Slide Menu
Search Help Show/Hide Menu
Short Citation:
OCM Partners, 2024: 2013 MDEQ-FEMA Rankin-Simpson Co. Lidar Survey,

Item Identification

Title: 2013 MDEQ-FEMA Rankin-Simpson Co. Lidar Survey
Short Name: ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson_m2595_metadata
Status: Completed
Publication Date: 2013-11-23

Fugro as a subconsultant to MGI was authorized to undertake this project, as a part of Work Order No. 112,

dated November 1, 2012, issued to MGI in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Professional

Services Agreement between MGI and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), dated

February 17, 2004. This Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) dataset is a survey of the Middle Pearl-Strong

River Basin in Rankin and Simpson Counties, Mississippi. The project area consists of approximately 973

square miles.


The acquisition, processing, and delivery of classified point cloud data, LiDAR intensity data, hydro-flattened

breaklines, and bare earth DEM covering Middle Pearl-Strong River Basin, MS was a coordinated effort

between Fugro and MGI to support MDEQ's Mississippi Digital Earth Model (MDEM) program. The mission of

MDEQ is to safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of present and future generations of Mississippians by

conserving and improving our environment and fostering wise economic growth through focused research and

responsible regulation.



Supplemental Information:

A footprint of this data set may be viewed in Google Earth at:

The Fugro Earthdata reports for Rankin-Simpson County lidar collection are available at:



Theme Keywords

Thesaurus Keyword
ISO 19115 Topic Category
None Bare Earth
None Ground Control
None Land Surface
None Light Detection and Ranging
None Point Cloud

Temporal Keywords

Thesaurus Keyword
None lead off
None Winter

Physical Location

Organization: Office for Coastal Management
City: Charleston
State/Province: SC

Data Set Information

Data Set Scope Code: Data Set
Maintenance Frequency: As Needed
Data Presentation Form: las
Distribution Liability:

Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of the following:

MDEQ, Fugro, NOAA, the Office for Coastal Management, or its partners.

Support Roles

Data Steward

CC ID: 678913
Date Effective From: 2013-11-23
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address:
Phone: (843) 740-1202


CC ID: 678915
Date Effective From: 2013-11-23
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address:
Phone: (843) 740-1202

Metadata Contact

CC ID: 678916
Date Effective From: 2013-11-23
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address:
Phone: (843) 740-1202

Point of Contact

CC ID: 678914
Date Effective From: 2013-11-23
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address:
Phone: (843) 740-1202


Currentness Reference: Ground Condition

Extent Group 1

Extent Group 1 / Geographic Area 1

CC ID: 1134880
W° Bound: -90.2566139
E° Bound: -89.7281777
N° Bound: 32.5947464
S° Bound: 31.9160127

Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 1

CC ID: 1134876
Time Frame Type: Discrete
Start: 2013-01-06

Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 2

CC ID: 1134877
Time Frame Type: Discrete
Start: 2013-01-07

Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 3

CC ID: 1134878
Time Frame Type: Discrete
Start: 2013-01-31

Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 4

CC ID: 1134879
Time Frame Type: Discrete
Start: 2013-02-01

Spatial Information

Spatial Representation

Representations Used

Vector: Yes

Access Information

Security Class: Unclassified
Data Access Procedure:

This data can be obtained on-line at the following URL:


Data Access Constraints:


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. These data depict the heights at the time of the survey and are only accurate for that time.

Distribution Information

Distribution 1

CC ID: 741549
Download URL:
File Name: Customized Download

Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc.

Distribution 2

CC ID: 741550
Download URL:
File Name: Bulk Download

Simple download of data files.



CC ID: 741552
URL Type:
Online Resource


CC ID: 741553
URL Type:
Online Resource


CC ID: 741554
Name: Browse Graphic
URL Type:
Browse Graphic
File Resource Format: kmz

This graphic shows the extent of the Rankin-Simpson County area survey.

Activity Log

Activity Log 1

CC ID: 678946
Activity Date/Time: 2017-03-20

Date that the source FGDC record was last modified.

Activity Log 2

CC ID: 678945
Activity Date/Time: 2017-11-14

Converted from FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (version FGDC-STD-001-1998) using '' script. Contact Tyler Christensen (NOS) for details.

Activity Log 3

CC ID: 718395
Activity Date/Time: 2018-02-08

Partial upload of Positional Accuracy fields only.

Activity Log 4

CC ID: 741551
Activity Date/Time: 2018-03-13

Partial upload to move data access links to Distribution Info.

Data Quality

Horizontal Positional Accuracy:

LiDAR data horizontal accuracy is met as contracted.; Quantitative Value: 1.0 meters, Test that produced the value: Horizontal Accuracy was not reported as tested.

Vertical Positional Accuracy:

See accuracy assessment report at:

; Quantitative Value: 0.08 meters, Test that produced the value:

Accuracy assessed on 20130613. Based on the vertical accuracy testing

conducted by Fugro Earthdata were able to determine vertical accuracy RMSE of 18.5 cm. Vertical accuracy tested

at 95% confidence interval to be 0.27 survey ft. (8.2 cm) under NSSDA calculation standards.

Completeness Measure:

Cloud Cover: 0

Completeness Report:

All data is complete to standards as specified. LIDAR raster data is visually inspected for completeness

to ensure that any gaps between flight lines of required collection area. LIDAR is self-illuminating and has minimal cloud

penetration capability. Water vapor in steam plumes or particulates in smoke may cause reflection of LIDAR signals and loss

of elevation information beneath these plumes. Glass structures and roofs may appear transparent to the LIDAR signal and

therefore may not register on the reflective surface.

Conceptual Consistency:

LiDAR flight lines have been examined to ensure that there was at least 50% sidelap, there are no gaps between

flightlines, and overlapping flightlines have consistent elevation values.


Process Steps

Process Step 1

CC ID: 1134872

The technician 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. The technician used commercial software

to calculate initial boresight adjustment angles based on sample areas selected in the lift- mini

project. 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 result and made any necessary additional adjustment until it is acceptable

for the mini project. Once the boresight angle calculation is complete for the mini project,

the adjusted settings were applied to all of the flight lines of the lift and checked for

consistency. The technician utilized commercial and proprietary software packages to analyze

the matching between flight line overlaps for the entire lift to ensure that systematic errors

are minimized for the lift and the results meet project requirements.

Once all lifts are completed with boresight adjustment individually, the technician checked and

corrected the vertical misalignment of all flight lines and also the matching between data and

ground truth. The technician ran a final vertical accuracy check of the boresighted flight lines

against the surveyed ground control points after the z correction to ensure the accuracy

requirement of 18.5cm RMSE was met; see Attachment B: Accuracy Assessment Report for results.


Once boresighting is complete for the project, the project was set up for automatic

classification first. The LiDAR data was cut to production tiles. The flight line

overlap points, Noise points and Ground points were classified automatically in this process.

Process Date/Time: 2013-06-13 00:00:00

Process Step 2

CC ID: 1134873


Fugro has developed a unique method for processing LiDAR data to identify and re-classify

elevation points falling on vegetation, building, and other above ground structures into

separate data layers. The steps are as follows:

Fugro utilized commercial software as well as proprietary software for automatic filtering.

The parameters used in the process were customized for each terrain type to obtain optimum

results. Once the automated filtering was completed, the files were run through a visual

inspection to ensure that the filtering was not too aggressive or not aggressive enough.

In cases where the filtering was too aggressive and important terrain features were

filtered out, the data was either run through a different filter within local area

or was corrected during the manual filtering process.

Interactive editing was completed in visualization software which provides manual

and automatic point classification tools. Fugro utilized commercial and proprietary

software for this process. Vegetation and artifacts remaining after automatic data

post-processing were reclassified manually through interactive editing. The hard

edges of ground features that were automatically filtered out during the automatic

filtering process were brought back into ground class during manual editing. The

technician reviewed the LiDAR points with color shaded TINs for anomalies in ground

class during interactive filtering.

All LAS tiles went through peer review after the first round of interactive editing

was finished. This helps to catch misclassification that may have been missed by the

interactive editing. After the manual editing and peer review, and finalization of

bare earth filtering, all tiles went through another final automated classification

routine. This process ensures only the required classifications are used in the

final product (all points classified into any temporary classes during manual editing

were then re-classified into the project specified classifications).

The classified LiDAR point cloud work tiles went through a water classification routine

based on the collected water polygons. Also, during this process, the points originally

classified as flight line overlap went through an automated classification to filter

ground points and low points inside overlap areas.

Process Date/Time: 2013-06-13 00:00:00

Process Step 3

CC ID: 1134874

The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received topographic files in .laz format from the Mississippi

Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The files contained lidar elevation measurements. The data

were received in Mississippi State Plane West 2302, NAD83 coordinates and were vertically referenced to

NAVD88 using the Geoid12a model. The vertical units of the data were feet. OCM performed the following

processing for data storage and Digital Coast provisioning purposes:

1. The topographic laz files were converted from a Projected Coordinate System (Mississippi State Plane West 2302)

to a Geographic Coordinate system (NAD83).

2. The topographic laz files' horizontal units were converted from feet to decimal degrees.

3. The topographic laz files were cleaned of erroneous bad elevations.

4. The topographic laz files' were converted from NAVD88 elevations to NAD83 ellipsoidal elevations using Geoid12a

5. Classification 11 was moved to classification 12 due to OCM system requirements (OCM class 11 is reserved for

bathymetric points, though these points are truly overlap points, Class 12).

Process Date/Time: 2013-11-23 00:00:00

Catalog Details

Catalog Item ID: 49824
GUID: gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:49824
Metadata Record Created By: Anne Ball
Metadata Record Created: 2017-11-15 15:22+0000
Metadata Record Last Modified By: SysAdmin InPortAdmin
Metadata Record Last Modified: 2022-08-09 17:11+0000
Metadata Record Published: 2022-03-16
Owner Org: OCMP
Metadata Publication Status: Published Externally
Do Not Publish?: N
Metadata Last Review Date: 2022-03-16
Metadata Review Frequency: 1 Year
Metadata Next Review Date: 2023-03-16