Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

AMP CRL Exam - Topic 5 Question 6 Discussion

Which of the following estimates represents the typical cost savings of a US $100,000 project by performing it in a proactive mode instead of a reactive mode?
A) US $25,000 to US $50,000
B) US $45,000 to US $70,000
C) US $65,000 to US $90,000

AMP CRL Exam - Topic 5 Question 6 Discussion

Actual exam question for AMP's CRL exam
Question #: 6
Topic #: 5
[All CRL Questions]

Which of the following estimates represents the typical cost savings of a US $100,000 project by performing it in a proactive mode instead of a reactive mode?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

The best answer is A because the question asks for a typical cost-saving estimate, not an extreme or best-case savings claim. In reliability engineering, proactive work reduces avoidable costs by preventing emergency labor, expedited parts, unplanned downtime, rework, collateral damage, and production disruption. However, a proactive approach does not normally remove nearly the entire project cost. A savings range of US $25,000 to US $50,000 on a US $100,000 reactive project reflects a realistic 25% to 50% cost-avoidance band. Option B may be possible in some favorable cases but is less typical. Option C is too aggressive for a general estimate because it implies that most of the project cost disappears simply by being proactive. Reactive maintenance is performed after failure and is often associated with urgent, disruptive, and expensive response work, while proactive and preventive approaches reduce the probability and impact of those failures. This aligns with the CRL emphasis on moving from reactive firefighting to proactive reliability strategy.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Larae
2 days ago
B is a safe bet, but I lean towards C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Felicitas
7 days ago
A is too conservative, I vote for C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristal
12 days ago
I agree, C has the highest estimate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Janna
17 days ago
Proactive mode is key for savings!
upvoted 0 times
...
Cherry
22 days ago
B feels reasonable, but C is better.
upvoted 0 times
...
Charlette
28 days ago
I feel like A is too low.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beth
1 month ago
Definitely! Option C seems right.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shelton
1 month ago
I think proactive saves more money.
upvoted 0 times
...
Major
1 month ago
A) sounds reasonable based on past experiences.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ettie
2 months ago
Wait, $65,000 to $90,000? That seems way too optimistic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leatha
2 months ago
I thought the savings would be higher, like in option C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gabriele
2 months ago
Definitely leaning towards option B! Makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hailey
2 months ago
I've read that proactive projects can save around $45,000 to $70,000.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alison
2 months ago
I’m a bit confused about the ranges. I thought proactive approaches saved a lot more, but I can't recall the exact numbers we went over.
upvoted 0 times
...
King
2 months ago
I feel like the range of $25,000 to $50,000 seems too low for a $100,000 project. Maybe it’s more like $65,000 to $90,000?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ezekiel
3 months ago
I think we practiced a question similar to this, and I want to say the savings were around $45,000 to $70,000, but I could be mixing it up.
upvoted 0 times
...
Refugia
3 months ago
I remember discussing how proactive management can lead to significant cost savings, but I’m not sure about the exact figures.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel