Life Cycle Costing: Standard
Life Cycle Costing: Standard
Standard
Version 3.0
Issued date: 17 April 2018
Important message
This document is one of a set of standards developed solely and specifically for use on Transport Assets (as defined in the Asset
Standards Authority Charter). It is not suitable for any other purpose.
The copyright and any other intellectual property in this document will at all times remain the property of the State of New South Wales
(Transport for NSW).
You must not use or adapt this document or rely upon it in any way unless you are providing products or services to a NSW
Government agency and that agency has expressly authorised you in writing to do so. If this document forms part of a contract with, or
is a condition of approval by a NSW Government agency, use of the document is subject to the terms of the contract or approval. To be
clear, the content of this document is not licensed under any Creative Commons Licence.
This document may contain third party material. The inclusion of third party material is for illustrative purposes only and does not
represent an endorsement by NSW Government of any third party product or service.
If you use this document or rely upon it without authorisation under these terms, the State of New South Wales (including Transport for
NSW) and its personnel does not accept any liability to you or any other person for any loss, damage, costs and expenses that you or
anyone else may suffer or incur from your use and reliance on the content contained in this document. Users should exercise their own
skill and care in the use of the document.
This document may not be current and is uncontrolled when printed or downloaded. Standards may be accessed from the Asset
Standards Authority website at www.asa.transport.nsw.gov.au
Standard governance
Owner: Manager Asset Stewardship, Asset Standards Authority
Authoriser: Director Network and Asset Strategy, Asset Standards Authority
Approver: Executive Director, Asset Standards Authority on behalf of the ASA Configuration Control
Board
Document history
Version Summary of changes
1.0 First issued 12 June 2014
2.0 Second issued 6 June 2017 – Applied new template
3.0 Third issue – Minor changes; Updated Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 4 and Table 1
Preface
The Asset Standards Authority (ASA) is a key strategic branch of Transport for NSW (TfNSW).
As the network design and standards authority for NSW Transport Assets, as specified in the
ASA Charter, the ASA identifies, selects, develops, publishes, maintains and controls a suite of
requirements documents on behalf of TfNSW, the asset owner.
The ASA deploys TfNSW requirements for asset and safety assurance by creating and
managing TfNSW's governance models, documents and processes. To achieve this, the ASA
focuses on four primary tasks:
• publishing and managing TfNSW's process and requirements documents including TfNSW
plans, standards, manuals and guides
• collaborating with the Transport cluster and industry through open engagement
The AEO framework authorises engineering organisations to supply and provide asset related
products and services to TfNSW. It works to assure the safety, quality and fitness for purpose of
those products and services over the asset's whole-of-life. AEOs are expected to demonstrate
how they have applied the requirements of ASA documents, including TfNSW plans, standards
and guides, when delivering assets and related services for TfNSW.
Compliance with ASA requirements by itself is not sufficient to ensure satisfactory outcomes for
NSW Transport Assets. The ASA expects that professional judgement be used by competent
personnel when using ASA requirements to produce those outcomes.
The changes to previous content in this version include minor changes and updates to Figure 1,
Figure 2, Figure 4 and Table 1.
Table of contents
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6
2. Purpose .................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Application ............................................................................................................................................. 6
3. Reference documents ............................................................................................................................. 7
4. Terms and definitions ............................................................................................................................. 8
5. Asset life cycle ......................................................................................................................................... 9
6. Life cycle costing process.................................................................................................................... 10
7. Life cycle costing model ....................................................................................................................... 14
7.1. Stakeholder management.................................................................................................................... 15
7.2. Assurance ............................................................................................................................................ 15
8. Safety considerations ........................................................................................................................... 16
9. Sustainability considerations............................................................................................................... 16
10. Risk ......................................................................................................................................................... 16
11. Record keeping ...................................................................................................................................... 16
Appendix A Gateway stages .................................................................................................................. 18
A.1. TfNSW's capital investments ............................................................................................................... 18
A.2. Case study example ............................................................................................................................ 19
Appendix B Recommended reading ..................................................................................................... 22
1. Introduction
The ASA is committed to effective and efficient management of TfNSW assets. The ASA
collaborates with government and non-government organisations to continuously improve
capability, performance and condition over the full life cycle of the assets.
This standard defines TfNSW life cycle costing (LCC) requirements. It is essential that service
providers (including consultants, designers, maintainers, manufacturers and so on, that provide
asset management related services for TfNSW) are able to demonstrate to TfNSW that physical
assets are managed efficiently and that those assets will support service and project outcomes
in the long term. LCC provides a framework for service providers to demonstrate the
relationship between the performance of their physical asset portfolio and the services they
deliver.
2. Purpose
This standard defines TfNSW LCC requirements that include frameworks. LCC is necessary to
substantiate asset investment and maintenance decisions which support TfNSW asset
management policies and strategies. This applies to those government and non-government
organisations engaged in the provision of asset management services to TfNSW.
2.1. Scope
The LCC requirements and frameworks presented within this document cover whole-of-life
management of assets that include but are not limited to the following aspects:
2.2. Application
The standard applies to life cycle asset acquisition, maintenance, operation and disposal across
the asset life cycle. It applies to all life cycle costing activities that affect TfNSW assets or
systems.
This life cycle costing standard is mandated to be used by organisations, service providers or
project developers that perform asset management related services to TfNSW, including their
suppliers involved in defining, designing, building, implementing, commissioning, maintaining,
integrating in to the operating network any new or altered assets or systems. This standard also
applies to the decommissioning and disposal of assets.
This standard shall also be applied during the business case development stage. That is,
choosing between options for individual sub-components or design alternatives that require
additional cost analysis, including changes to assets or provision of new assets by Authorised
Engineering Organisations (AEO).
Consistent application of LCC will allow for benchmarking, comparison and performance
evaluation of cost plans between different investment decisions. Appendix A outlines the
gateway stages described in the investment gating and assurance guidelines and where the life
cycle costing would be expected to be completed.
This standard aligns with the AEO guide to engineering as well as the TfNSW asset
management policy.
3. Reference documents
The following documents are cited in the text. For dated references, only the cited edition
applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document applies.
International standards
ISO 15686-5 Buildings and constructed assets – Service life planning – Part 5: Life-cycle
costing
Australian standards
Australian National Audit Office, 2001, Life Cycle Costing – better practice guide
NSW Treasury, 2004, Total asset management – Life cycle costing guideline, TAM04-10
Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, 2013, Preparation of a rail safety management
system guideline
asset an item, thing or entity that has potential or actual value to an organisation. Physical
assets usually refer to equipment, inventory and properties owned by the organisation. Physical
assets are the opposite of intangible assets, which are non-physical assets such as leases,
brands, digital assets, use rights, licences, intellectual property rights, reputation or agreements
availability measure of the percentage of time that an item or system is available to perform its
designated function
LCC life cycle costing is the process of assessing the cost of a product over its life cycle or a
portion thereof
maintainability the probability that a given active maintenance action, for an item under given
conditions of use can be carried out within a stated time interval when the maintenance is
performed under stated conditions and using stated procedures and resources
maintenance the combination of all technical and associated administrative actions during the
components service life with the aim of retaining it in a state in which it can perform its required
functions
maintenance support the provision of resources, including labour and materials, necessary for
maintaining the dependability of the asset during its service life (or ownership period)
reliability the ability of an item of equipment or a system to perform a required function under
stated conditions for a stated period of time or at a given point in time
LCC is most effectively applied in the project's early design phase to optimise the total
development and maintenance costs. However, it should also be used during maintenance and
operational phases of the life cycle to optimise maintenance strategies and facilitate efficient
allocation of resources. Figure 2 outlines the costs and stages of the life cycle costs.
In general, the life cycle cost of an asset may be expressed by the simple formula shown in
Figure 3.
The initial capital outlay cost is usually clearly defined and is often a key factor that can
influence the choice of a particular asset given a number of alternatives from which to select.
The initial capital outlay cost is, however, often only a small portion of the costs over an asset’s
life cycle that needs to be considered in making the right choice for asset investment and
maintenance decisions. In addition there are the life time operation costs which refer to
labour/training, materials and consumables, energy (power, fuel), equipment and facilities; and
engineering modifications incurred over the expected life of the asset/system. Life time
maintenance costs refer to general maintenance that includes recurrent maintenance and
capital maintenance (upgrading) costs. Disposal costs refer to system shutdown; disassembly
and removal; recycling or safe disposal related costs.
• calculate a dollar value that represents the LCC of a product as an input to a decision
making or evaluation process, together with other inputs. The cost is based on a defined
need associated with the systems/subsystems/assets
• support management considerations that affect decisions during any life cycle phase
• identify the attributes of the product which significantly influence the LCC (cost drivers) of
the systems/subsystems/assets so that they can be properly managed
Figure 4 gives an indication of how the process steps integrate within the life cycle:
Operate
Demand
Concept Specify Procurement Design Build Integrate Accept Evolve Dispose
Need Maintain
Update
In line with AS/NZS 4536, any life cycle cost analysis shall be conducted in a structured and
well-documented manner using the following steps:
The above steps may be performed in an iterative fashion if efforts at any stage indicate a need
to revisit and modify work accomplished at earlier stages.
Assumptions made at each step shall be documented to facilitate such iterations and to aid in
interpreting the results of the analysis.
• system interfaces to the asset option being considered and their effect on the life cycle cost
evaluation. An example is the effect on a networks power supply system demand by
introduction of new equipment to the network
• use of the assets during the operation stages of the life cycle
• access to the asset during installation, operations and maintenance activities, for example
any special conditions for access to the rail infrastructure via the rail operator
• recycling or safe disposal of the assets and considerations for asset requirements to
facilitate disposal
If a new or altered asset is introduced, the service provider shall develop a life cycle cost.
Where operation and maintenance data is a requirement the service provider may request
advice from TfNSW (ASA).
A list of typical considerations for the analysis may be found in Table F1 in Appendix F of
AS/NZ 4536:1999. A summary for the total life of the asset shall be created as per Table 1 (an
example is shown in Appendix A.2). The italics in the table are examples of the costs typically
involved in the life cycle stages however the cost activities identified can vary as appropriate for
the life of the asset or system.
The primary objective of the LCC model is to analyse alternative options for implementing a
project, for example, technology, performance levels, maintainability and so on as well as to
determine the option that provides the best value on a whole-of-life basis.
AS/NZS 4536 proposes that in order for the model to be realistic it shall:
• represent the characteristics of the asset being analysed including its intended use
environment, maintenance concept, operating and maintenance support scenarios, and
any constraints or limitations
• be simple enough to be easily understood and allow for its timely use in decision making,
and future updates and modification
• be designed in such a way as to allow for the independent evaluation of specific elements
of the LCC
Depending on the purpose of the analysis, different ways of expressing the cost may be
appropriate, that is, real cost, nominal cost, and discounted cost, the appendices in
AS/NZS 4536 provide examples on how to use the different cost methods.
LCC is part of the criteria to be considered when evaluating system options. All feasible options
require a life cycle cost to be developed. In order to estimate the total life cycle cost, it is
necessary to break down the asset costs into separate cost components.
In the development of cost data, the requirements may vary considerably depending on the
program phase. During the early planning and conceptual design phases of asset development,
where the available data is limited, then cost analyst may need to adopt varying life cycle cost
estimation techniques.
The cost may be estimated by using one of the following methods as appropriate:
• analogous cost method – involves cost estimation based one experience with similar
project and technology. It uses historical data, updated to reflect cost escalation and effect
of technology advances
• parametric cost method – uses significant parameters and variables to develop cost
estimating relationships which are usually in the form of equations. A parameter may be a
price (cost per man hour) or an empirically derived ratio
Further explanation and examples on these cost estimation techniques may be found in
AS/NZ 4536:1999, Appendix D.
7.2. Assurance
The service provider shall assure application of LCC process has been executed to its intended
use. That is evaluation of options has been completed adequately and be able to provide
supporting documentation.
Audit plans will be planned and completed to address the validation of the application of LCC in
the evaluation of option in investment and maintenance decision making. AEO's shall ensure
projects are applying adequate due process in progressively assuring its deliverables through its
life cycle phases.
ASA will provide ongoing surveillance of AEO's and ensure ongoing compliance with the LCC
process. ASA will provide advice where required concerning this standard.
8. Safety considerations
Safety is a critical requirement to take into account as part of the options consideration. This
shall be borne out in the life cycle calculations where applicable.
9. Sustainability considerations
To further develop sustainability oriented LCC, the LCC analysis shall consider environmental
and social costs from concept, operations through to disposal in order to minimise the impact on
the environment and the community.
10. Risk
LCC is part of the risk assessment evaluation to a change in asset as it outlines all impacts
associated with the change to the asset or new asset. The practice of comparing life cycle costs
will bring future maintenance needs into the decision, it enables valid cost comparisons to be
made not just comparisons of initial costs.
• assumptions made (and documented), including uncertainty and risks associated with the
established model. That is the model evaluation to ensure that the inputs have been
accurately established, the model has been used correctly, the results (including those of
sensitivity analysis) have been adequately evaluated and discussed and that the objectives
of the analysis have been achieved
• considerations made of interfaces to the system or asset during selections of options and
analysis of associated costs
• costs associated with alternate operations of systems during asset maintenance activities
• gate 0 – initiation
LCC shall take place prior to gate 2 – preliminary business case as part of the options analysis.
The life cycle cost should then be reassessed at the handover for service and that is gate 5 –
readiness for service & operations.
In addition to capital investment requirements, the TfNSW rail assets configuration management
plan addresses the application of configuration management principles to TfNSW’s requirement
to manage the configuration of its railway assets. A configuration change request is a formal
request to add or change an asset that is subject to configuration control at any stage of the
project lifecycle. It is an activity for control of the product after formal approval of its baseline.
AEOs are required to provide adequate evidence for the TfNSW configuration management
committee (CMC) to consider change requests at critical stages of a project. In particular the
CMC are involved at both the concept configuration change request stage (that is, CMC control
gateway 1) and asset acceptance configuration change request stage (that is, CMC control
gateway 5) of a project which would correspond to the gateways of TfNSW to consider the life
cycle costs.
Worked example
A general example is a hypothetical analysis of the LCC associated with a project for the
purchase and installation of new type approved equipment for a substation. The existing type
approval has an initial cost of $300,000 whereas the new type approval has an initial cost of
$400,000.
Initially we would be more inclined to not include a new type approval as the initial cost is
higher, however, applying the life cycle cost formula will determine if the new type approval is
truly more cost-effective than the existing type approval.
• Cost estimates are expressed in real cost terms. Escalation factors employed are real, that
is, they exclude inflation.
• The discounted cash flow (DCF) technique was employed to account for the time value of
money. The discounted cost has been calculated for each option.
For any future capital project cases In terms of economic appraisals, NSW Treasury
recommends "While there may be no universally accepted 'correct' discount rate,
interpretation of appraisal results will be impossible if different agencies use different
discount rates. The solution is the application of a standard set of real discount rates
of 4 per cent, 7 per cent and 10 per cent to see if the outcome is sensitive to such
variations and, if it is, to make the critical 'break-even' rate clear in the analysis results.
The central real discount rate is therefore 7% with sensitivity tests on the use of 4%
and 10%.
Outcome
• The new technology option attracts a higher initial capital cost and a better resale at
disposal. The existing type approval option attracts a higher total cash flow over the years
than the new option but has a lower initial purchase cost.
• The discounted cost of the new option over the expected 30 years operating life was
assessed to be approximately $4 million. The discounted cost for the second option was
approximately $5 million.
• The assumptions applied in the analysis are conservative and are taken over a typical 30
year equipment usage.
• In many instances the experience has been that the end of life for the equipment is largely
driven by change in technology.
The major difference is the difference in cash flow over the life of the investment and the initial
up-front cost. Cost growth of outgoings has been assumed to grow at a constant rate, for both
options (see Table 2 for Option 1 and Table 3 for Option 2) are assumed to compound annually
at 1.5% in real terms.
• Life Cycle Costing – better practice guide (December 2001) – Australian national audit
office
• TAM04-10 Total asset management – Life cycle costing guideline (September 2004) –
NSW Treasury