1. A new judging committee is appointed and approved by the Board immediately after elections.  The Judging Director is the only Board Member that can be on the Judging Committee, to allow for checks and balances.

2. Substitutions, deletions or additions may be made at any time with majority Board approval.

3. Ideally the Judging Committee is comprised of  5 (odd-number) diverse, active competitors with daily access to E-Mail.  The FPA should always strive to have at least one female player, European Player, and a Eastern player as a member of the committee, at a minimum.

1. Ideas and possible changes to the system are submitted by FPA Members, Board and Committee members, and others.
2. The Judging Committee discusses each proposal and eventually filters it down to a realistic list of potential changes.
3. This Survey is then submitted to membership, with a minimum 45 day deadline for returning feedback.
4. The committee takes into consideration members input, fine-tunes the list of proposed changes (if needed), and then votes on it.  A majority vote of the FPA Board  is needed to approve the changes, and the board can use line-item vetoes with majority approval.
5. FPA Executive Director has line item veto power, which can be overridden by at least 2/3 board vote.
6. Members are notified of the Final Changes six weeks prior to their first use in a tournament.  Ideally members are notified via e-mail and in writing, but due to mailing timing or personnel issues, written notice may not be sent out in all cases therefore E-Mail and word of mouth only may be relied upon.
7. The Competition Manual is then updated both in hard copy form and on the FPA Web Page.
8. As of the date that the new changes are effective, the system will be frozen for at least 1 year 3 months so the changes can be evaluated, and emphasis can be put on training and education.   Only one set of changes may be made in any one year.  Changes may be made anytime if there is a unanimous vote of the FPA Board, however. 

• Experimentation is encouraged by the FPA and alternative systems should be tried at smaller tournaments at the TDs discretion.
• New systems should be introduced over time:
  • For events where a limited number of experienced judges are available, allowing crowd voting perhaps (as in Milwaukee and Rimini, 1998)
  • Novice Freestyle, for spectator involvement.  Maybe just speed flow for now.
  • Extreme System - maybe for open pairs and/or women's.

Approved by the FPA Board: July 25,1998