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

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

Hello all,

Today’s update:

-6.4 needs some change: a) please quantify the source of schedule variance in 
the explanation (see my email from ~1 week ago), and b) in the corrective 
action you say "These changes led to the SV beginning to recover in the past 
several months, and the slow recovery should continue over the coming months” 
but this month the SV went up by a whopping $430k, so this statement is hard 
to reconcile with the numbers… => I’ve unlocked
 
-6.4.2 I’ve approved.  In the future be a bit careful: cost variance was not 
required and yet you mention it.  I’ve approved because it’s harmless here.

-6.5.4 is very hard to understand.  (Keep in mind the reader does not know 
the details of what you are doing.)  As far as I understand the text, it 
would indicate a positive SV (“early purchase”) but the SV is negative.  (The 
meaning of second sentence I don’t understand at all.)  Also the CV 
explanation I don’t understand.  So there was a mistake in accruals, but it 
sounds like the mistake was a month ago and it was corrected this month so 
should be ok now?  Also, we do accruals, so invoices being out of sync should 
be irrelevant. => I’ve unlocked.

-6.6.3: thanks for the quick turnaround, I’ve approved.

-6.8 and 6.8.4 are now late.  Please put a monthly reminder in your calendars 
to do this around the 15th of the month.

Best,

Gustaaf

> On Sep 20, 2024, at 15:33, Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> 
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> Thanks to those who have completed their VRs; others please do so asap.  
> Below are my comments so far.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Gustaaf
> 
> -6.4 and 6.4.2 are missing
> -6.4.1 I have approved (although limited impact != no impact….)
> -6.4.3 I have approved
> 
> -6.5.4 is missing
> 
> -6.6: I have approved, assuming more details on the CSM will be in the CSM 
> VR (see below)
> -6.6.3 has a typo: “results in an overestimate” => "results from an 
> overestimate”  I have unlocked because it drastically changes the meaning, 
> so needs to be fixed.
> -6.6.4: in an email a week or so ago I asked to be more precise: by how 
> much has it slipped?  When will it be cleared up?  How much float is left?  
> I have unlocked so you can add that information
> -6.6.5 I have approved
> 
> -6.8 and 6.8.4 are missing