2018 USGS Lidar: Calumet, Clark, Fond du Lac, Green Lake, Price, and Waupaca, WI
Data Set (DS) | OCM Partners (OCMP)GUID: gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:71685 | Updated: January 2, 2024 | Published / External
Item Identification
Title: | 2018 USGS Lidar: Calumet, Clark, Fond du Lac, Green Lake, Price, and Waupaca, WI |
---|---|
Short Name: | 2018 WI statewide m10001 |
Status: | Completed |
Publication Date: | 2019-05-28 |
Abstract: |
This is a multi-county lidar project in Wisconsin and may be referred to as the 2018 USGS Wisconsin Statewide collection. Coverages by county are: Calumet County = 336 square miles; Clark County = 1228 square miles; Fond Du Lac County = 780 square miles; Green Lake County = 386 square miles; Price County = 1288 square miles; and Waupaca County = 773 square miles. The lidar data was acquired at a nominal point spacing (NPS) of 0.7 meters and a single swath nominal point density (NPD) of 2.0. Project specifications are based on county requirements and on the U.S. Geological Survey National Geospatial Program Lidar Base Specification, Version 1.2. The data were developed based on a county specific projections and vertical datum of NAVD88 - Geoid12B (Feet). Lidar data were acquired using the Leica ALS80 SN8227 Sensor. Acquisition occurred with leaves absent from deciduous trees, when no snow was present on the ground, and with rivers at or below normal levels.
The original data were transformed to Entwine Point Tile format in Web Mercator projection. The Digital Coast Data Access Viewer is referrencing this data for custom processing and this metadata was created to support the Data Access Viewer. |
Purpose: |
This data, along with its derivatives, is the result of a countywide elevation mapping with cooperative partnerships from CalumetCounty, Wisconsin DOA, and the USGS 3DEP program. This data was produced from lidar data collected in May 2018, which was processed and delivered in 2019. |
Supplemental Information: |
The following are the USGS lidar fields in JSON: {
"ldrinfo" : {
"ldrspec" : "- National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2", "ldrsens" : "ALS80_SN8227", "ldrmaxnr" : "4", "ldrnps" : "0.71", "ldrdens" : "2.0", "ldranps" : "0.71", "ldradens" : "2.0", "ldrfltht" : "2000", "ldrfltsp" : "150", "ldrscana" : "36", "ldrscanr" : "50", "ldrpulsr" : "300", "ldrpulsd" : "4", "ldrpulsw" : "0.48", "ldrwavel" : "1020", "ldrmpia" : "1", "ldrbmdiv" : "0.22", "ldrswatw" : "1457", "ldrswato" : "30", "ldrgeoid" : "National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Geoid12B" }, "ldrinfo" : {
"ldrspec" : "USGS-NGP Base Lidar Specification v1.2", "ldrsens" : "Leica ALS80_SN8227", "ldrmaxnr" : "4", "ldrnps" : "0.71", "ldrdens" : "2.0", "ldranps" : "0.71", "ldradens" : "2.0", "ldrfltht" : "2000", "ldrfltsp" : "150", "ldrscana" : "36", "ldrscanr" : "50", "ldrpulsr" : "300", "ldrpulsd" : "4", "ldrpulsw" : "0.48", "ldrwavel" : "1020", "ldrmpia" : "1", "ldrbmdiv" : "0.22", "ldrswatw" : "1457", "ldrswato" : "30", "ldrgeoid" : "National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Geoid12B" }, "lasinfo" : {
"lasver" : "1.4", "lasprf" : "6", "laswheld" : "Withheld (ignore) points were identified in these files using the standard LAS Withheld bit.", "lasolap" : "Swath "overage" points were identified in these files using the standard LAS overlap bit.", "lasintr" : "11", "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "1", "clasitem" : "Processed, but Unclassified" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "2", "clasitem" : "Bare Earth Ground" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "5", "clasitem" : "High Vegetation" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "6", "clasitem" : "Buildings" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "7", "clasitem" : "Low Noise" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "9", "clasitem" : "Water" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "17", "clasitem" : "Bridge Deck" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "18", "clasitem" : "High Noise" }, "lasclass" : {
"clascode" : "20", "clasitem" : "Ignored Ground" } }} |
Keywords
Theme Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords |
EARTH SCIENCE
|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords |
EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > TOPOGRAPHY > TERRAIN ELEVATION
|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords |
EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > COASTAL PROCESSES > COASTAL ELEVATION
|
ISO 19115 Topic Category |
elevation
|
Spatial Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords |
CONTINENT > NORTH AMERICA > UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords |
CONTINENT > NORTH AMERICA > UNITED STATES OF AMERICA > WISCONSIN
|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords |
VERTICAL LOCATION > LAND SURFACE
|
UNCONTROLLED | |
None | Calumet County |
Instrument Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Instrument Keywords |
LIDAR > Light Detection and Ranging
|
Platform Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Platform Keywords |
Airplane > Airplane
|
Physical Location
Organization: | Office for Coastal Management |
---|---|
City: | Charleston |
State/Province: | SC |
Data Set Information
Data Set Scope Code: | Data Set |
---|---|
Data Set Type: | Elevation |
Maintenance Frequency: | None Planned |
Data Presentation Form: | Model (digital) |
Distribution Liability: |
Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of NOAA, the Office for Coastal Management or its partners |
Data Set Credit: | USGS; Ayres Associates |
Support Roles
Data Steward
Date Effective From: | 2023 |
---|---|
Date Effective To: | |
Contact (Organization): | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) |
Address: |
2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston, SC 29405-2413 |
Email Address: | coastal.info@noaa.gov |
Phone: | (843) 740-1202 |
URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Distributor
Date Effective From: | 2023 |
---|---|
Date Effective To: | |
Contact (Organization): | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) |
Address: |
2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston, SC 29405-2413 |
Email Address: | coastal.info@noaa.gov |
Phone: | (843) 740-1202 |
URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Metadata Contact
Date Effective From: | 2023 |
---|---|
Date Effective To: | |
Contact (Organization): | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) |
Address: |
2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston, SC 29405-2413 |
Email Address: | coastal.info@noaa.gov |
Phone: | (843) 740-1202 |
URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Point of Contact
Date Effective From: | 2023 |
---|---|
Date Effective To: | |
Contact (Organization): | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) |
Address: |
2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston, SC 29405-2413 |
Email Address: | coastal.info@noaa.gov |
Phone: | (843) 740-1202 |
URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Extents
Currentness Reference: | Ground Condition |
---|
Extent Group 1
Extent Description: |
Calumet County |
---|
Extent Group 1 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -88.889287 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -88.406008 | |
N° Bound: | 44.245009 | |
S° Bound: | 43.890201 |
Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-05-13 |
End: | 2018-05-16 |
Extent Group 2
Extent Description: |
Clark County |
---|
Extent Group 2 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -90.926146 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -90.310355 | |
N° Bound: | 45.035393 | |
S° Bound: | 44.420438 |
Extent Group 2 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-05-05 |
End: | 2018-05-12 |
Extent Group 3
Extent Description: |
Fond du Lac County |
---|
Extent Group 3 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -88.889287 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -88.156964 | |
N° Bound: | 43.939125 | |
S° Bound: | 43.541562 |
Extent Group 3 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-05-05 |
End: | 2018-05-07 |
Extent Group 4
Extent Description: |
Green Lake County |
---|
Extent Group 4 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -89.24686 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -88.882127 | |
N° Bound: | 43.984743 | |
S° Bound: | 43.630452 |
Extent Group 4 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-04-28 |
End: | 2018-04-30 |
Extent Group 5
Extent Description: |
Price County |
---|
Extent Group 5 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -90.682577 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -90.03593 | |
N° Bound: | 45.983786 | |
S° Bound: | 45.375024 |
Extent Group 5 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-05-11 |
End: | 2018-05-17 |
Extent Group 6
Extent Description: |
Waupaca County |
---|
Extent Group 6 / Geographic Area 1
W° Bound: | -89.22913 | |
---|---|---|
E° Bound: | -88.603886 | |
N° Bound: | 44.683005 | |
S° Bound: | 44.240987 |
Extent Group 6 / Time Frame 1
Time Frame Type: | Range |
---|---|
Start: | 2018-05-08 |
End: | 2018-05-13 |
Spatial Information
Spatial Resolution
Horizontal Distance: | 0.7 Meter |
---|
Spatial Representation
Representations Used
Grid: | No |
---|---|
Vector: | Yes |
Text / Table: | No |
TIN: | No |
Stereo Model: | No |
Video: | No |
Vector Representation 1
Point Object Present?: | Yes |
---|---|
Point Object Count: | 80654841245 |
Reference Systems
Reference System 1
Coordinate Reference System |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Reference System 2
Coordinate Reference System |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Access Information
Security Class: | Unclassified |
---|---|
Data Access Procedure: |
Data is available online for bulk or custom downloads |
Data Access Constraints: |
None |
Data 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. |
Distribution Information
Distribution 1
Start Date: | 2023-12-15 |
---|---|
End Date: | Present |
Download URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=10001/details/10001 |
Distributor: | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) (2023 - Present) |
File Name: | Customized Download |
Description: |
Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc. A new metadata will be produced to reflect your request using this record as a base. Change to an orthometric vertical datum is one of the many options. |
Distribution Format: | Not Applicable |
Compression: | Zip |
URLs
URL 1
URL: | https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/ |
---|---|
Name: | NOAA's Office for Coastal Management (OCM) Data Access Viewer (DAV) |
URL Type: |
Online Resource
|
File Resource Format: | HTML |
Description: |
The Data Access Viewer (DAV) allows a user to search for and download elevation, imagery, and land cover data for the coastal U.S. and its territories. The data, hosted by the NOAA Office for Coastal Management, can be customized and requested for free download through a checkout interface. An email provides a link to the customized data, while the original data set is available through a link within the viewer. |
URL 2
URL: | https://prd-tnm.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html?prefix=StagedProducts/Elevation/metadata/WI_Statewide_2018_A18/ |
---|---|
Name: | Reports by County |
URL Type: |
Online Resource
|
File Resource Format: | pdf; shapefile |
Description: |
Various reports and metadata by county from the contractor and USGS. |
URL 3
URL: | https://usgs.entwine.io/data/view.html?r=[%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Calumet_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Clark_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Clark_TL_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_FondduLac_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_GreenLake_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Price_2018/ept.json%22,%22https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Waupaca_2018/ept.json%22] |
---|---|
Name: | USGS 3D View |
URL Type: |
Online Resource
|
Description: |
Link to view the point cloud, using the Entwine Point Tile (EPT) format, in the 3D Potree viewer. |
Technical Environment
Description: |
Terrasolid |
---|
Data Quality
Vertical Positional Accuracy: |
The project specifications require that only Non-Vegetated Vertical Accuracy (NVA) be computed for raw lidar point cloud swath files. The required accuracy (ACCz) is: 19.6 cm at a 95% confidence level, derived according to NSSDA, i.e., based on RMSE of 10 cm in the “bare earth” and "urban" land cover classes. The NVA was tested with 29 checkpoints located in bare earth and urban (non-vegetated) areas. These check points were not used in the calibration or post processing of the lidar point cloud data. The checkpoints were distributed throughout the project area and were surveyed using GPS techniques. See survey report for additional survey methodologies. Elevations from the unclassified lidar surface were measured for the x,y location of each check point. Elevations interpolated from the lidar surface were then compared to the elevation values of the surveyed control points. AccuracyZ has been tested to meet 19.6 cm or better Non-Vegetated Vertical Accuracy at 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA); assessed and reported using National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP)/ASRPS Guidelines.Quantitative value: 0.07 m, Test that produced the value: Calumet County: Tested 0.059 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 29 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Clark County: Tested 0.065 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 65 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Fond Du Lac County County: Tested 0.079 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 61 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Green Lake County: Tested 0.066 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 33 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Price County: Tested 0.079 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 68 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Waupaca County: Tested 0.087 meters NVA at a 95% confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). The NVA of the raw lidar point cloud swath files was calculated against TINs derived from the final calibrated and controlled swath data using 60 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Weighted average of counties = 0.07 meters. |
---|---|
Completeness Report: |
These LAS data files include all data points collected. No points have been removed or excluded. A visual qualitative assessment was performed to ensure data completeness. No void areas or missing data exist. The raw point cloud is complete and data passes Vertical Accuracy specifications. |
Conceptual Consistency: |
Data covers the entire area specified for this project. |
Data Management
Have Resources for Management of these Data Been Identified?: | Yes |
---|---|
Approximate Percentage of Budget for these Data Devoted to Data Management: | Unknown |
Do these Data Comply with the Data Access Directive?: | Yes |
Actual or Planned Long-Term Data Archive Location: | NCEI-NC |
How Will the Data Be Protected from Accidental or Malicious Modification or Deletion Prior to Receipt by the Archive?: |
Data is backed up to cloud storage. |
Lineage
Sources
Calumet EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Calumet_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Calumet EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Clark County EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Clark_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Clark County EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Clark County Tribal Lands EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Clark_TL_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Clark County Tribal Lands EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Fond Du Lac EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_FondduLac_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Fond Du Lac EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Green Lake EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_GreenLake_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Green Lake EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Price County EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Price_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Price County EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Waupaca County EPT
Contact Role Type: | Publisher |
---|---|
Contact Type: | Organization |
Contact Name: | USGS |
Citation URL: | https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/WI_Waupaca_2018/ept.json |
Citation URL Name: | Waupaca County EPT |
Citation URL Description: |
Entwine Point Tiles |
Process Steps
Process Step 1
Description: |
The boresight for each lift was done individually as the solution may change slightly from lift to lift. The following steps describe the Raw Data Processing and Boresight process: 1) Technicians processed the raw data to LAS format flight lines using the final GPS/IMU solution. This LAS data set was used as source data for boresight. 2) Technicians first used Leica LMS software to calculate initial boresight adjustment angles based on sample areas selected in the lift. These areas cover calibration flight lines collected in the lift, cross tie and production flight lines. These areas are well distributed in the lift coverage and cover multiple terrain types that are necessary for boresight angle calculation. The technician then analyzed the results and made any necessary additional adjustment until it is acceptable for the selected areas. 3) Once the boresight angle calculation was completed for the selected areas, the adjusted settings were applied to all of the flight lines of the lift and checked for consistency. The technicians utilized commercial and proprietary software packages to analyze how well flight line overlaps match for the entire lift and adjusted as necessary until the results met the project specifications. 4) Once all lifts were completed with individual boresight adjustment, the technicians checked and corrected the vertical misalignment of all flight lines and also the matching between data and ground truth. The relative accuracy was less than or equal to 7 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 10 cm RMSEz or within swath overlap (between adjacent swaths). 5) The technicians ran a final vertical accuracy check of the boresighted flight lines against the surveyed check points after the z correction to ensure the requirement of NVA = 19.6 cm 95% Confidence Level (Required Accuracy) was met. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. |
---|---|
Process Date/Time: | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 |
Process Step 2
Description: |
LAS Point Cloud Classification: LiDAR data processing for the point cloud deliverable consists of classifying the LiDAR using a combination of automated classification and manual edit/reclassification processes. On most projects the automated classification routines will correctly classify 90-95 percent of the LiDAR points. The remaining 5-10 percent of the bare earth ground class must undergo manual edit and reclassification. Because the classified points serve as the foundation for the Terrain, DEM and breakline products, it is necessary for the QA/QC supervisor to review the completed point cloud deliverables prior to the production of any additional products. The following workflow steps are followed for automated LiDAR classification: 1. Lead technicians review the group of LiDAR tiles to determine which automated classification routines will achieve the best results. Factors such as vegetation density, cultural features, and terrain can affect the accuracy of the automated classification. The lead technicians have the ability to edit or tailor specific routines in order to accommodate the factors mentioned above, and achieve the best results and address errors. 2. Distributive processing is used to maximize the available hardware resources and speed up the automated processing as this is a resource-intensive process. 3. Once the results of the automated classification have been reviewed and passed consistent checks, the supervisor then approves the data tiles for manual classification. The following workflow steps are followed for manual edits of the LiDAR bare earth ground classification: 1. LiDAR technicians review each tile for errors made by the automated routines and correctly address errors any points that are in the wrong classification. By methodically panning through each tile, the technicians view the LiDAR points in profile, with a TIN surface, and as a point cloud. 2. Any ancillary data available, such as Google Earth, is used to identify any features that may not be identifiable as points so that the technician can make the determination to which classification the feature belongs. The QA/QC processes for the LiDAR processing phase consist of: 1. The lead technician reviews all automated classification results and adjust the macros as necessary to achieve the optimal efficiency. This is an iterative process, and the technician may need to make several adjustments to the macros, depending upon the complexity of the features in the area being processed. During the manual editing process, the LiDAR technicians use a system of QA, whereby they check each others edits. This results in several benefits to the process: - There is a greater chance of catching minor blunders - It increases communication between technicians on technique and appearance - Solutions to problems are communicated efficiently - To ensure consistency across the project area, the supervisor reviews the data once the manual editing is complete. For this phase of a project, the following specifications are checked against: • Point cloud - all points must be classified according to the USGS classification standard for LAS. The all-return point cloud must be delivered in fully-compliant LAS version 1.4. • LAS files will use the Spatial Reference Framework according to project specification and all files shall be projected and defined. • General Point classifications: - Class 1. Processed, but unclassified - Class 2. Bare Earth - Class 5. High Vegetation - Class 6. Building - Class 7. Noise - Class 9. Water - Class 17. Bridge Decks - Class 18. High Noise - Class 20. Ignored ground (Breakline proximity) • Outliers, noise, blunders, duplicates, geometrically unreliable points near the extreme edge of the swath, and other points deemed unusable are to be identified using the "Withheld" flag. This applies primarily to points which are identified during pre-processing or through automated post-processing routines. Subsequently identified no |
---|---|
Process Date/Time: | 2019-01-01 00:00:00 |
Process Step 3
Description: |
USGS created Entwine Point Tiles for the counties in Web Mercator projection. NOAA leveraged the data in that format for the Data Access Viewer custom processing. This metadata exists to support that custom processing. |
---|---|
Process Date/Time: | 2023-12-15 00:00:00 |
Process Contact: | NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM) |
Phone (Voice): | (843) 740-1202 |
Email Address: | coastal.info@noaa.gov |
Source: | Calumet EPT |
Catalog Details
Catalog Item ID: | 71685 |
---|---|
GUID: | gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:71685 |
Metadata Record Created By: | Kirk Waters |
Metadata Record Created: | 2023-12-15 18:31+0000 |
Metadata Record Last Modified By: | Kirk Waters |
Metadata Record Last Modified: | 2024-01-02 14:10+0000 |
Metadata Record Published: | 2023-12-15 |
Owner Org: | OCMP |
Metadata Publication Status: | Published Externally |
Do Not Publish?: | N |
Metadata Last Review Date: | 2023-12-15 |
Metadata Review Frequency: | 3 Years |
Metadata Next Review Date: | 2026-12-15 |