Chapter 10.
1
Total Protective Coatings Programs
Richard W. Drisko and James F. Jenkins
Introduction
This chapter describes how to prepare and
manage a total protective coatings program for an
industrial or government activity. The program can be
implemented using in-house or contract services. The
choice of in-house or contract personnel will depend
on the particular type of organizational management.
The goals of such a program include:
• Most economically maintaining assets of activity in
operating condition
• Minimizing operational down time and subsequent
loss of productivity for repair or replacement of
deteriorated components
• Meeting all health, safety, and economical
requirements
• Providing a working environment for good
productivity
Four basic steps must be taken to initiate and
implement a total protective coatings program:
• Obtaining continuing management financial support
• Designing facilities and protective systems for
minimizing long-term costs
• Periodic monitoring of conditions of facilities and
protective systems
• Maintaining protective systems in a systematically
programmed manner based upon the condition data
A total protective coatings program must also
include other appropriate methods of deterioration
control that can effectively supplement the protective
coatings program. Thus, such considerations as
design, including material selection, cathodic protec-
tion, and altering the environment can often be used to
work in conjunction with protective coatings to provide
a longer-lasting, more economical total protective
program.
Background
A total protective coatings program can be
defined as a systematic process of establishing:
• How effectively are structures and equipment
currently being protected?
• What actions and costs are currently required to
upgrade and/or maintain the desired levels of protec-
tion?
• What maintenance actions and costs can be ex-
pected in the next few years?
• Precisely what materials and methods should be
used for these maintenance actions?
• How can these actions be combined or scheduled to
reduce costs?
• Who should be responsible for each action?
• What coordination is needed with other scheduled
actions by the organization?
By utilizing a well planned and executed
protective coatings program, plant facilities can be
protected in the most economical manner. Health and
safety needs and worker morale will also be ad-
dressed. The total protective program can best be
utilized by a computer program that incorporates a
database containing:
• Initial designs of structures and equipment and their
subsequent modifications
• An initial detailed survey of conditions of structures,
equipment, and their coatings and scheduled (e.g.,
annually) reinspection to note (1) changes that have
occurred in the original construction and (2) present
conditions.
• Corrective actions to be taken for different types and
levels of deterioration
• Specific materials and methods to be used for these
actions
• Prioritizing these actions
• Scheduling these actions
• Requesting funding prior to actual need
The economics of corrosion control is
discussed in Reference 1. Specifying and managing
protective coating projects are described in
Reference 2.
Selling the Program to Management
All programs for long-term, economical
protection of plant facilities require continuing manage-
ment support. The presentation must convince man-
agement that systematic use of new engineered
materials and methods will result in much financial
reward, as compared to the present approach. It will
include the following important items:
• A review of the presently used coating and other
protective systems
• A review of past costs for protection of facilities by
coatings
• Proposed new technologies for reducing costs,
extending life of protection, meeting governmental
regulations, and protecting workers and property
• Aesthetics and associated effects on worker morale
and productivity
• A request for continuing management support and
budgeting to meet annual needs as determined from
periodic condition surveys
Management is more responsive to budgeting
for specific out-year requests for funding as deter-
mined from condition surveys and past experience
than merely allocating funds for use, as required.
Economic considerations must be stressed.
Design Facilities for Protection and
Maintenance
Ideally, programmed painting is initiated with a
new plant so that design of its structures and equip-
ment can be considered for both initial and mainte-
nance painting. Then, as modifications are made to
structures and equipment, they are designed to fit into
the program.
More often, a protective coatings program is
set up for existing facilities with different protective
designs and various degrees of deterioration. In such
cases, it is necessary to:
• Conduct a thorough survey of all structural and
equipment components to determine (1) their condi-
tions and the conditions of their coatings and (2) what
actions must be taken to bring them up to acceptable
conditions.
• Review the existing designs of structures and
equipment in the program to determine how they can
be modified to reduce deterioration and/or simplify
maintenance before initiation of the program.
490
The following structural designs should
be avoided:
• Incompatible materials/systems
• Contact of dissimilar metals
• Water traps
• Crevices
• Difficult-to coat components (bolted seams, sharp
edges, etc.)
• Inadequate access for maintenance
In new construction or modification of existing
construction, newer, alternative materials may be
available that will provide more effective protection
than more traditional materials. Some of the building
materials that may be used more effectively, with or
without coatings, than more traditional materials in
very corrosive or other unique environments include:
• Corrosion-resistant metals and platings
• Plastics
• Composites
• Ceramics
Also, new high-performance materials coating
systems are available to provide longer, more-
economical periods of protection. While they meet all
present and anticipated governmental requirements,
care must be exercised to ensure that they are com-
patible with existing coating systems when overcoating
is required.3
Identification of Existing Coating and
Other Corrosion Control Systems
Before initiating the protective coatings
program, all structures and equipment in the program,
as well as their components and corrosion protection
systems must be completely identified. Corrosion
protection systems may include coatings, corrosion-
resistant materials, cathodic protection, environmental
control, or other types of systems. In all cases, all
appropriate drawings, operating manuals, and specifi-
cations should be included in the total program
package.
It is essential to identify the generic type of the
finish coat of the existing coating system in order to
select a compatible maintenance coating to be applied
over it. If this information is not available from records,
identification by field sampling must be done.
The most precise method of identification of
the generic type of an organic finish coat is to submit a
small sample of the cleaned (washed and dried) finish
coat to a laboratory for infrared analysis of the binder.
The cleaned surface coating can be removed by light
sanding and analyzed in a potassium bromide disc.4
An even simpler sampling procedure was
reported at SSPC ‘96.5 The finish coat is lightly sanded
with a piece of silicon carbide sandpaper glued to a
wooden disc cut from a doweling. The disc is cut to fit
directly in a Fourier Transform infrared (FTIR) spectro-
photometer so that a diffuse reflectance spectrum can
be made. Because silicon carbide is transparent in
infrared light, it did not interfere with the coating
spectrum. Since organic coatings slowly oxidize in
sunlight, their spectra have an increased amount of
oxidation (e.g., carbonyl groups) as compared to the
same unexposed coatings.4
There are simple methods of chemical identifi-
cation of organic coating resins as described in
Reference 6. Identification of exterior epoxy coatings
can be verified by their heavy chalking.
Thermoplastic coatings can be distinguished
from thermosetting coatings by a simple methyl ethyl
ketone (MEK) rub test.5 Thermoplastic coatings are
soluble but thermosetting coatings are not. Alkyds and
other coatings that cure by chemical reaction of drying
oils with oxygen in the air are initially relatively soluble
in MEK but become more insoluble as they increase in
molecular weight by continuous cross-linking.
Besides establishing the identity of the finish
coat, testing must also establish whether the total
coating system contains lead or other toxic constitu-
ents.7 If these are present in significant quantity,
special containment, collection, and disposal proce-
dures may be required for generated toxic debris.
Selection of Coating Systems
Initial Coating System
Care must be taken to select the best available
coating system for each facility in an industrial plant. It
is wise to coat as many of the facilities as appropriate
with the same coating system to permit more economi-
cal future maintenance. The following factors should
be taken into account in selection of the initial coating
system:
Long-Term Performance in Specific Environment and
Service. Each environment in which coating protection
is desired is unique unto itself. Thus, coating systems
that have performed well in this environment before
491
should be considered for use again.
Long-Term Economics. Long-term economics is
always an important factor in coating selection.
Conformance to All Existing and Anticipated Govern-
mental Regulations. All coatings selected must meet
present government regulations for the intended use.
Also, all should meet scheduled or anticipated future
regulations such as those related to VOC content.
Present and Future Availability. The selected coating
system should not only be available at the present
time but also in the future, so that repairs can be made
to the system as it deteriorates. Availability may not
only be affected by governmental regulations but also
by availability of raw materials.
Ease of Application/Need for Skilled Applicator. It is
desirable to select a coating system that is relatively
easy to apply. With some newer coating (e.g., high
solids) and application (e.g., plural component)
systems, applicators with specialized training are
necessary.
Ease of Repair. Ease of repair is desired because
maintenance actions will be required as the system
deteriorates. Repairs are usually made with the same
coating system or a system of the same generic type
because they will be compatible with the initial system.
Field Assistance from Coating Manufacturer. It is wise
to select a coating system that is recommended for the
particular service with all coats from the same manu-
facturer. It is also wise to select a manufacturer who
provides field assistance in the application of a coating
system.
Later Overcoating
As stated previously, deteriorated coatings are
usually repaired with the initial or a similar compatible
system. One exception is the repair of systems with
inorganic zinc-rich primers. Organic zinc-rich primers
are normally used for repairs involving overcoating of
inorganic zinc-rich primer because inorganic zinc-rich
primers do not usually bond well to themselves or to
organic coatings.
Overcoats do not normally bond well to aged
thermosetting coatings because they are not softened
or penetrated by topcoat solvent. In such cases, the
recommendations of the coating manufacture should
be followed. Common recommendations include
sweep blasting the existing system and use of tie
coats.
It may be desirable to upgrade the perfor-
mance or resistance of an existing coating system with
a system that is normally incompatible. Universal
primers or tie coats can often be used for this purpose.
Periodic Inspection of Facilities
Structures
Each structure and piece of equipment in the
program should be inspected periodically (e.g, annu-
ally, as done by the military and some highway agen-
cies) by qualified personnel. Special items should be
inspected on a more frequent basis. Large structures
such as buildings should be broken down into smaller
areas (e.g., sides of buildings) for inspections. Some
buildings may require maintenance action only on the
side exposed to the most severe environment.
The periodic inspections should be performed
according to established procedures and recorded on
standard forms, so that the condition of each inspected
structure can be followed over the life of the facility
and can be compared to the condition of other struc-
tures in the facility. This will enable the corrective
actions to be prioritized and/or grouped regularly to
record current conditions. During periodic inspections,
all information pertinent to the facility owner/operator
should be recorded. In addition, an estimate should be
made as to when corrective actions should be taken.
All leaks and other deficiencies detected that require
immediate attention should be addressed first. Others
will be addressed according to priorities.
Protective Coatings and Substrates
During periodic inspections, the type and
extent of coating and substrate deterioration should be
determined. The extent of coating deterioration should
also be determined. This includes both the severity of
the deterioration and its distribution. It is often neces-
sary to define the amount of loose peeling paint in
order for specification writers to estimate the amount
of repair areas to be addressed. Loose peeling paint is
defined as any paint that is easily removed with a dull
putty knife.
If the distribution of coating deterioration is
492
localized, spot repairs may be adequate. If distribution
is extensive, then total removal and recoating may be
necessary. Standard block diagrams for estimating
coating deterioration on ships are described in Refer-
ence 8. They are usually adaptable to most fixed
structures.
During periodic inspections, the type and
extent of substrate deterioration (e.g., rusting) should
also be determined. Substrate deterioration is often
best defined through written commentary. However,
comparison with a visual standard such as SSPC-VIS
29/ASTM D 610 can be helpful in quantifying the extent
of rusting of coated surfaces. 10
Cathodic Protection Systems
All impressed-current cathodic protection
rectifiers should be checked monthly. All of these
voltage and current outputs should be recorded.
Structure-to-electrolyte potentials of both impressed-
current and galvanic cathodic protection systems
should be recorded at least annually, and all exposed
connections should be checked for tightness. Poten-
tials should be above –0.85 volts (with respect to a
copper/copper sulfate reference half-cell), but not
above –1.0 volt to prevent accelerated coating deterio-
ration. If this is not the case, corrective actions must
be taken.
Corrosion-Resistant Materials
The condition of special corrosion-resistant
materials should be recorded separately. Any coating
or other necessary remedial actions must be taken
separately from those for conventional steel.
Maintenance of Facilities
During each periodic inspection (which may be
annually or more frequently, if necessary) immediate
and future maintenance requirements should be noted.
These data will be used by the program manager to
arrange for procurement of necessary materials and
scheduling of necessary maintenance actions. The
program manager should group the similar mainte-
nance actions to be taken on different structures and
equipment and coordinate them to result in minimum
expense and down time. In the event of limited fund-
ing, prioritizing the work will ensure that the critical
repairs are made first.
As stated earlier, the program database will
contain recommended maintenance schedules and
standard procedures to correct deficiencies. These
schedules and procedures should be reviewed by the
corrosion engineer. Depending on the maintenance
requirements, SSPC Paint Application Guide No. 5
may be used as a guide for maintenance painting
procedures.11 However, in all cases, the procedures
should be reviewed by corrosion engineers or coating
specialists to determine what modifications may be
necessary to meet special requirements.
Protective Coatings
Maintenance painting is described in a
separate chapter.
Deteriorated Structural Components
Deteriorated components should be replaced
or rehabilitated before they become significant struc-
tural, operational, or safety problems. Delays in
replacement may result in more costly damage.
Management and Execution of Program
Whether maintenance work is accomplished
by in-house or contract personnel, or by a combination
of the two, the specification for the maintenance work
should be written or reviewed by a specialist available
in each of the different corrosion control method being
affected. Even small jobs require thorough planning,
thorough and accurate cost estimates, and develop-
ment of work progress schedules to complete the work
satisfactorily, on time, and within budget. Scheduling
and estimating can be simplified by the use of stan-
dard forms and charts. Scheduling must take into
account the work being done simultaneously by
other trades.
Summary
A total protective coatings program for indus-
trial facilities involves design, monitoring, and mainte-
nance of the facilities and protective systems. A
systematic process must be used to determine when
preventive actions are required, what actions are
required, and how those actions are to be performed
and coordinated. Cost comparisons are a vital part of
programmed corrosion control. Programmed corrosion
control has the following advantages:
• Life-cycle cost savings
• Long-term protection of valuable assets
• Reduction of operational down time
• Easier procurement of necessary funding
493
A total protective coatings program requires
that all structures and pieces of equipment and all
protective systems in the program to be inspected
periodically for condition. This includes protective
coatings and substrates, cathodic protection systems,
and corrosion-resistant materials. Programmed
corrosion control also calls for a maintenance plan. For
protective coatings, there are various levels of mainte-
nance. Maintenance procedures for cathodic protec-
tion systems and deteriorated components should also
be included.
When preparing a corrosion control program
for an existing facility, surveys of existing structures
and equipment are necessary to determine mainte-
nance requirements and any requirements for modifi-
cation of the design. Existing coatings and other
corrosion protection systems must also be identified.
References
1. Economics of Corrosion Control. In Corrosion and
Coatings; Drisko, Richard W. and Jenkins, James F.
SSPC: Pittsburgh, 1998.
2. C-2: Specifying and Managing Corrosion Projects;
SSPC: Pittsburgh, 2001.
3. SSPC-TU 3. Overcoating; SSPC: Pittsburgh, 1997.
4. Drisko, Richard W.; Crilly, Joseph B. Identification of
Weathered Paints by Infrared Spectroscopy. Materials
Performance, NACE: Houston, December 1972, pp
49-51.
5. Drisko, Richard W. Total Protective Coatings
Program. In Proceedings of SSPC ‘96.
6. Vind, Harold P.; Drisko, Richard W. Field Identifica-
tion of Weathered Paints. Materials Performance,
NACE: Houston, October 1973, pp 18-21.
7. Trimber, Kenneth A. Hazardous Waste: Testing,
Handling, Disposal, and Releases. In Industrial Lead
Removal Handbook; SSPC: Pittsburgh, 1991.
8. ASTM F 1130. Practice for Inspecting the Coating
System of a Ship; ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA.
9. SSPC-VIS 2. Standard Method of Evaluating
Degree of Rusting on Painted Steel Surfaces; SSPC:
Pittsburgh.
10. ASTM D 610. Standard Test Method for Evaluating
Degree of Rusting on Painted Steel Surfaces; ASTM:
West Conshohocken, PA.
11. SSPC Paint Application Guide No. 5. Guide to
Maintenance Painting Programs; Steel Structures
Painting Manual: Volume 2; Systems and Specifica-
tions, 7 th Edition; SSPC: Pittsburgh, 2000.
About the Authors

Dr. Richard W. Drisko

Dr. Richard W. Drisko has been the senior technical
advisor to SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings
since January 1995. Prior to this, he was employed for
over 40 years at the Naval Civil Engineering Labora-
tory, Port Hueneme, California, where he conducted
research, evaluation, and testing, and served as the
Navy’s center of expertise on coatings for shore
structures. He is a professional engineer in the state of
California, an SSPC certified protective coatings
specialist (PCS), and a NACE International certificated
corrosion specialist. Dr. Drisko received his BS, MS,
and PhD degrees from Stanford.

James F. Jenkins
James F. Jenkins retired in 1995 after 30 years of
service to the U.S. Navy in corrosion control for shore
and ocean-based facilities. Now a consultant, he is a
registered corrosion engineer in the state of California.
Mr. Jenkins received his BS degree in metallurgical
engineering from the University of Arizona.

494