106 



2. The est of priority rcsearcfa bdBty needs would be mde avulable to elieible 

 insdUitioos amnaOy. 



3. IiBdtudonsRibiiihtfncpnpasab for fiKiDtysruti under the program sfaotddsubn^ 

 the foDowing information: 



a. Evidcnee tliat the —— mil i piugmiii to be *■ « »« * ■■** ■<f in tlie 

 proposed taOOtr Is eonristtnt with die insdtndon's 

 >and prtfjected rescBTcb program. 



b. Evidence diat the pn^oaed liMffiQr, i 

 bidlding dcsipi faawc been arrowed bjr dM intfiuiaa's 



c Whav^pHeabia, cvidenee that dM ttatc wiD aecept die 

 increased easts and npport asndatad widi maintenaiiee of 

 tlie proposed fadUqr. 



d. Evidence of tlie instltiitloa's ooonnitiiieiit and "Hpn't lT to 

 provide the bcnlty, snpport staff; "|«"" * * " t fimds, and 

 graduate stu d ents (as appr op riat e) nwriiu ii y to support a 

 quality program in die proposed Cacility. 



e. An outline of the prupu s eJ ■«i m i ' M» « i>fif»T structure a«d 

 envtroiuneiit to cncounge the formatioo of cross* 

 disciplinary teams necessary to address priority research 

 problems. 



f. Certification that the institution can ■»■«* wiD meet the 

 non-federal funds matdiing requirenient of grants under the 

 the program and identify the source of the matching funds. 



The Secretary of Agricuhnre, in consultation with the Presidem of the National 

 Association of State Univenitles and Land-Grant CoUeges, shall name Merit Review 

 Panels to review and rank submitted proposals for funding. The panels should 

 consider the following: 



a. Whether the outlined research programs and the identified 

 facility needs lit the priority research area under which 

 the proposal was submitted. 



-2- 



