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

[Michael Tuts <tuts AT pmtuts.net>]

Dear NSF L2 managers,

Attached is the report from the EVMS surveillance review (Aug17-20). Please distribute to your CAMs.

Thanks, PO

 

From: Coles, Mark W. <mcoles AT nsf.gov>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 10:51 AM
To: tuts AT nevis.columbia.edu
Cc: Yasky, Rebecca Kay <ryasky AT nsf.gov>; Stein, Erica M. <estein AT nsf.gov>; Shank, James T. <jshank AT nsf.gov>
Subject: FW: ATLAS EVMS Surveillance Review Report

 

Hi Mike

 

The final EVMS surveillance report on the NSF-funded component of the ATLAS HL upgrade is attached. Please contact Rebecca directly, and copy Erica and me, if you or your team have any questions. We appreciate the efforts of your team to provide the information that was used to create this report.

 

Mark

 

From: Yasky, Rebecca Kay <ryasky AT nsf.gov>
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:22 PM
To: Coles, Mark W. <mcoles AT nsf.gov>
Cc: Stein, Erica M. <estein AT nsf.gov>; Farnsworth, Richard <rfarnswo AT nsf.gov>; Hawkins, Matthew J. <mjhawkin AT nsf.gov>
Subject: ATLAS EVMS Surveillance Review Report

 

Mark – Attached is the final report for the ATLAS EVMS surveillance review conducted virtually in August 2021.  The review team determined that the ATLAS EVMS continues to meet the intent of EIA-748 guidelines and NSF requirements and that the ATLAS Project Team appropriately uses the associated tools and processes. 

 

The report contains no findings for corrective actions and five recommendations for continuous improvement as listed below.  Recommendations with an asterisk (*) are priority and should be tracked for closure.

1. Document the Risk Adjusted Estimate at Completion (RAEAC) value in the NSF Monthly Report to comply with the NSF Major Facilities Guide (MFG) for reporting risk exposure. Include a summary of the risk analysis results with data tables and distribution curves whenever the risk exposure (RAEAC) is updated.*
2. Perform a comprehensive Estimate at Completion (EAC) in conjunction with the annual RAEAC analysis (as indicated by the MFG) and as a precursor to the re-baseline.*
3. In Variance Analysis Reports (VARs) with multiple drivers, quantify the cost and schedule impacts with each identified driver, especially for VARs with both COVID and non-COVID related variances.*
4. Include both positive and negative cost and schedule variance analysis reports in the NSF Monthly Reports per the MFG.*
5. Document the process for calculating total project risk exposure from the aggregation of multiple independent WBS Level 2 Monte Carlo simulations in either the Project Execution Plan (PEP), as a supplement to the Risk Management Plan, or in a risk analysis report.

 

Please feel free to share the report with the ATLAS Project Team so they have the complete background on the recommendations.  I’m available to discuss any questions you and/or Columbia may have regarding this report.  I’ve placed a copy of this report in eJacket.

 

Best,

Rebecca

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

Rebecca Yasky, PE, PMP, CCM, EVP | NSF Large Facilities Office, 2415 Eisenhower Ave, Rm E 6323

Alexandria, VA  22314 | ryasky AT nsf.gov | 703-292-4309 (Office) | 757-254-2868 (Mobile)

 

Attachment: NSF HL-LHC ATLAS EVMS Surveillance Report Final 9-30-21.pdf
Description: NSF HL-LHC ATLAS EVMS Surveillance Report Final 9-30-21.pdf