correct the spelling, punctuation and grammar in the email below. Also, please choose the most appropriate words but don't change the meaning nor the intent.  Hi Mr Righty,
This has been a good day for you, I hope. Mine was less intense in terms of meetings so you could say it was okay. Let’s right into it with my updates.
I’ll start off with the work on the RDS checks. What I have down is a combination of notes and reflections I have done today so it’s basically work in progress. I know we had the discussion about turnover not being relevant to BPD so maybe we should perform a check on total asset instead because it seems relevant and is used to create some ratios. I am wondering if there is a way to check in scope entities like for LCPD, but not sure in this is precisely why we had to task on ICL? What do we do with cascade, I think we discussed that these should be removed in that case we probably don’t need to do any check on them other than reporting how many there are in the current RDS. These are a few variables that we need to check based on the code CP shared with me. Cascade flag, grading events consisting of “exc_x_grade, internal_grade_flag…” although I am still to figure for what purpose. We need to count the number of missing for credit obligations and guarantors. As well we need to check the months the missing occurred. Missing values for defaults flags should be investigated but to the extedn that AG work is going as we don’t need to duplicate efforts. We would need to look into sp rating, md rating after categorisation i.e. levels assigned. I need to know how to get MCL and RMAT for further checks but maybe the link in LCPD could help for RMAT. The zero EAD checks, comparing old RDS with new one, and getting MI for other checks would be essential if possible to obtain them. I asked RL to see if she can leverage the code SJ has put together for the coverage exercise. AB should stop grouping by tonight and help RL with actual checks. We discussed about the importance of remembering the main purpose of the checks which is to ensure we have received the right data and that it’s fit for purpose. Any discrepancies should be reported and addressed in the next drop of the RDS.

During the planning session with the data team, AP said the WIP data dictionary will be made available today but as I write this, I haven’t seen any yet. The priority list will need to be revised further. This may mean for the RDS acceptance we probably won’t need to be as details as LCPD. AP insisted that to him the main purpose of the RDS DQ is to identify areas of concerns i.e. to flag anything that doesn’t appear right rather a full DQ. He mentioned that issues related to RDS may not be relevant for the MDS. For example if the data is completely missing there is nothing we could do about it but to drop it.  Scoping and default review are very important especially if we decide to only have 2 runs for the RDS instead of 3. This is may mean extending RDS DQ checks to ensure it’s more thorough than would be otherwise. 

Other things I have done including several calls with AB and RL, also discussions with AG on the default queries she had. Tomorrow, I’d like to do some checks but before that I’ll probably need to look at the MIRS and the tasks list proposed by RL.

Have a blessed evening

Decker