(B)
Interdisciplinary approach. The availability of expertise, either in-house or otherwise, accessible to the State agency.
(C)
Decision documentation. A description of a documentation process adequate to explain the basis for decisions to the public.
(D)
Public notice and participation. A description of the process, including routes of publication (e.g., local newspapers and project mailing list), and use of established State legal notification systems for notices of intent, and criteria for determining whether a public hearing is required. The adequacy of a rationale where the comment period differs from that under NEPA and is inconsistent with other State review periods.
(E)
Alternatives consideration. The extent to which the SERP will adequately consider:
(1) Designation of a study area comparable to the final system;
(2) A range of feasible alternatives, including the no action alternative;
(3) Direct and indirect impacts;
(4) Present and future conditions;
(5) Land use and other social parameters including relevant recreation and open-space considerations;
(6) Consistency with population projections used to develop State implementation plans under the Clean Air Act;
(7) Cumulative impacts including anticipated community growth (residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial) within the project study area; and
(8) Other anticipated public works projects including coordination with such projects.
