Dewberry 20190808 Lidar point cloud Product: These lidar data are processed Classified LAS 1.4 files, formatted to 50,901 individual 1500 m x 1500 m tiles; used to create intensity images, 3D breaklines and hydro-flattened DEMs as necessary. Geographic Extent: Texas West Central, covering approximately 42,557 square miles, spanning across three UTM zones (13, 14, and 15). Blocks 1-4 fall within UTM zone 13, Blocks 5-14 fall within UTM zone 14, and Block 15 falls within UTM zone 15. Dataset Description: Texas West Central 2018 Lidar project called for the Planning, Acquisition, processing and derivative products of lidar data to be collected at a nominal pulse spacing (NPS) of 0.7 meter. Project specifications are based on the U.S. Geological Survey National Geospatial Program Base Lidar Specification, Version 1.2. The data was developed based on a horizontal projection/datum of NAD83 (2011), Universal Transverse Mercator, meters and vertical datum of NAVD88 (GEOID12B), meters. Lidar data was delivered as processed Classified LAS 1.4 files, formatted to 50,901 individual 1500 m x 1500 m tiles, as tiled Intensity Imagery, and as tiled bare earth DEMs; all tiled to the same 1500 m x 1500 m schema. Ground Conditions: Lidar was collected between February 1, 2018 and May 27, 2018, with reflights collected on November 5, 2018, 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, Dewberry established a total of 372 ground control points that were used to calibrate the lidar to known ground locations established throughout the Texas West Central project area. An additional 1183 independent accuracy checkpoints, 705 in Bare Earth and Urban landcovers (705 NVA points), 478 in Tall Grass and Brushland/Low Trees categories (478 VVA points), were used to assess the vertical accuracy of the data. These checkpoints were not used to calibrate or post process the data. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Leica ALS-70 HP (Precision Aerial Reconnaissance LLC) Block 1 7 0.7 2 0.7 2 1800 150 40 53.4 151.7 9 0.2 1064 1 0.22 1310.29 30 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Riegl LMS-Q1560 (Airborne Imaging Inc.) Blocks 2 and 3 15 0.7 2 0.7 2 2000 150 60 185 800 3 0.9 1064 1 0.25 2241 30 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Riegl VQ-Q1560i (Axis Geospatial, LLC) Blocks 4 and 5 15 0.7 2 0.7 2 5700 147 58 201 1000 3 0.43 1064 1 0.25 1947 15 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Riegl LMS-Q1560 (Eagle Mapping) Blocks 6, 7, 8, and 14 15 0.7 2 0.7 2 2000 150 58 183 800 3 0.9 1064 1 0.25 2217 25 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Riegl VQ780i (Leading Edge Geomatics) Blocks 9-13 15 1 1 0.70 2 1800 100 60 68 280 5 1.50 1064 1 0.25 1996 55 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Riegl Q1560 (Leading Edge Geomatics) Block 13 15 0.7 2 0.7 2 1600 100 57 80 700 5 .43 1064 1 0.25 1737 55 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Geoid12B U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - National Geospatial Program (NGP) Lidar Base Specification v1.2 Leica ALS-70 HP (Aerial Services Inc.) Block 15 4 0.7 2 0.7 2 1400 150 50 47 379.8 9 2.7 1064 1 0.22 1300 30 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) GEOID12B USGS-NGP Base Lidar Specification v1.2 Optech Galaxy (Intermap) Block 15 4 0.57 3.1 0.57 3.1 1600 145 34 66 300 4 1.05 1064 1 0.25 978 30 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Geoid12B 0.614 0.090 705 0.091 705 0.117 478 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 Water 10 Ignored Ground 17 Bridge Decks 18 High Noise 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 DEM. The purpose of these lidar data was to produce high accuracy 3D hydro-flattened Digital Elevation Model (DEM) with a 1 meter cell size. These lidar point cloud data were used to create intensity images, 3D breaklines, and hydro-flattened DEMs as necessary. USGS Contract No. G16PC00020 CONTRACTOR: Dewberry SUBCONTRACTOR: Leading Edge Geomatics Lidar data were acquired by Leading Edge Geomatics. Axis Lidar data were acquired by Axis. Airborne Imaging Lidar data were acquired by Airborne Imaging. PAR Lidar data were acquired by PAR. Eagle Mapping Lidar data were acquired by Eagle Mapping. Intermap Lidar data were acquired by Intermap. ASI Lidar data were acquired by ASI. All follow-on processing was completed by the prime contractor. 20180201 20181105 ground condition Complete None planned -103.954221 -95.232557 34.470336 30.926054 -518484.964035 291448.045126 3832908.576866 3456873.389663 None Model LAS Point Cloud Remote Sensing Elevation Data Lidar None Texas New Mexico Oklahoma Southeastern New Mexico West Texas Red River region No restrictions apply to these 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 LAS data files include all data points collected. No points have been removed or excluded. A visual qualitative assessment was performed to ensure data completeness. No void areas or missing data exist. The raw point cloud is of good quality and data passes Non-Vegetated Vertical Accuracy specifications. 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 NVA was tested with 705 checkpoints located in bare earth and urban (non-vegetated) areas. These check points 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 check point. 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. 0.090 Tested 0.090 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 705 independent checkpoints located in Bare Earth and Urban land cover classes. Dewberry Consultants LLC 20180531 vector digital data and tabular digital data Lanham, Maryland Dewberry Consultants, LLC, Survey department None N/A/ 1640 Online 20180327 ground condition Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points This data source was used (along with airborne GPS/IMU data) to georeference the lidar point cloud data. Precision Aerial Reconnaissance LLC acquired the data for Block 1 using a Leica ALS-70 HP sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20181128 Precision Aerial Reconnaissance LLC Wesley Palmer mailing and physical

3910 Industrial Circle

Bossier City LA 71112 USA (870)904-1144 wes@precisionaerialrecon.com Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. Airborne Imaging Inc. acquired the data for Blocks 2 and 3 using a Riegl LMS-Q1560 sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20180312 Airborne Imaging Inc. Timothy R Willms mailing and physical

2700-61 Avenue SE

Calgary AB T2C 4V2 Canada (403) 215-2960 timw@airborneimaginginc.com Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. Axis Geospatial, LLC acquired the data for Blocks 4 and 5 using a Riegl VQ-Q1560i sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20180312 Axis Geospatial, LLC Justin Lahman mailing and physical

28640 Marys Court STE 200

Easton MD 21601 USA (410) 822-1441 jlahman@axisgeospatial.com Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. Eagle Mapping acquired the data for Blocks 6, 7, 8, and 14 using a Riegl LMS-Q1560 sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20180312 Eagle Mapping Andrew Lewis mailing and physical

2071 Kingsway Avenue

Port Coquitlam BC V3C 6N2 Canada (877) 942-5551 alewis@eaglemapping.com Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. Leading Edge Geomatics acquired the data for Blocks 9-13 using a Riegl VQ780i and a Riegl Q1560 sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20180304 Leading Edge Geomatics Bruce Hogan mailing and physical

2398 Route 102, Unit A2

Lincoln NB E3B 7G1 Canada (506)446-4403 b.hogan@legeo.ca Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. Aerial Services Inc. acquired the data for Block 15 using a Leica ALS-70 HP and an Optech Galaxy sensor. 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 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 6 cm RMSEz within individual swaths and less than or equal to 8 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. Point classification was performed according to USGS Lidar Base Specification 1.2, and breaklines were collected for water features. Bare earth DEMs were exported from the classified point cloud using collected breaklines for hydroflattening. Texas_West_Central_Ground_Control_Points 20180516 Aerial Services Inc Chuck Boyer mailing and physical

6315 Chancellor Dr.

Cedar Falls IA 50613 USA (319) 277-0436 cboyer@aerialservicesinc.com Monday - Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Central Time) If unable to reach the contact by telephone, please send an email. You should get a response within 24 hours. 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 flattening breaklines were then classified to water (ASPRS Class 9) using TerraScan macro functionality. A buffer of 0.7 m 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 was 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. Dewberry 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. 20180515 Point Universal Transverse Mercator 15 0.9996 -93.000000 0.0 500000 0.0 coordinate pair 0.01 0.01 meters North American Datum of 1983 (2011) Geodetic Reference System 80 6378137 298.257222101 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 0.01 meters Explicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates 20190808 Dewberry mailing and physical

1000 N Ashley Drive, Suite 801

Tampa FL 33602 USA (813)225-1325 FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998