A/HRC/9/18 page 6 periodic review-related reports produced for the Council), estimated costs to date amount to US$ 3,857,249.4 The estimated costs for the third annual session of the working group will add another US$ 2,481,827. 10. The statement of financial implications concerning resolution 5/1, dated 15 June 2007, estimated that universal periodic review conference-servicing costs under section 2, General Assembly Affairs and Conference Services, would total US$ 3,847,300 per year. This was to have covered the three annual sessions of the universal periodic review, a total of 60 meetings with interpretation services in six languages, as well as a total of 1,120 estimated standard pages of documents to be translated into six official languages. It was subsequently recognized that these documentation requirements were incorrectly stated; the figures included in the statement of financial implications were for one session only. Thus, the actual forecast should have been three times higher: a total of 3,360 estimated standard pages for three sessions. (It should also be noted that this estimate has proven to be low, given that nearly that amount has already been submitted for the first two sessions.) These revised documentation forecasts would result in substantially higher estimated costs under section 2. Unfortunately, it was too late to insert the changes in the report to the General Assembly, and thus the amount of US$ 3,847,300 was presented as the requirements. The final General Assembly budget review allocated only US$ 874,000 for the full servicing of three 2008 sessions of the universal periodic review working group, a reduction of 77 per cent from the initial figure and only 11 per cent of the amount actually required for 2008. 3. Additional considerations 11. The back-to-back scheduling of the first two sessions of the universal periodic review working group exacerbated the difficulties that the Division of Conference Management experienced in processing the voluminous documentation. Similar difficulties were created for the timely submission of those documents for processing. None of the deadlines were met, which increased the pressure on its already overstretched resources of the Division. Furthermore, differing interpretations regarding the approved document lengths resulted in a much larger volume of documentation than planned (resolution 5/1 provided for 40 pages of pre-session documentation for each State under review, whereas actual submissions averaged 75 estimated standard pages for each State). The same situation applied to post-session documentation. Outcome reports of the universal periodic review working group for the States under review were not expected to exceed 10 pages each, whereas the actual outcome reports averaged 27 pages in length. In total, therefore, while the Division had planned to process 1,600 estimated standard pages for the two universal periodic review sessions, more than twice that volume was submitted. 12. Meeting deadlines for the issuance of documentation is challenging even in ordinary circumstances when meetings overlap, or when reports arising out of one meeting are used as input for another. The outcome of both universal periodic review working group sessions was 4 This amount covers the translation in six languages of 3,285 original estimated pages submitted for the first two sessions of the universal periodic review, as well as their reproduction and distribution workload.