gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:49437
eng
UTF8
dataset
OCM Partners
resourceProvider
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
pointOfContact
2024-02-29T00:00:00
ISO 19115-2 Geographic Information - Metadata Part 2 Extensions for imagery and gridded data
ISO 19115-2:2009(E)
2015 NRCS-MDEQ Lidar DEM: Southeast Mississippi QL2
ms2015_nrcs_mdeq_se_DEM_m5166_metadata
2016-12-15
publication
NOAA/NMFS/EDM
49437
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/49437
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Full Metadata Record
View the complete metadata record on InPort for more information about this dataset.
information
https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Citation URL
Online Resource
download
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Citation URL
Online Resource
download
This report contains a comprehensive outline of the Mississippi QL2 and Tupelo QL3 Lidar Processing task order for the United States Geological Survey (USGS). This task is issued under USGS Contract No. G10PC00057, Task Order No. G14PD01046. This task order requires lidar data to be acquired over approximately 4385 square miles. The lidar was collected and processed to meet a maximum Nominal Post Spacing (NPS) of 0.7 meter. The NPS assessment is made against single swath, first return data located within the geometrically usable center portion (typically ~90%) of each swath. The data is a digital elevation model (DEM) created from the lidar point cloud and includes the application of 2-D breaklines and hydroflattening.
This task order also requests the processing of previously collected QL3 data near Tupelo, Mississippi. The lidar was collected and processed to meet a maximum Nominal Post Spacing (NPS) of 1.0 meter. The NPS assessment is made against single swath, first return data located within the geometrically usable center portion (typically ~90%) of each swath.
completed
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
pointOfContact
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
custodian
asNeeded
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid12b/4907/supplemental/ms2015_nrcs_mdeq_southeast_m4907.kmz
This graphic shows the coverage of the 2015 lidar QL2 project in the Southeast of Mississippi.
kmz
DEMs - partner (no harvest)
project
InPort
otherRestrictions
Cite As: OCM Partners, [Date of Access]: 2015 NRCS-MDEQ Lidar DEM: Southeast Mississippi QL2 [Data Date Range], https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/49437.
NOAA provides no warranty, nor accepts any liability occurring from any incomplete, incorrect, or misleading data, or from any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading use of the data. It is the responsibility of the user to determine whether or not the data is suitable for the intended purpose.
otherRestrictions
Access Constraints: None
otherRestrictions
Use Constraints: Users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this data set was collected and some parts of this data may no longer represent actual surface conditions. Users should not use this data for critical applications without a full awareness of its limitations. These data depict the heights at the time of the survey and are only accurate for that time.
otherRestrictions
Distribution Liability: Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of USDA-NRCS, MDEQ, Wooolpert, NOAA, the Office for Coastal Management or its partners.
unclassified
NOAA Data Management Plan (DMP)
NOAA/NMFS/EDM
49437
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inportserve/waf/noaa/nos/ocmp/dmp/pdf/49437.pdf
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Data Management Plan (DMP)
NOAA Data Management Plan for this record on InPort.
information
crossReference
grid
eng; US
elevation
-90.326075
-88.425228
30.997494
31.894581
| Currentness: Ground Condition
2015-01-31
2015-03-03
The lidar point cloud for this data set is available at https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=4907.
The lidar report for this data set is available here:
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid12b/4907/supplemental/ms2015_nrcs_mdeq_southeast_m4907_lidarreport.pdf
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
distributor
https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=5166
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Customized Download
Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc.
download
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/dem/MDEQ_NRCS_SE_DEM_2015_5166/index.html
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Bulk Download
Simple download of data files.
download
dataset
Horizontal Positional Accuracy
None reported; Quantitative Value: 100 meters, Test that produced the value: Horizontal accuracy is not reported in the accuracy report provided. Assumptions of 1 meter.
Vertical Positional Accuracy
The vertical accuracy statistics were calculated by comparison of the lidar bare earth points to the ground surveyed QA/QC points. Mississippi QL2 Lidar was processed and delivered in NAD1983(2011) UTM16, NAVD88 Geoid12A meters. Data deliverables were reprojected and also delivered in NAD1983(2011) UTM15, NAVD88 Geoid12A meters. It should be noted that accuracy analysis was reported for the UTM16 data.; Quantitative Value: 0.150 meters, Test that produced the value: LAS Swath Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) Tested 0.150 meters fundamental vertical accuracy at a 95 percent confidence level, derived according to NSSDA, in open terrain using (RMSEz) x 1.96000 Tested against the TIN using independent check points.; Quantitative Value: 0.162 meters, Test that produced the value: Bare-Earth DEM Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) Tested 0.162 meters fundamental vertical accuracy at a 95 percent confidence level, derived according to NSSDA, in open terrain using (RMSEz) x 1.96000 Tested against the DEM using independent check points.; Quantitative Value: 0.232 meters, Test that produced the value: Bare Earth/Open Terrain Land Cover Classification Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) Tested 0.232 meters supplemental vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile in Bare Earth/Open Terrain. Tested against the DEM.; Quantitative Value: 0.114 meters, Test that produced the value: Urban Land Cover Classification Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) Tested 0.114 meters supplemental vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile in Urban. Tested against the DEM. ; Quantitative Value: 0.238 meters, Test that produced the value: Tall Weeds/Crops Land Cover Classification Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) Tested 0.238 meters supplemental vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile in Tall Weeds/Crops. Tested against the DEM. ; Quantitative Value: 0.249 meters, Test that produced the value: Brush Lands and Trees Land Cover Classification Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) Tested 0.249 meters supplemental vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile in Brush Lands and Trees. Tested against the DEM.; Quantitative Value: 0.237 meters, Test that produced the value: Forested and Fully Grown Land Cover Classification Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) Tested 0.237 meters supplemental vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile in Forested and Fully Grown. Tested against the DEM.; Quantitative Value: 0.232 meters, Test that produced the value: Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA) Tested 0.232 meters consolidated vertical accuracy at the 95th percentile level, derived according to ASPRS Guidelines for Vertical Accuracy Reporting for LiDAR Data. Tested against the DEM. Based on the 95th percentile error in all land cover categories combined.
Completeness Report
The LiDAR data is visually inspected for completeness to ensure that are no gaps between flight lines.
Conceptual Consistency
All formatted data are validated using commercial GIS software to ensure proper formatting and loading prior to delivery.
USGS Contract No. G10PC00057. Task Order No. G12PD000125. Woolpert Order No. 073054
USGS Contract No. G10PC00057, Task Order No. G14PD01046
2015-01-31T00:00:00
The ALS70 calibration and system performance is verified on a periodic basis using Woolpert's calibration range. The calibration range consists of a large building and runway. The edges of the building and control points along the runway have been located using conventional survey methods. Inertial measurement unit (IMU) misalignment angles and horizontal accuracy are calculated by comparing the position of the building edges between opposing flight lines. The scanner scale factor and vertical accuracy is calculated through comparison of LiDAR data against control points along the runway. Field calibration is performed on all flight lines to refine the IMU misalignment angles. IMU misalignment angles are calculated from the relative displacement of features within the overlap region of adjacent (and opposing) flight lines. The raw LiDAR data is reduced using the refined misalignment angles.
2012-01-01T00:00:00
Once the data acquisition and GPS processing phases are complete, the LiDAR data was processed immediately to verify the coverage had no voids. The GPS and IMU data was post processed using differential and Kalman filter algorithms to derive a best estimate of trajectory. The quality of the solution was verified to be consistent with the accuracy requirements of the project.
2015-02-03T00:00:00
When the sensor calibration, data acquisition, and GPS processing phases were complete, the formal data reduction processes by Woolpert lidar specialists included:
- Processed individual flight lines to derive a raw "Point Cloud" LAS file. Matched overlapping flight lines, generated statistics for evaluation comparisons, and made the necessary adjustments to remove any residual systematic error.
- Calibrated LAS files were imported into the task order tiles and initially filtered to create a ground and non-ground class. Then additional classes were filtered as necessary to meet client specified classes.
- Once all project data was imported and classified, survey ground control data was imported and calculated for an accuracy assessment. As a QC measure, Woolpert has developed a routine to generate accuracy statistical reports by comparisons against the TIN and the DEM using surveyed ground control of higher accuracy. The lidar is adjusted accordingly to meet or exceed the vertical accuracy requirements.
- The lidar tiles were reviewed using a series of proprietary QA/QC procedures to ensure it fulfills the task order requirements. A portion of this requires a manual step to ensure anomalies have been removed from the ground class.
- The lidar LAS files are classified into the Default (Class 1), Ground (Class 2), Low Noise (Class 7), Water (Class 9), Ignored Ground (Class 10), Overlap Default (Class 17) and Overlap Ground (Class 18) classifications.
- FGDC Compliant metadata was developed for the task order in .xml format for the final data products.
- The horizontal datum used for the task order was referenced to UTM16N North American Datum of 1983 (2011) and UTM15N North American Datum of 1983 (2011). The vertical datum used for the task order was referenced to NAVD 1988, meters, GEOID12A. Coordinate positions were specified in units of meters.
- Breaklines were compiled defining water bodies and rivers and then used to perform the hydrologic flattening of water bodies, and gradient hydrologic flattening of double line streams and rivers. Lakes, reservoirs and ponds, at a minimum size of 2-acre or greater, were compiled as closed polygons. The closed water bodies were collected at a constant elevation. Rivers and streams, at a nominal minimum width of 30 meters (100 feet), were compiled in the direction of flow with both sides of the stream maintaining an equal gradient elevation. The following steps were used for this process:
1. Woolpert used the newly acquired lidar data to manually draw the hydrologic features in a 2D environment using the lidar intensity and bare earth surface. Open Source imagery was used as reference when necessary.
2. Woolpert utilizes an integrated software approach to combine the lidar data and 2D breaklines. This process "drapes" the 2D breaklines onto the 3D lidar surface model to assign an elevation. A monotonic process is performed to ensure the streams are consistently flowing in a gradient manner. A secondary step within the program verifies an equally matching elevation of both stream edges. The breaklines that characterize the closed water bodies are draped onto the 3D lidar surface and assigned a constant elevation at or just below ground elevation.
3. The lakes, reservoirs and ponds, at a minimum size of 1-acre or greater and streams at a minimum size of 30 meters (100 feet) nominal width, were compiled to meet task order requirements. Figure 4.1 illustrates an example of 30 meters (100 feet) nominal streams identified and defined with hydrologic breaklines. The breaklines defining rivers and streams, at a nominal minimum width of 30 meters (100 feet), were draped with both sides of the stream maintaining an equal gradient elevation.
4. All ground points were reclassified from inside the hydrologic feature polygons to water, class nine (9).
5. All ground points were reclassified from within a buffer along the hydrologic feature breaklines to buffered ground, class ten (10).
6. The lidar gr
2015-12-01T00:00:00
The NOAA Office for Coastal Management received the DEM files from MARIS (Mississippi Automated Resource Information System) via an FTP site. The data was received in UTM zones 15 and 16 horizontal coordinates in meters with vertical coordinates referenced to NAVD88 in meters. The Digital Coast ingested these files in Imagine format into the Data Access Viewer. No specific metadata was found for the DEM on the MARIS site. This metadata was created based on the point cloud metadata and the project report.
2016-11-02T00:00:00