Program Plan FY 1983 - FY 2002 Marine Environmental Services Division, Office of Oceanography, National Ocean Survey

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

OF C0*
Program Plan
Z'
FY 1983 = FY 2002

S,-,4 TES OV
Marine Environmental Services Division
Office of Oceanography
National. Ocean Survey

June 1982

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
G
G
3 .5 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
N37 National Ocean Survey
1982
C
37 5
N37
982

Program Plan
FY 1983 = FY 2002

"MENWT Of Marine Environmental Services Division
Office of Oceanography
National Ocean Survey

Prepared by
Marine Environmental Services Division
for
The Associate Director
Office of Oceanography

property of c0C Librarif

OF COMMERCE
@CES CENIEB
234 HOBSON AVENU@
2' . SC '29405-2413

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
John V. Byrne, Administrator
National Ocean Survey
Herbert R. Lippold, Jr., Director

Iv)

@j
1'5

Mention of a commercial company
or product does not constitute
an endorsement by the NOAA
National Ocean Survey. Use for
publicity or advertising purposes
of information from this publica-
tion concerning proprietary
products is not authorized.

FOREWORD

This plan was' prepared to document programs carried out by the Marine
Environmental Services Division (MESD), Office of Oceanography, National
Ocean Survey (NOS). Program histories and authorizations are described. The
plan addresses three future periods: the next 3 years, the following 7
years, and the 10-year period ending fiscal year 2002.

The goals and objectives for these periods were extracted from Office of
Oceanography documents and guidance, and by the management-by-objective plans
of NOS and the Department of Commerce. Results of two recent management
studies were also incorporated into this plan; user requirement information
were included from an NOS report on the evaluation of MESD program and an NOS
report on real-time navigation systems.

Changes of plans are inevitable. Organizations that wish to plan other
projects based on the information in this plan should communicate with the
MESD staff to learn of any changes.

At present, there are uncertainties about the resources needed to
continue MESD programs at their present levels, and planning exercises are
being conducted to reorganize the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration, including a major reorganization of the NOS. Despite present
uncertainties, this plan is issued to document actions necessary to respond
to national needs for MESD data and information products.

The plan was developed by a team of MESD supe rvisors, managers, and
scientists, including Samuel E. McCoy (plan coordinator), Charles R.
Muirhead, Donald C. Simpson, Bruce B. Parker, Richard C. Patchen, Dinorah C.
Esteva, and Elmo E. Long. Thomas L. Allen, Terry L. Mauk, and Laurie D.
Collins contributed to the graphics and production of the plan. Management
guidance was given by Wesley V. Hull, Associate Director, Office of Ocean-
ography.

Henry R. Frey
Chief, Marine Environmental
Services Division
Office of Oceanography

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

FOREWORD .................................................................. iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................ ix

1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................... I

2. BACKGROUND .................................. .......................... 3

2.1. Authorization ................................................. 3

2.2. History of MESO Programs ...................................... 3

2.3. Present MESD Structure and Functions .......................... 4

2.3.1. Marine Predictions Program ............................. 8
2.3.2. Circulatory Survey Program ........... .................. 9
2.3.3. Coastal Waves Program Support .......................... 13
2.3.4. Ocean Pollution Monitoring Program Support ............. 13

3. USER REQUIREMENTS .................................................... 14

4. MISSION AND GOALS ..................................................... 17

4.1. Mission Statement ............................................. 17

4.2. Goals ........................................................... 17

4.2.1. Goal 1 ................................................. 17
4.2.2. Goal 2 .................................................. 17
4.2.3. Goal 3 ................................................. 18
4.2.4. Goal 4 .................................................. 18

5., OBJECTIVES AND REQUIREMENTS ........................................... 19

5.1. Near-Term Objectives .......................................... 19

5.2. Mid-Term Objectives ........................................... 21

b.3. Long-Term Objectives ........................................... 22
b. OPERATING PLAN ........................................................ 24

6.1. Near-Term Objectives and Tasks ................................ 24

6.2. Mid-Term Objectives and Tasks ................................. 2b

6.3. Long-Term Objectives and lasks ................................ 26

Page

7. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS ................................................ 2/

7.1. Personnel Requirements ........................................ 27

7.2. Equipment and Software Requirements ........................... 27

7.3. Funding Requirements .......................................... 27

7.4. Projected Returns on Resource Investments ..................... 28
8. APPENDICES ............................................................. 29

8.1. Requirements for Circulatory Surveys .......................... 30

8.2. NOAA Ship FERREL ............................................... 32

8.3. NOAA Ship McARTHUR ............................................. 33

8.4. Products ...................................................... 34

8.5. FY 1983 Calendar .............................................. 38

8.6. User Requirements Documentation ................................ 40

FIGURES

Paqe

Figure A. Office of Oceanography ........................................ 6

Figure B. Marine Lnv ironmental Services Division Organizational Chart ... 7

Figure C. NOS Circulatory Survey Program ................................ 10

Figure D. Circulatory Measurement Requirements .......................... 23

TABLES

Table 1. Circulatory Survey Data Plan 1969 to 1983 ...................... 12.

Table 2. Marine Environmental Services Division Goals and Objectives .... 24

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Marine Environmental Services Division (MESD) Program Plan describes
those goals, objectIves and tasks necessary to meet the Nation's needs for
tide and circulation data and information products. and services during the
period FY 1983 through FY 2002.

The MESD is in the Office of Oceanography, National Ocean Survey,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric-Administration. The Division mission is to
provide appropriate, timely, and high quality data and information products
and services to meet the Nation's needs in coastal and offshore areas by
planning circulatory surveys;, by conducting special oceanographic investiga-
tions and related research; by processing, analyzing, and interpreti'ng the
acquired data; and by disseminating.the results and findings.

The MESD goals are-to:

0
conduct investigations of oceanic and estuarine phenomena for marine
environmental products and services;.

develop program improvements to meet user needs for data to utilize,
manage, and regulate coastal zone resources;

develop and apply the new technology and techniques necessary to
improve and maintain the quantity and/or quality of data collection,
handli.ng, analysis and distribution; and

enhance public awareness of NOS' activities.

The MESD objectives are to:

� plan circulatory surveys;

0 process and analyze the data acquired from circulatory surveys;

� prepare tide tables,.tidal current tables, tidal current charts,
and tidal current@chart diagrams for printing and distribution;

0 prepare and disseminate circulatory survey reports, technical
reports, special predictions, and circulatory survey data to users;

0 eliminate the circulatory survey data analysis backlog;

0 implement an Information Management, Processing, and Analysis Compu-
terized Technique (IMPACT) system;

publish and distribute a "Circulatory Survey Manual";

evaluate, develop/apply, and test numerical circulation models;

identify the more important requirements and needs of users in order
to provide-enhanced, effective MESO products and services;

modify and-upgrade the circulatory measurement systems for improved
data acquisition and processing;

0 design, procure, test and implement an estuarine/shelf physical
oceanographic measurement system for acquisition of data from
estuarine, coastal, and shelf waters of the major regions of the
United States;.

design, procure, test, evaluate and implement real-time current and
wind monitoring systems in the Nation's 10 busiest harbors and
approaches;

0 predict the water movement on continental shelves; and

develop and publish new oceanographic information reports and
atlases.

The MESD goals are derivations of the Office of Oceanography's (OCN)
subgoals. The subgoals. have been restated to relate specifically to MESD
activities. The MESD objectives were determined from OCN guidance, consider-
ation of noted studies, and user needs-and requirements.

The MESD aspires-to:

a transmit data to the National Oceanographic Data Center within 12
months of-data collection;

0 update prediction table values within 18 months of data collection;
and

0 produce survey and special reports within less than 2 years.

To accomplish all goals and objectives, the MESD will require adequate
resources. The key factor affecting MESD's capability and capacity to
succeed is obtaining additional funds for-

0 implementation of-an Information Management, Processing, and Analysis
Computerized Technique (IMPACT) system designed for processing,
analysis, storage and retrieval of MESD data and information;
J
0 staffing the Division with personnel in sufficient numbers, with
particular expertise, and appropriate mix of skills;

0 procurement of new circulatory measurement system for estuarine/shelf
data acquisition and upgrade of present measurement systems; and

0 defraying recurring engineering, data quality assurance, and applied
research needs.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Marine Environmental Services Division (MESD) has the responsibility
to plan circulatory surveys, conduct physical oceanographic investigations,
and disseminate the results; it does this in support of the National Ocean.
Survey (NOS) mission to provide. descriptions of the marine environment for
marine safety, marine resource development and management, and marine environ-
mental protection. This MESO Program Plan documents and defines the plans of
the Division through fiscal year (FY) 2002. MESD goals and objectives were
developed to satisfy the goals of the Office of Oceanography (OCN).
Near-term goals and objectives are stated for the 3-year period ending FY
10,85; mid-term goals and objectives are stated for the 7-y@ar period.from FY
1986 to FY 1992; and long-term goals and objectives are assigned to the
10-year period ending FY 2002. Completion of objectives is necessary to
achieve the goals. The MESD Program Plan will be reassessed periodically
against MESD's capac.ity, changes in guidance from Office of Oceanography
management, change's to the NOS automated data processing systems, and user
needs and requirements.
The Global 2000 1 report on energy, Gross National Product, nonfuel
minerals, and agriculture projections states that increasing amounts of toxic
pollutants will be produced in the decades ahead. There are ubiquitous 2
impacts of scientific and technological development in our use of the seas.
As a Nation, we must improve the safety and economy of society's aitivities
along the coast and.offshore by providingbetter ocean information. Results
of these referenced studies were used.in the development of the MESD Program
Plan-.

OCN provides data and information to support maritime safety, marine
resource development and management, and marine environmental protection.
MESD provides descriptions of water movement in the Nation's estuaries and
inner shelves. The MESD plans to provide descriptions of the physical pro-
cesses of both estuaries and continental shelves through a new observational,
modeling, and predictive capability. A more complete understanding of the
dynamics of estuaries and coastal seas is vital in providing enhanced pro-
ducts and services to users, i.e., those involved in maritime commerce,

1 The Global 2000 Report to the President of the U.S.: Volume I - The
Summary Report, Council on Lnvironmental Quality and the Department 01'
State, 1980, 360 pp.
2 1, Ocean Services for the Nation: National Ocean Goals and Objectives
for the 1980's," National Advisory Committee on Oceans and
Atmospheres. January, 1981, 67 pp.
3 il Proposed Atlantic Offshore Program: Executive Summary," Atlantic
Offshore Program Planning Workshop. University of Delaware, February
1978, 27 pp.

search and rescue, fisheries, offshore oil and gas, pollution abatement, etc.
This Program Plan results from guidance of the Associate Director, OCN,
discussions with NOS colleagues, and a review of the literature; it is MESD's
response toward meeting the challenges of the next two decades.

2. BACKGROUND

The MESD is one of two divisions operated by the Office of Oceanography.
This section describes the program authorization, history, and MESD structure
and functions.

2.1. Authorization

The-basic authority for the MESD programs is embodied in Title 33 of the
U.S. Code, Section 883 (as amended), the Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1965
(that formed ESSA), and the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 (that formed
NOAA). Pertinent excerpts from this authority are as follows-

33 U.S.C., Section 883a. "...the Secretary of Commerce, is
authorized to conduct following activities:

1. Hydrographic and topographic surveys;

2.. Tide-and current observations.; ... 11

33 U.S.C., Section 883b. "...the Secretary of Commerce, is
authorized to conduct following activities:

1. Analysis and prediction of tide and current data;

2. Processing and publication of data, informa-tion,
compilations, and reports....."

33 U.S.C., Section 883d. "To improve-the efficiency of the
National Ocean @5-rvey and to increase engineering and scientific
knowledge, the Secretary of Commerce is aut'horized to conduct
developmental work for the improvement of surveying ... ; and to
conduct investigations and research in geophysical sciences
(including ... oceanography ... )."

By Department Organization Order 25-5A, the Secretary delegated to NOAA
these functions under this chapter of the Code.

2.2. History of MESD Programs

The Act of February 10, 1807, authorized President Thomas Jefferson
"...to cause a survey to be taken of the coasts of the United States, in
which shall be designated the islands and shoals, with the roads or places of
anchorage,..." The Act further authorized "...such examinations and observa-
tions to be made, with respect to St. George's Bank, and any other bank or
shoal and the soundings and currents beyond the distance aforesaid to the
Gulf Stream, as in his opinion may be especially subservient to the commer-
cial interests of the United States." This Act established the Survey of the
Coast, which became the Coast Survey in 1836, the Coast and Geodetic Survey
in 1878, and the National Ocean Survey (NOS) in 1970.

Tide and current observations began as ancillary tasks connected with
the Coast Survey's hydrographic and topographic surveys. Because of changing
needs and demands, the collection of tide and tidal current data expanded

from ancillary tasks of hydrographic surveys and ships-o f-opportunity to
dedicated circulatory survey ships. Today, acquisition of tide and current
data, other water movement data, and related meteorological data are routine
functions of the NOS Circulatory Survey Program.

Similarly, data collection procedures, including the use of NOAA Ships
McARTHUR and FERREL, have evolved taking advantage of new technological
adv.ances-. The methods of current measurement have advanced from observation
of surface currents using a current pole, log line, stop watch, compass, and
pelorus, or sextant; to fixed-point measurements with modern day, self-con-
tained, current meters and vertical current profilers. The acoustic Doppler
profiling current meter and radar systems to measure ocean surface currents
are in advanced stages bf development. Future applications of developing
technology such as the Doppler and rada'r mapping promise improved data
acquisition procedures and products.

Processing, analysis, and prediction procedures have also changed with
the growing- sophistication of electronic computers-. Manual processing of
data has been reduced considerably. Presently, minicomputers process data on
both circulatory survey vessels. The NOS tide-predicting machine in use from
1910 was retired in 1965. Predictions were first computed by electronic
computer in 1966. To enhance MEN operations further, an automated storage,
retrieval, and processing system is being implemented; this will allow more
rapid response to user requests.

In recent years,. comprehensive circulatory survey projects were com-
pl eted. in:

0 Penobscot Bay (1969 -.1970)
0 Boston Harbor-(1971)
0
Cook Inlet (1973 -1975)
0
Puget Sound and Approaches (1973 -1978)
� Prince William-Sound (1976 -.1978)
� Casco Bay (1979)
� San Francisco Bay (1979 - 1980)
� New York Harbor (1980 - 1981)
� Columbia River (1981)
� Chesapeake.Bay (1981 - 1982.)

MESD plans and coordinates large-scale. oceanographic projects of high
national interest and.importance. The NOS Strategic Petroleum Reserve (NOS
SPR) Support Project is an example of the MESO capability and expertise to
perform large-scale studies. At the Department of Energy's request, NOS
collected 12 months of oceanographic and meteorological data, from June 1978
to June 1979, to develop physical oceanographi6 characterizations of two
proposed brine disposal sites on the Louisiana inner continental shelf. The
project was the most intensive physical oceanographic survey carried out
along the Louisiana coast;. it produced an enormous data set, equivalent to
about 20 instrument-years of information.

2.3. Present MESD Structure and Functions

During January 1979, a reorganization established the Office of Oceano-
graphy (See Figure A) within the National Ocean Survey. Prior to the reor-

ganization, OCN functions were done in the Office of Marine Surveys and Maps.
The long-range goal of OCN is to:

0 provide appropriate, timely, high-quality products and services to
meet the Nation's need for oceanographic data and information in
coastal and offshore areas.

These products and services must be in response to and in support of
Department of Commerce policy and NOS management priorities. OCN promotes
safety and efficiency in maritime commerce by providing descriptions and
predictions of the coastal oceanic environment. This information is also
applied to coastal zone.management, regulation, and scientific research.

Operating within OCN is the MESD. The MESD is composed of a staff
consisting of a Division Chief, Technical Adviser, Applied Research Oceano-
grapher, and Secretary; a Coastal-Waves Program (CWP) support group and two
branches. The Circulatory Surveys Branch has 17 employees and consists of
two sections.: the Applications- and Requirements Section, and the Analysis
Section. The Marine Predictions Branch has eight employees. The present
structure of the MESD is shown in Figure B.

OFFICE OF OCEANOGRAPHY

ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR

L)LpUjy
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR

COASTAL WAVES PkIV!,ICAL OCEAN POLLUTION
RESOURCE PROGRAM APPUEO TECI
PROGRAM OCIFANOGRAPHE" MON110HING GROUP
MAttAGILMENT SlAkf GHOU
MANAGIll

MARINE ENWHONMI:NTAII. TIOESANDWATER
SLHWICES ulyltilo" LLVLLS UIVIWON

TIDAL HEGUIREMENTS
IECHNiCALADVISER AND ACOUSITIONS
IECIINICAL A LIHANCH
OPERATIONAL
STAff

T1 ALHEOUIREMENTS
bLCTION

MARINE PHLOICTIONS, CIHCULAlORY TWALDATLIUSAND
UHANCli SURVEYS iJHANCI! INFOIIMAII ION URANCH
TIDAL ACQUItillION
SLClIOjJ

APPLICAJIONSAND ANALYSIS SECTION JiDAL ANALYSIS WATER LEVELS URANCH
FIE QUOIL MLN 14SLClION LIHANCH
TIDAL 7L

EANA Liu I I

FIG. A

----------

A 7

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES DIVISION (MESD)

SUPERVISORY OCEANOGRAPHER
SECRETARY

MESO STAFF COASTAL WAVES SUPPORT GROUP

COMMISSIONED OFFICER 2 OCEANOGRAPHERS
COMPUTER SPECIALIST PHYSICAL-SCIENCE TECHNICIAN
TECHNICAL ADVISER STUDENT ASSISTANT
RESEARCH OCEANOGRAPHER SECRETARY

CIRCULATORY SURVEYS MARINE PREDICTIONS
BRANCH BRANCH

SUPERVISORY OCEANOGRAPHER SUPERVISORY OCEANOGRAPHER
SECRETARY 5 OCEANOGRAPHERS
TECH. PUB. EDITOR
SECRETARY

APPLICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS SECTION
SECTION

SUPERVISORY OCEANOGRAPHER SUPERVISORY OCEANOGRAPHER
OPERATIONS OFFICER 7 OCEANOGRAPHERS
COMPUTER PROGRAMMER PHYSICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN
2 OCEANOGRAPHERS STUDENT ASSISTANT
PHYSICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

Fi g. 8

2.3.1. Marine Predictions Program

The Marine Predictions Program provides marine predictions and pub *lica-
tions that aid in safe navigation and management of the marine environment.
Tide prediction,tables have been published by the National Ocean Survey since
1853. Originally, the tables consisted of astronomical constants which
enabled the mariner to make his own predictions of tides. In 1867, the first
tables of daily predictions were published; only the times and heights of
high waters were presented for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United
States. Today, the tide tables are issued annually in four volumes; Europe
and West Coast of Africa; East Coast of North and South America; West Coast
of North and South America; and Central and Western Pacific Ocean and, Indian
Ocean. The tables contain daily predicted times and heights of high and low
waters for- 198 reference stations and differences and other constants for
about 6,000 stations.

.Current tables were published. first in 1890, appearing as a part of the
tide tables. They included instructions for obtaining the times of slack
water,at a few@locations from the. times of high and low tide. In 1923, two
separate volumes giving daily predictions of slack water were published for
the Pacific Coast and the Atlantic Coast. The tidal current tables.are now
issued annually in two volumes; Atlantic Coast of North America, and Pacific
Coast of North-America and Asia. Daily predicted times of slack waters 5r
minimum currents and predicted times and velocities of maximum currents
(floods and ebbs) are presented for- 54 reference stations; differences and
other constants are provided for about 2,400 stations.
Predicted dati are also provided to users on request. The Marine
Predictions Branch maintains quality control on the predicted data published
in the tide and tidal current tables. The constants derived from observed
data are received@ from the. Tidal Analysis Branch, Tides and Water Levels
Division,. and the.Circulatory Surveys Branch. Predictions from that data are
evaluated by statistical methods, and are used for updating. the tables.
These evaluation and test routines are accomplished by automated data proces-
sing. An improved data management and information system, presently being
planned, will improve the predictive capability.

Special predictions are provided to other government agencies, e.g.,
U.S. Navy, U.S.. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency,
U.S. Geological Survey, and the National Weather Service (NWS). The Marine
Predictions Branch provides NWS with 181 sets of predicted tide data each
year. These predictions aid in NWS storm surge-forecasts and warnings.

In accordance with international agreements, some of the daily predicted
tide and tidal current- data published in the annual tables are from foreign
hydrographic offices. The NOS transmits predicted tidal data to 10 foreign
offices, and receives predicted data from 18 offices. Each Nation is respon-
sible to predict data for its own ports. The cooperation of all participat-
ing International Hydrographic Office member Nations is important to obtain
worldwide coverage.

Requirements for new prediction techniques have been identified and are
discussed in Section 3.

2.3.2. Circulatory Survey Program

The data and information products resulting from the Circulatory Survey
Program (CSP) are tidal current tables, tidal current charts, tidal current
chart diagrams, circulatory survey reports, technical reports, and circula-
tory survey data sets. These products- are derived from the oceanographic
data acquired during circulatory surveys. A circulatory survey consists of
the acquisition of current meter, tide gage, meteorological (MET) station and
conductIvity-temperature versus depth (CTD) data. The current meter data
include time series of water speed and direction, temperature and conducti-
vity. The meteorological data include wind speed and direction, air temper-
ature, and barometric pressure. Surveys conducted and those planned for
calendar years 1982. through 198/ are shown in Figure C; requirements for
these circulatory surveys-are in Appendix A.

Circulatory surveys on the East Coast are conducted by the 133-foot NOAA
Ship FERREL (see Appendix B). The main component of the FERREL's circulatory
survey measurement system, is the- Grundy Environmental Systems Model 9021
current meter, which has been in use since 1978. Circulatory surveys on the
West Coast are conducted by the 175-foot NOAA Ship McARTHUR (see Appendix C).
The main component of the McARTHUR's system is the Aanderaa RCM-4 current
meter, which has been in use since 1973.

The circulatory survey measurement systems of both NOAA ships require
upgrading or replacement taprovide@efficient*, one-pass data processing, and
to provide more accuratB.measurements on inner shelves. Presently, shipboard
POP-11/34 computers allow@ ships' personnel to monitor data acquisition,
maintain data quality assurance, and perform preliminary data processing.
Enhancement of the shipboard systems is necessary to improve data quality and
quantity, improve instrument reliability, and reduce the data processing
effort at NOS Headquarters. The goal is to use ships' computer facilities to
produce. data tapes which can be certified, then analyzed upon receipt at
Headquarters.. These improvements will complement the new Circulatory
Measurements Data Processing (CMDP) system which is operating on both ships.

A plan to complete and update the circulatory survey data products
(tidal current tables, circulatory survey reports, and special technical
reports) is summarized in Table 1, "Circulatory Survey Data Plan 1969 to
1983." Completion of this plan is the MESO's highest priority during the
near-term; it.will eliminate the CSP analysis backlog. However, implementa-
tion of a data management and information system, an@ the development of the
next generation circulatory survey measurement system are required to ensure
against future backlog.s- and for long-term balance of the program.

NOS is the traditional lead agency for circulatory survey data; it has
measured and processed current data routinely since 1844. Requests for water
movement data have increased. These requests must be responded to quickly
and in a useful- format. "Probems and Opportunities in the Design of Entran-
ces to Ports and Harbors," National Research Council (NRC), 11080, recommends
the intiation of:

...Reliable and economical measurement, reduction, presentation,
and storage of environmental data;..."

NOS CIRCULATORY SURVIiy eROGRAM
1982-1987

Buzzards Pay - Copq Cod Bay
washinglo"-pregon Estuaries i 9117

-C

Southeast Alaska
)983-1987 Georgi
Southern California Estu
1984-1986 19
Los Angeles Harbor
1983
Tampa Bay-
1986

Son Carlos Bay-Charjollo Harbor
1985

Fig. C
G

a
a Y3
a

To satisfy user requests for circulatory survey data product and/or
services, several actions are in process:

An Information Management, Processing, and Analysis Computerized Tech-
nique (IMPACT) system designed for the processing, analysis, storage, and
retrieval of MESD data and-information is being planned. The IMPACT system
will expedite data processing,, analysis, and easy access to data information.

The MESD is preparing for acquisition of the next generation circulatory
measurement systems by analyzing the propagation of errors from measurement
to predictions [Sensitivity Analysis Project (SAP)], and developing Circula-
tory Surveys Systems Analysis (CSSA) requirements based on its present
perception of long-term user requirements.

The MESD is also continuing development of the Data Quality Assurance
(DQA) program, which includes total measurement uncertainty analysis of data.
The SAP, CSSA, and DQA are programs being conducted with NOAA'engineerirg
support groups.

Investigations on improving the analysis of tidal current data and
predictions when there are diurnal inequalities were recently initiated.
Th; MESD will respond within its capacity to the growing need for
real-time monitoring of currents in major- ports, harbors, and waterways.

Table 1. CIRCULATORY SURVEY DATA PLAN 1969 TO 1983

YEAR AREA TRANSMIT MEMO MEMO
TO ANALYSIS TABLES SURVEY SPECIAL STATUS FINAL
NODC COMPLETE UPDATED REPORT REPORT REPORT REPORT

1969/70 Penobsot Bay ME (Note A) 1/82 1984 6/82
1971/73 South Carolina Estuaries 1973 11/81 1983 7/82
1973 Georgia Estuaries 1974 11/81 1983 8/82
1973/8 Puget Sound and Approches
(Note B) 1979 8/83 1985/6 1980 1977 9/82 12/83
1973/5 Cook Inlet AK 1977 12/82 1984 1981 5/82 2/83
1975/6 Portsmouth Harbor NH 7/82 1/83 1984 6/82 3/83
1975 Oregon Inlet NC 7/82 1/82 1984 6/82
1976 Beaufort Inlet NC 1979 1978 1980 1981 3/82
1976 Cape Fear River NC 1978 1978 1980 1979 3/82
1976/8 Prince William Sound AK 1979 3/83 1985 5/82 5/83
1977 Narragansette Bay RI 1980 2/82 1984 9/82
1977 Georgia Estuaries 8/82 5/83 1985 9/82 7/83
1979 Kings Bay GA 12/81 1979 1982 2/82
1979 Casco Bay ME 12/81 5/82 1984 11/82
1979 Icy Bay AK 12/81 3/82 1984 10/83
1980 Georgia Esutaries 8/82 10/82 1984 4/83 12/83
1979/80 San Francisco Bay Ca (Note B) 9/82 5/83 1985/6 1/83 10/84
1980 New York Harbor 11/62 12/82 1984 4/82 11/84
1981 New York Harbor 11/62 12/82 1984 4/82 11/84
1981 Columbia River 1/83 2/83 1984 3/83 7/85
1981 Chesapeake Bay 1/83 3/83 1985 10/84 10/86
1982 Grays Harbor WA 5/83 6/83 1985 4/84
1982 Willapa Bay WA 5/83 6/83 1985 4/84
1982 Coos Bay OR 6/83 7/83 1985 4/84
1982 Yaquina River OR 7/83 8/83 1985 4/84
1982 Chesapeake Bay 7/83 8/83 1985 10/84 10/86
1983 Los Angeles Harbor CA 4/84 6/84 1986 9/84
1983 Humboldt Bay CA 6/84 7/84 1986 4/85
1983 Oregon Estuaries CA 7/84 8/84 1986 4/85
1983 Chesapeake Bay 6/84 7/84 1986 10/84 10/86

Note A: Penobscot Bay data were collected using four different types of current meters (Robers Radio, Photo-Geodyne,
Ticus I and Ticus II). Only Ticus II data were collected on magnetic tape; other data are on pressure
sensitive tapes that require manual reading, on photographic film processed to ouput cards, aon on punch
paper. The effort required to digitize and transmit the data to NODC is prohibitive. The Penobscot Bay data
will be treated the same as other pre-1970 surveys.
Note B: Applied research is underway to determine an appropriate method of analyzing tidal current data with diurnal
inequalities to be included in Table 2. Dates shown for Puget Sound and Approaches and for San Francisco Bay
assume a tested and verified solution during August 1982.
COMMENTS: Present plannng by DOC to consolidate ADP services and to move DOS to a UNIVAC facility at NBS could introduce
large delays in 1982 and 1983 schedules. Preparations for a move will also divert C21 personnel from improving
efficiency and reducing backlog further.
Assumptions made regarding the above schedule include the filling of the position of Chief, Analysis Section by
June 1, 1982; overtme for employees will continue to be funded; and, the proposed upgrade of ADP equipment will
materialize.
The goal of updating prediction tables and charts within about 18 months cannont be achieved without implementation
of C21's proposed Information Management Processing and Analysis Computerized Technique (IMPACT).

As of April 23, 1982

2.3.3. Coastal Waves Program Support

The MESD provides technical support to the Coastal Waves Program (CWP)
which is directed by an Office of Oceanography program manager. Support
includes planning, oversight of field operations, coordination with other
agencies, data processing and analysis, program documentation, and
dissemination of data and information. The CWP is designed and planned as
one component of a cooperative national effort by Federal and state agencies
and the private sector to provide mutually needed wave information. The
prime tasks of the CWP are to assure availability of large-scale, long-term
data and statistics for all U.S. coastal waters; wave information affecting
public safety (especia.11Y navigation); and overall coordination of wave
programs. Other Federal agencies will provide wave forecasts, some measure-
ments, archival services, and other environmental data needed to support wave
studies. The private sector and Federal agencies generally use their own and
other data to provide site specific forecasts and statistics to meet particu-
lar needs. A high degree of cooperation is expected in measurements, hind-
casts, exchange of data, evalu@ting accuracies, developing mod@ls, and
improved-methods of measurement.

2.3.4. Ocean-Pollution Monitoring Program Support

The MESD also provides technical support to the Ocean Pollution Monitor-
ing Program (OPMP) which is directed by an Office of Oceanography program
manager. Support includes operation o-f CSTD instrumentation, data processing
and analysis., and documentation. The OPMP represents an integration of
ongoing and planned NOAA. marine pollution monitoring activities in the
Northeast. The program has been designed to obtain the maximum amount of
useful data in the most cost-effective way. Pollution monitoring is defined
as the systematic, periodic observation of predetermined pollutants in
pertinent components of the marine ecosystem over a length of time sufficient
to determine (1) existing levels; (2) trends; and (3) variations in the water
column, sediments, and biota. Operational pollution monitoring is a subset
of monitoring which is used for environme@tal or resource management by means
of extant technologies.and organizations.

4 is Coastal Waves Program," Office of Oceanography, January 1982, 19 pp.
5 "Northeast Monitoring Program, A Pilot Marine Pollution Monitoring Plan,"
NOAA, October 1981, 40 pp.

3. USER REQUIREMENTS

The products and services provided by MESD are in response to require-
ments of commercial, military, recreational, research, and other users.
These users need information on the physica-1 state of the ocean and coastal
seas, including estuaries. Activities along the coasts and offshore can be
made safer and more economical by providing this type of marine information.
The MESO provides data and information to a broad spectrum of users, ranging
from public interests (such as environmentalists and recreational ists ) to
high technology industries (e.g., offshore petroleum drilling and mineral
mining). MESD products and services respond to user requirements by aiding
safe navigation,mari time commerce, and environmental management. A MESO
objective is to respond to these user requirements through dissemination of
tide and tidal current tables, tidal current charts, tidal current chart
diagrams, circulatory survey reports, technical reports, special predictiorfs,
and the circulatory survey data sets.

MESD provides a variety of marine prediction products and circulatory
survey data (see Appendix 8.4. ). About 100,000 tide and tidal current
publications were distributed during FY 1981. About 900 station-years of
miscellaneous predictions. were distributed. Approximately 1,000 station-
months of circulatory survey data were also provided to users.

The following paragraph from the Foreword, "Problems and Opportunities
in the Design of Entrances. to Ports and Harbors," Marine Board, National
Research Council, 1980, illustrates new requirements:
"There is increasing dema@d abroad for this country's coal and food,
and increasing domestic demand for imported oil. The ships necessary
to profitable trade in this international traffic demand deeper drafts
and more room to stop: they present far different characteristics of
maneuverability than the ships America's ports were designed to receive.
While it was always necessary to know the patterns of tides and
currents, the location of hazards, and other facts about the physical.
environment of ports and harbors, it is now necessary to know much more
to design port and harbor works, manage greatly increased traffic, and
effect safe passage."

Two of therecommendations in the NRC.report are:

Is 0 Improved and validated models for the prediction of horizonta-1
and vertical ship movements in the particular conditions of
harbor entrances; ...

0 Cost-effective models of the physical environment for prediction
of natural conditions and forces, and changes caused by human
activity;..."

Pilots and harbor/port entrance design engineers requirements for
wind/current response were stated in the NRC report:

"...The ship must be steered at some angle into the current and wind to
compensate for a varying lateral force, if it is to remain on a straight
course that will maintain adequate clearance between the ends of the harbor

breakwaters. The current is likely to bevariable- and may be stronger near
the ends of the breakwater...- Wind set-up, causing'the surface water to flow
in the wind's direction, is frequently the dominant factor causing water
ovement.in both the-vertical and horizontal directions."
The importance of the wind/current response was also'described by the
National Transportation Safety Board, Marine Accident Reoort, U.S. Tug
Sentinel, Loss of Tow and Resultant GroLFn-dingof Barges KONA and AGATTU, Gul'f
of the Farallones, Pacific Ocean, December-31, 1979. The Safety Board
concluded:

"The Safety Board believes that in attempting this course of action the
master failed to take into account adequately the effects of wind and cur-
rent. The wind was southerly between 15 to 30 knots. Such a wind would have
struck the portside of the barges, which had large sail areas, and would have
caused the barges to be set to the north. The wind induced current, coupled
with the Davidson Inshore Current, would have acted against the underwater
portions of the barges and caused them to be set to the north. The testimony
of the master oave no indication that he had made allowance for these condi-
tions. The Sa@ety Board be-lieves that the master, as a professional seaman,
should have been aware of the effects of wind and current and made the
necessary allowances or adjustments to counteract these effects."

The need by the ship operators- for vertical and horizontal "shear"
information when describing the horizontal clearance requirement is addressed
.also in the. NCR report. The most critical points to consider are "...when
preparing for an abrupt shear-current... after responding to a shear-current."
Maneuverability is a considerable concern;.the report states "...with reduced
speed comes a reduction of maneuverability and an increase crosstrack varia-
bility..." The importance. of accurate. data at the correct spatial scales is
stated by, "...the navigability of a 350-meter-wide waterway with 100 percent
accuracy of information about the current is better than the navicability of
a 670-meter-wide waterway in which the accuracy of information about the
current is 75 percent..." A summary statement made in the report was "...In-
sufficient information has been collected and analyzed to predict the effect
on steering of: Complex three-dimensional currents..."

Users who answer environmental questions, require information concerning
surface circulation (e.g., predictions of oil trajectory), or a velocity
(shear) at a given depth (layer) in the water column (e.g., to predict
dispersion at a sewer outfall or larvae dispersal); sediment transport
calculations require a measurement of velocity (or shear) in the bottom
boundary layer; and structural engineers and naval architects require
information on the velocity shear for determining design criteria.

The NOS task group assigned during 1982 to review and evaluate MESO
programs provided sorne of the documents in Appendix 8.6. The task group held
discussions with large ship operators, tug and towboat operators, and the
Military Sealift Command. Findings were:

Use of NOS tide and tidal current tables have economical value
(Operation of a 240,000 OWT tanker may average S75,000 a day.).

0 Tide tables are used for tanker transiting and tidal current tables
are used to plan docking and undocking.

0 Water column data (temperature and salinity) and wind data are
needed.

0 Masters and pilots are dependent on tide and tidal current
predictions-to plan for passages.

Hourly height predictions are particularly useful in Cook Inlet.

0 Real-time data-may be helpful.

0 Some container ship masters reported satisfaction with tide and tidal
current,tables, "as is," and "publications are excellent and give
information needed to bring ships in and out."

0
Detailed information is needed on currents.

A NOS task group studying requirements- for real-time navigation data
also provided information on requirements. To date, the task team visited 14
ports, and reported: (1) Much interest has been shown in the application of
real-time marine da-ta to the safety and efficiency of marine operations. (2)
Real-time data and short-term forecasting of salinity information might be
useful since the draft of a vessel increases as it is brought from salt to
fresh water. (3) Knowledge of real-time currents- would be extremely valuable
to all facets@of the offshore industry..
Findings and recommendations from the studies of tAe NRC, MESD task
group and the real-time task group, and conclusions from user requirements
workshops will be used to identify the more important requirements, inter-
ests, and needs of users so that MESD can provide enhanced, more effective
products and services.

4. MISSION AND GOALS

This section contains' the MESD mission which is derived from the OCN
long-range goal. It also provides goals which were adopted from OCN sub-
goals. The OCN subgoals are restated here to relate specifically to MESD
activities.

4.1. Mission Statement

The MESD mission is to provide appropriate, timely, and high
quality data and information products and services to meet the Nation's needs
in coastal and offshore areas by planning circulatory surveys; by conducting
special oceanographic investigations and related research; by processing,
analyzing, and interpreting the acquired data; and by disseminating the
results and findings.

4.2. Goals

The ME50 goals are stated below. Following each goal is a narrative
describing how the particular goal will be achieved.

4.2.1. Goal One is to:

conduct investigations of oceanic and estuarine phenomena for marine
environmental products and services.

The MESO plans circulatory surveys for the acquisition of physical
oceanographic data from port, harbor, coastal , and offshore areas. The
acquired circulatory survey data include measurements of water currents,
tides, conductivity, temperature and depth, and also include wind speed and
direction, air temperature, and barometric pressure. These data are pro-
cessed, analyzed, interpreted,. and provided to users on demand. The water
movement data are used to compute tide and tidal current predictions, to
determine circulation, patterns, and to define tidal datums and boundaries.
To accomplish this goal, MESO must continue the acquisition of data from the
estuaries and coastal waters; but it should also acquire data from the
continental shelf areas through an improved circulatory survey capability.
The data results and findings should satisfy user requests for navigational
and circulatory information.

4.2.2. Goal Two is to:

develop program improvements to meet user needs -for data to utilize,
manage, and regulate coastal zone resources.

The MESD will continue to implement actions to respond to user needs and
requirements for data and information products. Accuracy specification and
verification procedures. are extremely important for the assurance of quality
data; the DQA program will be enhanced. New predictive and analysis tech-
niques will continue'to be investigated toward satisfying user needs for
information on total water circulation. A data management and information
system will be implemented to provide timely response to user needs.

4.2.3. Goal Three is to:

develop and apply the new technology and t chniques necessary to improve
and maintain the $uantity and/or quality of data collecEion, handling,
analysis and distribution.

The employment of state-of-the-art technology and techniques by MESD is
necessary to enhance data quality and to disseminate data in a timely
fashion. The MESD has developed and will refine requirements for the acqui-
sition of a new estuarine/s.helf physical oceanographic measurement system.
Other requirements, such as those needed for instrumentation to observe
currents for real-time data transmittal, will be developed. New techniques,
such as numerical modeling of estuaries, will be implemented.

4.2.4. Goal Four is to:

enhance public awareness of NOS' activities.

The principal MESID products are tide tables, tidal current tables, tidal
current charts, tidal current chart diagrams, circulatory survey reports,
special technical reports and the data sets themselves. The tables and
charts are updated with new data from the Tides and Water Levels Division and
the Circulatory Surveys Branch.. The circulatory survey report details
general information about a particular survey. The special technical report
presents information resulting from a particular survey and also presents
descriptions, interpretations, and analyses of the data.

5. OBJECTIVES AND REQUIREMENTS

This requirements section states MESD objectives which are necessary
steps toward achieving the goals. Certain actions are required to accomplish
the objectives.. These actions are described in the narrative after each
objective.

5.1. Near-Term Objectives, FY 1983 - FY 1985, are to:

a. plan circulatory surveys

[Requirements for- circulatory surveys are decided by user needs and
Federal policy decisions. Planning priorities are established according to
NOAA's internal policy, other Federal agency, State agency, research institu-
tion, and private user requirements. Some factors which are considered in
determining survey priorities are: area vessel traffic, adequacy of histori-
cal survey data, changes in bathymetry, changes in circulation dynamics, and
future data requirements (e.g., planned marine construction, proposed dump
sites, etc.). Surveys are planned through interactions among the Office of
Oceanography, Office of Marine Operations, Hydrographic Surveys Division,
Atlantic Marine@ Center, Pacific Marine Center, and supporting NOAA engi-,
neers.1;

b. process and__analZze the data acquired from circulatory surveys
[The circulatory survey ships acquire, evaluate, and initially process
data befol-e the data tapes are transmitted to Rockville Headquarters. The
shipboard Circulatory Measurements. Data Processing (CMDP) system (1) tabu--
lates survey data; (2) compiles translation and malfunction statistics; (3)
converts instrument units to engineering units; (4) assigns times to each
data point; (5) formats the data; and (6) plots the data. Upon receipt, MESD
certifies, processes and analyzes four types of data: current meter data,
CTO data, meteorological instrument data, and water level recorder data.
Processing, of the instrument data tape consists of the translation and
conversion of raw data into computer compatible, error-free, time checked
data in engineering units. Copies of processed tapes are transmitted to the
National Oceanographic Data Center for archival. The processed current data
are analyzed harmonically and nonharmonically. Harmonic analysis and least
squares analysis determine the harmonic constants. The constants, amplitudes
and phase lags, of each tidal constiuent are used to predict the tidal
current. The nonharmonic analysis is a numerical comparison between a
reference current station and a subordinate current station. Time differ-
ences of minimum and maximum currents, and speed ratios; average flood and
ebb directions and speeds are calculated. Time series analyses and statisti-
cal correlation studies are done on the current meter, CTD, MET, and water
level data. Tide data are processed and analyzed by the Tides and Water
Levels Division, OCN. These processed and analyzed circulatory data sets are
sent to users on request.];

c disseminate tide tables, tidal current tables, circulatory survey
reports, technical reoorts, tidal current charts, tidal current diagrams,
special predi cti5ns, and circulatory survey data
[Cooperative interaction among the Circulatory Survey Program, Marine
Predictions Program, and Tides and Water Levels Program assures the continu-
ous updating of tide and tidal current data. Stations at selected represen-
tative locations are occupied for days, months, and/or years at a time to
obtain data series of sufficient length to determine accurate values of the
most important harmonic constants. These stations may become the reference
-stations predicted in Table I of the tide and tidal current tables published
by the MESO. The other shorter term tide and tidal current stations. in the
area may appear in Table 2 of the publications. These subordinate stations
are related to the reference stations of Table 1 by time and height differ-
ences and/or ratios, and time and speed differences and ratios. These values
are derived from nonharmonic reductions, comparisons, and analyses of the
data. MESD plans to continue providing updated tide and tidal current
predictions to foreign hydrographic offices, other Government organizations
such as the National Weather Service, and to the user community.

Circulatory survey reports provide descriptions of the quality of the
data, sampling rates,. locations of stations, time periods of occupation,
measurement systems and other information in which a potential user would be
interested. The technical reports present detailed information on analyses
and interpretations of survey data. Harmonic analysis results are presented
'in the form of tables, cotidal charts, and corange charts with illustrations
depicting various harmonic constituent relationships. Salinity and tempera-
ture data are presented as contours of longitudinal transects and time series
stations covering the- tidal cycle. Implications on circulation and hydro-
dynamics from the resu.lts of various analyses may be discussed, and models
may be- presented to describe- the dynamics of a survey area. The tidal
current cha.rt publication consists of a series of charts depicting the
velocities at locations of survey stations in a particular waterway. These
charts illustrate circulation for 13 time stages of the tidal cycle and
present a comprehensive areal view of the tidal current movement. The tidal
current, chart diagrams are graphs used with the tidal current charts to
predict tidal currents at any time-of the year. Three tidal current diagram
booklets are published annually. The circulatory survey reports, technical
reports, and tidal current charts are published as required. The reports are
done on survey areas of high interest and importance. There are 12 tidal
current chart publications of various U.S. harbors. These are reissued on
demand, and revised when data become obsolete. All three publications
contain significant navigational and circulatory information. Circulator@.
survey data sets are sent to users on request, and routinely sent to NODC.

d. eliminate the circulatory survey data analysis backlog

[Efforts toward elimination of the data analysis backlog have been
implemented. This activity was discussed in Section 2.3.2.];

e implement an Information Manaaement, Processing, and Analysis
Comput;rIzed Technique tIMPTCT) system

[A data management and information system designed for processing,
'analysis, storage, and retrieval of MESO data and information is needed to
respond promptly to user requests. MESD will implement an integrated compu-
ter system, IMPACT, which will: process and analyze circulatory survey data
in a time1y manner; store and allow prompt retrieval of information; be
compatible with data requirements of the OCN and with the NOS data management
system; and allow for prompt response to requests.];

f. publish and distribute a "Circulatory Survey Manual"

[The "Circulatory Survey Manual" presently in preparation by the MESD
will describe circulatory survey planning; the acquisition of circulatory
survey data with available technology; data processing and analysis; and the
preparation of products for dissemination. This manual will improve inter-
action among the various groups involved in circulatory surveys. It will
document survey procedures, and serve as a training manual and reference for
operations and contract personnel.];

g. evaluate, develop/apply, and test numerical circulation models

[These models will predict water circulation and the results will be
presented in new MESO products. After- assessing available models, those
models found to be appropriate will be tested. In ar:eas where no appropriate
model exists, MESD will develop models.];

h. identify the more Jimportant requirements and needs of users to
provide enhanced, effective marine _products and services
[Communications between M@ESD and users and prospective users of MESD
products and services, must improve. Improved communications will aid in (1)
the. evaluation of- product adequacy; (2) improving cost effectiveness (3)
determining program redirections, and (4) improving product quality.]; and

i. modify and upgrade-the circulatory measurement systems for improved
data acquisition and processing
[An analysis of the existing circulatory measurements systems is re-
quired to determine modifications necessary to improve data auality and
increase-cost effectiveness of data processing.].

5.2. Mid-Term Objectives, FY 1986 - FY 1992, are to:

a. design, procure, test. and impleme.nt an estuarine/shelf physical
oceanographic measurement system for acquisition of Ja-ta from estuarine,
coastal, and shelf waters of the major regions of the United States
[Existing circulatory survey measurement systems do not meet all user
requirements. The present current sensor's basic design limits its use to
areas having minimum noise contamination (due to waves and swell). Naviga-
tional and environmental needs require measurements in some areas where noise
levels are high. The traditional uses of the waterways have changed and
expanded. For example, the offshore regions of the United States, such as
the northeast Atlantic, the Gulf of Mexico, the coasts of Hawaii, Alaska,

and California are being exploited increasingly by the fisheries industry,
and the oil, gas, and mineral industries. These and other associated users
require local water movement- data; but they also require physical oceano-
graphic data which describe regional circulation. Acquisition of data from
the shelf regions to complement coastal and estuarine data collection will
satisfy these demands and aid in meaningful interpretation of regional flow
characteristics. The. implementation of a new- estuarine/shelf physical
oceanographic measurement system is necessary to meet the new requirements.
Figure 0 illustrates examples of oceanographic sensors which may aid in
responding to the changed and expanded uses of the waterways.]; and

b,. design, procure, test, evaluate and implement real-time current and
wind-moniT-or-7ng-systems in the Nation's 1U busiest harbors and approa-ches

COceanographic monitoring stations strategically located in the 10
busiest harbors and approaches will transmit data to port services, offices,
and/or ships in transit. These permanent systems will provide real-time
current and wind data in the form of printouts and/or cathode ray tube
displays, will aid. in ship traffic control, and improve safe navigation.
This objective will require the use of new instrumentation, such as the
upward--looking acoustic, remote. current meter@ to measure through the water
column, and the application of radar to measure surface currents. This
objective relates directly to similar objectives of the Tides and Water
Levels Division and.the Coastal Waves Program.].

..3. Long-Term Objectives, FY 1993 -FY 2002., are to:

a. predict water movement on continental-shelves

[The-MESD will expand its data and information products to descriptions,
models, and predictions of coastal seas- This program emphasis will comple-
ment similar efforts in bays and estuaries. Where possible, the models will
be coupled.. Phenomena to be- included are mean circulation and variations
over different time scales, surface currents, effects of stratification, and
meteorological effects.]; and.

b. develop and publish new oceanographic reports and atlases

[This objective is an intensive@extension of near-term objective h. The
publication of the present tide and tidal current tables, tidal curFent
charts and chart diagrams, circulatory survey and technical reports will most
likely continue. Future information publications should emphasize conceptual
models of the physical environment. The publications willl have descriptions
of general offshore marine environmental conditions (climatology); tides and
tidal currents, nontidal flow, other physical and chemical properties, and
various analyses of water movement in different and overlapping regions. The
atlases will include isopleths of physical oceanographic parameters, mean
values, and variations over different time scales for users who require
detailed technical information. This objective will be coordinated with
efforts in other related areas (waves, water quality, sediments, etc.,) to
provide for comprehensive information.].

@,N

Meteorological
al, station
mF Radar -Tid*s

arlabi
CTD*i
0 CODA Nt CJCTO

Meteorologic
au
OY

water
01winn
..............
C

Motor

`:N

Circulatory Measurement System Requirements
Fig. 0

6. OPERATING PLAN

This operating plan lists the- tasks necessary to accomplish the
preceding goals and objectives. Table 2 lists specific objectives which will
satisfy goals. Tasks follow each objective according to time period.

Table 2. MESD Goals and Objectives.

Near-Term - a, b, h
GOAL I. Objectives: Mid-Term - a, b
Long-Term - a, b

Near-Term - d, e, f, i
GOAL 2 Objectives: Mid-Term - a, b
Long-Term - a, b

Near-Term
GOAL 3 Objectives: Mid-Term a, b
Long-Term a, b

Near-Term.- c, h
GOAL 4 Objectives: Mid-Term - a, b
Long-Term - a, b

6.1. Near-Term Objectives and Tasks

a. Plan circulatory surveys.

Task 1. Select survey areas.
Task 2. Develop ship and engineering requirements.
Task 3. Formulate preliminary survey plans.
Task 4. Conduct reconnaissance.
Task 5. Issue draft,project instructions.
Task 6. Issue final project instructions.
Task 7. Communicateand interact w1th ship personnel.

b. Process and analyze new survey data.

Task 1. Verify and certify data upon receipt.
Task 2. Complete processing of data.
Task 3. Analyze data.

c. Disseminate marine information products.

Task 1. Predict tide and tidal current data.
Task 2. Publish tide and tidal current tables annually.

Task 3. Distribute 180 station-years of tide and tidal
current predictions annually to the National Weather
Service.
Task 4. Distribute 90 station-years of predictions to
foreign offices annually.
Task 5'. Distribute 600 station-years of miscellaneous
predictions annually.
Task 6. Distribute circulatory survey data on demand.
Tas.k 7. Interpret circulatory survey'data.
Task 8. Publish circulatory survey reports.
Task 9. Publish technical reports.
Task 10. Produce tidal current charts and diacrams.

d. Eliminate circulatory survey data analysis backlog.

Task 1. Analyze data..
Task 2. Transmit processed data to NODC.
Task 3. Issue memorandum reports.
Task 4. Publish survey reports.
Task 5. Publish special reports.
Task 6. Update tables.

e. Implement IMPACT.

Task 1. Submit Request for Proposal (RFP) fo@ hardware to DOC.
Task 2. Submit RFP for-software to.DOC.
Task 3. Monitor progress of procurement.
Task 4. Install hardware.
Task 5. Implement software.
Task 6. Test-software and hardware.
Task 7. Certify system operational.

f. Publish "Circulatory Survey Manual."

Task 1. Draft first manuscript (including graphics).
Task 2. Submit to editor.
Task. 3. Review internally.
Task 4. Revise.
Task 5. Distribute for general review and comments.
Task 6. Revise final manuscript.
Task 7. Publish and distribute.

Develop/apply and test numerical circulation model.
9

Task 1. Continue development of MESD models.
Task 2. Assess utility of existing models.
Task 3. Select candidate model for evaluation.
Task 4. Test model.

h. Identify user requirements and needs.

Task 1. Review information from recent user interaction (MESD Task
Group and Real-Time Task Force reports, and user require-
ments workshops).

Task 2. Secure additional decision-making information.
Task 3. Conduct user workshops in cooperation with OCN.
Task 4. Recommend new and improved products.
Task 5 Publish new and improved products.
Task 6. Recommend necessary program changes.
Task 7. Implement recommendations approved by OCN.

i. Upgrade circulatory measurement systems.

Task 1. Improve data translation.
Task 2. Enhance CMDP.
Task 3. Complete present circulatory measurement systems analysis
study.
Task 4. Enhance DQA program.
Task 5. Procure appropriate hardware, software, and instruments as
directed by systems analysis study and user requirements
recommendations.

6.2. Mid-Term Objectives and Tasks.

a. Implement.estuarine/shelf physical oceanographic measurement system.

Task 1. Develop initiative.
Task 2. Complete detailed system description.
Task 3.. Test and evaluate (T&E) candidate components.
Task 4. Procure subsystem.
Task 5. Procure system.
Task 6. Complete DOA/Integrated Logistical Suppo@t (ILS)/Field
Engineering Support (FES) plans.
Task 7. Integrate system (first ship).
Task 8. Modify and integrate system (second ship).
Task 9. Certify systems operational.

b. Implement real-time current and wind monitoring systems.

Task 1. Prepare technical development plan, (in collaboration with
Tides and Water Levels Division and Coastal Waves
Program).
Task 2. Evaluate candidate systems.
Task 3. Determine.requirements for prototype.
Task 4. Issue RFP for prototype system fabrication, T&E, ILS, and
FES.
Task 5. Deploy prototype in select harbor.
Task 6. Certify prototype operational.
Task 7. Complete system analysis, upgrade, and specifications for
operational systems to be deployed in Nation's 10 busiest
harbors and approaches.
Task 8. Issue RFP for 10 operational systems.
Task 9. Deploy systems.
Task 10. Certify 10 systems operational.

6.3. Long-Term Objectives and Tasks

The tasks required to satisfy long-term objectives are inherent in the
near-term and mid-term objectives and tasks. Achievement of near-term and
mid-term tasks are required for the success of the long-term objectives.

7. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS

The key factor affecting MESD's capabi I i ty 'and capaci ty to meet i ts
objectives is having adequate resources. Obtaining adequate resources
depends in large part on the priorities given to the MESD programs by OCN and
NOS management. Personnel in sufficient numbers and with particular exper-
tise are required in the MESD, along with upgraded or replaced measurement
systems that will provide for one-pass, cost-ettective data processing; a
data and information system that will enable the MESO to respond to user
needs more rapidly than it can now; and funds to covpr recurring engineering,
DQA, and applied research needs. Completion of the objectives described in
this plan depends on obtaining the necessary resources.

/.i. Personnel Requirements

The-MESD's requirements for staffing include:

0 fill computer specialist position on Division staff,

0
fill vacant.oceanographer position in the Marine Predictions Branch,

0 fill computer programmer position in the Circulatory Surveys Branch,

fill two physical science technician positions in the Circulatory
Surveys Branch,

0 create.three oceanographer positions for numerical modeling,.

0 create mathematician position mainly for modeling,

0
create engineering position to manage circulatory measurement systems
and real-time,navigation information system.

7.2. Equipment and Software Requirements

The MESD's requirements for equipment and software include:

upgrade of present circulatory survey measurement systems,

0
acquisition of new circulatory measurement system tor estuarine/
shelf data acquisition,

0
implementation of IMPACT, including all hardware, software, and
documentation.

/.3. Funding Requirements

In addition to the funds necessary for personnel , equipment, and
software listed in sections 7.1 and 7.2., the MESD requires funds for:

0 user requirements workshops,

0
contract editing, graphics and camera-ready copy for "Circulatory
Survey Manual,"

0 recurring DQA expenses,

0 periodic engineering analyses (until engineer position in MESO is
filled).

7.4. Projected Returns on Resource Inivestments

With the resources listed in sections 7.1. to 7.3., the MESO plans to:

0 undertake large-scale coastal and shelf studies of national inter est,

determine user needs and demands for MESD products,

transmit data to NODC within 12 months of data collection,

0 update prediction table values within 18 months of data collection,

0 produce survey and special reports within 2 years,

0 publish in refereed journals,

add capabilities to measure sea surface currents and continuous
vertical profiles of currents,

0 develop numerical models, and

0 provide real-time oceanographic data.

8. APPENDICES

8.1. Requirements for Circulatory Surveys

8.2. NOAA Ship FERREL

8.3. NOAA Ship McARTHUR

8.4. Listing of Marine Environmental Services Division Products

8.5. FY 1983 Calendar

8.6. User Requirements Documentation

APPENDIX 8.1. REQUIREMENTS FOR CIRCULATORY SURVEYS 1981 - 1987

Maine Estuaries (1985-1987):

Many estuaries along the Maine coast have insufficient current observa-
tions. Most past surveys are very old and had insufficient spatial coverage.
Only Casco Bay and Penobscot Bay have recent and valid data. Commercial and
recreational navigation are extensive in the area. The lobster and fishing
industries require circulatory survey data products. The offshore energy
development industry also requires the products.

Chesapeake Bay (1981-1983):

Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary on the East Coast and has the
largest economic interest. Three of the main concerns are the oyster, crab,
and fishing industries. This area has high scientific interest and NOAA,
USGS, COE, Chesapeake Bay Institute, and local universities participate in
cooperative programs to study this important bay. Commercial and recrea-
tional navigation are extensive. Partial surveys were done from 1963 to
1965. These had insufficient spatial coverage.

Georgia-Florida Estuaries (1984):

Some of the current observations that exist from these assorted estua-
ries are from the 1930's. New circulatory survey data and products are.
required for comm6rcial and recreational navigation, the shrimp, fishing, and
offshore energy development industries.

Florida Gulf Coast Estuaries (1985-1986):

Curr*ent data from these areas are sparse and old. Pensacola Bay En-
trance was last observed in 1940, and Tampa Bay was last surveyed in 1963.
There are little data of San Carlos Bay and Charlotte Harbor. Natural physi-
cal changes, coastal construction, and dredging may have changed characteris-
tics of circulation. Updated circulatory survey products and data are needed
for-navigation and the fishing industry.

Southeast Alaska (1983-1987):

Virtually no data exists for this area. Current observations from the
numerous straits and bays in Southeast Alaska (South and West of Juneau) have
been obtained only by hydrographic ships, randomly and in small quantities.
The last observations were recorded in 1965. Circulatory survey data and
products are needed for commerical navigation, the crab and fishing induso-
tries, and fisheries regulation enforcement.

Washington-Oregon Estuaries (1982):

Previous current surveys during the 1930's were of short duration with
primitive equipment. Willapa Bay was last surveyed in 1890 for 31 days using
the current pole technique. These old data are inadequate to meet the
present day needs of commercial and recreational navigators.

Los Angeles-Southern California (1983-1986):

Current data for most California estuaries are outdated or nonexistent.
Humboldt Bay data are: over 50 years old. San Diego Bay Entrance was last
surveyed in 1934. Updated circulatory survey data and products are needed
for commercial and recreational navigation, the offshore energy development
industry, and offshore energy regulation enforcement (e.g., the Santa Barbara
oil spill was in this area).

APPENDIX 8.2. NOAA SHIP FERREL

Commissioned: June 1968
Designer/Builder: Zigler Shipyards, Inc., Jennings, LA
Homeport: Norfolk, VA

Officers and Crew: 19 Berthing: 20 bunks
Displacement: 360 tons
Length: 133 ft.
Breadth: 32 ft. Scientific Laboratory Facilities:
Draft: 8.0 ft. 2
Cruising Speed: 10 kn- Wet oceanographic lab: 40 ft 2
Range: 2,200 nmi. Electronics workshop: 500 ft
Endurance: 9 d

Winches: One oceanographic winch One CTO winch
Two utility winches One BT winch

'Cranes and Booms: One telescoping boom One articulated boom
Location: Amidships Location: Portside aft

A-Frames: One movable type
Location: Stern

Scientific Equipment:

1 Grundy C/STD system 2 Lab salinometers (Guildline,
36 Grundy current meters Plessey)
DQA Test equipment 15-20 Tide gages (Fischer Porter
2 Aanderaa meteorological stations ADRs and Metercraft and Bristol
Bubblers)

Circulatory Measurements Data Processing (CMDP) System: The CMDP is equipped
with a PDP 11/34 computer with a 128K memory and a CAMAC interface system
which are used for processing circulatory survey data.

LAUNCHES

One 28 ft. diesel Lafco aluminum workboat
One 17 ft. gasoline outboard Mako Marine fiberglass open boat
Two 19 ft. gasoline outboard Monark aluminum open boat

APPENDIX 8.3. NOAA SHIP MCARTHUR

Commissioned: December-1966
Builder: Norfolk Shipbuilding and Drydock, Norfolk, VA
Homeport: Seattle, WA

Officers and Crew: 38 Berthing: 40 bunks
Displacement: 995 tons
Length: 175.0 ft.
Breadth: 38.0 ft.
Draft: 12.1 ft.
Cruising Speed: 12 kn..
Range: 6,000 nmi 2
Endurance: 17 d Oceanographic Laboratory: 150 ft

Winches: One Northern Line oceanographic winch
One Branden oceanographic-winch
One A-frame winch

Cranes-and Booms: One te-lescoping boom One articulated boom
Location: Foredeck Location: Starboard quarter

A-Frames: One movable type
Location: Stern

Scientific Equipment:

1 Grundy C/STD system- 3 Plessey lab salinometers
I AML portable CTD 52 Aanderaa current meters
1 Soltec C/STD analog recorder 4 Aanderaa water level gages..
1*XBT'system 3 Aanderaa meteorological stations
15-20 tide gages (Fischer Porter ADRs, OQA test equipment
and Metercraft and Bristol bubblers)

Circulatory Measurements Data Processing (CMOP) System: The CMDP is equipped
with a POP 1.1/34 computer with a 128K memory and a CAMAC interface system
which are used for processing circulatory survey data.

LAUNCHES

One 26 ft. diesel Monark aluminum workboat
One 17 ft. gasoline outboard Monark aluminum open boat
One 12 ft. gasoline outboard Alumacraft aluminum skiff
One 16 ft. gasoline outboard Boston Whaler fiberglass open boat

34@

APPENDIX 8.4. LISTING OF MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PRODUCTS

Tide Tables

Tidal Current Tables

Tidal Current Charts and Diagrams

Special Tide and Tidal Current Predictions

Tide and Tidal Current Harmonic Constants

Circulatory Survey Data

Circulatory Survey Data Reports

Special Technical Reports

Supplemental Tidal Predictions--Alaska

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PRODUCTS

Product Product Description Principal User Use
Tide Tables Predictions issued annually in four volumes federal Government; State, local, Safe transit through
covering the East Coast of North and South and regional authorities; indivi- navigable waters.
America. the West Coast of North and South dual citizens-, marine construction marine commerce. re-
America, Europe and the West Coast of Africa, and engineering; coastal devel- creational boating and
and the Central and Western Pacific and opers; transportation; offshore fishing. baseline ref-
Indian Ocean. facill ty operations; waste dispo- erence for the location
sal; insurance; fisheries; recrea- and'design of offshore
tion; R&D; science; academia; law; structures. dumpsites.
foreign. shoreline erosion
studies, water quality
control & oceanographic
research.

Tidal Predictions issued annually in two volumes federal Government; State; local. Safe transit through
Current covering the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of and regional authorities; indivi- navigable waters,
Tables North America. They include the predicted dual citizens; marine constructiQn marine coijunerce, re-
times of slack water and the times and velo- and engineering; shipbuilding; creational boating and
cities of strength of tidal currents for each transportation; offshore facility fishing. baseline ref- Ln
day of the year at many of the more important operations; waste disposal; fish- erence for the location
waterways, factors to obtain similar predic- eries; recreation, 110; science, and design of offshore
tions elsewhere, velocities of current at any academia; foreign. structures, dumpsites,
given time. duration of slack, coastal tidal shoreline erosion
currents, and in some cases, wind currents. studies, water quality
control & oceanographic
research.
Tidal Publications consisting of 12 or 13 charts fe@eral Government; State; local, Safe transit through
Current which depict. by means of arrows and figures, and regional authorities; indivi- navigable waters,
Charts and the direction and speed of tidal currents for dual citizens@ marine construction marine commerce, re-
Diagrams each hour of the tidal cycle for many of the and engineering; shipbuilding; creationai boating and
more important harbors and bays. In some transportation; offshore facility fishing, aid in survey
cases. the tidal current charts are comple- operations; waste disposal; fish- planning, validation
mented with a series of 12 monthly. equal- eries; recreation, R&D; science, of numerical circula-
intervals, tidal current diagrams. academia; foreign. tion models, and
oceanographic research.

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PRODUCTS

Product Product Description Principal User Use
Special Tide Special request predictions of time and Federal Government; State; local. Safe transit through
and Tidal heights of high and low waters; hourly tidal and regional authorities; marine navigable waters, base-
Current heights and current speeds; and times of construction and engineering; line reference for the
Predictions slack waters and times and speeds of maximum shipbuilding; transportation; location and design of
flood and ebb currents for specific dates and offshore facility operations; offshore structures.
areas. Information is provided as computer waste disposal; fisheries; dumpsites, shoreline
printouts, tapes, and/or plots. recreation, RQ; science, erosion studies, water
academia; foreign. quality control and
oceanographic research.
Tide and Unpublished data on file which are used to Federal Government; R&D; science; The users can predict
Tidal predict tides and tidal currents. The data academia; foreign. tide and currents for
Current are the results of harmonic analysis of the special interest areas
Harmonic observed tide or tidal currents and are in by using these harmonic
Constants the form of amplitudes and epochs. They are constants.
provided on request.

Circulatory These data include measurements of water cur- federal Government; State, local. Input for oceanographic
Survey Data rents. tides. temperature and salinity struc- and'regional authorities; indivi- research and numerical
tures, meteorological parameters, and other dual citizens; marine construction hydrodynamic models and
associated data such as dissolved oxygen and and engineering; shipbuilding; determinants and/or
waves. These data. available as computer transportation; offshore facility indicators for decision
printouts or on magnetic tape, are available operations; waste disposal; and operations in the
as. (1) processed and edited data; (2) harmo- fisheries; recreation; 110; coastal zone such as
nic and nonharmonic constants; (3) general, sciencei academia; foreign. sewage disposal. pollu-
spectral, and rotary current graphic plots, tion control, location
(4) tabulations of salinity. temperature, and and design of offshore
density; acid (5) cross-sectional and time con- structures, shoreline
touring of salinity, temperature, and density. erosion studies and
control, etc.

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PRODUCTS

Product Product Description Principal User Use

Circulatory This report details the circulatory informa- Federal Government, State, local, To make users and po-
Survey Data tion acquired during a particular survey. A and regional authorities'; indivi- tential users aware of
Reports description of quality of the data, sampling dual citizens; marine construction the existence of the
rate. locations, time period of occupation. and engineering; shipbuilding, data.
type of instrumentation used, and other in- transportation; offshore facility
formation that a potential user would be operations; waste disposal; fish-
interested are supplied. The report also eries; recreation; 110; science;
describes the format in which these data can academia; and foreign.'
be obtained.

Special This report presents information resulting federal Government; State, local, Input for oceanographic
Technical from a particular circulatory survey and also and regional authorities; indivi- research and numerical
Reports presents descriptions, interpretations, and dual citizens; marine construction hydrodynamic models,
analyses of the data. and engineering; shipbuilding; and determinants and/or
transportation; offshore facility indicators for decision
operations; waste disposal; fish- and operations In the
eries; recreation; R&D; science; coastal zone such as W
academia; foreign. sewage disposal, pollu- 14
tion control, location
and design of offshore
structures, shoreline
erosion studies and
control, etc.

Supplemental Predictions issued annually in one volume (Same as for Tide Tables) (Same as for Tide
covering the Alaskan ports of Anchorage, Tables)
Nikishka, Seldovia. and Valdez. They include
not only predicted times and heights of high
and low waters but also predicted heights at
every hour for each day of the year.

APPENDIX 8.5. MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION (MESD) CALENDER, FY 1983

October 1982 May 1983
1 Merit Pay Performance Appraisal and Compensation System (MPP) 2 Submit Nominatins for Admin.'s Award:
Begins: October 1, 1982 - September 30, 1983 Gold, Silver, Bronze Medal Awards to
15 Distribute Draft PI's for Chesapeake Bay (III): C211 C21: Staff
5 Submit Nominations to C2: C21
26-31 AAAS, Annual Meeting, Detroit, MI
November 1982 28 Notification of Final Rating (GWPASS)
no later
15 Submit 1-Page Narrative for each Major 1982 Accomplishment to 30 Spring Meeting, AGU, Baltimore, MD
C21: Staff 31 Submit FY 1984 Travel Estimates to C21:
22 Submit Narratives to C2: C21 Staff
15 Distribute Draft PI's for Los Angeles Harbor: C211 31 Submit Want List (End of Year Funds,
FY 1983) to C21: MESD Staff

December 1982 June 1983

7-15 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, CA 1-3 Spring Meeting, AGU
15 Submit Final PI's for Chesapeake Bay (III) to C2: C21 1 Begin Preparation of Engineering Require-
31 Commissioned Officer's Fitness Reports to C2: C21 ments for FY 1984: Staff
5 Submit FY 1984 Travel Estimates to C2:
C21
January 1983 5 Submit FY 1983 Want List to C2: C21
14 Submit Revised 5-year ADP Plans to C21: C21x4, C211, C212 8 Submit FY 1984 Eng. Req. to C21: c21X2
15 Submit Final PI's for Los Angeles Harbor to C2: C21 15 Submit FY 1984 Eng. Req. to C2: C21
15 Revise MESD Program Plan: C21x3
20 Prepare C21 FY 1984 Budget: Staff
30 Submit Reqst, for FY 1984 Ship Time to
February 1983 C2: C212
30 Submit Tide Tables for Editorial
15 Submit Revised 5-Year ADP Plans to C2x4: C21 Services: C212
15 Submit Input to C21 (cc: C21x3) for Revision of MESD Program
Plan: MESD Staff

March 1983 July 1983

17 Submit GWPAS Plans to C21: C21 Staff Employees, C211, C212 1 Begin Development of C21 MBO Plans: C21x3
(April 1, 1983 - March 31, 1984) 15 Submit MBO Plans to C21 (cc: C21x3):
31 Submit GWPAS Plans to C2: C21 Staff
31 Begin Progress Reviews With MPP employees: All supervisors 15 Submit C21 FY 1984 Budget to C2:
(cc: C2x3): C21
22 Submit C21 MBO Plans to C21: C21x3

April 1983 August 1983
1 GWPAS Begins: April 1, 1983 - March 31, 1984 1 Submit C21 MSO Plans to C2: C21
1 Begin Formal Appraisal Discussion (GWPAS 4/1/82 - 3/31/83) 5 Submit Abstracts for all
15 Submit Vacation Schedules to C21: MESD Staff Published/Presented 1983 Scientific
20 Submit Vacation Schedules to C2: C21 Technical Papers/Oral Presentations to
25 Submit GWPAS Ratings (4/1/82 - 3/31/83) C21: Staff
29 Last Official Day for Formal Appraisal Discussions 10 Submit Abstracts to C2: C21
30 Prepare Ship Schedules for FY 1984: C211 15 Review Unfunded C21 FY 1984 Budget
Request: Staff
28-31 Oceans '83, MIS-IEEE, San Francisco, CA

September 1983

1 Begin Prog. Reviews w/GWPAS employees:
All Supervisors
10 Submit MPP's (10/1/83 - 9/30/84) to C21:
Staff
30 Submit MPP's to C2: C21
30 Submit Tidal Current Tables for Editorial
Services: C212

APPENDIX B.S. MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION (MESD) CALENDAR, FY 1983

MONDAY: MEETINGS:
10:00 a.m. Submit green correspondence to C2: C21 Circulatory Survey Meeting: Usually
held every 6 weeks (occasionally monthly).

9:00 a.m. Time and Attendance Report due to C2x3: C21 Committee members will be notified: C2111

TUESDAY: FIRST TUESDAY:

1:00 p.m.: NOS Research & Development Council
Meeting. PLACE: Director's Conf.
Room.

SECOND TUESDAY:

10:00 a.m.: NOS Equal Employment Opportunity
Committee Meeting. PLACE:
Director's Conference Room.

LAST TUESDAY:
THURSDAY:
10:00 a.m.: MESD Monthly Program Review.
PLACE: Director's Conference Room

2:30 P.M. NOS Director's Staff Meeting REPORTS:

1. Submit Branches and Staff Reports to C21
(cc: C21x3) on the 25th of each month.
FRIDAY: 2. Submit Division Monthly Report to C2 on the
29th of each month: C21
9:00 a.m. Submit Weekly Report on Significant Activities 3. Submit Management by Objective (MBO)
and Accomplishments o 21 (cc:C2lx3): Appropriate Monthly Report to C21 (cc: C21x3) on the
Personnel and to C2 (by 12:00 p.m.): C21 28th of each month, if required: MESD
Staff

4. Submit MSO Monthly Report for the Division
to CZ on the 5th of each month, If
9:00 a.m. Submit typing items for the Administrator's Action required:. C21
Agenda to C21 (cc: C21x3): Staff and to C2 (by 12:00 P.m.):
C21 5. Submit Anticipated Travel Report for the
Division to C2x3 the 15th of each month:C21
9:30 a.m. Office, of Oceanography Staff Meeting QUARTERLY:
1:30 p.m. MESD Staff Meeting (Review and Plan Programs, Analyze Submit Milestones Status Reports to:
Impacts) C21 (cc: C21x3): MESD Staff C2: C21

1st Quarter: 12/20/82 1/10/83
2nd Quarter: 3/25/83 4/08/83
3rd Quarter: 6/24/83 7/08/83
4th Quarter: 9/26/83 10/04/93

8.6. User Requirements Documentation

Memorandums

To From Subject

OA/C2 OA/C21 Demonstrated Needs for Circulation, Waves
and Tides Data

OA/C21 OA/C21x3 Excerpts from Hoffman (EG&G) Report; Cir-
culatory Survey Justifications

RECORD OA/C21 Military Use of Marine Environmental
Services Division Information Products

RECORD OA/C21x2 Commerical Use of Marine Environmental
Services Division Information Products

RECORD OA/C21 Summary of Telephone Discussions with
Users of Marine Environmental Services
Division Information Products

OA/C2 OA/C2x1 Comments on Draft Summary of Telephone
Discussions with Users of Tide and Tidal
'Current Prediction Tables and Tidal
Current Charts

RECORD OA/C211 Use ot Tidal Cirrent.Charts

RECORD OA/C3x2 Trip Report of National Ocean Survey (NOS)
OA/C2xZ Real-Time Marine Navigation Data System
Task Team/Galveston and Houston, Texas

OA/C OA/Clxl Progress Report: Real-Time Marine
Navigation Data Task Force

RECORD OA/C2x2 Meeting Report: National Ocean Survey
OA/C3x2 (NOS) Real-Time Marine Navigation Data
Systems Task Team with Maryland Port
Authority/Port of Baltimore Officials

RECORD OA/C2x2 Trip Report - Report of Meetings:
OA/C3x2 National Ocean Survey Real-Time Marine
Navigation Data Task Team With Superior,
Wisconsin, Duluth, Minnesota, St. Lawrence
Seaway Development Corporation

OA/C2x2 Sea Grant Meeting at Superior, Wisconsin, Duluth,
Minnesota

To From Subject

RECORD OA/C2x2 Trip Report: Meetings Between National
OA/C3x2 Ocean Survey Real-Time*Navigation Task
Team With Port Everglades, Florida Port
Authority, Lake Charles,.Louisiana Port
Authority, and LSU Sea. Grant Agents;
Baton Rouge, Louisiana Port Director,
Beaumont, Texas Port Authority, LSU
University, Sea Grant Marine Advisory
Service Agents

RECORD C2111 Southeast Alaska Circulatory Surve y

Honorable USCG Request for assistance in determining
Richard Frank, current survey requirements
Administrator,
NOAA
RECORD C2'x2 Trip Report - Meeting of the NOS Real-Time
C3x2 Marine Navigation Task Team with the
Mariner's Advisory Committee for the
Delaware Bay and River

RECORD C2x2 Trip Report - Report of Meetings: NOS
C3x2 Real-Time Marine Navigation Data Task
Team at Humboldt Bay, California; San
Francisco Marine Exchange; Portland,
Oregon Port Authority; Anchorage, Alaska;
and Valdez, Alaska

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockvifle. Md. 20852

December 8, 1981 OA/C21 :KRF

TO- OA/CZ Wesley V. Hull

FROM- OA/C21 - Henry R. Frey

SUBJECT: Demonstrated Reeds for Circulation, Waves and Tides Data

REF: "Problems and Opportunities in the Design of Entrances to Ports and
Harbors," Proceedings of a Symposium, August 13-15, 1980, Marine
Board, Assembly of Engineering, National Research Council

The referenced report contains a wealth of information of direct interest
to the Office of Oceanography, e.g., currents, waves, tides, winds, CTID structure.
Statements by the Ships and Users Group, the Nature and Environment Group, and
the Design and Maintenance Group are excerpted below. These statements, pro-
vided by a group as authoritarian as the Marine Board, should be interpreted as
definite national needs for physical oceanographic data to support the maritime
industry. I recommend that we cite this information when we are asked about
user requirements.

er No validated mathematical model exists for predicting ship motion
(horizontal and vertical directions) in shallow water, waves, and
currents..

Insufficient information exists for predicting bottom clearance in
existing harbor entrances--

Sinkage/trim
Wave spectra/swell
Vertical ship motion
Detailed currents.
Actual tidal height
Knowledge.of draft
Salinity

I Insuffitient information has been collected and analyzed 11.-o predict
the effect on steering of:

Bottom and bottom irregularities due to silting
Complex three-dimensional currents
Currents in turns
Basic suction
Passing ships

9 No analytical method exists for predicting three-dimensional currents
on harbor entrance waterways.

10rR ANNiVERSARY 4,270-ISSO
anal Oceanic and Atmosp1heric Administration
A young agency with a historic
tradition (of service cc tre Nation

Ensure that the new entrance will provide for safe navigation with
respect to tides, currents, winds, waves, channel dimensions, and
structure design.

s Determine the accuracy of environmental information, such as waves,
winds, tides, currents, and bottom characteristics.

0 Develop a consistent data.base of waves and currents for part design.

9 Develop cost-effective models of waves, currents, water levels,
tsunamis, storm-surges, sedimentation, and other hydrodynamic
processes.

a. Develop reliable methods of predicting seiching in harbors.

s Ensure that changes caused in the physical parameters (tides,.currents,
salinity, etc.) are not so drastic as to cause major adverse environ-
mental effects.

Develop cost-effective- technology for measurement of waves, tides,
salinity, sediments, etc.

Develop real-time systems to.provide data on wind, waves, and currents
as aids to navigation.

0: Solve wave-current interaction probTem.

Cost-effective methods of quantifying physical environmental parameters
in coastal areas should be sought.

0 There are unmet needs for reliable quantitative hydraulic (and/or)
mathematical models for the prediction of tides, currents, waves,
salinity, and sediment changes in harbor entrances as a function of
various design configurations.

0 There is a need for better estimates of shoaling rates in approach
channels for different sediments and different waves and currents.

0 There is a need for better quantification of physical environmental
parameters in coastal areas (i.e., waves, climate, currents, sediment
movement, etc.).

cc:
OA/C2lx3
OA/C211
OA/C212
OA/C23
OA/C2x2
OA/C2x7
OA/C2x8

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Ocean Survey
Rockville, MD 20852

February 18, 1981 OA/C21:SEM

TO: OA/C21 - Henry R. Frey

FROM: OA/C21 - Samuel E Mccoy

SUBJECT: Excerpts from Hoffman (EG&G) Report: Circulatory Survey Justifications

The following references from "Investigation into Deep-Draft Vessel Berthing Problems at Selected U.S. Naval
Facilities", Dr. John F. Hoffman, P.E. have been excerpted. These quotes inherently justify the present, past or
future conducting of circulatory surveys in the areas of six deep-draft harbors used by the U.S. Navy. These are the
Naval Air Station at Alameda, CA, the Naval Station and Naval Shipyard at Charleston, SC, the Naval Station at
Mayport, FL, and the Naval Air Station, North Island, San Diego, CA.

Alameda Naval Air Station:

Alameda Naval Station is located in San Francisco Bay. The ship channel is roughly 4,000 feet long by 1,000 feet wide,
extending from deep water in San Francisco Bay to the eastern end of the breakwater. Project depth of the ship channel,
turning basin and berthing area, is 42 feet below MLLW. This facility is the home port of two aircraft carriers, the U.S.S.
Enterprise and U.S.S. Coral Sea. The nuclear-powered ENTERPRISE (CVN-65) is the largest carrier operating out of Alameda,
with an overal length of 1,123 feet, a maximum width of 237 feet, a beam of 133 feet and a maximum draft of 40 feet.

Ships entering San Francisco Bay on a strong flood tide, and passing the south pier of the Golden Gate Bridge close
aboard, often experience a stron shear force to the starboard by a peculiar deflection of the current by the bridge pier.
This shear cannot be readily overcome by the rudder and, in some cases, has resulted in complete loss of control of the
course steered.

Large current eddies having the same effect are found in the vicinity of the foundation piers of the San Francisco -
Oakland Bridge and the Richmond Rafael Bridge.

10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
A young agency with a historic
tradition of service to the Nation

Vessels departing San Francisco Bay on a strong ebb current must use
extreme. caution to avoid excessive speed which can cause the vessel to take
heavy seas on the foredeck.

Pilots indicate a speed of about 10 knots is generally maintained in the
channel to assure steerageway against tidal currents and winds. Maximum cur-
rents in the channel and turning basin are estimated at about 2.0 knots. Pi I ots.
taking ships into Alameda, however, feel currents are sometimes considerably
s"..'roncer than this estimate. Currents are also said to cause some navigational
pnblems, particularly within the turning basin.

Mayaort Naval Station:

Mayport Basin (Ribault Say), is about 1/2 mile long and about 700 yards wide
and is located on the south side of the St. Johns River, Florida about 1-1/2
miles west of the river entrance into the ocean. The river at the point of entry
is kept open by means of jetties. Two deep-draft vessels, the aircraft carriers
U.S.S. FORRESTAL and the U.S.S. SARATOGA, are homeported in Mayport.

Oue to tidal currents in the river at the port of Jacksonville, precautionary
measures must be taken and maneuvering done at or neartimes of slack water
where possible. Currents in the entrance to the turning'basin are variable
according to the Chief Harbor Pilot.

Norfolk Naval Station:

Hampton Roads, also referred to from a Navy standpoint as Norfolk Harbor is
utilized by both military and commercial shipping. The U.S. Naval Station is
located an the southeast shore. All types of U.S. Navy vessels, includinq sub-
marines, are brought-into the harbor and berthed by U.S. Government harbor Pilots
(civ i I i an) .

According to Port Services Officer currents, affected by both tide and wind,
influence berthing to the extent that it is desirdble to berth vessels in the
period frcm one hour before slack to one hour after slack. There is a scarcity
of current velocity data for Norfolk Harbor. Isolated measurements have been
.made but there is no program of continuous measurements. In Hampton Roads
winds greatly influence the currents and at times attain velocities in excess
of those given on the Current Tables.

Pensacola Naval A-ir Stat-ion:

The Naval Air Station at Pensacola is located about four miles southwest of
.the city of Pensacola, Florida on the Pensacola Say. The U.S.S. LEXINGTON is
moored at Pier 303.

'There are no tidal constraints to the movement of the U.S.S. LEXINGTON;
however, on occasion wind does affect manuevering. There are no data available
concerning the velocity of currents. Jn Pensacola Bay.

North Island Naval Air Station:

North Island Naval Air Station is located in Coronado, across the Say south-
west from San Diego, CA. Four aircraft carriers are homeported at North Island.
The:Fleet Guide - San Diego, Eight edition 1978 indicates that the current is
generally in the-direction of the channels..-,.Care should be taken while passing
Ballast Point, as a cross-current deflected from Ballast Point may cause a
ship to take-a sudden shear.

Charleston Naval Complex-_
The Charleston Naval Complex is located in CharleMn Harbor which is formed
by the:Cooper, Ashley, and Wando Rivers. Nuclear subm:@-ines are based at.one.
of the docks,and require,a.35-foot channel.

Berthing vessels at the Naval Facility requires considerable skill. The
presence of a five-knot current.at times and a narrow channel width of 600
feet requires berthing by docking pilots. In the approaches to Charleston
Harbor-,,tge-most important water movements (surface) are rotary tidal currents.
Tides higher than predicted result with southerly winds and.falling prestvre;
tides- lower-than predicted'result with westerly winds and rising pressure.

Recommendation: Investigate the feasibility of-establishing an array of
current meters with read outs in the Port Services Office in order to determine
the current variation in-various piers and in the channel.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville, Md. 20852

February 4, 1982 OA/C21:HRF

TO: THE RECORD

FROM: OA/C21 -Henry R. Frey

SUBJECT: Military Use of Marine Environmental Services Division
Information Products

Captain Henry C. Morris, Assistant Chief of Staff for Fleet Operations,
Military Sealift Command (MSLC) stated, during a telephone conversation with
me today, that the operations managers of the MSLC consider the NOS tide and
tidal current tables to have great value to them. They consider both tables

to be of equal importance, and believe that this is the case throughout the
industry.

The tidal current charts are used, but not as much as the tables. The
charts are "would like to haves" for the MSLC. More dense data are needed on
the, tidal current charts.

Captain Morris sees no major usefulness of real-time tides, currents,
winds, but thinks they may be useful to others.

cc:
OA/C2 - W. V. Hull
OA/C2xl -A. J. Patrick
OA/C2x2. - M. Grunthal
OA/Cx2l- G. Younger
OA/C51 - T. Johnson
OA/C35 - T. Richards

10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
A young agency with a historic
tradition of service to the Nation

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville Md. 20852

February 8, 1982 OA/C21:DET

TO: THE RECORD

FROM: OA/C21x2 - Dan Tracy
SUBJECT: Commercial Use of Marine Environmental Services Division
Information Products

Mr. F. Ricci, Manager of the Port and Navigation Division, CHEVRON,
Shipping Company, stated during a telephone conversation with me today,
that his ship operators find the NOS Tidal Current Tables quite valuable
during berthing. The NOS Tide Tables are more important than the Tidal
Current Tables, but both are essential. His company needs hourly predic-
tions for several busy harbors, in fact, they purchase these predictions
for Yosu, Korea and Mallorca Straits, Spain from local universities.

The CHEVRON Shipping Company controls nine domestic carriers and
43 international flag vessels ranging in size between 35,000 to 800,000
tons. The trend is toward larger vessels and thus an increasing, need for
tidal predictions.

cc:
OA/C2 W. Hull
OA/C2xl - A. Patrick
OA/C2x2- M. Grunthal
OA/Cx21 G. Younger
OA/C51 T. Johnson
OA/C35 T. Richards

10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
A young agency with a historic
tradition of service to the Nation

".TC0%,
4#
401 1., UNITED STATES 0EPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.
Z
Iyational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
RoCkvifle. Ma. 201352
*'4,t$ Of
February 24, 1982 OA/C21:HRF

TO: THE RECORD
FROM: OA/C21 -Henry R. Frey /J`7 //@7 "_7
SUBJECT: Summary of Telephone Discussions With Users of Marine Environmental
Services Division Information Products
:ji
Telephone discussions were conducted on January 28, 1982, between members
of the Marine Environmental Services Division (MESO) Study Group and six users
in the maritimp-:industry. The users were contacted during the preceeding day
to:

(1.) explain the purpose-of the-contact and the information sought by NOS,

(2) provide time-for internal user,consultation (with masters, operations
managers, pilots, etc.) prior to the discussion, and

(3) arrange a convenient-time for the telephone interviews.

The MESO Study Group invited Capt. Archie@Patrick, Deputy Associate Director,
Off'ice of Oceanography to attend the discussions. Lt. Cdr. Thomas Richards 'wes on
travel status and did not attend. Messrs. George Younger and Thomas'Johnson,
Dr. Henry R. Frey, Cdr. Melvin Grunthal, and Captain Patrick participated. A
draft of this memorandum was provided to each of the participants for comments.

The discussions were held.with three operators of large ships, including
tankers, general cargo ships, container carriers, break-bulk carriers, and a
1,500 ton seismic survey ship. Two pilots association presidents were contacted.
Information was obtained from one-towing corporation. The discussions are
summarized as follows:

Captain Jerry Aspland
Operations Manager
ARCO
5900 Cherry Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90805
(213) 428-7591, Ext. 321

ARCO operates 12 U.S. Flag tankers and one 1,500 ton seismic vessel. NOS
tide and tidal current tables have economic value. They "play the tide" to
transit into and out of parts by using the tide tables, and they plan docking
and undocking according to tidal current tables. Tidal current charts are not

10TH 'VERSA RY 1970-1920
National Oceanic ard Atmospheric Administration
A young agencywith a historic
tradition of service to the Nation

used frequently, but are valuable when considering new ports. If NOS did not
produce the tables, ARCO would have to seek private industry to fill the void.
The NOS reference stations (table one) should reflect the major economic ports.
ARCO operates at Valdez, Puget Sound, San Francisco, Los Angeles/San Pedro,
.Panama, Mississippi River, Houston, and Philadelphia. Their fleet is split:
eight ships on the West Coast, and five ships an the East Coast.

Operation of an ARCO tanker averages $75K per day, or about S3K per hour.
Minimizing time to approach, dock, offload, undock, and exit converts to "large"
dollars. ARCO sees this as becoming even more important as their tankers become
larger (greater than 250k tons OWT).
Captain Aspland expressed a need for wind data accurate to 04 5 knots to
model dock-ing and undocking; winds can have even more of an effect on berthing
than currents. Real-time and predicted winds are important from a planning
standpoint. Wind stations are usually not at waterfronts. He estimates that
current speeds should be accurate to &0.5 knot. Times of high and low water,
slacks, and maximum currents must be within 15 minutes.

ARCO likes to have 6 feet under the keel when entering port. A ship may
heel (roll) when turning such that its skegs run deeper than its keel.

ARCO was unaware of where and how to obtain tide and current data.

-Captain Aspland mentioned a need for water column data at Valdez (temperature
and salinity) to analyze peculiar ships' behavior. He believes that NOS could get
indus-4ry support for a Valdez project.

He suggested further contacts: Capt. Richard Bonner, LA Pilot,
(213) 548-7838

Capt. Oick jacobsen, Long Beach Pilots,
(213) 435-6354

Captain Gerard Hasselbach
Asst. Marine Sup't- Container Ships
American President Line
1950 Franklin Street
Oakland, CA 94152
(415) 271-8000

Need to know times of highs and lows, slacks and maximum currents for
planning. Time converts to dollars. He queried ships' masters and operations
types and had Captain Larkin on an extension. They operate 15 container ships
and 5 break bulk ships. They are satisfied with t.@de and tidal current tables
'las is"--"publications are excellent and give information needed to bring ships
in and out." They use tidal current charts, but not on an "everyday basis."

Complained that the 1982 tables were late getting to local vendor. (The lateness
appears to be-in the-distribution system.) They perceive a need to get more into
climatology. Need more details. about currents:, particularly Kuroshio Current and
currents.in the Say of Bengal. Hadilittle knowledge or opinion about real-time.

Captain Edward.Fulkerson
Manager-, Ports and Navigation
Chevron Shipping Company.
555 Market Street
San Francisco, CA
(415) 894-5580

Chevron is especially active in the Cook Inlet. They spend much time
planning for-passages, and.use both tide and tidal current predictions. Tidal
current tables are accepted as being less.accurate than tide tables; "tidal
currents are more of an "ify" question." They use times of slacks and maximum
speeds. The masters. have not asked for-add.itional information, so the manage-
ment believes that the tables are adequate. Captain Fulkerson believes that
real-time.data may be helpful, but they must depend on predictions for planning
purposes. Hourly heights are useful in Cook Inlet; however, Chevron masters and
pilots compute hourly height manually, which indicates that the NOS publication,
"Supplemental Tida-1 Predictions Anchorage, Nikishka, Seldovia, and Valdez, Alaska','
has. not been publicized adequately.

Captain Russell Bryand
President
Galveston - Texas City Pilots-
(713) 935-3310

Astronomic tides are not as important as winds. High and low water times
sometimes vary by Z to 4 hours because of winds. Currents are found up to
3 knots although predictions,indicate about 2 knots. When making approaches,
cross channel currents in the vicinity of buoys 5, 6, 7 and 8 make manuevering
extremely difficult, especially when ships pass one another; this is believed
to be due to the effects of an upstream jetty. The currents appear to set toward.
the southwest about 90 percent of the time. The pilots often call the bridge
operator to find.whether.the current is ebbing or flooding. (An HF radar system
mounted on the-bridge may be useful.) Captain Bryand thought that real-time water
levels and currents near the jetty and buoys 5 to 8 would be useful; now, there is
no method of determining the direction of the current before getting into tile actual
current. He does not use the Coast Pilot regularly.

Captain William T'. Mitchell
President
Boston Pilots
Massport Pier 1, Berth 1
East Boston, MA 02128
(617) 569-4500

Captain Mitchell stated that they use our tide tables to bring vessels into
port at the earliest possible moment, to satisfy oil company concerns, and that
the tide predictions are-.very accurate. Our current predictions in the main
harbor and channel are adequate, but this is not so for the vari .ous small inlets
within the harbor. Our tidal current charts are hel 'oful but have inaccuracies:
t. C -luence of the 'all River
Sheep Island, in Hingham Bay and adjacent to 'he onT r
Channel and West Gut, is entirely missing. This area is important for large ship
traffic, and it is deficient in showing proper currents.

Captain Mitchell thinks that our data may be more important to coastwise tug
captains than pilots, because the coastwise operators are not as familiar with the
local waters. Currents prediction near Paddocks Island and Hull Island are too
weak.

He expressed a need for real-time-tides, especially during passage of LNG
tankers. Need both depth under keel and clearance under the iMystic Bridge. He
also expressed a need for denser current information on tidal current charts.

Captain Mitchell mentioned a nautical chart deficiency in the outer harbor;
there is a crescent-shaped cable area (for degaussing) and, although it is still
marked an the chart, local sources believe the cable has been removed. He would
like-to see the notation removed from the chart to alleviate an anchorage
problem.

Captain Leonard Goodwin
Vice President, Operations
Moran Towing Corporation
One World Trade Center
New York, NY
(212) 466-3600

.Captain Goodwin reported heavy use of both the tide and tidal current tables;
they are "used regularly every day." He indicated light use of tidal current charts.
He is "quite satisfied'@ with our products.

cc:
OA/C2 - W. V. Hull
OA/C2xl - A. J. Patrick
OA/C2x2 - M. Grunthal
OA/Cx2l - G. Younger
OA/C51 - T. Johnson
OA/C35 - T. Richards
OA/C211 - C. R. Muirhead
OA/C212 - 0. Simpson
OA/C2lx3 - S. McCoy

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville. Md. 20852

February 11, 1982 OA/C2xl:AJP

TO: OA/C2 - Wesley V. Hull

FROM: OA/C2x1 - A.J. Patrick

SUBJECT: Comments on Draft Summary of Telephone Discussions with
Users of Tide and Tidal Current Prediction Tables and
Tidal Current Charts

The draft document appears to adequately summarize the telephone
discussions of January 28, 1982. As a whole the comments seem to attach
greatest usefulness to the tide tables, followed by the tidal current
tables, with tidal current charts running third in order of usefulness.
The degree of usefulness of our products seems to be associated more with
format than absolute accuracy. It is apparent that different types of
users have different preferences in formatting tide, and tidal current
information. There is some need for daily predictions at a larger number
of major ports, or at least a need to disseminate the fact that daily
predictions can be made available for other than reference stations
published in the tables. As the user changes from one involved with
long-range operational planning to one actually operating a vessel on the
water, the usefulness of the existing product formats declines because
daily predictions may not be available, currents being driven primarily
by meteorological conditions, or the necessity of having to arrive at
predicted values through a series of arithmetic operations.

The British Admiralty prints on their nautical charts tables of
current speed and direction at various points referenced to time of high
water at a given reference tide station. The Brazilian Directorate of
Hydrography and Navigation shows a current rose on nautical charts. The
above are just two examples of alternative methods of orienting our product
formats to the needs of vessel operators. We should review these as
possible alternatives or supplements to our own way of "doing business" so
that maximum service may be rendered to the mariner using our existing data
base.

cc;
OA/C21

10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
A young agency with a historic
tradition of service to the Nation

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.
T7
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAI_ OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville, Ma. 20852

April 7, 1982 OA/C211:CRM

TO: The Record

FROM: OA/C211 - Charles R. Muirhead

SUBJECT: Use of Tidal Current Charts

Ouring the time period of April 1-6, 1982, several telephone calls were
made to various individuals in an attempt to get preliminary information on
how much the Tidal Current Charts are used. The results of these calls are
as follows:

1. Mr. Ken Hilton, Standish Boat Yard and Marina, Tiverton,.Rhode Island.
Mr. Hilton is a sales agent of NOS products as well as a user. He
uses the. Narragansett Bay, Long Island Sound-81ock Island Sound, and
Narragansett Bay to Nantucket Sound Tidal Current Charts. On how much the
charts are used, he stated "use all the time". On how they can be improved,
he stated "we are very pleased", and indicated no improvements are necessary.
He also indicated the coverage of the charts is adequate for his needs. As
a sales agent he indicated that his sales are to small craft o%4ners and that
"99.9'/6" buy them for personal use and not because they are required.
2.. Mr.' William Shaw, Pierson Yachts, Portsmouth, Rhode Island.

Mr. Shaw is a naval architect and..a member of the U.S. Yacht Racing
Union. He uses the@Narragansett Bay, Long Island Sound-Block Island Sound,
and Narragansett Say to Nantucket Sound Tidal Current Charts. He indicated
that he uses them often for both cruising and racing. They are particularly
useful in planning sailing schedules. On how they can be improved,'he stated
they are "very easy to use" and indicated no improvements are necessary. He
indicated a desire for charts on the area of Rhode Island Sound.

3. Mr-. Charles M. Murphy, District Staff Officer, First U.S. Coast
Guard Auxiliary District, Lowell, Massachusetts. I

Mr. Murphy uses the Boston Harbor and Narragansett Say to Nantucket
Sound Tidal Current Charts. He indicated he uses them "oft-en". He stated
that others also use them as.well as the Eldridge Tide and Pilot Book.
Mr. 'Murphy operates a 100 foot, 100 ton offshore charter fishing boat and
uses the charts to transverse to and from fishing grounds. He would like
to have charts for the offshore area betaeen Cape Cod and Portland, Maine.
He also uses the current roses an the nautical charts and would like to see
more of these.

4. Mr. John Oalton, District Staff Officer, Seventh U.S. Coast Guard
Auxiliary District, Englewood, Florida.

Mr. Dalton does not personally use the Tidal Current Charts, but is
sure others do. He indicated that he would be glad to assist in surveying
the members of his district on the use of the Tampa Say Tidal Current Charts.

5. Mr. Oan Bates, Captains Nautical Supply, Seattle Washington.

Mr. Sates is a sales agent of NOS products and was very helpful. He
indicated that sales of the Puget Sound Tidal Current Charts (North and South)
are primarily to small boat owners, both commercial and recreational, with
the majority being sold to recreation interests. He averages about 12 charts
per month sales, but indicated that the NOS charts draw heavy competition from
other sources such as various nautical and boating almanacs, which copy the
NOS products. He also stated that the Pacific Science Center publishes tidal
current charts for Puget Sound (one volume) using output From a computer model
which offers many more vectors than the NOS charts. He also stated to at the
Tidal Current Tables have a high sales volume, 250 copies per month compared
to 100 copies per month for Tide Tables.

It is obvious that there is real use of the Tidal Current Charts, particu-
larly in the northeast where five of the twelve existing charts are available.
The results of the telephone calls listed above are not conclusive in the
amount of usace. Most of the users appear to be small craft operators, both
power and sail, commercial and recreational. However, many users at' NOS prod-
ucts acquire the information through secondary sources such as the Eldridge
Tide and Pilot Book, Reed's Nautical Almanac and Coast Pilot, and the boating
Almanac. There are at least three instances of other sources Of just tidal
current charts. The University of Rhode Island/Sea Grant publishes -tidal
current-charts for "the Narragansett Say and for Long Island Sound to Suzzards
Say. The Pacific Science Center publishes tidal current charts for Puget
Sound. All three of these publications are accomplished by use of numerical
models. There are problems in using numerical models for to, is type of publica-
tion, but careful use can greatly enhance the value of the charts.

To get precise information on the use of the NOS Tidal Current Charts
would require significant effort. A good start would be to enlist the aid
of the Power Squadrons and Coast Guard Auxiliares in interviewing their
members. PartIcipation in boat shows would provide addiltional information.
However, eventually contacts with local marinas, yacht clubs, and other private
boating organizations would be necessary to obtain a clear picture of chart
use. This will be a time consuming and somewhat expensive job. However, if
we are to ever really know what the usage of our charts is, it will be neccessary.

ATT&CHMIT G
UNITED STATES'DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.-
Nationai Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

65
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
RaCkville. Md. 20852
April 23, 1932 OA/C2x2:MCG

TO Memorandum'.for the Record

FROM: OA/C3x2 - Melvin J. Umbach
OA/C2x2.- Melvyn C. Grunthal
SUBJECT: Trip Report of National Ocean Survey (NOS) Real-
Time Marine Navigation Data System Task Team

The purpose of this trip was to determine the interest of
potential users of real-time.marine navigation data in the
Galveston/Houston area and to assess their willingness to work
with NOS in defining performance requirements.

We presented the NOAA goals and objectives to provide
real-time marine navigation- data to improve the operational
efficiency and safety OT our Nation's major lake and sea
ports. *Our discussions focused on the NOS nautical chart
digital data base (AIS), and on real-time water level, current,
wave., a.nd meteorologica-1 information. Varf@ous potential
applications and the versatility of these data using available-
and rapidly developing mew technology, with emphasis on the
gulf ports e.nvironme.nt, were discussed. in detail. The user
charge issue-was discussed openly--or-as openly as we could
considering what little we.. know of its current status.

Upon arrival at Houston, we briefed Mr. DeWayne Hollin,
a member of NOAA's Sea Grant Marine Advisory Program from
Texas A. & M., o-n the@ concept of a real-time marine naviga-
tion data s stem. Mr. Hollin was interested and suggested
y
(and set up) several contacts in the Galveston/Houston area.
Mr. Hollin is well acquainted. with the maritime interests
of the Texas Gulf area and offered to help us set up a work-
shop in the Galveston area.

During this trip we attended meetirgswith the Ports
of Galveston and Houston and attended a luncheon oil '%he
Galveston Port Safety and Advisory Council. We were invited

to speak about real -ti me marine navigation data at one of
the Council's future luncheons. In add'ition we had an
extensive telephone conversation with Mr. John Miloy. Mr. Miloy
is Program Director for the Texas Coastal and Marine Council,
a group which is interested in vessel accident mitigation along
the Texas coast (3 of 11 largest U.S. port complexes are located
in Texas). Mr. Miloy extended an invitation for us to speak at
one of the Council's future meetings.

Port of Galveston Meeting:

The Port of Galveston is the smallest (in terms of total
tonnage) of the Houston/Texas City/Galveston complex. However,
it is the closest to the deep water of the gulf and is an
aggressive, forward-looking organization. This summer it will
begin a project to dredge the Galveston approaches and harbor
area from 42 feet to 56 feet. This effor@ will be privately
funded--no small effort, since the port is owned by the City of
Galveston which has a population of approximately 200,000.
The port expects to become one of the largest grain-loading
terminals in the United States after completion of the project.
The meeting was held on April 6, 1982,-at 1400 at the
Port of Galveston facilities in Galves'ton, texas. Attending
the meeti, ng were

Mr. C. E. Poe, Deputy P6rt Director, Port of Galveston
Mr. Ehling N. Carlson, Pelican Terminal Company
Capt. Russel Bryant, Galveston/Texas City Pilots
Mr. C. H. Shepherd III, Lykes Steamship Company
Mr. Ted Thorjussen, West Gulf Maritime Association
Mr. J. Franklin Bryant, Gahagan & Bryant Associates
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach, NOAA, Office of Marine Surveys
and Maps
Cdr. Melvyn C. Grunthal, NOAA, Office of Oceanography

The tenor of the meeting was generally positive. The attendees
lelt that NOAA could provide information (to improve the effi-
ciency and safety of vessel operations in the Galveston area.
The consensus of the meeting was that a workshop should be
held in the area at a later date. Mr. Poe agreed to help,
coordinate such a workshop.

The following items of interest were raised at the Galveston
meeti ng :

1. NOAA tide and tidal current tables are of little use
in the Galveston area because ol' the effects of meteorological

conditions. One of the. participants suggested that the tide
tables are accurate about 20 percent of the time. (The.
current tables are not as-accurate as. the tide tables.)

2. There is a definite need for real-time currents.
These currents are needed during periods of docking and un-
docking and when a vessel is crosswise to the main channel
current while bringing it into the harbor. The average of
the current throughout the water column would be acceptable.
The Pelican Terminal Company plans to temporarily deploy a
current meter off a small vessel during times of need.

3. Very accurate short-term (1-6 hour) forecasts of water
levels and currents are needed for the approaches to Galveston
Harbor. These forecasts should take all factors into account
inclu.ding,the- runoff from sto,rms in the Houston area if
necessary.

4. Real-time and short-te.rm forecasting of wave informa-
tion in the approaches. to Galveston Bay would be useful. Most
waves in the approaches to Galveston Harbor are relatively
short period-and do. not constitute a danger to large ships
except in unusual.circums.tanc.es. Occasionally, however, waves
are of such a period as to cause larger ships to pitch excessively.
This can be dangerous if the ships are operating.near- the limits
of the channel depth.
5'.. Chart distribution was ag'ain mentioned as a problem.
A suggestion-was made that, regional outlets be provided with
equipment to print out- updated charts on demand.

6. No great enthusiasm was shown for indicating the
vessel's real-time position on a nautical chart background.
This attitude probably occurred since piloting (buoy-running)
techniques are used in this area.

7. The lack of adequate, accurate short-term weather.
forecasts was again raised.

8. A suggestion was made that the shipboard receivers be
inexpensive, simple and portable. If the receivers were
portable., a pilot could bring it aboard, thus relieving the
shipowner of the burden of equipping his vessel. Unfortunately,
this might effectively take the shipowners out of the funding
of the system. If someone els.e is going to provide the hard-
ware, why should they contribute?

9. Real-time and short-term forecasting of salinity informa-
tion might be useful since the draft of-a vessel increases as
it is brought from salt to fresh water.

10. At this time poor Loran-C coverage in the gulf prohibits
the use of differential Loran-C as a precision navigation device.

Port of Houston Meeting:

The Port of Houston is the third largest port in the United
States. It handles more foreign vessels than any other U.S. port.
The port is located approximately '30 miles inland of the mouth
of Galveston Harbor via the Houston Ship Channel. The ship
channel is dredged to 40 feet below Brady Island and 36 feet above
Brady Island. Further dredging below,40 feet is restricted by
a tunnel running under the channel. The channel is 300 feet or
400 feet wide except for turning basins.

The meeting was attended by:

Mr. Ted G. Walters, Manager, Marine Department,
. Port of Houston Authority
Mr. OeWayne Hollin
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach, NOAA
Cdr. Melvyn C. Grunthal, NOAA

While Mr. Walters was interested in our program, he did not feel
that it would be of any particular benefit to the Part of Houston.
He suggested that we talk directly to the shippers or to shiPping
associations. However, he did express interest in sending a
representative to a workshop held in the area.

The following points were raised during the Houston meeting:

1. The Port of Houston maintains three tide gages in the
Houston Ship Channel, thus giving them access to real-time water
evel s .

2. Mr. Walters did not consider currents to be a problem
in the channel.

3. Fresh water runoff from the heavy storms which are
frequent in the area was not considered a problem, either -from
the standpoint of currents or water levels.

4. Real-time ship positioning and chart updating were not
considered to be an advantage in the channel; this attitude
'probably results from the narrowness of the channel (300 feet
to 400 feet) and heav vessel traffic transiting the channel
y
(an average of about 32 daily).

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF C0MMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATI0NAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville, Md. 20852 OA/ClxL:PCJ

TO: OA/C - H. R. Lippold, Jr.

FROM: OACL - Phillip C. Johnson

SUBJECT: Progress Report: Real-Time Marine Navigation Data Task Force

Three-site visits will be-made in April 1982 by Captain Umbach and
Commander Grunthal to areas which have expressed potential interest in real-
time digital marine navigation data. The purpose of these initial site visits
is to acquaint users with NOS products and capabilities and to begin to assess
the level of user interest and their requirements. Sites were selected based
on interest, geographic, distribution, shipping volume and problems unique to
the port. The selected areas are Baltimore/Norfolk (Chesapeake Bay Complex),
Houston/Galveston (Houston Ship Channe1 Area) and Superior, Wisconsin (Great
Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway- Complex) .

Site selection rationale:

Baltimore/Norfolk:

1. The Port of Baltimore has expressed interest- in working with NOS to
explore potentia1 benefits of real time marine navigation data
delivery systems.
2. The Part: of Baltimore has one of the largest discrepancies between
predicted and actual tides in the United States.
3. This area is close to Washington, D.C., and has easy access and high
visibility.

4. Baltimore and Norfolk (excluding-naval cargo operations) are the
fourth largest, in terms of tonnage in the U.S.

5. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers intends to increase channel depths
to Batimore, Indicating a strong degree of interest in maximizing
use of the Baltimore facilities. A real-time tide system could
assist dredging operations in addition to increasing the efficiency
of shipping operations.

Houston/Galveston

1. The Port of Galveston has shown an interest concerning real-time
data on tides and waves cc assist in maneuvering ships in and out
of the Galveston Harbor.

2. In an interview with members of the Marine Environmental Services
Division Task Force, the President of the Galveston/Texas City
Pilots Association, stated the following:

Meteorological effects were more important than astronomic effects
in determining water level - times of high and low cides some-
times vary from the predictions by two or four hours;

Real-time tides and currents would be useful in moving ships

through the charnel. - cross channel. currents are difficult to
predict near the jetty and buoys 3 to 8;

Local. operators need more and better tide and-current data for
determing operations at SEADOCK, the projected deep water port-.

3. The Houston/Galveston Complex is the third. largest U.S. port in terms
of tonnage.

Great Lakes:

1. The port of Superior, Wisconsin expressed an interest in the possible
benefits. that may be realized from a real-time matine navigation data
delivery system.

2. The St. Lawrence Seaway and Great Lakes is a major shipping system
that should be given equal. consideration and exposure as our
saltwater seaports.

3- The Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway. System is open for commercial
navigation only 260 days each year. The Corps of Engineers has
determined. in a recent study that it is feasible to expand
operations throughout a greater oortion of the winter months on the
Lakes, its channe1s, and river systems. Fog, heavy precipitation,
and ice, during the fall, winter and spring combined with the ramoval.
of floating aids cc aavigation, ellInate. totally or restrict'
recreational. and commercial. vessels to daylight movement the
availabity of real-time marine navigation digital data, joined
with an.all weather, reliable, accurate positioning system cou1d
increase the- systems. commerci1 1 capacity six percent.

Initial site visits require two-person local travel to Baltimore, a two
or three day trip to Houston/Galveston, and approximately one week to the
Great Lakes area. Representatives from port authorities, harbor commissions,
shipping associations, pilot associations, and other interest groups will be
interviewed as time permits. As oppossed to the major seaports through-out the
United States which can- be viewed as more-or-less independent and
operations, Great Lake ports and the Seaway must be Considered as a system.
No one piece, or entity of the system operates or functions independently.
Therefore, rather than limit the itial meetings to a single part or
activity, the St. Lawrence-Seaway Development Corportation and the vocal lake
Carriers Associantion will be contacted to develop a broader constituency and
perspective of Lake/Seaway system user requirements. Additional contacts-will
be made with the Navy, Coast Guard, and Arm Corps of Engineers.

cc:
Pyle
Hayes
bossler
Lanier
Hull
Umbach
Grunthal

AMAZM@IMT 11

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville. Md. 20852
OA/C3x2:MJU

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

FROM: OA/C2x2 --Mel Grunthal
OA/C3x2 - Jerry Umbac

SUBJECT: Meeting Report: National Ocean Survey (NOS) Real-Time Marine
Navigation Data Systems Task Team with Maryland Part Authority/
Port of Baltimore. Officials

1. The purpose of the meeting was to determine the Part Authority's.
potential interest in real-time marine navigation data and assess its
willingness.to work with NOS in defining performance.requirements.

2. The meeting was held an March 29, 1982, at 2 p.m. at the Baltimore
World Trade-Center.

3. Attendees were:

Jim Hogan, Terminal Director, Part of Balt-imare.
Tom Powers., Manager of Hazardous.Materials and Safety
Development, Port of Baltimore
Tony Mazzaccaro, Sea Grant Program Leader, University of
Maryland (College Park), Marine Advisory Service
Mel Grunthal,. OA/C2x2-
Jerry Umbach, OA/C3xZ

4. Mazzaccaro was asked by Bob Shephard, Director of Sea Grant's
Advisory Service., to attend this meeting to assess what role Sea Grant.
might play if this concept was well received in Baltimore. He seems to
be'a "fisheries" and research-oriented individual, but expressed a.sincere
willingness to cooperate and work with us although he-is not familiar with
the marine transportation industry.

5. We presented, informally, our desires and goal to provide real-
time marine navigation data to improve the operational efficiency and safety
of our Nation's major lake and sea ports. Our presentations and discussions
focused on the NOS nautical chart'digital data base and on real-time tides,
currents, waves, and weather. Various potential applications and the versa-
tility of these data using available and rapidly developing new t@echnology,
Particularly with regard to 3altimore, were discussed in detail. The user
charge issue was discussed openly.

Powers and Hogan, although finding the concept interesting and of
potential benefit to other ports and harbors with greater tidal ranges,
could foresee little or no application to Baltimore, at least from the Port
Authority's perspective. The Baltimore Port Authority envisions itself
as lessors and managers of port facilities and providers of terminal ser-
vices. They believe vessel movements in Baltimore Harbor and its approaches
to be efficient and safe, and because of the less than 2 feet of tidal
range and low current velocities,do not perceive real-time information to
be cost beneficial. Their imajor concern seems to be deepening the channel
from 42 feet to 50 feet. Incidentally, their insurers require the port co
contract with AccuWeather for nowcasting and forecasting.

7. The concensus of the attendees was that we were not talking to the
right group of people. Hogan and Powers believe it is the vessel owners'
or operators' problem to transport goods in and out of port, and that only
this group could or should decide whether real-time marine navigation systems
are feasible or cast beneficial. We believe the port authorities' role in
this initiative should be more active, even to the point of acting as "brokers"
or interfaces between the Government and actual users, and think their non-
aggressive posture is somewhat shortsighted. However, NOS shoul-d not pressure
any organization into an uncomfortable position.
8. Powers and Hogan suggest tha ,t better contacts would be the shipping
companies, pilots associations, and other interest groups. Specifical.1y:

Association of MarNland Pilots
- American Merchant Marine Institute (Washington, D.C.)
- Master Mates and Pilots Association School (Max Carpenter)
- Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore (Bill Detweiller)
- Foreign flag shipping associations

1,,F they show sufficient interest in such a system, the port administration
would most likely become involved on the sidelines.

9. Powers and Hogan both suggest that of the suite of technology, ser-
vices, and data that NOS could provide, up-to-date chart information seemis
to be the most appropriate--but reaffirmed that we should work directly with
the users to determine their specific requirements. There have been many
complaints in Baltimore because the on board infornation required by the U.S.
Coast Guard to operate in U.S. waters (up-to-date nautical charts, tide tables,
current tables, Notices to Mariners, and Coast Pilots) are frequently diffi-
cult to obtain locally on a timely basis And can cause sailing delays. Pro-
viding such updated information might be cost effective because chart correc-
tion work is now done manually by one of the mates on an overtime schedule--
an expensive proposition. They also believe that real-time access to naviga-
tion data combined with a display showing the vessel's position accurately
would be useful during severe winter freezes when floating aids to navigation
are destroyed or shift.

10. Again, real-time tidal information was not perceived as import-ant.
Because of the small range in astronomic tildes (Tess than 2 feet) and low
current velocities, little benefit would be derived from "riding the high
t';Ide" in and out of Baltimore. NOS might be able to prove this assertion to

be incorrect, but it would require an-exteensive analysis* of tidal flows
in Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. In addition, there are few piers
and access channels in Baltimore.which-can accommodate vessels drawing
over 37 feet. (See attachment)

11. The legal implications of providing navigational data electronically
should.be investigated. What.happens if a casualty occurs which was caused
by erroneous information provided by NOS or an intermediary?

12. The oyster industry should be contacted to assess the potential
usefullness of rea.1-time water conductivity data (salinity) for timely
harvesting. Tony Mazzaccaro would be the logical person to follow up on
this initiative if we. think it's a good idea. Itseems like this is the kind
of opportunity that Sea.Grant.would leap on.
cc: 13. Strike one! At least we got up to bat.
OA /Clxl
OA/C2
OA/C3
OA/CS13

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NA71ONAL OCEAN SURVEY
ATTAC1LNWT 1i uxl-
Rockville. Md. 20852

April 22, 1982 OA/C3x2

MEMORANDUM FOR THE.RECORD

FROM: OA/C2x1 -I.Mel Grunthal
OA/C3x2 - Jerry Umbach

SUBJECT: Trip Report - Report of meetings: National Ocean Survey Real-Time
Marine Navigation Data Task Team with:

1. Superior', Wisconsin/Duluth, Minnesota Port Authority officials
and potential user constituency representatives; and.

2. St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation officials at
Massena, New York.

1. The,purpose of themeeting in Superior was to determine the degree-of
interest of the part authority and potential users in real-time marine
navigation-data, and to assess their willingness to collaborate with NOS
in defining-performance@requirements.,

A. The meeting-was held on April 13, 1982, at 0900 ilh the City Hall
Hedring Room Superior, Wiscc nsin.

B. Attendees-were:

James M'. (Jim) McCarville - Superior Port-Oirector
Mark Olson - Superior Port Authority
Dan Jorgensen - Wiscons-in O.O.T./Superior Board of Harbor Commission
William Hammann - Superior Board of Harbor Commissioners
Betty Hetzel - League of Women Voters, Superior Board of Harbor
Commissioners, and Douglas County Supervisor
Francis (Ed) Stein - Superior City Council I
Dennis Van Hoof - Wisconsin Coastal Management, Northwest
Regional Planning
Robert H. Johnson- ORTRAPI, Superior Midwest Energy Terminal
Captain George Luckenbill - Upper- Great Lakes Pilots Association,
Duluth, Minnesota
Alan Johnson - Seaway Port Authority of Duluth
Phil Keillor - University of Wisconsin, Sea Grant Institute
Kenneth Bra -.University of Wisconsin, Sea Grant Institute
Bruce Munson - University of Minnesota, Sea Grant Institute
Me] Grunthal - OA/C2x2
Jerry Umbach - OA/C3x2
note: U.S. Coast Guard and Corps of Engineers were invited, but did
not attend.

C. We presented the NOAA goals and objectives to provide real-time marine navigation data to improve
the operational efficiency and safety of our Nation's major lake and seaports. Our discussions
focused on the NOS nautical chart digital data base (AIS), and on real-time water level,current,
wave, and meteorological information. Various potential applications and the versatility of these
data using available and rapidly developing new technology, with emphasis on the Great Lakes
environment, were discussed in detail. The user charge issue was discussed openly-- or as openly as
we could considering what little we know of its current status.

D. The primary merchant shipping industry concern in the Great Lakes is extending the navigation season
further into the winter months. Most floating aids to navigation are removed on a phased basis during
the fall, remain out during the hard winter months, and then are gradually replaced in the spring.
When these aids are not in place, vessel movement is prohibited during darkness and periods of reduced
visibility. Winter aids are highly susceptable to positional shifting caused by ice movements, and
are of questionable value for accurate and safe winter navigation.

A broad concencus developed that a precise navigation or positioning system which could automatically
superimpose a vessel's position against a chart background would alleviate this problem--with a mild
admonition from a pilot that the industry's objective is to make, not spend, money, and that such a
technology must be priced reasonably.

E. More accurate up-to-date hydrographic information is needed to operate safely, particularly in the
vicinity of lock approaches and narrow channel cuts where vessel propellers scour the bottom and
create new schoaling. Ships sometimes have one foot or less clearance between keel and the bottom.

F. Great Lakes Pilots have worked with a real-time marine navigation data system for years--word of mouth!

G. The Great Lakes tanker fleet has a much better operating safety record than its "saltie" equivalent. The
suggestion was made that the cause may be the "salties" unfamiliarity with lake sailing and their
relatively lax practices in navigating and piloting. It is not uncommon for a pilot to turn the conn
over to the regular watch for an open lake transit, rest a bit, and return to the bridge to find the
vessel five or six miles off the desired steaming track. Would real-time, automaticlly plotted situations
improve this situation?

We have no statistics on the relative safety records of the Lakers vs Salties.

H. Accurate, real-time water level informa'tion at locks and bridges
would be useful. Water-level staffs areJocated at each lock,
but the information is not routinely made available to the
pilots. Heavily laden vessels often clear lock sills by only
six inches. During hot and sunny days, lake vessels tend to
"hog" because of temperature differentials --- decks and super-
structures are hosed down with cold lake water to straighten
the keel.

I. Real-time current information would be@"nice to know" in various
areas of Lake,.Superior, particularly when docking or undocking,
and when locking and unlocking.

J. Real-time wave information could prove useful and contribute
to safer navigation. Pilots exchange wave and sea condition
information via radio and use a combination of U.S. and Canadian
official forecasts, and.radio and television forecasts for weather.

K. Wave@climatoloqy is sadly lacking in the Lakes. This kind of in-
formation would be extremely useful for:

1. vessel design -- lake wave characteristics are dissimilar
to thosp- of ocean waves.

2. Erosion-control studies

3. Waterfront design

L. We were told.that real-time ice depth, movement, and open lead
information would be particularly valuable durirTg'periods of
marginal navigating canditions.(we weren't smart enough to come
up with this ourselves). Vessel operators now make decisions
an which shore:to run based on pilot cross-talk and radio and
te-levision information. Clearly, ice information falls within
the scope of the real-time marine navigation data concept.
M. Better, more-fraquent weather forecasts are need'ed for safer
operations -both commercially and recreationally -- density
of observation and forecast stations should be increased.
Operators run the lee shore-of the Lakes for safety and
efficiency.

N. The most positive response and definition of need for the
information, services, and technology discussed above was
articulated by the, Duluth Pilots Association representative,
George Luckenbill

0. There was a general agreement among the participants, and a
specific interest expressed by the Port Director, that a
workshop is warranted as the next step in defining more
concisely future systems performance requirements. The
following helpful comments were made with regard to 'a
workshop approach:

1. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway should be considered
as a single marine transportation-system, as opposed to
approaching each port uniquely. -- "the sum of the ports is
greater than the whole."

2. NOAA should connect with other Federal interests to determine
and establish roles, particularly with regard to activities
.C
junding.

3. NOAA should develop a draft basic plan (straw-man) for the
works-hop for consideration of participants.

4. A visual model display of a potential system could prove to
be very helpful.

5. The workshop should involve:

a. Federal Government

b. User constituency

c. Technology industry

6. Canadians should participate

P. Sidenotes

1. U.W. Sea Grant has problems with the poor quality of
bathymetric data available and requested information
on how to get new surveys conducted.

2. They also perceive that they have no input to NOS for
survey requirements, and cannot get survey results.

3. Jim McCarville, Port Director, was enthusiastic about
a workshop and expressed a willingness to steer our
local representative to useful contacts*in the.industry.

4. Phil Keillor, University of Wisconsin Sea Grant, seems to
view his responsibilities from a research and university
interest perspective, i.e., lake shore erosion studies,
wave climatology, bathymetry, hydrography, current Midies,
etc; Sea Grant should be the conceptualizers on behalf of
the academic/research interests. We are not sure of how
much willing help we can get with the needed leg-work,
local contact, and mechanics for a successful workshop.

5. The chart shows the Superior "High Bridge" clearance
as 123 ft. The bridge was supposed to be built for a
120 ft. clearance. Which is correct? (to OA/C32 for
answer to George Luckenbill)

2. The purpose of the meeting with St. Lawrence Seaway Pevelopment Corporation
(SLSDC)officials was to assess their interest and need for real-time marine
navigational data systems and their willingness to work with NOAA in
developing-user performance-requirements.
A. The meeting was held on-April 15, 1982, at 9:00 am at the Corporation
operational headquarters in Massena, New York.

B. Attendees were:

William H. Kennedy, Resident Manager-
Tom Sizemore,, Assist?,nt Resident Manager
John B. Adams, Chief Engineer
Henry H. Montroy, Chief, Marine Services
Joseph C. Simmons, Chief, Lock Operations
Jerry Umbach@, OA/C.3x2
Mel Grunthal, OA/C2x2.

C.. SLSOC's primary concern-seems to lie in better weather forecasting.
Approximately 15% of navigable time is lost between April and November
because of bad weather and reduced visibility. Interest was expressed
in the concept of using digital chart data, provided that precise vessel
positioning would be part of such a system. Money is a serious problem
with SLSOC Seaway --tolls incl^eased 18% this year, and will be
upped by anoti2er 10% next year.

D. SLSOC'has its-own-problems in getting NOAA *nautical charts updated in a
timely manner.. When the U.S * Lake Service was in business, it took
only about one year-tto get hand corrections applied to a chart -- it
takes.NOAA much longer-now. The reissue cycle timing is not believed
to be adequate. SLSOC,is a. prime-user of our charts for a variety of
purposes, the most important of which is maintaining floating aids.
SLSOC does its own work in placing, removing, and servicing some 300
buoys and fixed aids.

E'. Water level information is always valuable for seaway and lock operations.
Staffs are located at all of the locks. SLSOC.installed and maintains
its own water-level gages (non-telemetering), and telemetering temperature
gages. Because of the-lock staf's, vessel operators need only to request
this information from the lock operator via radio.

F. Although currents in the seaway and lock areas can present problems
to vessel operators, real-time information or observations do not
appear to be warranted. The currents are reasonably easy to predict-
based on the known volume,of water being spilled through the locks,
hydrauTic power plants, and spillways.

G Wind driven waves within the confines of -the St. Lawrence River
are not a problem. Vessel wakes are because of shoreline erosion.
Wave heights on Lake Ontario are important if in excess of 10
ft., barge traffic is restricted.

H. Ice thickness, movement, and open lead information would be extremely
valuable during the fall freeze and spring thaw.

1. A committee has been formed to define an optimum Precise all-weather
navigation system (PAWNS) for piloting in the Great Lakes and Seaway
marine transportation system. Committee membership includes representa-
tives from the U.S. and Canadian Coast Guard, the U.S. and Canadian
Seaway Commissions, the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Authority,
and SLSOC. We suggested, and SLSOC concurred that it might be a
good idea to include NOAA in an advisory capacity because of its
in-house expertise and proficiency with precise positioning systems.
NOAA would benefit by keeping abreast of PAWNS developments in ".-he
Great Lakes with regard to the proposed Real-Time marine Navigation
Data System and could assist the committee.

J. SLSDC. suggests that the systems cost must be kept low -- owners of
older vessels, particularly foT-eign,are not likely to make substantial
investments in this type of equipment.

K. User fees for nautical charts may be a real problem. Lake operators
(and ihe SLSOC) would buy and use Canadian charts if NOAA prices itself
out of the market.

L. The operations wing of SLSDC is interested in the real-time marine
navigation data concept and is willing to work with NOAA -- however,
we have to contact Dave Robb (R&0j in the SLSDC executive headquarters
in Washington, DC, to determine the degree of participation and
assistance which will be provided.

Recommended additional contacts in the Lakes.

o Lake Carriers Association
a Dominion Marine Association
o Upper Great Lakes Pilots Association
o Lake Pilots Association - Port Huron
o Canadian Pilots Association
o U.S. and Canadian Coast Guard
o U.S. Corps of Engineers
o U.S. 1-11aritime Administration
o RAOM Roy Hoffman (USN,Ret), Milwaukee Port Director and Chairman of
Western Great Lakes Ports Association
o Gary Failor, Port of Toledo, President, U.S. Section of the Interna-t4lonal
Association of Great Lakes Ports
o Ray Lunn, Port of Oshawa, President Canadian. Section of the International
Association of Great Lakes Ports
o Harry Benfort, University of I'lichigan, respected expert on Great Lakes
ship transportation system with credibility throughout the industry.

cc: OA/Cxl, OA/Clxl, OA/C2, OA/C3, OA/513

Sea Grant Program
Sea Grant Extension Program
109 Washburn Hall University of Minnesota/Duluth, Minnesota 55812 (218) 725-9106

TO: Commander Melvyn Grunthal and Captain Jerry Umbach
FROM: Bruce H. Munson, Acting Director
DATE: April 27, 1982

All of us who are involved with the Ports of Duluth and Superior
would like to thank you for visiting with us and discussing user
requirements for the Great Lakes. Real time data could be invaluable
to not only navigation of Lake Superior, but also to maneuvering
within the harbor.

On the lake the data which may be most valuable are:
1. ice-cover reports - thickness and location of leads;
2. precision positioning;
3. comprehensive weather data for the whole lake (Is there
satellite info which would help?); and
4. wave height (Are the models and formulas which would allow
for projections of wave heighth given windspeed, wind
direction, & fretch?)
I personally feel that real time data could be of considerable
value when used within the harbor. Here again precision postioning
could be very useful. In addition, water level, current flow, and
current direction data could present some of the mishap's we've had in
our harbor in recent years. We've had a few boats hit the pire at the
Duluth entry and some of the error has probably been due to lack of
knowledge of the harbor conditions.
The technologies for data-interpretation and retrieval certainly
exist. It would be useful to have workshops which demonstrate the
various capabilities.

My primary concern would be regarding data input. I'd hate to
get the port authorities and captains all excited about technology
which would take several years to get in place.

If we at Sea Grant can be of assistance in future workshops
please let me know.

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
In corporation with Agticultural Extension and Continuning Education and

ATTACHMENT I

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration I
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville, Md. 20852
May 7, 1982 OA/03X2:MJU

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

FROM: OA/2x2 - Mel Grunthal
OA/3x2 - Jerry Umbach
SUBJECT: Trip Report: Meetings between National Ocean Survey Real-time
Navigation Task Team with:
1. Port Everglades, Florida Port-Authority officials;
2. Lake Charles, Louisiana Port Authority officials,
potential user constituency representatives, and
LSU Sea Grant agents;
3. Baton Rouge, Louisian Port Director; 3. Baton Rouge, Louisiana Port Director;
4. Beaumont, Texas Port Authority officials and
potential user constituency representatives;
and
5. Louisiana State University, Sea Grant Marine
Advisory Service Agents
PURPOSE: The purposes of the meetings were to assess the degree of interest of
port authorities and potential users in real-time marine navigational
data, and to determine their willingness to collaborate with MOS in
defining performance requirements.

The NOS task Team presented the NOAA goals and objectives to provide
real-time marine navigation data to improve the operational efficiency
and safety of our Nation's major lake and seaports. Our discussions
focused on the NOS nautical chart digital data base (AIS), and on real-
time water level, current, wave and meteorological information.
Various potential applications and the versatility of these data using
available and rapidly developing new technology, with emphasis on the
local environment, were discussed in detail. The user charge issue
was discussed.

1. The Port Everglades meeting was held an April 26, 1982, at the port offices
in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

A. Attendees were:

James H. Phifer, Port Director
Bob Richards, Harbormaster
Bob Clapp, Assistant Director of Engineering
Mel Grunthal, OA/C2x2
Jerry Umbach, OA/C3x2

B As meetings go, this one was relatively unproductive with regard to
advancing the cause of real-time navigation data systems. We seem to
have caught the port authorities cold as evidenced by their underwhelming
response. Pilots and carrier representatives were invited but did not
attend. The Florida Sea Grant Marine Advisory Services agent (Dr.
Marion Clark, University of Florida, Gainsville) was invited on short
notice and did not show up. We did learn an important lesson here
provide more detailed information in advance to bring our listeners
more up to speed.

C. Port Everglades seems to be a small, compact, and well protected
facility with easy and safe entry and egress. The port shows
relatively few of the problems normally associated with its bigger
brothers. Tidal ranges vary from 2 1/2 - 3 feet and current velocities
are slight. NOS prediction tables for these phenomena are reasonably
accurate. Real-time information might be "nice" to have for pollution
control planning or occurrences. Wave data technology stimulated
little interest as well.

D. The Port Director agreed to distribute our pamphlets to the local carriers,
towing concerns, and pilots; then confer among themselves to decide which L fer among themselves to decide whIc."i
technology, data, and services might be appropriate for the Port. Jim
Phifer is supposed to let us know the outcome.

E. The Port Authority and Corps of Engineers resurvey the port waters and
project channels annually, and they perceive moderate seafloor stability
and little need for digital nautical chart information.

F. Port of Palm Beach, Florida may be interested in discussing technology
as it has problems with currents.

G. Port engineers like working with NOS charts with the enhanced orthophoto background for inshore features. They were given contacts qfor more in-
background for inshore features. They were given contacts for more in-
formation on the NOS seaward Boundary Map Series which uses rectified
photomasaics at 1:10,000 scale.
H. Although the Port's initial response is low-key, the Director seemed
to be interested in attending a workshop sponsored elsewhere (Port
Directors like to travel too).

1. The Part has major funding problems and expressed a major concern over
the cost of implementing or acquiring such systems.

2. The Lake Charles, Louisiana meeting was held at the port offices on April 27,
1982, at 0900.

A. Attendees were:

Jim Sudduth, Port Director
Jack LeBleu, Port of Lake Charles
Edgar Carpenter, Harbor Docking and Towing Co.

Malcolm Gillis, Lake Charles Pilots Association
David C. Leln@z, Gastrans Co.
Dwayne Chatoney, Sabine Towing CO.
Robert Sylvia, LSU Sea Grant, Marine-Advisory Service
and of course, Niel and Jerry.

B. Lake Charles is practically a land-locked port about 32 miles inland
from the,Gulf of Mexico. No?i;ial tidal ranges are 1.5 ft. at the entrance
to CalcasiaLl'.Lake and about 0.5 ft. at Lake Charles. Currents tend to be
light except during freshets. Little flooding occurs unless a major stornm
hits the area from the Gulf.

C. The Lake Charles pilots have problems with the adequacy and accuracy of
buoy placement, and believe the buoys shift position frequently. Water
levels are very important to the pilots -the lake bottom is soft and
heavily laden vessels are always "pushing mud." 1110S tidal and current
predictions are unreliable.

D. As is the.case-with the other ports. we have visited, Lake Charles is
concerned about the cost and size of such data systems and real-time
telemetering technology, and of the methodology for transmitting this
information to ships. Real-time automatic vessel positioning capability
is not 'considered to be important.

E. The pilots: have been trying to get a standard nautical chart issued for
the Lake area since 1980. Existing-chart layout.7 also need.to be revised
to better serve the-needs of the users. NOS has not been particularly
responsive in this matter. Bob Norris will contact Captain Gillis to
establish a better dialogue.

F. Attendees@' concensus- seemed to be that a workshop is 'the most appropriate
vehicle to pursuerfurther such a coop erative effort between the government
and industry; and that a local workshop might be better than a regional
gathering because of part differences. We agreed to send our final report
to Lake Charles after meeting with the initially targeted ports and assessing
the@overall situation.

G. At Lake Charles we began to get more specific input on the need for real-
time systems for the offshore industry. --- where usage would have a
significant economic pay off Di-gital nautical chart data bases, which
could be updated on a near re'al-time basis could be useful in the Gulf,
particularly for planning movements and operating oil and gas drilling
rigs. Some rigs lease for $40K - 50K per day. By the time.NOS shows
some of the mobile drilling rigs or platforms on its charts, they are gone!

H. Tug and barge transportation is increasing in the Gulf of Mexico -- this
combination is extremely sensitive to wave action when compared to seagoing
carriers. 'Wave amt'plitude and period combinations play a major role in
planning and scheduling jack-up rig operations. Some platforms have wave
measuring instrumentation.

I. Knowledge of real-time currents would be extremely valuable to all facets of the offshore industry.

J. Suggested additional contacts:

Sam Giallanza
New Orleans Steamship Association
219 Carodulet
New Orleans, LA

Dr. Eda
Stevens Institute
(for offshore industry)

3. The Baton Rouge meeting was held at the port offices on April 28,1982 at 1100.

A. Mr. C.W. (Bill) Herbert, Executive Director, was briefed by the MOS road show. Bob Sylvia, LSU Marine
Advisory Service, also attended. Mr. Herbert did not see fit to invite anyone else to the meeting and
seemed to have little knowledge of marine shipping operations and navigational concerns.

B. Herbert sees little utility of digital nautical chart data applications and expressed no interes in real-
time wave, water level, and current information for the Port of Baton Rouge; the port is protected from
the Gulf of Mexico by over 150 miles of Mississippi River. Annual snowfall in the northern plains and
upriver precipitation are the major influences on river stages.

C. Suggested additional contacts.

Bar Pilots Association,
Lower River Pilots Association, and
New Orleans/Baton Rouge Pilots Association

D. Mr. Herbert will try to make arrangements for NOS to present this program at the Gulf Ports Association
semi-annual meeting in Pensacola, September 8-10,1982. (Ben Murphy, President--Pensacola)

4. The Beaumont meeting was held in the Chamber of Commerce Boardroom on April 29, 1982, at 1000.

A. Attendees were:

( See attached roster)

B. This was the largest meeting we have been involved in so far, and there was a desire expressed to
participate in a workshop. A separate workshop specifically for Beaumont does not appear warranted at
this time.

C. Tide and current prediction tables are inaccurate in the Port Arthur, Beaumont, Orange Complex. Local
knowledge is mandatory for the safe handling of large vessels, Water levels at the ports and along the

Sabine @River are largely affected by precipitation runoff, sLrong and
long norther-lies, and major Gulf storm systems. Current information
is needed for safer river piloting and-shiphandling, and for dock and
waterfront design.

0. Access to digital nautical chart data with corresponding computer
iorth
graphics technology and automatic positioning capability may be @ I -
whi-Te -- the need for backup hard copy, perhaps by 'Facsimile transmission,
was expressed in the event of power failures or comanuilications disruptions.
(this type of requirement would be addressed in the conceptual or engineer ing
development phases).

E. The local Coast Guard informed us that establishing sal"ety fain-lays and
auxiliary channels (such as Hampton Roads) are a high priority item in
the Lake-Charles area. They would like these areas @.-jire-dragged and
shown on the charts.

F. Additional recommended.contacts:

Ron Brinson, President
Association of American Port Authorities.

G. A lively discussion and bantering with regard to potential user charges
.C
ior NOS products and services closed the meeting.

5. During the trip vie also met,.-tith Mr. Ronald Becker and Mr. RobertSylvia of
the Sea Grant-Marine Advisory Program at Louisiana State University. Sylvia is
developing a low-cost system to provide near real-time (1-3 hours old) '.-lind,
@.emperature and wave data to a wide range of users via phone lines.

He envisions a clientele as diverse as large offshore oil companies or
individual fisherman.

Based on their experience in developing this system, Mr. Becker and Mr. Sylvia
suggested that NOS involve offshore maritime interests in the development of any
real-time marine navigation data system. Specifically, they suggested:

Offshore Operators-Committee.(Offshore oil industry)
Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP)
Marine Insurance Companies
National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA)
Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA)
International Association of Oil Drilling Contractors

Several other important points were brought up during our discussion:

1. Actual waves and currents and short-term-forecasts of .vaves and currents
are very important when moving expensive CS10K per day and,greater) jack-
up drilling rigs. Currents can be determined from satellite sea surface
temperature readings.

2. The vessel Traffic control System Panel for the Mississippi River can provide NOS with useful information about Mississippi River navigation.
3. NWS Port Meteorological Officers may be a good contact point.
4. The interests of potential small users of real-time marine navigation data should be considered. It is unlikely that this group will be adequately represented at any meeting or workshop and their intersts might easily be overlooked. The design of any Real-Time Marine Navigation Data System should include the ability to access the data at a low cost.
5. Low-lying fog in the river channel is a major problem on the Mississippi.
Attachment
cc:
OA/Cx1
OA/C1x1
OA/C2
OA/C2x2
OA/C3
OA/C513

R 0 S T E R

WATERWAYS COMMITTEE MEETING

APRIL, 29, 1982

BEAUMONT, TX.

Josh Allen Fred Heinar
Allen investments Heiner Farms
1393 Calder
P.O. Box 3387
Beaumont, TX 77701 Beaumont, TX 7774
833-8947 842-1228

Paul Beard Dennis Huffman
Sabine Propeller Executive Vice President
P.O. Box 1057 Greater Port Archur Chamber
Port Arthur, TX 77640 0f Commerce
4749 Twin City Highway
Andy Brauninger
Sabine Towing Port Arthur, TX 77640
963-1107
P.0. Box 1528
Groves, TX Carroll. Lewis
962-0201 Texaco
Stirling Copp P.O. Box, 728
Port Arthur, TX 77640
City of Beaumont 985-74641
P.0. Box 3827
Beaumont, TX 77704 Barry Long
838-0706 Bethlehem Steel
Ulalter Crawford P.O. Box 3031
Beaumont, TX 77704
Beaumont Navigation District 833-6821
420 2Mariposa
Beauriant, TX 77701 J.W. Martin
835-7742 Fort of Beaumont
J.C. Davis P.O. Box 2297
Gulf Oil Marine Beaumont, TX 77704

P.O. Box 701 Capt. James 2Manr6y
Port kirthur, TX 77640 Manry & Marine Consultants
935-1.566 2935 Bryan
Brian Frank Groves, TX 776@19
Beaumont Enterprise 962-4054
P.O. Box 3071 J.F. Plangman
Beaumont, TX 77704 Trotti & Thompson
833-3311 P.O. Box 070
O.L. Fulton Beaumont, T08X 77704
833-7411
2?.0. Box 3033
Port Arthur, TX 77640 Johnny Rozsypal
722-21922
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box. 157
Port Arthur, TX 77640
985-4383

-2-

Gary Scaton
Texaco, Inc.
P.O. 30@: 102S
Port Arthur, TX 77640
933-74 11

Helen Sohlincper
Port Arthur News
% Press Room
JaEferson County Courthouse
Beaumont, TX 77701

D.L. Turpin
Beaumont Navigation District
420 maripasa,
Beaumont, TX 77701
335-770 42

J.F. Vandergrift
Capt. Van, Inc.
552 5th Street
Fort Arthur, TX 77640
982-2911

H.E. Weaver
Sabine Pilots
5148 W parkway
Groves, TX 77619
962-8530

D.P. Wheat
P.O. Box 5187
Beaumont, TX 77702
835-4933

Capt. J.J. 1-licks
U.S. Coast Guard
Federal Bu-4ldin,v
Port Arthur, TX 77640
983-3244

Toramy Williamson
Coascal Construction Co.
P.O. Box 1368
Fort Arthur, TX 77640
727-073 21

Will Wilson
First Security Bank
P.O. Box 3391
Beau-mont, TX 77704

DOW Wynn
Fort of- Fort Arthur
P.O. Box 14263
Port Arthur, TX 77640
983-2011

A
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville. Md. 20852

June 29, 1982 C2111:GOP

TO: THE.RECORD

FROM: C2111 - Lt (ig) Gary D. Petrae

SUBJECT: Southeast AlAska Circulatory Survey

While preparing to draft the five-year circulatory survey plan of Southeast
Alaska, 1. had occasion to talk with some representatives of the larcest users
of these waters. My first conversation was with Captain J. Hodgman of the
Southeast Alaska Pilots Association. He stated "no one uses the tidal current
tables more.than we do," and indicated a strong interest on behalf of his asso-
ciation in our plans- for the survey. In a follow up conversation, he provided
a list of 11 areas tilat they were very interested in having surveyed. The
areas ranged from Skagway-in the north to 1@etchikan in the south with special
interest in-Juneau Harbor. Captain Hodgmkn'stated that because of 'the complex
current regime in Juneau.they would "love to see a tida.1 current chart of the
harbor."

Foss,Launch and Tug Company's.Port Captain Tim Lyness was my next source
of informa ti.0 n. He indicated that they move barges of-220 to 343 feet through-
out Southeast Alaska on a weekly scheduled basis. Additionally, they operate.
an oil barge service to many of the outlying areas in the smaller bays and in-
lets. Their need for accurate predictions is critical for transiting and docking.
He expressed.a specific need- for data in Sergis Narrows, Wrangell Narrows, and
Snow Pass.

This need for accurate predictions in Wrangell Na@rows was also stressed
by Captain Herbert Stetson, Port Captain of the Alaska Marine Highway System
(AMHS). He stated that the AMHS ferries transit the entire area of Southeast
Alaska at least once a month in the-isolated regions, and as often as two to
four times a day through Wrangell Narrows.

Captain Stetson and Mr. Lyness did not indicate that there was a need for
tidal current charts but Mr. Lyness said that if they were available they
might use them.

I also spoke with Mr. Bob Alberson of the Fishing Vessel Owners Association
in Seattle, Washington. Mr. Alberson stated that the members of his association
fish mainly off shore of Southeast Alaska. They are interested in current data
along the west coast of the area and for Chatham Strait, Ketchikan, Sit-ka and
Petersburg.

cc:
C2
C2Xl
C2x2
C21
C211
C2111 Patchen

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
MAILS140 AOORCSSS
U.S. COAST GUARD (G-NBR/ 14)
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD WASHO
PH0NE 202-426-0942

TH-2
27 JAN 1981

Honorable Richard Frank
Director, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
6001 Executive Boulevard
Rockville, Maryland 20852

Dear Mr. Frank:

The Coast Guard is conducqtqina an investigation of a possibly obstructive bridge
across the Atchafalaya River (Berwick Bay) near Morgan City, Louisiana. As
part of. the@ investigation, it is desired to conduct a current study of the area. I
am requesting your assistance. in determi2qniFq;g survey requirements and in
developing, a- work statement. It would also be desirable to discuss various
contracting sources, including the possibility of NOAA conducting the survey on
behalf of the Coast Guard. Dr. Henry Frey was referred to as a possible source
of assistance within NOAA.

Your assistance in this matter is greatly aqepreciaqted. Should you desire-
additional information, Mr. George Entwistle of my staff. may be reached by
telephone on 426-0942.

Sincerely,

A. T. MESCHTER
Acting Chief, Bridge A ministration
Division
By direction of the Commandant

I IT
0qrinistratic

qf 64q700q;`q-qC

It's a qiq84qw we
can Uwe with.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

FROM: C3x2 - Melvin J. Umbach
C2x2 - Melvyn C. Grunthal

SUBJECT: Trip Report - Report of Meetings: National Ocean Survev Real-Time
Marine Navigation Data Task Team at:

(1) Humboldt Bay, California;
(2) San Francisco Marine Exchange;
(3) Portland, Oregon Port Authority;
@4) Anchorage, Alaska; and
(5) Valdez, Alaska.

PURPOSE: The purposes of the meetings were to assess the degree of interest
of port authorities and potential users in real-time marine
navigational data, and to determine their willingness to collaborate
with the National Ocean Survey (NOS) in defininq performance
requirements.

The NOS Task Taam presented the N OAA goals and objectives to provide
real-time marine navigation data to improve the operational
efficiency and safety of our Nation's major lake and seaports. Our
discussions focused on the NOS nautical chart diqital data base
(AIS), and on real-time water level, current, wave, and reteoro-
logical information. Various potential applications and the
versatility of these data using available and rapidly developing new
technology, with emphasis on the local environment, were discussed
in detail. The user charge issue was discussed.

1. The Humboldt Bay meeting was held at Eureka, California, on May 12,
1982.

Humboldt Ba 'y is a 1arge estuarine baY (second largest bay in California)-
with a large runoff and a dancerous-bar. The diurnal tidal range within the
bay is 6 to 7 feet. The port serves lumber and paper exporters (it is the
largest wood product exporter in California.), and boasts an active fishing and
recreation fleet. Humboldt Bay also has a budding mariculture industry.
Although Humboldt Bay is not a large port in terms of total tonnage, the Task
Team thought that it was important to visit the port for several reasons:
. (a) The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Corservation District
(HBHR&CD) the port operator, showed a high degree of interest.
(b) PORTS (Port Objectives for Real-Time Systems) could have
environmental, as well as navigational, implications in Humboldt Bav.
(c) Humboldt Say shares problems with several ports along the northern
California to Washington coastline.

(d) We already planned to be in the 3rea San Francisco.

Oceanographic/Meteorological Parameters

Tides and Water Levels

The participants at the meeting expressed a strong interest in real-time
tidal information.

Present tidal and tidal current predictions are not accurate. This was
attributed to major hydrological changes which have taken place in the bay
over the past few years.

The port's major carrier, Star Shipping, regularly brings ships with a 35
feet 4 inches draft (27,000 tons) over a ba@ dredged to 35 feet. They expect
to begin using 39 feet 6 inches draft ships (42,000 tons) in the near future.
If these ships cannot be operated economically at less than full capacity in
Humboldt Bay, Star may have to drop the bay as a port of call and move to San
Francisco. Neither Star nor HBHR&CD wanted this.

Real-Time Currents

A strong interest in real-time currents was shown at the meeting.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) conducted a circulatory survey of
Humboldt Bay, in conjunction with Scripps and Humboldt State Univeirsities, to
establish a computer model of the bay.

The Regional Water Quality Council conducted a circulatory dye test in
April 1982.

A circulatory survey of Humboldt Bay is scheduled for FY 1983.

Waves

The bar crossing at Humboldt Bay entrance is very dangerous - three to
five fatalities per year on the average. The participants at the meeting
thought that the bar had the highest fatality rate per crossing of any west
coast bar.

The group noted that wave and swell conditions tended to be worse north
of Cape Mendocino than they were to the south and that wave information to the
north was often very sketchy.

A U.S. Coast Guard monster navigation buoy is deployed off Blunt's Reef
near Cape Mendocino. It might be possible to instrument this buoy to provide
oceanographic and meteorological information.

Fog

The participants thought that better information on fog conditions and
better short-term fog forecasts woul d be useful.

Nautical Charting

The group expressed a strong need for,a hydrographic survey - they were
concerned that the nautical charts were not-updated or revised in a timely
manner; i.e., a pier which was constructed,in 197/2 is not yet on the Humboldt
Say chart.

Dr. James Gast, a member of the HBHR&CO and the head of the Department-of
Oceanography at Humboldt State University, suggested that MOS should put the
LORAN C lattice on the Humboldt Bay chart.

Miscellaneous

The group noted that safety of navigation was critical since chlorine, a
highly toxic gas, was brought to area pulp and paper mills by ship.

Humboldt Bay is a port of refuge for recreation and fishing boats during
heavy storms,. particularly in the summer. Five to six hundred Goats might-be
crowded. into the. bay during such a storm-.

Workshop

Humboldt Say was very interested in a workshop, but did not feel that
they were large enough-to justify their own. They would prefer not to be
included.with San Francisco/SoutherTi California.
They fe'It that it was imoortant,to have a'representation from the fishing
industry and suggested that October/Movember would be the best time for
fishing interests to be.represented.

The Chief Executive@of the port offered to act as a local contact for
planning purposes.

Attendees:

Name Organizatiom

Charles F. Gulbe Star Shipping
Paul F. Hoey Humboldt Bay Bar Pilots
James A. Gast Commissioner;
Humboldt Say Harbor, Recreation, and
Conservation District
Jack Alderson Chief Executive Officer;
Humboldt Say Harbor, Recr*eation, and
Conservation District
Melvyn C. Grunthal NOAAINOS, U.S. Oepartment of Commerce
Melvin J. Umbach NOAA/NOS, U.S. Department of Commerce

2. The San Francisco meeting was held at the offices of the San Francisco
Marine Exchange on May 13, 1982.

The San Francisco Bay complex consists of 9 major ports on San Francisco
Say with a total of about 60 million tons of commerce in 1979. This makes it
one of the ten largest port complexes in the United States. The San Francisco
Marine Exchange (the equivalent of MAPONY in New York) set up the meeting For
us. The results of this meeting were rather depressing. Although we had a
good turnout and a relatively good representation, the discussion centered
around the cost of the system, cost/benefit ratios, and public versus private
dissemination of data. We tried to impress the attendees that we were not yet
ready to discuss these problems. However, we were not successful in steering
the discussion to user needs and, therefore, did not obtain much useful input.

The following items were raised at the meeting:

(a) There was a general consensus that real-time water level (tide) and
current information would be useful. Lesser interest was shown in real-time
wave data.

(b) The National Weather Service (NWS) hydrological river forecasts are
more accurate than the NOS predicted tides 1: or determining water levels above
New York Point (approximately 40 miles inland near Pittsburg, California).
(c) Mr. Robert Langer, Executive Director of the Marin Exchange,
requested a comparison OT actual versus predicted tides for San Francisco Bay.
He also requested the results of the cost/benefit study which MAPONY of New
York conducted.

(d) The group was very strong in their desire for system costs, good
cost/benefit data, and a determination of the point at which public
responsibilities end and private enterprise begins.

Attendees:

Name Organization

Thomas McCarthy Thomas McCarthy & Associates
David Greenfield American Shipper Magazine
Frank C. Boerger Consulting Engineer
Cdr. 7im Johnson U.S. Coast Guard - Aids to Maviation
rapt. Paul Nichiporuk U.S. Coast Guard - Marine Safety
Capt. R. Sommer U.S. Coast Guard - Marine Safety
Capt. E. C. Greething SOH10 - Port Captain
Cdr. J. L. Shanoner U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service
Eugene Serex Port of Richmond
Peter Mel Hughes Port of Redwood City
Jack Lambert Port oF Oak and
Capt. H. T. Zicbro Marine Operations - Matson Naval Company
Gil Anderson Operator Engineers Local Union 3 - San
Francisco

Plame Organization
Paul Janota Environmental Research and Technology, Inc.
COMSAT'- Concord, Massacusetts
Barbara Katz University of California - Sea Grant
Robert Langner Executive Director, -
San Francisco Marine Exchance
Cdr. Melvyn C. Gunthal NOAA/NOS, U.S. Department of Commerce
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach NOAA/MOS, U.S. Department of Commerce.

3. The Portland meeting was held at the Port of Portland offices on May 14,
1982.

The lower Willamette and Columbia Rivers below Portland, Oregon,
constitute one of the largest port complexes in the United States with an
annual (1979 figures) commerce of approximately 47 million tons. Although
Portland is by far the largest port with about 60 percent of the total
commerce, other Oregon and Washington ports also handle significant tonnage.
Turnout at the meeting was good with five different ports, the COE, the U.S.
Coast Guard, and the Columbia River Pilots represented. The response to our
presentation was very good with the following points being raised.

Oceanographic/Meteorological Parameters

Tides and Water Levels

Real-time water level information would be useful from the mouth of the
river to Portland, about 102 miles. The river pilots presently deter-mine
water depth by reading tide staffs located at various points along the river.
Unfortunately, these staffs are not visible at night or during periods of low
visibility.
The flood tide advances up the river at approximately the same speed as
the larger ships. Therefore, the pilot can "ride" the Flood tide up the
river,taking advantage of the deeper water. Unfortunately, outbound vessels

must encounter at least one low tide during 'heir transit from Portland to the
ocean. The pilots must therefore schedule their departure to arrive at the
most critical point along the river at high tide for their deePer draft
vessals.

Currants

Real-time current information would be useful at specific sites along the
river, e.g., the Port of riwaco, near Longview, and at a bridge in Portland.

Waves

Real-time wave information would be beneficial to: Commercial carriers,
commercial fishermen and recreational boaters.

Real-time wave information at the Columbia River Bar is critical for safe
bar crossirgs. Visual observation is presently the best method to determine
the danger of crossing the bar. Unfortunately, visual observation is not
effertive at night and the bar might be improperly closed due to lack of
accurate wave information.

Nautical Charting

A low level of interest was shown in. real-time on a nautical
chart background.

Charts need to be updated and revised more frequently. Terminal 6 on the
Willamette River has been in use for 6 years, but is not yet on the chart.

The river pilots use COE river survey charts For navigation - they are a
much larger scale than NOAA charts. We have found this technique in use in
several other areas.

Concern was expressed over-the assignment of-liability in case of a
grounding or collision if an "electronic." chart was used.

Miscellaneous

The COE was concerned about coordinating 'the collection or wave
information - what is..NOAA's responsibility and what is the COE's
responsibility. Or. Laodolph Baer, NOS Coastal Waves Program, in7Ormed us
that this potential problem has already been resolved and has furnished us
copies of the-NOAA/COE agreement.

Several participants expressed a desire for more information regarding
the. costs and the, development timeframe for a real*-time system.

Mel Maki of COE'complimented Mr. Mickey Moss and Lt. Q.g.) Richard Behn
of the Pacific Tides Party for their outstanding work in assisting COE
personnel on the Columbia River prototype real-time tide system.

Workshop

Both the Port of-gort'land and the Portland District of the'COE expressed
a-strong,interest in having a workshop for the Real-Time Marine @,Iavigation
Data System and being one-of the-ports at which a real-time svst&-m is
installed.

The Port of Portland,considers the Columbia Riv@!@ to be unique and
believes that a workshop should be-held for those parts alonc the river.

Attendees:

Name Organization

iNlr. Church Port of Portland
Lon Rasmussen Port-of Ilwaco
Dennis R. Tis.dell Captains Nautical Supplies
Mr. Patella Port of Portland
gave Neset Director, Marine Services,
Port of Portland
Mel iMaki I-_
U.S. Army Corps of Enqireers - Portland
District
Dave Sims U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Portland
District
Vuris Jurisons U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Portland
District
Dick Lawrence Port of Vancouver
Jack Patterson U.S. Coast Guard
Ma rk I
Nichols River Pilots
Bill Bach Port of Portland
Ogden Beeman Ogden Seeman and Associat es

Name Organization

Paul R. Monk Olympic Steamship
Gib Carter Oregon State University;
NOAA Sea Grant Marine Advisory Program
John Fratt Part of Kalama
Lou Rasmussen Part of Kalama
Virgil Warden Port of Longview
Cdr. Melvyn C. Grunthal NOAA/NOS, U.S. Department of Commerce
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach NOAA/INOS, U.S. Department of Commerce

4. The Anchorage meeting was held on May 17, 1982.

Anchorage is a relatively small port in terms of total tonnage
(1.6 million.tons@in 1979); however, its small size belies its actual
importance. It is the major receiving point for waterborne-commerce into
Alaska.(1979 figures), and the.city is of significant political influence
within the state.

The port of Anchorage is located att upper Cook Inlet on the southeast
side of Knik Arm about 175 miles.from the entrance to the inlet. The diurnal
rance of the tide at Anchorace is 29 feet with an observed extreme low water
of 6.5 feet below mean T-ower'low water. Stro"ng currents and swirls in the
Anchorage area make navigation difficult. Flood currents of 1.5 knots and ebb
currents of 2.5 knots are present near the port facilities and currents of up
to 6 knots occur in mid-channel.

Shoals near and in the approaches to Anchorage shift radically from year
to,year. Ice may be a problem from November through April, but the inlet
rarely freezes because of the large tidal range.

Oceanographic/Meteorological ParameteriL

Tides and Water Levels

Commercial shipping organizations expressed a strong interest in
real-time wa@er level information. Determ*ination of high water is critical
for'scheduling vessel arrival and departure because of the shoals in the
approaches to Anchorage- A !-hour shift due to hydrological or meteorological
factors can mean a 5-feet discrepancy between the Predicted tide and the
actual water level.

Currents

The local tug operator stiated-that real-time current information would be
useful, particularly in the area near the.Anchorace wharfis. The currents in
this area are often unpredictable, with slack water immediately adjacent to a
strong current. The Coast Pilot notes that an eddy flows uo Knilk 'Irm during
an ebb tide.

Real-time current information,and short-term current predictions would be
useful along the entire 175-mile length of the approach up Cook Inlet to
Anchorage to determine transit times.

Waves

Although no one expressed a need for wave information at Anchoraae, a
comment was made that the State of Alaska Lind the COE were gathering wave
information near Kodiak for desicn of port 1@acilities.

ice

Alt'houch upper Cook Inlet does not freeze solid, ice can still be a
danger. Ships calling at Anchorage during the winter should have reinforced

hulls and protected screws. Real-time information about open water and ice
thickness would be useful.

Nautical Chartqina

The group thought that the Anchorage charts needed to be updated more
frequently. Because of the relatively Tow level of vessel traffic, real-time
positioning and the use of electronic-charts for navigation were not thought
to be necessary at "his time.

Miscellaneous

Any real-time system should be kept inexpensive.

The question was raised as to the possibility of adjusting the predicted
tide tables by calculating and applying correction factors for wind speed and
direction, air pressure, runoff, etc. This concept had been investigated
previously by NOS and found to be wanting - it is likely less expensive and
simpler to measure the actual water level than to calculate and apply the
correctors.

Ice will complicate the placement of sensors to measure real-time data
bottom-mounted sensors may be necessary.

Attendees:

Name Organization

Ken Hippe Advance Vessel Agency
John Ball University of Alaska, NOAA Sea 'Grant Marire
Advisory Program
Jack Brown Part of Anchorage
Jim Nelson Sea-Land
Ed Hoffman Sea-Land
Doug Tipton Sea-Land
Paul Sequin U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
W. 0. McKinney Port Director,
Port of Anchorage
Ed. Hanzuk Totem Ocean Trailer Express
Ethan Bradford Butler Aviation (Petroleum Handling)
Carl Anderson Cook Inlet Tug and Barge (Pacific Wind)
Cdr. Melvyn C. Gruntthal NOAA/NDS, U.S. Department of Commerce
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach NOAA/NDS, U.S. Department of Commerce

@z. The Val-dez meeting was held on iMay 18, 1982.

Port Valdez is the name given to the body of water extending from Valdez
Narrows to the head of the bay. The-city of Valdez and the Valdez Marine
Terminal lie near the head of Port I/aldez with the-city on the north side and
the terminal on the-south side.. The Valdez Marine Terminal is the terminus of'
the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline. In 1979 Valdez handled more than 65 million tons
of shipping (seventh largest in the United States in 1979), nearly all of
which was crude petroleum shipped outbound.

Valdez is the northernmost ice-free Port in North America. However, ice
calving.off nearby glaciers creates an cccasional hazard. 'The aPproaches to
Valdez are very deep with a minimum of obstructions. The diurnal range of the
tide at Valdez is 12 feet and the tidal currents at both Valdez and Valdez
Narrows are too light and variable to be predicted. Unfortunatel,/, nontidal
currents are appreciable at,thehead of -he bay and are strong enough at
Valdez Marrows to affect the low-speed maneuvering of deep-draft vessels.

Oceanographic/Meteorologica-1 Parameters

Tides and Water Levels

There appears to be no need for real-time water level information because
of the extremely deep.water in the-approaches to Valdez.

Currents

A circulatory survey by the McARTHUR during 1976 through 1978 found that
tiaal currents in Valdez Narrows are too weak and variable to be predicted.

The U.S. Coast Guard and@SPC Shipping (SOHIO), however, are extremely
interest-ad in the nontidal currents for search and rescue and possible oil
spill clean-up-operations. Real-time current information also would be useful
in predicting the paths of icebergs which calve off glaciers near the
approaches to Valdez..

Real-time.currents also may be useful for docking and undocking
operations - unfortunately the Pilots ssociation was not represented at the
meeting, so we do not know how useful such inf@rmation would be.

Waves

Although wave information is not needed by shipping concerns within Port
Valdez, real-time wave. information in the Gulf of @laska would be beneficial.
Even the Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC) delay in Prince Williams Sound
awaiting better weather conditions in the gulf.

j
Weather

I ts are needed.
Better weather forecast.

Nautical Charting

No need was expressed for real-time positioning or electronic charts for
navigation.

Area charts need to be updated for fishing and recreation - they are
still in error from the 1964 earthquake.

Miscellaneous

Valdez is very concerned about tsunami.

Fifty-two to sixty VLCCs call at Valdez each month.

portant; VLCCs with drafts of
Water level information may become more im
78 feet may begin calling at the Valdez Marine Terminal . Berths 3, 4, and 5
at the terminal show depths of from 75 to 87 feet alongside.

Attendees:-

Name Organization

G. A. Zoet Port Director,
City of Valdez
Steve Kelly SPC Shipping Inc. (SOHIO)
.Fred Hanson City of Valdez - Engineering -
Rob Ridgway City of Valdez - Planning
Cdr. Mike Cavett - U.S. Coast Guard
Lee Doering SPC Shipping Inc. (SOHIO)
Jim Woople Alyeska - Port Captain
Cdr. Melvyn C. Grunthal NOAA/NOS, U.S. Department of Commerce
Capt. Melvin J. Umbach NOAA/NOS, U.S. Department of Commerce

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY
Rockville, Md. 20852
July 19, 1982 C2x2:tICG

TO: MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

FROM: C3x2 - Melvin J. Umbach
C2x2 - Melvyn C. Grunthal

SUBJECT: Trip Report- Meeting of the National Ocean Survey Real-Time
Marine Navigation Task Team with the Mariners' Advisory
Committee for the Delaware Bay and River

The purpose of the meeting was to assess the degree of interest of
port authorities and potential users in real-time marine navigational data,
and to determine their willingness to collaborate with National Ocean
Survey (NOS) in defining performance requirements.

The NOS Task Team presented the NOAA goals and objectives to provide
real-time marine navigation data to imp@ove the operational efficiency
and safety of our Nation's major lakes and seaports. Our discussions
focused on the NOS nautical chart digital- data base (AIS), and on real-
time water level, current, wave, and meteorological information.
Various potential applications and the versatility of these data using
available and rapidly developing new technology, with emphisis on the
local environment, were discussed in detail. The user charge issue was
discussed.

The meeting was held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on June 3,
1982, during the scheduled quarterly meeting of the Mariners' Advisory
Committee at the offices of the Pilots' Association. Turnout at the
meeting was very good and response to the presentation was generally
favorable. A subcommittee was formed to further investigate the needs
for real-time data.

The Delaware River port complex is the second largest in the
United States in terms of total tonnage at 164.6 million tons (1979
figures), ranking below only the Mississippi River complex and being
approximately the same size as the Port of New York and the Houston/
Texas City/Galveston complex. Philadelphia is the major port on the

Delaware River and is 86.5 nautical miles above the Delaware Capes.
Channel depths to 40 feet are authorized to a point 24.5 nautical
miles above the Philadelphia. The mean tidal range at Philadelphia
is 5.9 feet. Fog can be expected during the autumn and winter.

OCEANOGRAPHIC/METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS

Tides and Water Levels

The need for real-time tidal information was strongly endorsed- -The
Pilots' Association, led by Captain Paul Ives, established a 3-gage
real-time tide network in 1963. Although it is relatively simple,
it is effective--the statement was made that without the system it would
be impossible to bring a number of the present larger vessels to
Philadelphia.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates a real-time network of
tide gages in the C&D Canal; this canal links the Delaware River with
the Chesapeake Bay.

Currents

Current information at site specific points may be useful.
Waves Interest was shown in obtaining wave informati on at the mouth of
Delaware Bay.

The question was raised as to how wave information could be disseminated
to ships.

Weather

As at several prior meetings interest was shown in obtaining better
weather data and better forecast; fog forecasts were raised as a particular
problem.

NAUTICAL CHARTING

The comment was made that better chart updating procedures were needed.

MISCELLANEOUS

We were again asked for any cost/benefit information.

Regulatory changes might be necessary before real-time information
could be used.

The Radio Technical Commission for Marine Services (RTCM) was
suggested as a group to whom we might speak about the real-time
applications of marine navigational data. The RTCM has experience
in coordinating the efforts of Federal agencies with the needs of
user groups and the technology of private industry.

Captain Paul L. Ives, an active member of the Pilots' Association
and the Delaware Bay and River Mariners' Advisory Group and the Secretary-
'Treasure of The American Pilot's Association, was a very strong supporter
of NOAA and NOS. He is also knowledgeable and articulate--he would be
an excellent contact for any marine related activity in the Delaware
River and Bay.

I
I
I
I
I
DATE DUE I
i
!- I
I
I
I
I I
GAYLORD No. 2333 - IPRINTED IN U.S.A. I
I
I
I
111 1
3 6668 14107 0096 1
1
I