PSP Exam Dumps - AACE International Professional Level Certifications Questions and Answers

 Mitigating Late Completion:

A procurement agent could monitor and expedite long-lead equipment, reducing delivery delays that often affect project timelines.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Hiring a senior project manager may not address the specific issue.

B: Self-performing may not resolve procurement delays.

D: Better structural steel drawings relate to design, not equipment delays.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

PSP emphasizes early identification and mitigation of procurement risks (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Procurement and Supply Chain Management).

 Activity Relationships:

Activity 2002 is directly succeeded by Activity 2003 in the schedule.

The late start (LS) of Activity 2003 determines the late finish (LF) of Activity 2002, adjusted by any lags or additional constraints.

 Late Finish Calculation Formula:

LF of 2002 = LS of 2003 - 1 day.

This accounts for the predecessor-successor logic and the sequence of activities.

 Date Calculation:

Late start of 2003 = 10-06-01.

Late finish of 2002 = 10-06-01 - 1 day = 10-05-01.

 Verification:

PSP guidelines emphasize that late finish values are derived by subtracting any relevant time constraints from the successor's late start (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Backward Pass Calculations)

 Understanding the Problem:

The question asks which risk cannot be estimated using only a resource-loaded schedule.

A resource-loaded schedule contains detailed information about activities, resources (labor, materials, equipment), and their associated costs but does not provide external information unrelated to project resources.

 Analysis of Each Option:

A. Delay due to SDOT's other projects:

This risk depends on external factors beyond the control or visibility of the resource-loaded schedule, such as project interactions, priorities, or resource allocation managed by SDOT (the State Department of Transportation).

A resource-loaded schedule cannot estimate this delay, as it does not account for external dependencies or priorities outside the project's scope.

This is the correct answer.

B. Delay due to labor shortage:

A resource-loaded schedule tracks labor availability and allocation. By analyzing resource constraints, it can estimate potential delays due to labor shortages.

This risk can be estimated using the schedule.

C. Liquidated damages on the SDOT contract:

Liquidated damages are linked to project delays. A resource-loaded schedule can estimate the delay impact and calculate potential damages based on contract terms.

This risk can be estimated.

D. Cost overruns due to cement shortage:

Cement shortages directly affect the material resource allocations in the schedule. A resource-loaded schedule can estimate cost overruns by analyzing material usage and constraints.

This risk can be estimated.

 Final Answer and Justification:

Option A is correct because a resource-loaded schedule cannot consider or predict delays caused by external projects managed by other entities like SDOT.

All other risks relate to project resources or scheduling, which can be analyzed using a resource-loaded schedule.

 Study Guide Reference:

Refer to the PSP Certification Study Guide, Chapter 2 – Scheduling, sections on Schedule Maintenance and Risk Analysis (p. 209), and Resource-Constrained Scheduling (p. 163).

AACE Recommended Practice 57R-09: "Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis" provides additional insights into risks measurable through schedules.

 Volume of Concrete per Column:

Each column requires 2,000 cubic feet of concrete.

 Lift Bucket Capacity:

Each lift bucket holds 40 cubic feet.

 Calculate Number of Lifts per Column:

Number of Lifts = Volume of Concrete ÷ Bucket Capacity = 2,000 ÷ 40 = 80 lifts.

 Cross-Verification:

Option B (50 lifts): Incorrect. Miscalculates required lifts.

Option C (5 lifts): Incorrect. Unrealistic for 2,000 cubic feet.

Option D (20 lifts): Incorrect. Underestimates.

Option A (80 lifts): Correct.

An effective schedule is one that is realistic, collaborative, and accepted by key stakeholders involved in project execution.

Gaining consent and agreement ensures buy-in, facilitates implementation, and minimizes disputes (Option B)​.

Frequent updates (Option A) are essential for tracking but are insufficient without team agreement.

Contract specifications (Option C) govern compliance but do not guarantee effective field use.

Large contingencies (Option D) may reduce accountability and create inefficiencies in project management.

Collaboration and stakeholder involvement, as emphasized in the PSP Study Guide, are essential for schedule usability​.

 Understanding the Requirement:

The "normal" schedule duration is 1072 days for Activity 1000 (General Conditions).

Billing occurs at the end of each month for the previous month.

Partial months are included in billing cycles.

 Total Project Duration in Months:

Total days: 1072.

Convert to months: 107230.44≈35.2\frac{1072}{30.44} \approx 35.230.441072​≈35.2 months.

Include partial months, which adds 1 additional invoice.

 Total Invoices:

Full months: 35.

Partial months: 7 (assuming each partial month is rounded up to include invoicing).

Total invoices = 35+7=4235 + 7 = 4235+7=42.

 PSP Principles Cross-Verification:

PSP guidelines emphasize accurate conversion of schedule durations into calendar billing periods for effective cash flow management (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Schedule Output and Deliverables).

 The Critical Path comprises the sequence of activities that directly impact the project’s completion time.

 If only the last half of Activity B delays the subsequent activities, then this portion lies on the critical path.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.4.3 – Schedule Analysis, emphasizes identifying segments of activities that are critical due to dependencies and float values.