P&P Review for conformance on use of Partners vs ESIPs

[honu-girl]

There is inconsistency with the use of "Partners" versus "ESIPs" throughout the P&P. For clarity, this should be reviewed and updated.

[aebudden]

ESIPs should be replaced by partners.
Also, check for instances of 'Federation'. ESIP is Foundation for Earth Science Information Partners (inc). Inc not needed in P&P.

For those working on this issue, please comment which P&P section has been reviewed / completed.

[aebudden]

In cleaning up the language of 'ESIPs' throughout the Policies and procedures, @BenGalewsky noted the occurrence of old language in deprecated documents. We discussed this in the Governance Committee meeting and felt that they could remain as is - they reflect the language in use at the time and are in deprecated status. @honu-girl - as the individual that opened the ticket, I wanted to make you are aware of this decision. I will merge the PR and close this issue, but if you feel that the deprecated documents needs review, please comment.

[aebudden]

Deprecated documents has been addressed. Need to double check for 'Federation'.

[relphj]

Pull request #45. Whoopee.