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

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

On May 20, 2025, at 17:02, Elliot Lipeles <lipeles AT sas.upenn.edu> wrote:

Sorry I thought 10% was okay for no variance report.

Rounding plays tricks here: if the 10% is black, it’s not needed (it’s really just under 10%, rounded up) and when it’s red, it’s needed (10% or slightly more, rounded down).  The threshold is 10%.

I put it in. The main issue is the delay of approval for the BNL effort, which is actually bad for the project, particularly since we'd started to count on this once the BCP went in.

Could you rephrase “the delay in approval for transfering funds to BNL and starting work on the "XRT Integration and AI/ML HLS Kernels” tasks” to "the delay in starting work on the "XRT Integration and AI/ML HLS Kernels” tasks”?

Similarly for the impact and corrective action, remove the mention of BNL.  The fact that the work is being done by BNL people is not the point, it’s that it’s delayed.  And we don’t want to highlight that we’re subcontracting work to BNL.

I’ve unlocked it.

Thx

Gustaaf

Elliot

On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:41 AM Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:

Hello all,

Here are my comments on this month’s VRs.

Best,

Gustaaf

-6.4.1: I have approved, but if all VTRx+ have been received, why is there a negative schedule variance.
-6.4.2 I have approved

-6.5.4 is missing

-6.6.1 is missing
-6.6.3 I have approved
-6.6.4 I will wait for confirmation that there was a typo - the point of VRs is that we show we understand what’s going on…

-6.8.1 I have approved, but given the latest news from samtec, it seems a little weird to say this has been “finalized”
-6.8.4 I have unlocked: you also owe a report on the SV.

--

Elliot Lipeles

Professor

Physics and Astronomy