(2) The head of each Federal agency, in making a decision referred to in paragraph (1), shall consider, and make detailed findings supported by substantial evidence, with respect to
(A) the need for, and economic feasibility of, the transportation or utility system;
(B) alternative routes and modes of access, including a determination with respect to whether there is any economically feasible and prudent alternative to the routing of the system through or within a conservation system unit, national recreation area, or national conservation area and, if not, whether there are alternative routes or modes which would result in fewer or less severe adverse impacts upon the conservation system unit;
(C) the feasibility and impacts of including different transportation or utility systems in the same area;
(D) short- and long-term social, economic, and environmental impacts of national, State, or local significance, including impacts on fish and wildlife and their habitat, and on rural, traditional lifestyles;
(E) the impacts, if any, on the national security interests of the United States, that may result from approval or denial of the application for a transportation or utility system;
(F) any impacts that would affect the purposes for which the Federal unit or area concerned was established;
(G) measures which should be instituted to avoid or minimize negative impacts; and
(H) the short- and long-term public values which may be adversely affected by approval of the transportation or utility system versus the short- and long-term public benefits which may accrue from such approval.