Skip to main content (Press Enter).
US Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
Mission and Vision
Business With Us
Small Business Program
Construction Quality Management
General Preliminary Information
Non Corps Owned Property
Information Specific to Filming At Corps Dams and
Port San Luis
Marina del Rey
Port of Los Angeles
Port of Long Beach
Levee Safety Program
Projects & Studies
Solana-Encinitas Shoreline Study
Santa Clara River Watershed Study
Malibu Creek Study
Navajo Nation Watershed Study
Prado Basin Feasibility Study
Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration
Little Colorado River Winslow
Aliso Creek Mainstem Ecosystem Restoration Study
East San Pedro Bay Ecosystem Restoration Study
Whittier Narrows Dam Safety Modification Study
Port of Long Beach Deep Draft Navigation Study
Dam Safety Program
Formerly Used Defense Sites
Areas D, G and H
Camp San Luis Obispo
Multi-Use Range Complex
Grenade Courts 25 and 26
Kirtland Demolition Bombing Range
Kofa National Wildlife Refuge
Castle Dome Mountain Ordnance Area
King Valley Impact Area
Maneuver Area/Vehicular Access
Hidden Valley Practice Landmine Area
Southeastern Impact Area
McPherson Pass Practice Landmine Area
Maneuver Area/Small Arms
Goffs Butte OE Disposal Areas
Rifle and Pistol Ranges
Mojave Gunnery Range "C"
Strafing Target #71
Strafing Target #71
Bomb Target "F"
Rocket Range 101
Bombing Range #73
APA Areas 5 & 6
APA Areas E, E1 and E2
APA Area C
Border Field State Park
Small Arms Range Complex
Demonstration Bombing Target
Dry Canyon Artillery Range
Kingman Ground-to-Ground Gunnery Range
MRS03 - 15 Skeet Ranges
Former Fort Huachuca
Charleston Maneuver Area
Artillery, Mortar Ranges & Maneuver Area
Deming Precision Bombing Range No. 24
Nellis Small Arms Range Annex
UNLV Study Area
UCSD (Camp Matthews), Range Complex No. 1
Sahuarita Air Force Range
Baywood Park Training Area
Mohave Maneuver Area C
Interagency & International Support
Final Regulatory Actions
WRDA Section 214
Regional General Permits
District Boundaries Map
Section 10 of the Rivers & Harbors Act
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
Traditional Navigable Waters
Report a Violation
SAMP Permitting and Research
SDC SAMP Research-Assessment
SDC SAMP Research-PLD
Otay SAMP Research
Section 408 Permits
WRDA Section 214
Congressional Project Activity Database
Project Fact Sheets
Nogales Wash Emergency Flood Fight
Santa Barbara County Debris Removal
Whittier Narrows Dam
Santa Fe Dam
Los Angeles River
Prado Dam Master Plan
Real Estate Division
Southern CA Area
Regulatory Public Notices
Project Public Notices
USACE Office Locator
SAMP Permitting and Research
Permitting Procedures for the San Diego Creek Watershed SAMP
Pursuant to its authority under 33 CFR 325.2(e)(1)(ii) and in accordance with procedures outlined in 33 CFR Part 325, the Corps proposes to issue LOPs for activities that are consistent with the purposes and goals of the SAMP. Such activities would need to have undergone effective pre‐application coordination, complied with the section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, and included appropriate compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts. The LOP authorization is an abbreviated method for issuing an individual permit, where a decision to issue permit authorization is made after coordination with federal and state fish and wildlife agencies, a public interest evaluation, and a concise environmental review, but without publishing an individual public notice. Review involving other resource agencies will ensure adverse impacts are minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
To determine whether your proposed project is eligible for abbreviated LOP permitting within the San Diego Creek Watershed SAMP
If your project is eligible for LOP permitting, proceed by submitting the following application materials:
A completed Department of the Army application form Eng Form 4345, or a Joint Corps/Department application for the Watershed, including the list of names and addresses for adjacent property owners.
A complete project description, which includes:
Pre-project photographs of the project site;
A site location map and view of the project showing areas and acreage to be impacted on 8.5" x 11" sheets;
Location coordinates: latitude/longitude or UTM's;
Volume, type and source of material to be placed into waters of the U.S.;
Total area of waters of the U.S. to be directly and indirectly affected;
A verified delineation of waters of the U.S. located in the project area including a wetland delineation map on 8.5ʺ x 11ʺ sheets;
A description of habitat, including plant communities, located in the project area;
A description of methods to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts to water quality or aquatic function at the project site including best management practices used during project implementation to control siltation and erosion;
Any other information pertinent to the wetlands, stream, or water body involved; and
Proposed project schedule.
A record of pre‐application coordination with the Corps, the Department, RWQCB, USFWS, and EPA. If coordination was not accomplished with any of the agencies, the applicant must show that a concerted effort was made to meet with the agency and explain why such coordination was not achieved. The record must document comments and concerns made by each agency during pre‐application consultation. If the applicant participated during the formulation of the SAMP and the activity was reviewed, this requirement does not apply.
A discussion of how each agency comment/concern was addressed. If the applicant participated during the development of the SAMP, this requirement does not apply.
A statement addressing the section 404(b)(1) Guidelines alternatives analysis. If the applicant participated during the formulation of the SAMP and the activity was reviewed, this requirement does not apply.
A statement explaining how avoidance and minimization of discharges to jurisdictional waters were achieved on the project site.
A compensatory mitigation plan consistent with the SAMP mitigation framework to address any unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters and the program goal of no net loss of wetlands.
Local approvals or other evidence that the project has been reviewed by the appropriate local governmental body and has been found to be consistent with state and local land use plans and policies, particularly state and local wetland policies.
Appropriate surveys, inventories, or reports that will allow the Corps to make a determination of the effect of the proposed project (and if necessary consult) pursuant to the ESA or evidence of incidental take authorizations under ESA.
Evidence of compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
Upon receipt of a complete application, the Corps will process the application by following the procedure detailed below:
The applicant will provide the Corps and the review agencies complete applications, using a San Diego Creek Watershed Joint Agency Notification/Application form, if available. The Corps will review the applicantʹs submission and assign an action ID number.
Within seven (7) calendar days, the Corps will determine if the application is complete. If an application is incomplete, within seven (7) calendar days the Corps will notify the applicant of the needed information items and the applicant will be required to resubmit.
Within 10 calendar days of receiving a complete application, the Corps will submit materials to the agencies (the Department, RWQCB, USFWS, EPA, and State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)) via FAX or email and request the agencies provide comments. The agencies (except for SHPO) will provide comments to the Corps within 21 calendar days. The SHPO will provide comment within 30 calendar days. ʺNo objectionʺ comments may be provided by phone, but substantive comments should be provided and confirmed by FAX or letter. When the LOP pre‐project notification is transmitted to the other resource agencies, the Corps will consider the following subjects:
Conformity of the proposed project with the SAMP;
Accuracy of the wetland delineation and the resource assessment;
Minimization of impacts to the maximum extent practicable;
Consistency of the proposed project‐specific compensatory mitigation with the SAMP Aquatic Resource Conservation Program;
Whether federally listed species issues have been resolved in a manner consistent with the local NCCP/HCP program;
Resolution or status of compliance with the NHPA;
Resolution or status of the 401 certification;
Resolution of ESA section 7, if applicable;
Resolution or status of compliance with CZMA, if applicable;
The Corps will review the comments received and make a final determination within 45 calendar days of receiving the complete application, unless consultation under section 7 of ESA is required, which would likely extend the processing time for a final permit decision. After all the comments are received from the resource agencies, the Corps will perform a final evaluation of the project. Any problems identified during the LOP notification process to the resource agencies will be resolved before an LOP is issued. If the project meets the criteria for LOP authorization, an LOP will be issued.
If the project fails to meet the criteria for LOP authorization, the Corps will notify the applicant of need for review through a Standard Individual Permit process.