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

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

Hi,

You should not include this in your slides, but you should have it on 
your desktop to answer questions if they come up.

Also, after the DR we will need to go over all of these in preparation 
for the EVMS review.

Best,

Gustaaf


On 6/10/21 9:20 PM, Stephanie Majewski wrote:
> Hi Gustaaf,
>
> Are you suggesting that we include some version of this in our slides 
> (or should we upload it somewhere)? Or are you suggesting to just 
> complete the template and have it ready for reference.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephanie
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 12:53 AM Gustaaf Brooijmans 
> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>> wrote:
>
>
>     Hello L2 managers,
>
>     After our interactions with NSF for the most recent BCP and their
>     comments on recent variance reports, we believe it is important that
>     you
>     prepare for the upcoming reviews by quantifying the impact of the
>     statements you made over the past year.  This includes the descriptions
>     in the COVID BCPs as well as statements in variance reports.
>
>     NSF will verify if everything is consistent.  Here's a relatively
>     simple
>     example related to the LAr ADC development that will lead to questions
>     from NSF:
>
>     -significant COVID-induced delays were incurred because of the
>     pre-prototype radiation test delay (8 months) and now the prototype
>     foundry delay => ok
>     -there's also a statement that some parts of the chip are substantially
>     more complex and require more engineering
>
>     Since the latter is not in any BCP, we should see a corresponding cost
>     variance.  But here's what we see:
>
>     -in the May CPR, the combined 6.4.1 Columbia+Austin cost variance is
>     -$98k, looks as expected
>     -however, declared COVID actuals for 6.4.1.1 and .2 add up to $118k
>     So the net non-COVID cost variance is actually +$20k.
>
>     NSF is asking
>
>     a) that statements like "some parts of the chip are substantially more
>     complex and require more engineering" be quantified: how much more
>     engineering?  At what cost?
>
>     b) that ultimately things add up: since that extra engineering isn't in
>     the baseline, it's an extra cost.  But it's not reflected in the cost
>     variance.  Why?
>
>     Please go through each of your deliverables, list all the statements
>     you
>     make and the variances at those times, and make sure you can explain
>     all
>     the numbers.  I attach a template that tries to make this easier.  The
>     template may need adjustments...
>
>     You should probably complete this before the DR.
>
>     Best,
>
>     Gustaaf
>     _______________________________________________
>     Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
>     Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>     <mailto:Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>     
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l__;!!C5qS4YX3!V3rQ-z6dFxGxhNl1pqndXywnfFD1-tt9razKkOYdC48CL5LuofOJQlWRbUnU1PUff5U$
>     
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l__;!!C5qS4YX3!V3rQ-z6dFxGxhNl1pqndXywnfFD1-tt9razKkOYdC48CL5LuofOJQlWRbUnU1PUff5U$>