InspectThis_Fall2012

1 InspectThis! Fall 2012

Supplement to CoatingsPro Magazine FALL 2012

IN THIS ISSUE...

From the Chairman ........................................... 1

Computer Software Program Manages

Coating Inspection Gauge Readings .... 2

Rountable Q&A:

Challenges in Managing the

Maintenance of Protective Coatings

on Critical Assets ......................................... 4

Get This! .................................................................. 8

NACE Coatings Course Schedule.............. 9

Coatings Resources .........................................10

Keeping up with the StandardsBy Malcolm McNeil, CIP Committee Chair

As inspectors we rely on specifi-cations to pro-

vide us with guidelines for ou r i n sp e c t ion t a s k s . We l e a r n e d early on in NACE In-ternat iona l Coat ing I nspec tor Prog ra m

(CIP) Level 1 that it is the inspector’s responsibility to “obtain, read, and un-derstand” the specification. We spend a lot of time studying the specification before the pre-job conference so that we are prepared to ask questions and get clarifications before beginning a project. If we neglect to give this ini-tial step the attention it demands, our inspection process is going to be very difficult, and probably ineffective.

Good specification writers use the standards that are available to supple-ment their specifications. These stan-dards, which are available from orga-nizat ions such as NACE , ASTM, SSPC, AWWA, ISO, and many others, are a great help in providing guide-lines for almost every facet of a coat-

ings project. They are invaluable to all members of the team working on any given coatings project.

As inspectors it is also our responsi-bility to “obtain, read, and understand” the referenced standards along with the specification. When a standard is ref-erenced and becomes part of the con-tractual agreement, the various tasks on the project are governed by the referenced standards. Our work as inspectors is governed by the refer-enced standards as well. Therefore, it is our responsibility to be totally famil-iar with all details of the standards. Standards are reconfirmed or revised normally on a f ive-year cycle. This means that the various standards that we work with commonly may change. A good example is the recent with-drawal of NACE No. 5/SSPC SP-12, “Surface Preparation and Cleaning of Steel and Other Hard Materials by High- and Ultrahigh-Pressure Water Jetting Prior to Recoating,” and the replacement thereof. This one standard has now been replaced by four separate standards. Another example is SSPC

PA-2, “Measurement of Dry Coating Thick ness with Magnet ic Gages,” which is under revision again.

If we, as inspectors, are to stay up to date and knowledgeable in our field, we must be constantly on the lookout for new standards and for changes to cur-rent standards. This, along with many other responsibilities, goes with the territory of being a NACE-certified Coating Inspector. We are fortunate that we have the opportunity to do so. !

If we neglect to give this initial step the attention it demands, our inspection

process is going to be very difficult, and probably ineffective.


When overseeing the inspection of the lining on pipe seg-ments that were to be used to

construct a high-temperature, produced-water pipeline, NACE International mem-ber Dave Wells, a NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector with Bay Area Coatings Consultants (Bakersfield, California), dis-covered problems with the shop-applied lining: the dry film thickness (DFT) on a portion of the pipe segments did not meet the thicknesses specified in the product data sheet, and there were flaws in the lining that caused coating discontinui-ties. Because he used digital gauges and data management software to collect and manage the inspection data, Wells was able to supply comprehensive documenta-tion that supported the inspection results during an ensuing arbitration.

The three-week long project involved the inspection of more than 1,200 seg-ments of new, 30-ft (9-m) long, 12-in (305-mm) diameter steel pipe with a fac-tory-applied, 100% solids, plural-compo-nent epoxy lining between 5 and 10 mils thick. To conduct the pipe lining inspec-tion, Wells and his inspection team used digital coating thickness gauges, digital dew point meters, and a data management computer software program recently in-troduced by Elcometer, Inc. (Rochester Hills, Michigan). Digital coating thickness gauges use electromagnetic induction to measure the thickness of non-magnetic coatings on magnetic substrates such as steel and the eddy current principle for measuring the thickness of non-conduc-tive coatings on non-ferrous metal sub-strates. The dew point meter measures and records all relevant climatic factors, such as air temperature, relative humidity, sur-face temperature, and dew point tem-perature, to determine if atmospheric conditions are suitable for painting. The data management program uploads and stores the inspection readings directly from compatible digital gauges. It has the capability to combine readings from dif-

ferent batches or gauges into one compre-hensive inspection file; perform mathe-matical calculations such as averages and percentages; and generate a range of standard reports that can be printed, e-mailed, or exported to spreadsheets.

Before measuring the DFT of the pipe segment linings, Wells and his team pro-grammed their digital coating thickness gauges with the high and low DFT limits as specified on the coating product data sheet. The inspection team also used digital dew point meters to record the climatic conditions while the DFT mea-surements were taken.

Using a dew point meter as a data log-ger, temperatures and humidity were continually monitored through time- and date-stamped measurements taken auto-matically every minute during the inspec-tion of each pipe segment lining. Wells explains that DFT readings, if taken when the ambient air temperature is too high, may be considered inaccurate because of pipe expansion. Similarly, DFT readings may be considered inaccurate if the ambi-ent air temperature is too low and the pipe has contracted. Monitoring and recording

climatic conditions provides accurate documentation of the temperature while measuring DFT, he adds.

Following the guidelines in SSPC-PA 2,1 10 DFT readings were taken for each pipe segment lining, which included readings at various circumferential points located along the length of the pipe. These time- and date-stamped readings were stored in the digital gauge and organized into batches—the coating thickness gauge Wells uses can store up to 150,000 readings in 2,500 batches—with each batch comprising the 10 readings taken for one pipe segment.

The readings from both the coating thickness gauges and the dew point me-ters were uploaded into the data manage-ment software program using Bluetooth† wireless technology, although the digital gauges are able to upload data to the computer program through a USB cable. The data management program also has the capability to upload and store inspec-tion readings taken with other digital gauges that are compatible with the soft-ware, which include surface profile gauges that record the peak-to-valley height on blast-cleaned surfaces, and

Computer Software Program Manages Coating Inspection Gauge Readings By Kathy Riggs Larsen, MP Associate Editor

A coating inspector uses a digital coating thickness gauge to measure the thickness of the lining on a pipe sample. Photo courtesy of Dave Wells, Bay Area Coatings Consultants.

Fall 2012 InspectThis! 3

late temperature readings with DFT read-ings taken at the same time during the lining inspections. The data management software then organized the data into a report that Wells was able to print and present to his client. “This equipment helps a coating inspector do his job more efficiently,” he says.

For this particular inspection job, the inspection results indicated that the lin-ing on ~85% of the pipe segments did not meet the data sheet specifications for ei-ther DFT or holidays, and the coating project ended up in arbitration. Because Wells and his team used the data manage-

gauges that measure the thickness of steel. However, those types of gauges were not used for this inspection job.

For each pipe segment, the data man-agement software program calculated the average DFT of the pipe lining based on the 10 DFT readings, as well as the per-centages of readings that fell above and below the DFT limits. The average DFT is used to provide an indication as to whether or not the applied coating meets the manufacturer’s product data sheet requirements for mil thickness. “If the average DFT fell either above or below the DFT limits as specified on the product data sheet, the entire pipe segment failed the inspection,” Wells says.

Because the pipe linings were also tested using holiday detectors, the average DFT was also used to set the lower and upper voltage limits on the holiday detectors as specified by NACE SP0188,2 Wells explains, adding that holiday detectors use an electri-cal current to detect pits, holes, and other flaws in a coating or lining, and accurate voltage limits are crucial for conducting valid tests without damaging the coating. For this project, the data sheet called for the lining to be 100% holiday free.

Overall, more than 12,000 DFT read-ings were uploaded and processed by the software, a time-consuming task that is typically done manually by the coating inspectors, Wells says. Even when digital gauges are used and readings are stored in the gauge, without the data manage-ment software the coating inspectors would need to calculate DFT averages and out-of-limit percentages by hand. Not only does the data management software save time, it also eliminates the possibil-ity of human error when recording mea-surements and making calculations, which is key if the results of the coating inspection should ever come into ques-tion. “There’s no human manipulation of the data at all,” Wells emphasizes. “Once the gauges take the readings and upload them to the software, the data fields in the report are filled in automatically. The only thing the user can do is rename the batches, set the high and low limits, and add notes, comments, and photos.”

When uploading the data stored in the digital dew point meter into the data management software, Wells was able to add those readings into the data file that contained the DFT readings, and corre-

ment software to upload the readings directly from the gauges, perform the mathematical calculations, and generate the inspection reports, the inspection results were difficult to dispute. !

† Trade name.

References1 SSPC-PA 2, “Procedure for Determin-

ing Conformance to Dry Coating Thickness Requirements” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

2 NACE SP0188-2006, “Discontinuity (Holiday) Testing of New Protective Coat-ings on Conductive Substrates” (Houston, TX: NACE International, 2006).

a SPYfor

For more details on SPY® products and our complete line of SPY® Holiday Detection Equipment visit our website @ www.picltd.com.

PIPELINE INSPECTION COMPANY, LTD. PH: (713) 681-5837 • FAX: (713) 681-4838

SPY® Model 780, 785 and 790Portable Holiday Detectors• New ergonomic design

• Pipe coating inspections up to 60”

• Extremely durable

• Infinite voltage setting on the fly

Compact,lightweightwet sponge

holidaydetectors

Reliable continuous inspectionson the assembly line

every missionInspect Any Metal Surface Coating

For pipes, tanks or any coated contoured surface in the field or inside your manufacturingfacility, we simplify coating integrity testing

with our full line of SPY® portable and permanent Holiday Detectors.

SPY® Wet Sponge PortableHoliday Detectors• No belts, lightweight, fast set up

• Sponge roller speeds large flatsurface area inspections

• Interchangeable flat or roller sponge

SPY® In-Plant Holiday Detector Systems• Custom designed to streamline

manufacturing

• From pipecoating inspections to large flat surfaces

EveryMission 1/18/07 9:47 PM Page 1


Using a coating as a barrier be-tween a corrosive environment and a material to be protected is

arguably the most widely used method of corrosion control for metals and other substrates. However, successfully managing the maintenance of coated assets does have challenges. To better understand how coatings management can impact the longevity and reliability of coated assets, Materials Performance magazine asked several NACE Inter-national members to comment on the challenges associated with managing assets with protective coatings. Panel-ists are Robert Boswell, Gary Cheung, Lucas Clark, Kat Coronado, Chuck Fite, D. Terry Greenfield, Egil Lillerovde, and Jennifer Van Den Driessche.

MP: How are assets with protec-t ive coat i ngs t y pic a l ly

managed in your industry?Fite: The management of assets varies

depending on several factors. These fac-tors include the industry, the location of the industry, and the size of the owner. Larger owners will typically have a group that facilitates asset management for the company in conjunction with a local facil-ity group. Smaller owners may not have the funds to have a corporate group and rely totally on the local facility group to manage their assets.

Coronado: Assets are typically han-dled differently from one owner to an-other. The majority respond to input

from production or maintenance/facil-ity personnel when there is an obvious problem such as a leak or equipment breakdown. Many of the larger asset owners are proactive in their mainte-nance planning.

Boswell: This is handled differently depending upon the city, utility district, or private water supply company. Large cities and metropolitan areas generally will rely on the services of professional groups to provide them with recom-mendations on how to manage their assets and protective coatings. Small

utility districts often will have a water tank recoated after it starts “looking bad” on the outside.

Cheung: Hong Kong is a coastal city and always has relative humidity over 80%. When dealing with such a corrosive environment, most asset owners/opera-tors are very concerned about the integ-rity of their assets. A protective coating maintenance plan is always designed and enforced to ensure an effective coating system continues to protect the integrity of assets, although it might not be well planned and structured.

Van Den Driessche: At NASA’s Ken-nedy Space Center, assets with protec-tive coatings are managed by the use of a coatings database. This database con-tains data that include photos, condition assessments, and dry film thickness (DFT) measurements gathered by certi-fied NACE inspectors during a yearly inspection of these assets. Using this

Roundtable Q & A: Challenges in Managing the Maintenance of Protective Coatings on Critical AssetsBy Kathy Riggs Larsen, MP Associate Editor

Without an active coatings management program, protective coatings will fail. Photo courtesy of Robert Boswell.

The perception is that it is only paint! One of the biggest hurdles is that very few asset owners have a coating maintenance

philosophy and strategy.


data, the database is then employed to compare facilities’ conditions, help plan downtime, and show the progression of corrosion in a certain area over a period of time.

MP: A re t here benef it s i n developing a management

program for assets with protective coatings? If so, can you explain what they are?

Coronado: A good asset management program will provide prolonged asset life; minimize downtime of asset(s); provide a more aesthetically pleasing work envi-ronment; and, most importantly, provide a safer work environment. It also allows for sustainability; better planning; and, therefore, better management of future maintenance costs.

Fite: A major benefit of an asset man-agement program is that it provides the owner with a “snapshot” of the facility at a given time. The program also pro-vides the facility management with documentation and results to justify expenditures in the future to protect the facility assets.

Van Den Driessche: There are many benefits for developing a management program for assets in our industry. We are able to prioritize and match work with the existing corrosion control fund-ing, along with being able to better plan and limit long and costly shutdowns of facilities and systems during corrosion control work.

Boswell: The biggest benefit is extend-ing the life of the asset. With an active management program, corrosion and early coating failure can be controlled, hundreds of thousands of dollars in repair and replacement costs per tank can be saved, and the issues with struc-tural failure can be avoided. With a management program, downtime of the asset can be minimized, loss in revenue generated by the asset can be prevented, and the overall frustration that comes with assets that have not been properly maintained can be prevented.

Greenfield: The most obvious benefits are improved performance, improved asset uptime, and using the available funding to its best advantage. Another great benefit is having a strong under-standing of the funding required to maintain the coated assets within opera-

tional and regulatory requirements.Lillerovde: Documented cost savings

of 20 to 60% have been realized when better planning and management pro-gram requirements have been intro-duced. When you have an overview of all the coated assets, it is easier to have control over costs and provide mainte-nance budget inputs. You can prioritize and introduce better plans.

MP: What are some key aspects to consider when devel-

oping a management program for protective coatings?

Greenfield: The first is to develop a coatings maintenance corporate phi-losophy that guides the approach and prioritization of the maintenance effort in maintaining the coatings—the “why.” Beyond that, the old stalwarts include knowledge-based standards from les-sons learned, project-specific specifica-tions, qualified materials, qualified ap-pl icators , ef fec t ive inspect ion of installed coatings, ongoing in-service evaluation of the installed coatings to assess performance, and a system to manage that information and prioritize maintenance work.


Van Den Driessche: A key aspect to consider is how the yearly inspections will be performed. Condition ratings and definitions need to be decided and in-spectors need to be trained on these definitions and assessments prior to the start of any inspection to ensure that each yearly inspection can be compared to the previous years. A plan also should be developed on what areas will be in-spected and how to access those hard-to-access areas that can often become cor-rosion issues.

Coronado: An asset that is deemed unsafe should get priority consider-ation. Pitted steel, leaking pipe, unsafe walkways, etc. should be addressed im-mediately. The next priority would be the value of the asset (replacement cost) and the value of the output, i.e., what are the financial ramifications of the down-time of a particular asset.

Clark: The most important informa-tion that needs to be established is the current condition of the existing coating system and properly identifying the service environment. The condition evaluation should include adhesion, ap-pearance (gloss, chalk, primer, mill scale, and rust), percent of failure, and DFT. The environment should be de-fined according the SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings Environmental Zone Method.

MP: W hat are some of t he h u r d l e s f a c e d w h e n

implementing a protective coating management program?Lillerovde: The perception that it is only paint! One of the biggest hurdles is that very few asset owners have a coating maintenance philosophy and strategy. Too many managers and planners don’t see the need for paint and corrosion prevention so therefore they don’t plan. They will use the money on mainte-nance instead of planning, even if they can reduce costs by doing some plan-ning and management. Coating main-tenance and coating planning are also the first to be reduced and cut in a budget reduction.

Coronado: Budget constraints. Gen-erally speaking, coating management programs will not be a top priority for upper management. The budget is likely to be the limiting factor dictating which

Quick and easy measurement of Protective Coatings in harsh environmentswith NEW MP0/MP0R SERIES

• Measurement on ships, bridges, off-shore installations, cranes, heavy machinery, construction structures, and others

• Special measuring modes in accordance with SSPC-PA2 and IM0-PSPC

• Measurement on steel and aluminium

• Wear resistant probes for precise measurement even on rough surfaces

• Pre-inspection of large areas with continous scan mode

• USB port for data communication (MP0R)

• Customer report generation for paperless QA

www.fi scher-technology.com 860-683-0781 info@fi scher-technology.com


assets can be targeted for improvement. Downtime is expensive, because an as-set that is out of service is not providing any revenue.

Greenfield: The toughest may be the internal hurdles—from justifying the cost to mid-level management account-ability. Effective management of coat-ings assets will pay for itself long-term, but there are the costs of commitment and implementation. It won’t happen without a “champion” and top-manage-ment commitment to the cause and ef-fort. The commitment requires an initial large effort (and associated cost) to set up the baseline information and condi-tion assessment of those assets.

Cheung: The owner may interrupt implementation of the program when the stoppage of an operation significantly impacts revenue or an ad hoc incident may postpone the schedule of the pro-gram or even lead to change or cancella-tion of the program.

Van Den Driessche: The biggest hurdle that we experienced in setting up our program was the initial setup of the coat-ings management database. Equipment needed to be purchased, measurements of materials in facilities needed to be taken, and items needed to be base-lined prior to starting annual inspections.

MP: W hat c a n be done to o v e r c o m e c h a l l e n g e s

encountered when implementing a coating management program?

Van Den Driessche: The best way to overcome the challenges encountered when implementing a coating manage-ment program is to have a strong in-spection plan at the start. Inspectors may change and facilities may be added to the program or changed over the years. With a strong inspection plan, this will ensure seamless transitions and ensure that the data will be equivalent to previous years and other facilities.

Boswell: Make sure the owner is in-volved with the decision-making pro-cess and understands exactly what is going on. One of the ways to educate the owner and to make assurances that it is the right thing to do is to develop pre-sentations that discuss corrosion issues and how to mitigate them. Once the owner understands the benefit and what to expect from a protective coating

Meet the PanelistsRobert Boswell (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is a project manager/consultant with Kleinfelder (San Diego, California).

Gary Cheung (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is the managing consul-tant of Sea Land Consulting Services Ltd. (Hong Kong, China).

Lucas Clark (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is the director of training and development with Carboline Co. (St. Louis, Missouri).

Kat Coronado (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is the technical support manager with International Paint, LLC (Houston, Texas).

Chuck Fite (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is the senior corrosion specification specialist for the Florida and Caribbean Areas for The Sherwin-Williams Co. Protective & Marine Coatings Division (Cleveland, Ohio).

D. Terry Greenfield (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is the principal consultant for CorroMetrics Services, Inc. (Fairhope, Alabama).

Egil Lillerovde is the advisory service manager—corrosion and insulation for Oceaneering Asset Integrity (Houston, Texas).

Jennifer Van Den Driessche (NACE-certified Level 3 Coating Inspector) is a cor-rosion control engineer for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida.


ings, the percentage of the budget is zero, and that is the biggest reason for failure. The industry must realize that corrosion prevention, corrosion con-trol, and coating maintenance are im-portant, and planning and managing are a huge part of it. !

A longer version of this article was pub-lished in the October 2012 issue of MP.

management program and also under-stands the risks of not setting one up, then and only then can a successful discussion about setting up a manage-ment program be held.

Cheung: A third-party coating con-sultant or an internal audit group can be tasked to carry out a coating survey and create an objective report(s) for submission to the owner to convince him of the importance and need of having a protective coatings manage-ment program in place to protect as-sets. Develop a corporate or depart-menta l cu lt u re where protec t ive

coatings management is an essential element in daily operations.

Clark: “Cost per square foot per year” is always the most effective way to show the savings of implementing a coating management program. Since the invest-ment of protective coatings is a long-term protection concept, the value is a function of time and cost.

Lillerovde: Show them how much they can save by using a coating man-agement program. When a pipe is to be installed, it is normal to use 15 to 20% of the budget for planning and engi-neering. For plans to maintain coat-

Get This!

Jeff Slaughter, a NACE-certified Coat-ing Inspector, is the winner of this issue’s drawing for a free Coating

Inspector Program (CIP) course. A research engineer for American Techni-cal Division in Birmingham, Alabama, Slaughter is currently certified to CIP Level 1.

How can you enter the drawing to win a free CIP course?

Simply send an e-mail message to [email protected] and mention that you saw this article. To be eligible, you must have completed CIP Level 1 and your certification must be active. The free CIP course (Level 2 or Level 3—Peer Review) must be taken within one year of winning the drawing.

Please note that the drawing only ap-plies to CIP courses and not other NACE course offerings. The prize is transfer-rable but may not be sold. If this prize is transferred, the recipient must meet the same criteria as the winner. !


NACE Coatings Course ScheduleCIP LEvEL 1December 1-6, 2012 Dammam, Saudi ArabiaDecember 2-7, 2012 Orlando, FLDecember 2-7, 2012 Shanghai, ChinaDecember 3-8, 2012 Perth, WA, AustraliaDecember 3-8, 2012 Veracruz, MexicoDecember 3-8, 2012 Aberdeen, U.K.December 8-13, 2012 Houston, TXDecember 9-14, 2012 Houston, TXDecember 17-22, 2012 Chennai, IndiaJanuary 6-11, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 6-11, 2013 Concordville, PAJanuary 7-12, 2013 Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaJanuary 13-18, 2013 Newington, NHJanuary 20-25, 2013 Halifax, NS, CanadaJanuary 20-25, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 21-26, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 27-February 1, 2013 Dubai, U.A.E.January 27-February 1, 2013 Calgary, AB, CanadaJanuary 28-February 2, 2013 Chennai, IndiaJanuary 28-February 2, 2013 Aberdeen, U.K.February 2-7, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 3-8, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 3-8, 2013 Mobile, ALFebruary 3-8, 2013 Montreal, QC, CanadaFebruary 4-9, 2013 Manchester, U.K.February 17-22, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 18-23, 2013 Johannesburg, South AfricaFebruary 18-23, 2013 Quito, EcuadorFebruary 24-March 1, 2013 Shanghai, ChinaFebruary 24-March 1, 2013 Milano, ItalyFebruary 27-March 4, 2013 Beijing, ChinaMarch 3-8, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 3-8, 2013 Dubai, U.A.E.March 4-9, 2013 Chennai, IndiaMarch 10-15, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 11-16, 2013 Newcastle-upon-Tyne, U.K.March 16-21, 2013 Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.March 18-23, 2013 Newcastle-upon-Tyne, U.K.CIP ExAM CoURSE 1December 16-18, 2012 Houston, TXFebruary 24-26, 2013 Houston, TXCIP LEvEL 2December 1-6, 2012 Dubai, U.A.E.December 2-7, 2012 Houston, TXDecember 3-8, 2012 Mumbai, IndiaDecember 8-13, 2012 Dammam, Saudi ArabiaDecember 9-14, 2012 Edmonton, AB, CanadaDecember 9-14, 2012 Orlando, FLDecember 9-14, 2012 Shanghai, ChinaDecember 10-15, 2012 Perth, WA, AustraliaDecember 16-21, 2012 New Orleans, LADecember 16 - 21, 2012 Houston, TXJanuary 5-10, 2013 Fahaheel, KuwaitJanuary 13-18, 2013 Concordville, PAJanuary 13-18, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 14-19, 2013 Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaJanuary 20-25, 2013 Newington, NHJanuary 20-25, 2013 Surrey, BC, CanadaJanuary 27-February 1, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 27-February 1, 2013 Halifax, NS, CanadaFebruary 2-7, 2013 Dubai, U.A.E.February 3-8, 2013 Calgary, AB, Canada

February 4-9, 2013 Chennai, IndiaFebruary 10-15, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 10-15, 2013 Montreal, QC, CanadaFebruary 10-15, 2013 Mobile, ALFebruary 24-March 1, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 3-8, 2013 Shanghai, ChinaMarch 4-9, 2013 Aberdeen, U.K.March 6-11, 2013 Beijing, ChinaMarch 9-14, 2013 Dubai, U.A.E.March 10-15, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 11-16, 2013 Newcatle-upon-Tyne, U.K.March 11-16, 2013 Chennai, IndiaMarch 18-23, 2013 Newcastle-upon-Tyne, U.K.CIP ExAM CoURSE 2December 19-21, 2012 Houston, TXFebruary 27-March 1, 2013 Houston, TXCIP LEvEL 2, MARITIME EMPHASISMarch 21-26, 2013 Orlando, FLCIP oNE-DAY BRIDGE CoURSEJanuary 12, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 2, 2013 Calgary, AB, CanadaMarch 9, 2013 Houston, TXCIP PEER REvIEWDecember 1-5, 2012 Aberdeen, U.K.December 6-9, 2012 Dubai, U.A.E.December 14-17, 2012 Orlando, FLDecember 21-24, 2012 New Orleans, LADecember 21-24, 2012 Houston, TXJanuary 18-21, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 18-21, 2013 Concordville, PAJanuary 25-28, 2013 Newington, NHJanuary 25-28, 2013 Surrey, BC, CanadaFebruary 1-4, 2013 Halifax, NS, CanadaFebruary 8-11, 2013 Calgary, AB, CanadaFebruary 15-18, 2013 Houston, TXFebruary 15-18, 2013 Mobile, ALFebruary 15-18, 2013 Montreal, QC, CanadaMarch 12-15, 2013 Beijing, ChinaMarch 14-17, 2013 Dubai, U.A.E.March 15-18, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 22-25, 2013 Newcastle-upon-Tyne, U.K.CoATINGS IN CoNJUNCTIoN WITH CATHoDIC PRoTECTIoNJanuary 13-18, 2013 Calgary, AB, CanadaFebruary 10-15, 2013 Houston, TXNUCLEAR PoWER PLANT TRAINING FoR CoATING INSPECToRSJanuary 27-31, 2013 Houston, TXMarch 21-25, 2013 Orlando, FLMarch 24-28, 2013 Houston, TXPCS 1 BASIC PRINCIPLESDecember 3-5, 2012 Anchorage, AKDecember 15-17, 2012 Cairo, EgyptJanuary 13-15, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 27-29, 2013 San Bernardino, CAMarch 3-5, 2013 Houston, TXPCS 2 ADvANCED

December 3-5, 2012 New Orleans, LADecember 6-8, 2012 Anchorage, AKJanuary 16-18, 2013 Houston, TXJanuary 30-February 1, 2013 San Bernardino, CAMarch 6-8, 2013 Houston, TX


Coatings ResourcesNACE International Technical Committees Need You!• Help influence industry standards. • Exchange technical information. • Strengthen your leadership skills.

As a NACE International member, you can sign up online to join a committee—go to the NACE Committees section at www.nace.org to join an STG or TEG. Contact the chair of a TG to indicate interest in that type of committee.

Types of Committees• Specific Technology Groups (STGs) • Task Groups (TGs) • Technology Exchange Groups (TEGs)

TECHNICAL CoMMITTEES

Committee Description Scope/Assignment

STG 02 Coatings and Linings, Protective: Atmospheric Scope: Determine uses, application, and performance of coatings for atmo-spheric service. Atmospheric service denotes industrial and commercial equipment, architectural structures, and bridges.

TG 146 Coatings, Thermal-Spray Assignment: Review and revise joint standard NACE No. 12/AWS C2.23M/SSPC-CS 23.00, “Specification for the Application of Thermal Spray Coatings (Metalizing) of Aluminum, Zinc, and their Alloys and Composites for the Cor-rosion Protection of Steel.”

TG 148 Threaded Fasteners: Coatings for Protection of Threaded Fasteners Used with Structural Steel, Piping, and Equipment

Assignment: Revise NACE Publication 02107, “Coatings for Protection of Threaded Fasteners Used with Structural Steel, Piping, and Equipment.”

TEG 192x Coating Industry Problems Confronting Owners and Contractors

Assignment: To provide a format for handling problems and issues that affect the owner and contractor utilizing coatings. Problems and issues may include hazardous waste, volatile organic compounds, applicator training, federal and state regulations, and others that may develop.

TEG 255x Coatings, Thermal-Spray for Corrosion Protection Assignment: Exchange of information regarding thermal-spray coatings (TSCs)used for corrosion protection.

TG 260 Review of NACE Standard TM0304-2004 Assignment: Review and revise as necessary the test methods in NACE Stan-dard TM0304.

TEG 311x Threaded Fasteners: Coatings and Methods of Protection for Threaded Fasteners Used with Structural Steel, Piping, and Equipment

Assignment: Share information concerning, and discuss effective methods for, corrosion control of fasteners used with structural, piping, and equipment connections.

TG 312 Offshore Platform Coatings for Atmospheric and Splash Zone New Construction

Assignment: Review and revise as necessary the test methods in NACE Stan-dard TM0404.

TG 340 Offshore Coating Condition Assessment for Maintenance Planning

Assignment: Develop a standard practice addressing a standard method and grading system to assess the in-service condition of offshore coatings. Provide direction regarding the use of assessment data in managing maintenance painting programs. The documented process will serve as an aid in the plan-ning, budget, and execution of offshore maintenance programs.

TEG 346x Offshore Coatings: Laboratory Testing Criteria Assignment: Review and critique laboratory testing methods designed to predict performance in an offshore environment. Assess test variables and gather data needed to improve industry standard techniques.

TEG 399x Evaluation, Testing, and Specifying Coating Materials for Elevated Temperatures for Insulated and Uninsulated Service

Assignment: Exchange information, create a task group for state-of-the-art report, followed by formation of a task group to write a standard practice, and sponsor symposium.

TG 415 Review and Revise as Necessary NACE Standard RP0281-2004

Assignment: Review and revise if necessary NACE Standard RP0281-2004, “Method for Conducting Coating (Paint) Panel Evaluation Testing in Atmospheric Exposures.”

TG 422 Coatings for Elevated-Temperature Insulated or Noninsulated Exterior Service

Assignment: To write a state-of-the-art report.

TEG 424x Liquid-Applied Insulative Coatings for Atmospheric Service at 0 to 375 °F

Assignment: To discuss issues of spray-applied insulative coatings for elevated-temperature exterior surfaces.

TEG 428x Hot-Dip Galvanizing for Steel Corrosion Protection Assignment: To discuss and furnish technical information on the process of hot-dip galvanizing and its use as a corrosion protection system for steel fabrications as well as the inspection of hot-dip galvanized coatings with other corrosion protection systems.

TG 457 Review of NACE SP0297-2012 Assignment: To review and revise as necessary NACE SP0297-2012, “Maintenance Painting of Electrical Substation Apparatus Including Flow Coating of Transformer Radiators.”


Coatings ResourcesCommittee Description Scope/Assignment

STG 03 Coatings and Linings, Protective: Immersion and Buried Service

Scope: Determine effectiveness, performance criteria, and quality needs of immersion coatings and lining materials used in immersion service.

TG 009 Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic Linings for Aboveground Storage Tank Floors

Assignment: To develop a standard practice for installing fiberglass-reinforced plastic linings within aboveground storage tanks.

TG 031 Pipeline Coating, Plant-Applied Fusion-Bonded Epoxy: Review of NACE Standard RP0394

Assignment: To update and revise NACE Standard RP0394-2002, “Application, Performance, and Quality Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded Epoxy External Pipe Coating.”

TG 034 Pipeline Coatings, External: Gouge Test Assignment: To write a test method and criteria for evaluation of gouge resistance of a particular coating.

TG 037 Pipelines, Oilfield: Thermoplastic Liners Assignment: To review and revise NACE Standard RP0304-2004 as necessary.

TG 141 Coatings and Linings over Concrete for Chemical Immersion and Containment Service

Assignment: To update SP0892-2007 to incorporate current technologies and practices to successfully protect concrete.

TG 246 Thin-Film Organic Linings Applied to Process Vessels and Tankages

Assignment: Develop application technology for applying thin-film linings to prevent corrosion, hydrogen-induced cracking, or other corrosion deterioration by internal corrosion mechanisms.

TG 247 Reaffirm NACE Standard RP0105-2005 Assignment: To reaffirm NACE Standard RP0105-2005, “External Repair, Rehabilita-tion, and Weld Joints on Pipelines.”

TG 248 Coatings, Heat-Shrink Sleeves for External Repair, Rehabilitations, and Weld Joints on Pipelines

Assignment: To review and revise as needed NACE Standard RP0303-2003, “Field-Applied Heat-Shrinkable Sleeves for Pipelines: Application, Perfor-mance, and Quality Control.”


Assignment: Review and revise as necessary NACE Standard RP0402-2002, “Field-Applied Fusion-Bonded Epoxy (FBE) Pipe Coating Systems for Girth Weld Joints: Application, Performance, and Quality Control.”

TG 250 Coal-Tar Enamel Coatings for External Repair, Rehabilitations, and Weld Joints on Pipelines

Assignment: Review and revise/reaffirm as necessary NACE Standard RP0602-2002, “Field-Applied External Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Coating Systems: Applica-tion, Performance, and Quality Control.”

TG 263 Review of NACE Standard TM0104-2004 Assignment: Review and revise as necessary the test methods in NACE Stan-dard TM0104-2004.

TG 264 Offshore Exterior Submerged Coatings: Standard Test Methods

Assignment: Review and revise as necessary the test methods in NACE Stan-dard TM0204-2004.

TG 266 Coating and Lining Materials in Immersion Service: Review of NACE Standard TM0174-2001

Assignment: Review and revise as necessary NACE Standard TM0174-2001, “Labo-ratory Methods for the Evaluation of Protective Coatings and Lining Materials in Immersion Service.”

TG 281 Coatings, Polyurethane for Field Repair, Rehabilitation, and Girth Weld Joints on Pipelines

Assignment: To develop a standard practice for a minimal specification for the field application, repair, and testing for a polyurethane coating to be used on the exterior of buried pipelines.

TG 296 Coating Systems, Wax, for Underground Piping Systems: Review of NACE Standard RP0375

Assignment: To review and revise as necessary NACE Standard RP0375, “Wax Coating Systems for Underground Piping Systems.”


Assignment: To review and revise as necessary NACE Standard RP0399-2004, “Plant-Applied External Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and Quality Control.”

TG 336 External Pipeline Coatings: Practices, Test Methods, and/or Test Methodologies for High-Operating-Temperature Pipelines, Immersion and Buried Service Only

Assignment: Develop a technical committee report that outlines state-of-the-art practices as described in the title.

TG 337 External Pipeline Coatings: Field Installation and Inspection Criteria for Maximum Performance

Assignment: Develop a standard practice that identifies common aspects of field installation pertaining to quality installation and long-term performance.

TEG 351x Coatings Under Insulation Material Testing Procedure Recommendations: Discussion

Assignment: Discussion of the development of a recommended test procedure for qualification of coatings used under insulation service.

TG 352 Coating Systems (External) for Pipeline Directional Drill Applications

Assignment: To develop a standard practice for minimum specifications for external coatings for use in directional drill service.

TG 353 External Pipeline Coatings: Multi-Layer Polyolefin Coating Systems

Assignment: Develop a standard to describe requirements for multi-layer polyolefin coating systems for pipelines.


Coatings Resources

TEG 354x Pipeline Coatings: Underground Blistering Assignment: Discuss blistering of underground pipeline coatings, causes of blistering, and prevention methods.

TG 425 State of the Art in CUI Coating Systems Assignment: Describe available systems, performance, and industry-accepted criteria for coatings under insulation.

TEG 435x Effects of Bioethanols on Fused Silica Containment Vessels in Immersion and Phase Change Exposures

Assignment: To hold technical information exchanges (TIEs) on the effects of bioethanols, aromatic ethanols, and sulfurous emissions on fused silica containment vessels.


Assignment: To review and update as necessary NACE Standard RP0288-2004, “Inspection of Linings on Steel and Concrete.”

TG 470 Cathodic Disbondment Test for Coated Steel Structures Under Cathodic Protection

Assignment: To develop a standard test method to conduct the cathodic disbondment test.

STG 04 Coatings and Linings, Protective: Surface Preparation Scope: Determine effectiveness, performance criteria, and quality needs of various methods of surface preparation for the application of coatings and linings.

TG 006 Blasting: Review of Joint Standards NACE 1-4/SSPC-SP 5, 10, 6, and 7, and NACE No. 8/SSPC-SP 14

Assignment: To review, revise, or reaffirm as necessary joint blasting standards NACE No. 1-4/SSPC-SP 5, 10, 6, 7: “White Metal Blast Cleaning,” “Near-White Metal Blast Cleaning,” “Commercial Blast Cleaning,” and “Brush-Off Blast Clean-ing,” and NACE No. 8/SSPC-SP 14, “Industrial Blast Cleaning.”

TG 323 Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning Assignment: To review and update joint technical committee report NACE 6G198/SSPC-TR 2, “Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning.”

TG 350 Surface Preparation by Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning Assignment: Develop a standard for wet abrasive blast cleaning of steel surfaces that will complement the existing NACE/SSPC joint standards for dry abrasive blast cleaning.

TG 417 Review and Revise as Necessary Joint Surface Preparation Standard NACE No. 6/SSPC-SP 13

Assignment: Review and revise as necessary joint standard NACE No. 6/SSPC-SP 13, “Surface Preparation of Concrete,” to reflect current industry practices and to reflect proper reference to other industry publications.

TG 418 Risk Assessment for Salt Contamination Assignment: To develop a standard practice to define levels of soluble salt contamination on surfaces and to provide methods to assess the level of risk inherent in the different levels, leading to decision-making based on cost/benefit analysis.


Assignment: Review and revise as necessary RP0287-2002, “Field Measurement of Surface Profile of Abrasive Blast-Cleaned Steel Surfaces Using a Replica Tape,” and to include other methods of profile measurement now being widely used throughout the industry.

TEG 423x Nonvisible, Nonwater-Soluble Contaminants Affecting Corrosion Protection

Assignment: Discuss the effects of coating performance when applied over nonvisible, nonwater-soluble contaminants and their effects on coating performance.

TG 443 Field Testing for Soluble Salts: Commonly Used Methods

Assignment: Develop a technical committee report detailing commonly used soluble salts field test methods.

TEG 469x Surface Preparation Issues Assignment: To provide a forum to discuss various issues affecting surface preparation.

STG 43 Transportation, Land Scope: To promote the development of techniques to extend the life of land transportation equipment.

TG 061 Revision of NACE SP0592 (formerly RP0592), “Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Railway Tank Cars in Concentrated (90-98%) Sulfuric Acid Service”

Assignment: To update and revise NACE SP0592 (formerly RP0592), “Applica-tion of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Railway Tank Cars in Concentrated (90-98%) Sulfuric Acid Service.”

TG 063 Railcars: Corrosion Protection and Control Program Assignment: Develop guidelines for railcar lining requalification.

TEG 064x Railcar Surface Preparation Assignment: To keep abreast of industry changes and techniques and report findings annually.

TG 067 Review and Revise or Reaffirm NACE SP0302-2007 Assignment: To review and revise or reaffirm NACE SP0302-2007, “Selection and Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Rail Tank Cars in Molten Sulfur Service.”



Coatings Resources

TG 271 Removal Procedures for Nonvisible Contaminants on Railcar Surfaces

Assignment: To prepare a technical committee report describing surface decontamination for railcars prior to coating application.

TEG 291x Land Transportation: Information Exchange on Corrosion and Coating-Related Issues

Assignment: Technical information exchange in conjunction with an STG meeting.

TG 332 Review and Revise or Reaffirm as Necessary NACE SP0386-2007

Assignment: To review and revise as necessary NACE SP0386-2007 (formerly RP0386), “Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of Covered Steel Hopper Railcars in Plastic, Food, and Chemical Service.”

TG 333 Review and Revise or Reaffirm as Necessary NACE SP0295-2008

Assignment: To review and revise or reaffirm NACE SP0295-2008 (formerly RP0295), “Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Rail Tank Cars.”

TG 339 Railcars: Coating Application on Exterior Surfaces of Steel Railcars

Assignment: Review and revise as appropriate NACE Standard RP0692-2003, “Application of a Coating System to Exterior Surfaces of Steel Rail Cars.”

TG 366 Railcars: Corrosion Under Tank Car Insulation Assignment: Review and revise as appropriate NACE Publication 14C296 to ensure information is still relevant.

TG 378 Waterborne Coatings on Railcars Assignment: To prepare a state-of-the-art report on waterborne coatings on railcars.

TG 379 Surface Preparation by Encapsulated Blast Media for Repair of Existing Coatings on Railcars

Assignment: To prepare a state-of-the-art report on surface preparation by encapsulated blast media for repair of existing coatings on railcars.

TG 394 Guidelines for Qualifying Personnel as Abrasive Blasters and Coating and Lining Applicators in the Rail Industry

Assignment: To review and revise NACE Standard RP0495-2003.

TG 406 Review of NACE SP0398-2006 Assignment: Review and revise as necessary NACE SP0398-2006 (formerly RP0398), “Recommendations for Training and Qualifying Personnel as Railcar Coating and Lining Inspectors.”

TG 437 Maintenance Overcoating of Railcar Exteriors Assignment: To prepare a state-of-the-art report for the application of maintenance overcoating of railcar exteriors.

TG 444 Guidelines for Data Collection and Analysis of Railroad Tank Car Interior Coating/Lining Condition

Assignment: To produce a standard that provides guidelines for inspecting, rating, and documenting the condition of interior coatings and linings in railroad tank cars to comply with H-201.

TG 451 Corrosion-Resistant Non-Skid Surfaces for Railcar Exteriors

Assignment: Produce a standard that defines and addresses the essential properties and specifications for corrosion-resistant non-skid surfaces on railcar exteriors.

TG 456 Coating Thickness Measurement, Methods, and Recording—Specific to the Railcar Industry

Assignment: Prepare a state-of-the-art report outlining currently used procedures for dry film thickness measurement and recording for coatings on railcars.

STG 44 Marine Corrosion: Ships and Structures Scope: To study the corrosion mechanisms, causes, effects, and corrosion control remedies for ships, structures, and equipment exposed to marine environments and to disseminate information in the form of industry stan-dards and formal and informal technical information exchanges on the re-search, development, and performance of materials, coatings, and improved or innovative methods to mitigate problems related to marine corrosion.

TEG 181x Marine Vessel Corrosion Assignment: To study the causes, effects, and remedies of corrosion in various marine vessels.

TG 403 Antifouling Coatings and Other Tools Used for Hull Resistance Management of Ship Hulls

Assignment: To write a standard on requirements for protective coatings systems and other mitigating solutions to prevent and mitigate fouling cor-rosion on ship hulls and related components.

TG 452 Testing of Coating Suitability, Anode Consumption, and Corrosion Evaluation with Use of BWT Systems

Assignment: To write a standard on evaluation of risk for damage to coatings, increased anode consumption, and corrosion in conjunction with the use of ballast water treatment (BWT) systems.

TG 461 Standard for Hull Roughness Measurements on Ship Hulls in Dry Dock

Assignment: To develop a standard on how to perform both in-docking hull roughness readings (before blasting and cleaning in dry dock) and before out-docking hull roughness readings.

Ad Hoc xx Pictorial Standard for Underwater Evaluation of Degrees of Fouling

Assignment: To develop a pictorial standard to be used to evaluate the (1) extent, (2) location, and (3) type of fouling to ship hulls and propellers.



Coatings ResourcesSTANDARDS & REPoRTS

Atmospheric Service

Standards Item Number

SP0108-2008 Corrosion Control of Offshore Structures by Protective Coatings 21126

RP0281-2004 Method for Conducting Coating (Paint) Panel Evaluation Testing in Atmospheric Exposures 21026

SP0297-2012 (formerly RP0297-2004) Maintenance Painting of Electrical Substation Apparatus Including Flow Coating of Transformer Radiators

21081

NACE No. 12/AWS C2.23M/SSPC-CS 23.00

Specification for the Application of Thermal Spray Coatings (Metallizing) of Aluminum, Zinc, and Their Alloys and Composites for the Corrosion Protection of Steel (RP0203-2003)

21100

TM0304-2004 Offshore Platform Atmospheric and Splash Zone Maintenance Coating System Evaluation

21245

TM0404-2004 Offshore Platform Atmospheric and Splash Zone New Construction Coating System Evaluation

21246

Reports Item Number

NACE Publication 80200/SSPC-TR 4 Preparation of Protective Coating Specifications for Atmospheric Service 24209

NACE Publication 02103 Liquid-Applied Coatings for High-Temperature Atmospheric Service 24219

NACE Publication 02203/ICRI Technical Guideline 03741/SSPC-TR 5

Design, Installation, and Maintenance of Protective Polymer Flooring Systems for Concrete 24220

Immersion/Buried Service


SP0274-2011 (formerly RP0274) High-Voltage Electrical Inspection of Pipeline Coatings Prior to Installation 21010

RP0375-2006 Field-Applied Underground Wax Coating Systems for Underground Pipelines: Application, Performance, and Quality Control

21013

SP0185-2007 (formerly RP0185) Extruded Polyolefin Resin Coating Systems with Soft Adhesives for Underground or Submerged Pipe

21029

SP0111-2011 Coating Technical File in Accordance with the IMO Performance Standard for Protective Coatings

21153

SP0188-2006 (formerly RP0188) Discontinuity (Holiday) Testing of New Protective Coatings on Conductive Substrates 21038

SP0288-2011 (formerly RP0288) Inspection of Linings on Steel and Concrete 21039

SP0490-2007 (formerly RP0490) Holiday Detection of Fusion-Bonded Epoxy External Pipeline Coatings of 250 to 760 µm (10 to 30 mils)

21045

SP0892-2007 (formerly RP0892) Coatings and Linings over Concrete for Chemical Immersion and Containment Service

21060

RP0394-2002 Application, Performance, and Quality Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded Epoxy External Pipe Coating

21064

SP0298-2007 (formerly RP0298) Sheet Rubber Linings for Abrasion and Corrosion Service 21085

RP0399-2004 Plant-Applied, External Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and Quality Control

21089

NACE No. 10/SSPC-PA 6 Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Linings Applied to Bottoms of Carbon Steel Aboveground Storage Tanks (RP0202-2002)

21093

RP0402-2002 Field-Applied Fusion-Bonded Epoxy (FBE) Pipe Coating Systems for Girth Weld Joints: Application, Performance, and Quality Control

21096

RP0105-2005 Liquid-Epoxy Coatings for External Repair, Rehabilitation, and Weld Joints on Buried Steel Pipelines

21106

SP0181-2006 (formerly RP0181) Liquid-Applied Internal Protective Coatings for Oilfield Production Equipment 21025

RP0602-2002 Field-Applied Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and Quality Control

21098

NACE No. 11/SSPC-PA 8 Thin-Film Organic Linings Applied in New Carbon Steel Process Vessels (RP0103-2003) 21099

RP0303-2003 Field-Applied Heat-Shrinkable Sleeves for Pipelines: Application, Performance, and Quality Control

21101

RP0304-2004 Design, Installation, and Operation of Thermoplastic Liners for Oilfield Pipelines 21103

TM0174-2002 Laboratory Methods for the Evaluation of Protective Coatings and Lining Materials on Metallic Substrates in Immersion Service

21206


Coatings ResourcesTM0102-2002 Measurement of Protective Coating Electrical Conductance on Underground

Pipelines21241

TM0104-2004 Offshore Platform Ballast Water Tank Coating System Evaluation 21243

TM0204-2004 Exterior Protective Coatings for Seawater Immersion Service 21244

SP0109-2009 Field Application of Bonded Tape Coatings for External Repair, Rehabilitation, and Weld Joints on Buried Metal Pipelines

21143

TM0109-2009 Aboveground Survey Techniques for the Evaluation of Underground Pipeline Coating Condition

21254

Surface Preparation


SP0178-2007 (formerly RP0178) Design, Fabrication, and Surface Finish Practices for Tanks and Vessels to be Lined for Immersion Service

21022

RP0287-2002 Field Measurement of Surface Profile of Abrasive Blast Cleaned Steel Surfaces Using a Replica Tape

21035

TM0105-2005 Test Procedures for Organic-Based Conductive Coating Anodes for Use on Concrete Structures

21247

NACE No. 1/SSPC-SP 5 White Metal Blast Cleaning (SP0494-2007) 21065

NACE No. 2/SSPC-SP 10 Near-White Metal Blast Cleaning (SP0594-2007) 21066

NACE No. 3/SSPC-SP 6 Commercial Blast Cleaning (SP0694-2007) 21067

NACE No. 4/SSPC-SP 7 Brush-Off Blast Cleaning (SP0794-2007) 21068

NACE No. 5/SSPC-SP 12 Surface Preparation and Cleaning of Metals by Waterjetting Prior to Recoating (RP0595-2002)

21076

NACE No. 6/SSPC-SP 13 Surface Preparation of Concrete (RP0397-2003) 21082

NACE No. 8/SSPC-SP 14 Industrial Blast Cleaning (SP0299-2007) 21088

NACE No. 13/SSPC-ACS-1 Industrial Coating and Lining Application Specialist Qualification and Certification 21122

SP0508-2010 Methods of Validating Equivalence to ISO 8502-9 on Measurement of the Levels of Soluble Salts

21134

Reports Item Number

NACE Publication 6A192/SSPC-TR 3 Dehumidification and Temperature Control During Surface Preparation, Application, and Curing for Coatings/Linings of Steel Tanks, Vessels, and Other Enclosed Spaces

24083

NACE Publication 6G194/SSPC-TR 1 Thermal Precleaning 24183

NACE Publication 6G197/SSPC-TU 2 Design, Installation, and Maintenance of Coating Systems for Concrete Used in Secondary Containment

24193

NACE Publication 6G198/SSPC-TR 2 Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning 24199

Land Transportation


SP0386-2007 (formerly RP0386) Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of Covered Steel Hopper Rail Cars in Plastic, Food, and Chemical Service

21033

SP0592-2006 (formerly RP0592) Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Rail Tank Cars in Concentrated (90 to 98%) Sulfuric Acid Service

21057

RP0692-2003 Application of a Coating System to Exterior Surfaces of Steel Rail Cars 21058

SP0295-2008 (formerly RP0295) Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Rail Tank Cars 21070

RP0495-2003 Guidelines for Qualifying Personnel as Abrasive Blasters and Coating and Lining Applicators in the Rail Industries

21072

SP0398-2006 (formerly RP0398) Recommendations for Training and Qualifying Personnel as Railcar Coating and Lining Inspectors

21086

SP0302-2007 (formerly RP0302) Selection and Application of a Coating System to Interior Surfaces of New and Used Rail Tank Cars in Molten Sulfur Service

21095

Reports Item Number

NACE Publication 14C296 Protective Coatings for Mitigating Corrosion Under Insulation on Rail Tank Cars 24191

NACE Publication 6G198/SSPC-TR 2 Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning 24199

16 InspectThis! Fall 2012Introducing the 3-Year Warranty on the Model 10/20 Holiday Detector!Introducing the 3-Year Warranty on the Model 10/20 Holiday Detector!Introducing the 3-Year Warranty on the Model 10/20 Holiday Detector!

Documents

InspectThis_Fall2012