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

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

Hi Mark,

There is a BOE for EFT, so I think we do provide that at least.

Best,

Gustaaf

On Apr 5, 2023, at 2:31 PM, Coles, Mark W. <mcoles AT nsf.gov> wrote:

Hi Mike

 

I will share this with the committee to ask for their feedback. The cost and schedule folks are the same ones that participated in the CMS rebaselining, so their experience with what worked at that review will be valuable.

 

I have one concern though, and this is about the EFT. I think you will get a question from the panel on Monday asking you to describe the estimation methods and provide the basis of estimate calculations for the EFT budget and schedule. That’s new since FDR, and unless I missed it the documentation you provided does not have this material. The EFT review may take more time than just the drill-down on the cost book that was part of the CMS rebaselining. And software is harder to plan and manage too, so the discussion is likely to take longer than for the other areas.

 

Mark

 

From: Michael Tuts <tuts AT pmtuts.net> 
Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 3:47 PM
To: Coles, Mark W. <mcoles AT nsf.gov>
Cc: usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov; Amy Garwood - Nevis Labs (agarwood AT nevis.columbia.edu) <agarwood AT nevis.columbia.edu>; us-atlas-hllhc-pmgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - The choreography of the Cost & Schedule breakouts

 

This email originated from outside of the National Science Foundation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

 

Hi Mark,

 

We have been thinking of how best to handle the Subsystem breakouts and the Cost & Schedule breakouts on Day 2. Our current thinking is as follows, and I wanted to get your (and the committee) feedback to see if this would work.

 

• We have a total of 5 hours set aside for breakouts on Day 2 -- 9:30-12:30 & 14:45-16:45
• We would suggest that the subsystems are assigned their fixed breakout rooms (for all 5 hours), and that the cost & schedule reviewers “travel” to the subsystem rooms to do their review. This keeps the number of people travelling down to a minimum, since the subsystems are already setup and established with their laptop and Zoom sessions; this makes for more efficiency.
• So, the choreography looks as follows: we start with all subarea reviewers going to their corresponding rooms. The Cost & Schedule & Management reviewers start with one hour (9:30-10:30) with USATLAS management for global cost/schedule/management breakout, then the Cost & Schedule reviewers travel from room-to-room for 1 hour each with the subsystems (Tile->LAr->Muon->Trigger) and the subsystem reviewers remain in their respective subsystem rooms since they too may be interested in the Cost&Schedule information for their subsystem. I tried to capture that in the table below.

 

<image001.png>

 

Then you can decide whether the management reviewers wish to remain after 10:30 with the ATLAS project management team in the Science Center for further breakout (or maybe they want to travel to the subsystems?). We can of course tweak the times if the C&S 1-hour slot is too much/little (or needs to be changed according to subsystem) – we leave that to the reviewers to establish beforehand, perhaps once they have a feel for the various subsystems.

 

Your thoughts? We thought this the most efficient way to achieve the breakout goals with all ATLAS experts available for both the subsystem breakout and the C&S breakout.

 

Thanks, Mike

 

_______________________________________________
Us-atlas-hllhc-pmgmt-l mailing list
Us-atlas-hllhc-pmgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/us-atlas-hllhc-pmgmt-l