Maintenance Painting Management...•Visibledeterioration(SSPC-VIS2) •Presenceoflead...

acifiCorp Energy (PacifiCorp), a division of PacifiCorp, provides 7,750megawatts of electricity every hour from 12 coal-, gas-, and geother-mal-fired generating plants in Utah and Wyoming. MidAmericanEnergy Holdings Company acquired PacifiCorp in 2006 and identified

coatings maintenance as a priority, both in terms of corrosion protectionand aesthetics. In response, PacifiCorp Energy’s Generation Engineering group

engaged the services of an independent coatings expert to assess the painted surfacesthroughout 10 of PacifiCorp’s 12 facilities to establish painting priorities, painting costestimates, and specifications for maintenance of the coatings.This article describes the consultant selection process, the field survey process, results

of the field surveys, and the next steps to be taken.

12 www.paintsquare.comJ P C L N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8

Pby Lon Udy, PacifiCorp Energy; and Kenneth A. Trimber and Kirk Wissmar, KTA-Tator, Inc.

Evaluation of Ten Power Generation FacilitiesMaintenance Painting Management:

pre-bid meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah,where the scope of work was present-ed in detail, and questions regardingthe project were openly discussed.Once the scope was understood, thefirms were given a tour of the GadsbyPlant, one of the ten facilities to be sur-veyed as part of the contract. The pur-pose of the tour was to make certainthat the entire scope of the project wasfully understood by all bidders.The firms were then required to

complete a small, representative sur-vey of two locations within Unit 1 ofthe plant (Figs. 2 and 3). The surveyshad to be comprehensive, with the dataentered into each firm’s respectivecomputer program. The surveysallowed PacifiCorp to see examples ofeach program’s capabilities and overallproduct, based on familiar surfaces andstructures.The survey results and other techni-

cal and financial information wereincorporated into proposals submitteda few weeks after the pre-bid meeting.PacifiCorp reviewed the proposals andarranged to visit the two short-listedfirms.The first day with each firm was

spent examining the capabilities of thefirm and interviewing key personnelwho would support the project. Theconsultants also presented their bidproposals and discussed in detail theirmaintenance painting management pro-grams.The second day with each short-list-

ed firm involved a tour of a facilitywhere each consultant’s proposed pro-gram was being used. The facility own-ers and PacifiCorp also held privatediscussions about the pros and cons ofthe consultants’ work and their pro-grams. The tour and discussionsallowed PacifiCorp to develop an unbi-ased opinion about the benefits andcapabilities of each firm and to deter-

cations had to begin in June 2007 andbe completed by the end of November2007. Because of the amount of workrequired, the aggressive schedule, andthe tremendous investment beingmade in money and personnel,PacifiCorp made it clear from thebeginning that for the project to suc-ceed, the power company and the con-sultant had to work together as part-ners in every aspect of the project toaddress issues and concerns as soon asthey were recognized and to resolvethem collectively.

Consultant Selection ProcessBecause of the financial outlay and theneed to do the work on a “time andmaterials” basis—due to a number ofunknowns that could affect the com-pletion of the surveys—PacifiCorpdeveloped a unique, multi-phase con-sultant selection process. The firstphase involved identifying firms thatPacifiCorp thought would be capableof completing the project. The list wasdeveloped by researching informationon the Internet. The candidate firms(bidders) were required to attend a

Goals of the Maintenance Painting ProgramIn 2007, after deciding to hire a con-sultant to help establish a five-yearmaintenance painting program for tenof PacifiCorp’s facilities, the energycompany set several goals for the pro-gram (Fig. 1).The program had to clearly define

painting needs for all structures ineach facility, from the power house andcoal handling areas to warehouses andadministrative offices. The only areasexcluded from the program at eachplant site were the substations andstructures related to transmission anddistribution. The five-year programhad to identify the surfaces to be paint-ed each year, give cost estimates forconducting the work, provide compre-hensive specifications for surfacepreparation and coating application,and address the controls requiredwhen disturbing lead-based paint.Painting priorities were based on con-tinued service life of the operatingequipment and structures).One significant challenge was added

to the project: work on the surveys,reports, recommendations, and specifi-

J P C L N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8 13www.paintsquare.com

Fig. 1 (Facing page, below): Three of the 10 PacifiCorp facilities included in the survey. The pilot study was donein the Naughton plant, on the lower right. Photos courtesy of the authorsFig. 2 (Facing page, top): A sample survey was conducted as part of the consultant selection process.Sample survey, Unit 1 ID fan, duct, and surrounding steel

Fig. 3: Sample survey, Unit 1 boiler, feed pumps, and surrounding steel

mine whether their proposed pro-grams would completely addressPacifiCorp’s requirements.After the proposal presentations

and site tours, PacifiCorp’s projectteam collaborated to evaluate eachconsultant’s proposal and sampleassessment. From this process, thecompany selected a consultant andawarded a contract.

Pilot StudyThe aggressive schedule for completingthe surveys and coatings recommenda-tions for the ten plants created severalunique challenges. First, there aremany ways to subdivide a facility forthe collection of coating condition data.Any logical approach can be used toconduct a survey at a single facility.However, because this work involvedten facilities, it was important to devel-op a plan that was consistent with themanner in which PacifiCorp views thefacilities and that would be acceptablefleet-wide. Due to the schedule, theplan had to be established before theconsultant had the opportunity to visiteach facility.Second, the consultant needed to

conduct surveys in as many as fourplants simultaneously; therefore, itwas not possible to use the sameinspection crew at every location.Steps had to be taken to assure thatthe data collected at each facility wasconsistent and that the terminologywas standardized as much as possible.Third, it was clear that there would

not be time to change the surveyprocess once PacifiCorp reviewed thefirst report because surveys in otherfacilities would be underway or evencompleted before the initial reviewswere finished.Fourth, the support required from

PacifiCorp, both its corporate officeand the facilities, had to be determinedbefore beginning each survey, as did ameans for collecting it. The supportincluded drawings of each facility and

consultant’s project management teammet with PacifiCorp to present the pilotresults and to reach an agreement onthe process that would be used for theremaining surveys, which startedimmediately thereafter.

Field Survey ProcessTo control the field survey process, theconsultant developed a site manual thatdefined the survey process and con-tained administrative and technicalprocedures. The manual assured thatthe teams followed a standard operat-ing procedure at each facility and thatcommunication and coordination withPacifiCorp were standardized acrossthe fleet.The field survey required that each

specific piece of equipment and associ-

available painting histories, piping andstructure color codes, information onthe prior use of lead paint, and otherproject-specific information.Fifth, estimates of the cost and time

to complete the entire project, as wellas schedules for visiting all ten facilities,had to be established within the firstfew weeks following the award of thecontract.Because of the challenges above and

other concerns, PacifiCorp and theselected consultant agreed that a pilotsurvey should be conducted at one ofthe facilities to resolve questions andconcerns before starting work in multi-ple facilities simultaneously. The deci-sion proved to be invaluable to the suc-cess of the project.The Naughton plant (Fig. 1), located

south of Kemmerer, Wyoming, wasselected for the pilot study. ThePacifiCorp project team participating inthe pilot included the project manage-ment team from corporate (GenerationEngineering) and the supervisory staffof the Naughton plant. The consultantteam consisted of corporate projectmanagement, four consultant surveyteam leaders, and a data entry supervi-sor from the consultant’s home office.The four consultant team leaders wouldbe in charge of data collection at theother facilities once the pilot programwas completed.The consultant’s corporate project

management team led the pilot study toassure that a uniform method for subdi-viding the facilities was developed, toestablish appropriate terminology, todevelop consistency in data collection,to streamline the data entry process, toidentify PacifiCorp support needs, andto work out other project logistics.Based on the time required to completethe pilot survey and on the size of thepilot facility relative to the other nineplants, PacifiCorp worked with the con-sultant to develop a schedule for con-ducting the remaining surveys. Twoweeks after completion of the pilot, the


Fig. 4: The survey required the identification of allpainted components (structural steel, equipment,

piping, etc.) throughout each facility.

ated process systems be identified andassessed together with structural steel,walkways, and other structures (Fig. 4and box on p. 16). Essentially, all paint-ed surfaces (primarily steel atPacifiCorp’s direction) were included(Fig. 5). For each item inventoried, thetotal painted surface area was estimat-ed (Fig. 6). The consultant had devel-oped a unique rating scale and used itto assess the overall amount of visibledeterioration on each item. The scale is

based on SSPC-VIS 2, “StandardMethod for Evaluating Rusting onPainted Steel Surfaces.” The percentageof deterioration is typically linked to amaintenance strategy.Although the consultant developed

the unique rating system, the mainte-nance strategies (no action, localizedtouchup, full overcoating, or completeremoval/replacement of the coating)based on the percentage of deteriora-tion are generally consistent with therecommendations found in SSPC-TU 3,“Overcoating.” The general serviceenvironment was categorized; tempera-tures were measured for high tempera-ture equipment; and accessibility fac-tors were assigned to each component.The accessibility factor is a multiplierassigned to the base square foot price


Fig. 5: The field survey process was largely focusedon steel, at PacifiCorp’s direction.

Fig. 6: Surface area is required for the cost analysisbecause the various maintenance strategies are

assigned a unique cost per square foot.

Clickour

Readere-Card

atpaintsquare.com/ric

analysis of the data. For example, thecomputer program might recommendlocalized touchup to address corrosionprotection. While a spotty appearanceis not objectionable in many cases, it isnot acceptable in every instance.Accordingly, PacifiCorp establishedguidelines for overriding the touchuprecommendations and reassigning anovercoating maintenance strategy.Likewise, the maintenance recommen-dations needed to be established withconsideration for the remaining life ofthe asset, the timing of overhauls, andother site-specific issues that had to beconveyed to the consultant.The communication among all parties

was effective throughout the project,enabling the two companies to trulypartner and work as a team. All issuesand concerns were addressed immedi-ately, assuring that the quality of work,costs, and schedule were not affected.Such teamwork was also instrumentalto the success of the project.

Painting SpecificationsThe contract also required the develop-ment of painting specifications toaddress the aspects of surface prepara-tion and coating application required toachieve long-lasting coating system per-

to account for additional costs associ-ated with rigging or complexity. Digitalphotographs were taken and stored inthe computer program with the fielddata.The existing coating type was docu-

mented when known by the facility,but a laboratory analysis to determinethe generic coating type was notincluded in the initial surveys. Thepresence or absence of lead-basedpaint on each component was estab-lished, based on the facility’s paintinghistory and random spot checks usingfield lead detection swabs; however, alaboratory analysis was not includedduring the initial survey stage.Laboratory analysis for lead will beconducted as necessary before award-ing the painting application contracts,and appropriate coating thickness andadhesion tests will be completed. Thethickness/adhesion testing will be per-formed on those surfaces scheduled forovercoating to confirm that the integri-ty of the existing coating is adequate toreceive an overcoat.

Quality Control and CommunicationBecause of the amount of work beingundertaken simultaneously, the consis-tency and accuracy of data collection,data entry, and data analysis were keyfactors that had to be controlledthroughout the process. The necessarylevel of control was achieved throughmultiple steps and checks. First, thepilot survey was performed with theconsultant’s project manager and eachof the team leaders to develop andensure a consistent survey format. Thesurveys at the facilities followed thesite manual and were managed by oneof the consultant team leaders. A sur-vey technician assisted each teamleader. Having team leaders conductthe pilot was a critical step in assuringthe consistency of the data collected inthe remaining nine facilities.As a second step, the consultant’s

project manager spent a few days with

each team at the start up of their firstfacilities, providing further assurancethat consistency would be achieved.A third check occurred at the time

of data entry. Each day, the data wastransferred electronically to the dataentry supervisor (who had also partici-pated in the pilot) in the consultant’shome office, where the data wasreviewed for consistency before beingforwarded to data entry personnel. Atthe same time, the corporate projectmanager provided a quality controlfunction by examining the data for rea-sonableness and resolving questionswith the field teams. After the datawas entered, the data entry supervisorspot-checked the entries.As a further step to address quality

and assure a high level of communica-tion, PacifiCorp facilitated weekly pro-ject status meetings through confer-ence calls each Monday (Fig. 7).PacifiCorp’s project management team,


Minimum Data Collected for Each Item

• Substrate type

• Surface area

• Coating type

• Visible deterioration (SSPC-VIS 2)

• Presence of lead

• Service environment

• Temperatures (for high temperature items)

• Accessibility factors

Additional Data Collected priorto Specifying Painting Work

• Coating thickness

• Coating adhesion

• Additional lead tests as needed

Fig. 7: One of the progress meetings heldevery Monday

each of the consultant team leaders,consultant project management, thedata entry supervisor, and accountingpersonnel participated in the confer-ence calls. Informal communicationbetween PacifiCorp and the consul-tant’s management also occurred daily.In addition to trips by consultant

project management to PacifiCorpheadquarters and to various facilitiesduring the project, PacifiCorp projectmanagement visited the consultantwhen the field data was first beingrefined to establish guidelines for the


formance. Master corporate specifica-tions were developed, addressingrequirements from cleaning to mixingthe coating, application, and film conti-nuity.Paint system specifications, each

three or four pages in length, wereattached to the master specification.The paint system specifications provid-ed cleaning and painting requirementsthat were unique to the system (e.g.,degree of surface preparation required,restrictions on ambient conditions,coating thickness, and product brandnames). This approach providesPacifiCorp with the flexibility to easilyadd or delete systems in the future.Separate tables were developed toidentify the appropriate system forpainted surfaces in each environment.

Delivering the DataThe consultant offered to license thecomputer program to PacifiCorp, whichwould allow each facility, as well as cor-porate, to adjust and analyze the data.However, for at least the first year,PacifiCorp decided that such analysiswas best left to experienced personnelbecause no one within PacifiCorp wasspecifically focusing on protective coat-ings. Accordingly, rather than deliveringthe program or hard copies of program-specific documents, the consultantexported the data, after analysis, to amore widely used and accepted spread-sheet. PacifiCorp can use the spread-sheet to examine key data downloadedfrom the program.All items identified in each subdivi-

sion of each facility were listed. The fol-lowing data was provided for eachitem: the condition of the coating onthe item, the painted surface area ofthe item, the type of substrate involved(e.g., steel or concrete), whether or notlead was present in the paint, the main-tenance painting strategy recommend-ed over a five-year period (touchup,overcoat, remove/replace, or do noth-ing), the future cost for painting each

Clickour

Readere-Card


http://www.chlor-rid.com

year (budgetary estimate), net presentvalue, and any unique comments aboutthe item. Representative photographsof the items were also included.The spreadsheets were appended to

the painting recommendations, whichwere summarized in a written reporttogether with total cost estimates forthe work required each year over afive-year period. Graphics illustratedthe comparative condition of variousareas within each facility, as well as thecomposite condition for each facility

(Figs. 8 and 9).The reports and comparative analy-

sis enable PacifiCorp to quickly deter-mine the allocation of maintenancepainting funds, both in terms of onefacility versus another and specificareas within each facility. In short, thereports and recommendations are usedby PacifiCorp to manage overall paint-ing needs fleet-wide for years to come.

Next StepsBefore the five-year maintenance paint-

ing program began at the facilities, aseries of meetings were held withPacifiCorp’s owners and key facilitypersonnel. The meetings outlined theresults of the surveys and the mainte-nance painting recommendations forthe next five years. The first meetingwas held in March 2008 and was fol-lowed by the site-specific reviews ofthe new maintenance painting pro-grams a few months thereafter. Theprogram recommendations and specifi-cations have been successfully used fora few projects in 2008.With the assistance of the consul-

tant, PacifiCorp also developed a quali-fied contractors list. PacifiCorp made adecision that beginning in 2009, con-tractors doing painting work inPacifiCorp facilities will have to beSSPC-QP 1-and QP 2-certified. A longlist of contractors was reduced to ashort list based on a review of initialsubmittal packages. Select firms werethen invited to participate in inter-views. For the interviews, PacifiCorprequired the bidding contractors tohave a management representative, aproject superintendent, and a QCinspector. After an initial presentationby the company, specific questionswere presented to each representative,and only that representative was per-mitted to respond. This means of inter-viewing proved to be very effective. Itshowed how key field staff respond tosituations, rather than only hearingfrom corporate management or busi-ness development. The list of contrac-tors was reduced further as a result ofthe interviews, and only the selectedgroup will be invited to bid onPacifiCorp painting projects for thenext three years. The first project at aPacifiCorp facility using the qualifiedcontractor list will be performed at theend of 2008.As painting work at the various

facilities is completed, the data in theprogram will be updated to remain cur-rent. At the same time, cost adjust-


F(Very Poor)

9%

C(Poor)

21%

B(Mod.)

35%

A(Good)

35%

NV

0%NP

0%

FACILITY CONDITION

F

C-

C

C+

B-

B

B+

A-

A

A+

F%

C%

B%

A%

NV/NP%

Ave

rage

Con

ditio

n

Unit 1Unit 3

Unit 2Water Treat Bldg

T-Chlor Bldg

Sample House 2

Coal Tunnel

Lube Oil Bldg

Mine Belt

Stlg Basin Pump House

COATING PERFORMANCE

Fig. 8: Pie chart showing the percentage of coatings in good, moderate,and poor condition throughout an entire facility

Fig. 9: Bar charts showing the condition of the coatings in each area of the plant. Similar bar charts areprovided to compare the overall condition of the coatings among the 10 plants.

Areas

Ave

rag

eC

on

dit

ion


ments for more accurate budgets andrevisions to the existing data will bemade as necessary.In a few years, the surveys may be

repeated to update the accuracy of theprojections. Since the initial surveysrepresent a snapshot in time, it is possi-ble that a surface painted “yesterday”appeared to be in excellent condition atthe time of the survey, regardless of thequality of the underlying preparationor integrity of the pre-existing coating.As a result, the program will projectthat maintenance work is not requiredfor many years. However, by quicklyreexamining the surfaces after a fewyears, such conditions will be revealed,and the data populating the programwill become more reliable. Repeatingthe surveys will take a fraction of thetime required for the initial surveysbecause key data has already been col-lected.The second round of surveys also

helps to refine the projected rates ofcoating deterioration for each coatingsystem in each service environment,with the default coating deteriorationcurves that are an integral part of thecomputer program, adjusted asrequired.The goal is to continue following the

recommendations in the program untilthe coatings throughout all facilities areupgraded to the point at which onlyminimal routine touchup is required toeffectively protect the assets from cor-rosion and to enhance the aesthetics ofthe PacifiCorp Thermal Generatingfleet.

ConclusionsDuring 2007, PacifiCorp’s ownersdetermined that greater emphasisshould be placed on protecting corpo-rate assets and improving aesthetics.Rather than engineer the maintenancepainting program through internalresources alone, PacifiCorp solicitedindependent expertise to project thepainting needs in 10 of 12 power gener-

Clickour

Readere-Card


Clickour

Readere-Card


http://www.fischer-technology.comhttp://www.blastox.com

located in the Seattle, Washington area. Following

his years of service in the construction and main-

tenance industry, he “jumped ship” to join the

power generation industry, where he has been a

part of engineering and project management with

PacifiCorp for the past 16 years, both at the

power plants and at the corporate level.

Currently, he is the department manager for a

project management group that supports

PacifiCorp Energy’s fleet of thermal generation

plants located in Utah and Wyoming.

Kenneth A. Trimber is the president of KTA-

Tator, Inc. (Pittsburgh, PA). He holds a BS from

Indiana University of Pennsylvania, is a NACE-

certified Coatings Inspector, is an SSPC

Protective Coatings Specialist, is certified at a

Level III coating inspection capability in accor-

dance with ANSI N45.2.6, and is certified as a

Nuclear Coatings Specialist by the NBR. Mr.

Trimber has more than 30 years of experience

in the industrial painting field, is a past presi-

dent of the SSPC, chairman of the Surface

Clic

kou

rRe

ader

e-Ca

rdat

pain

tsqu

are.

com

/ric


ating facilities over a five-year period,together with the development of spec-ifications, coating material selection,and budgetary estimates for the recom-mended work. A unique consultantselection process was developed byPacifiCorp to evaluate the suitability ofthe candidate firms and their programsto deliver the desired results. Also, apainting contractor selection processwas undertaken in order to develop aqualified contractor list for biddingprojects for at least the next 3 years.The data collection phase was

deemed to be a strong success by allparties involved. All painted compo-nents were examined and entered intoa powerful computer program thatissued specific recommendations andcost estimates for a new five-yearpainting plan. PacifiCorp is confidentthat it now has the information neces-sary to make informed maintenance

painting decisions and, with the aid ofthe computer program, it will be ableto evaluate the cost/benefit of nearlyany maintenance painting scenario thatmight be considered in the future.

Lon C. Udy is the manager for PacifiCorp

Energy’s Project Management Department in its

Generation Engineering organization located in

Salt Lake City, Utah. He holds a BS in construc-

tion management from Washington State

University. Mr. Udy has over 27 years of experi-

ence in the project management profession for

the construction industry, power plant mainte-

nance services, and power generation industry.

He began his career as

a designer in the

nuclear industry and

then worked as a con-

struction manager for a

construction manage-

ment and power plant

maintenance firm

http://www.highland-international.com

WE KNOW...

MARINECOATINGS

WE KNOW. . . MARINE WE KNOW. . . MARINE WE KNOW. . . MARINEWE KNO NEMARI...WO NEMARI...WWE KNO WE KNO NEMARI...WO

PPG Protective and Marine Coatings (PMC) develops and distributes marine products and coating

systems to protect customer assets. In partnership with industry experts and customers, PMC’s

scientists work tirelessly to create new innovative coatings and optimize coating systems which

meet and exceed the needs and specifications of the marine business.

The result is a highly innovative and competitive set of products for inland and deepwater marine.

Contact a PMC specialist or visit PPGPMC.com for more information.

www.ppgpmc.com

OUR SOLUTIONS

PPG Protective and Marine Coatings

protects customer assets in some

of the world’s most demanding

conditions and environments. Our

proven products and technologies

are used to safeguard a wide variety

of constructions: from marine new-

building and vessel maintenance &

repair to offshore and FPSO, from

civil infrastructure and power to

petrochemical.

ne avitcetorG PPP GPP

O

sgnitaoe Cnirad Mn s (gnitaoe Cnirad Mne avitcetorG P

OUR SOLUTIONS

as metubirtsid dns apoleve) dCMP(

ONS

gnitaod cns atcudore pnira

erohsffo or tiaper

ssed vng anidliub

:snoitcurtsnof co

gefao sd tese ura

s atcudorn pevorp

nd ens anoitidnoc

os md’lroe whf to

emotsus ctcetorp

ne avitcetorG PPP

noC

ehT

eem

eics

tsys

GPP

mor, fOSd FPna

e &cnanetnial mes

-wee nniram morf

yteirae vdid a wrau

seigolonhced tna

ru. Ostnemnorivn

gnidnamet ds

emon ss itessr ae

sgnitaoe Cnirad Mn

PGPt Pisir vt osilaicepC sMt a Pcatn

dne avitavonny ilhgis a ht ilusee r

icepd sns adeee nhd teecxd ent ae

ee ntaero cy tlsselerik tros wtsitne

.stessr aemotsut ccetoro ps tmet

s (gnitaoe Cnirad Mne avitcetorG P

.noitamrofne iror mom foc.CMP

lnr ios ftcudorf pt oee svititepmoc

.ssenisue bnirae mhf ts onoitacfii

zimitpd ons agnitaoe cvitavonnw ie

epxy ertsudnh itip wihsrentran pI

as metubirtsid dns apoleve) dCMP(

.enirar metawpeed dnd ana

hcihs wmetsyg snitaoe cz

s’CM, Psremotsud cns atr

gnitaod cns atcudore pnira

.alcimehocrtpe

erutcurtsarfnl iivic or tewod pne a

mco.mcpgpp.www

Click our Reader e-Card at paintsquare.com/ric

P

http://www.ppgpmc.com


FindMoreJobs to BidPaint BidTracker www.paintsquare.com1-800-837-8303

Preparation

Committee, chairman

of the Visual

Standards Committee,

and chairman of the

Task Group on

Containment. He is

also past chairman of

ASTM D1 on Paints

and Related Coatings, Materials, and

Applications. Mr. Trimber wrote The Industrial

Lead Paint Removal Handbook, and co-

authored Volume 2 of the handbook, Project

Design. He was named Coatings Specialist of

the Decade at the SSPC National Conference

in 1990 and is also a past technical editor of

the Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings.

Mr. Trimber is a principal instructor for SSPC’s

“Supervisor/Competent Person for Deleading

Projects Course (C-3)” and the NHI/FHWA

courses, “Bridge Coatings Inspection” and

“Hazardous Bridge Coatings: Design and

Management of Maintenance and Removal

Operations.”

Kirk Wissmar is the surveys department super-

visor at KTA-Tator. Mr. Wissmar holds a BS in

civil engineering from the West Virginia

University Institute of Technology, holds EIT in

the state of West

Virginia, and is a

NACE Coatings

Inspector Level

1–Certified. Mr.

Wissmar was instru-

mental in the devel-

opment and imple-

mentation of KTA’s

computerized coating assessment software

program. In addition to overseeing survey work

performed by other professional staff, Mr.

Wissmar provides coating condition assess-

ment and engineering services on projects

involving bridges, storage tanks, power gener-

ation facilities, and other industrial structures.

To find more JPCL articles on power

plants and condition surveys, go to

www. paintsquare.com and search

“Publications/Library.”

Clic

kou

rRe

ader

e-Ca

rdat

pain

tsqu

are.

com

/ric

Clic

kou

rRe

ader

e-Ca

rdat

pain

tsqu

are.

com

/ric

http://www.wiwa.com

As a global leader in specialtychemicals, Evonik-Degussa delivershigh-performance, innovative colorsolutions. With the recent introductionof our environmentally-inspiredColortrend® 808 no-VOC colorants,we continue to meet market expectations.

Whether you are tinting water-based,solvent, no-VOC or high-performancecoatings, our color reproducibility,consistency, and color systemsexpertise will exceed your “just-in-time” business needs!

Colortrend® and Chroma-Chem®

……..the possibilities are endless!

The Future of Color...Today!

Architectural and Industrial Colorants

For more information, please contactyour local Evonik Degussa account manager or the Colorants customerservice department at 800-367-4857. ww.smartformulating.com

The Future of Color…Today!™

Click our Reader e-Card at paintsquare.com/ric
http://www.smartformulating.com

Maintenance Painting Management...•Visibledeterioration(SSPC-VIS2) •Presenceoflead...

Documents

Transcript of Maintenance Painting Management...•Visibledeterioration(SSPC-VIS2) •Presenceoflead...