ASTM F1675-13(2022)

This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Designation: F1675 − 13 (Reapproved 2022)
Standard Practice for
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Plastic Pipe Used for Culverts,
Storm Sewers, and Other Buried Conduits
This standard is issued under the fixed designation F1675; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope* 2.2 ASTM Adjuncts:
Discount Factor Tables
1.1 This practice establishes a procedure for using life cycle
cost (LCC) analysis techniques to evaluate alternative drainage
3. Terminology
system designs, using plastic pipe that satisfy the same
3.1 Definitions:
functional requirements.
3.1.1 common costs, n—costs that are common to all alter-
1.2 The LCC technique measures the present value of all
natives in nature and amount, such as initial planning fees or
relevant costs to install, operate, and maintain alternative
future annual inspection costs.
drainage systems such as engineering, construction,
3.1.2 discount rate, n—the investor’s time value of money,
maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement over a specified
expressed as a percent, used to convert costs occurring at
period of time. The practice also accommodates any remaining
different times, to equivalent costs at a common point in time.
residual or salvage value.
3.1.3 drainage project, n—a project having a definable,
1.3 The decision maker, using the results of the LCC
functional drainage requirement that can be satisfied by two or
analysis, can then identify the alternative(s) with the lowest
more design or construction alternatives, or both.
estimated total cost based on the present value of all costs.
3.1.4 future costs, n—costs required to keep the system
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
operating that are incurred after the project is placed in service,
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
such as operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
costs.
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
3.1.5 inflation, n—the general trend or rising prices that,
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
over time, result in the reduction of the purchasing power of
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
the dollar from year to year.
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
3.1.6 initial cost, n—the total of all costs; such as design
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
costs, material purchase costs, and construction/installation
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
costs, that are specific to each alternative and are incurred to
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
bring each alternative to a point of functional readiness.
3.1.7 maintenance cost, n—the annual or periodic costs,
2. Referenced Documents
such as inspection and cleaning to keep a drainage structure
2.1 Other Standards:
functioning for the project design life, but do not extend the
TM-5-802-1 Economic Studies for Military Construction
material service life.
Design Applications (12/86)
3.1.8 material service life, n—the number of years of
Federal Office of Management and Budget Guidelines and
service a particular material, system, or structure will provide
Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal
before rehabilitation or replacement is necessary.
Programs and state documents for guidelines or require-
3.1.9 project design life, n—the planning horizon for the
ments
project,expressedasthenumberofyearsofusefulliferequired
of the drainage structure.
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F17 on Plastic
3.1.10 rehabilitation cost, n—the total of all costs incurred
Piping Systems and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F17.62 on Sewer.
to extend the material service life of a specific alternative.
Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2022. Published March 2022. Originally
approved in 1996. Last previous edition approved in 2017 as F1675–13(2017). DOI:
10.1520/F1675-13R22.
2 4
Available from Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, DC. Available from ASTM International Headquarters. Order Adjunct No.
Available from Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC. ADJE091703.
*A Summary of Changes section appears at the end of this standard
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
F1675 − 13 (2022)
3.1.11 replacement cost, n—the total of all costs incurred to 6.3.1 Establish the uniform assumptions to be made in the
replace a material before the end of the project design life. LCC analysis of all alternatives.These assumptions include the
selection of the discount rate, the treatment of inflation, general
3.1.12 terminal value, n—the remaining value of the drain-
inflation rate, the project design life, and the desired compre-
age structure in place at the end of the project design life.
hensiveness of the analysis.
6.3.2 Discount Rate—The discount rate selected should
4. Summary of Practice
reflect the owner’s time value of money. That is, the discount
4.1 This practice outlines a procedure for conducting an
rate should reflect the rate of interest that makes the owner
LCC analysis of two or more drainage pipe alternatives using
indifferentbetweenpayingorreceivingadollarnoworatsome
plastic pipe over a specified project design life. This practice
futuretime.Thediscountrateisusedtoconvertcostsoccurring
identifies the project data and general assumptions needed for
atdifferenttimestoequivalentcostsatacommonpointintime.
the analysis and the method of computation.
6.3.2.1 There is no single correct discount rate for all
owners. Selection of the discount rate should be guided by the
5. Significance and Use
rate of return on alternative investment opportunities of com-
5.1 LCC analysis is an economic method to evaluate alter- parable risk (that is, the opportunity cost of capital), or, in the
natives that are characterized by differing cash flows over the case of some public organizations, on mandated or legislated
designated project design life. The method entails calculating federal or state requirements. (See Federal Office of Manage-
the LCC of each alternative capable of satisfying the functional ment and Budget.)
requirements of the project and comparing them to determine
6.3.2.2 The discount rate may include general price inflation
which have the lowest estimated LCC over the project design over the study period. This discount rate is referred to as the
life.
“nominal” discount rate in this practice. The discount rate may
also be expressed as the real earning power of money over and
5.2 The LCC method is particularly suitable for determining
above general price inflation, referred to as the “real” discount
whether the higher initial cost of an alternative is economically
rate.
justified by reductions in future costs (for example, operating
6.3.2.3 A nominal discount rate (d ) and the corresponding
maintenance,rehabilitation,orreplacement)whencomparedto n
real discount rate (d ) are related as follows:
r
an alternative with lower initial costs but higher future costs. If
a design alternative has both a lower initial cost and lower
11d
n
d 5 21or d 5 ~11d !~11I! 21 (1)
r n r
future costs than other alternatives, an LCC analysis is not
11I
necessary to show the former is the economically preferable
where:
choice.
I = the rate of general price inflation.
6. Procedure
6.3.2.4 The same discount rate should be used in evaluating
each design alternative. Annex A1 contains a procedure to
6.1 The procedure for performing an LCC analysis for
follow in developing the discount rate. This procedure may be
drainage pipe applications is as follows:
applied by those who wish to select their own values as well as
6.1.1 Identify project objectives, alternatives, and con-
those who are required to follow mandated or legislated
straints (6.2).
requirements.
6.1.2 Establish basic assumptions (6.3).
6.3.3 Inflation—This practice is designed only to accommo-
6.1.3 Compile data (6.4).
date a uniform rate of general inflation. Calculate the LCC in
6.1.4 Compute life cycle cost for each alternative (7.1).
constant dollar terms (not including general inflation) or in
6.1.5 Evaluate results (7.2).
current dollar terms (including general inflation). If the latter is
6.2 Project Objectives, Alternatives, and Constraints:
used, a consistent projection of general price inflation shall be
6.2.1 Specify the design objective that is to be
used throughout the LCC analysis, including adjustment of the
accomplished, identify alternative systems or designs that
discount rate to incorporate general inflation (6.3.2.2). The
accomplish that objective, and identify any constraints that
percentage change in GNP deflator and the Producers Price
may limit the options to be considered.
Index are two broad indicators of general inflation.
6.2.2 An example is the design of a storm water drainage
6.3.3.1 If the user desires or is required to treat inflation on
system for a residential development project. The system must
an incremental (differential) basis, or uniquely to each indi-
satisfy mandated drainage system objectives, such as specified
vidual cost component (for example, energy costs), consult
rainfall intensities and storm water runoff limits. Available
either TM-5-802-1 or Discount Factor Tables , respectively.
alternatives, such as different pipe materials and varying
6.3.4 Project Design Life—Establish the project design life
configurations of catch basins, ponds, or underground deten-
(3.1.9) from mandated public policy, legislated requirements,
tion chambers may have different initial costs as well as
or selection by the owner based on situation requirements. Use
expected future costs. The system design may be constrained
the same design life for each alternative under comparison and
by structural and hydraulic limits such as minimum and
for all categories of cost under consideration. The potential
...