[NCUC-DISCUSS] My views on the supplementary rules for the Independent Review Process

[Paul Rosenzweig]

I just added some text about the 45 day limit since I thought the comment was not very specific on that.  On the 12-month cut off, I think what you have is good – and it is good that we have it restated in a different way from what Brett and I said.

 

We should definitely add more on some of the notice and right of intervention issues that Kathy K has brought up – but I don’t know that well enough to write.

 

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

 <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com

My PGP Key:  <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684

 

From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of farzaneh badii
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 11:19 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] My views on the supplementary rules for the Independent Review Process

 

Hi everyone, 

 

Since the deadline for this public comment is fast approaching (25th January), I suggest to comment on it  by 20th January  <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMI2n_EgBDVTSUZm2Xwl7SSHWks9Hz076NQGfsXxqso/edit?usp=sharing> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMI2n_EgBDVTSUZm2Xwl7SSHWks9Hz076NQGfsXxqso/edit?usp=sharing, we will resolve the issues and then submit it to NCSG PC for approval. 

 

Best 

 

Farzaneh 




Farzaneh 

 

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:26 PM, avri doria <avri at apc.org <mailto:avri at apc.org> > wrote:

On 11-Jan-17 10:50, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> your comments will not be taken into account by the implementation
> team unless they are submitted to the public comment forum

They probably will if they are known, But  you are right, it is good to
submit through the formal source, though sending a pointer to the blog
(or even the text) in a message may be good enough at times.  To the
point, in today's IRP meeting we ack'ed both your and Kathy's comments
and listed the issues among those we need to work on after the comment
period ends. These issues have been discussed before, incidentally, it
is just that the pre-comment period consensus fell were it did.  So it
is good to have the comments to work with.

There were some disagreement between support staff and the group on
including those blogs in the staff comment summary write-up, but no
question in the group that we would pay attention to them.

Still I endorse the advice to send the comments in.

avri



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170118/460d99a0/attachment.htm>