Hello All, Just some brief comments on the discussion on operational procedures for AoC reviews:
There are 3 questions for the Board so we can understand these requirements better.
Would the community have input on developing or approving these initial Oper. Standards?
I would expect so. I would see that ultimately each review team should actually develop operational standards overtime just as the nominating committee has done. The community should certainly have input into those processes.
Could the CCWG proposals on size & composition, working methods, and timing be considered the starting point for the Operational Standards?
Yes.
What is process for revising and approving changes later on?
For detailed operational processes - I would see that the review teams could probably approve them for each review with input from the SOs and ACs. Not dissimilar to how the CCWG developed its charter.
SDelBianco - We only require max, size, composition, timings and methods. The rest can be in Ops.
That makes sense. I think for the bylaws it should stay at a high level with respect to each of those topics. WE will have a looka t the language that is intended to guide the development of the bylaws and maybe suggest some edits for consideration. Regards, Bruce Tonkin