> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://apecoindao.gitbook.io/apecoin-dao-governance-working-group/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://apecoindao.gitbook.io/apecoin-dao-governance-working-group/apecoin-dao-essentials/aip-proposal-process/aip-phases/phase-6-administrative-review.md).

# Phase 6: Administrative Review

* This phase is only for Pending AIPs that have been tagged with “Needs Administrative Review.”
* When this happens, the Board, serving in an administrative capacity, will determine whether further action is required prior to a Pending AIP proceeding to Phase 7.
* Pending AIPs that the Board determines do not require additional action will be tagged as “Approved for Voting” and proceed to Phase 7.
* If the Board decides to return a Pending AIP for further clarification or action, they must provide a clear explanation of why and tag it as either “Return for Reconstruction” or “Return for Clarification.”
* Reasons to tag as “Return for Reconstruction” or “Return for Clarification” may include but are not limited to:
  * Cost to implement unclear/not able to be calculated (tagged as “Return for Clarification”)
  * Proposes to use more than 5% of the Ecosystem Fund (tagged as “Return for Clarification”)
  * Conflicts with another proposal (tagged as “Return for Clarification”)
  * Proposal is at odds with the mission/values of the DAO (tagged as “Return for Reconstruction”)
  * Proposal is at odds with the well-being of the DAO (tagged as “Return for Reconstruction”)
  * Violations of law, or against advice of counsel for APE Foundation (tagged as “Return for Reconstruction”)
  * Reasonable suspicion of fraud or other misleading information (tagged as “Return for Reconstruction”)