Digital Elevation Model for Monterey, California:

Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis

Prepared for the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) NOAA Center for 

Tsunami Research by the NOAA National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC)

January 11, 2008

Taylor, L.A., B.W. Eakins, K.S. Carignan, R.R. Warnken, T. Sazonova, and D.C. Schoolcraft

NOAA, National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado

Corresponding author 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: H U Lisa.A.Taylor@noaa.gov U

H Uhttp://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/inundation/ U H
2 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 4

2. Study Area............................................................................................................................................... 5

3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Data Sources and Processing.......................................................................................................... 7

3.1.1 Shoreline.................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.2 Bathymetry.............................................................................................................. 10

3.1.3 Topography ............................................................................................................. 17

3.2 Establishing Common Datums..................................................................................................... 20

3.2.1 Vertical datum transformations ............................................................................. 20

3.2.2 Horizontal datum transformations......................................................................... 21

3.3 Digital Elevation Model Development........................................................................................ 22

3.3.1 Verifying consistency between datasets................................................................ 22

3.3.2 Smoothing of bathymetric data.............................................................................. 23

3.3.3 Gridding the data with MB-System....................................................................... 24

3.4 Quality Assessment of the DEM.................................................................................................. 24

3.4.1 Horizontal accuracy................................................................................................ 24

3.4.2 Vertical accuracy .................................................................................................... 24

3.4.3 Slope maps and 3-D perspectives.......................................................................... 25

3.4.4 Comparison with source data files......................................................................... 26

3.4.5 Comparison with NGS geodetic monuments........................................................ 27

4. Summary and Conclusions................................................................................................................... 28

5. Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................ 28

6. References............................................................................................................................................. 28

7. Data Processing Software..................................................................................................................... 29

8. Appendix A ........................................................................................................................................... 30

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Shaded-relief image of the Monterey, California DEM ............................................................... 4

Figure 2. Google Earth image of Central California coast ........................................................................... 5

Figure 3. Source and coverage of datasets used to compile the Monterey DEM........................................ 7

Figure 4. Digital coastline datasets available in the Monterey region ......................................................... 8

Figure 5. Digital NOS hydrographic survey coverage in the Monterey region ........................................ 12

Figure 6. Spatial coverage of California State Seafloor Mapping Lab digital 

multibeam sonar surveys used to compile the Monterey DEM.......................................... 14

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

DEM ....................................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 8. Images of unknown feature in USGS multibeam survey ........................................................... 16

Figure 9. Spatial coverage of ENC sounding data used to compile the Monterey DEM ......................... 16

Figure 10. Aerial photographs of Moss Landing Harbor and Monterey Harbor......................................... 18

Figure 11. Details of the Monterey Harbor features digitized by NGDC.................................................... 18

Figure 12. Location of NGDC digitized features in Santa Cruz harbor ...................................................... 19

Figure 13. Location of NGDC digitized features in Moss Landing harbor................................................. 19

Figure 14. Location of NGDC digitized features in Monterey harbor......................................................... 19

Figure 15. Coverage of VDatum tool for the Monterey DEM region ......................................................... 20

Figure 16. Illustration of VDatum tool coverage limitation within Moss Landing inlet............................ 21

Figure 17. Histogram of the differences between NOS hydrographic survey H05414 and the 1 

arc-second pre-surfaced bathymetric grid ............................................................................ 23

Figure 18. Slope map of the Monterey DEM ................................................................................................ 25

Figure 19. Perspective view of the Monterey DEM. .................................................................................... 26

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

Monterey DEM...................................................................................................................... 26

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

and the Monterey DEM ........................................................................................................ 27

Figure 22. Location of NGS geodetic monuments and the NOAA tide stations ........................................ 27
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. PMEL specifications for the Monterey, California DEM ............................................................ 6

Table 2. Shoreline datasets used in the Monterey, California region......................................................... 8

Table 3. Electronic navigational charts available in the Monterey, California region .............................. 9

Table 4. Bathymetric datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM..................................................... 10

Table 5. Digital NOS hydrographic surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM.............................. 10

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

the Monterey DEM................................................................................................................ 13

Table 7. USGS multibeam sonar surveys used in compiling the Monterey DEM .................................. 15

Table 8. Topographic datasets used in compiling the Monterey DEM.................................................... 17

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

Monterey region..................................................................................................................... 21

Table 10. Data hierarchy used to assign gridding weight in MB-System.................................................. 24
4 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Digital Elevation Model for Monterey, California:

Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis

1. INTRODUCTION

The National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC), an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), has 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 ( H Uhttp://nctr.pmel.noaa.gov/ U H). The 1/3 arc-second F

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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 5

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 into 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.
6 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

3. METHODOLOGY

The Monterey, California DEM was developed to meet PMEL specifications (Table 1), based on input 

requirements for the MOST inundation model. The best available digital data were obtained by NGDC and 

shifted to common horizontal and vertical datums: World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) and Mean High 

Water (MHW), for modeling of “worst-case scenario” flooding, respectively. 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 (WGS84)

Vertical Datum Mean High Water (MHW)

Vertical Units Meters

Grid Spacing 1/3 arc-second

Grid Format ESRI Arc ASCII grid
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 7

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 (H Uhttp://www.safe.com/ U H) FME data translation 

tool package was used to shift datasets to WGS84 horizontal datum and to convert them into ESRI 

(H Uhttp://www.esri.com/ U H) ArcGIS shape files. 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 ( H Uhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/csdl/vdatum.htmU H).

Applied Imagery’s Quick Terrain Modeler software ( H Uhttp://www.appliedimagery.com/ U H) was used to 

evaluate processing and gridding techniques.

Figure 3. Source and coverage of datasets used to compile the Monterey DEM.
8 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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’s 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

WGS84 geographic

(meters) Mean High Water

H Uhttp://nauticalcha

rts.noaa.gov/mcd/

enc/index.htmUH

California Dept. 

of Fish and 

Game, Marine 

Region

1996

digitized 

1:24,000 

USGS quads

1:24,000 NAD83 geographic 

(meters) Mean High Tide

http://www.dfg.ca

.gov/biogeodata/g

is/mr.asp

Figure 4. Digital coastline datasets available in the Monterey region.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 9

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 

(H Uhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/mcd/enc/index.htmU H). 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.
10 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

3.1.2 Bathymetry

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

surveys, 17 Cal 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)

NAD27 or 

NAD83

geographic

Mean Lower 

Low Water

H Uhttp://www.ngdc.noaa.go

v/mgg/bathymetry/hydro.

htmlU H

Cal State 

Seafloor 

Mapping 

Lab

2003 Multibeam 

sonar 1 to 3 meters WGS84 UTM zone 10N

Mean Lower 

Low Water or 

NAVD88

H Uhttp://seafloor.csumb.edu

/index.htmlU H

USGS 1995 to 

1998

Multibeam 

sonar 5 meters NAD83 UTM zone 10N

assumed

Mean Sea 

Level

H Uhttp://geopubs.wr.usgs.g

ov/open-file/of01-

179/index.htmlU H

OCS ENC 2006 to 

2007

Extracted 

soundings

1:80,000 to 

1:400,000

WGS84 

geographic

Mean High 

Water

H Uhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa

.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 NAD27 or 

NAD83 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 ( H Uhttp://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/bathymetry/hydro.html U H)

referenced to NAD83. The data were then converted to WGS84 using FME software, an integrated 

collection of spatial extract, transform, and load tools for data transformation 

(H Uhttp://www.safe.comU H). 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 NAD27

H05472 1932 20,000 MLLW NAD27

H05287 1932 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05366 1932 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05405 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05406 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05412 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 11

H05414 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05415 1933 5,000 MLLW NAD27

H05452 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05453 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05477 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD27

H05245 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD27

H05266 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD27

H05313 1933 40,000 MLLW NAD27

H05373 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05393 1933 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05473 1934 80,000 MLLW NAD27

H05618 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05619 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05620 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05640 1934 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H05279 1935 80,000 MLLW NAD27

H05312 1935 10,000 MLLW NAD27

H09809 1979 5,000 MLLW NAD27

B00034 1985 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00039 1985 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00079 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00081 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00093 1986 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00119 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00121 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00123 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00128 1988 50,000 MLLW NAD83

B00209 1989 50,000 MLLW NAD83
12 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 13

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 ( H Uhttp://seafloor.csumb.edu/index.html U H) as gridded data 

(Table 6, Fig. 6). The surveys were collected from 2000 to 2006, and referenced to WGS84 UTM 

Zone 10N and either NAVD88 (meters) or MLLW datums. The files were converted to WGS84 

using ArcCatalog and to MHW using either CSC’s 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
14 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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

the Monterey DEM.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 15

3) USGS multibeam sonar surveys

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 ( H Uhttp://geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of01-179/index.html U H) in 5-meter gridded 

format in NAD83 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 WGS84 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 NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mont95sg 1995 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mont95c 1995 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mtcan5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

mtshlf5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

sgf5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

sur5g 1998 assumed Mean Sea Level NAD83 UTM Zone 10N 5m grid

Figure 7. Spatial coverage of USGS multibeam sonar surveys used to compile the Monterey DEM.
16 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

Editing of the USGS multibeam data was needed 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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 17

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 arcsecondNAD83 

geographic

NAVD88

(meters) H Uhttp://ned.usgs.gov/U H

CSC

2004 

to 

2005

IfSAR

DEMs 5 meters NAD83 geographic

NAVD88 

(meters) Uhttp://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/tcm/current.htmlU

NGDC

digitized 

elevation 

points

~2.5 

meters

WGS84 

geographic

MHW 

(meters)

1) USGS NED topographic DEM

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED; H Uhttp://ned.usgs.gov/ U H) 

provides complete 1/3 arc-second coverage of the Monterey region F

2

F . Data are in NAD83 

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 

(H Uhttp://seamless.usgs.gov/ U H). 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 was 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 is 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. 

 2. 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 NAD83, except for AK, which is NAD27. 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]
18 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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 referring 

to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineer’s Database of Navigation Projects and Structures 

(H Uhttp://cirp.wes.army.mil/cirp/structdb/structdb.php3?sel=start U H). 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 (H Uhttp://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 (H Uhttp://www.monterey.org/harbor/marinamap.htmlU H) Red 

arrow points at seawall in image A.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 19

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.
20 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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 

worst-case scenario for inundation modeling.

1) Bathymetric data

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

Seafloor Mapping Lab, and USGS multibeam sonar surveys were transformed from MLLW and 

MSL to MHW, using the VDatum tool (H Uhttp://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/csdl/vdatum.htmU H ) based 

on VDatum coverage (Fig. 15).

Figure 15. Blue outline illustrates generalized coverage of 

VDatum tool for the Monterey DEM region.

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

Elkhorn Slough were transformed using a constant derived from 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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 21

Figure 16. Illustration of VDatum 

tool limitation within Moss Landing inlet. 

Green area designates Cal State Seafloor 

Mapping Lab 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 WGS84 geographic, 

WGS84 UTM Zone 10 North, NAD83 UTM Zone 10 North, NAD83 geographic, or NAD27 geographic

horizontal datums. The relationships and transformational equations between these horizontal datums are 

well established. All data were converted to a horizontal datum of WGS84 geographic using FME software.
22 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

3.3 Digital Elevation Model Development

3.3.1 Verifying consistency between datasets

After horizontal and vertical transformations were applied, the resulting ESRI shape files were checked 

in ArcMap 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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 23

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 NSFfunded share-ware software application designed to manipulate data for mapping purposes 

(H Uhttp://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/ U H).

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 of the 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 harbor 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 was used only where there was a significant lack of current 

bathymetric data (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-bythe-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 presurfaced bathymetric grid.
24 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

3.3.3 Gridding the data with MB-System

MB-System ( H Uhttp://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/pi/MB-System/ U H ) 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 quads 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 sub aerial 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 data 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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 25

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. Threedimensional 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.
26 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 27

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 ( H Uhttp://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/datasheet.prl U H), which give monument positions in 

NAD83 (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 and are located primarily along the coast and at high elevations. Such 

discrepancies are caused by the rough terrain in Monterey area, where significant changes in local relief 

could occur on the scale of less then 10 meters. 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.
28 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 29

7. DATA PROCESSING SOFTWARE

ArcGIS v. 9.2 – developed and licensed by ESRI, Redlands, California, H Uhttp://www.esri.com/ U H

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

Canada, H Uhttp://www.safe.com/ U H

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

National Geophysical Data Center, H U http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/geodas/ U H

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

Smith, funded by the National Science Foundation, H Uhttp://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/ U H

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

funded by the National Science Foundation, H Uhttp://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/pi/MB-System/U H

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, 

H Uhttp://www.appliedimagery.com/ U H

GDAL v. 1.4.4 – Geospatial Data Abstraction Library, freeware developed and maintained by 

FrankWarnerdam, H Uhttp://www.gdal.org U

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

Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd., H U http://www.povray.org U
30 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

8. APPENDIX A

Contact Barry Eakins ( H Ubarry.eakins@noaa.gov U H ; 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 
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 31

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 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 
32 DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA

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 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
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL FOR MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 33

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

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