Substantial evidence is a standard of review used in judicial review of agency decisions, but it is not a ground for challenging an agency decision.

In judicial review of agency transportation decisions, the standard of review for determining whether an agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence is substantial evidence review.

The scope of judicial review of agency transportation decisions includes review of the agency's decision on the record before it, review of the agency's decision for errors of law, and de novo review.

Damages are not a remedy that a court may order in judicial review of an agency transportation decision.

The role of the court in judicial review of agency transportation decisions is to ensure that the agency has acted within its authority, that the agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, and that the agency has followed proper procedures.

All of the above are examples of procedural errors that could lead to judicial review of an agency transportation decision.

The purpose of judicial review of agency transportation decisions is to ensure that the agency has acted within its authority, that the agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, and that the agency has followed proper procedures.

Whether the agency's decision was supported by substantial evidence is not a factor that a court may consider in determining whether an agency's transportation decision is arbitrary and capricious.

The standard of review for determining whether an agency's transportation decision is arbitrary and capricious is arbitrary and capricious review.

The agency's decision not being supported by substantial evidence is not a ground for challenging an agency transportation decision on the basis of procedural error.

The role of the court in judicial review of agency transportation decisions involving environmental issues is to ensure that the agency has acted within its authority, that the agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, and that the agency has followed proper procedures.

Whether the agency's decision was supported by substantial evidence is not a factor that a court may consider in determining whether an agency's transportation decision is in accordance with the agency's own rules and regulations.

The standard of review for determining whether an agency's transportation decision is in accordance with the agency's own rules and regulations is arbitrary and capricious review.

The agency's decision not being supported by substantial evidence is not a ground for challenging an agency transportation decision on the basis of lack of jurisdiction.

The standard of review for determining whether an agency's transportation decision is in accordance with the law is de novo review.