Grow this from sentences that SURVIVED review — provenance in parentheses.
Report phrasings
- Methodology: “Analyses were conducted using [method] consistent with [agency] guidelines and the approved methodology memorandum dated [date].”
- Findings: “Under Future Build conditions, [movement] operates at LOS [X] with a 95th-percentile queue of [Y] ft, exceeding the available [Z] ft of storage.”
- Assumption: “In the absence of [data], [value] was assumed based on [source]; results are sensitive/not sensitive to this assumption.”
- Comment response (agree): “Concur. [Change] has been made; see [location].” (clarify): “The analysis reflects [X] per [source §]; no change proposed. Additional detail added to [location] for clarity.” Email skeletons (subject: PROJECT — topic — action/date)
- Deliverable: what’s attached · what changed since last · what you checked · what you’re unsure of · what you need & by when. Five lines beats five paragraphs.
- Data/info request: context one line → numbered asks → deadline w/ reason → thanks.
- Heads-up on a problem: issue → impact → options (your recommended one flagged) → decision needed by. Bad news travels FAST and with options. Meeting follow-up within 24h: decisions · actions (who/when) · assumptions stated aloud — the email IS the record. Explaining tech to non-engineers: lead with the consequence, not the method (“the left-turn line will block the through lane ~15 min each evening” > “v/c exceeds 1.0”).
See also: MOC - Report Writing · Methodology Memo Skeleton · Comment-Response Matrix Pattern