to reconvene

10:00 Dec 29, 2016 

Regarding punctuation, it has been commented on before in this forum, there seems to be a trend, particularly among legal draughters (you'd know that better than I!) and particularly in the US (it seems to me) to leave out punctuation, even where this would help comprehension. Of course, I'm all in favour of getting rid of lengthy strings of sometimes nested subordinate clauses and parenthesis (so beloved of French legal writers!); but simply removing the punctuation that makes some sense of them doens't seem to me to be the way to go!
One very annoying example, which is at the origin of a great many KudoZ questions, is the omission of hyphens; although it's good to avoid clutter, and I'm generally in favour of 'joining up' word-pairs that have passed into everyday usage, simply leaving out hyphens seems to me counter-productive, where their presence might have helped comprehension; this is particularly the case with a group of (say) 3 words where it isn't always obvious (especially, perhaps, to a non-native speaker) which word the middle one should be associated with.

18:20 Dec 15, 2016 

I'm sure it's just that we work in different fields and have different backgrounds, and hence also exposure to different kinds of documents.

Concerning 'of budget', without the rest of the context, it's impossible to know which of your 2 suggestions it might be; I think it is more likely to be the first, which is how I instinctively initially read it "$16m out of the total budget requested/approved/available (etc.)"

But your second meaning is not inconceivable: some people (and I've noticed it particularly in EN-US) do tend to use expressions like '$1 of budget' instead of saying 'a budget of $1' — I suppose it's a bit like saying '1 lb of flour', but sort of makes 'budget' into a different kind of noun, that can be used with a partitive. But consider a more common expression '£10 of damage' — certainly in modern journalism, there's a tendency to leave out the '-worth' of that I as a pedantic traditionalist would expect to read.

17:27 Dec 15, 2016 

Je suis toujours surprise de constater comme ce qui m'apparaît nébuleux ou absurde vous apparaît totalement sensé et "typique" alors que des textes qui vous apparaissent totalement tordus et à réécrire me semblent tout juste complexes, mais intelligibles. Enfin! ainsi va la vie! Faisons de l'absence de ponctuation et de la syntaxe elliptique la norme en communication d'affaires et ajoutons "approval of *$ of budget" dans notre dictionnaire de l'anglais US standard.

Cela dit, oui, vous avez tout à fait raison, passer de "reconvoquer" à "reconduire" c'est étirer pas mal l'élastique. Et la virgule qui m'a échappé, "quite helpful", c'est le moins qu'on puisse dire, donne un sens à la phrase.

15:36 Dec 15, 2016 

Although the language is typical corporate-speak, it DOES make perfect sense as it stands ... although a little more punctuation wouldn't go amiss, as you say! This is typical US usage, streamlining almost ad absurdum.
Also, we of course can't second-guess what the preceding / surrounding context might be.
BUT do please note that 'reconvene' can ONLY possibly apply to 'the Board' — there is no way in EN that the meaning could be stretched to mean 'reconduire'. If it makes it easier for you to understand, imagine it with a quite helpful comma before 'with': "...budget as laid out, with the board to reconvene..." — and we know why, because it is "...following finalisation..." In other words, they need to meet again to discuss further once something else has been finalized.
There's nothing wrong with 'of budget', no reason to assume any kind of typo.

14:42 Dec 15, 2016 

Malheureusement, la ponctuation fait cruellement défaut et puis, il y a aussi ce "of 16m$ of budget" - typo? De quelque façon qu'on lise la phrase, quelque chose cloche, mais à priori, il me semble que :

"... tel que déposé au conseil [qui doit se réunir][à convoquer] au 1er trimestre 2016..." : ou bien ce budget a été déposé, ou bien il le sera, mais les deux ne peuvent se produire en même temps. Il faut donc conclure que c'est le budget qui sera "reconduit" et non le conseil qui "sera reconvoqué" ou "se réunira à nouveau".

Ça donnerait quelque chose comme:

Après finalisation de l'estimation budgétaire de contrôle du projet, AP Management recommande d'approuver que le budget de 16 millions de dollars tel que [présenté] [déposé] au conseil d'administration soit reconduit au 1er trimestre 2016.

(Il m'apparaît improbable qu'on recommande la reconduction d'un budget "après" la finalisation d'une estimation budgétaire.)