Dear EPDP Team, Further to the discussion in our recent meeting, please find an outline of the approach to handling legal questions and the chair-appointed members of the Legal Advisory Group. Those of you who participated in Phase 1 will remember we established a Legal Committee to review and revise proposed legal questions to ensure: (1) the questions are truly legal in nature, as opposed to policy or policy implementation questions; (2) the questions are phrased in a neutral manner, avoiding both presumed outcomes as well as constituency positioning; (3) the questions are both apposite and timely to the EPDP Team’s work; and (4) the limited budget for external legal counsel is being used responsibly. In order to forward these goals, I proposed that I work together with a small team of chair-appointed legal experts to review legal questions as they come in. The membership of this team is not representative, but expertise based. Members of the Legal Advisory Group are asked to provide advice based on their legal experience, factoring in all aspects of the conversation, not only that of their respective constituency. It is important to state that any output of deliberations of the Legal Advisory Group will be shared with the EPDP Team for review and agreement. At this time, I do not anticipate a weekly meeting schedule; the Legal Advisory Group will meet on an as-needed basis. The meetings will be open to anyone from the EPDP Team who would like to attend; however, only the chair-appointed legal experts will be invited to speak. I have also asked EPDP Support Staff to provide a recommendation for an initial categorization of the clarifying legal questions received. Specifically, Support Staff has reviewed the questions to determine: 1. if the questions relate to Phase 2 issues identified in the Mind Map, i.e., charter questions, questions in the Annex: Important Issues for Further Community Action, or issues deferred from Phase 1. 2. If the question is NOT related to the EPDP Team’s Phase 2 work, it will not be reviewed further. If the question does relate to Phase 2 work, Support Staff will align the question with the relevant Phase 2 issue and determine if the Phase 2 issue is a Priority 1 or a Priority 2 item. 3. Priority 1 questions, or questions related to a system for standardized access/disclosure, will be reviewed first. 4. Priority 2 items will be moved to the corresponding worksheets for further discussion following EPDP Team agreement on the scope and expected deliverable of the topic. 5. Once the initial parameters are agreed to, the Legal Advisory Group can better determine necessary legal guidance (if any) and will begin working on the Priority 1 questions identified. I have asked the following members to the Team to donate their time to the Legal Advisory Group: Laureen Kapin Brian King Margie Milam Thomas Rickert Kristina Rosette Tatiana Tropina I invited these individuals due to their legal expertise, but also that they would provide diverse views to ensure that the different perspectives on the EPDP Team will be considered. Legal Advisory Group’s activities will be supported by ICANN staff and ICANN Org liaison (Legal) will attend the meetings and will be engaging with the Group when asked. You will find an updated table with Support Staff’s preliminary recommendations attached. Thank you JK