2008 South Carolina Lidar: Fairfield County
OCM Partners
Data Set
(DS)
| ID: 49967
| Published / External
Created: 2017-11-15
|
Last Modified: 2022-08-09
Project (PRJ) | ID: 49401
ID: 49967
Data Set (DS)
* Discovery• First Pass
» Metadata Rubric
Item Identification
* » Title | 2008 South Carolina Lidar: Fairfield County |
---|---|
Short Name | sc2008_fairfield_m503_metadata |
* Status | Completed |
Creation Date | |
Revision Date | |
• Publication Date | 2009 |
* » Abstract |
The project area is composed of 16 counties in the State of South Carolina - Cherokee, Union, Laurens, Greenwood, Newberry, Chester, Fairfield, Lancaster, Chesterfield, Marlboro, Darlington, Dillon, Marion, Williamsburg, Clarendon, and Orangeburg. This metadata file is for the lidar county deliverables for Fairfield County, SC. The project area consists of approximately 10,194 square miles including a buffer of 50 feet along the edges of the project area and an additional buffer in some areas. The project design of the lidar data acquisition was developed to support a nominal post spacing of 1.4 meters. The Fugro EarthData, Inc. acquisition team of Fugro Horizons, Inc. and North West Group acquired 721 flight lines in 44 lifts from January 15, 2008 through February 10, 2008. The data was divided into 5000' by 5000' foot cells that serve as the tiling scheme. Lidar data collection was performed with a Cessna 310 aircraft, utilizing a Leica ALS50-II MPiA sensor, collecting multiple return x, y, and z data as well as intensity data. Lidar data was processed to achieve a bare ground surface (Classes 2 and 8). Lidar data is remotely sensed high-resolution elevation data collected by an airborne collection platform. Using a combination of laser range finding, GPS positioning and inertial measurement technologies, lidar instruments are able to make highly detailed Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of the earth's terrain, man-made structures, and vegetation. |
* Purpose |
The purpose of this project is to collect and deliver topographic elevation point data derived from multiple return light detection and ranging (lidar) measurements for a 16-county area in South Carolina. The elevation data will be used as base data for South Carolina's flood plain mapping program (as part of FEMA's Map Modernization Program) and for additional geospatial map products in the future. |
Notes |
10611 |
Other Citation Details | |
• Supplemental Information |
The LiDAR Quality Assurance (QA) Report Fairfield County, South Carolina may be viewed at: https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/503/supplemental/LiDAR_QAQC_Report_Fairfield.pdf |
DOI (Digital Object Identifier) | |
DOI Registration Authority | |
DOI Issue Date |
Keywords
Theme Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
ISO 19115 Topic Category | elevation |
None | Bare Earth |
None | Intensity |
None | Surface |
None | Terrain |
Temporal Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
* Spatial Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Stratum Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Instrument Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Platform Keywords
Thesaurus | Keyword |
---|---|
Physical Location
• » Organization | Office for Coastal Management |
---|---|
• » City | Charleston |
• » State/Province | SC |
• Country | |
• » Location Description |
Data Set Information
* Data Set Scope Code | Data Set |
---|---|
• Data Set Type | |
• Maintenance Frequency | Unknown |
Maintenance Note | |
» Data Presentation Form | |
• Entity Attribute Overview |
The information contained in the LAS point cloud data set are the following attributes; X, Y, Z to two significant digits; Intensity as integer; Class as integer; Return number; Number of returns; Scan direction; scan angle rank; GPS time. |
Entity Attribute Detail Citation |
Lidar point cloud data tiled in LAS 1.1 format; ASPRS classification scheme, class 12 - flight line overlap points, class 9 - points in water, class 8 - model-key points, class 2 - ground points, and class 1 - all other. |
Entity Attribute Detail URL | |
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 |
Support Roles
* » Support Role | Data Steward |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | 2009 |
Date Effective To | |
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 |
Fax | |
Mobile | |
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Business Hours | |
Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | Distributor |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | 2009 |
Date Effective To | |
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 |
Fax | |
Mobile | |
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Business Hours | |
Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | Metadata Contact |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | 2009 |
Date Effective To | |
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 |
Fax | |
Mobile | |
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Business Hours | |
Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | Point of Contact |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | 2009 |
Date Effective To | |
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 |
Fax | |
Mobile | |
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov |
Business Hours | |
Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | |
Date Effective To | |
* » Contact | |
* Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | |
Date Effective To | |
* » Contact | |
* Contact Instructions |
* » Support Role | |
---|---|
* » Date Effective From | |
Date Effective To | |
* » Contact | |
* Contact Instructions |
Extents
Currentness Reference | Ground Condition |
---|
Extent Group 1
Extent Description |
---|
Extent Group 1 / Geographic Area 1
* » W° Bound | -81.4319 |
---|---|
* » E° Bound | -80.770691 |
* » N° Bound | 34.58137 |
* » S° Bound | 34.172798 |
* » Description |
Extent Group 1 / Vertical Extent
EPSG Code | |
---|---|
Vertical Minimum | |
Vertical Maximum |
Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 1
* » Time Frame Type | Range |
---|---|
* » Start | 2008-01-15 |
End | 2008-02-10 |
Alternate Start As Of Info | |
Alternate End As Of Info | |
Description |
Spatial Information
Spatial Resolution
Angular Distance | |
---|---|
Angular Distance Units | |
Horizontal Distance | |
Horizontal Distance Units | |
Vertical Distance | |
Vertical Distance Units | |
Equivalent Scale Denominator | |
Level of Detail Description |
Spatial Representation
Grid Representation Used? | |
---|---|
Vector Representation Used? | Yes |
Text / Table Representation Used? | |
TIN Representation Used? | |
Stereo Model Representation Used? | |
Video Representation Used? |
Grid Representation
Dimension Count | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cell Geometry | |||||||||||||
Transformation Parameter Available? | |||||||||||||
Axis Dimension |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
Axis Dimension |
|||||||||||||
|
Vector Representation
Topology Level | |
---|---|
Complex Object Present? | |
Complex Object Count | |
Composite Object Present? | |
Composite Object Count | |
Curve Object Present? | |
Curve Object Count | |
Point Object Present? | |
Point Object Count | |
Solid Object Present? | |
Solid Object Count | |
Surface Object Present? | |
Surface Object Count |
Reference Systems
Reference System
EPSG Code | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Horizontal Resolution |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vertical Resolution |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Access Information
Data License | |
---|---|
Data License URL | |
Data License Statement | |
* » Security Class | Unclassified |
* Security Classification System | |
Security Handling Description | |
• Data Access Policy | |
» Data Access Procedure |
This data can be obtained on-line at the following URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer The data set is dynamically generated based on user-specified parameters. ; |
• » 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. |
Metadata Access Constraints | |
Metadata Use Constraints |
Distribution Information
Start Date | |
---|---|
» Download URL | https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=503 |
Distributor | |
File Name | Customized Download |
Description |
Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc. |
File Date/Time | |
File Type (Deprecated) | |
Distribution Format | |
File Size | |
Application Version | |
Compression | |
Review Status |
Start Date | |
---|---|
» Download URL | https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/503/index.html |
Distributor | |
File Name | Bulk Download |
Description |
Simple download of data files. |
File Date/Time | |
File Type (Deprecated) | |
Distribution Format | |
File Size | |
Application Version | |
Compression | |
Review Status |
Start Date | |
---|---|
End Date | |
» Download URL | |
Distributor | |
File Name | |
Description | |
File Date/Time | |
File Type | |
FGDC Content Type | |
File Size | |
Application Version | |
Compression | |
Review Status |
Start Date | |
---|---|
End Date | |
» Download URL | |
Distributor | |
File Name | |
Description | |
File Date/Time | |
File Type | |
FGDC Content Type | |
File Size | |
Application Version | |
Compression | |
Review Status |
Start Date | |
---|---|
End Date | |
» Download URL | |
Distributor | |
File Name | |
Description | |
File Date/Time | |
File Type | |
FGDC Content Type | |
File Size | |
Application Version | |
Compression | |
Review Status |
Archive Information
Location | |
---|---|
File Identifier | |
File Name | |
URL | |
Description | |
DOI | |
Archive Date | |
Archive Update Frequency |
Location | |
---|---|
File Identifier | |
File Name | |
URL | |
Description | |
DOI | |
Archive Date | |
Archive Update Frequency |
Location | |
---|---|
File Identifier | |
File Name | |
URL | |
Description | |
DOI | |
Archive Date | |
Archive Update Frequency |
URLs
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer |
---|---|
Name | |
URL Type | Online Resource |
File Resource Format | |
Description |
URL | https://coast.noaa.gov |
---|---|
Name | |
URL Type | Online Resource |
File Resource Format | |
Description |
URL | |
---|---|
Name | |
URL Type | |
File Resource Format | |
Description |
URL | |
---|---|
Name | |
URL Type | |
File Resource Format | |
Description |
URL | |
---|---|
Name | |
URL Type | |
File Resource Format | |
Description |
Activity Log
Activity Time | 2016-05-23 |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Date that the source FGDC record was last modified. |
Activity Time | 2017-11-14 |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Converted from FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (version FGDC-STD-001-1998) using 'fgdc_to_inport_xml.pl' script. Contact Tyler Christensen (NOS) for details. |
Activity Time | 2018-02-08 |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Partial upload of Positional Accuracy fields only. |
Activity Time | 2018-03-13 |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Partial upload to move data access links to Distribution Info. |
Activity Time | |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Activity Time | |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Activity Time | |
---|---|
Activity Type | |
Responsible Party | |
Description |
Issues
Issue Date | |
---|---|
Author | |
Issue |
Issue Date | |
---|---|
Author | |
Issue |
Issue Date | |
---|---|
Author | |
Issue |
Technical Environment
Description |
|
---|
Data Quality
Representativeness | |
---|---|
Accuracy |
The following methods are used to assure lidar accuracy: 1. Use of IMU and ground control network utilizing GPS techniques 2. Use of airborne GPS in conjunction with the acquisition of lidar 3. Measurement of quality control ground survey points within the finished product. The boresight of the lidar was processed against the ground control for Fairfield County which consisted of 11 lidar ground survey points and 1 airborne GPS (ABGPS) base station at the operation airport. The horizontal datum for the control was the North American Datum of 1983, 2007 adjustment (NAD83/2007). The vertical datum was the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). The Geoid 2003 model was used to transform the ellipsoidal heights to GPS derived orthometric heights. ABGPS data was collected during the acquisition mission for each flight line. During the data acquisition the Positional Dilution of Precision (PDOP) for the ABGPS was monitored. The control points were measured by technicians using Terrascan and Fugro EarthData proprietary software and applied to the boresight solution for the project lines. |
Analytical Accuracy | |
Horizontal Positional Accuracy |
The minimum expected horizontal accuracy was tested during the boresight process to meet or exceed the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA). Horizontal accuracy is 1 meter RMSE or better. |
Vertical Positional Accuracy |
108 high accuracy checkpoints were surveyed following FEMA Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners Appendix A: Guidance for Aerial Mapping and Surveying which is based on the NSSDA. Compared with the 0.363m specification for vertical accuracy at the 95% confidence level, equivalent to 2-foot contours, the dataset passes by all methods of accuracy assessment (tested by Dewberry): Tested 0.114 meter Fundamental Vertical Accuracy at 95 percent confidence level in open terrain using RMSEz x 1.9600 (FEMA/NSSDA and NDEP/ASPRS methodologies); Tested 0.147 meter Consolidated Vertical Accuracy at 95th percentile in all land cover categories combined (NDEP/ASPRS methodology); Tested 0.154 meter Supplemental Vertical Accuracy at 95th percentile in Vegetated terrain (NDEP/ASPRS methodology); Tested 0.131 meter Supplemental Vertical Accuracy at 95th percentile in Urban terrain (NDEP/ASPRS methodology). |
Quantitation Limits | |
Bias | |
Comparability | |
Completeness Measure |
Cloud Cover: 0 |
Precision | |
Analytical Precision | |
Field Precision | |
Sensitivity | |
Detection Limit | |
Completeness Report |
The bare earth surface will contain voids where insufficient energy was reflected from the surface to generate a valid return from the terrain. Voids in the bare earth surface tend to occur in heavily vegetated areas, water bodies, and beneath buildings, motor vehicles, bridges etc. Fresh or wet asphalt, wet sand and certain types of vegetation can also cause voids or anomalous elevations. |
Conceptual Consistency |
Compliance with the accuracy standard was ensured by the collection of GPS ground control during the acquisition of aerial lidar and the establishment of a GPS base station operation airport. The following checks were performed: 1. The ground control and airborne GPS data stream were validated through a fully analytical boresight adjustment. 2. The Lidar elevation data were checked against the project control. 3. Lidar elevation data was validated through an inspection of edge matching and visual inspection for quality (artifact removal). |
» Quality Control Procedures Employed |
Data Management
» Have Resources for Management of these Data Been Identified? | |
---|---|
» Approximate Percentage of Budget for these Data Devoted to Data Management | |
» Do these Data Comply with the Data Access Directive? | |
» Is Access to the Data Limited Based on an Approved Waiver? | |
» If Distributor (Data Hosting Service) is Needed, Please Indicate | |
» Approximate Delay Between Data Collection and Dissemination | |
» If Delay is Longer than Latency of Automated Processing, Indicate Under What Authority Data Access is Delayed |
|
» Actual or Planned Long-Term Data Archive Location | |
» If World Data Center or Other, Specify | |
» If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended, Explain |
|
» Approximate Delay Between Data Collection and Archiving | |
» How Will the Data Be Protected from Accidental or Malicious Modification or Deletion Prior to Receipt by the Archive? |
|
Lineage
» Lineage Statement |
---|
Sources
Citation Title | Aerial Acquisition of Lidar Data for 16 counties in the State of South Carolina |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | 2008-02-15 |
Extent Type | Range |
Extent Start Date/Time | 2008-01-15 |
Extent End Date/Time | 2008-02-10 |
Scale Denominator | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Source Contribution |
The Fugro EarthData, Inc. acquisition team of Fugro Horizons, Inc. and North West Group collected ALS50-II derived lidar over 16 counties in the State of South Carolina with a 1.4m, nominal post spacing using a Cessna 310 aircraft. The collection for the entire project area was accomplished from January 15, 2008 through February 10, 2008 (Flight dates were January 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and February 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10). The collection was performed using a Leica ALS50-II MPiA lidar system, serial numbers ALS039 and ALS064, including an inertial measuring unit (IMU) and a dual frequency GPS receiver. This project required 44 lifts of flight lines to be collected. The lines were flown at an average of 6,000 feet above mean terrain using a maximum pulse rate frequency of 112,000 pulses per second. The planned maximum baseline length was 50 miles. | Type of Source Media: external hard drive |
Citation Title | Fairfield County, SC - Digital Orthophotography |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | |
Extent Type | Discrete |
Extent Start Date/Time | 2006-05-09 |
Extent End Date/Time | |
Scale Denominator | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Source Contribution |
The State of South Carolina, Department of Natural Resources provided digital orthophotography covering the project area in support of this project. | Type of Source Media: external hard drive |
Citation Title | South Carolina Lidar, Quality Control Surveys, 16 Counties |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | 2008-01-31 |
Extent Type | Discrete |
Extent Start Date/Time | 2008-01-21 |
Extent End Date/Time | |
Scale Denominator | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Source Contribution |
ESP under contract to Fugro EarthData, Inc. successfully established ground control for Fairfield County, SC. A total of 11 ground control points in Fairfield County, SC were acquired. GPS was used to establish the control network. The horizontal datum was the North American Datum of 1983, 2007 adjustment (NAD83/2007). The vertical datum was the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). | Type of Source Media: electronic mail system |
Citation Title | |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | |
Extent Type | |
Extent Start Date/Time | |
Extent End Date/Time | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Scale Denominator |
Citation Title | |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | |
Extent Type | |
Extent Start Date/Time | |
Extent End Date/Time | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Scale Denominator |
Citation Title | |
---|---|
Contact Role Type | |
Contact Type | |
Contact Name | |
Publish Date | |
Extent Type | |
Extent Start Date/Time | |
Extent End Date/Time | |
Citation URL | |
Citation URL Name | |
Citation URL Description | |
Scale Denominator |
Process Steps
Process Step Number | 1 |
---|---|
» Description |
1. Lidar, GPS, and IMU data was processed together using lidar processing software. 2. The lidar data set for each flight line was checked for project area coverage and lidar post spacing was checked to ensure it meets project specifications. 3. The lidar collected at the calibration area and project area were used to correct the rotational, atmospheric, and vertical elevation differences that are inherent to lidar data. 4. Intensity rasters were generated to verify that intensity was recorded for each lidar point. 5. Lidar data was transformed to the specified project coordinate system. 6. By utilizing the ground survey data collected at the calibration site and project area, the lidar data was vertically biased to the ground. 7. Comparisons between the biased lidar data and ground survey data within the project area were evaluated and a final RMSE value was generated to ensure the data meets project specifications. 8. Lidar data in overlap areas of project flight lines were trimmed and data from all swaths were merged into a single data set. 9. The data set was trimmed to the digital project boundary including an additional buffer zone of 50 feet (buffer zone assures adequate contour generation from the DEM). 10.The resulting data set is referred to as the raw lidar data. |
Process Date/Time | 2008-06-25 00:00:00 |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | 2 |
---|---|
» Description |
1. The raw lidar data was processed through a minimum block mean algorithm, and points were classified as either bare earth or non-bare earth. 2. User developed "macros" that factor mean terrain angle and height from the ground were used to determine bare earth point classification. 3. The next phase of the surfacing process was a 2D edit procedure that ensures the accuracy of the automated feature classification. 4. Editors used a combination of imagery, intensity of the lidar reflection, profiles, and tin-editing software to assess points. 5. The lidar data was filtered, as necessary, using a quadric error metric to remove redundant points. This method leaves points where there is a change in the slope of surfaces (road ditches) and eliminates points from evenly sloped terrain (flat field) where the points do not affect the surface. 6. The algorithms for filtering data were utilized within Fugro EarthData's proprietary software and commercial software written by TerraSolid. 7. The flight line overlap points were merged back into filtered data set for delivery product. 8. The point cloud data were delivered tiled in LAS 1.1 format; class 12 - flight line overlap points, class 9 - points in water, class 8 - model-key points, class 2 - ground points, and class 1 - all other. |
Process Date/Time | 2008-12-18 00:00:00 |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | 3 |
---|---|
» Description |
Lidar intensity images were generated in TerraSolid software. The images are then brought up in Photoshop to see if a curve is needed to modify the radiometrics and to ensure they match from group to group. Along with looking for missing coverage and clipping to the boundary, the following steps are run in Photoshop: 1. Flip 0 values to 1 2. Change 3-band images to 1 band 3. Restore GeoTIFF headers. The intensity images were delivered in GeoTIFF format. |
Process Date/Time | 2008-12-16 00:00:00 |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | 4 |
---|---|
» Description |
Tiled lidar LAS datasets are imported into a single multipoint geodatabase featureclass. Only Ground and Model-Keypoint are imported. An ArcGIS geodatabase terrain feature class is created using the terrain creation dialogue provided through ArcCatalog. The multipoint featureclass is imported as mass point features in the terrain. An overall tile boundary for the county is input as a soft clip feature for the terrain. The terrain pyramid level resolutions and scales are automatically calculated based on the point coverage for the county. |
Process Date/Time | 2008-12-21 00:00:00 |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | 5 |
---|---|
» Description |
The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received files in LAS format. The files contained LiDAR intensity and elevation measurements. OCM performed the following processing on the data to make it available within Digital Coast: 1. The data were converted from State Plane, SPCS Zone 3900 coordinates to geographic coordinates. 2. The data were converted from NAVD88 heights to ellipsoid heights using Geoid03. 3. The LAS header fields were sorted by latitude and updated. |
Process Date/Time | 2009-09-01 00:00:00 |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | |
---|---|
» Description | |
Process Date/Time | |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | |
---|---|
» Description | |
Process Date/Time | |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Process Step Number | |
---|---|
» Description | |
Process Date/Time | |
Process Contact | |
Phone (Voice) | |
Email Address | |
Source |
Acquisition Information
Instruments
Instrument Unavailable Reason |
---|
Identifier | |
---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |
Instrument / Gear | |
Instrument Type | |
Description |
Identifier | |
---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |
Instrument / Gear | |
Instrument Type | |
Description |
Identifier | |
---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |
Instrument / Gear | |
Instrument Type | |
Description |
Platforms
Platform Unavailable Reason |
---|
Identifier | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |||||||
Description | |||||||
Mounted Instruments |
|||||||
|
Identifier | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |||||||
Description | |||||||
Mounted Instruments |
|||||||
|
Identifier | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Docucomp UUID | |||||||
Description | |||||||
Mounted Instruments |
|||||||
|
FAQs
Date | |
---|---|
Author | |
Question | |
Answer |
Child Items
Rubric scores updated every 15m
Score | Type | Title |
---|---|---|
Related Items
Item Type | Relationship Type | Title |
---|---|---|
Catalog Details
Catalog Item ID | 49967 |
---|---|
Metadata Record Created By | Anne Ball |
Metadata Record Created | 2017-11-15 15:23+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 Workflow State | Published / External |
Metadata Last Review Date | 2022-03-16 |
Metadata Review Frequency | 1 Year |
Metadata Next Review Date | 2023-03-16 |
Tags |
---|