Issue 8 (Section 10) deals with Periodic and Organizational Reviews. As the current chair of the SSR2 Review Team, I would like to provide some comments on that section. I prefer Option 1, but I believe that the implementation of Option 1 could adopt some concepts from Option 2 in order to reduce the time commitment for an individual to take part in a Specific Review. In my view, a Specific Review could be conducted in less than a year using a schedule roughly like this: Staff Preparation: - Prepares a report on the implementation of the recommendations from the previous review (See Note1 below) - Hire a technical writer for the yet-to-be-formed review team Meeting 1 (in conjunction with an ICANN meeting): - Select leasership - Establish ToR - Assignments for assessing the implementation of previous recommendations; deliver by email to whole team and technical writer for discussion on weekly teleconferences - Prepare questions for ICANN staff Meeting 2 (6-8 weeks after Meering 1): - Review the draft report on recommendation implementation - Review progress on the questions for ICANN staff, providing clarifications as needed Meeting 3 (in conjunction with an ICANN meeting): - Review draft report on the implementation of previous recommendations - Receive answers to the questions for ICANN staff (might include briefings) - Assignments for writing findings and recommendations; deliver by email to whole team and technical writer for discussion on weekly teleconferences Meeting 4 (6-8 weeks after Meering 3): - Review draft report - Send it out for public comment Meeting 5 (in conjunction with an ICANN meeting): - Resolve public comments - Send final report to the ICANN Board after discussion on a teleconferences Note1: The amount of work needed to produce this report is greatly reduced if a dashboard for each recommendation is produced. This suggestion has been made is different forms in different venues of the last few years. SSR2 will make this suggestion yet again in out upcoming draft report.