See embedded. Also, there is a reference at the end of your note to "implantation". Don't know where it comes from, but presume it should be implementation. At 23/12/2013 06:35 PM, Larisa B. Gurnick wrote:

Dear ATRT2, Attached is the latest version of the ATRT2 Report, along with separate documents for Appendices B- E (Appendix A is the ICC report). All changes have been incorporated and Table of Contents has been updated. These are the master files and should be used if you plan to make any further changes to the report prior to submitting it to the Board. Please copy me, Denise and Alice when you submit your Final Report to the Board.

Staff flagged several items (previously included as notes in the document) for you to consider as you finalize the report – please see the listing below.

As a reminder, ICANN will be closed for the holidays from noon on 24 December through 1 January. Staff will be available to assist with any last minute edits upon return on 2 January. Staff will submit the final report for translation and coordinate the posting on the web site as soon as ATRT2 confirms the Final Report documents after the holidays.

Happy Holidays, Larisa

Items for ATRT2 consideration prior to finalizing the report: 1. Recommendation #4 – Paul indicated that the Review Team should develop a footnote explaining change from prior language, i.e. only mention policy development and implementation, not administrative matters. Executive Summary and body of the report. 2. Recommendation #6 Confirm that the following should be deleted: “Increase GAC early involvement in the various ICANN policy processes (tied to ATRT 1 Recommendation 12). Recommendation was merged and concepts included in the recommendations related to cross-community development processes.” Executive Summary and body of the report.

I cannot locate that line, so presume it was already deleted. In any case, I can see no reason to keep it. If we really want a link, it could be worded "Another GAC-related recommendation can be found at Recommendation 10.2". However, I see no real need for that.

3. Report Section 1; Findings of ATRT1: “In the course of its deliberations, ATRT1 found that the Nominating Committee (NomCom) had failed to implement previous recommendations from, [S1]

4. In several sections of the report, references to ATRT1 recommendations have been footnoted. This has not been done consistently throughout the report.

5. Report Section 5; Findings of ATRT1 - capacity[S2] .

6. Report Section Headings – Alan made a change to Report Section 13, which was incorporated. He took out the parenthetical reference; yet other Report Sections still have it and earlier, there was an agreement to include these references for further clarity. ATRT2 should make a decision to address this consistently.

What I removed was factually incorrect - it referred to earlier versions which were focused on the GNSO PDP. What you have for sections 14 and 15 is: Report Section 14. AoC REVIEW PROCESS EFFECTIVENESS: ATRT2 Recommendation 11 (New Recommendation on Effectiveness of the Review Process) Report Section 15. FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABIILITY AND TRANSPARENCY: ATRT2 Recommendation #12 (New Recommendation on Finance Accountability and Transparency) The parenthetical seems rather redundant to me, but if you want one for Section 13, it should be: Report Section 13. CROSS-COMMUNITY DELIBERATIONS: ATRT2 Recommendation #10 (New Recommendation on Cross-community Deliberations)

7. P.54 – Summary of other relevant information – Staff has previously submitted a correction: “Correction: Page 45 of the Draft Report: Reconsideration review – on 13-3, the Board, through the NGPC, actually accepted reconsideration of the issue, though the ultimate decision was that the action should not be overturned. This is different from the Board denying reconsideration, which is what happened in the other instances cited.”

8. Appendix E – p. E-4; Metrics and criteria for measuring progress; last sentence - ATRT2 requested that it be able to interact with One World Trust directly so that ATRT2 could reflect the need for metrics in its Final Report in a coordinated way. [LBG3]

Larisa B. Gurnick Consultant/Senior Director, Organizational Reviews Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) <mailto:larisa.gurnick@icann.org>larisa.gurnick@icann.org 310 383-8995

[S1]PD7 asks do we know what entity made this recommendation? Would need citations LG response: Not sure – could be the structural review mandated by the bylaws.

[S2]PD19 says reference explanatory text on why ATRT2 is only focusing on policy development and implantation? [LBG3]Staff suggestion: update the comment based on the draft report that has been shared confidentially with the ATRT2.