Assessment workspace

Untitled Louisiana water project

Select a project type and funding source to establish the likely applicant deliverable.

0%draft complete

Likely deliverable Screening incomplete

Pathway not yet determined

Complete project setup to identify the correct route.

Critical gaps 0

Workstream progress

Official guidance

Your entries are saved in this browser. Export a JSON backup regularly.

02 · Project and pathway

Define the project

Identify the applicant, project, location, funding and likely responsible agencies.

0 of 8 checks

Route-specific engineering conclusions

These narratives populate the CWSRF PER or DWRLF SIP headings when the selected route requires them.

Future conditions and future-without-project condition Selected-plan description and cost analysis PER conclusions and recommendations

Project identity

Core identifiers used throughout the draft report.

Project name * Project number Applicant * Owner / water system Prepared by Project type * Funding / program * Report date Report version Federal lead agency State lead / administering agency

Location and system identifiers

Use coordinates for the representative project location; describe the full footprint below.

Parish * Municipality / community Street / site address Latitude Longitude PWS ID Existing / proposed LPDES number Louisiana professional engineer Louisiana PE license

Purpose, need and engineering description

Write for a public audience and state the source of quantitative values in the evidence register.

Executive summary Purpose and need * Existing system and deficiencies * Proposed action * Location and planning context Construction scope * Operation and maintenance * Schedule Planning period / design year Current capacity Proposed capacity Service population Estimated cost

Environmental route screening

These questions identify data gaps and a possible categorical-exclusion candidate. They do not determine eligibility.

Incomplete

Potential CE/CATEX action category Selection only establishes a candidate category. LDEQ or LDH makes the determination.

Work limited to an existing disturbed footprint?

New site, easement or right-of-way?

Capacity or service-area expansion?

Capacity more than 30% above the existing population?

New or relocated surface-water/groundwater discharge?

Substantial increase in discharge volume or pollutant loading?

Infrastructure principally intended for future development?

Project supported by an applicable growth plan or strategy?

Wetlands, waters or navigable waters affected?

Floodplain or coastal-zone location?

Listed species or sensitive habitat potential?

Historic or archaeological resource potential?

Relocation, displacement or land acquisition?

Potential disproportionate community effects?

Controversy or unresolved substantive comments?

Known contamination or hazardous-material concern?

Potential induced growth or cumulative effects?

Screening rationale and unresolved data needs *

03 · Alternatives

Compare reasonable alternatives

No action is mandatory. Retain the reason each feasible alternative was selected or rejected.

0 of 5 checks

Decision rule: The preferred action should follow from purpose and need, feasibility, lifecycle cost and comparative environmental consequences—not from an unexplained preselection.

Preferred-alternative rationale *

04 · Environment and impacts

Build the impact record

Document baseline conditions, construction and operational effects, significance reasoning, mitigation and evidence for every resource.

0 of 5 checks

Impact conclusions

Populate route-specific EID findings in addition to the resource-by-resource record.

Overall impact conclusion * Unavoidable adverse impacts and mitigation Short-term uses versus long-term safety and productivity Irreversible and irretrievable commitments Environmental-justice / disproportionate-effects conclusion

05 · Permits and consultations

Track every approval pathway

Review each item for applicability. A permit register is not evidence that an authorization has been issued.

0 of 3 checks

Approval / consultation	Applies?	Status	Identifier / target date	Evidence / determination

06 · Mitigation and monitoring

Make commitments auditable

Connect each measure to an impact, owner, timing, performance check and completion evidence.

0 of 3 checks

Mitigation and monitoring conclusion *

07 · Agency and public record

Preserve consultation and responsiveness

Record outgoing requests, incoming determinations, notices, hearing materials, comments, responses and closure.

0 of 2 checks

Public-participation narrative Responsiveness summary

08 · Evidence

Build a traceable source register

Capture the exact dataset or document, date, locator, file reference and how it supports the assessment.

0 of 2 checks

Evidence rule: “Not found in screening data” does not mean a resource is absent. Record data limitations and field or agency verification where necessary.

09 · Review and export

Validate the applicant draft

Resolve missing content, record professional review and export a clearly labeled draft.

0 of 3 checks

0%

Draft completeness

Validation has not been completed.

Quality-control signoff

Qualified reviewer certification recordedI confirm that a qualified person reviewed the draft, evidence links, assumptions and limitations. This is not an agency approval. PE review status

Limitations, assumptions and outstanding studies *

Draft deliverable

Generate the environmental-review report

The report carries a visible draft status, a completeness appendix and the professional-review limitation.