AACE PSP: Conduct Planning Duties

Try 10 focused AACE PSP questions on Conduct Planning Duties, with answers and explanations, then continue with PM Mastery.

On this page

Open the matching PM Mastery practice page for timed mocks, topic drills, progress tracking, explanations, and full practice.

Topic snapshot

FieldDetail
Exam routeAACE PSP
Topic areaConduct Planning Duties
Blueprint weight30%
Page purposeFocused sample questions before returning to mixed practice

How to use this topic drill

Use this page to isolate Conduct Planning Duties for AACE PSP. Work through the 10 questions first, then review the explanations and return to mixed practice in PM Mastery.

PassWhat to doWhat to record
First attemptAnswer without checking the explanation first.The fact, rule, calculation, or judgment point that controlled your answer.
ReviewRead the explanation even when you were correct.Why the best answer is stronger than the closest distractor.
RepairRepeat only missed or uncertain items after a short break.The pattern behind misses, not the answer letter.
TransferReturn to mixed practice once the topic feels stable.Whether the same skill holds up when the topic is no longer obvious.

Blueprint context: 30% of the practice outline. A focused topic score can overstate readiness if you recognize the pattern too quickly, so use it as repair work before timed mixed sets.

Sample questions

These questions are original PM Mastery practice items aligned to this topic area. They are designed for self-assessment and are not official exam questions.

Question 1

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

An EPC project’s schedule governance procedure states:

  • Discipline reviewers may recommend logic and duration changes, but only the project manager and project controls manager may approve a baseline.
  • A forecast may be communicated before baseline approval if it is clearly labeled as a forecast, tied to a model revision ID, and its assumptions and uncertainties are stated.
  • Each model revision must preserve the prior version, review comments, comment disposition, and approval record.

Revision 3 of the integrated schedule has completed reviewer comment resolution. The procurement strategy is still awaiting executive approval, so the baseline has not been approved. The owner asks for tomorrow’s steering committee update on the likely commissioning date. What should the scheduler do?

  • A. Issue Revision 3 as the baseline because reviewer comments are closed
  • B. Provide a labeled pre-baseline forecast from Revision 3, state the procurement assumption and uncertainty, and retain the revision history and review log
  • C. Overwrite the prior model with Revision 3 so stakeholders see only one current schedule
  • D. Withhold any date communication until the formal baseline is approved

Best answer: B

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The best governance response is to separate forecast communication from baseline approval. Stakeholders can receive a current date forecast, but it must be clearly identified as pre-baseline, supported by stated assumptions, and traceable to a specific model version.

This question tests schedule governance discipline. Reviewer closure does not equal baseline approval when the governance procedure reserves baseline authority to named approvers. At the same time, the owner has a legitimate decision need, so the scheduler should not suppress useful schedule information if the procedure allows a forecast before baseline approval.

The strongest action is to issue a clearly labeled pre-baseline forecast from the current revision, identify the pending procurement approval as the basis of uncertainty, and preserve version traceability through retained files, comment disposition, and approval records. That approach protects the control reference, avoids misrepresenting an unapproved baseline, and still gives stakeholders evidence-based schedule information for decision-making.

The key distinction is that a forecast can be communicated now, but the baseline cannot be declared approved without the authorized approvals.

This preserves baseline authority, meets the immediate forecast need, and maintains traceable version control and evidence.


Question 2

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

A contractor wants sponsor approval of the integrated schedule baseline next week. The contract has a fixed Substantial Completion milestone, engineering uses a 5-day calendar, construction uses a 6-day calendar, and two long-lead equipment delivery dates are still planning assumptions because purchase orders are not yet awarded. The sponsor asks for the single best planning evidence to judge baseline readiness. What should the planner provide?

  • A. A procurement update noting long-lead delivery dates will be finalized after baseline approval
  • B. A level-1 milestone report showing planned completion before the contractual Substantial Completion date
  • C. A resource-loading summary showing peak engineering and construction demand within available crews
  • D. A reviewed basis-of-schedule package documenting WBS coverage, calendars, assumptions, constraints, and interface signoff

Best answer: D

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: For a baseline approval decision, the sponsor needs evidence that the schedule rests on a complete, reviewed planning basis. Documentation of scope coverage, calendars, constraints, assumptions, and interfaces is more useful than a favorable finish date or a partial feasibility view.

Baseline readiness is a planning-quality decision, not just a date check. In this scenario, differing discipline calendars and unawarded long-lead equipment can materially change the schedule, so the most useful evidence is a reviewed basis-of-schedule package that makes those inputs explicit and traceable.

It should show:

  • scope coverage from the WBS into the schedule
  • milestone, calendar, constraint, and interface assumptions
  • unresolved procurement assumptions and who reviewed or accepted them

That gives the sponsor a defensible basis to approve, defer, or condition the baseline decision. A milestone report or resource summary may support analysis, but neither proves that the baseline is founded on complete and controlled planning inputs.

Baseline readiness is best supported by documented planning basis and stakeholder review, especially when calendars and procurement assumptions materially affect dates.


Question 3

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

During pre-baseline review for a substation expansion project, the reviewer sees this basis-of-schedule excerpt:

Required energization milestone: November 14, 2026
Calendars: Engineering 5-day week; construction 6-day week
Transformer procurement duration: 24 weeks
Site installation starts after transformer delivery
Commissioning follows installation

The excerpt does not state the source of the November 14 date, the interface assumptions behind the delivery-to-installation sequence, or any owner review/approval durations. What is the next appropriate step?

  • A. Document the milestone source, interface assumptions, approval durations, and sequencing rationale in the basis of schedule before approval.
  • B. Approve the excerpt because the schedule model already shows the dates and logic links.
  • C. Defer the gap until the first update and validate the sequence from actual progress.
  • D. Replace the missing rationale with baseline dates for the key activities.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The basis of schedule is incomplete because it shows schedule outputs without the supporting rationale. Before approval, it should document the source of key dates and the assumptions behind major sequence decisions so a reviewer can trace how the schedule was developed.

A complete basis of schedule lets a reviewer understand why key milestone dates and major sequences exist in the schedule model. In this case, the excerpt lists a required milestone, calendars, a procurement duration, and broad sequencing, but it does not explain the source of the energization date, the interface logic behind delivery driving installation, or any approval durations that could affect the path.

The next step is to revise the basis of schedule so it includes the documented rationale for those dates and relationships, such as:

  • the origin of the required milestone date
  • the assumptions governing procurement and handoffs
  • review/approval durations and interface timing
  • any logic or calendar assumptions affecting the sequence

Using the schedule model alone or copying baseline dates does not replace documented schedule basis. Waiting until an update is too late because completeness should be established before baseline approval.

A basis of schedule must explain how key dates and logic were derived, not just list resulting dates and activity order.


Question 4

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

During baseline development for a refinery tie-in project, the scheduler applies Start On or After to outage work and Finish On to startup testing. The basis of schedule contains only one note: Use management target dates. The contract includes one required mechanical completion milestone, and the owner will allow tie-in work only during an approved shutdown window. Which correction best addresses the real issue before those constraints remain in the schedule model?

  • A. Replace the constraints with lag so the dates still match management targets.
  • B. Document the source, required date or window, affected milestone, and basis assumptions for each constraint, including whether it is mandatory or only a target.
  • C. Remove all date constraints and rely on network logic for every required date.
  • D. Keep the constraints and describe them later in the first update narrative.

Best answer: B

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The problem is missing planning basis, not simply the presence of constraints. Before a constraint is kept in the schedule model, the basis of schedule should identify the source of the date, the exact required date or window, the affected milestone, and the assumptions that make it a true external requirement rather than an internal target.

In PSP practice, a date constraint is acceptable only when it traces to a documented planning fact. That fact might be a contractual milestone, regulatory deadline, approved outage window, site-access restriction, or similar external requirement. Before the constraint is used, the basis of schedule should record the exact date or allowed window, who or what establishes it, which activity or milestone it governs, and any related assumptions such as approval timing, access limits, or calendar rules.

Without that documentation, the constraint can hide weak logic and make an internal target look like a mandatory requirement. Removing every constraint is too broad, while converting the issue into lag or deferring the explanation until later does not fix the missing planning basis. The key test is whether the date is a documented planning input.

A date constraint should remain in the model only when its planning basis is documented as a real external requirement or window, not just a preferred target.


Question 5

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

At baseline review for a refinery turnaround, the scheduler notes that the integrated schedule meets all contractual milestones. The project controls manager wants evidence that will also support future schedule updates, forecast explanations, and communication of schedule impacts if conditions change. Which evidence best validates approving the baseline?

  • A. A critical path report with total float and milestone dates
  • B. A basis-of-schedule document covering calendars, assumptions, constraints, and exclusions
  • C. A two-week construction look-ahead from the field superintendent
  • D. A stakeholder-approved milestone list with baseline commitment dates

Best answer: B

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The strongest validating evidence is the documented basis behind the schedule, not just the schedule outputs. A complete basis-of-schedule record lets reviewers test baseline credibility and later explain forecast changes against stated calendars, assumptions, constraints, and exclusions.

A basis-of-schedule document is the traceable record of why the baseline was built the way it was. For baseline review, it should capture the major calendars, key logic and duration assumptions, imposed constraints, interface assumptions, and explicit exclusions that affect the dates. That same documentation becomes essential during later updates because the team can compare actual conditions with the original basis and explain whether a forecast change came from changed access, vendor performance, weather, work-hour rules, or another stated assumption. By contrast, schedule outputs such as critical path reports or milestone lists show what the model currently says, but not why those dates were considered valid when the baseline was approved. The key distinction is rationale versus output.

It documents the rationale behind the baseline dates so later updates and impact explanations can be traced to explicit planning assumptions.


Question 6

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

During planning for a substation expansion, the contract requires Energize Unit 2 by November 30, 2026. A logic-based planning check shows earliest energization in mid-January 2027 using these approved assumptions:

  • Design complete: June 20, 2026
  • Submittal approval: 10 workdays after design complete
  • Transformer fabrication/delivery: 24 weeks after approved submittal
  • Site access: October 20, 2026 after an owner outage
  • Only qualified setting crew available: October 27, 2026

No alternate vendor, access change, or second crew has been approved. What is the best planning action?

  • A. Baseline November 30 and monitor the gap as a risk.
  • B. Shorten procurement lead time to fit November 30.
  • C. Apply a mandatory finish for November 30.
  • D. Document the conflict and escalate decision options before baseline approval.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The milestone conflict is already demonstrated by known logic, lead time, access, and crew limits, so the planner should not force the schedule to the contract date. The best action is to document the basis conflict and seek an approved decision on mitigation or milestone change before baseline approval.

The core planning concept is realism before baseline approval. When a required milestone conflicts with known work sequence, procurement duration, access conditions, or resource assumptions, the planner should keep the schedule logic intact, document the basis of schedule, and elevate the conflict for decision.

In this scenario, the late outcome is not a speculative risk; it is the current evidence-based result. No alternate supplier, changed outage window, or added crew has been approved, so there is no support for shortening durations or forcing dates. The proper planning response is to present the variance and decision options such as approved acceleration, alternate sourcing, changed access, or milestone relief.

A required date may remain as a control target, but it should not override realistic logic or be used to baseline an infeasible plan.

Planning should preserve evidence-based logic and assumptions, then obtain a management decision on approved mitigation or milestone relief before baselining.


Question 7

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

A scheduler is decomposing a control account for equipment foundations. Use duration = quantity / install rate; all results are whole workdays. One civil crew works a 5-day calendar.

Exhibit: Current scope summary

Foundation typeQty definedInstall rate
Standard142 per workday
Deep-pedestal61 per workday

The approved equipment list requires 24 foundations total, but 4 foundations on the IFC drawings are marked TBD type. Depending on that classification, installation could be 15 or 17 workdays. Which item is the incomplete scope information that must be resolved before activity definition, sequence logic, and duration basis continue?

  • A. Whether the 4 TBD type foundations are standard or deep-pedestal
  • B. Whether a finish-no-later-than constraint should be added
  • C. Whether progress should be measured by units or labor hours
  • D. Whether curing should be modeled as a lag or a separate activity

Best answer: A

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The missing scope definition is the classification of the four unassigned foundations. Because standard and deep-pedestal foundations use different quantities and install rates, that unresolved scope changes the work content and creates a different duration basis.

Before activities, logic, and baseline dates can be trusted, the schedulable scope must be complete and unambiguous. Here, the equipment list requires 24 foundations, but only 20 are fully defined. The remaining four are missing scope classification, and that directly changes the duration basis.

\[ \begin{aligned} \text{If all 4 are standard: } & 18/2 + 6/1 = 15 \text{ workdays} \\ \text{If all 4 are deep-pedestal: } & 14/2 + 10/1 = 17 \text{ workdays} \end{aligned} \]

That 2-workday range comes from incomplete scope decomposition, so the planner should resolve the foundation types before continuing. Modeling choices, constraints, and reporting methods do not fix missing scope definition.

Those four foundations are an unresolved scope classification, and the different quantities and rates change the activities and duration basis.


Question 8

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

A contractor’s schedule management plan says the scheduler will keep one live schedule file, overwrite baseline dates in that file after each approved change, issue monthly PDF reports, and archive only the final schedule at closeout. Six months later, management cannot tell whether a key milestone slip came from routine status updates, an approved change, or a changed forecast assumption. Which correction best addresses the real control weakness?

  • A. Keep one live file but require a detailed monthly narrative explaining every milestone movement.
  • B. Keep one live file but add activity codes to identify work affected by approved changes.
  • C. Store PDF schedule reports and milestone charts after each update for closeout reference.
  • D. Keep the original baseline read-only, save dated update versions, preserve each approved revision separately with change-log links, and archive all schedule records at closeout.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: Traceability requires more than reports or narratives; it requires preserved schedule records. The sound correction is to keep the original baseline intact, save each status update as a controlled version, separately preserve any approved revision with change-log linkage, and archive the full record at closeout.

Schedule governance should let a reviewer trace any date from the original approved baseline to later updates, approved changes, the current forecast, and final closeout documents. In the scenario, the failure is version control: one live file is being overwritten, so baseline history, update history, and approved-change history are mixed together. A defensible procedure should:

  • lock the original baseline as read-only;
  • save each update as a separate dated schedule file or controlled version;
  • preserve any approved baseline revision separately and cross-reference it to the change log or approval record;
  • archive the baseline, revisions, update files, and final as-built/current schedule package at closeout.

Activity coding, narratives, and PDFs can support reporting, but they do not replace an auditable schedule record chain.

Preserving separate baseline, update, approved-change, and closeout records creates the auditable chain needed to trace any date change.


Question 9

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

A planner is reviewing a draft baseline schedule for a brownfield compressor-station upgrade. Before baseline approval, these conditions are confirmed:

  • Operations allows only one 48-hour tie-in outage on November 15-16, 2026.
  • Cable pulling in the live unit is allowed only during night-shift access windows.
  • Commissioning requires turnover by system so System A can be tested before System B.
  • The draft schedule is built as large discipline packages and shows only one final startup milestone.

What is the best planning action?

  • A. Retain the current logic and add contingency after startup to absorb possible access and constructability problems.
  • B. Repackage the work by area/system, add interim turnover and outage milestones, and confirm the field sequence with operations and commissioning before baseline approval.
  • C. Keep the discipline-based packages and add date constraints so the outage and startup dates remain protected.
  • D. Baseline the schedule now and let the execution team split the work packages and commissioning sequence during monthly updates.

Best answer: B

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The planning risk comes from treating field constraints as later execution details instead of building them into the planning basis. Before baseline approval, the schedule structure should reflect constructability, outage timing, access limits, and commissioning turnover needs.

In planning, execution strategy must be visible in the schedule structure before the baseline is approved. Here, the main risks are already known: a fixed outage window, restricted access in an operating area, and a commissioning sequence that depends on system turnover. Large discipline-based packages with only a final startup milestone do not provide a credible basis for sequencing, handoff, or readiness analysis.

  • Break broad packages into installable and testable area/system work.
  • Include interim outage and turnover milestones tied to the required sequence.
  • Validate the field sequence with operations and commissioning teams.

Adding constraints or contingency without changing the work packaging only masks the planning weakness; it does not create a realistic baseline for control and forecasting.

This best addresses constructability, access, outage, and commissioning requirements in the planning basis before they distort the baseline.


Question 10

Topic: Conduct Planning Duties

During planning handoff for a utility substation expansion, the scheduler is asked to build detailed CPM logic for engineering, transformer procurement, planned outage work, and commissioning. The team has a draft work breakdown, but transformer lead time is only a verbal estimate, the owner’s outage window is not yet approved, and discipline calendars are still being finalized. Which evidence best validates the scheduler’s decision to pause model development and first validate planning inputs?

  • A. A handoff review showing outage dates, calendars, and procurement assumptions are still unapproved
  • B. A benchmark report showing similar transformer installations averaged 15 workdays last year
  • C. A resource histogram showing electrical crews are overallocated during installation
  • D. A preliminary CPM run showing the forecast finish misses turnover by 9 workdays

Best answer: A

What this tests: Conduct Planning Duties

Explanation: The strongest validation is evidence that the planning basis itself is incomplete or unapproved. A handoff review showing unresolved outage dates, calendars, and procurement assumptions demonstrates that the schedule model would be built on unsupported inputs, so pausing is appropriate.

In PSP practice, the scheduler should pause detailed model development when foundational planning inputs are not yet validated. The deciding evidence is not a downstream schedule output; it is a check that shows essential inputs such as external milestones, calendars, and major duration assumptions remain undocumented, unapproved, or only verbally understood.

  • Confirm required dates and interface milestones are approved.
  • Confirm calendars and work windows are defined.
  • Confirm major lead times and assumptions are documented in the basis of schedule or handoff package.

If those items are unresolved, building detailed logic creates false precision and weakens later forecasting and control. A calculated late finish may look useful, but it does not prove the underlying inputs are reliable.

This directly confirms key planning inputs are unresolved, so detailed logic would rely on unsupported assumptions.

Continue with full practice

Use the AACE PSP Practice Test page for the full PM Mastery route, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, explanations, and web/mobile app access.

Open the matching PM Mastery practice page for timed mocks, topic drills, progress tracking, explanations, and full practice.

Free review resource

Read the AACE PSP guide on PMExams.com, then return to PM Mastery for timed practice.

Revised on Thursday, May 14, 2026