No, sorry, I don't understand your calculation.
As I already said in my previous post, the storage level is limited to at most 0.178055×0.57=0.10149 PJ, by your NCAP_AF=0.57. According to your results, your actual max. VAR_ACT is 1.852 in season S09, and so your actual max. storage level is 0.061 in that season, because VAR_ACT is aggregated over 30.345 days in season S09.
Now you say that "I was thinking Var_Act for storage represents the storage level during that time slice."
But earlier, you understood that if we take two consecutive time slices T1 and T2, Var_Act (T1)+Var_FIn(T1)–Var_FOut(T1)= Var_Act(T2). Clearly, you should immediately see that VAR_Act cannot represent the storage level if that relation holds! So, how could you think that VAR_Act represents the storage level during the time slice?
As I already said in my previous post, the storage level is limited to at most 0.178055×0.57=0.10149 PJ, by your NCAP_AF=0.57. According to your results, your actual max. VAR_ACT is 1.852 in season S09, and so your actual max. storage level is 0.061 in that season, because VAR_ACT is aggregated over 30.345 days in season S09.
Now you say that "I was thinking Var_Act for storage represents the storage level during that time slice."
But earlier, you understood that if we take two consecutive time slices T1 and T2, Var_Act (T1)+Var_FIn(T1)–Var_FOut(T1)= Var_Act(T2). Clearly, you should immediately see that VAR_Act cannot represent the storage level if that relation holds! So, how could you think that VAR_Act represents the storage level during the time slice?