U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List

[Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>]

Hi John,

I think that's the kind of text we want.  I assume you did keep track of 
any effort increases that were entered.  For example, for  the ADC, FE 
electronics Columbia and UT Austin, you added 664 and 331 hours, 
respectively.  So you should add a sentence explaining these, ie what 
efficiency numbers you used.

Best,

Gustaaf


On 12/16/20 8:40 PM, John Parsons wrote:
> Hi Mike, all,
>
>      I don't see how to sensibly try put together all that material in 
> such a short time, not to mention make sure it is all consistent with 
> what was put in P6.  I think we need to push back a bit on the NSF.  All 
> the numbers should come from the BCP delta reports out of P6/Cobra.  
> What we should provide is some text explaining what went on, for each 
> L3.  For example, for the LAr ADC I would write something along the 
> lines given below.
>      I really don't see being able to do much more than this for each 
> L3. Thoughts?
>      Regards,
>          John
>
> LAr ADC Development
>      The radiation test of the v3 pre-prototyoe ADC was scheduled for 
> March but postponed since the radiation facility (MGH in Boston) closed 
> due to COVID.  Similarly, tests of the analog performance were also 
> postponed, due to the university COVID-related lab closures.  As a 
> result, the ATLAS PDR for the ADC, which was scheduled for April, was 
> postponed.
>      When the university labs started partial re-opening in late June, 
> performance testing started again and continued through the summer, 
> albeit with lower efficiency due to density restrictions and other 
> COVID-related restrictions. The radiation test was also able to be 
> re-scheduled, and was completed in a different facility (NSRL at BNL) on 
> Nov. 2.
>      With the performance tests in hand and the radiation test 
> completed, the PDR was successfully held on Dec. 8, about 7.5 months 
> later than originally scheduled.  However, during the summer some design 
> work on v4 was started, without waiting for the PDR.  As a result, some 
> of the accumulated delay was recuperated.  We aim to submit the v4 
> design for fabrication in April 2021, about 5 months behind the original 
> schedule.
>
> On 12/16/20 9:52 AM, Michael Tuts wrote:
> > Sorry for the typo in the body of the text. The due date is Friday Dec 
> > 18 (not Dec 17).
> >
> > *From:* Michael Tuts
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 16, 2020 9:51 AM
> > *To:* usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > *Cc:* us-atlas-hllhc-pmgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov; Amy Garwood - Nevis Labs 
> > (agarwood AT nevis.columbia.edu) <agarwood AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> > *Subject:* Please provide COVID BCP narrative describing COVID changes 
> > by COB Dec 18
> >
> > Dear NSF scope L2s,
> >
> > We have just held a meeting with NSF regrading getting NSF approval of 
> > the NSF COVID BCP. They have no issues with the numbers or process, 
> > but they require more documentation regarding the description of the 
> > COVID changes in your subsystems down to L3. The sooner we get this 
> > done, the sooner we can get it approved by NSF, so to that end can you 
> > please provide it by COB Friday December 17 (sorry for the short 
> > notice, but as usual we get short notice from NSF). In addition, this 
> > information will be necessary for an eventual re-baselining to address 
> > the COVID needs – so writing this down this while it is still fresh in 
> > your minds will help with the future required documentation. The 
> > format of it should be along the lines of a “BOE”. The snip provided 
> > below may be helpful as it splits the costs into direct, fringe, 
> > overhead, escalation.
> >
> >   * For each L3, provide the description of the COVID change in the BCP
> >     (e.g. what was the work that was delayed and why/how was it delayed
> >     by lab/office closures; what tasks were not started and moved to the
> >     future, etc)
> >   * In evaluating our BCP and trying to clearly understand what is COVID
> >     related and what is not COVID related, NSF would also like to have a
> >     description of the non-COVID delays and/or resource increases during
> >     the same period covered by this COVID BCP (for example NSF monitors
> >     our baseline milestones and the working schedule milestones). So
> >     include that in a separate non-COVID section/paragraph.
> >   * If resources changed, indicate why they changed (e.g. efficiency and
> >     how you estimated that efficiency, or…)
> >   * If it is a simple schedule shift, then presumably the associated
> >     cost increase is an escalation effect only, etc
> >   * If you eliminated travel, specify how much that was and why it was
> >     eliminated
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Your PO
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
> > Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l

--
Gustaaf Brooijmans - Columbia University
@Columbia: (212) 854 4527; Nevis virtual phone: (914) 591 2804

Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.