(PUBLIC/QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW DRAFT) 33R-15: Developing the Project Work Breakdown Structure

You may provide your comment by either:

·         Posting a message in this thread directly

·         Providing your comment in the "REVIEWER" columns of the Excel file and posting it in this thread

This draft RP is open for review and comment until January 18, 2026.

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog.xlsx   111 KB 1 version

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04.pdf   470 KB 1 version

Posted on behalf of Peter Holroyd:"

Attachment(s)

313 - WBS Dictionary_IWO Rev 4.pdf   425 KB 1 version

comments attached

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog_JMARZONIE.xlsx   114 KB 1 version

Greetings, All,

Wishing you a healthy, successful, and fulfilling New Year. I have attached my comments for your review. 

Thank you,

Amin

~~~~~~

Amin S. Terouhid, Ph.D., P.E.^*, CVS

PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT

Adroit Consultants, LLC

DIRECT:  201.366.3522 | FAX: 805.309.7534

LinkedIn | Twitter | AdroitProjectConsultants.com

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog.xlsx   112 KB 1 version

Additional comments. 

Thanks,

------------------------------
Janet Bradford
Project Controls Manager
Garney

------------------------------

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog_Bradford.xlsx   113 KB 1 version

Hi Chris,

This PR is properly prepared so my comments or suggestions are not that many.

Attached please find my comments log.

Thanks,

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog __Very CAO.xlsx   113 KB 1 version

Very nice work.  I have attached Excel comment form.  My biggest comment is centered on the detail for the WBS descriptions.  Otherwise I think this is very thorough.  The samples are simple but I think we should caution that the actual WBS descriptions should be detailed.  I think Lines 221-225 try to cover this, but I think it should be spelled out more clearly.  

Figures 1, 2 and 3 and Tables 2, 3 and 4 - I understand that these are examples and for clarity may be less detailed, but I think it is important for the information from the upper levels of the WBS carry down to the lower levels.  Commonly when users see WBS elements or bands they are separated by activities and sub levels may carry on for several pages or screens on a device.  I think it is important to show detail in these tables where for example Table 4:

·         Building 1

o   Design-Building 1

§  Architectural Design - Building 1

·         Arch. Masonry Design - Building 1

·         Arch Window Design - Building 1

·         Arch. Door Design - Building 1

§  Structural Steel Design – Building 1

§  Mechanical & Electrical Design – Building 1

·         Building 2

o   Construction – Building 2

§  Grading Construction – Building 2

§  Foundation Construction – Building 2

§  Floor 1 Construction – Building 2

·         Steel Framing Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

o   Steel Columns Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

o   Steel Beams Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

o   Steel Roof Truss Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

·         Concrete Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

·         Entries Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

·         Windows Const. Floor 1 – Building 2

I am exaggerating for effect and acronyms or shortened descriptions can be used.  My concern would be that readers of the RP would think is reasonable to have duplicate WBS descriptions which I think confuse the overall schedule document.  Maybe clarify that these are simple examples and state separately that the WBS should be detailed sufficiently.

Thank you

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog FP.xlsx   113 KB 1 version

Additional Comments are attached.

Thank you,

Attachment(s)

PRD_QAR_33R-15_2025-12-04_CommentLog_Matthew Freih.xlsx   113 KB 1 version