noaa / NATIONAL OCEANIC AND

ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION

National Environmental Satellite,

Data, and Information Service

NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-20

DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA:

PROCEDURES, DATA SOURCES AND ANALYSIS 

K.S. Carignan

L.A.Taylor

B.W. Eakins

R.R. Warnken

T. Sazonova 

D.C. Schoolcraft

National Geophysical Data Center

Marine Geology and Geophysics Division

Boulder, Colorado

March 2009

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Gary Locke

Secretary

NATIONAL OCEANIC AND

ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION

Dr. Jane Lubchenco

Under Secretary for Oceans

and Atmosphere/Administrator

National Environmental Satellite,

Data, and Information Service

Mary E. Kicza

Assistant Administrator

NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-20

DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA:

PROCEDURES, DATA SOURCES AND ANALYSIS

Kelly S. Carignan1

Lisa A. Taylor2

Barry W. Eakins1

Robin R. Warnken2

Tatiana Sazonova1

David C. Schoolcraft2

1Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder

2NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado 

National Geophysical Data Center

Marine Geology and Geophysics Division 

Boulder, Colorado

March 2009
Carignan et al., 2009

ii

NOTICE

Mention of a commercial company or product does not constitute an endorsement by the 

NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service. Use of information 

from this publication concerning proprietary products or the test of such products for publicity

or advertising purposes is not authorized. 

Corresponding project contact:

Lisa A. Taylor

NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center

Marine Geology and Geophysics Division

325 Broadway, E/GC 3

Boulder, Colorado 80305

Phone: 303-497-6767

Fax: 303-497-6513

E-mail: Lisa.A.Taylor@noaa.gov

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/inundation/tsunami/inundation.html

Also available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

(http://www.ntis.gov)
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

iii

Contents

1. Introduction........................................................................................................................................1

2. Study Area..........................................................................................................................................2

3. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................3

3.1 Data Sources and Processing ......................................................................................................4

3.1.1 Shoreline................................................................................................................5

3.1.2 Bathymetry ............................................................................................................7

3.1.3 Topography..........................................................................................................14

3.2 Establishing Common Datums .................................................................................................17

3.2.1 Vertical datum transformations ...........................................................................17

3.2.2 Horizontal datum transformations.......................................................................18

3.3 Digital Elevation Model Development .....................................................................................19

3.3.1 Verifying consistency between datasets..............................................................19

3.3.2 Smoothing of bathymetric data ...........................................................................20

3.3.3 Gridding the data with MB-System.....................................................................21

3.4 Quality Assessment of the DEM...............................................................................................21

3.4.1 Horizontal accuracy.............................................................................................21

3.4.2 Vertical accuracy .................................................................................................21

3.4.3 Slope maps and 3-D perspectives........................................................................22

3.4.4	 Comparison with source data files.......................................................................23

3.4.5 Comparison with NGS geodetic monuments......................................................24

4. Summary and Conclusions...............................................................................................................25

5. Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................25

6. References........................................................................................................................................25

7. Data Processing Software ................................................................................................................26

8. Appendix A.......................................................................................................................................27

List of Figures

Figure 1. Shaded-relief image of the Monterey, California DEM..............................................................1

Figure 2. Google Earth image of Central California coast.........................................................................2

Figure 3. Source and coverage of datasets used to compile the Monterey DEM.......................................4

Figure 4. Digital coastline datasets available in the Monterey region .......................................................5

Figure 5. Digital NOS hydrographic survey coverage in the Monterey region .........................................9

Figure 6.	 Spatial coverage of California State Seafloor Mapping Laboratory multibeam sonar

surveys used to compile the Monterey DEM ....................................................................11

Figure 7. Spatial coverage of USGS multibeam sonar surveys used to compile the Monterey 

DEM ..................................................................................................................................12

Figure 8. Images of unknown feature in USGS multibeam survey..........................................................13

Figure 9. Spatial coverage of ENC sounding data used to compile the Monterey DEM.........................13

Figure 10. Aerial photographs of Moss Landing Harbor and Monterey Harbor .......................................15

Figure 11. Details of the Monterey Harbor features digitized by NGDC..................................................15

Figure 12. Location of NGDC digitized features in Santa Cruz harbor.....................................................16

Figure 13. Location of NGDC digitized features in Moss Landing harbor ...............................................16

Figure 14. Location of NGDC digitized features in Monterey harbor.......................................................16

Figure 15. Coverage of VDatum tool for the Monterey DEM region........................................................17

Figure 16. Illustration of VDatum tool coverage limitation within Moss Landing inlet ...........................18

Figure 17. Histogram of the differences between NOS hydrographic survey H05414 and the 

1 arc-second pre-surfaced bathymetric grid ......................................................................20

Figure 18. Slope map of the Monterey DEM.............................................................................................22

Figure 19. Perspective view of the Monterey DEM...................................................................................23

Figure 20. Histogram of the differences between one CSC IfSAR survey tile and the Monterey 

DEM ..................................................................................................................................23

Figure 21. Histogram of the differences between NGS geodetic monument elevations and the

 Monterey DEM ................................................................................................................24
Carignan et al., 2009

iv

Figure 22. Location of NGS geodetic monuments and the NOAA tide stations........................................24

List of Tables

Table 1.	 PMEL specifications for the Monterey, California DEM ...........................................................3

Table 2. Shoreline datasets used in the Monterey, DEM..........................................................................3

Table 3. Electronic navigational charts available in the Monterey, California region..............................6

Table 4. Bathymetric datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM.....................................................7

Table 5. Digital NOS hydrographic surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM...............................7

Table 6.	 California State Seafloor Mapping Lab multibeam sonar surveys used in compiling

the Monterey DEM............................................................................................................10

Table 7. USGS multibeam sonar surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM .................................12

Table 8. Topographic datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM...................................................14

Table 9. Relationship between Mean High Water and other vertical datums in the Monterey 

region .................................................................................................................................18

Table 10. Data hierarchy used to assign gridding weight in MB-System.................................................21
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California:

Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis

1. Introduction

In January 2008, the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC), an office of the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), developed a bathymetric–topographic digital elevation model (DEM) of 

Monterey, California (Fig. 1) for the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) NOAA Center for Tsunami

Research (HUhttp://nctr.pmel.noaa.gov/UH). The 1/3 arc-secondF

1

F coastal DEM will be used as input for the Method of 

Splitting Tsunami (MOST) model developed by PMEL to simulate tsunami generation, propagation and inundation. 

The DEM was generated from diverse digital datasets in the region (grid boundary and sources shown in Fig. 3) and 

will be used for tsunami inundation modeling, as part of the tsunami forecast system SIFT (Short-term Inundation 

Forecasting for Tsunamis) currently being developed by PMEL for the NOAA Tsunami Warning Centers. This report 

provides a summary of the data sources and methodology used in developing the Monterey DEM.

Figure 1. Shaded-relief image of the Monterey, California DEM. Contour interval is 100 meters.

1. The Monterey DEM is built upon a grid of cells that are square in geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude), however, the cells are not 

square when converted to projected coordinate systems, such as UTM zones (in meters). At the latitude of Monterey, California (36°36.3′ N, 

121°53.3′ W) 1/3 arc-second of latitude is equivalent to 10.275 meters; 1/3 arc-second of longitude equals 8.284 meters.
Carignan et al., 2009

2

2. Study Area

The Monterey DEM covers the coastal region surrounding the town of Monterey, California from Ano Nuevo in 

the north to Dolan Rock in the south and includes the communities of Santa Cruz, Capitola, Moss Landing, Seaside, 

Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea (Fig. 2). Encompassing a portion of the Monterey Bay National

Marine Sanctuary, the DEM includes large underwater canyons. The region is home to many species of marine life, 

which provide recreation, educational, and economic benefits to the surrounding communities and offers research

opportunities for the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in Moss Landing and the University of California 

Santa Cruz in Santa Cruz. The coastline varies from beaches to sea cliffs and the drive along the coast is considered to 

be one of the most scenic on the west coast.

The town of Monterey is located at the southernmost part of the bay and has a population of approximately 

30,000. Originally a fishing and whaling community built up in the 1850s, the town developed a large recreational and

agricultural based economy in the 1950s. Santa Cruz, at the northern end of the bay, has a population of approximately 

55,000.

Figure 2. The central California coast showing the Monterey DEM boundary in red.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

3

3. Methodology

TheMonterey,CaliforniaDEMwas constructed tomeetPMELspecifications(Table 1), based on inputrequirements

for the development of Reference Inundation Models (RIMs) and Standby Inundation Models (SIMs) (V. Titov, pers. 

comm.) in support of NOAA’s Tsunami Warning Centers use of SIFT to provide real-time tsunami forecasts in an 

operational environment. The best available digital data were obtained by NGDC and shifted to common horizontal 

and vertical datums: North America Datum 1983 (NAD 83) and Mean High Water (MHW), for modeling of maximum 

flooding, respectively2. Data processing and evaluation, and DEM assembly and assessment are described in the 

following subsections.

Table 1: PMEL specifications for the Monterey, California DEM.

Grid Area Monterey, California

Coverage Area 121.51o to 122.52o W; 36.10o to 37.10o N

Coordinate System Geographic decimal degrees

Horizontal Datum World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84)

Vertical Datum Mean High Water (MHW)

Vertical Units Meters

Grid Spacing 1/3 arc-second

Grid Format ESRI Arc ASCII grid

2. The horizontal difference between the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) and World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS 84) geographic 

horizontal datums is approximately one meter across the contiguous U.S., which is significantly less than the cell size of the DEM. Most GIS applications treat the two datums as identical, so do not actually transform data between them, and the error introduced by not converting between 

the datums is insignificant for our purposes. NAD 83 is restricted to North America, while WGS 84 is a global datum. As tsunamis may originate

most anywhere around the world, tsunami modelers require a global datum, such as WGS 84 geographic, for their DEMs so that they can model the 

wave’s passage across ocean basins. This DEM is identified as having a WGS 84 geographic horizontal datum even though the underlying elevation

data were typically transformed to NAD 83 geographic. At the scale of the DEM, WGS 84 and NAD 83 geographic are identical and may be used 

interchangeably.
Carignan et al., 2009

4

3.1 Data Sources and Processing

Shoreline, bathymetric, topographic, and bathymetric–topographic digital datasets (Fig. 3) were obtained from 

several U.S. federal, state and local agencies including: NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS), Office of Coast

Survey (OCS) and Coastal Services Center (CSC); California State University Seafloor Mapping Laboratory; the

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS); and the California Department of Fish and Game Marine Region GIS unit (CDFG). 

Safe Software’s (HUhttp://www.safe.com/UH) FME data translation tool package was used to shift datasets to NAD 83 

horizontal datum and to convert them into ESRI (HUhttp://www.esri.com/UH) ArcGIS shape files3. The shape files were then

displayed with ArcGIS to assess data quality and manually edit datasets. Vertical datum transformations to MHW were 

accomplished using FME, based upon data from the NOAA Monterey tide station and NOAA’s Office of Coast Survey

and National Geodetic Survey VDatum model software (HUhttp://vdatum.noaa.govUH). Applied Imagery’s Quick Terrain 

Modeler software (HUhttp://www.appliedimagery.com/UH) was used to evaluate processing and gridding techniques.

Figure 3. Source and coverage of datasets used to compile the Monterey DEM.

3. FME uses the North American Datum Conversion Utility (NADCON; http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/TOOLS/Nadcon/Nadcon.html) developed by 

NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey (NGS) to convert data from NAD 27 to NAD 83. NADCON is the U.S. Federal Standard for NAD 27 to NAD 

83 datum transformations.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

5

3.1.1 Shoreline

Coastline datasets of the Monterey region were obtained from NOAA’s Office of Coast Survey (OCS) and

the National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center/Moss Landing Marine Laboratory 

(NMFS,SWFSC/MLML); the California State Land Commission (CSLC); the California Dept. of Fish and Game, 

Marine Region GIS Unit (CDFG); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (Table 2; Fig. 4). Of these five datasets,

the OCS electronic navigational charts (ENCs) and the CDFG coastline metadata records provided vertical datum 

reference and were used to develop the ‘combined coastline’ for the Monterey DEM.

 Table 2: Shoreline datasets used in the Monterey DEM.

Source Year Data Type Spatial 

Resolution

Original Horizontal 

Datum/Coordinate 

System

Original Vertical 

Datum URL

OCS ENCs 2007 Coastline 1:40,000 to 

1:216,000

WGS 84 geographic 

(meters) Mean High Water

HUhttp://

nauticalcharts.

noaa.gov/mcd/

enc/index.htmUH

California Dept. 

of Fish and 

Game, Marine 

Region

1996

digitized 

1:24,000 

USGS quads

1:24,000 NAD 83 geographic 

(meters) Mean High Tide

http://www.

dfg.ca.gov/

biogeodata/gis/

mr.asp

Figure 4. Digital coastline datasets available in the Monterey region.
Carignan et al., 2009

6

1) OCS electronic navigational chart

Three electronic navigational charts (ENCs) were available for the Monterey area (Table 3) and 

downloaded from NOAA’s Office of Coast Survey website (HUhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/mcd/enc/index.

htmUH). The ENCs are in S-57 format and include coastline data files referenced to Mean High Water. The

extracted ENC coastline was used primarily around the harbors at Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Moss Landing 

to define the harbor entrances and jetties.

 Table 3: Electronic navigational charts available in the Monterey, California region.

Chart Title Edition Year of Source data Issue Date Scale

18680 Point Sur to San Francisco 8 2001 2007 210,668

18686 Pfeiffer Point to Cypress Point 3 1999 2007 40,000

18700 Point Conception to Point Sur 5 2003 2007 216,116

2) California Dept. of Fish and Game, Marine Region GIS Unit (CDFG) coastline

The CDFG coastline was originally developed by the California State Land Commission from digitized 

USGS 7.5’ quads to define the mean high tide line and was subsequently rebuilt to reduce tolerances by the

CDFG in 1996. In order to define the current coastline, NGDC analyzed the most recent high-resolution

topographic IfSAR dataset available from CSC and used the derived zero elevation line to manually adjust 

and clarify location of the mean high water line in the CDFG coastline.

The two coastline datasets were merged in ArcMap forming a ‘combined coastline’, which was edited to include 

channel inlets where digital bathymetric data are present. Modifications to the coastline include adjustments to remove

piers, docks, and bridges. All modifications were done using ArcMap editing tools.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

7

3.1.2 Bathymetry

Bathymetric datasets used in the compilation of the Monterey DEM include 42 NOS hydrographic surveys, 17 

California State Sea Floor Mapping Lab multibeam sonar surveys located along the southern coast, 6 USGS multibeam 

sonar surveys that cover the deeper areas within the bay, and extracted ENC/RNC sounding data (Table 4; Fig. 3).

 Table 4: Bathymetric datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM.

Source Year Data Type Spatial Resolution

Original 

Horizontal Datum/

Coordinate System

Original 

Vertical 

Datum

URL

 NOS 1932 to 

1989

Hydrographic 

survey 

soundings

Ranges from 10 

m to 1 km (varies 

with scale of survey, 

depth, traffic, and

probability of 

obstructions)

NAD 27 or NAD 

83 geographic

Mean Lower 

Low Water

http://www.ngdc.noaa. HU

gov/mgg/bathymetry/

hydro.htmlUH

Cal State 

Seafloor

Mapping 

Lab

2003 Multibeam 

sonar 1 to 3 meters WGS 84 UTM zone 10N

Mean Lower 

Low Water or 

NAVD88

http://seafloor.csumb.edu/ HU

index.htmlUH

USGS 1995 to 

1998

Multibeam 

sonar 5 meters NAD 83 UTM zone 10N

assumed 

Mean Sea 

Level

HUhttp://geopubs.wr.usgs.

gov/open-file/of01-179/

index.htmlUH

OCS ENC 2006 to 

2007

Extracted 

soundings

1:80,000 to 

1:400,000

WGS 84 

geographic

Mean High 

Water

http://nauticalcharts.noaa. HU

gov/mcd/enc/index.htmUH

1) NOS hydrographic survey data

A total of 42 NOS hydrographic surveys conducted between 1932 and 1989 were available for use in 

developing the Monterey DEM. The hydrographic survey data were originally vertically referenced to Mean 

Lower Low Water (MLLW) and horizontally referenced to either NAD 27 or NAD 83 datums. Only 36 of 

the 42 surveys were used in building the Monterey DEM, as some older surveys have been superseded (Table 

5; Fig. 7).

Data point spacing for the NOS surveys varied by collection date. In general, earlier surveys had greater 

point spacing than more recent surveys. All surveys were extracted from NGDC’s online NOS hydrographic 

database (HUhttp://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/bathymetry/hydro.htmlUH) referenced to NAD 83. The surveys were 

subsequently clipped to a polygon 0.05 degree (~5%) larger than the Monterey DEM area to support data 

interpolation along grid edges.

After converting all NOS survey data to MHW using VDatum (see Section 3.2.1), the data were displayed 

in ESRI ArcMap and reviewed for digitizing errors against scanned original survey smooth sheets and edited 

as necessary. The surveys were also compared to the topographic and bathymetric datasets, the combined 

coastline, and NOS raster nautical charts (RNCs). The surveys were clipped to remove soundings that overlap 

the more recent multibeam surveys and where soundings from older surveys have been superseded by more 

recent NOS surveys.

 Table 5: Digital NOS hydrographic surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM.

Survey ID Year Scale Original Vertical Datum Original Horizontal Datum

H05247 1932 40,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05472 1932 20,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05287 1932 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05366 1932 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05405 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05406 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05412 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05414 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27
Carignan et al., 2009

8

H05415 1933 5,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05452 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05453 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05477 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05245 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05266 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05313 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05373 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05393 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05473 1934 80,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05618 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05619 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05620 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05640 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05279 1935 80,000 MLLW NAD 27

H05312 1935 10,000 MLLW NAD 27

H09809 1979 5,000 MLLW NAD 27

B00034 1985 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00039 1985 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00079 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00081 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00093 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00119 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00121 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00123 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00128 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD 83

B00209 1989 50,000 MLLW NAD 83
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

9

Figure 5. Digital NOS hydrographic survey coverage in the Monterey region. Some older surveys were not used as they 

have been superseded by more recent surveys. DEM boundary in red.
Carignan et al., 2009

10

2) California State Seafloor Mapping Laboratory multibeam sonar surveys

Seventeen near-shore multibeam sonar surveys were downloaded from the California State Seafloor

Mapping Laboratory website (HUhttp://seafloor.csumb.edu/index.htmlUH) as gridded data (Table 6, Fig. 6). The 

surveys were collected from 2000 to 2006, and referenced to WGS 84 UTM Zone 10N and either NAVD88 

(meters) or MLLW datums. The files were converted to NAD 83 using ArcCatalog and to MHW using either

the VDatum tool or, for inlet surveys at Elkhorn Slough, a constant derived from the VDatum tool (see 

section 3.2.1). The surveys were reviewed and edited as necessary to remove anomalous data points using 

QT Modeler and ArcMap.

 Table 6: California State Seafloor Mapping Lab multibeam sonar surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM.

Survey ID Year Original Vertical 

Datum Original Horizontal Datum Type

Big Sur, Cooper Point 2005 NAVD88 WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Grimes Point 2005 to 

2006 NAVD88 WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Hurricane Point 2004 to 

2005 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Kessler Point 2004 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Point Sur 2005 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Slate Rock 2006 NAVD88 WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Soberanes Point 2004 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Big Sur, Yankee Point 2004 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Elkhorn Slough 2003 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

Elkhorn Slough 2005 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 1m grid

Monterey Canyon 2006 NAVD88 WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 3m grid

Moss Landing Harbor unknown assumed MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 1m xyz

Monterey Peninsula, Cypress Pt. to Pt. 

Pinos

2000 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Monterey Peninsula, Monastery to 

Cypress Pt.

2000 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Monterey Peninsula, Pt. Pinos to 

Shalebeds

2000 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Point Lobos 2000 to 

2006 MLLW WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 2m grid

Soquel Canyon 2006 NAVD88 WGS1984 UTM Zone 10N 3m grid
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

11

Figure 6. Spatial coverage of California State Seafloor Mapping Laboratory multibeam sonar surveys used to compile the 

Monterey DEM.
Carignan et al., 2009

12

3) USGS multibeam sonar surveys

The USGS created bathymetric grids along the California coast using EM1000 and EM300 multibeam 

sonar data (Table 7, Fig. 7). Seven surveys were downloaded from the USGS data catalog website (HUhttp://

geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of01-179/index.htmlUH) in 5-meter gridded format in NAD 83 geographic UTM 

Zone 10 horizontal datum. Metadata records provided no vertical datum reference and NGDC processed the 

data as mean sea level, converting the surveys to WGS 84 using ArcCatalog and MHW using VDatum tool. 

Further review and editing to remove anomalous data points was completed using QT Modeler.

 Table 7: USGS multibeam sonar surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM.

Survey ID Year Original Vertical Datum Original Horizontal Datum Resolution

mont95ng 1995 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mont95sg 1995 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mont95c 1995 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mtcan5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mtshlf5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

sgf5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

sur5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD 83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

Figure 7. Spatial coverage of USGS multibeam sonar surveys used to compile the Monterey DEM.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

13

Editing of the USGS multibeam data were necessary to remove suspect data crossing land at the beginning/

end of survey lines of mtshlf5g and mont95sg. Survey mont95sg also contained an unknown feature which NGDC 

could not confirm (Fig. 8).

Figure 8. Images of unknown feature in USGS multibeam survey south of Moss Landing Inlet. A) QT Modeler image of gridded multibeam data 

showing feature and coordinates. B) Sidescan sonar image. Red box is approximate area shown in image A. Diagonal white line in upper right 

corner is underwater pipeline from shore.

4) Office of Coast Survey Electronic navigational chart extracted soundings

The OCS electronic navigational chart sounding data were extracted from charts #18680, 18700, and 

18686 and converted to MHW using VDatum tool. Soundings from these ENCs were clipped to the multibeam 

surveys. Additional soundings digitized from RNCs were added near Moss Landing Harbor and Santa Cruz 

Harbor to ensure negative elevations in the bathymetric surface where no other sounding data were available 

(Fig. 9).

Figure 9. Spatial coverage of ENC sounding data 

used to compile the Monterey DEM.
Carignan et al., 2009

14

3.1.3 Topography

Two topographic datasets in the Monterey region were obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and 

NOAA’s Coastal Service Center and used to build the Monterey DEM (CSC; Table 8; Fig. 3). NGDC evaluated but 

did not use the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Elevation 1 arc-second DEM available from USGS or 

CSC LiDAR data from 1998. NGDC digitized some elevation points to supplement the USGS and CSC datasets at 

Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Moss Landing.

 Table 8: Topographic datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM.

Source Year Data 

Type

Spatial

Resolution

Original 

Horizontal Datum/

Coordinate System

Original 

Vertical 

Datum

URL

USGS 1999-

2006

NED 

DEM

1/3 arcsecondNAD 83 

geographic

NAVD88

(meters) HUhttp://ned.usgs.gov/UH

CSC

2004 

to 

2005

IfSAR 

DEMs 5 meters NAD 83 geographic

NAVD88 

(meters) http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/tcm/current.html U U

NGDC

digitized 

elevation 

points

~2.5 

meters

WGS 84 

geographic

MHW 

(meters)

1) USGS NED topographic DEM

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED; HUhttp://ned.usgs.gov/UH) provides 

complete 1/3 arc-second coverage of the Monterey regionF

4

F. Data are in NAD 83 geographic coordinates 

and NAVD88 vertical datum (meters), and are available for download as raster DEMs. The bare-earth 

elevations have a vertical accuracy of +/- 7 to 15 meters depending on source data resolution. See the USGS 

Seamless web site for specific source information (HUhttp://seamless.usgs.gov/UH). The dataset was derived from 

USGS quadrangle maps and aerial photographs based on topographic surveys; it has been revised using data 

collected in 1999 and 2006. The NED DEM included “zero” elevation values over the open ocean, which 

were removed from the dataset by clipping to the combined coastline. The data were then converted to xyz 

points and filtered to remove “zero” elevations within the ‘combined coastline’.

2) CSC Interferometric SAR topography (IfSAR) DEMs

CSC provided 7.5 minute DEMs derived from 2004/2005 IfSAR data for the entire coastal region in 

raster tile format. Radar shadow and layover created some ‘no data’ areas in the raw data but were interpolated 

across in final processing steps by Intermap contractors in creating the DEMs. Harbor features in Monterey,

Santa Cruz, and Moss Landing were not fully resolved in this dataset. The tiles were transformed to MHW 

and clipped to the ‘combined coastline’ using ArcCatalog then converted to xyz points. The data are not 

specified as bare earth and roadway overpasses, bridges, and piers were removed using QT Modeler.

This dataset was not used in constructing the publicly available version of the Monterey 

DEM because it is proprietary. 

4. The USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) has been developed by merging the highest-resolution, best quality elevation data available across 

the United States into a seamless raster format. NED is the result of the maturation of the USGS effort to provide 1:24,000-scale Digital Elevation 

Model (DEM) data for the conterminous U.S. and 1:63,360-scale DEM data for Georgia. The dataset provides seamless coverage of the United 

States, HI, AK, and the island territories. NED has a consistent projection (Geographic), resolution (1 arc second), and elevation units (meters). The 

horizontal datum is NAD 83, except for AK, which is NAD 27. The vertical datum is NAVD88, except for AK, which is NGVD29. NED is a living 

dataset that is updated bimonthly to incorporate the “best available” DEM data. As more 1/3 arc second (10 m) data covers the U.S., then this will 

also be a seamless dataset. [Extracted from USGS NED website]
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

15

3) NGDC digitized elevation points

To represent the jetties at Monterey, Santa Cruz, and Moss Landing (Figs. 10 and 11), NGDC created 

digital representations of the features using ArcMap and assigned elevations (Figs 12, 13, and 14). The 

elevation for the Monterey Coast Guard pier was set at 1.74 meters and the Monterey wharf and seawall at 3 

meters and 1 meter respectively using the NGS tidal benchmarks. The elevations for the jetties at Santa Cruz 

and Moss Landing were set at 2.2 and 2.8 meters respectively based on values taken from the U.S. Army 

Corp of Engineer’s Database of Navigation Projects and Structures (HUhttp://cirp.wes.army.mil/cirp/structdb/

structdb.php3?sel=startUH). Point spacing for all digitized features is ~2.5 meters to ensure an even surface on 

the tops of features.

Figure 10. Aerial photographs of Moss Landing Harbor (Image A) and Monterey Harbor (Image B) used to confirm features not resolved in NED 

and CSC topographic datasets (HUhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/nsd/Cp7/CP7-40ed-Ch06_7.pdfUH).

Figure 11. Details of the Monterey Harbor feature digitized by NGDC. A) Satellite image from Google Earth of Monterey Harbor. The red 

arrow points to installed seawall midway out the wharf. The yellow outlines the appearance of sediment deposition used in determining wharf 

characteristics. B) Graphic outlining marina details (HUhttp://www.monterey.org/harbor/marinamap.htmlUH) Red arrow points at seawall in image A.
Carignan et al., 2009

16

Figure 12. Location of digitized harbor feature in Santa Cruz 

Harbor. East and west digitized jetties shown in red.

Figure 13. Location of digitized harbor features in Moss Landing. 

North and south jetties shown in red.

Figure 14. Location of digitized harbor features in Monterey 

Harbor. Coast Guard pier, wharf, and seawall shown in red.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

17

3.2 Establishing Common Datums

3.2.1 Vertical datum transformations

Datasets used in the compilation and evaluation of the Monterey DEM were originally referenced to a number of 

vertical datums including Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW), Mean Sea Level (MSL), and North American Vertical 

Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). All datasets were transformed to MHW to provide the maximum flooding for inundation

modeling.

1) Bathymetric data

The NOS hydrographic surveys, the ENC extracted soundings, the California State University Seafloor

Mapping Laboratory, and USGS multibeam sonar surveys were transformed from MLLW and MSL to MHW, 

using the VDatum tool (HUhttp://vdatum.noaa.govH ) based on VDatum coverage (Fig. 15).

Figure 15. Coverage of VDatum tool for the Monterey DEM region.

California State University Seafloor Mapping Laboratory surveys located in Moss Landing Inlet and

Elkhorn Slough were transformed using a constant derived from the VDatum transformation tool, as the 

tool coverage does not extend past the main harbor channel entrance (Fig. 16). Data points entered in the 

transformation tool that do not lie within the tool boundary are output with elevation value of -999999 

and subsequently filtered out using FME. Viewing all datasets in ArcMap prior to using the VDatum tool

eliminated the possibility of missing data in final gridding.
Carignan et al., 2009

18

Figure 16. Illustration of VDatum tool limitation within Moss Landing inlet. Green area designates California State Seafloor 

Mapping Laboratory multibeam sonar data transformed by VDatum tool. Purple shows multibeam data not transformed by VDatum.

2) Topographic data

The USGS NED 1/3 arc-second DEMs and the CSC IfSAR DEMs were originally referenced to NAVD88. 

Conversion to MHW, using FME software and ArcCatalog, was accomplished by adding a constant offset 

of -1.457 meters (Table 9) the average of the Monterey Harbor and Elkhorn Slough tide stations (#9413450 

and #9413663).

Table 9. Relationship between Mean High Water and other vertical datums used in the Monterey DEM.

Vertical datum Difference to MHW*

NAVD88 -1.457

MSL -0.556

MLLW -1.441

*average of the Monterey Harbor and Elkhorn Slough tide stations (#9413450 and #9413663)

3.2.2 Horizontal datum transformations

Datasets used to compile the Monterey DEM were originally referenced to WGS 84 geographic, WGS 84 UTM 

Zone 10 North, NAD 83 UTM Zone 10 North, NAD 83 geographic, or NAD 27 geographic horizontal datums. The 

relationships and transformational equations between these horizontal datums are well established. All data were 

converted to a horizontal datum of NAD 83 geographic using FME software.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

19

3.3 Digital Elevation Model Development

3.3.1 Verifying consistency between datasets

After horizontal and vertical transformations were applied, the resulting ESRIshape files were checked inArcMap

for consistency between datasets. Problems and errors were identified and resolved before proceeding with subsequent

gridding steps. The evaluated and edited ESRI shape files were then converted to xyz files in preparation for gridding.

Problems included:

•	 Suspect topographic elevations located on and within inlets and estuaries.

•	 Data values over the ocean and rivers in the NED topographic data. The dataset required automated clipping 

to the combined coastline.

•	 Topographic IfSAR dataset not processed to bare earth. The dataset required filtering of elevation values on

land and manual editing of individual features.

•	 Digital, measured bathymetric values from NOS surveys date back over 70 years. More recent data, such as 

the multibeam surveys differed from older NOS data by as much as 100 meters vertically. The older NOS 

survey data were excised where more recent bathymetric data exists.
Carignan et al., 2009

20

3.3.2 Smoothing of bathymetric data

The older NOS hydrographic surveys are generally sparse at the resolution of 1/3 arc-second in both deep water 

and in some areas close to shore. In order to reduce the effect of artifacts in the form of lines of “pimples” in the DEM 

due to this low resolution dataset, and to provide effective interpolation into the coastal zone, a 1 arc-second-spacing 

‘pre-surface’ bathymetric grid was generated using GMT, an NSF-funded share-ware software application designed to 

manipulate data for mapping purposes (HUhttp://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/UH).

The NOS hydrographic point data, in xyz format, were clipped to remove overlap with the USGS and California 

State multibeam data then combined with the ENC sounding data along with points extracted from the combined 

coastline—to provide a buffer along the entire coastline. The coastline elevation value was set at -1.0 m to ensure a 

bathymetric surface below zero in areas where data is sparse or non-existent.

Some inconsistencies were identified while merging the bathymetric datasets due to the range in ages and

resolutions of the NOS hydrographic surveys. Coastal erosion and development have modified the coastline to the

extent that harbors surveyed in the early 20th century have had changes in structures and design. In areas where more 

recent data were available, the older surveys were either edited or removed. The extracted ENC/RNC sounding data 

were used only where there was a significant lack of current bathymetric data (see Fig. 9). These areas include the

northern half of Monterey Bay close to the shoreline, at the entrance to Moss Landing, the southern shoreline within 

the Bay, the near shore area from Carmel-by-the-Sea extending southward, and in deeper water due west of Point 

Sur. The region in the deeper water posed significant gridding difficulties due to the extreme low resolution of the

hydrographic surveys (data point spacing ranges from 200 up to 1000 meters).

The point data were median-averaged using the GMT tool ‘blockmedian’ to create a 1 arc-second grid 0.05 

degrees (~5%) larger than the Monterey DEM gridding region. The GMT tool ‘surface’ was then used to apply a 

tight spline tension to interpolate elevations for cells without data values. The GMT grid created by ‘surface’ was 

converted into an ESRI Arc ASCII grid file, and clipped to the combined coastline (to eliminate data interpolation into

land areas). The resulting surface was compared with original soundings to ensure grid accuracy (e.g., Fig. 17) and 

exported as an xyz file for use in the final gridding process (see Table 11).

Figure 17. Histogram of the differences between NOS hydrographic survey H05414 and the 1 arc-second pre-surfaced 

bathymetric grid.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

21

3.3.3 Gridding the data with MB-System

MB-System (HUhttp://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/pi/MB-System/UH) was used to create the 1/3 arc-second Monterey 

DEM. MB-System is an NSF-funded share-ware software application specifically designed to manipulate submarine

multibeam sonar data, though it can utilize a wide variety of data types, including generic xyz data. The MB-System 

tool ‘mbgrid’ was used to apply a tight spline tension to the xyz data, and interpolate values for cells without data. 

The data hierarchy used in the ‘mbgrid’ gridding algorithm, as relative gridding weights, is listed in Table 10. Greatest 

weight was given to the CSC IfSAR data. Least weight was given to the pre-surfaced 1 arc-second bathymetric grid. 

Gridding was performed in quadrants with the resulting Arc ASCII grids seamlessly merged in ArcCatalog to create 

the final 1/3 arc-second Monterey DEM.

 Table 10. Data hierarchy used to assign gridding weight in MB-System.

Dataset Relative Gridding Weight

CSC topographic coastal IfSAR 100,000

USGS NED topographic DEM 100

NGDC digitized topographic harbor features 10,000

Combined coastline 100

USGS multibeam surveys 10,000

Cal State multibeam surveys 10,000

NOS hydrographic surveys 10

ENC/RNC soundings 10

Pre-surfaced bathymetric grid 1

3.4 Quality Assessment of the DEM

3.4.1. Horizontal accuracy

The horizontal accuracy of topographic and bathymetric features in the Monterey DEM is dependent upon the 

datasets used to determine corresponding DEM cell values. Topographic features have an estimated accuracy of up to 

10 meters: CSC topographic IfSAR data have accuracy better than 2 meters; NED topography is accurate to within 

about 10 meters. Bathymetric features are resolved only to within a few tens of meters in deep-water areas. Shallow, 

near-coastal regions, rivers, and harbor surveys have an accuracy approaching that of subaerial topographic features. 

Positional accuracy is limited by the sparseness of deep-water soundings; potentially large positional uncertainty of 

pre-satellite navigated (e.g., GPS) NOS hydrographic surveys, and by the morphologic change that occurs in this 

dynamic region.

3.4.2 Vertical accuracy

Vertical accuracy of elevation values for the Monterey DEM is also highly dependent upon the source datasets 

contributing to DEM cell values. Topographic areas have an estimated vertical accuracy better than 1 meter for CSC 

topographic IfSAR data, and up to 7 meters for NED topography. Bathymetric areas have an estimated accuracy 

of between 0.1 meters and 5% of water depth. Those values were derived from the wide range of input sounding 

measurements from the early 20th century to recent, GPS-navigated sonar surveys. Gridding interpolation to determine 

values between sparse, poorly-located NOS soundings degrades the vertical accuracy of elevations in deep water.
Carignan et al., 2009

22

3.4.3 Slope maps and 3-D perspectives

ESRI ArcCatalog was used to generate a slope grid from the Monterey DEM to allow for visual inspection and 

identification of artificial slopes along boundaries between datasets (e.g., Fig. 18). The DEM was transformed to UTM

Zone 10 coordinates (horizontal units in meters) in ArcCatalog for derivation of the slope grid; equivalent horizontal 

and vertical units are required for effective slope analysis. Three-dimensional viewing of the DEM was accomplished 

using QT Modeler. Figure 19 shows a perspective rendering generated using ArcMap. Analysis of preliminary grids 

revealed suspect data points, which were corrected before recompiling the DEM. Figure 1 shows a color image of the 

1/3 arc-second Monterey DEM in its final version.

Figure 18. Slope map of the Monterey DEM. Flat-lying slopes are white; dark shading denotes steep 

slopes; combined coastline in red.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

23

Figure 19. Perspective view from the southwest of the Monterey DEM. Vertical 

exaggeration 1.5 times.

3.4.4	 Comparison with source data files

To ensure grid accuracy, the Monterey DEM was compared to select source data files. Files were chosen on

the basis of their contribution to the grid-cell values in their coverage areas (i.e., had the greatest weight and did 

not significantly overlap other data files with comparable weight). A histogram of the differences between a CSC

topographic IfSAR survey tile and the Monterey DEM is shown in Figure 20. Differences cluster around zero, with 

only a handful of soundings, in regions of steep topography, exceeding 0.5-meter discrepancy from the DEM.

Figure 20. Histogram of the difference between one CSC IfSAR DEM tile and the Monterey DEM.
Carignan et al., 2009

24

3.4.5 Comparison with NGS geodetic monuments

The elevations of 1025 NOAA NGS geodetic monuments were extracted from online shape files of monument

datasheets (HUhttp://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/datasheet.prlUH), which give monument positions in NAD 83 (typically 

sub-mm accuracy) and elevations in NAVD88 (in meters). Elevations were shifted to MHW vertical datum (see Table 

10) for comparison with the Monterey DEM (see Fig. 22 for monument locations). Differences between the Monterey 

DEM and the NGS geodetic monument elevations range from -435 to 306 meters, with the majority of them being 

within U+U 2 meters. Negative values indicate that the monument elevation is less than the DEM (Fig. 21). Only 160 

monuments out of 1025 total showed significant deviations from the DEM at locations located primarily along the

coast and at high elevations. Other larger discrepancies occurred where monuments are located on buildings, towers, 

and bridges.

Figure 21. Histogram of the differences between NGS geodetic monument elevations and the Monterey DEM.

Figure 22. Location of NGS geodetic monuments, shown as green triangles, and the NOAA tide stations, yellow circles. 

NGS monument elevations were used to evaluate the DEM.
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

25

4. Summary and Conclusions

A bathymetric–topographic digital elevation model of the Monterey, California region, with cell spacing of 1/3 

arc-second, was developed for the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) NOAA Center for Tsunami

Research. The best available digital data from U.S. federal, state and local agencies were obtained by NGDC, shifted 

to common horizontal and vertical datums, and evaluated and edited before DEM generation. The data were quality 

checked, processed and gridded using ESRI ArcGIS, FME, GMT, MB-System and Quick Terrain Modeler software. 

Recommendations to improve the Monterey DEM, based on NGDC’s research and analysis, are listed below:

•	 Conduct hydrographic surveys for near-shore areas especially in harbors, inlets, and estuaries.

•	 Conduct bathymetric–topographic LiDAR surveying of entire region.

•	 Conduct deep water multibeam surveys for northern Monterey Bay.

5. Acknowledgments

The creation of the Monterey DEM was funded by the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory. The

authors thank Chris Chamberlin and Vasily Titov (PMEL), Keil Schmid of NOAA, CSC, and George Fong of U.S. 

Army Corp of Engineers, San Francisco District. Data used in this study were acquired, processed, archived, and 

distributed by the Seafloor Mapping Lab of California State University Monterey Bay.

6. References

Nautical Chart #18680 (ENC), 8th Edition, 2007. Point Sur to San Francisco. Scale 1: 210,668. U.S. Department of 

Commerce, NOAA, National Ocean Service, Coast Survey.

Nautical Chart #18686 (ENC), 3rd Edition, 2007. Pfeiffer Point to Cypress Point. Scale 1:40,000. U.S. Department of 

Commerce, NOAA, National Ocean Service, Coast Survey.

Nautical Chart #18700 (ENC), 5th Edition, 2007. Point Conception to Point Sur. Scale 1:216,116. U.S. Department of 

Commerce, NOAA, National Ocean Service, Coast Survey.

Nautical Chart #18685 (RNC), 33rd Edition, 2005. Monterey Bay. Scale 1:50,000. U.S. Department of Commerce, 

NOAA, National Ocean Service, Coast Survey.
Carignan et al., 2009

26

7. Data Processing Software

ArcGIS v. 9.2 – developed and licensed by ESRI, Redlands, California, HUhttp://www.esri.com/UH

FME 2007 GB – Feature Manipulation Engine, developed and licensed by Safe Software, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 

HUhttp://www.safe.com/UH

GEODAS v. 5 – Geophysical Data System, freeware developed and maintained by Dan Metzger, NOAA National 

Geophysical Data Center, HUhttp://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/geodas/UH

GMT v. 4.1.4 – Generic Mapping Tools, freeware developed and maintained by Paul Wessel and Walter Smith, funded 

by the National Science Foundation, HUhttp://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/UH

MB-System v. 5.1.0 – shareware developed and maintained by David W. Caress and Dale N. Chayes, funded by the 

National Science Foundation, HUhttp://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/pi/MB-System/UH

Quick Terrain Modeler v. 6.0.1 – LiDAR processing software developed by John Hopkins University’s Applied Physics 

Laboratory (APL) and maintained and licensed by Applied Imagery, HUhttp://www.appliedimagery.com/UH

GDAL v. 1.4.4 – Geospatial Data Abstraction Library, freeware developed and maintained by FrankWarnerdam, HUhttp://

www.gdal.orgU

POV-Ray v. 3.6 – Persistence of Vision Raytracer, freeware developed and maintained by Persistence of Vision 

Raytracer Pty. Ltd., HUhttp://www.povray.orgU
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

27

8. Appendix A

Contact Barry Eakins (HUbarry.eakins@noaa.govUH; 303-497-6505) to make arrangements to obtain the gridded data, if 

you are a NOAA employee or part of the US Coastal Management Community as defined in the EULA.

INTERMAP TECHNOLOGIES INC.

NOAA PERPETUAL END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT (EULA)

1. Introduction. This End User License Agreement (“EULA”) is between Intermap Technologies Inc. (“Intermap”) 

and the Clients (“You”), which are defined as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) and

the Coastal Management Community as defined in Attachment A. This license governs the Client’s perpetual use of

the data products or documentation accompanying this EULA (the “Products”). By using the Products, the Client 

agrees to be bound by the terms of this EULA. If the Client does not agree with these terms, they should promptly 

return the unused Product to Intermap and their money will be refunded in full. The Products includes Intermap data 

and data products, and the data and data products of third parties that are licensed to Intermap for distribution.

2. Scope of License. Intermap grants You a limited, non- transferable, non-exclusive license to use the Products in the 

manner set forth in this license. Your use of the Products must conform to the following restrictions: (a) the Products 

may only be used for internal purposes; if You wish to distribute the Products, You must obtain an additional license 

from Intermap; (b) use of the Products is confined to Your employees, agents or sub-contractors; (c) the Products may

be used internally on one or more information processing machines and at one or more geographical locations; (d) 

You may not create or distribute Product Derivative Works (as defined in Section 3); (e) Orthorectification of aerial

or satellite imagery is allowed. You may create and distribute the orthoimagery products as long as, when distributing 

the products, You agree to always include the Intermap Technologies Inc. logo, which is available in digital form from 

Intermap, on the medium of distribution and its packaging; and (f) You may distribute Thematic Derivative Works (as 

defined in Section 4).

3. Product Derivative Works. Product Derivative Works for the purpose of this license are defined as any image,

representation or alteration of the Products received from Intermap from which the Products can be reverse engineered. 

Examples of Product Derivative Works include, but are not limited to, contour maps and elevation data from resampled 

Products.

4. Thematic Derivative Works. Thematic Derivative Works for the purpose of this license are defined as any image,

representation or alteration of the Products received from Intermap from which the Products cannot be reverse 

engineered. Examples of Thematic Derivative Works include thematic maps, hazard maps, fly-through videos,

perspective views, vector-based road center lines, building or feature outlines, mapping class boundaries, or other 

vector-based data extraction results. Thematic Derivative Works are not subject to this license except insofar as their 

creation from the Products is concerned.

5. Restrictions. This EULA prohibits You from disclosing, publishing, selling, assigning, leasing, sublicensing, 

marketing or transferring the Products in whole or in part, or using the same in any manner or for any purpose not 

expressly authorized by this EULA. Intermap reserves all rights not expressly granted by this EULA. You may not 

use the Products on behalf of, or allow the Products to be used by, any affiliated organization or subsidiary whether or

not controlled by the Client or the Client’s organization. If the Products are licensed to a government agency (whether 

federal, state or local) under this EULA, the Product may be used only by the licensed agency and not by any other 

government agency. You acknowledge that the Products and the data within them are proprietary to, copyrighted 

by, and contain trade secrets of, Intermap or its suppliers. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or display of the 

Products in any manner not expressly authorized herein is prohibited. You agree to keep confidential and use Your

best efforts to prevent and protect the contents of the Product from unauthorized disclosure or use. You will advise 

Intermap immediately upon discovering evidence of a breach or threatened breach of the terms of this license by any 

party.

6. U.S. Government End Users. The Product is a “commercial item” as that term is defined at 48 C.F.R. 2.101

(Oct. 1995), consisting of “commercial computer software” and “commercial computer software documentation,” as 

such terms are used in 48 C.F.R. 12.212 (Sept. 1995). Consistent with 48 C.F.R. 12.212 (Sept. 1995) and 48 C.F.R. 

227.7202-1 throughout 227.7202-4 (June 1995), all U.S. Government End Users acquire the Products with only those 

rights set forth herein. Contractor/manufacturer is Intermap Technologies Incorporated, Englewood, Colorado, USA. 

If the Products or any Thematic Derivative Works are used in connection with the performance of any government 

contracts or subcontracts, You shall ensure that (i) the Products and any Thematic Derivative Works shall not constitute 

a deliverable under any governmental contracts or subcontracts; and (ii) in no event shall a government entity acquire 
Carignan et al., 2009

28

any rights other than those provided in this Section.

7. LIMITED WARRANTY AND DISCLAIMERS. INTERMAP WARRANTS FOR SIXTY (60)

DAYS AFTER THE DELIVERY OF THE PRODUCTS THAT THE DATA DELIVERED WILL BE 

OF THE AREA OF INTEREST ORDERED AND THE MEDIA USED TO CARRY THE DATA WILL 

BE FREE FROM PHYSICAL OR MATERIAL DEFECTS. INTERMAP’S SOLE LIABILITY UNDER 

THIS LIMITED WARRANTY SHALL BE TO REPLACE THE MEDIA IF IT (NOT THE SOFTWARE 

OR DATA ENCODED THEREON) IS DEFECTIVE AND YOU RETURN SUCH TO INTERMAP 

WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS OF DELIVERY. EXCEPT FOR THE LIMITED WARRANTY SPECIFIED 

HEREIN, THE PRODUCTS ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, AND ALL 

WARRANTIES OR MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE 

EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED. INTERMAP DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE PRODUCTS WILL 

MEET YOUR NEEDS OR EXPECTATIONS OR THAT USE OF THE PRODUCTS WILL BE ERROR 

FREE OR UNINTERRUPTED. IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE FOR ANY 

CLAIM OR LOSS INCURRED BY THE OTHER PARTY (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION 

COMPENSATORY, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 

DAMAGES), IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER SUCH PARTY HAS BEEN INFORMED, KNEW, OR 

SHOULD HAVE KNOWN OF THE LIKELIHOOD OF SUCH DAMAGES. THIS LIMITATION APPLIES 

TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION BREACH OF CONTRACT OR 

WARRANTY OR TORT. IF THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT 

SHALL FOR ANY REASON BE HELD UNENFORCEABLE OR INAPPLICABLE, BOTH PARTIES 

AGREE THAT THE OTHER’S LIABILITY SHALL NOT EXCEED FIFTY PERCENT (50%) OF 

THE LICENSE FEES PAID BY CLIENT TO INTERMAP WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCTS AT 

ISSUE.

8. Term and Termination. This EULA shall become effective upon use of the Product and shall continue in force until 

terminated as provided herein. This EULA shall terminate immediately if You fail to comply with any of its terms. 

Upon termination of this EULA for any reason, You shall deliver to Intermap the Products and confirm You have

destroyed all copies of the Products in Your possession.

9. Dispute Resolution and Governing Law. This EULA shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws 

of the State of Colorado not withstanding its conflict of laws provisions. The parties agree to attempt to settle any claim

or controversy arising under this EULA through consultation and negotiation in the spirit of mutual friendship and 

cooperation. If such attempts fail, then the dispute shall first be submitted to a mutually acceptable neutral advisor for

initial fact finding in preparation for mediation or other form of alternate dispute resolution. The exclusive jurisdiction

and venue for any lawsuit between the parties arising out of this EULA shall be the United States District Court for the 

District of Colorado or the state courts in Denver, Colorado, USA.

10. Miscellaneous. This EULA is the complete and exclusive statement between the Client and Intermap with respect 

to the use of the Products and may be amended or modified only in a written instrument signed by a duly authorized

representative of Intermap. If any provision is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions 

of this EULA shall continue to be valid and enforceable. Neither this EULA nor any of the rights granted by it may 

be assigned or transferred by You without the prior written consent of Intermap. This restriction on assignments or 

transfers shall apply to assignments or transfers by operation of law, as well as by contract, merger or consolidation. 

The Client shall be solely responsible for obtaining any and all required government authorizations, including without 

limitation, any export or import licenses and foreign exchange permits. Nothing in this section shall restrict the ability 

of Intermap to pursue any legal or equitable remedy or to obtain an injunction to protect any rights Intermap may have 

rising out of or relating to the Product or any of Intermap’s other trademark or intellectual property rights. Sections 

5, 6, 7 and 8 shall survive expiration or termination of this EULA. 11. Export Licensing Notification. The products 

delivered hereunder are subject to the export licensing regulations of the United States Department of Commerce. 

The recipient of the Products may be obligated under US law to comply with such regulations in distributing the 

Products.

NOAA EULA - ATTACHMENT A

Section i. “Coastal Management Community” shall be defined as government organizations within the United States

at the State, County or Local government level whose primary function is Coastal Management. For the purposes of 

this license agreement, Coastal Management shall be defined as the management of coastal zones, inland waterways
Digital Elevation Model of Monterey, California

29

and lands adjacent to the Great Lakes in support of environmental, wildlife, and natural resource applications. A listing 

of the organizations and programs that constitute the Coastal Management Community is listed in Section ii. The list 

in Section ii may be modified or extended upon the mutual consent of NOAA and Intermap.

Section ii. Government organizations and programs within the United States at the State, County or Local government 

level that are defined to be the Coastal Management Community are:

Coastal Management Programs

Kachemak Bay NERR

Weeks Bay NERR

Elkhorn Slough NERR

San Francisco Bay NERR

Tijuana River NERR

Delaware NERR

Apalachicola Bay NERR

GTM NERR

Rookery Bay NERR

Sapelo Island NERR

Waquoit Bay NERR

Chesapeake Bay (MD) NERR

Wells NERR

Grand Bay NERR

North Carolina NERR

Great Bay NERR

Mullica River NERR

Hudson River NERR

St. Lawrence River Basin NERR

Old Woman Creek NERR

South Slough NERR

Jobos Bay NERR

Narragansett Bay NERR

ACE Basin NERR

North Inlet-Winyah Bay NERR

Chesapeake Bay (VA) NERR

Padilla Bay NERR

Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program

Coastal Management Organizations

University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute

ADCNR, Coastal Programs Office

California Coastal Commission

SF Bay Conservation and Development Commission

Office of Long Island Sound Programs

FL Coastal Management Program

GA Coastal Management Program

Hawaii CZM Program

MA CZMP

Maine Coastal Program

MN Coastal Program

MS Coastal Program

NH Coastal Program

NJ Coastal Program

OH Dept of Natural Resources

OR Coastal Management Program

PA CZMP

PR Coastal Program/ Dept of Natural Resources
Carignan et al., 2009

30

Coastal Resource Management Council

SC CZMP

VA Coastal Program

VI Coastal Zone Program

WI Coastal Management Program

AL Dept of Environmental Management

Alabama Division of Wildlife & Fisheries

CA Dept of Boating & Waterways

CA Dept of Fish and Game

CA Dept of Water Resources

CA Ocean Resources Management

California Coastal Conservancy

CT DEP Bureau of Natural Resources

DNREC Div of Fish & Wildlife

DNREC Div of Soil & Water Conservation

DNREC Div of Water Resources

FL Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission

GA DNR/Environ. Prot. Div.

Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources

IN Dept of Environmental Management

LA Dept of Wildlife & Fisheries

MA Dept of Environmental Management

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

MD Dept of the Environment

Maine Department of Environmental Protection

ME Dept of Conservation

ME Dept of Marine Resources

Michigan Department of Natural Resources

MN Board of Water & Soil Resources

MN Pollution Control Agency

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

NC Division of Marine Fisheries

New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services