[council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures

[Steve Chan]

Jonathan and GNSO Councillors,

I¹d like to include some additional information that may further the
discussion.

In regards to bullets 1 and 2, in strictly adhering to timelines in the PDP
Manual, publishing 31 August was the only scenario that allowed for the
possibility of considering the Final Issue Report in November. However, that
represented a best case scenario and could be affected by substantial public
comment and/or changes to the report that may require more than the default
30 days. To the extent that the public comment summary/analysis and edits to
the Final Issue Report are achievable in 30 days, that work would very
likely be achievable in the 27 days that would result from a publication
date of 3 September, 40 day public comment period, and delivery of the Final
Issue Report on 9 November. In other words, publishing on 3 September would
not necessarily prevent a November Council deliberation date.

That said, if the Council prefers that the report be published on 31 August,
staff is prepared to support that direction.

Best,
Steve

From:  Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
Organization:  Afilias
Reply-To:  Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
Date:  Monday, August 24, 2015 at 12:38 PM
To:  Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>, "council at gnso.icann.org"
<council at gnso.icann.org>, "bret at uniregistry.link" <bret at uniregistry.link>
Subject:  RE: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent
Procedures

Steve and GNSO Councillors,
 
It seems to me that we need to think about a three points here:
 
1.     Do we publish 31st August i.e. ahead of the forthcoming council
meeting and such that we can deal with this at the 19 November meeting as
per option 1 below OR

2.     Do we publish 3rd September and, if so, does that necessarily mean we
miss dealing with it on 19 November?

3.     Regardless of 31 August or 3rd September, do we think that a public
comment period of more than the now standard 40 day period is necessary?

 
Note: My  personal opinion is that it would be OK to publish with a 40 day
comment period and then extend if that was felt to be important / necessary
and that this will not be confusing.
 
Thoughts / input will be helpful, especially if we are to publish the report
by 31 August.
 
Thanks,
 
 
Jonathan
 

From: Steve Chan [mailto:steve.chan at icann.org]
Sent: 18 August 2015 23:26
To: council at gnso.icann.org; bret at uniregistry.link
Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent
Procedures
 

Bret,

 

Thanks, great question and hopefully the information below is beneficial to
the Council¹s consideration of the 3 day hold, as well as the discussion
around the extended public comment period. Regarding next steps and timing,
here is the relevant language from the PDP Manual:

 
> 
> The Staff Manager is responsible for drafting a summary and analysis of the
> public comments received on the Issue Report and producing a Final Issue
> Report based upon the comments received. The Staff Manager should forward the
> Final Issue Report, along with any summary and analysis of the public comments
> received, to the Chair of the GNSO Council for consideration for initiation of
> a PDP.
> 
>  
> 
> The summary and analysis and the Final Issue Report are expected to be
> delivered to the Chair of the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of
> the public comment forum, though the Staff Manager may request an extension of
> that 30-day time for delivery.
> 
>  

Without knowledge of the level of public comment that will be received, it
is difficult to estimate how long the summary and analysis and Final Issue
Report will take to prepare. However, assuming 30 days, here are the three
timelines expanded to include the next GNSO Council meeting, as long as the
document and motion deadline is met. I would note, these are are the first,
and not only, opportunities for the Council to consider the initiation of a
PDP:

* Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October -> 9
November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 9 November Documents & Motions
Deadline -> 19 November GNSO Council Meeting
* Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October -> 12
November PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents & Motions
Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting
* Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2
November -> 2 December PC Analysis & Final Report -> 7 December Documents &
Motions Deadline -> 17 December GNSO Council Meeting
These are all estimates of course, and in the case of the first bullet,
dependent on everything executing according to plan to be able to precisely
hit the documents & motions deadline. Substantial public comment and
substantive changes to the Final Report could ultimately derail these
timelines.

 

Apologies for the lengthy response, but I hope this answers your questions.

 

Best,

Steve

 

 

From: Bret Fausett <bret at uniregistry.link>
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:22 PM
To: Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>, "council at gnso.icann.org"
<council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] - Preliminary Issue Report - New gTLD Subsequent
Procedures

 

Thanks Steve. Great news on the progress.

 

On the timelines, can you remind me what happens after the close of the
comment deadline? How do we get from the close of the public comment period
to Day 1 of the PDP working group? How many Council meetings/votes between
close of comment period and starting the hard policy work?

 

    Bret

 
 
> 
> On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org> wrote:
>  
> 
> Dear Councilors,
> 
>  
> 
> Staff is on track to be able to deliver the Preliminary Issue Report on New
> gTLD Subsequent Procedures for public comment by the end of August, as
> discussed on the previous GNSO Council meeting. However, I wanted to note that
> during the meeting, the possibility of providing for an extended public
> comment period was also discussed, which would keep it open through the
> ICANN54 meeting. This topic is expected to be on the agenda for the next
> Council meeting, scheduled for 03 September and as such, it may make sense to
> delay the publication of the report by approximately 3 days to allow for
> discussion during the meeting and a decision to be made, to avoid confusion
> from possibly amending the comment close date. The impact appears to be
> minimal:
> * Publish 31 August -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 10 October (note that
> this is a Saturday)
> * Publish 3 September -> 40 Day Public Comment -> Close 13 October
> * Publish 3 September -> 60 Day (for instance) Public Comment -> Close 2
> November  
> Staff is leaning towards waiting the three days and immediately putting in the
> request to publish the Preliminary Issue Report after a decision is made, but
> wanted to be sure there were no strong objections to this approach.
> 
>  
> 
> Best,
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Steven Chan
> Sr. Policy Manager
> 
> ICANN
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
> 
> Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
> steve.chan at icann.org
>  <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>
> direct: +1.310.301.3886
> mobile: +1.310.339.4410
> 
> tel: +1.310.301.5800
> 
> fax: +1.310.823.8649
 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20150824/d56959de/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20150824/d56959de/smime.p7s>