SSPC-PA Guide 5

September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009

SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings

Paint application guide NO. 5

Guide to Maintenance Coating of Steel Structures
in Atmospheric Service

1. Scope 3. Referenced Standards

1.1 This guide covers procedures for developing a main- 3.1. SSPC STANDARDS AND JOINT STANDARDS1
tenance coating program for steel structures. The guide may
be used for one-time recoat programs or long-range recoat Items preceded by an asterisk (*) are referenced in the
programs. Notes or Appendices.
Guide 6 Guide for Containing Debris
1.2 The guide is intended for use primarily by owners’ Generated During Paint Removal
representatives. It is not intended to be a do-it-yourself guide, Operations
but is representative of the processes that a coating specialist Guide 7 Guide for the Disposal of Lead-
(such as a Protective Coating Specialist [PCS] certified by Contaminated Surface Preparation
SSPC) would follow to develop a maintenance coating plan Debris
for specific facilities. Guide 14 Guide for the Repair of
Imperfections in Galvanized or
2. Description Inorganic Zinc Coated Steel with
Organic Zinc-Rich Paint
2.1 A maintenance coating program is required to prevent Guide 15 Field Methods for Retrieval
corrosion of steel and deterioration of other substrates. It is and Analysis of Soluble Salts
also required to maintain an acceptable appearance of coated on Steel and Other Nonporous
structures. Decisions on frequency and extent of recoating and Substrates
type of system to be used require consideration of numerous PA 2 Measurement of Dry Coating Thick-
factors, including both technical and economical alterna- ness with Magnetic Gauges
tives. PA Guide 4 Guide to Maintenance Repainting
with Oil Base or Alkyd Painting
2.2 This guide sets out specific steps that may be used, Systems
either individually or collectively, to identify and address PA 1 Shop, Field, and Maintenance
essential elements of a maintenance coating program. These Painting of Steel
steps are summarized in Section 4. Preparation of a contract SP 1 Solvent Cleaning
specification for coating work is covered in SSPC-TR 4/NACE SP 2 Hand Tool Cleaning
80200, “Preparation of Protective Coating Specifications for SP 3 Power Tool Cleaning
Atmospheric Service” (latest edition).1 Due to wide variations SP 5/NACE No. 1 White Metal Blast Cleaning
in procedures, a discussion of contracting methodologies and SP 6/NACE No. 3 Commercial Blast Cleaning
implementation schemes is outside the scope of this guide. SP 7/NACE No. 4 Brush-Off Blast Cleaning
SP 10/NACE No. 2 Near-White Blast Cleaning
2.3 MAJOR STEPS IN MAINTENANCE COATING: This SP 11 Power Tool Cleaning to Bare
guide addresses six major steps in a maintenance coating Metal
program, which are defined as: SP 12/NACE No. 5 Surface Preparation and Cleaning
• Plan and Conduct Condition Assessment Survey of Metals by Waterjetting Prior to
(Section 5) Recoating
• List Potential Maintenance Painting Options (Section 6) SP 14/NACE No. 8 Industrial Blast Cleaning
• Evaluate Economics of Available Options (Section 7) SP 15 Commercial Grade Power Tool
• Select Appropriate Maintenance Painting Options and Cleaning
Establish Implementation Procedures (Section 8) * QP 1 Standard Procedure for Evaluat-
• Implement Maintenance Painting Options (Section 9) ing Painting Contractors (Field
• Plan and Implement Follow-Up Activities (Section 10) Application to Complex Industrial
Structures)

1
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
* QP 2 Standard Procedure for Evaluat-
ing the Qualification of Painting
Contractors (Field Removal of
Hazardous Coatings from Complex
Industrial Structures)
* QP 5 Standard Procedure for Evaluating
Qualifications of Coating and Lining
Inspection Companies
TR 4/NACE 80200 Preparation of Protective Coating
Specifications for Atmospheric
Service
TU 3 Overcoating
TU 9 Estimating Costs for Protective
Coatings Projects
VIS 2 Standard Method of Evaluating
Degree of Rusting on Painted Steel
Surfaces
3.2 ASTM INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS:2
* D 3276 Standard Guide for Painting Inspectors
(Metal Substrates)
* D 4228 Standard Practice for the Qualification
of Coating Applicators for Application of
Coatings to Steel Surfaces
D 610 Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree
of Rusting on Painted Steel Surfaces
3.3 FEDERAL STANDARD3
Code of Federal Regulations
29 CFR 1926.62 Lead (Construction Industry Standard
29 CFR 1925.1025 Lead (Occupational Safety and
Health Standards for Shipyard
Employment)
29 CFR 1910.134 Respiratory Protection
4. Planning and Use of Guide
4.1 This document is based on, and is intended to be used
with, the technical principles outlined in SSPC-TU 3. Planning
and implementation of maintenance coating programs for steel
structures are presented in a logical sequence of six specific
steps. These steps range from planning and conducting condi-
tion assessment to follow-up activities required for implementing
an on-going maintenance program. Each step is designed
such that it may be utilized in sequence with the other steps,
or independently for those with interest in only one or a few
aspects of the program. A summary of each step follows.
4.1.1 Plan and Conduct Condition Assessment Survey
(Step 1): Section 5 provides a general approach for organizing
surveys to evaluate the condition of the structure. Three different
types of surveys (general overview, detailed visual survey, and
2
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2659. Available onliine from www.astm.org.
3
FED STD 141 can be obtained from <http://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/>
2
physical inspection) are covered, along with a proposed plan
for assessing sub-units of a larger, more complex structure,
and a description of procedures and documentation needed.
4.1.2 List Potential Maintenance Painting Options (Step
2): Section 6 reviews the various maintenance painting options
available, including: spot repair, overcoating, and complete
recoat, as well as the rationale for selecting these maintenance
painting options and the types of information needed for the
decision.
4.1.3 Evaluate Economics of Available Options (Step
3): Section 7 provides guidance in evaluating the initial and
life-cycle costs of available maintenance painting options.
Each decision has potential impact on the life cycle cost of
the coating system and must be identified and evaluated.
4.1.4 Select Appropriate Maintenance Painting Options
and Establish Implementation Procedures (Step 4): Section
8 reviews the factors and considerations necessary to establish
specifications for the two major maintenance painting options
of spot repair and complete recoat, including identification
of relevant factors for coating system selection, and surface
preparation selection, depending on whether complete removal
and recoat, spot repair, or a combination of spot repair and
overcoating is selected as a strategy.
4.1.5 Implement Maintenance Painting Options (Step
5) Section 9
4.1.6 Plan and Implement Follow-Up Activities (Step
6): Section 10 describes procedures and review actions after
the job is completed, including documentation, short- and
long-term condition inspections, and preventative maintenance
measures.
5. Plan and Conduct Condition Assessment
Survey (Step 1)
5.1 PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING CONDITION
ASSESSMENT SURVEY: Condition assessments can be used
for several purposes, i.e., to determine the need for recoating,
to determine the extent of corrosion and corrosion damage,
to determine the performance of various coating systems, or
to prioritize coating requirements where insufficient funds are
available to do all the desired work (see Note 11.1).
5.2 IDENTIFY AND INVENTORY STRUCTURES TO BE
SURVEYED: A written description of the structures requiring
maintenance coating should be obtained or prepared. The
description should include location, dimensions, type of
substrate, configuration, process, previous surface prepara-
tion and coating plans, specifications, history, and any other

pertinent information. Examples of the latter would include
proximity to sensitive areas, planned new construction or other
activities nearby, and types of exposures (e.g., acid fallout).
(See SSPC Publication 94-18, Project Design.) It is usually
most economical to consider all structures in similar condi-
tion within a given area for maintenance at the same general
time.
5.3 DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF ASSESSMENT
REQUIRED: The survey may vary considerably in the extent
and detail of the information required. Among the types of
survey to be considered are:
5.3.1 General Coating Condition Assessment: In this
assessment, usually only one or two parameters are rated
(e.g., general condition or rusting). The structure is normally
observed from the ground (i.e., without scaffolding). The assess-
ment is at best a qualitative rating of the condition (e.g., good,
fair, poor). Only the major features of a structure or facility are
rated (e.g., a full span of a bridge or a side of a storage tank).
This type of assessment is usually done in a few hours or less
and is suitable for identifying overall condition of the coating.
5.3.2 Detailed Visual Assessment: This type of assess-
ment also relies exclusively on visual observations, but these
are performed more systematically than for a general assess-
ment. Numerous structural elements (e.g., support beams,
connections, edges) are separately rated according to SSPC-
VIS 2, ASTM D 610, or equivalent and combined to provide
an overall structure or facility rating. Often, several condition
parameters (e.g., loss of topcoat, cracking, rust staining) and
several corrosion parameters (e.g., rusting, blistering, scaling,
loss of metal) are recorded. With this survey, one can obtain a
semi-quantitative rating of the percent of surface deteriorated.
This type of survey may be used to develop preliminary cost
estimates for recoating.
5.3.3 Physical Coating Testing: Physical testing, visual
assessment, and the general assessment are often performed
simultaneously. Visual assessment gives no information on the
film adhesion, thickness, brittleness, or underfilm corrosion.
Physical testing is required to determine whether the coating
can be overcoated or repaired, or whether it is too weak to
accept another coating layer. This assessment should be
performed prior to specifying the maintenance painting options
and requires direct access to the surface at several locations
on the structure. SSPC-TU 3 provides discussion of the value
of physical testing, as well as the procedures for testing.
Identification of the generic type of the existing finish
coating is important when selecting compatible coatings for
maintenance coating, if part of the existing coating is to remain. A
laboratory technique, Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
(FTIR), is frequently used to determine the generic coating type.
This requires only a tiny sample chip of paint to identify the
3
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
coating type, and is available at a nominal price. Alternatively,
patch tests of the proposed system or systems may be applied
to the existing coating to establish compatibility.
5.3.4 Hazardous Content Assessment: Unless previous
coating history and specifications are known, laboratory
testing needs to be performed to determine if any hazardous
elements are present. These include, but are not limited to,
lead, cadmium, and chromium. OSHA (Occupational Safety
and Health Administration) requirements for worker expo-
sure and RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)
requirements for disposal with its implied containment should
be incorporated into the contract to protect workers and lessen
potential claims. SSPC-Guide 6 and Guide 7 provide details
relevant to containment and disposal. OSHA regulation 29
CFR 1926.62 details worker protection requirements specific
to lead hazards in construction work (which includes industrial
coating projects), while OSHA 29 CFR 1925.1025 details worker
protection requirements for lead in general industry work.
OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 contains requirements specifically
for respiratory protection.
5.3.5 Structural Inspection: Coating assessment should
be included as part of any general structural inspection for loss of
metal, broken joints, or other structural defects. A relatively small
additional inspection time is required to evaluate and record
the ratings of individual structures or structural elements. This
information will normally prove extremely valuable in evaluating
maintenance painting options, especially in developing the most
cost effective life-cycle maintenance strategy. Numerous public
and private entities have been successful in using scheduled
facility inspections, such as bridge safety inspections, as the
“first cut” in determining coating condition.
5.4 DETERMINE THE CONDITION RATING SCHEME:
For both visual inspection and physical testing, it is necessary
to use a standard rating system and format for recording data.
SSPC-TU 3 discusses the salient characteristics of a rating
scheme that is based on the technical merits of coating condi-
tion and overcoating.
5.4.1 Physical Testing: See SSPC-TU 3 for detailed guid-
ance in evaluating coating condition and risks of overcoating.
These evaluations generally require certain detailed information
concerning the coating type and physical condition.
5.4.2 Use of Ratings Data: In many cases, these condi-
tion ratings will be keyed directly to repair procedures (e.g.,
SSPC-PA Guide 4). The next two sections of this guide give
the procedures for developing such a scheme.
5.5 PLAN FOR INSPECTING STRUCTURAL
COMPONENTS: A sub-unit sampling plan identifies the
portions of the structure or facility that will be rated and the
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
type of rating scheme to be used. Sub-unit sampling plans are
needed for complex structures or where detailed information
is required. For a process unit, (for example) the structural
steel might be divided into individual tanks, piping, handrails
and ladders, and structural support. On large structures, the
areas could be further subdivided into sections. Because of
differences in corrosion tendencies, it is often useful to have
separate ratings for edges and flat surfaces. The extent of
inspection depends on how detailed a survey is desired and
what resources may be available.
5.6 ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND ASSEMBLE
RELATED DOCUMENTS
5.6.1 A specific procedure should be established for a
condition assessment, which should include a budget and
schedule, including equipment and crews. The availability
of funds will determine the extent of the survey that can be
undertaken. A schedule should be established based on the
number of hours or days required to prepare the structure
(e.g., notify other trades) or arrange for access (i.e., coordinate
schedules of other individuals). This includes identifying support
crews and equipment that may be required to assist with the
condition assessment. Personnel requirements must also be
established (i.e., identify individuals who will conduct the survey
such as in-house inspectors, engineers, outside consultants,
coating contractors, or coating manufacturers). If a condition
assessment survey is to be performed by a consultant or
contractor, a written contract should be prepared. If a coating
manufacturer offers to do the assessment at no cost, the firm
should be asked to submit a written description of the plan
for the owner’s review, modification, and approval. There are
numerous contracting methods available for acquiring condi-
tion assessments, structural inspections, and coating work,
including options ranging from acquiring each facet of work by
different contracts to using “turnkey” type contracts to perform
all inspection, structural repair, and coating work. When more
than one facet of work is included in a single contract, steps
should be taken to ensure the validity of each facet prior to
proceeding to the next facet.
5.6.2 Required standards (e.g., standards such as SSPC
VIS 2, ASTM D 610, or equivalent) as well as field equipment
such as tape recorders, inspection forms, and a camera must
be available.
5.7 CONDUCT ASSESSMENT SURVEY: The survey
should be conducted after the schedule and the standards
have been established. The owner’s representative should
ensure that all elements of the survey have been properly
performed, recorded correctly, and distributed to predetermined
personnel.
4
6. List Potential Maintenance Painting Options
(Step 2)
6.1 REVIEW SURVEY DATAAND COATING OBJECTIVES
AND CRITERIA
6.1.1 The corrective action to be taken is based on the
results of the previous surveys, the short and long-term objec-
tives of the coating program, special limitations, and other
relevant factors.
6.1.2 The data to be analyzed are those that have been
previously collected from an overview, visual inspection, or
physical inspection. If no formal survey was taken, use the
best information available (e.g., coating historical records) to
estimate the overall condition ratings.
6.2 CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS: After the
data is reviewed, the available alternative actions should be
considered. These range from not coating to complete coating
removal and recoating.
6.3 NO MAINTENANCE REQUIRED FOR THREE YEARS
OR LONGER: In one possible scenario, the coating is in good
shape and no corrosion or deterioration requires attention. In a
second scenario, the coating may be providing some protec-
tion but may be in too poor a condition to salvage. Eventually,
total coating removal will be needed, but maintenance can be
delayed without any significant harm to the structure. This option
may be considered under the following circumstances:
6.3.1 The structure is in a mild environment and little
corrosion activity is expected at breaks in the coating film over
the next few years.
6.3.2 The extent of discoloration, topcoat erosion, or
general degradation is not very important, due to the locations
on the structure. In general, the coating is intact and protection
is still being provided.
6.3.3 The structure is being assigned a low priority for
maintenance because of economics, aesthetics, or other
reasons.
6.3.4 The structure is scheduled for major coating repair
or complete replacement within 3 years. The additional time
is not expected to add significantly to the corrosion metal loss
or the surface preparation cost.
6.3.5 The structure is due for demolition.
6.4 SPOT REPAIR ONLY: Spot repair entails surface
preparation and touch-up coating of localized areas of deterio-
rated coating and corrosion. The surface preparation may be

accomplished by hand or power tool cleaning, high- or ultrahigh
pressure waterjetting, or abrasive blasting. Several specialized
materials and procedures are available for localized surface
preparation, including composite media (sponge), sodium
carbonate slurries, plastic media, walnut shells, corncobs, etc.
The intact coating surrounding the degraded area should be
feathered and lightly sanded 2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto the
intact coating to permit a smooth transition. The cleaned areas
are primed with a coating compatible with the existing coating
system and spot topcoated to conform to the required DFT. In
this particular option, the remaining (e.g., intact) coating is not
overcoated. It should be noted that the spot repair method is
primarily a stopgap method. It is recommended that the structure
be re-evaluated within three to five years. Spot repair may be
considered under the following circumstances:
6.4.1 Repairs are hidden or in a low-visibility area and
thus unimportant to the aesthetics.
6.4.2 Owner maintenance crews are available for this type
of work.
6.4.3 Structures are small, not requiring extensive scaf-
folding or hard-to-access areas.
6.4.4 Corrosion and degradation are limited to isolated
areas and relatively small sections, which amount to less than
1% of the total area.
6.4.5 A decision has been made to upgrade small isolated
areas such as bearing areas, crevices, or areas subject to
leakage, condensation, or chemical splash.
6.5 SPOT REPAIR AND OVERCOATING: This technique
involves spot repair of deteriorated coating and corroded areas
followed by the application of a full finish coating over the
entire surface, including spot repaired areas and intact coating
areas. The intact coating surrounding the degraded area must
be feathered back. The repair coating should extend at least
2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto the intact coating to allow for
a smoother transition of the repair coating onto the existing
coating and better topcoat adhesion. The topcoat should
be compatible with the existing coating. The existing intact
coating should be cleaned of surface contaminants before
total recoating. This type of system would be expected to give
perhaps five years or more additional life to the entire surface
area by helping to prevent further deterioration of the intact
coating. Successful overcoating will often delay the need for
a full coating removal. Spot repair and overcoating may be
considered under the following circumstances:
6.5.1 An evaluation of risks in overcoating is a function of
adhesion and existing coating thickness, as outlined in SSPC-
TU 3. This risk analysis must be performed if risks are to be
managed, and while it is generally thought that risks should
5
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
be held to the range of “low” to “moderate,” higher risks may
be acceptable to the owner under certain conditions.
6.5.2 The intact surface can be readily cleaned with pres-
surized air, hand tools (SSPC-SP 2), power tools (SSPC-SP 3),
solvent or detergent wiping (SSPC-SP 1), or power washing
(as described in SSPC-SP 12). If low or high pressure water
cleaning (also called “power washing”) is used, the maximum
water pressure required should be stated in the project speci-
fication.
6.5.3 If severely corroded surfaces (as described in Section
6.6) are found, special cleaning methods and coating systems
may be required.
6.5.4 When corrosion and deterioration exceed 10 to 15%
of the total area, project economics may suggest total removal
of the coating system.
6.6 COMPLETE RECOAT OF STRUCTURE OR SUB-
UNITS (ZONES): When the overall coating condition is poor,
when the remaining life of the structure or sub-unit justifies the
expense, and when funds are available, a decision to recoat
the structure in its entirety is usually made. This involves
removing the old coating and all of the corrosion products before
applying the primer, intermediate coats, and topcoat. Coating
a sub-unit of a structure (often called “zone” painting) may be
a variation of this alternative when funds are limited or when
the remaining portions of the structure are in good condition.
This option presents a much lower risk of early coating/corro-
sion problems (such as catastrophic delamination or early rust
back) than do the alternative options.
6.7 OTHER REPAIR METHODS: On occasion, different
methods of cleaning and/or coating may be required for different
areas or zones of the structure. A higher-performing coating
system (e.g., abrasive blast cleaning followed by application
of a zinc-rich/epoxy/polyurethane system) may be specified
for high corrosion atmospheric areas of a structure, such as
areas subject to deicing salt, dripping, or chemical spillage),
with a lesser performing system (such as hand or power tool
cleaning followed by an alkyd or a high-solids epoxy with
good wetting) on less critical or less corrosion-prone areas.
Compatible topcoats may be required to blend in with restored
or rehabilitated portions of the structure.
6.8 ADDITIONAL SURVEY: After an analysis of the avail-
able data, an additional survey may be required. The initial
survey may have been too limited to provide sufficient data
to make remedial recommendations, or the survey may have
only looked at a portion of the structure or not examined some
specific details required, such as the integrity of the coating
near high-corrosion prone areas. The area may be scheduled
for other repair or outage work within a 2-year period and may
be re-assessed at that time.
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009

7. Evaluate Economics of Available Options
(Step 3)
7.1 The act of contemplating coating application or main-
tenance is, in effect, an analysis of the economics of abating
or slowing the effects of corrosion damage. The variables
involved in protective coatings often require a variety of solu-
tions, each of which will carry unique cost-benefit factors.
Many factors influence the selection of coating systems.
However, when considering maintenance of existing coating
systems, the factors are generally restricted due to constraints
imposed by the existing coating. Still, there are generally
multiple options available, and it is important to consider the
economic impacts of all options prior to finalizing a design.
The chapter on economics in the SSPC Painting Manual,
Volume 1–Good Painting Practice, and SSPC-TU 9, Estimating
Costs for Protective Coatings Projects, provide comparative
costs for most surface preparation methods, generic coating
systems, application, and special requirements for selected
situations.
8. Select Appropriate Maintenance Painting Op-
tions and Establish Implementation Procedures
(Step 4)
8.1 Once a course of action has been determined, it is
essential that detailed specifications and supporting documents
be prepared to achieve that course of action.
8.2 IDENTIFY RELEVANT FACTORS FOR COATING
SYSTEM SELECTION
8.2.3 Weather or configuration can also limit the selection
of coating systems. Many coatings (e.g., conventional epoxies,
water-borne acrylics) are best applied above 10˚C (50˚F).
Other coatings are sensitive to high humidity or low humidity
(e.g., inorganic zinc-rich primers). In certain configurations,
spray application may not be permitted because of high wind
or overspray on sensitive equipment or automobiles.
8.2.4 The exposure environment is a major determinant of
the type of coating system. Typically, exposure environments
are classified according to the presence of soluble salts, pollu-
tion, sunlight exposure, rain/humidity, or chemicals.
8.2.5 The existing condition of the structure must be
known. For spot repair or overcoating, the compatibility of the
new coats over existing ones should be verified by a patch
test, as shown in SSPC-TU 3. If the patch coating shows no
adverse physical effects (e.g., lifting of the existing coating) or
appearance effects (e.g., bleeding) on the existing coating, it
should be considered compatible with it. In addition, the patch
test, when evaluated over a period of six months or more, can
provide important data on the physical compatibility (stress)
of the new coating over the old.
8.2.6 The ability of the coating to tolerate residual soluble
salts will directly affect the time to early rust-back. SSPC-Guide
15 addresses salt remediation testing. The coating to be applied
must be tolerant of the level of contaminant present.
8.3 SELECT SURFACE PREPARATION METHODS
AND COATING MATERIALS FOR COMPLETE RECOAT
STRATEGY

8.2.1 The selection of the coating system is influenced

8.3.1 Select Surface Preparation Methods: SSPC and
not only by the type of recoating (e.g., spot repair or complete
other organizations have well-defined standards for most of
recoat) but also by special factors such as restrictions due to
these requirements, which can readily be incorporated into
environmental, health, and safety regulations; budgets; expo-
a specification. Available surface preparation techniques for
sure environment; weather; or configuration and contaminants.
complete recoating include conventional dry abrasive blast
Thus, before choosing the coating system, it is useful to identify
cleaning (SSPC-SP 5/NACE No. 1, SSPC-SP 10/NACE No.
these pertinent factors.
2, SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3, SSPC-SP 14/NACE No. 8, and
SSPC-SP 7/NACE No. 4), wet abrasive blast cleaning, vacuum
8.2.2 Abrasive blast cleaning may require containment
blasting, and high- and ultrahigh pressure water jetting (SSPC-
controls due to air quality concerns or the need to avoid dust or
SP 12/ NACE No. 5). It is important to specify the degree of
abrasive rebound in sensitive areas. The presence of hazards
cleanliness and the surface profile (for blast cleaning), the
such as lead-based coatings on a structure will require special
degree of salt or contaminant remediation, and the need for
collection and containment devices–the type of device being
solvent cleaning and/or water washing prior to blast cleaning.
largely determined by the extent of lead- based coating to
Waterjetting can neither alter nor create profile, but can expose
be removed. Site-specific regulations on the volatile organic
existing profile.
compound (VOC) content may exclude the use of previously
used coatings. . SSPC offers several training courses designed
An important consideration when blast cleaning is the
for craft workers, for example: C-7, Abrasive Blasting Program,
collection and disposal of blasting debris. SSPC-Guide 6
C-12, Airless Spray Basics, C-13, Water Jetting Program, Plural
provides guidance on the selection of the type of containment
Component Basics, and Floor Coating Basics. In addition,
based on the type of surface preparation being performed. It can
a joint standard for Industrial Coating and Lining Application
also be used to provide guidance on the level of containment
Specialist Qualification and Certification issued by SSPC and
that is necessary for a job. Guidance is provided on ventilation,
NACE International, establishes a body of knowledge and
air flow, and dust emissions. Guide 7 provides guidance on
evaluation criteria for qualifying coating applicators.

6

the disposal of hazardous surface preparation debris once it
has been contained and collected.
If the surface preparation techniques discussed herein
cannot be used, it may be necessary to clean to a less desir-
able surface condition and to apply a coating system (primer,
intermediate, and topcoat) over a surface that is not completely
rust and coating free. In such instances, the primer must be
tolerant of the surface condition. Certain power tools are also
capable of removing existing rust and coating (SSPC-SP 11
or SSPC-SP 15) but generally at much lower production rates.
Coating system life expectancy is likely to decrease if the level
of surface preparation is lowered.
8.3.2 Select Coating Materials: The selection of the
coating system often involves two phases: first, identifying the
generic types (e.g., epoxy/zinc-rich/polyurethane); and second,
identifying the criteria for selecting materials. The specifica-
tion may utilize generic compositions, a qualified product list
of proprietary materials, or other approaches. In the coating
specification, the owner should describe the procedures for
qualification and acceptance criteria for the coating materials.
For qualification, the supplier may be required to furnish
evidence of previous use of the coatings on similar structures,
or laboratory tests of physical properties, accelerated corrosion
and weathering properties, and application properties. These
properties should be certified by the manufacturer or an inde-
pendent laboratory. For new technology coatings, extensive
service data may not be available. The owner may also require
some verification that the material delivered to the job site is
the same as that which was originally qualified.
8.3.3.1 An important part of the specification is the coating
film thickness. Both a minimum and a maximum dry film thick-
ness should be specified (see SSPC-PA 2).
8.3.3.2 The application methods are normally governed
by the materials selected and are stipulated by coating manu-
facturers on their data sheets. SSPC-PA 1 provides guidance
for applicators that will supplement the manufacturer’s appli-
cation instructions. If there is a contradiction between the two
recommendations, that of the coating manufacturer should
take precedence.
8.4 SELECT SURFACE PREPARATION METHODS
AND COATING MATERIALS FOR SPOT REPAIR OR SPOT
REPAIR AND OVERCOATING
8.4.1 Determine Techniques and Standards for Repair,
Surface Preparation, and Recoating
8.4.1.1 When making spot repairs, it is necessary to deter-
mine the precise areas requiring repair. Areas where coating
can be removed by moderate scraping with a dull putty knife
will require spot repair. Residual loose material will prevent
proper spot repair.
7
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
8.4.1.2 One important decision to be made is whether
abrasive blast cleaning will be used for spot repair mainte-
nance. Abrasive blasting may be used for brush-off cleaning
(SSPC-SP 7/NACE No. 4) or industrial blast cleaning (SSPC-
SP 14/NACE No. 8). To provide a higher level of cleaning with
the total removal of rust and coating, SSPC-SP 6/NACE No.
3 or greater may be specified for spot repair areas. Brush off
blasting may be used to remove loose coating or rust. It or some
other surface treatment may be necessary to obtain acceptable
adhesion between the existing intact coating and the repair or
overcoating system. Great care must be exercised when spot
blasting to avoid over-blast damage to adjacent intact coating
that does not need to be blasted. Spot blasting is generally not
recommended for areas of repair of less than 1 square foot or
when the total repair is less than 5 to 10 percent of the total
surface area, unless a lesser degree of cleaning cannot be
tolerated.
8.4.1.3 Alternatives to open spot blasting include hand
tool cleaning (SSPC-SP 2), conventional power tool cleaning
(SSPC-SP 3), commercial grade power tool cleaning (SSPC-
SP 15), special (profiling) power tool cleaning (SSPC-SP 11),
and vacuum or wet blasting methods. These methods may be
used easily with vacuum assists for containment.
8.4.1.4. After spot cleaning, the cleaned areas are coated
with a primer that extends over the feathered edges of the
intact coating to overlap them 2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto
the sound, intact coating. This will minimize edge lifting and
will provide a better appearance.
8.4.2 Select Coating Materials for Spot Repair or Spot
Repair with Overcoating.
8.4.2.1 The selection of the coatings will be determined
by the need for compatibility with the existing surfaces. Most
coatings are suitable for application to the bare metal areas
(i.e., spot-repaired areas), so the main concern is compat-
ibility with the previous coating. See SSPC-TU 3 for detailed
instructions for performing and evaluating patch testing.
8.4.2.2 The selection of the coating materials for spot repair
is guided by the same considerations as for full recoat. For spot
repair of small areas, a brushable primer is advantageous. It is
also important that the primer be compatible with the existing
intact coating because it is necessary to have the spot repair
overlap the intact coating. As an example, an organic zinc-
rich coating is normally used instead of an inorganic zinc-rich
coating for spot repair of a damaged inorganic zinc coating with
an organic finish coat, because the inorganic zinc-rich coating
does not bond sufficiently to either organic or inorganic coat-
ings. Additional information on repair of damaged galvanized
or inorganic zinc coatings is given in SSPC-Guide 14.
8.4.2.4 The coatings selected for the full topcoat must be
compatible with both the spot primer and the existing intact
coating.
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
8.4.2.5 The requirements for application, film thickness,
material qualifications, and acceptance criteria are the same
as those for applying a full recoat system. For spot repair,
however, it is essential that the requirements for determining
which areas are to be repaired should be clear and definitive.
Discussion of these items should be included in the pre-bid
and pre-job meetings.
8.5 PREPARE SPECIFICATION
8.5.1 The job specification provides the basis for the cost
and execution of the work. It is essential that the job specifi-
cation provide a complete description of the desired work by
prescribing specific procedures, processes, and materials or
by describing the work product. The specification must also
provide criteria for acceptance or rejection of work as well as
remedies for unacceptable work.
8.5.2 A job specification should be prepared using the
general format of the Construction Specification Institute
(CSI). Chapter 3 of The Inspection of Coatings and Linings:
A Handbook of Basic Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and
Specifiers provides a description of the CSI format and its parts
or specific owner’s format requirements. Additional information
for preparing a job specification for protective coating work can
be found in SSPC-TR 4/NACE 80200, “Preparation of Protective
Coatings Specifications for Atmospheric Service.” Appendix
A provides additional information that should be considered
during preparation of the job specification.
9. Implement Maintenance Painting Options
(Step 5)
Clean and coat the structure.
10. Plan and Implement Follow-up Activities
(Step 6)
10.1 BENEFITS OF FOLLOW-UP: An important part of a
maintenance coating program is to monitor the performance of
the applied coatings system, for both short-term and long-term
effects. In the short term, certain inspections and follow-ups
are necessary to ensure that the contractor has fulfilled the
requirements of the contract. For the long-term, there are
certain beneficial measures that can be taken to minimize the
onset of corrosion and information that can be collected that
will facilitate future decisions on maintaining the structure.
10.2 ESTABLISH NEED FOR PERIODIC INSPECTION:
Inspection should be made of the structure within 6 to 12
months after application especially in cases where there are
surfaces such as edges or bolts that will delaminate or rust
within a short period due to difficult surface preparation or
application, or especially severe service conditions. If these
areas are discovered and are corrected within the first year,
the time interval until the next maintenance may be extended.
8
Some agencies require a one-year touchup provision as part
of a contractor’s obligations in the contract to cover such
contingencies. Other warranted work should also be inspected
prior to expiration of the warranty.
10.3 ESTABLISH SCHEDULES FOR CONDITION
ASSESSMENT: In addition to periodic inspection, a structure
should be scheduled for a periodic condition assessment.
Depending on the type of structure and the environment, the
first condition asssessment would normally be conducted
about 5 years after the original application and every 3 years
thereafter. Specific rating sheets or parameters to be inspected
should be made available to inspection personnel. The condi-
tion assessment should be similar to the survey data required
in Section 5 of this guide.
10.4 ENSURE PROPER DOCUMENTATION AND FILING
OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION: Before the job is officially
accepted, it is necessary that all documentation be completed.
The record of the daily inspection logs and the records of the
coatings procured, used, discarded, or disposed of should be
properly stored in the owner files. It should be verified that
the retained samples of the coating are properly labeled and
stored for future reference.
10.5 INSTITUTE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
MEASURES: In some cases, regular removal of contaminants
can eliminate potential problems before they become severe.
Examples are chemical spills that might occur or concentrations
of de-icing salts. In some cases, moderate design changes can
be made that will eliminate water or other chemicals collecting
in crevices or other areas vulnerable to corrosion attack.
11. Notes
11.1. Numerous public and private entities have been
successful in using scheduled facility inspections, such as
bridge safety inspections, as the “first cut” in determining coating
condition. Depending on the processes used for such inspec-
tions, it is feasible to train facility inspectors to perform surveys
that range from “General Overview Condition Assessment” to
“Detailed Visual Inspection,” as described in Section 5.3. It
requires a relatively small additional inspection time to evaluate
and record the ratings of individual structures or structural
elements. This information will normally prove extremely valu-
able in evaluating maintenance painting options, especially
in developing the most cost effective life-cycle maintenance
strategy.
12. Disclaimer
12.1 This guide is designed to describe, review, or analyze
new or improved technology and does not meet the definition
of a standard as defined by SSPC. A guide differs from a stan-
dard in that it is not suitable for referencing in a specification
or procurement document.

12.2 While every precaution is taken to ensure that all
information furnished in SSPC guides is as accurate, complete,
and useful as possible, SSPC cannot assume responsibility
nor incur any obligation resulting from the use of any materials,
coatings, or methods described herein, or of the guide itself.
12.3 This guide does not attempt to address problems
concerning safety associated with its use. The user of this
specification, as well as the user of all products or practices
described herein, is responsible for instituting appropriate
health and safety practices and for ensuring compliance with
all governmental regulations.
13. Bibliography
The following reference materials may contain useful
supplementary information:
Appleman, Bernard R., “Advances in Technology and Standards
for Mitigating the Effects of Soluble Salts,” Journal of
Protective Coatings & Linings, Vol. 19, No. 5, (May, 2002),
pp. 42-47.
Appleman, Bernard R. “Coating Over Soluble Salts: A
Perspective.” Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings,
Vol. 4, No. 10, (October 1987), pp. 68-82.
Castler, L. Brian, Jayson L. Helsel, Michael F. MeLampy, and
Eric Kline, “Comparative Painting Costs.” Steel Structures
Painting Manual, Vol. 1: Good Painting Practice, Chapter
8. Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2002.
“Environmentally Acceptable Materials for Corrosion Protection
of Steel Bridges,” Appendix 1 from Environmental
Guidelines for Painting Practices. Washington DC: FHWA,
1997. (FHWA Report RD-96-058).
Guide to Bridge Painting, FHWA TS-89-14. Washington DC:
Highway Administration, 1989. (SSPC Publication 89-
04).
Inspection of Coatings and Linings: A Handbook of Basic
Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and Specifiers. Richard
W. Drisko, and Judy Neugebauer, eds. Pittsburgh, PA:
SSPC, 1997. (SSPC Publication 97-07).
PDCA Safety & Loss Control Manual., Fairfax, VA: Painting &
Decorating Contractors of America, 1984.
“Protective Systems for Steel Bridges,” Section 16.4, Bridge
Inspector’s Training Manual 90, produced by Michael
Baker, Jr., Inc. Washington DC: FHWA, 1991. FHWA-
PD-91-015.
9
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
SSPC Painting Manual, Volume 1–Good Painting Practice
(Fourth Edition). Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2002. (SSPC
Publication 02-14).
SSPC Painting Manual, Vol. 2–Systems & Specifications (Eighth
Edition), “Selection of Coating Systems by Environmental
Zone.” Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2000. (SSPC Publication
00-10).
SSPC-TU 1: Technology Update: Surface Tolerant Coatings.
Pittsburgh: SSPC, 1997. (SSPC Publication 97-20).
Trimber, Kenneth A. Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook,
2nd ed. Pittsburgh, PA: KTA-Tator, Inc., 1993. (SSPC
Publication 93-02).
Trimber, Kenneth A. and Daniel P. Adley, CIH, CSP. Project
Design: Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook,
Volume II. Pittsburgh, PA: KTA-Tator, Inc., 1995. (SSPC
Publication 95-06).
Appendix A. Other Considerations in Preparing
Contract Documents and Executing Mainte-
nance Coating Projects
The items below are intended to provide the owner’s
representative with a summary of items to be considered when
preparing contract documents and following up as the project
evolves.
A.1 BENEFITS OF WELL-PREPARED CONTRACTS: A
well-planned and designed contract will benefit both the owner
and the contractor as follows:
• Reduce the cost of the work to the owner.
• Provide clear expectations of work to be
performed.
• Eliminate unnecessary contingencies for the
contractor.
• Provide for a smooth, trouble-free workflow without
costly interruptions.
• Identify and anticipate possible problems, avoid them
when possible, and provide means to resolve them
when they occur.
• Complete the work safely.
• Provide measurement and payment criteria.
A.2 ESTABLISH QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
FOR CONTRACTORS
A.2.1 Pre-Qualification of Contracting Firms: Many
agencies have adopted guidelines or procedures for screening
or pre-qualifying contractors based on references or actual job
evaluations. SSPC, through its Painting Contractor Certification
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
Program (PCCP), has established a program for certifying
contractors. The QP 1 program is for field paint application,
the QP 3 program is for shop application firms, and the QP 2
program is for the removal of hazardous coatings. In addition,
numerous owners require that a contractor be bonded to cover
the estimated cost of the work.
A.2.2 Qualifications for Applicators and Blasters:
Some state and other agencies require that the applicators
demonstrate their abilities to attain specified quality of cleaning
and coating application. ASTM D 4228, “Standard Practice for
Qualification of Coating Applicators for Application of Coatings
to Steel Surfaces” may be used to qualify applicators. SSPC
offers several training courses designed for craft workers, for
example: C-7, Abrasive Blasting Program, C-12, Airless Spray
Basics, C-13, Water Jetting Program, Plural Component Basics,
and Floor Coating Basics. In addition, a joint standard for
Industrial Coating and Lining Application Specialist Qualification
and Certification issued by SSPC and NACE International,
establishes a body of knowledge and evaluation criteria for
qualifying coating applicators.
A.2.3 Union or Labor Requirements: Some jurisdictions
may be restricted to union shops.
A.3 PROTECTION OF EXISTING PLANT FACILITY AND
EQUIPMENT: Identify all the steps that should be taken by
the contractor and/or owner to protect the existing plant facility
and equipment from the planned operations. Establish hold
points to verify that the proper protection is in place prior to
proceeding with operations. Identify on plans or in the scope
of work if the coating is or may be hazardous.
A.4 SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: All employers must
prepare a safety plan, including both facility owners and contrac-
tors. When contractors are working at a particular facility, their
site-specific safety plan must incorporate the relevant issues.
The safety plan used is likely to be an amalgamation of the stan-
dard safety plan of both the owner and the contractor. Depending
upon the particular situation, the plan may be prepared by
the facility owner, the contractor, or by both working together,
but it should be understood and approved by both parties. All
employers must provide personal protective equipment (PPE),
including specific equipment such as respirators, and training
in its use. Safe working conditions are the responsibility of
the employer. Such responsibility is more easily defined at a
fixed facility where all the workers are employed by the same
company than at a complex construction site where there are
many different companies working together. Nevertheless,
all safety precautions must be made, and it is the employer’s
responsibility to ensure that safety issues are recognized, and
the risks are minimized. Any details not completely understood
should be resolved in the pre-construction conference and at
subsequent other conferences. All HAZCOM requirements,
including labeling and material safety data sheets, must be
met. The SSPC Painting Manual Volume 1–Good Painting
10
Practice provides additional guidance on safety issues in the
coating industry.
A.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE: The owner shall notify the
contractor if lead, cadmium, chromium-containing paints or
other hazardous materials are to be removed. The contractor
should identify the requirements to remove lead, chromium,
or cadmium-containing paints, or other toxic materials. The
owner should also indicate the extent of responsibility of the
contractor for generating, containing, collecting samples,
testing, and disposing of hazardous waste.
A.6 ACCESS FOR INSPECTION: The contractor should
provide for reasonable access to the work for the owner’s
inspectors, including use of the contractor’s scaffolding, work
platforms, and safety apparatus.
A.7 OWNER-FURNISHED ITEMS AND SERVICES: It is
often necessary and/or economically beneficial to the owner to
make various items and services available to the contractor.
These may include: laydown/storage areas, electric power,
potable water, restrooms, etc. For any utilities provided, the
owner should identify locations, pressures, amounts, fittings,
voltages, and other pertinent operating details. The contractor
should identify any owner-furnished items or services.
A.8 WARRANTY/GUARANTEE: The most common
warranty for coating work is a one-year warranty against defec-
tive materials and job quality. Extended period performance
warranties are becoming more common, and, when utilized,
should be formulated to correlate with the specific coating
systems selected. When warranties are utilized, it should be
clearly stated who is to be responsible for the warranty and
what conditions will trigger the warranty repair, any required
inspection schedules, what is expected of the warranty repairs,
etc.
A.9 PERSONNEL AND COATING CONSUMPTION
RECORDS: Information regarding personnel resources and
coating quantities can be beneficial in preparing cost estimates
for similar work. Tracking mechanisms should be defined in
the contract documents. Also, owners should request copies
of contractor inspection reports and daily logs for their files.
A.10 TYPE OF CONTRACT: The SSPC Painting Manual
Volume 1–Good Painting Practice provides a detailed descrip-
tion of the types of contracts, bids, and proposals.
A.11 ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR OWNER-
CONTRACTOR RELATIONS
A.11.1 Identification of Owner and Contractor
Representatives: The contractor and owner should each
appoint an authorized representative to whom all required
notifications are given, through whom contract changes are

processed, and who is responsible for contract coordination
and resolution of non-conformances and other problems.
Ensure that all personnel are familiar with responsibilities and
procedures and that the authorities of engineer, inspector, field
supervisor, and coating manufacturer’s representative are
defined. In particular, identify the person who is responsible
for inspection and that person’s affiliation (e.g., owner’s repre-
sentative, third party, or other). Review procedures established
for handling and disposing of waste.
A.11.2 Interface with Plant Operation: The contract
should identify all plant operations and operations of other
contractors that will be ongoing in the work area. The contract
should outline how the coating work will interface with these
operations and what precautions will be necessary. Special
efforts should be made so that conflicting operations, such as
welding and spray coating, do not occur simultaneously in the
same area.
A.12 PREPARE CONTRACT AND SCHEDULE: It is
useful to prepare a list of the various activities required in
securing the contracts and the time allotted for each of these.
Typical elements of this schedule are as follows: authorities and responsibilities of different individuals involved
a. Prepare Contract Documents
b. Notice Inviting Proposals
c. Pre-Bid Conference
d. Pre-Bid Demonstration/Inspection
e. Proposal Due Date
f. Post-Bid Meetings and Clarifications
g. Negotiations, if allowed
h. Contract Award
i. Pre-Job Conference/Demonstration
j. Contract Start Date
k. Contract Termination Date
l. Owner Acceptance Date
m. Warranty Date
n. EEO requirements
Specific sample clauses for these and other details required
in obtaining contracts may be found in SSPC-TR 4/NACE
80200.
A.13 ARRANGE AND CONDUCT PRE-BID
CONFERENCE: All prospective or qualified bidders are invited
to attend a meeting with the owner’s representative to review the
bid package. This review would normally include an explanation
of the surface cleaning and application requirements, the nature
of the structure, its condition, access to the structure, special
restrictions (e.g., on blast cleaning safety requirements), and
answer any questions the contractor might have. Ordinarily,
an actual visit to the structures or facility to be coated should
be required. Many contractors are reluctant to attend pre-bid
meetings because of the cost and time, or simply because they
do not want to let their interests be known. For major and critical
projects, experienced owners often make pre-bid attendance
mandatory because it eliminates problems that occur when
11
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions March 1, 2009
contractors are not familiar with the structure or the terms of
the specifications. Some public agencies do not permit such
meetings because they feel that the additional travel expense
is unfair to contractors from remote locations.
A.14 REVIEW BID AND AWARD CONTRACT: This
operation is usually strictly governed by owner legal policies
and requirements. The contractor who has met the previous
requirement with the lowest bid is generally awarded the
contract in the competitive bidding system.
A.15 PRE-JOB CONFERENCE: This meeting is held
between the owner and the contractor hired to do the job.
Owners may need to include representatives from their internal
safety and environmental departments in these meetings.
The contractor should bring the field superintendent and the
company principal or company representative. The purpose
of this meeting is to review in detail the specific work assign-
ments, schedules, needs for coordination, and procedures
for formal and informal communication. The conference must
include a review of (1) the contractor’s working methods; (2)
inspection hold points, test procedures, and criteria; and (3) the
in the work. Any agreements reached at this conference, or
other subsequent owner/contractor conferences, should be
written down and signed by both parties, so that they become
part of the contract. Any differences not resolved in advance
may result in costly change orders later. The pre-construction
conference should also include a visit to the work site to ensure
that conditions there do not deviate from the descriptions in
the specification, and to identify safety hazards, facilities, and
equipment that require protection or special care, and safety
and emergency systems available. Significant site differences
from those in the specification constitute one of the leading
causes of project change orders.
A.16 PROCURE COATINGS ACCORDING TO
SPECIFICATION: Either the owner or the contractor may
procure the coatings. In either case, it is necessary to verify
that the coatings meet the specification. The owner’s inspector
should verify that the agreed-upon coating materials supplied
to the job site are properly labeled, that proper certifications
have been obtained, and that samples are retained for testing
by the owner’s laboratory, an independent laboratory, or for
future reference. Any exceptions or replacements should be
noted. Pre-sampling, testing, and approval prior to shipment
can help assure that approved material arrives on the job. This
can help prevent job delays.
A.18 Quality Assurance/Quality Control: Quality
Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) are important
parts of any maintenance program. The purpose of the QA/
QC program is to ensure that the processes and work prod-
ucts are in conformance with the specified criteria. The CSI
specification format includes QC under Part 3. Execution.
The CSI approach requires the contractor to execute the QC
program. The contractor is responsible for quality control. The
processes need to be verified, which requires the contractor to
perform various inspection functions related to the QC effort.
The owner is responsible for quality assurance and should
be functioning to provide this assurance role. In other words,
the owner should assure that the contractor is providing the
necessary quality control. (This concept is often misinterpreted
as meaning the QC program will be executed by the owner,
utilizing in-house personnel or independent third party inspec-
tors, with the contractor providing no quality control effort.)
Qualified personnel are essential to the execution of the QC
as well as the QA program. Qualified inspector qualification
programs, such as SSPC’s Protective Coatings Inspector
Program, Bridge Coating Inspector Program or equivalent
for individual inspectors, or SSPC-QP 5 for coating and lining
inspection companies, are excellent tools for obtaining qualified
inspectors. The inspectors can be utilized in either a quality
control role or a quality assurance role. The content of the QC
program as described in the specification is also important.
The QC program must include appropriate methods and tools
with suitable references. Inspection frequency, distribution, and
data analysis methods must also be described. The correct
amount of inspection is important. Inadequate inspection may
not identify serious deficiencies. There are numerous guides,
such as Inspection of Coatings and Linings: A Handbook of
Basic Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and Specifiers, the
SSPC Guide for Planning Coating Inspection and ASTM D
3276, which may be used to develop project-specific coating
inspection plans. Over-inspection may increase the cost of the
coating project while returning little or no additional benefits.