Data Management Plan

DMP Template v2.0.1 (2015-01-01)

Please provide the following information, and submit to the NOAA DM Plan Repository.

Reference to Master DM Plan (if applicable)

As stated in Section IV, Requirement 1.3, DM Plans may be hierarchical. If this DM Plan inherits provisions from a higher-level DM Plan already submitted to the Repository, then this more-specific Plan only needs to provide information that differs from what was provided in the Master DM Plan.

URL of higher-level DM Plan (if any) as submitted to DM Plan Repository:
Always left blank

1. General Description of Data to be Managed

1.1. Name of the Data, data collection Project, or data-producing Program:
Coastal Populated Places
1.2. Summary description of the data:

This data included the Populated Places dataset from the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics’ (BTS's) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). Including cities and towns in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. As well as the DEC2010_IslandAreas & Place_2010Census_ DP1 TIGER/Line shapefiles from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB) for all U.S. Territories which are not included in the USGS National Atlas. The boundaries of all CDPs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2010 Census. Populated places were buffered from the coastline to gather only coastal cities & all other inland cities were removed. The cities remaining were divided into 4 groupings based on population & underwent a thinning process based on a 5 mile buffer of any grouping with a larger population. Cities left were guaranteed to be 5 miles apart if they were from different groupings. Areas with dense coastal lying places had any remaining inland cities removed. Utilizing the Raster Navigational Charts from NOAA started at Alaska & working down the coastline extraneous places from the center of land out to the coastline from smallest to largest were removed, assuring that cites that existed on the RNC remained, or a city with the largest population near the coast & close to an RNC designated city remained. Territory Island data from the U.S. Census was then merged with this data set so that it contained places for all U.S. populated places & territories. (The U.S. Census data was turned into a point feature utilizing the feature to point tool, the points are a representation of the centroid of the U.S. Census's polygon shapefile.) sparse or areas had places added from the U.S. Census Places dataset if the area was too sparse after this process. This dataset is not meant to be all inclusive, and only includes some coastal populated places in the U.S. and it's territories for NOAA's Ocean Reporting Tool.

Taken From: Item Identification | Abstract
Notes: Only a maximum of 4000 characters will be included.
Edit
1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
No information found
Taken From: Extents / Time Frames | Time Frame Type
Notes: Data collection is considered ongoing if a time frame of type "Continuous" exists.
Edit
1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data:
No information found
Taken From: Extents | Time Frame - Start, Time Frame - End
Notes: All time frames from all extent groups are included.
Edit
1.5. Actual or planned geographic coverage of the data:
W: -176.6580556, E: 145.785477267, N: 71.2905556, S: -14.380990309
Taken From: Extents | Geographic Area Bounds, Geographic Area Description
Notes: All geographic areas from all extent groups are included.
Edit
1.6. Type(s) of data:
(e.g., digital numeric data, imagery, photographs, video, audio, database, tabular data, etc.)
Map (digital)
1.7. Data collection method(s):
(e.g., satellite, airplane, unmanned aerial system, radar, weather station, moored buoy, research vessel, autonomous underwater vehicle, animal tagging, manual surveys, enforcement activities, numerical model, etc.)
No information found
1.8. If data are from a NOAA Observing System of Record, indicate name of system:
Always left blank due to field exemption
1.8.1. If data are from another observing system, please specify:
Always left blank due to field exemption

2. Point of Contact for this Data Management Plan (author or maintainer)

2.1. Name:
Office for Coastal Management (OCM)
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. The support role must be in effect.
Edit
2.2. Title:
Metadata Contact
Always listed as "Metadata Contact"
2.3. Affiliation or facility:
Office for Coastal Management (OCM)
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. This field is required if applicable.
Edit
2.4. E-mail address:
No information found
Notes: The email address is taken from the address listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles.
2.5. Phone number:
No information found
Notes: The phone number is taken from the number listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles. If the phone number is missing or incorrect, please contact your Librarian to update the Person record.

3. Responsible Party for Data Management

Program Managers, or their designee, shall be responsible for assuring the proper management of the data produced by their Program. Please indicate the responsible party below.

3.1. Name:
No information found
Taken From: Support Roles (Data Steward) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Data Steward" is used. The support role must be in effect.
Edit
3.2. Position Title:
Data Steward
Always listed as "Data Steward"

4. Resources

Programs must identify resources within their own budget for managing the data they produce.

4.1. Have resources for management of these data been identified?
No information found
4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management (specify percentage or "unknown"):
No information found

5. Data Lineage and Quality

NOAA has issued Information Quality Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information which it disseminates.

5.1. Processing workflow of the data from collection or acquisition to making it publicly accessible
(describe or provide URL of description):

Process Steps:

  • 2018-04-02 00:00:00 - Starting with US Census data - Place_2010Census_DP1 & DEC2010_IslandAreas. Shapefiles were downloaded for the US & Territories (which were separate) All feature classes were then Projected into World Mercator Each feature from the downloaded geodatabase had to be run through Feature to Point Tool-to make a point file for the centroid of the area Created: State_Name, State, Place_Name & Census2010 columns & populated them accordingly. Merged the 4 territories into one Census2012Territory Points shapefile. Fixed exotic place names that did not come into ArcGIS correctly because of unrecognized characters.
  • 2018-04-03 00:00:00 - Utilizing the Populated Places layer from - U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics's (BTS's) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). Feature class was Projected into World Mercator Layer contained many points so to make it easier to work with any point that was farther than 50 miles from the SLA (Submerged Land Act, BOEM layer) was removed to make processing easier-resulting layer was called Populated_PlacesCoastalCities.
  • 2018-04-03 00:00:00 - Created State_Name, State, Place_Name & Census2010 Columns & populated them accordingly. Then Selected by Attribute cites based on population and export them into 4 independent point files with appropriate names - 4 levels of importance: Huge Cities >100K , Big Cities >10k but not including Huge , Medium Cities > 1k but not including Big & Huge, & Tiny Cities > 0 population but not including Medium, Big, & Huge. I called these layers, PP_CCHUGE, PP_CCBIG, PP_CCMED, & PP_CCTINY. Allow the 4 new layers of cites to be added to your map. Created a 5 mile buffer for the 3 largest layers.
  • 2018-04-03 00:00:00 - Before Removing any cites from these 4 city layers, duplicate each one of them & name it with REMOVED at the end. Remove the original layers= PP_CCHUGE, PP_CCBIG, PP_CCMED, & PP_CCTINY from your map so that you do not remove cities from them as it will be easier later to add a city back in from one of these layers if needed. Working with your PP_CCHUGE_REMOVED, PP_CCBIG_REMOVED, PP_CCMED_REMOVED, & PP_CCTINY_REMOVED - Utilized the Huge_5mileBuffer to remove any city from the Big, Med, or Tiny falling within the Huge buffer using the select by location tool. Utilized the Big_5mileBuffer to remove any Med & Tiny city within the Big buffer using the select by location tool. Utilized the Med_5mileBuffer to remove any Tiny city within the Med buffer using the select by location tool.
  • 2018-04-04 00:00:00 - Merge Census2010TerritoryPoints & each of the 4 removed layers into one layer which I called PLACE. If any areas appeared too sparse after this was completed I was able to return to the PP_CCHUGE, PP_CCBIG, PP_CCMED, & PP_CCTINY layers to see if there is a city to add, if no city existed look in the Place_2010 Census centroid point file. Utilizing the Raster Navigational Charts from NOAA as a base map systematically start at Alaska & worked down around the coastline removing/deleting, using the editor tool, any extraneous cites from the center of land out to the coastline from smallest to largest, assuring that cites that existed on the RNC remained, or a city with the largest population near the coast & close to an RNC designated city remained.
  • 2018-04-04 00:00:00 - You are left with cities of differing sizes guaranteed to be 5 miles apart, but bunching will still occur with cities within the same layer. For all areas where the coastline had a dense population of larger cites to utilize I deleted smaller sized inland cities (as we originally had a 50 mile buffer inland & moving forward only want coastal cities)
  • 2018-04-09 00:00:00 - Connected the ACS 2013 3YR total population estimates via the GEOID's provided & re-creating Place_Name within the ACS table. Copied population estimates to a created ACS_2013_3YR_Estimate attribute in Populated Places. Visually inspect information & fill in possible missing estimates using AmericanFact Finder for 2013 census data.
5.1.1. If data at different stages of the workflow, or products derived from these data, are subject to a separate data management plan, provide reference to other plan:
Always left blank
5.2. Quality control procedures employed
(describe or provide URL of description):
No information found

6. Data Documentation

The EDMC Data Documentation Procedural Directive requires that NOAA data be well documented, specifies the use of ISO 19115 and related standards for documentation of new data, and provides links to resources and tools for metadata creation and validation.

6.1. Does metadata comply with EDMC Data Documentation directive?
No
Notes: All required DMP fields must be populated and valid to comply with the directive.
6.1.1. If metadata are non-existent or non-compliant, please explain:

Missing/invalid information:

  • 1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
  • 1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data
  • 1.7. Data collection method(s)
  • 2.4. Point of Contact Email
  • 3.1. Responsible Party for Data Management
  • 4.1. Have resources for management of these data been identified?
  • 4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management
  • 5.2. Quality control procedures employed
  • 7.1. Do these data comply with the Data Access directive?
  • 7.1.1. If data are not available or has limitations, has a Waiver been filed?
  • 7.1.2. If there are limitations to data access, describe how data are protected
  • 7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination
  • 8.1. Actual or planned long-term data archive location
  • 8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility
  • 8.4. How will the data be protected from accidental or malicious modification or deletion prior to receipt by the archive?
Notes: Required DMP fields that are not populated or invalid are listed here.
6.2. Name of organization or facility providing metadata hosting:
NMFS Office of Science and Technology
Always listed as "NMFS Office of Science and Technology"
6.2.1. If service is needed for metadata hosting, please indicate:
Always left blank
6.3. URL of metadata folder or data catalog, if known:
Always listed as the URL to the InPort Data Set record
6.4. Process for producing and maintaining metadata
(describe or provide URL of description):
Metadata produced and maintained in accordance with the NOAA Data Documentation Procedural Directive: https://nosc.noaa.gov/EDMC/DAARWG/docs/EDMC_PD-Data_Documentation_v1.pdf
Always listed with the above statement

7. Data Access

NAO 212-15 states that access to environmental data may only be restricted when distribution is explicitly limited by law, regulation, policy (such as those applicable to personally identifiable information or protected critical infrastructure information or proprietary trade information) or by security requirements. The EDMC Data Access Procedural Directive contains specific guidance, recommends the use of open-standard, interoperable, non-proprietary web services, provides information about resources and tools to enable data access, and includes a Waiver to be submitted to justify any approach other than full, unrestricted public access.

7.1. Do these data comply with the Data Access directive?
No information found
7.1.1. If the data are not to be made available to the public at all, or with limitations, has a Waiver (Appendix A of Data Access directive) been filed?
No information found
7.1.2. If there are limitations to public data access, describe how data are protected from unauthorized access or disclosure:

None

7.2. Name of organization of facility providing data access:
NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Taken From: Support Roles (Distributor) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Distributor" is used. The support role must be in effect. This information is not required if an approved access waiver exists for this data.
Edit
7.2.1. If data hosting service is needed, please indicate:
Taken From: Data Management | If data hosting service is needed, please indicate
Notes: This field is required if a Distributor has not been specified.
Edit
7.2.2. URL of data access service, if known:
Taken From: Distribution Info | Download URL
Notes: All URLs listed in the Distribution Info section will be included. This field is required if applicable.
Edit
7.3. Data access methods or services offered:

REST map service

7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination:
No information found
7.4.1. If delay is longer than latency of automated processing, indicate under what authority data access is delayed:

8. Data Preservation and Protection

The NOAA Procedure for Scientific Records Appraisal and Archive Approval describes how to identify, appraise and decide what scientific records are to be preserved in a NOAA archive.

8.1. Actual or planned long-term data archive location:
(Specify NCEI-MD, NCEI-CO, NCEI-NC, NCEI-MS, World Data Center (WDC) facility, Other, To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended)
No information found
8.1.1. If World Data Center or Other, specify:
Taken From: Data Management | Actual or planned long-term data archive location
Notes: This field is required if archive location is World Data Center or Other.
Edit
8.1.2. If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain:
Taken From: Data Management | If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain
Notes: This field is required if archive location is To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended.
Edit
8.2. Data storage facility prior to being sent to an archive facility (if any):
Office for Coastal Management - Charleston, SC
 
NOAA Office for Coastal Management, Charleston Office
Taken From: Physical Location | Organization, City, State, Location Description
Notes: Physical Location Organization, City and State are required, or a Location Description is required.
Edit
8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility:
No information found
8.4. How will the data be protected from accidental or malicious modification or deletion prior to receipt by the archive?
Discuss data back-up, disaster recovery/contingency planning, and off-site data storage relevant to the data collection
No information found

9. Additional Line Office or Staff Office Questions

Line and Staff Offices may extend this template by inserting additional questions in this section.

Always left blank