Lineage Process Step / Support Roles Issue: We have received reports of issues when working with Lineage Process Steps, as well as Organizations missing from Support Role forms. We are currently working on a fix and plan to release a patch soon. We apologize for any inconvenience in the meantime.
View All
Search Help Show/Hide Menu
Deprecated Version
This is an outdated version of the NOAA Data Management Plan template. InPort now supports a dedicated Data Management Plan Catalog Item type, which is up-to-date with the latest NOAA DMP template. The ability to generate Data Management Plans from Data Sets will be discontinued in a future release. Please see the Data Management Plan Help Guide to learn more.

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:
2023 NOAA USGS Lidar DEM: Hawaii (Big Island)
1.2. Summary description of the data:

Original Dataset Product: 0.5-meter bare-earth raster digital elevation model (DEM) data tiles in GeoTIFF format.

Original Dataset Geographic Extent:

HI_NOAAMauiOahu_3: The work unit covers approximately Approximately 306 square miles on the eastern side of the big island of Hawaii.

Original Dataset Description:

HI_NOAAMauiOahu_3 (Big Island)

The HI_NOAAMauiOahu_3_B20 lidar project called for the planning, acquisition, processing, and production of derivative products of QL1 lidar data to be collected an aggregate nominal pulse spacing (ANPS) of 0.35-meters and 8 points per square meter (ppsm). Project specifications were based on the National Geospatial Program Lidar Base Specification Version 2.1, and the American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data (Edition 1, Version 1.0). The data was developed based on a horizontal reference system of NAD83 (PA11), UTM 5 (EPSG 6635), Meter, and a vertical reference system of NAVD88 (GEOID12B), Meter. DEM data was delivered as processed GeoTIFF files formatted to 3,450 individual 500-meters x 500-meters tiles. Note: Between 2020 and 2023 multiple mobilizations were made to collect the data in the project area due to the extreme terrain and persistent low clouds. On March 31, 2023, it was decided between Woolpert and USGS to end the acquisition phase of the project and move onto processing with the data collected. The DPA and work unit has been clipped to the extent of the data collected. Areas of low point density and/or small data voids within the work unit have been identified with low confidence polygons.

Original Dataset Ground Conditions:

HI_NOAAMauiOahu_3 (Big Island)

Lidar was collected from February 14, 2023, through March 15, 2023 while no snow was on the ground and rivers were at or below normal levels. In order to post process the lidar data to meet task order specifications and meet ASPRS vertical accuracy guidelines, Woolpert established ground control points that were used to calibrate the lidar to known ground locations established throughout the entire project area. An additional independent accuracy checkpoints were collected throughout the entire project area and used to assess the vertical accuracy of the data. These checkpoints were not used to calibrate or post process the data.

Taken From: Item Identification | Abstract
Notes: Only a maximum of 4000 characters will be included.
1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
One-time data collection
Taken From: Extents / Time Frames | Time Frame Type
Notes: Data collection is considered ongoing if a time frame of type "Continuous" exists.
1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data:
2023-02-14 to 2023-03-15
Taken From: Extents | Time Frame - Start, Time Frame - End
Notes: All time frames from all extent groups are included.
1.5. Actual or planned geographic coverage of the data:
W: -155.433659, E: -154.830943, N: 19.77762, S: 19.252617
Taken From: Extents | Geographic Area Bounds, Geographic Area Description
Notes: All geographic areas from all extent groups are included.
1.6. Type(s) of data:
(e.g., digital numeric data, imagery, photographs, video, audio, database, tabular data, etc.)
Model (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:
NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/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.
2.2. Title:
Metadata Contact
Always listed as "Metadata Contact"
2.3. Affiliation or facility:
NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/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.
2.4. E-mail address:
coastal.info@noaa.gov
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:
(843) 740-1202
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.
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?
Yes
4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management (specify percentage or "unknown"):
Unknown

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):

Lineage Statement:
This data was collected for NOAA and the USGS by Woolpert. The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received a copy of the data from Woolpert and processed the data to make it available for custom download from the NOAA Digital Coast Data Access Viewer and for bulk download from AWS S3.

Process Steps:

  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - After acquisition QC was complete, a formal reduction process was performed. Boresight calibrations (omega, phi, kappa) are performed, and a block adjustment is made to ensure relative accuracy. The laser point position was then calculated by associating the SBET position to each laser point return time, scan angle, intensity, etc. Raw laser point cloud data was created for the whole project area in LAS format with each point containing the corresponding scan angle, return number (echo), intensity, and x, y, and z information. Automated line-to-line calibrations were then performed for system attitude parameters (pitch, roll, heading), mirror flex (scale) and GPS/IMU drift to test the relative calibration. Calibrations were performed on ground classified points from paired flight lines. Every flight line was used for relative accuracy calibration. Statistical reports were generated for comparison and used to make the necessary adjustments to remove any residual systematic error.
  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - Lidar Point Cloud Classification: The point cloud underwent a classification process to determine bare-earth points and non-ground points utilizing "first and only" as well as "last of many" lidar returns. This process determined Processed, but Unclassified (Class 1), Bare Earth Ground (Class 2), Low Noise (Class 7), Water (Class 9), Bridge Decks (Class 17), High Noise (Class 18), and Ignored Ground (Class 20). The bare-earth (Class 2 - Ground) lidar points underwent a manual QA/QC step to verify the quality of the DEM as well as a peer-based QC review. This included a review of the DEM surface to remove artifacts and ensure topographic quality. After the bare-earth surface is finalized, it is then used to generate all hydro-breaklines through a semi-automated process. All ground (Class 2) lidar data inside of the Lake Pond and Double Line Drain hydro flattening breaklines were then classified to water (Class 9) using TerraScan/LP360 macro functionality. A buffer of 0.35 meters was also used around each hydro-flattened feature to classify these ground (Class 2) points to Ignored Ground (Class 20). All Lake Pond Island and Double Line Drain Island features were checked to ensure that the ground (Class 2) points were reclassified to the correct classification after the automated classification was completed. All data was manually reviewed and any remaining artifacts removed using functionality provided by TerraScan and TerraModeler. Global Mapper was used as a final check of the bare earth dataset. GeoCue was then used to create the deliverable industry-standard LAS files. Woolpert proprietary software and LP360 was used to perform final statistical analysis of the classes in the LAS files, on a per tile level to verify final classification metrics and full LAS header information.
  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - During the initial quality check, the lidar data was processed immediately following acquisition to verify the coverage has appropriate density, distribution, and no unacceptable data voids. The spatial distribution of the geometrically usable first return lidar points was reviewed for density by verifying the points spaced so that 90% of the cells in a 2*NPS grid placed over the data contain at least one lidar point. The Nominal Point Spacing (NPS) assessment was conducted against single swath, first return data located within the geometrically usable center portion (typically ~90%) of each swath. The data coverage was reviewed for unacceptable data voids to determine no area greater than or equal to (4 x ANPS)² exhibited data coverage gaps.
  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - Maximum Surface Height Rasters (MSHR) is a proof of performance check that the withheld bit flag was used properly in the point cloud. Using all returns in the point cloud and excluding any points flagged as withheld, a raster is generated at twice the pixel size as the DEM deliverable using the same delivery tile index. This raster is generated as a 32-bit floating-point GeoTIFF with each pixel being generated as highest-hit elevation. The raster is then visually reviewed for anomalies that might indicate improperly classified noise. Any issues encountered are then corrected in the point cloud and a new/updated raster is generated. 5,044 files were produced and clipped to the DPA. The GSD for the surface is 1 meter, which is two times the DEM cell size.
  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - The Swath Separation Imagery (SSI) was generated to visualize the DZ between the overlapping areas of the flight lines. To generate this surface a point insertion method was applied as the primary algorithm. Last returns were used, and points flagged as withheld or classified as noise were excluded. A GeoTIFF was generated, and the color ramp is based on a QL1 data product. The GSD for the raster is 1 meter, which is two times the DEM post spacing. Intensity values were modulated to 50% to ensure that there is no oversaturation of intensities values throughout the surface. After all calculations and surfaces were made, 5,044 files were produced and clipped to the data extent. The color ramp for the swath separation image is as follows: Less than 8-cm: Green, 8 to 16-cm: Yellow, 16-24-cm: Orange, Greater than 24-cm: Red.
  • 2024-07-26 00:00:00 - Hydro-Flattened Digital Elevation Models (DEMs): Class 2 (ground) lidar points in conjunction with the hydro breaklines as well bridge breaklines were used to create a 0.5-meter, hydro-flattened bare-earth raster DEM. Using automated scripting routines within ArcMap, a GeoTIFF file was created for each tile. Each surface is reviewed using Global Mapper to check for any surface anomalies or incorrect elevations found within the surface.
  • The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received 3450 GeoTIFF files for the NOAA USGS Hawaii lidar project from Woolpert. The bare earth raster files were at a 0.5 m grid spacing. The data were in UTM Zone 5N NAD83 (PA11), meters coordinates and NAVD88 (Geoid12B) elevations in meters. OCM assigned the appropriate EPSG codes (Horiz - 6635, Vert - 5703) and copied the raster files to AWS S3 for Digital Coast storage and provisioning purposes.
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:

  • 1.7. Data collection method(s)
  • 3.1. Responsible Party for Data Management
  • 5.2. Quality control procedures employed
  • 7.1.1. If data are not available or has limitations, has a Waiver been filed?
  • 7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination
  • 8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility
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?
Yes
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.
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.
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.
7.3. Data access methods or services offered:

Data is available online for bulk and custom downloads.

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)
NCEI_NC
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.
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.
8.2. Data storage facility prior to being sent to an archive facility (if any):
Office for Coastal Management - Charleston, SC
Taken From: Physical Location | Organization, City, State, Location Description
Notes: Physical Location Organization, City and State are required, or a Location Description is required.
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

Data is backed up to cloud storage.

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