Search results
1 – 10 of 637James C. Ellis, Edward White, Jonathan D. Ritschel, Shawn M. Valentine, Brandon Lucas and Ian S. Cordell
There appears to be no empirical-based method in the literature for estimating if an engineering change proposal (ECP) will occur or the dollar amount incurred. This paper aims to…
Abstract
Purpose
There appears to be no empirical-based method in the literature for estimating if an engineering change proposal (ECP) will occur or the dollar amount incurred. This paper aims to present an empirically based approach to address this shortfall.
Design/methodology/approach
Using the cost assessment data enterprise database, 533 contracts were randomly selected via a stratified sampling plan to build two regression models: one to predict the likelihood of a contract experiencing an ECP and the other to determine the expected median per cent increase in baseline contract cost if an ECP was likely. Both models adopted a stepwise approach. A validation set was placed aside prior to any model building.
Findings
Not every contract incurs an ECP; approximately 80 per cent of the contracts in the database did not have an ECP. The likelihood of an ECP and the additional amount incurred appears to be statistically independent of acquisition phase, branch of service, commodity, contract type or any other factor except for the basic contract amount and the number of contract line item numbers; both of these later variables equally affected the contract percentage increase because of an ECP. The combined model overall bested current anecdotal approaches to ECP withhold.
Originality/value
This paper both serves as a published reference point for ECP withholds in the archival forum and presents an empirically based method for determining per cent ECP withhold to use.
Details
Keywords
Thalia Anthony, Juanita Sherwood, Harry Blagg and Kieran Tranter
Thomas Grigalunas, Simona Trandafrr, Meifeng Luo, James Opaluch and Suk-Jae Kwon
This paper analyzes two external costs often associated with port development, cost to fisheries from marine dredge disposal and damages from air pollution, using estimates of…
Abstract
This paper analyzes two external costs often associated with port development, cost to fisheries from marine dredge disposal and damages from air pollution, using estimates of development and operation for a proposed (but since cancelled) container port as a case study. For dredge disposal, a bio-economic model was used to assess short- and long-term and indirect (joodweb) damages to fisheries from marine disposal of clean sediments. In the case of air pollution, estimates of annual activity levels and emission coefficients are used to estimate incremental annual emissions of three key pollutants (NOx, HC and CO) for trucks, trains, yard vehicles, and vessels. These estimates allow for phasing in of strict new air pollution regulations. For both external costs, sensitivity analyses are used to reflect uncertainty. Estimates of shadow values in year 2002 dollars amount from $0.094 per cubic yard to $0.169 per cubic yard of clean dredged material for the selected disposal site and from $0.0584 per mile (jor current control standards) to $ 0. 0023 per mile (after phasing in of new regulations) for air pollution from heavy trucks.
Details