In carrying out its review under § 3415.14, the peer review group will take into account the following factors unless, pursuant to § 3415.5(a), different evaluation criteria are specified in the annual program solicitation:

1. (a) Scientific merit of the proposal.

   1. (1) Conceptual adequacy of hypothesis;
   2. (2) Clarity and delineation of objectives;
   3. (3) Adequacy of the description of the undertaking and suitability and feasibility of methodology;
   4. (4) Demonstration of feasibility through preliminary data;
   5. (5) Probability of success of project;
   6. (6) Novelty, uniqueness and originality; and
   7. (7) Appropriateness to regulation of biotechnology and risk assessment.

2. (b) Qualifications of proposed project personnel and adequacy of facilities.

   1. (1) Training and demonstrated awareness of previous and alternative approaches to the problem identified in the proposal, and performance record and/or potential for future accomplishments;
   2. (2) Time allocated for systematic attainment of objectives;
   3. (3) Institutional experience and competence in subject area; and
   4. (4) Adequacy of available or obtainable support personnel, facilities, and instrumentation.

3. (c) Relevance of project to solving biotechnology regulatory uncertainty for United States agriculture.

   1. (1) Scientific contribution of research in leading to important discoveries or significant breakthroughs in announced program areas; and
   2. (2) Relevance of the risk assessment research to agriculture and environmental regulations.