Historical Development and Applications of the EPIC and APEX Models, June 2005

The development of the field-scale Erosion Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) model was initiated in 1981 to support assessments of soil erosion impacts on soil productivity for soil, climate, and cropping conditions representative of a broad spectrum of U.S. agricultural production regions. The first major application of EPIC was a national analysis performed in support of the 1985 Resources Conservation Act (RCA) assessment. The model has continuously evolved since that time and has been applied for a wide range of field, regional, and national studies both in the U.S. and in other countries. The range of EPIC applications has also expanded greatly over that time, including studies of (1) surface runoff and leaching estimates of nitrogen and phosphorus losses from fertilizer and manure applications, (2) leaching and runoff from simulated pesticide applications, (3) soil erosion losses from wind erosion, (4) climate change impacts on crop yield and erosion, and (5) soil carbon sequestration assessments. The EPIC acronym now stands for Erosion Policy Impact Climate, to reflect the greater diversity of problems to which the model is currently applied. The Agricultural Policy EXtender (APEX) model is essentially a multi-field version of EPIC that was developed in the late 1990s to address environmental problems associated with livestock and other agricultural production systems on a whole-farm or small watershed basis. The APEX model also continues to evolve and to be utilized for a wide variety of environmental assessments. The historical development for both models will be presented, as well as example applications on several different scales.

A Multi-Project Scheduling Procedure for Transportation Projects, Final Report, HR-339, 1993

This report proposes, that for certain types of highway construction projects undertaken by the Iowa Department of Transportation, a scheduling technique commonly referred to as linear scheduling may be more effective than the Critical Path Method scheduling technique that is currently being used. The types of projects that appear to be good candidates for the technique are those projects that have a strong linear orientation. Like a bar chart, this technique shows when an activity is scheduled to occur and like a CPM schedule it shows the sequence in which activities are expected to occur. During the 1992 construction season, the authors worked with an inlay project on Interstate 29 to demonstrate the linear scheduling technique to the Construction Office. The as-planned schedule was developed from the CPM schedule that the contractor had developed for the project. Therefore, this schedule represents what a linear representation of a CPM schedule would look like, and not necessarily what a true linear schedule would look like if it had been the only scheduling technique applied to the project. There is a need to expand the current repertoire of scheduling techniques to address those projects for which the bar chart and CPM may not be appropriate either because of the lack of control information or due to overly complex process for the actual project characteristics. The scheduling approaches used today on transportation projects have many shortcomings for properly modeling the real world constraints and conditions which are encountered. Linear project's predilection for activities with variable production rates, a concept very difficult to handle with the CPM, is easily handled and visualized with the linear technique. It is recommended that work proceed with the refinement of the method of linear scheduling described above and the development of a microcomputer based system for use by the Iowa Department of Transportation and contractors for its implementation. The system will be designed to provide the information needed to adjust schedules in a rational understandable method for monitoring progress on the projects and alerting Iowa Department of Transportation personnel when the contractor is deviating from the plan.