Quantum Spatial, Inc. 20180605 Lidar point cloud Product: This lidar data set includes unclassified swath LAS 1.4 files, classified LAS 1.4 files, breaklines, digital elevation models (DEMs), and intensity imagery. Geographic Extent: Twelve counties in Eastern Oklahoma, covering approximately 8,606 total square miles, including five counties partially covering approximately 410 square miles in the City of Tulsa AOI. Please note that the entire project area covers UTM Zones 14 and 15 and encompasses 14,869 square miles across 23 counties in the State of Oklahoma. Dataset Description: Oklahoma 2016 Lidar project called for the planning, acquisition, processing, and derivative products of lidar data to be collected at a nominal pulse spacing (NPS) of 0.35 meters. Project specifications are based on the U.S. Geological Survey National Geospatial Program Base Lidar Specification, Version 1.2. The data for counties in the eastern AOIs were developed based on a horizontal projection/datum of NAD83 (2011), UTM Zone 15, meters and vertical datum of NAVD88 (GEOID12B), meters. Lidar data was delivered as flightline-extent unclassified LAS swaths, as processed Classified LAS 1.4 files formatted to 9890 individual 1500 x 1500 m UTM 15 tiles at QL2, as tiled intensity imagery, and as tiled bare earth DEMs; all tiled to the same schema. For the City of Tulsa, processed Classified LAS 1.4 files were formatted to 2164 individual 750 x 750 m UTM 15 tiles at QL1. Continuous breaklines were produced in Esri file geodatabase format. Building footprints were created in Esri file geodatabase format. Ground Conditions: Lidar was collected between December 2016 and April 2017, 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, Quantum Spatial, Inc. established a total of 369 ground control points that were used to calibrate the lidar to known ground locations established throughout the Oklahoma project area. An additional 458 independent accuracy checkpoints, 271 in Bare Earth and Urban landcovers (271 raw NVA points, 270 NVA points), 187 in Forested, Brushland/Trees, and Tall Weeds/Crops categories (187 VVA points), were used to assess the vertical accuracy of the data. These checkpoints were not used to calibrate or post process the data. To acquire detailed surface elevation data for use in conservation planning, design, research, floodplain mapping, dam safety assessments and elevation modeling, etc. Classified LAS files are used to show the manually reviewed bare earth surface. This allows the user to create intensity images, breaklines and raster DEMs. The purpose of these lidar data was to produce high accuracy 3D hydro-flattened digital elevation models (DEMs) with a 1-meter cell size. These raw lidar point cloud data were used to create classified lidar LAS files, intensity images, 3D breaklines, and hydro-flattened DEMs as necessary. USGS Contract No. G10PC00016 Task Order No. G17PD00013. CONTRACTOR: Quantum Spatial, Inc. SUBCONTRACTOR: Keystone Aerial Surveys, Inc., Aerial Surveys International, LLC, Airborne Imaging, Inc. Lidar data were acquired by Keystone Aerial Surveys, Inc., Aerial Surveys International, LLC, and Airborne Imaging, Inc. All follow-on processing was completed by the prime contractor. USGS-NGP Base Specification v1.2 Optech Orion H300 5 0.70 2.04 0.70 2.04 1700 140 38 52.0 225 4 0.38 1064 1 0.25 1127.5 30 GEOID12B NAD 1983 (2011) UTM Zone 15 meters USGS-NGP Base Specification v1.2 Optech ALTM Galaxy T1000 8 0.70 2.04 0.70 2.04 1575 140 41 52.0 250 3 0.38 1064 1 0.25 1127.0 30 GEOID12B NAD 1983 (2011) UTM Zone 15 meters 0.196 0.092 271 1.4 6 Withheld (ignore) points were identified in these files using the standard LAS Withheld bit Swath "overage" points were identified in these files using the standard LAS overlap bit 16 1 Processed, but Unclassified 2 Bare-Earth Ground 7 Low Noise 9 In-land Water 10 Ignored Ground 17 Bridge Decks 18 High Noise 20161213 20170417 ground condition Complete None planned -97.091445 -94.784343 37.053909 33.975886 None Model Breaklines LAS Point Cloud Intensity Image Raster DEM Remote Sensing Elevation Data Lidar Hydrology None Oklahoma Kay County Osage County Tulsa County Wagoner County Muskogee County McIntosh County Haskell County Pittsburg County Atoka County Pushmataha County Chocktaw County Sequoya County No restrictions apply to this data. None. However, users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this dataset was collected and that some parts of these data may no longer represent actual surface conditions. Users should not use these data for critical applications without a full awareness of its limitations. Acknowledgement of the U.S. Geological Survey would be appreciated for products derived from these data. Data covers the entire area specified for this project. These raw LAS and LAS data files include all data points collected. No points have been removed or excluded. The raw point cloud is of good quality and data passes Non-Vegetated Vertical Accuracy specifications. Datasets contain complete coverage of tiles. A visual qualitative assessment was performed to ensure data completeness. There are no void areas or missing data. All files are inspected to ensure that they conform to the specified file naming conventions, all files load in their correct geographic position, all files conform to the project specifications for file standard and content. 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 Raw Swath NVA was tested with 271 checkpoints located in bare earth and urban (non-vegetated) areas. These checkpoints 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 checkpoint. 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. The project specifications require the accuracy (ACCz) of the derived DEM be calculated and reported in two ways: 1. The required NVA 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. This is a required accuracy. The Bare Earth DEM NVA was tested with 270 checkpoints located in bare earth and urban (non-vegetated) areas; the 2. Vegetated Vertical Accuracy (VVA): VVA is be reported for "forested", "brushland/trees", and "tall weeds/crops" land cover classes. The target VVA is: 29.4 cm at the 95th percentile, derived according to ASPRS Guidelines, Vertical Accuracy Reporting for Lidar Data, i.e., based on the 95th percentile error in all vegetated land cover classes combined. This is a target accuracy. The VVA was tested with 187 checkpoints located in forested, brushland/trees, and tall weeds/crops (vegetated) areas. The checkpoints were distributed throughout the project area and were surveyed using GPS techniques. See survey report for additional survey methodologies. 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. 0.092 Tested 0.092 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 271 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. 0.093 Tested 0.093 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 DEM was calculated using 270 independent checkpoints located in the Bare Earth and Urban land cover categories. 0.185 Tested 0.185 meters VVA was calculated using 187 checkpoints located in the Forested, Shrubs, and Tall Weeds land cover categories at the 95th percentile, derived according to ASPRS Guidelines, Vertical Accuracy Reporting for Lidar Data. Tested against the DEM. Raw Data and Boresight Processing: 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 Quantum Spatial, Inc. proprietary and commercial 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. 2017 LAS Point Classification: The point classification is performed as described below. The bare earth surface is then manually reviewed to ensure correct classification on the Class 2 (Ground) points. After the bare-earth surface is finalized, it is then used to generate all hydro-breaklines through heads-up digitization. All ground (ASPRS Class 2) lidar data inside of the Lake Pond and Double Line Drain hydro-flattened breaklines were then classified to Water (ASPRS Class 9) using TerraScan macro functionality. A buffer of 1 meter was also used around each hydro-flattened feature to classify these ground (ASPRS Class 2) points to Ignored ground (ASPRS Class 10). All Lake Pond Island and Double Line Drain Island features were checked to ensure that the ground (ASPRS Class 2) points were reclassified to the correct classification after the automated classification was completed. All overlap data was processed through automated functionality provided by TerraScan to classify the overlapping flight line data to approved classes by USGS. The overlap data was classified using standard LAS overlap bit. These classes were created through automated processes only and were not verified for classification accuracy. Due to software limitations within TerraScan, these classes were used to trip the withheld bit within various software packages. These processes were reviewed and accepted by USGS through numerous conference calls and pilot study areas. All data was manually reviewed and any remaining artifacts removed using functionality provided by TerraScan and TerraModeler. Global Mapper us used as a final check of the bare earth dataset. GeoCue was then used to create the deliverable industry-standard LAS files for both the All Point Cloud Data and the Bare Earth. Quantum Spatial, Inc. proprietary software 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. 2017 Hydro-Flattened Breakline Processing: Class 2 (ground) lidar points was used to create a bare earth surface model. The surface model was then used to heads-up digitize 2D breaklines of inland streams and rivers with a 100-foot nominal width and inland ponds and lakes of 2 acres or greater surface area. Elevation values were assigned to all Inland Ponds and Lakes, Inland Pond and Lake Islands, Inland Stream and River Islands, using TerraModeler functionality. Elevation values were assigned to all inland streams and rivers using Quantum Spatial, Inc. proprietary software. All Ground (ASPRS Class 2) lidar data inside of the collected inland breaklines were then classified to Water (ASPRS Class 9) using TerraScan macro functionality. A buffer of 1 meter was also used around each hydro-flattened feature. These points were moved from ground (ASPRS Class 2) to Ignored Ground (ASPRS Class 10). The breakline files were then translated to Esri file geodatabase format using Esri conversion tools. Breaklines are reviewed against lidar intensity imagery to verify completeness of capture. All breaklines are then compared to TINs (triangular irregular networks) created from ground only points prior to water classification. The horizontal placement of breaklines is compared to terrain features and the breakline elevations are compared to lidar elevations to ensure all breaklines match the lidar within acceptable tolerances. Some deviation is expected between breakline and lidar elevations due to monotonicity, connectivity, and flattening rules that are enforced on the breaklines. Once completeness, horizontal placement, and vertical variance is reviewed, all breaklines are reviewed for topological consistency and data integrity using a combination of Esri Data Reviewer tools and proprietary tools. 2017 Hydro-Flattened Raster DEM Processing: Class 2 (Ground) LiDAR points in conjunction with the hydro-breaklines were used to create a 1-meter hydro-flattened raster DEM. Using automated scripting routines within ArcMap, an ERDAS Imagine .IMG 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. 2017 Intensity Image Processing: GeoCue software was used to create the deliverable intensity images. All overlap classes were ignored during this process. This helps to ensure a more aesthetically pleasing image. The GeoCue software was then used to verify full project coverage as well. TIF/TWF files with a 1-meter cell size were then provided as the deliverable for this dataset requirement. 2017 Point Universal Transverse Mercator 15 0.9996 -93.0 0.0 500000.0 0.0 coordinate pair 0.01 0.01 meters North American Datum of 1983 (2011) Geodetic Reference System 80 6378137.0 298.257222101 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (GEOID12B) 0.01 meters Explicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates Chris Stoner USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Oklahoma NRCS State Conservation Engineer mailing and physical address

224 N. Orchard

Stillwater OK 74074 USA 405-742-1260 Chris.Stoner@ok.usda.gov The NRCS distributes data directly to program partners. Public access to the data is available from the USGS. In no event shall the creators, custodians, or distributors of these data be liable for any damages arising out of its use, or from the inability of the customer to use these data for their intended application. Jennifer Knecht Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region VI FEMA Regional Flood Map Geospatial Lead mailing and physical address

800 North Loop 288

Denton TX 76209 USA 940-898-5553 Jennifer.Knecht@fema.dhs.gov FEMA distributes data directly to program partners. Public access to the data is available from the USGS. In no event shall the creators, custodians, or distributors of these data be liable for any damages arising out of its use, or from the inability of the customer to use these data for their intended application. Edgar Mersiovsky Arkansas United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) State Soil Scientist mailing and physical address

USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service

Room 3416 Federal Building

700 West Capitol Avenue

Little Rock AR 72201-3225 USA 501-301-3161 edgar.mersiovsky@ar.usda.gov The Arkasas USDA distributes data directly to program partners. Public access to the data is available from the USGS. In no event shall the creators, custodians, or distributors of these data be liable for any damages arising out of its use, or from the inability of the customer to use these data for their intended application. 20180605 Quantum Spatial mailing and physical

523 Wellington Way

Lexington KY 40503 USA 859-277-8700 859-277-8901 Monday through Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (Eastern Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998 None. None. None. Unclassified NONE