要求补充下面几条：
The evidence, as initially ted, is insufficient to warrant approval.
Evidence of the following types might be particularly helpful:
1) Evidence which indicate that the award for Progress in Science and technology granted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences constittutes a nationally or internationally recognized prize or award;
这一条我已经准备了奖励条例的中文文件并且翻译了其中一部分。
2) Evidence that the beneficiary's work has attracted significant interest from academic institutions, from government, or from industry in the form of major research grants or funding awards;
有一个美国小的Grant的和出国前几个中国的Grants，准备了。其他的几个都是参加课题研究，让PI写了证明信不知道有没有用？
3) Articles or exvcerpts from trade publications, journals, or magzines in which the beneficiary's achivements are commented on by his peers; or copies or trans of major media items (newspaper articles, radio or TV spots, etc.) in which the beneficiary is mentioned by name.
这一条没有直接的证据，但有媒体采访总课题首席科学家的报道，我是其中一个子课题主持人，报道中根本没有替我的名字。这个报道有用吗？
另外我满足了其他几条：比如是多个杂志的审稿人，研究成果的原创性（原来提交了多封来自政府部门和其他独立推荐人的推荐信）。在这次RFE中是否要重新提供一遍这些证据？需要更多推荐信吗？
询问律师RFE的工作方案，律师只是说有什么就提供什么，跟什么都没有说一样。
请位前辈帮忙，多谢了。