Evaluation of Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Practices Used by the Michigan Department of Transportation
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 134, Issue 6
Abstract
Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) has become a common practice in road construction at the state level during the past decade in the United States. It enables pavement engineers to conduct a comprehensive assessment of long-term costs, and ideally agency highway funding can be allocated more optimally. Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has adopted LCCA in the pavement selection process since the mid-1980s, yet its application in actual projects has not been reviewed. Using case studies, this paper seeks to analyze MDOT’s accuracy in projecting the actual costs over the pavement service life and choosing the lowest-cost pavement alternative. Ten highway sections in Michigan were chosen and grouped into four case studies. Their estimated and actual accumulated costs and maintenance schedules were compared. While results indicate that MDOT LCCA procedure correctly predicts the pavement type with lower initial construction cost, actual costs are usually lower than estimated in the LCCA. This outcome may be partly because the cost estimation module in MDOT’s model is not site specific enough. Refinements to its pavement construction and maintenance cost estimating procedures would assist MDOT in realizing the full potential of LCCA in identifying the lowest cost pavement alternatives for the pavements studied.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This research was funded through an NSF MUSES Biocomplexity Program Grant (Grant Nos. NSFCMS-0223971 and NSFCMS-0329416). MUSES (materials use: science, engineering, and society) supports projects that study the reduction of the adverse human impact on the total interactive system of resource use, the design and synthesis of new materials with environmentally benign impacts on biocomplex systems, as well as the maximization of efficient use of materials throughout their life cycles. Most of the data in this study were collected and verified with the help of Benjamin Krom and Michael Eacker, who worked at the Michigan Department of Transportation as pavement selection engineers. The views expressed are those of the writers and do not represent an official policy statement of any government agency.
References
AASHTO. (1986). 1986 guide for design of pavement structures, Washington, D.C.
ASCE. (2005). Report card for America’s infrastructure, Reston, Va.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). (2006). “Table 7.1B. Current-cost net stock of government fixed assets, National economic account.” ⟨http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/FA2004/TableView.asp#Mid⟩ (Dec. 7, 2006 ).
Carr, R. (2000). “Construction congestion cost basic model.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 126(2), 105–113.
Cross, S., and Parsons, R. (2002). Evaluation of expenditures on rural interstate pavements in Kansas, Kansas Univ. Transportation Center, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, Kan.
Delucchi, M., and McCubbin, D. (1996). “The social cost of the health effects of motor vehicle air pollution: Report #11 in the series—The annualized social cost of motor vehicle use in the United States, based on 1990-1991 data.” Rep. No. UCD-ITS-RR-96-3(11), Institute of Transportation Studies, Univ. of California, Davis, Calif.
Embacher, R., and Snyder, M. (2001). “Life cycle cost comparisons of asphalt and concrete pavements on low-volume roads.” Transportation Research Record. 1749, Transport Research Board, Washington, D.C., 28–37.
Engineering Operations Committee (EOC). (1985). “Engineering operations committee minutes, June 1985.” Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing, Mich.
ERES Consultants. (2003). “Neutral third party Ohio pavement selection process analysis.” Rep. Prepared for Ohio DOT Pavement Selection Advisory Council, Champaign, Ill.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (1998). “Life-cycle cost analysis in pavement design.” HNG-42/9-98(5M)QE, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2002). “Life-cycle cost analysis primer.” FHWA-IF-02-047, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2003a). “Economic analysis primer.” FHWA IF-03-032, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2003b). “Life-cycle cost analysis: The Pennsylvania experience.” FHWA-IF-03-038, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2005a). “Highway statistics 2004.” FHWA-PL-05-013, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2005b). “Memorandum: Pavement preservation definitions.” FHWA:HIAM-20:LLAWNDY:63975:ll:08/22/05, Washington, D.C.
Gerke, R., Dewald, R., and Gerbrandt, R. (1998). “Use of highway network level data for a project level life cycle analysis.” Proc., 1998 Transportation Conf., Iowa State Univ., Ames, Iowa, 135–138.
Herbold, K. (2000). “Using Monte Carlo simulation for pavement cost analysis.” Public Roads, 64(3), 2, http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/nov00/lifecycle.htm (Sep. 25, 2006 ).
Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT). (2005). Pavement design and selection manual, Lansing, Mich.
Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT). (2006). “Construction contract inquiry.” Lansing, Mich., ⟨http://mdotwas1.mdot.state.mi.us/public/trnsport/⟩.
New Jersey Dept. of Transportation (NJDOT). (1999). Road user cost manual, Trenton, N.J.
Ozbay, K., Jawad, D., Parker, N. A., and Hussain, S. (2004). Life cycle cost analysis: State-of-the-practice vs. state-of-the-art, Rutgers University and the City College of the City University of New York Press, New York.
The Road Information Program (TRIP). (2006). “Key facts: America’s road and bridge conditions and federal funding.” Washington, D.C.
Snook, R., and Buch, N. (1998). Long term cost comparison of pavement types in Michigan, Pavement Research Center of Excellence, Michigan State Univ., Lansing, Mich.
US Government Printing Office (GPO). (2001). “Code of federal regulations: Title 23, Chapter I, Part 627—Value engineering.” Washington, D.C.
Villacres, J. (2005). Pavement Life-Cycle Cost Studies Using Actual Data Cost—A Synthesis, Rep. No. 5672-2/1, Asphalt Pavement Alliance, Lanham, Md.
Wilde, W., Waalkes, S., and Harrison, R. (2001). “Life cycle cost analysis of portland cement concrete pavements.” SWUTC/01/167205-1, Center for Transportation Research, Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 134 • Issue 6 • June 2008
Pages: 236 - 245
Copyright
© 2008 ASCE.
History
Received: Dec 19, 2006
Accepted: Aug 27, 2007
Published online: Jun 1, 2008
Published in print: Jun 2008
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.