RE: [gnso-arr-dt] RE: Draft Motion to Approve Endorsement Process

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

45 days is okay, so we probably should give the SGs 3 weeks thereby
leaving 3 weeks if needed for the Council.  If any SGs find 3 weeks as
too short we could extend it to 24 days and still stay within the 45
days and still allow 3 weeks for Council action if needed.

 

Chuck

 

From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 12:53 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Caroline Greer; Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-arr-dt] RE: Draft Motion to Approve Endorsement
Process

 

Hi Chuck

 

On May 29, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:





Once we have the proposed process finalized, the motion may be made.
The motion must be made on the Council list not later than Wednesday, 2
June. 

 

Did I miss the answer on this, how many days to fix for SG endorsement?
I didn't think I'd seen a resolution in your threads with Janis, staff
etc.  Also is the term of art we refer to the Call for Applications?

 

 

        On May 27, 2010, at 9:38 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
        
        
        

         

                Note the following message I just sent to the SOAC list
regarding opening the call for AoC RT applicants.  As soon as we have
our draft process, I would like to send it to Marco & Janis if no one
objects. Can we finalize the proposed process not later than tomorrow so
that Bill may send it to the Council list by then?  If so, then I will
send it as a draft to Marco & Janis.

        
        Mixing together the details of the next two RTs and the
permanent process seems to complicate discussion, how about we focus
here on the latter.  To finalize we need clarification from selectors et
al on the expected regular RT time cycles so contracted folk can decide
how long they can have after the calls close, bearing in mind the
potentially three week wait after that to the next council call.  When
you reach closure we'll plug in the number.