Free and Premium AACE International PSP Dumps Questions Answers

 Update Process Essentials:

Schedule updates track the current status of the project using actuals (start/finish dates), progress (percent complete), and future plans (remaining duration).

The original duration does not change and is part of baseline data, not required for routine updates.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scheduling update procedures are discussed, emphasizing active progress tracking elements like actual start, percent complete, and remaining duration​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as original duration is not a variable considered in regular updates.

 Scenario Review:

Delay in the parking structure foundation is an off-critical path activity.

No impact on the overall project completion date.

 Delay Analysis:

While the foundation activity is delayed, the float ensures that no downstream activities are impacted.

 Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Assumes a 4-day impact.

Option C: Incorrect. Overestimates delays.

Option D: Incorrect. Miscalculates delays.

Understanding As-Built Critical Path Analysis:

Determining the as-built critical path of a project involves identifying the sequence of activities that actually dictated the completion of the project. This is especially important in projects that are underway, as schedules often deviate from the original baseline due to progress updates and unplanned changes​​.

Explanation of Each Option:

A. Use the progressed portion of the critical path of all the updates previous to the current update:This is correct. To determine the most likely as-built critical path, analyzing the progressed portion of the critical path from all previous updates provides the most accurate representation of the project’s actual execution. By reviewing the progression over time, you can piece together the actual sequence of critical activities​​.

B. Use the progressed portion of the critical path of the baseline schedule:This is incorrect. The baseline schedule reflects the original plan, which may no longer be accurate due to progress deviations, delays, or changes in logic. Using the baseline alone does not account for the dynamic nature of the project​.

C. Interview the project personnel for their perceptions and opinions because the schedule is usually inadequate:This is incorrect. While project personnel may provide insights, relying solely on subjective opinions introduces biases and inconsistencies. A properly maintained and updated schedule is far more reliable for determining the critical path​.

D. Use the forward-looking critical path of the most current updates:This is incorrect. The forward-looking critical path only reflects what is expected to happen from the current point onward. It does not provide an accurate representation of the as-built critical path up to the current point​.

 Study Guide References:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of analyzing progress updates to trace the actual sequence of critical activities. Section 2.3.2 (Tracking Schedule Progress) discusses the role of historical updates in understanding project performance​.

The guide also highlights that a proper as-built analysis requires a review of all updates to identify shifts in the critical path over time​.

Activity Details (9001 - "Spillway - Concrete"):

Duration: 175 days in the Normal schedule.

To calculate Late Start (LS), the Late Finish (LF) is required. LS is calculated by subtracting the activity's duration from the LF.

Formula for Late Start (LS):LS = LF.9001 - Dur.9001.

Date Calculation:

Late Finish (LF.9001) = 11-20-02 (given or derived).

Apply the formula:LS.9001 = LF.9001 - Dur.9001= 11-20-02 - 175 days.

Cross-Verification of Dates:

After subtracting 175 days, LS.9001 = 11-20-02.

Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. EF (Early Finish) is not needed for this calculation.

Option B: Incorrect. Uses LS and Dur incorrectly without connecting to LF.

Option C: Incorrect. Data provided is sufficient.

Option D: Correct. Matches both the formula and the date calculation.

 Activity 2002 in the Crashed Schedule:

Activity 2002 duration in the crashed schedule is 28 days.

Start Date: 12 August 2021.

Finish Date = Start Date + Duration (excluding non-working days).

 Calculation:

12 August + 28 days = 09 September 2021 (excluding weekends or non-working days based on typical calendars).

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Accurate calculation of start and finish dates aligns with scheduling best practices (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Schedule Development).

 Role of Project Schedules:

Schedules primarily control time, cost, and resource allocations.

Quality management is related to design specifications and execution standards, not directly managed by schedules.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide clarifies the limitations of scheduling tools in managing quality aspects​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is A, as project schedules do not directly control quality.

Retaining existing logic means preserving the original relationships and dependencies defined in the schedule. Even if progress is recorded out of sequence, calculations adhere to the pre-established logic unless explicitly changed.

Option B reflects adjustments for out-of-sequence progress but contradicts the original logic requirement.

Option C imposes restrictions that do not align with typical CPM calculations.

Option D is incorrect as the concept exists​​.

The PSP Study Guide discusses the importance of maintaining logic integrity in CPM scheduling​.

The sum of all budgets for work scheduled to be accomplished within a specific time period is referred to as the Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS). It represents the planned value of work to be performed during the reporting period.

Option A (Estimate at Completion - EAC) refers to the projected final cost of the project.

Option B (Budget at Completion - BAC) is the total project budget.

Option C (Budgeted Cost of Work Performed - BCWP) refers to the earned value.

This definition aligns with earned value management concepts covered in the PSP Study Guide​.

 Late Finish (LF) is calculated by adjusting the Late Start (LS) of the subsequent activity (2003) by the lag value.

 The formula, LS of 2003 - 1 day, aligns with CPM principles where the predecessor's LF must occur before the successor starts.

 The date calculation, considering lags and dependencies, results in 06 Oct 2021.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 – Relationships and Calculations, Appendix A – Sample Calculations for LF and LS relationships.

 Activity 11001 Characteristics:

Activity 11001 (Spillway - Concrete) is logically defined as the final activity in the project.

Final activities in a project typically do not have successor activities since they signify project completion.

 Exclusion of Other Options:

Option A: Circular logic does not apply since the scheduling logic is linear and follows standard precedence diagramming methods.

Option B: Activity 11001 is not penultimate but the final activity.

Option C: The scheduler's error is highly unlikely in a controlled environment following PSP principles.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide explains that final activities represent the culmination of a project's logical sequence and typically lack successors (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Logical Sequencing).

Total float is influenced by factors like multiple calendars, start/finish constraints, and preferential logic because these directly affect the calculation of early and late dates.

Option D (front end loading), which involves distributing work to earlier project phases, does not inherently affect float calculations as it primarily pertains to resource or phase management strategies​​.

 Impact of Scope Definition on Cost Overruns:

Poor scope definition leads to unrealistic budgets and unforeseen changes, which significantly contribute to cost overruns.

Other factors like change management and WBS definitions are secondary contributors compared to scope inadequacy.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide emphasizes scope definition as a critical factor for accurate budgeting and planning​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as scope definition at the estimate stage has the most frequent and significant impact on cost overruns.

 Relationship Analysis:

Activity 4001 starts 15 days after Activity 3001 begins, based on their logical dependency (SS +15).

This indicates partial concurrency, as both activities overlap in execution.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Incorrect, as the statement refers to Activity 5001, not 3001.

C: Incorrect, as Activity 4001 does not start before Activity 3001.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

PSP guidelines stress precise interpretation of activity relationships (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Logical Relationships and Lags).

 Impact of Overrun:

Drafting (Activity C) and manufacturing (Activity D) are critical path activities.

A 5-day overrun in drafting consumes all available time for manufacturing.

Therefore, manufacturing cannot be delayed without affecting the release of the product.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide specifies that critical path activities have zero float, so delays propagate directly to the project finish (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path and Float).

 Shape of Cumulative BCWS:

The Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) reflects a cumulative expenditure curve over time, typically shaped like an "S".

 Explanation of the S-Curve:

Initially slow expenditure, acceleration during peak work, and tapering off near completion.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide discusses BCWS as part of earned value management (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1D: Earned Value Analysis).

 Role of Soils Engineer:

Soils engineers address subsurface conditions, such as soil stability, unexpected geology, and underground obstacles.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Survey errors are typically addressed by surveyors.

C: Archeological findings involve specialists in historical preservation.

D: Toxic soils are typically handled by environmental engineers.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide includes subsurface investigations as a key responsibility for geotechnical professionals (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1A: Site Conditions).

A logic loop occurs when a circular dependency is introduced, creating a scenario where activities cannot progress in a linear or logical manner.

Adding a relationship between F and I would create such a loop if existing dependencies between these or related activities already establish mutual dependencies.

When detailed estimates are unavailable, historical production rates can provide reliable data for estimating durations based on past projects with similar work.

Option A (Eichleay formula) is for overhead cost allocation.

Option C (Time impact analysis) evaluates delay impacts, not durations.

Option D (Black-Scholes model) is irrelevant in this context.

Historical data usage is a recognized method in project planning and scheduling practices​​.

 Estimating Activity Durations:

The critical factors are crew size, labor hours, and the standard workday.

Cost estimation is not directly required to calculate durations.

 Evaluation of Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Crew size is needed for productivity estimation.

Option B: Incorrect. Labor hours are directly tied to durations.

Option C: Incorrect. Workday hours define the available time.

Option D: Correct. Cost is not directly linked to duration

 The Late Finish (LF) for an activity in CPM is determined by adding the activity’s duration to its Late Start (LS).

 For Activity 9004, if its Late Start is known, adding the activity’s 72-day duration gives the Late Finish date.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 – Relationships and Calculations, highlights the importance of forward and backward pass calculations to determine ES, EF, LS, and LF.

 Activity-specific costs in CPM schedules typically include direct expenses like materials (C), field-related overhead (D), and specific schedule management tasks (B).

 Home office expenses are classified as indirect costs and are not associated with any specific activity within the project schedule. They are accounted for in broader financial statements rather than in the activity-based budget.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 1.3.10 – Cost Estimate Development, explains how costs are categorized and assigned in schedules.

 Definition of a Critical Path Method (CPM) Schedule:

CPM schedules are based on network diagrams that logically link activities, showing the sequence and dependencies between them.

These schedules identify the critical path, which is the longest path through the network, determining the project's shortest possible duration.

 Evaluation of Options:

Option A: Incorrect. While CPM schedules do include tasks and timelines, the defining feature is the logical interconnection of activities.

Option B: Incorrect. CPM schedules are not limited to "risky" work; they show all activities.

Option C: Incorrect. CPM schedules use network diagrams, not just graphical representations.

Option D: Correct. The network diagram is the key characteristic of CPM schedules.

 Critical Path Characteristics:

The critical path is the longest path through the network, defining the minimum project completion time. It cannot be the shortest path.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Critical path analysis emphasizes that it is determined by network logic and represents the chain of activities controlling the project duration​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A, C, and D: Accurately describe the critical path.

Option B: Incorrect; the critical path is not the shortest path.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as the critical path is the longest path, not the shortest.

 Critical Path and Delays:

A delay must impact the critical path to qualify for a time extension or compensable delay, as the critical path determines the project's overall completion time.

If the critical path is not affected, the delay is considered to have "float," which means it does not affect the project's completion date and, therefore, may not be compensable.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Delays impacting the critical path are emphasized in the PSP Study Guide under schedule analysis and delay management sections. The claimant must demonstrate that the delay impacts key project milestones and overall project completion​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A: Correct. A delay that does not affect the critical path does not result in additional time or compensation.

Option B: Concurrent delays involve shared responsibility and may complicate claims for compensation but are not a strict requirement for delay consideration.

Option C: Monetary harm is not directly relevant to time extension entitlement.

Option D: While planned schedules are significant, the focus is on the project's critical path, not just the contractor's planned sequence.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is A because affecting the critical path is the key determinant for entitlement to a time extension or compensable delay.

 Situation Analysis:

A 5-day delay in product release impacts the printing window.

The printer is further delayed by 10 workdays.

 Total Delay Impact Calculation:

The combined impact of the testing and printing delays = 5 + 10 = 15 days.

This results in a cumulative delay in product release.

 Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Ignores delays entirely.

Option C: Incorrect. Assumes only one source of delay.

Option D: Incorrect. Underestimates delay impact.

Option A: Correct. Matches the calculated total delay.

Understand Activity B's Status:

Activity B has an original duration of 5 days.

As of the data date/status date, the diagram shows progress beyond 5 days.

Review Actual Duration:

The progress bar indicates that 7 days have already been worked on Activity B.

Actual duration as of the status date = 7 days.

Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Progress exceeds 3 days.

Option C: Incorrect. Progress is not 0 days.

Option D: Incorrect. Progress is more than 4 days.

Option A: Correct. Matches the observed progress on the diagram.

Compensability and Excusability:

Excusable delays are those beyond the contractor’s control, while compensable delays are excusable delays for which the owner bears responsibility.

If a delay is compensable, it inherently qualifies as excusable.

PSP Study Guide References:

The relationship between excusability and compensability is clarified in delay analysis discussions​.

Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as compensability implies excusability.

 As-Planned vs. As-Built (APAB) Analysis:

A simple APAB compares the planned schedule to the actual schedule to identify deviations.

It does not involve inserting delaying events or re-forecasting the schedule, which makes it unsuitable for detailed analysis.

 Limitations of APAB:

Unsuitable for complex projects (A).

Inserting delays is not part of APAB (B).

Accuracy diminishes for long projects (C) or those requiring granular mid-project analyses (D).

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as inserting delays into the as-planned schedule is not a feature of simple APAB analysis.

 Interpret the Narrow Band at "Y":

The narrow band at "Y" is located on a part of the schedule where activities have been delayed or slowed down.

Such delays typically indicate resource limitations (e.g., insufficient manpower or equipment).

 Reasoning:

No evidence of rework or activity inactivity is explicitly shown in the diagram.

Resource limitations are common in network diagrams to explain such periods.

 Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. No evidence of rework exists.

Option C: Incorrect. Activity inactivity does not fit the context.

Option D: Incorrect. Sufficient information is provided.

Option A: Correct. Resource limitation fits the observed diagram behavior.

 Scope Planning Tools and Techniques:

Tools for scope planning include methods to define and refine the project scope. These involve cost-benefit analysis, expert judgment, and alternatives identification.

Schedule performance indexing is a performance tracking tool used during execution and is unrelated to scope planning.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scope planning methods are detailed in the PSP guide, emphasizing tools like expert judgment, alternatives analysis, and structured decision-making techniques​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A: A common method to analyze the costs and benefits of scope components.

Option B: Incorrect. This is a tracking tool, not a scope planning method.

Option C: Expert judgment is a key technique in defining project scope.

Option D: Alternatives identification supports exploring various approaches to project goals.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as schedule performance indexing is not a scope planning tool.

 Purpose of Multiple Calendars:

Multiple calendars account for varied work/non-work periods among resources, regions, or activities, accurately representing project execution.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

B, C, D: These may be secondary benefits but are not the primary reason.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of calendars for realistic scheduling (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Calendars and Constraints).

When planning a contractor's baseline critical path schedule for constructing a high-clearance bridge near an airport, a planner/scheduler must consider documents directly relevant to the project's execution and constraints. Here's the detailed reasoning:

Project Plans and Specifications (Option A):These documents contain the detailed design, materials, and methods necessary for construction. They are indispensable for planning the baseline critical path schedule.

Project Geotechnical Report (Option B):The geotechnical report provides critical information about soil conditions, foundational requirements, and potential challenges, which significantly influence construction sequencing and methods.

Regulations Published by the Government Aviation Agency (Option C):As the project is near an airport, these regulations will likely impose height restrictions, flight path considerations, and safety requirements. Compliance with these regulations is crucial to avoid project delays or legal issues.

Government's Report on Future High-Clearance Bridge Projects (Option D):This document provides information on future projects and does not pertain to the current construction project. It does not provide actionable data or constraints affecting the planning or execution of the baseline critical path schedule for the awarded project.

Conclusion: Option D is the least valuable document in this scenario as it does not contribute directly to the planning or scheduling of the current project.

 Requirement to Expedite:

To release the product 20 days earlier, critical path activities must be expedited.

Critical path activities: A (Testing), D (Manufacturing), G (Packaging).

 Excluded Activities:

Activities like drafting (Activity C) or proofing (Activity F) are not critical and do not impact the total project duration.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

PSP guidelines emphasize expediting critical path tasks for schedule acceleration (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Schedule Compression Techniques).

 Early Start Constraint:

An early start constraint specifies the earliest date on which an activity can begin, aligning with project constraints or milestones.

It is a planning input and does not dictate actual or remaining durations.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scheduling constraints, including early start, are critical for establishing realistic schedules and milestones​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is C, as an early start constraint refers to the planned start date of an activity.

Original Completion Date (Normal Schedule):

Project completion is originally set for 03-01-04 (based on all durations and dependencies).

Slippage Details:

Activity 1001: Slipped by 10 days.

Activity 10002: Slipped by 35 days.

Remaining activities retain original durations.

Revised Completion Date Calculation:

Adjust original completion date for the cumulative slippage of 35 days (largest impact).

New completion date = 03-01-04 + 10 days = 03-11-04.

Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A (02-19-04): Incorrect. Ignores slippage.

Option B (03-21-04): Incorrect. Overestimates slippage impact.

Option D (03-20-04): Incorrect. Does not align with the logical sequence.

Option C (03-11-04): Correct. Matches adjusted completion date.

Column Pour Requirements:

Each column pour requires 60 lifts per day.

Crane Capacity:

Each crane can perform 35 lifts per day.

Determine Minimum Cranes Required:

Minimum Cranes = Column Lifts ÷ Crane Capacity = 60 ÷ 35 ≈ 1.71 cranes.

Since partial cranes cannot be used, round up to 3 cranes.

Cross-Verification:

Option A (2 cranes): Incorrect. Insufficient lifts per day.

Option B (1 crane): Incorrect. Infeasible.

Option C (4 cranes): Incorrect. Exceeds requirement.

Option D (3 cranes): Correct. Satisfies lift requirements efficiently.

 Cost for 2000 Series Activities:

Activity 2001: $150,000.

Activity 2002: $25,000.

Activity 2003: $18,000.

Activity 2004: $96,000.

Total: 150,000+25,000+18,000+96,000=289,000150,000 + 25,000 + 18,000 + 96,000 = 289,000150,000+25,000+18,000+96,000=289,000.

 Total Project Cost:

Total cost: $7,308,000 (sum of all activities in "normal" schedule).

 Percentage Contribution:

289,0007,308,000×100≈3.95%\frac{289,000}{7,308,000} \times 100 \approx 3.95\%7,308,000289,000​×100≈3.95%.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes accuracy in percentage-based cost contributions as a critical analysis tool in project cost management (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1B: Cost Breakdown Structure).

 Activity Duration Estimation Techniques:

Accurate estimation methods include detailed breakdowns, using experienced personnel, and analyzing specific factors for individual activities.

Relying on gross estimates or averages (as in A) introduces significant inaccuracies.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of detailed and specific input to improve estimation accuracy​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A: Incorrect method, as averages do not provide accurate results for individual activities.

Option B: Misguided suggestion; focusing independently on activities without logic paths introduces potential errors.

Option C: Correct. Dividing activities enhances detail and estimation precision.

Option D: Correct. Involving the executors ensures realistic and experienced-based durations.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is A, as using gross estimates is not an effective method for improving accuracy.

 To eliminate Activity B from the critical path, its dependencies must change so that its delay no longer impacts the path's completion time.

 Replacing the A → B relationship with a Finish-to-Finish with Offset (FFO) and adding an FSO (Finish-to-Start with Offset) relationship from A → C allows Activity C to proceed independently of Activity B.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 – Relationships and Calculations, explains how relationship types can influence critical path determination.

 Analyze the Data and Logic:

Activity 9004 ("Valve House Embankment"): This activity has a direct Finish-to-Start (FS) relationship with Activity 10002, with a lag of 7 days.

Late Start (LS) and Late Finish (LF): In backward pass calculations, the late finish of the successor activity is adjusted for lag and task duration to determine the late start of the predecessor activity.

 Formula for Late Finish (LF):

The Late Finish of Activity 9004 is derived by taking the Late Start (LS) of Activity 10002, subtracting the lag of 7 days, and subtracting 1 day to calculate the exact finish date.

 Correct Date Calculation:

Given the Late Start (LS) of Activity 10002:

LS.10002 = 11-28-03.

Apply the formula:LF.9004 = LS.10002 - Lag.7 - 1 day = 11-28-03 - 7 days - 1 day = 11-20-03.

 Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Misrepresents the formula.

Option B: Incorrect. Incorrect application of logic and lag adjustments.

Option C: Incorrect. Omits the correct lag consideration.

Option D: Correct. Matches both formula and calculated date.

 Time-Scaled Logic Diagrams:

Represent activities with respect to a time scale (e.g., a calendar).

Show logical relationships and durations in a visually aligned manner, aiding in analysis and reporting.

 Common Misconceptions:

They are not the same as pure logic diagrams (B).

While often created using computer software, manual versions are also possible, so (A) is incorrect.

They are not specifically for calculating activity durations (C).

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide identifies time-scaled logic diagrams as a tool for better visualization of schedules, where activities align with calendar dates​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as time-scaled logic diagrams are drawn to align activities with a calendar.

 SDOT, as the project owner or primary stakeholder, benefits most from a master schedule as it provides an overview of progress, resource allocation, and critical path analysis for the entire project.

 Contractors (e.g., BILCO) may rely on more detailed schedules specific to their scope rather than the overall master schedule.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.4.8 – Management Summary, which explains how master schedules are valuable to owners and stakeholders for overall project oversight.

 Critical Path Identification:

The critical path is the longest sequence of activities that determines the project’s minimum duration.

Path: A → B → G → H.

 Exclusion of Other Options:

Paths involving F, J, or non-critical activities do not align with the longest duration.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes identifying the critical path for schedule optimization (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path Analysis)

To determine how many activities in the "normal" schedule would be affected by the constraint of no activity exceeding a two-month duration (approximately 60 days):

Review the "Normal Schedule Days" Column:Look for activities with a duration greater than 60 days in the "Normal Schedule Days" column of the table provided in the image.

Count the Affected Activities:Count all activities where the "Normal Schedule Days" value exceeds 60.

Activities with durations greater than 60 days:

Activity ID 1000: 1072 days

Activity ID 1001: 85 days

Activity ID 2001: 92 days

Activity ID 3001: 152 days

Activity ID 4001: 152 days

Activity ID 5001: 102 days

Activity ID 6001: 140 days

Activity ID 6002: 115 days

Activity ID 6003: 152 days

Activity ID 9001: 175 days

Activity ID 9002: 180 days

Activity ID 9005: 72 days

Total Count:

There are 12 activities in the "normal" schedule exceeding the 60-day duration constraint.

Verified Answer:

A. 12.

Detailed Explanation with References: The constraint specifies that no activity should exceed a two-month (60-day) duration. By examining the "Normal Schedule Days" column, any activity with a duration greater than 60 days is non-compliant and therefore affected. The PSP study guide emphasizes reviewing contract requirements to ensure schedules adhere to such administrative constraints​.