[gnso-ppsc-pdp] Your input requested - recommendation 14 - Efficiency and flexibility during the planning / request for an Issues Report phase

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

For discussion / consideration:


 *   The recommendation for item 7 - Community input / How to incorporate 
public comments would also apply here: A decision is needed on the timeframe 
for the delivery of an issues report. The WT could consider putting forward a 
number of different ranges for community consideration e.g. within thirty (30) 
calendar days / forty-five (45) calendar days / a period determined by the GNSO 
Council. The WT might also want to consider allowing the Council to modify this 
timeframe if it is deemed that additional research / discussion is required to 
develop an informed and balanced Issues Report.

________________________________
>From PDP-WT – Draft Conclusions and Recommendations – Updated 11 May

9. Efficiency and flexibility during planning / request for an issues report 
phase

Recommendation 14.

§  To be decided [Recommendations suggested for issue 7 could also apply here]

Efficiency and flexibility during planning / request for an issues report phase

Current rules and practice

>From ICANN by-laws:
Within fifteen (15) calendar days after receiving either (i) an instruction 
from the Board; (ii) a properly supported motion from a Council member; or 
(iii) a properly supported motion from an Advisory Committee, the Staff Manager 
will create a report (an "Issue Report")

Concerns / Questions

9.a          Current deadline of 15 days after receipt of a request is 
unworkable. How to build in sufficient flexibility to allow for additional 
research and consultation when needed, while being able to move forward quickly 
in those cases where additional work is not deemed necessary? Would a flexible 
timetable be an option i.e. in the request the submitting party with staff 
support develops a draft timeline which can consist of a number of phases that 
are pre-determined with a set timeframe?
9.b          What flexibility should be foreseen for additional research or 
study at the initiation phase?


PDP WT Response

9.a          It was suggested that a drafting team that is tasked with 
developing a charter for a WG should also be in a good position to develop a 
realistic timeline for delivery of the milestones. Some suggested a maximum 
deadline of 30 days or 45 days that could be extended but only with the 
agreement of the requester. Others suggested to include target dates in the 
by-laws based on the current experience with PDP timelines, but with the 
flexibility for modification by the GNSO Council if it is deemed necessary to 
allow for extra time for research or consultation. It as also suggested that 
guidance could be provided on how much additional time should be needed for 
certain additional elements such as a workshop or public comment period during 
the planning and initiation phase. Some noted that this should be left to the 
Council to decide on a case-by-case basis, with input from Staff as to their 
current workload and estimate of time to complete each project. Others noted 
that the timeline should be driven by the complexity of the issue but within a 
certain date boundary set out. Some suggested that there should be two types of 
requests, one standard request, which would be queued behind exiting requests / 
reports, and a second expedited / urgent request which would move up to the 
queue if it has broad support of multiple SO/ACs and/or the Board or GNSO 
Council.
9.b          Some suggested that flexibility should be retained, but that 
research or study can occur after the initiation phase. Some indicated that 
research / study at this stage should be minimized.  Others suggested that 
there should be flexibility at all stages.