LIST OF FIGURES (continued) 



Page 



Figure 3-6. Apparent thickness of CDM at the Seawolf Mound (contour 



interval = 0.25 m). Red line represents extent of UDM deposit 



(0.25 m contour) 49 



Figure 3-7. Postcap bathymetric survey of the Seawolf Mound area conducted in 



September 1997 50 



Figure 3-8. Total thickness of capped Seawolf Mound (contour interval = 0.25 m) as 

 measureed in September 1997 compared to the February 1996 footprint 

 overlain on baseline bathymetry 51 



Figure 3-9. Thicknesses of apparent consolidation and accumulation of material over the 



seawolf Mound, September 1997 (contour interval = 0.25 m) 53 



Figure 3-10. Bathymetric chart of the 1000 x 1000 m Seawolf Mound survey area, 



July 1998 54 



Figure 3-11. Depth difference comparison between 1998 and 1995 1000 x 1000 m 



bathymetric surveys showing the Seawolf Mound 55 



Figure 3-12. Depth difference comparison between 1998 and 1997 1000 x 1000 m 



bathymetric surveys showing minor consolidation and accumulation 56 



Figure 3-13. Location of Seawolf REMOTS® stations relative to areal extent (0.25 m) 



of Seawolf dredged material 58 



Figure 3-14. Map of average OSI values at the Seawolf Mound REMOTS® stations in 



1997 63 



Figure 3-15. REMOTS® sediment profile photographs from 1997 showing variation in 

 CDM over the Seawolf Mound (glacial gray clay at the center station and 

 brown sand and silt at 300E A) 64 



Figure 3-16. Detection of glacial clay at Station 300E in 1997 provides evidence of capping 



material 65 



Figure 3-17. Seawolf Mound REMOTS® stations showing variable surface conditions 67 



Figure 3-18. Mean RPD depths (cm) over the Seawolf Mound in 1998 68 



