATION USED: Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel, VA 863-8863Lat. 36° 58.0’ Long. 76° 06.8' W

PLANE OF REFERENCE (MEAN LOWER LOW WATER): 0.000 metersHEIGHT OF HIGH WATER ABOVE PLANE OF REFERENCE: 0.814 meters

REMARKS: RECOMMENDED GRID

Please use the TCARI grid "E350TJ2012.tc" as the final grid forproject OPR-E350-TJ-2012, H12421, during the time period betweenApril 04 - May 01, 2012

Note 2: Due to inaccurate shoreline around Cape Charles Harbor,survey tracklines fall outside of the TCARI grid boundariesin some areas. TCARI will extrapolate the tide corrector tocover these soundings.

TIDE NOTE FOR HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY

_______________________________________________

Yorktown, VA 863-7689

Peter J. Stone Digitally signed by Peter J. Stone DN: cn=Peter J. Stone, o=Oceanographic Division, ou=NOAA/NOS/CO-OPS, [email protected], c=US Date: 2012.05.09 11:22:54 -04'00'

APPENDIX II SUPPLEMENTAL SURVEY RECORDS AND

CORRESPONDENCE

Re: Crossline comparison

1 of 1 9/10/2009 2:57 PM

Subject: Re: Crossline comparisonFrom: Chris van Westendorp <[email protected]>Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:00:35 -0400To: "mark.blankenship" <[email protected]>CC: LCDR Rick Brennan <[email protected]>, Castle Parker <[email protected]>,Edward Owens <[email protected]>, LT Jasper Schaer <[email protected]>, CDR ShepSmith <[email protected]>, Daniel Wright <[email protected]>

Mark,

Per 5.1.4.3 of the HSSD, AHB authorizes TJ to use the Standard Deviation layer to conductsurface difference comparison and analysis on future survey submissions of multibeamdata. This meets the crossline comparison requirement laid out in HSSD.

Please let me know if you have any questions or need for further clarification.

R/ LCDR Chris van Westendorp, NOAA

mark.blankenship wrote: Chris, You mentioned in the meeting today that AHB was not going to require the multiple CUBEsurface comparison, instead allowing us to use a single surface standard deviationlayer to do our checks with. Is there any memo coming out for that? Mark

LCDR Chris van Westendorp <[email protected]>Atlantic Hydrographic BranchNOAA OCS

William Winner <[email protected]>

SEP File for OPR-E350-TJ-122 messages

William Winner <[email protected]> Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 4:08 PMTo: Corey Allen <[email protected]>

Corey,

We would like to use ERS for this project but the SEP file we have from last year stops within our first sheet. Canwe get an updated SEP file covering our current project area?

Thanks,Bill Winner

--William Winner, LT/NOAAOperations Officer in TrainingNOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONMarine Operations Center- Atlantic439 W York St.Norfolk, VA 23510

Ship's Cell: (757) 647-0187Personal Cell: (765) 760-0767

Corey Allen <[email protected]> Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:33 PMTo: William Winner <[email protected]>Cc: Michael Davidson <[email protected]>, Marc S Moser <[email protected]>

Bill,Apologies for not getting back sooner. I'm out of the office in the BayHydro this week, and was coordinating withLCDR Moser via email regarding your request. I had previously discussed with Davidson and Jeff the TJ's interest inperforming ERS for all surveys, and OPS' decision was to only prescribe ERS for a portion of B340 & B370. Jeffwas happy to allow the TJ to proceed with ERS at the commands discretion and I'm happy to hear you guys areeagerly moving forward.

I will try to create a SEP for you remotely, but can't promise anything till Monday. I would also like to document yourprocedures in an email for seeking approval from HSD should ERS provide the most efficient and accurate pathforward for the data. I do not plan to revise the project instructions to reflect this as a requirement so that the TJ can opt out, but theemail should suffice as supplemental correspondence attached to the DR should ERS be the final route.

Please let me know how this sounds and feel free to email or call if you have any questions.

Regards, Corey[Quoted text hidden]--J. Corey AllenOffice of Coast Survey, Operations BranchNational Oceanic & Atmospheric [email protected] x103 (Office)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Mail - SEP File for O... https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=6a9d009e84&view=pt&search=i...

1 of 2 4/11/2012 2:51 PM

301.717.7271 (Cellular)301.713.4533 (Fax)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Mail - SEP File for O... https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=6a9d009e84&view=pt&search=i...

2 of 2 4/11/2012 2:51 PM

William Winner <[email protected]>H12421 Question3 messages

William Winner <[email protected]> Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:59 AMTo: Marc Moser <[email protected]>

LCDR Moser,

We had a question regarding the upper left corner of sheet H12421. The project instructions listed our only optionfor greater than 20m of water as being Multibeam with Backscatter. In that corner, we are right at the 20m limit. Can we continue our 200% SSS through that area instead? I have attached a screen shot of the area.

V/R,LT Winner

--William Winner, LT/NOAAOperations Officer in TrainingNOAA Ship THOMAS JEFFERSONMarine Operations Center- Atlantic439 W York St.Norfolk, VA 23510

Ship's Cell: (757) 647-0187Personal Cell: (765) 760-0767

12421.bmp4041K

Marc Moser <[email protected]> Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 11:09 AMTo: William Winner <[email protected]>Cc: Lori Knell <[email protected]>

Good morning, Yes, 200% SSS is fine. Keep in mind you still need to meet the fish height requirements (8-20% ht) when usingSSS. Please include this email with the surveys supplemental correspondance.[Quoted text hidden]--LCDR Marc S. Moser, NOAAChief, Operations BranchSSMC3, Rm: 6854, N/CS31, 1315 East West HighwaySilver Spring, MD 20910Tel: (301) 713-2702 x112, Fax: (301) 713-4533, Cel: (757) 339-1950

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Mail - H12421 Question https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=6a9d009e84&view=pt&search=i...

1 of 2 4/3/2012 11:17 AM

William Winner <[email protected]> Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 11:16 AMTo: _OMAO MOA CO Thomas Jefferson <[email protected]>, _OMAO MOA OPS Thomas Jefferson<[email protected]>, Kimberly Glomb <[email protected]>

NW corner of Kim's sheet (H12421) can be all 200% SSS per LCDR Moser.[Quoted text hidden]

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Mail - H12421 Question https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=6a9d009e84&view=pt&search=i...

2 of 2 4/3/2012 11:17 AM

APPENDIX III FEATURE REPORT

DtoN – one AWOIS – one Wrecks – none

Maritime Boundary - none

H12421 Danger to Navigation

Registry Number:

State:

Locality:

Sub-locality:

Project Number:

Survey Date:

H12421

Virginia

Southern Chesapeake Bay


OPR-E350-TJ-12

04/04/2012 - 05/01/2012

Charts Affected

Number Edition Date Scale (RNC) RNC Correction(s)*

12224 24th 02/01/2006 1:40,000 (12224_1) [L]NTM: ?

12221 80th 01/01/2009 1:80,000 (12221_1) [L]NTM: ?

12280 8th 03/01/2008 1:200,000 (12280_2) [L]NTM: ?

13003 49th 04/01/2007 1:1,200,000 (13003_1) [L]NTM: ?

* Correction(s) - source: last correction applied (last correction reviewed--"cleared date")

Features

No. NameFeature

TypeSurveyDepth

SurveyLatitude

SurveyLongitude

AWOISItem

1.1 DTON 1 Dangerous Obstruction Obstruction 10.76 m 37° 18' 10.8" N 076° 04' 45.2" W ---

Generated by Pydro v12.9(r3923) on Thu Aug 22 14:25:35 2013 [UTC]

1 - DToN

1.1) DTON 1 Dangerous Obstruction

DANGER TO NAVIGATION

Survey Summary

Survey Position: 37° 18' 10.8" N, 076° 04' 45.2" W

Least Depth: 10.76 m (= 35.30 ft = 5.884 fm = 5 fm 5.30 ft)

TPU (±1.96σ): THU (TPEh) [None] ; TVU (TPEv) [None]

Timestamp: 2012-122.00:00:00.000 (05/01/2012)

Dataset: H12421_Features_Pydro.000

FOID: US 0000865459 00001(0226000D34B30001)

Charts Affected: 12224_1, 12221_1, 12280_2, 13003_1

Remarks:

OBSTRN/remrks: Dangerous obstruction found with 200% Klein 5000 side scan sonar and Reson 7125multibeam. Soundings are corrected to MLLW with verified tides and preliminary zoning.

Feature Correlation

Source Feature Range Azimuth Status

H12421_Features_Pydro.000 US 0000865459 00001 0.00 000.0 Primary

Hydrographer Recommendations

Chart dangerous obstruction.

Cartographically-Rounded Depth (Affected Charts):

35ft (12224_1, 12221_1, 12280_2)

5 ¾fm (13003_1)

S-57 Data

Geo object 1: Obstruction (OBSTRN)

Attributes: NINFOM - Chart obstruction

QUASOU - 6:least depth known

SORDAT - 20120501

SORIND - US,US,graph,H12421

H12421 Danger to Navigation 1 - DToN

Page 3

TECSOU - 2,3:found by side scan sonar,found by multi-beam

VALSOU - 10.760 m

WATLEV - 3:always under water/submerged

Office Notes

SAR note: The feature is evident in both the MBES data and the 100 and 200% side scan sonar. Theleast depth of the feature matches that of the charted depth.

COMPILE: Chart 35ft obstruction.


Page 4

Feature Images

Figure 1.1.1


Page 5

Figure 1.1.2


Page 6

Figure 1.1.3


Page 7

H12421 AWOIS

Registry Number: H12421

State: Virginia

Locality: Southern Chesapeake Bay

Sub-locality: Approaches to Cherrystone Inlet

Project Number: OPR-E350-TJ-12

Survey Date:

Charts Affected

Number Edition Date Scale (RNC) RNC Correction(s)*

12224 24th 02/01/2006 1:40,000 (12224_1) [L]NTM: ?

12221 80th 01/01/2009 1:80,000 (12221_1) [L]NTM: ?

12280 8th 03/01/2008 1:200,000 (12280_2) [L]NTM: ?

12200 49th 06/01/2007 1:419,706 (12200_1) [L]NTM: ?

13003 49th 04/01/2007 1:1,200,000 (13003_1) [L]NTM: ?

* Correction(s) - source: last correction applied (last correction reviewed--"cleared date")

Features

No. NameFeature

TypeSurveyDepth

SurveyLatitude

SurveyLongitude

AWOISItem

1.1 UNKNOWN AWOIS [no data] [no data] [no data] ---

Generated by Pydro v12.9(r3923) on Thu Aug 22 14:24:17 2013 [UTC]

04/04/02012 - 05/01/2012

1 - AWOIS

1.1) AWOIS #13868 - UNKNOWN

No Primary Survey Feature for this AWOIS Item

Search Position: 37° 20' 41.0" N, 076° 02' 47.6" W

Historical Depth: [None]

Search Radius: 1000

Search Technique: S2, MB, DI, SD

Technique Notes: [None]

History Notes:

LNM 26/06 (6/28/2006) -- DANGEROUS SUBMERGED WRECK REPORTED IN POSITIONAPPROXIMATE: 37-20-41.04 N, 076-02-47.64 W, NAD83. UPDATED 12/22/2006 JCM

Survey Summary

Charts Affected: 12224_1, 12221_1, 12280_2, 12200_1, 13003_1

Remarks:

[None]

Feature Correlation

Source Feature Range Azimuth Status

AWOIS_EXPORT AWOIS # 13868 0.00 000.0 Primary

H12421_Features_Pydro.000 US 0000865458 00001 0.04 000.0 Secondary (grouped)

Hydrographer Recommendations

[None]

S-57 Data

[None]

Office Notes

SAR Note: Object disproven using set line spacing MBES and side scan sonar data.

COMPILE: Delete charted wreck.

H12421 AWOIS 1 - AWOIS

Page 3

APPROVAL PAGE

H12421

Data meet or exceed current specifications as certified by the OCS survey acceptance review process. Descriptive Report and survey data except where noted are adequate to supersede prior surveys and nautical charts in the common area.

The following products will be sent to NGDC for archive - H12421.pdf - Collection of depth varied resolution BAGS - Processed survey data and records - H12421_GeoImage.pdf

The survey evaluation and verification has been conducted according current OCS Specifications, and the survey has been approved for dissemination and usage of updating NOAA’s suite of nautical charts.

Approved:_____________________________________________________________________ LCDR Abigail Higgins, NOAA Chief, Atlantic Hydrographic Branch

descriptive report h12421

Documents