COPYRIGHT SSPC: THE SOCIETY FOR PROTECTIVE

COATINGS

This document and the information contained herein are copyrighted by

SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings, 40 24th St 6th Fl, Pittsburgh PA
15222-4656 USA. All rights reserved.

You are granted the right to download an electronic file of this SSPC standard
for temporary storage on one computer for purposes of viewing and/or printing
a single copy for individual use. This copy may be may only be distributed
to other employees within your organization and only for information or
instructional purposes. Neither the electronic file nor the printed hard copy
may be reproduced or distributed in any other way without the express written
permission of SSPC.

DISCLAIMER

SSPC standards, guides, specifications, and other technical documents are

developed in accordance with voluntary consensus procedures established
by SSPC Technical Committees. They are intended to represent a balance of
interests, and are believed to represent good current practice. All documents
are monitored and revised as practices improve. Suggestions for revision are
welcome.

SSPC specifically disclaims responsibility for the use or misuse of any

information contained in this document, and is not responsible for the
application, interpretation, or administration of this information. Furthermore,
no person is authorized to issue an interpretation of this information on behalf
of SSPC. The supplying of details about patented formulations, treatments,
or processes is not to be regarded as conveying any right or permission to
the user of this document to use or sell any patented invention. When it is
known that the subject matter of the text is covered by patent, such patents
are reflected in the text. Mention of specific product names does not imply
SSPC endorsement.

It should be understood by all persons using this product that SSPC does not
give any warranties, expressed or implied, nor make any representations as
to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information or conclusions
contained herein, nor assume any responsibility of any nature from whatever
cause including negligence resulting from the use of this product.
 SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004

SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings

PAINT APPLICATION GUIDE NO. 5

Guide to Maintenance Coating of Steel Structures
in Atmospheric Service

1. Scope Plan and Implement Follow-Up Activities (Section 10)

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

1
Joint standards may alo be obtained from NACE International at http:/www.nace.org

7-53
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004

* QP 2 Standard Procedure for Evaluat-
ing the Qualication of Painting
Contractors (Field Removal of
Hazardous Coatings from Complex
Industrial Structures)
* QP 5 Standard Procedure for Evaluating
Qualications of Coating and Lining
Inspection Companies
TR 4/NACE 80200 Preparation of Protective Coating
Specifications for Atmospheric
Service
TU 3 Overcoating
TU 4 Field Methods for Retrieval and
Analysis of Soluble Salts on Sub-
strates
VIS 2 Standard Method of Evaluating
Degree of Rusting on Painted Steel
Surfaces
3.2 ASTM INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS:2
* D 3276 Standard Guide for Painting Inspectors
(Metal Substrates)
* D 4228 Standard Practice for the Qualication
of Coating Applicators for Application of
Coatings to Steel Surfaces
D 610 Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree
of Rusting on Painted Steel Surfaces
3.3 FEDERAL STANDARD3
Code of Federal Regulations
29 CFR 1926.62 Lead (Construction Industry Standard)
4. Planning and Use of Guide
4.1.2 List Potential Maintenance Painting Options (Step
2): Section 6 reviews the various maintenance painting options
available, including: spot repair, overcoating, and complete
recoat, as well as the rationale for selecting these maintenance
painting options and the types of information needed for the
decision.
4.1.3 Evaluate Economics of Available Options (Step
3): Section 7 provides guidance in evaluating the initial and
life-cycle costs of available maintenance painting options.
Each decision has potential impact on the life cycle cost of
the coating system and must be identied and evaluated.
4.1.4 Select Appropriate Maintenance Painting Options
and Establish Implementation Procedures (Step 4): Section
8 reviews the factors and considerations necessary to establish
specications for the two major maintenance painting options
of spot repair and complete recoat, including identication
of relevant factors for coating system selection, and surface
preparation selection, depending on whether complete removal
and recoat, spot repair, or a combination of spot repair and
overcoating is selected as a strategy.
4.1.5 Implement Maintenance Painting Options (Step
5) Section 9
4.1.6 Plan and Implement Follow-Up Activities (Step
6): Section 10 describes procedures and review actions after
the job is completed, including documentation, short- and
long-term condition inspections, and preventative maintenance
measures.
5. Plan and Conduct Condition Assessment
Survey (Step 1)

4.1 This document is based on, and is intended to be used
with, the technical principles outlined in SSPC-TU 3. Planning
and implementation of maintenance coating programs for steel
structures are presented in a logical sequence of six specic
steps. These steps range from planning and conducting condi-
tion assessment to follow-up activities required for implementing
an on-going maintenance program. Each step is designed
such that it may be utilized in sequence with the other steps,
or independently for those with interest in only one or a few
aspects of the program. A summary of each step follows.
4.1.1 Plan and Conduct Condition Assessment Survey
(Step 1): Section 5 provides a general approach for organizing
surveys to evaluate the condition of the structure. Three different
types of surveys (general overview, detailed visual survey, and
physical inspection) are covered, along with a proposed plan
for assessing sub-units of a larger, more complex structure,
and a description of procedures and documentation needed.
5.1 PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING CONDITION
ASSESSMENT SURVEY: Condition assessments can be used
for several purposes, i.e., to determine the need for recoating,
to determine the extent of corrosion and corrosion damage,
to determine the performance of various coating systems, or
to prioritize coating requirements where insufcient funds are
available to do all the desired work (see Note 11.1).
5.2 IDENTIFY AND INVENTORY STRUCTURES TO BE
SURVEYED: A written description of the structures requiring
maintenance coating should be obtained or prepared. The
description should include location, dimensions, type of
substrate, conguration, process, previous surface prepara-
tion and coating plans, specications, history, and any other
pertinent information. Examples of the latter would include
proximity to sensitive areas, planned new construction or other
activities nearby, and types of exposures (e.g., acid fallout).
(See SSPC Publication 94-18, Project Design.) It is usually

2
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2659. Available onliine from www.astm.org.
3
FED STD 141 can be obtained from http://astimage.daps.dla.mil/online/new/

7-54

most economical to consider all structures in similar condi-
tion within a given area for maintenance at the same general
time.
5.3 DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF ASSESSMENT
REQUIRED: The survey may vary considerably in the extent
and detail of the information required. Among the types of
survey to be considered are:
5.3.1 General Coating Condition Assessment: In this
assessment, usually only one or two parameters are rated
(e.g., general condition or rusting). The structure is normally
observed from the ground (i.e., without scaffolding). The assess-
ment is at best a qualitative rating of the condition (e.g., good,
fair, poor). Only the major features of a structure or facility are
rated (e.g., a full span of a bridge or a side of a storage tank).
This type of assessment is usually done in a few hours or less
and is suitable for identifying overall condition of the coating.
5.3.2 Detailed Visual Assessment: This type of assess-
ment also relies exclusively on visual observations, but these
are performed more systematically than for a general assess-
ment. Numerous structural elements (e.g., support beams,
connections, edges) are separately rated according to SSPC-
VIS 2, ASTM D 610, or equivalent and combined to provide
an overall structure or facility rating. Often, several condition
parameters (e.g., loss of topcoat, cracking, rust staining) and
several corrosion parameters (e.g., rusting, blistering, scaling,
loss of metal) are recorded. With this survey, one can obtain a
semi-quantitative rating of the percent of surface deteriorated.
This type of survey may be used to develop preliminary cost
estimates for recoating.
5.3.3 Physical Coating Testing: Physical testing, visual
assessment, and the general assessment are often performed
simultaneously. Visual assessment gives no information on the
lm adhesion, thickness, brittleness, or underlm corrosion.
Physical testing is required to determine whether the coating
can be overcoated or repaired, or whether it is too weak to
accept another coating layer. This assessment should be
performed prior to specifying the maintenance painting options
and requires direct access to the surface at several locations
on the structure. SSPC-TU 3 provides discussion of the value
of physical testing, as well as the procedures for testing.
Identication of the generic type of the existing nish
coating is important when selecting compatible coatings for
maintenance coating, if part of the existing coating is to remain. A
laboratory technique, Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
(FTIR), is frequently used to determine the generic coating type.
This requires only a tiny sample chip of paint to identify the
coating type, and is available at a nominal price. Alternatively,
patch tests of the proposed system or systems may be applied
to the existing coating to establish compatibility.
7-55
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
5.3.4 Hazardous Content Assessment: Unless previous
coating history and specications are known, laboratory
testing needs to be performed to determine if any hazardous
elements are present. These include, but are not limited to,
lead, cadmium, and chromium. OSHA (Occupational Safety
and Health Administration) requirements for worker expo-
sure and RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)
requirements for disposal with its implied containment should
be incorporated into the contract to protect workers and lessen
potential claims. SSPC-Guide 6 and Guide 7 provide details
relevant to containment and disposal. OSHA regulation 29
CFR 1926.62 details worker protection requirements for lead
(see SSPC publication 95-06, Project Design).
5.3.5 Structural Inspection: Coating assessment should
be included as part of any general structural inspection for loss of
metal, broken joints, or other structural defects. A relatively small
additional inspection time is required to evaluate and record
the ratings of individual structures or structural elements. This
information will normally prove extremely valuable in evaluating
maintenance painting options, especially in developing the most
cost effective life-cycle maintenance strategy. Numerous public
and private entities have been successful in using scheduled
facility inspections, such as bridge safety inspections, as the
rst cut in determining coating condition.
5.4 DETERMINE THE CONDITION RATING SCHEME:
For both visual inspection and physical testing, it is necessary
to use a standard rating system and format for recording data.
SSPC-TU 3 discusses the salient characteristics of a rating
scheme that is based on the technical merits of coating condi-
tion and overcoating.
5.4.1 Physical Testing: See SSPC-TU 3 for detailed guid-
ance in evaluating coating condition and risks of overcoating.
These evaluations generally require certain detailed information
concerning the coating type and physical condition.
5.4.2 Use of Ratings Data: In many cases, these condi-
tion ratings will be keyed directly to repair procedures (e.g.,
SSPC-PA Guide 4). The next two sections of this guide give
the procedures for developing such a scheme.
5.5 PLAN FOR INSPECTING STRUCTURAL
COMPONENTS: A sub-unit sampling plan identies the
portions of the structure or facility that will be rated and the
type of rating scheme to be used. Sub-unit sampling plans are
needed for complex structures or where detailed information
is required. For a process unit, (for example) the structural
steel might be divided into individual tanks, piping, handrails
and ladders, and structural support. On large structures, the
areas could be further subdivided into sections. Because of
differences in corrosion tendencies, it is often useful to have
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
separate ratings for edges and at surfaces. The extent of
inspection depends on how detailed a survey is desired and
what resources may be available.
5.6 ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND ASSEMBLE
RELATED DOCUMENTS
5.6.1 A specic procedure should be established for a
condition assessment, which should include a budget and
schedule, including equipment and crews. The availability
of funds will determine the extent of the survey that can be
undertaken. A schedule should be established based on the
number of hours or days required to prepare the structure
(e.g., notify other trades) or arrange for access (i.e., coordinate
schedules of other individuals). This includes identifying support
crews and equipment that may be required to assist with the
condition assessment. Personnel requirements must also be
established (i.e., identify individuals who will conduct the survey
such as in-house inspectors, engineers, outside consultants,
coating contractors, or coating manufacturers). If a condition
assessment survey is to be performed by a consultant or
contractor, a written contract should be prepared. If a coating
manufacturer offers to do the assessment at no cost, the rm
should be asked to submit a written description of the plan
for the owners review, modication, and approval. There are
numerous contracting methods available for acquiring condi-
tion assessments, structural inspections, and coating work,
including options ranging from acquiring each facet of work by
different contracts to using turnkey type contracts to perform
all inspection, structural repair, and coating work. When more
than one facet of work is included in a single contract, steps
should be taken to ensure the validity of each facet prior to
proceeding to the next facet.
5.6.2 Required standards (e.g., standards such as SSPC
VIS 2, ASTM D 610, or equivalent) as well as eld equipment
such as tape recorders, inspection forms, and a camera must
be available.
5.7 CONDUCT ASSESSMENT SURVEY: The survey
should be conducted after the schedule and the standards
have been established. The owners representative should
ensure that all elements of the survey have been properly
performed, recorded correctly, and distributed to predetermined
personnel.
6. List Potential Maintenance Painting Options
(Step 2)
6.1 REVIEW SURVEY DATAAND COATING OBJECTIVES
AND CRITERIA
6.1.1 The corrective action to be taken is based on the
results of the previous surveys, the short and long-term objec-
tives of the coating program, special limitations, and other
relevant factors.
7-56
6.1.2 The data to be analyzed are those that have been
previously collected from an overview, visual inspection, or
physical inspection. If no formal survey was taken, use the
best information available (e.g., coating historical records) to
estimate the overall condition ratings.
6.2 CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS: After the
data is reviewed, the available alternative actions should be
considered. These range from not coating to complete coating
removal and recoating.
6.3 NO MAINTENANCE REQUIRED FOR THREE YEARS
OR LONGER: In one possible scenario, the coating is in good
shape and no corrosion or deterioration requires attention. In a
second scenario, the coating may be providing some protec-
tion but may be in too poor a condition to salvage. Eventually,
total coating removal will be needed, but maintenance can be
delayed without any signicant harm to the structure. This option
may be considered under the following circumstances:
6.3.1 The structure is in a mild environment and little
corrosion activity is expected at breaks in the coating lm over
the next few years.
6.3.2 The extent of discoloration, topcoat erosion, or
general degradation is not very important, due to the locations
on the structure. In general, the coating is intact and protection
is still being provided.
6.3.3 The structure is being assigned a low priority for
maintenance because of economics, aesthetics, or other
reasons.
6.3.4 The structure is scheduled for major coating repair
or complete replacement within 3 years. The additional time
is not expected to add signicantly to the corrosion metal loss
or the surface preparation cost.
6.3.5 The structure is due for demolition.
6.4 SPOT REPAIR ONLY: Spot repair entails surface
preparation and touch-up coating of localized areas of deterio-
rated coating and corrosion. The surface preparation may be
accomplished by hand or power tool cleaning, high- or ultrahigh
pressure waterjetting, or abrasive blasting. Several specialized
materials and procedures are available for localized surface
preparation, including composite media (sponge), sodium
carbonate slurries, plastic media, walnut shells, corncobs, etc.
The intact coating surrounding the degraded area should be
feathered and lightly sanded 2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto the
intact coating to permit a smooth transition. The cleaned areas
are primed with a coating compatible with the existing coating
system and spot topcoated to conform to the required DFT. In
this particular option, the remaining (e.g., intact) coating is not
overcoated. It should be noted that the spot repair method is
primarily a stopgap method. It is recommended that the structure

be re-evaluated within three to ve years. Spot repair may be
considered under the following circumstances:
6.4.1 Repairs are hidden or in a low-visibility area and
thus unimportant to the aesthetics.
6.4.2 Owner maintenance crews are available for this type
of work.
6.4.3 Structures are small, not requiring extensive scaf-
folding or hard-to-access areas.
6.4.4 Corrosion and degradation are limited to isolated
areas and relatively small sections, which amount to less than
1% of the total area.
6.4.5 A decision has been made to upgrade small isolated
areas such as bearing areas, crevices, or areas subject to
leakage, condensation, or chemical splash.
6.5 SPOT REPAIR AND OVERCOATING: This technique
involves spot repair of deteriorated coating and corroded areas
followed by the application of a full nish coating over the
entire surface, including spot repaired areas and intact coating
areas. The intact coating surrounding the degraded area must
be feathered back. The repair coating should extend at least
2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto the intact coating to allow for
a smoother transition of the repair coating onto the existing
coating and better topcoat adhesion. The topcoat should
be compatible with the existing coating. The existing intact
coating should be cleaned of surface contaminants before
total recoating. This type of system would be expected to give
perhaps ve years or more additional life to the entire surface
area by helping to prevent further deterioration of the intact
coating. Successful overcoating will often delay the need for
a full coating removal. Spot repair and overcoating may be
considered under the following circumstances:
6.5.1 An evaluation of risks in overcoating is a function of
adhesion and existing coating thickness, as outlined in SSPC-
TU 3. This risk analysis must be performed if risks are to be
managed, and while it is generally thought that risks should
be held to the range of low to moderate, higher risks may
be acceptable to the owner under certain conditions.
6.5.2 The intact surface can be readily cleaned with pres-
surized air, hand tools (SSPC-SP 2), power tools (SSPC-SP 3),
solvent or detergent wiping (SSPC-SP 1), or power washing
(as described in SSPC-SP 12). If low or high pressure water
cleaning (also called power washing) is used, the maximum
water pressure required should be stated in the project speci-
cation.
6.5.3 If severely corroded surfaces (as described in Section
6.6) are found, special cleaning methods and coating systems
may be required.
7-57
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
6.5.4 When corrosion and deterioration exceed 10 to 15%
of the total area, project economics may suggest total removal
of the coating system.
6.6 COMPLETE RECOAT OF STRUCTURE OR SUB-
UNITS (ZONES): When the overall coating condition is poor,
when the remaining life of the structure or sub-unit justies the
expense, and when funds are available, a decision to recoat
the structure in its entirety is usually made. This involves
removing the old coating and all of the corrosion products before
applying the primer, intermediate coats, and topcoat. Coating
a sub-unit of a structure (often called zone painting) may be
a variation of this alternative when funds are limited or when
the remaining portions of the structure are in good condition.
This option presents a much lower risk of early coating/corro-
sion problems (such as catastrophic delamination or early rust
back) than do the alternative options.
6.7 OTHER REPAIR METHODS: On occasion, different
methods of cleaning and/or coating may be required for different
areas or zones of the structure. A higher-performing coating
system (e.g., abrasive blast cleaning followed by application
of a zinc-rich/epoxy/polyurethane system) may be specied
for high corrosion atmospheric areas of a structure, such as
areas subject to deicing salt, dripping, or chemical spillage),
with a lesser performing system (such as hand or power tool
cleaning followed by an alkyd or a high-solids epoxy with
good wetting) on less critical or less corrosion-prone areas.
Compatible topcoats may be required to blend in with restored
or rehabilitated portions of the structure.
6.8 ADDITIONAL SURVEY: After an analysis of the avail-
able data, an additional survey may be required. The initial
survey may have been too limited to provide sufcient data
to make remedial recommendations, or the survey may have
only looked at a portion of the structure or not examined some
specic details required, such as the integrity of the coating
near high-corrosion prone areas. The area may be scheduled
for other repair or outage work within a 2-year period and may
be re-assessed at that time.
7. Evaluate Economics of Available Options
(Step 3)
7.1 The act of contemplating coating application or main-
tenance is, in effect, an analysis of the economics of abating
or slowing the effects of corrosion damage. The variables
involved in protective coatings often require a variety of solu-
tions, each of which will carry unique cost-benet factors. Many
factors inuence the selection of coating systems. However,
when considering maintenance of existing coating systems,
the factors are generally restricted due to constraints imposed
by the existing coating. Still, there are generally multiple
options available, and it is important to consider the economic
impacts of all options prior to nalizing a design. The chapter
on economics in the SSPC Painting Manual, Volume 1Good
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
Painting Practice, provides comparative costs for most surface
preparation methods, generic coating systems, application,
and special requirements for selected situations.
8. Select Appropriate Maintenance Painting Op-
tions and Establish Implementation Procedures
(Step 4)
8.1 Once a course of action has been determined, it is
essential that detailed specications and supporting documents
be prepared to achieve that course of action.
8.2 IDENTIFY RELEVANT FACTORS FOR COATING
SYSTEM SELECTION
8.2.1 The selection of the coating system is inuenced
not only by the type of recoating (e.g., spot repair or complete
recoat) but also by special factors such as restrictions due to
environmental, health, and safety regulations; budgets; expo-
sure environment; weather; or conguration and contaminants.
Thus, before choosing the coating system, it is useful to identify
these pertinent factors.
8.2.2 Abrasive blast cleaning may require containment
controls due to air quality concerns or the need to avoid dust or
abrasive rebound in sensitive areas. The presence of hazards
such as lead-based coatings on a structure will require special
collection and containment devicesthe type of device being
largely determined by the extent of lead- based coating to
be removed. Site-specic regulations on the volatile organic
compound (VOC) content may exclude the use of previously
used coatings.
8.2.3 Weather or conguration can also limit the selection
of coating systems. Many coatings (e.g., conventional epoxies,
water-borne acrylics) are best applied above 10C (50F).
Other coatings are sensitive to high humidity or low humidity
(e.g., inorganic zinc-rich primers). In certain congurations,
spray application may not be permitted because of high wind
or overspray on sensitive equipment or automobiles.
8.2.4 The exposure environment is a major determinant of
the type of coating system. Typically, exposure environments
are classied according to the presence of soluble salts, pollu-
tion, sunlight exposure, rain/humidity, or chemicals.
8.2.5 The existing condition of the structure must be
known. For spot repair or overcoating, the compatibility of the
new coats over existing ones should be veried by a patch
test, as shown in SSPC-TU 3. If the patch coating shows no
adverse physical effects (e.g., lifting of the existing coating) or
appearance effects (e.g., bleeding) on the existing coating, it
should be considered compatible with it. In addition, the patch
test, when evaluated over a period of six months or more, can
provide important data on the physical compatibility (stress)
of the new coating over the old.
7-58
8.2.6 The ability of the coating to tolerate residual soluble
salts will directly affect the time to early rust-back. SSPC-TU 4
addresses salt remediation testing. The coating to be applied
must be tolerant of the level of contaminant present.
8.3 SELECT SURFACE PREPARATION METHODS
AND COATING MATERIALS FOR COMPLETE RECOAT
STRATEGY
8.3.1 Select Surface Preparation Methods: SSPC and
other organizations have well-dened standards for most of
these requirements, which can readily be incorporated into
a specication. Available surface preparation techniques for
complete recoating include conventional dry abrasive blast
cleaning (SSPC-SP 5/NACE No. 1, SSPC-SP 10/NACE No.
2, SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3, SSPC-SP 14/NACE No. 8, and
SSPC-SP 7/NACE No. 4), wet abrasive blast cleaning, vacuum
blasting, and high- and ultrahigh pressure water jetting (SSPC-
SP 12/ NACE No. 5). It is important to specify the degree of
cleanliness and the surface prole (for blast cleaning), the
degree of salt or contaminant remediation, and the need for
solvent cleaning and/or water washing prior to blast cleaning.
Waterjetting can neither alter nor create prole, but can expose
existing prole.
An important consideration when blast cleaning is the
collection and disposal of blasting debris. SSPC-Guide 6
provides guidance on the selection of the type of containment
based on the type of surface preparation being performed. It can
also be used to provide guidance on the level of containment
that is necessary for a job. Guidance is provided on ventilation,
air ow, and dust emissions. Guide 7 provides guidance on
the disposal of hazardous surface preparation debris once it
has been contained and collected.
If the surface preparation techniques discussed herein
cannot be used, it may be necessary to clean to a less desir-
able surface condition and to apply a coating system (primer,
intermediate, and topcoat) over a surface that is not completely
rust and coating free. In such instances, the primer must be
tolerant of the surface condition. Certain power tools are also
capable of removing existing rust and coating (SSPC-SP 11
or SSPC-SP 15) but generally at much lower production rates.
Coating system life expectancy is likely to decrease if the level
of surface preparation is lowered.
8.3.2 Select Coating Materials: The selection of the
coating system often involves two phases: rst, identifying the
generic types (e.g., epoxy/zinc-rich/polyurethane); and second,
identifying the criteria for selecting materials. The specica-
tion may utilize generic compositions, a qualied product list
of proprietary materials, or other approaches. In the coating
specication, the owner should describe the procedures for
qualication and acceptance criteria for the coating materials.
For qualication, the supplier may be required to furnish
evidence of previous use of the coatings on similar structures,

or laboratory tests of physical properties, accelerated corrosion
and weathering properties, and application properties. These
properties should be certied by the manufacturer or an inde-
pendent laboratory. For new technology coatings, extensive
service data may not be available. The owner may also require
some verication that the material delivered to the job site is
the same as that which was originally qualied. Some general
guidelines on acceptance sampling and testing are given in the
SSPC Painting Manual, Volume1Good Painting Practice.
8.3.3.1 An important part of the specication is the coating
lm thickness. Both a minimum and a maximum dry lm thick-
ness should be specied (see SSPC-PA 2).
8.3.3.2 The application methods are normally governed
by the materials selected and are stipulated by coating manu-
facturers on their data sheets. SSPC-PA 1 provides guidance
for applicators that will supplement the manufacturers appli-
cation instructions. If there is a contradiction between the two
recommendations, that of the coating manufacturer should
take precedence.
8.4 SELECT SURFACE PREPARATION METHODS
AND COATING MATERIALS FOR SPOT REPAIR OR SPOT
REPAIR AND OVERCOATING
8.4.1 Determine Techniques and Standards for Repair,
Surface Preparation, and Recoating
8.4.1.1 When making spot repairs, it is necessary to deter-
mine the precise areas requiring repair. Areas where coating
can be removed by moderate scraping with a dull putty knife
will require spot repair. Residual loose material will prevent
proper spot repair.
8.4.1.2 One important decision to be made is whether
abrasive blast cleaning will be used for spot repair mainte-
nance. Abrasive blasting may be used for brush-off cleaning
(SSPC-SP 7/NACE No. 4) or industrial blast cleaning (SSPC-
SP 14/NACE No. 8). To provide a higher level of cleaning with
the total removal of rust and coating, SSPC-SP 6/NACE No.
3 or greater may be specied for spot repair areas. Brush off
blasting may be used to remove loose coating or rust. It or some
other surface treatment may be necessary to obtain acceptable
adhesion between the existing intact coating and the repair or
overcoating system. Great care must be exercised when spot
blasting to avoid over-blast damage to adjacent intact coating
that does not need to be blasted. Spot blasting is generally not
recommended for areas of repair of less than 1 square foot or
when the total repair is less than 5 to 10 percent of the total
surface area, unless a lesser degree of cleaning cannot be
tolerated.
8.4.1.3 Alternatives to open spot blasting include hand
tool cleaning (SSPC-SP 2), conventional power tool cleaning
7-59
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
(SSPC-SP 3), commercial grade power tool cleaning (SSPC-
SP 15), special (proling) power tool cleaning (SSPC-SP 11),
and vacuum or wet blasting methods. These methods may be
used easily with vacuum assists for containment.
8.4.1.4. After spot cleaning, the cleaned areas are coated
with a primer that extends over the feathered edges of the
intact coating to overlap them 2.5 to 5 cm (1 to 2 inches) onto
the sound, intact coating. This will minimize edge lifting and
will provide a better appearance.
8.4.2 Select Coating Materials for Spot Repair or Spot
Repair with Overcoating.
8.4.2.1 The selection of the coatings will be determined
by the need for compatibility with the existing surfaces. Most
coatings are suitable for application to the bare metal areas
(i.e., spot-repaired areas), so the main concern is compat-
ibility with the previous coating. See SSPC-TU 3 for detailed
instructions for performing and evaluating patch testing.
8.4.2.2 The selection of the coating materials for spot repair
is guided by the same considerations as for full recoat. For spot
repair of small areas, a brushable primer is advantageous. It is
also important that the primer be compatible with the existing
intact coating because it is necessary to have the spot repair
overlap the intact coating. As an example, an organic zinc-
rich coating is normally used instead of an inorganic zinc-rich
coating for spot repair of a damaged inorganic zinc coating with
an organic nish coat, because the inorganic zinc-rich coating
does not bond sufciently to either organic or inorganic coat-
ings. Additional information on repair of damaged galvanized
or inorganic zinc coatings is given in SSPC-Guide 14.
8.4.2.4 The coatings selected for the full topcoat must be
compatible with both the spot primer and the existing intact
coating.
8.4.2.5 The requirements for application, lm thickness,
material qualications, and acceptance criteria are the same
as those for applying a full recoat system. For spot repair,
however, it is essential that the requirements for determining
which areas are to be repaired should be clear and denitive.
Discussion of these items should be included in the pre-bid
and pre-job meetings.
8.5 PREPARE SPECIFICATION
8.5.1 The job specication provides the basis for the cost
and execution of the work. It is essential that the job speci-
cation provide a complete description of the desired work by
prescribing specic procedures, processes, and materials or
by describing the work product. The specication must also
provide criteria for acceptance or rejection of work as well as
remedies for unacceptable work.
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004

8.5.2 A job specication should be prepared using the
general format of the Construction Specication Institute
(CSI). Chapter 3 of The Inspection of Coatings and Linings:
A Handbook of Basic Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and
Speciers provides a description of the CSI format and its parts
or specic owners format requirements. Additional information
for preparing a job specication for protective coating work can
be found in SSPC-TR 4/NACE 80200, Preparation of Protective
Coatings Specications for Atmospheric Service. Appendix
A provides additional information that should be considered
during preparation of the job specication.
9. Implement Maintenance Painting Options
(Step 5)
Clean and coat the structure.
10.4 ENSURE PROPER DOCUMENTATION AND FILING
OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION: Before the job is ofcially
accepted, it is necessary that all documentation be completed.
The record of the daily inspection logs and the records of the
coatings procured, used, discarded, or disposed of should be
properly stored in the owner les. It should be veried that
the retained samples of the coating are properly labeled and
stored for future reference.
10.5 INSTITUTE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
MEASURES: In some cases, regular removal of contaminants
can eliminate potential problems before they become severe.
Examples are chemical spills that might occur or concentrations
of de-icing salts. In some cases, moderate design changes can
be made that will eliminate water or other chemicals collecting
in crevices or other areas vulnerable to corrosion attack.

10. Plan and Implement Follow-up Activities

11. Notes
(Step 6)
11.1. Numerous public and private entities have been
10.1 BENEFITS OF FOLLOW-UP: An important part of a
successful in using scheduled facility inspections, such as
maintenance coating program is to monitor the performance of
bridge safety inspections, as the rst cut in determining coating
the applied coatings system, for both short-term and long-term
condition. Depending on the processes used for such inspec-
effects. In the short term, certain inspections and follow-ups
tions, it is feasible to train facility inspectors to perform surveys
are necessary to ensure that the contractor has fullled the
that range from General Overview Condition Assessment to
requirements of the contract. For the long-term, there are
Detailed Visual Inspection, as described in Section 5.3. It
certain benecial measures that can be taken to minimize the
requires a relatively small additional inspection time to evaluate
onset of corrosion and information that can be collected that
and record the ratings of individual structures or structural
will facilitate future decisions on maintaining the structure.
elements. This information will normally prove extremely valu-
able in evaluating maintenance painting options, especially
10.2 ESTABLISH NEED FOR PERIODIC INSPECTION:
in developing the most cost effective life-cycle maintenance
Inspection should be made of the structure within 6 to 12
strategy.
months after application especially in cases where there are
surfaces such as edges or bolts that will delaminate or rust
12. Disclaimer
within a short period due to difcult surface preparation or
application, or especially severe service conditions. If these
12.1 This guide is designed to describe, review, or analyze
areas are discovered and are corrected within the rst year,
new or improved technology and does not meet the denition
the time interval until the next maintenance may be extended.
of a standard as dened by SSPC. A guide differs from a stan-
Some agencies require a one-year touchup provision as part
dard in that it is not suitable for referencing in a specication
of a contractors obligations in the contract to cover such
or procurement document.
contingencies. Other warranted work should also be inspected
prior to expiration of the warranty.
12.2 While every precaution is taken to ensure that all
information furnished in SSPC guides is as accurate, complete,
10.3 ESTABLISH SCHEDULES FOR CONDITION
and useful as possible, SSPC cannot assume responsibility
ASSESSMENT: In addition to periodic inspection, a structure
nor incur any obligation resulting from the use of any materials,
should be scheduled for a periodic condition assessment.
coatings, or methods described herein, or of the guide itself.
Depending on the type of structure and the environment, the
rst condition asssessment would normally be conducted
12.3 This guide does not attempt to address problems
about 5 years after the original application and every 3 years
concerning safety associated with its use. The user of this
thereafter. Specic rating sheets or parameters to be inspected
specication, as well as the user of all products or practices
should be made available to inspection personnel. The condi-
described herein, is responsible for instituting appropriate
tion assessment should be similar to the survey data required
health and safety practices and for ensuring compliance with
in Section 5 of this guide.
all governmental regulations.

7-60

13. Bibliography
The following reference materials may contain useful
supplementary information:
Appleman, Bernard R., Advances in Technology and Standards
for Mitigating the Effects of Soluble Salts, Journal of
Protective Coatings & Linings, Vol. 19, No. 5, (May, 2002),
pp. 42-47.
Appleman, Bernard R. Coating Over Soluble Salts: A
Perspective. Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings,
Vol. 4, No. 10, (October 1987), pp. 68-82.
Castler, L. Brian, Jayson L. Helsel, Michael F. MeLampy, and
Eric Kline, Comparative Painting Costs. Steel Structures
Painting Manual, Vol. 1: Good Painting Practice, Chapter
8. Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2002.
Environmentally Acceptable Materials for Corrosion Protection
of Steel Bridges, Appendix 1 from Environmental
Guidelines for Painting Practices. Washington DC: FHWA,
1997. (FHWA Report RD-96-058).
Guide to Bridge Painting, FHWA TS-89-14. Washington DC:
Highway Administration, 1989. (SSPC Publication 89-
04).
Inspection of Coatings and Linings: A Handbook of Basic
Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and Speciers. Richard
W. Drisko, and Judy Neugebauer, eds. Pittsburgh, PA:
SSPC, 1997. (SSPC Publication 97-07).
PDCA Safety & Loss Control Manual., Fairfax, VA: Painting &
Decorating Contractors of America, 1984.
Protective Systems for Steel Bridges, Section 16.4, Bridge
Inspectors Training Manual 90, produced by Michael
Baker, Jr., Inc. Washington DC: FHWA, 1991. FHWA-
PD-91-015.
SSPC Painting Manual, Volume 1Good Painting Practice
(Fourth Edition). Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2002. (SSPC
Publication 02-14).
SSPC Painting Manual, Vol. 2Systems & Specications (Eighth
Edition), Selection of Coating Systems by Environmental
Zone. Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, 2000. (SSPC Publication
00-10).
SSPC-TU 1: Technology Update: Surface Tolerant Coatings.
Pittsburgh: SSPC, 1997. (SSPC Publication 97-20).
7-61
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
Trimber, Kenneth A. Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook,
2nd ed. Pittsburgh, PA: KTA-Tator, Inc., 1993. (SSPC
Publication 93-02).
Trimber, Kenneth A. and Daniel P. Adley, CIH, CSP. Project
Design: Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook,
Volume II. Pittsburgh, PA: KTA-Tator, Inc., 1995. (SSPC
Publication 95-06).
Appendix A. Other Considerations in Preparing
Contract Documents and Executing Mainte-
nance Coating Projects
The items below are intended to provide the owners
representative with a summary of items to be considered when
preparing contract documents and following up as the project
evolves.
A.1 BENEFITS OF WELL-PREPARED CONTRACTS: A
well-planned and designed contract will benet both the owner
and the contractor as follows:
Reduce the cost of the work to the owner.
Provide clear expectations of work to be
performed.
Eliminate unnecessary contingencies for the
contractor.
Provide for a smooth, trouble-free workow without
costly interruptions.
Identify and anticipate possible problems, avoid them
when possible, and provide means to resolve them
when they occur.
Complete the work safely.
Provide measurement and payment criteria.
A.2 ESTABLISH QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
FOR CONTRACTORS
A.2.1 Pre-Qualication of Contracting Firms: Many
agencies have adopted guidelines or procedures for screening
or pre-qualifying contractors based on references or actual job
evaluations. SSPC, through its Painting Contractor Certication
Program (PCCP), has established a program for certifying
contractors. The QP 1 program is for eld paint application,
the QP 3 program is for shop application rms, and the QP 2
program is for the removal of hazardous coatings. In addition,
numerous owners require that a contractor be bonded to cover
the estimated cost of the work.
A.2.2 Qualications for Applicators and Blasters:
Some state and other agencies require that the applicators
demonstrate their abilities to attain specied quality of cleaning
and coating application. ASTM D 4228, Standard Practice for
Qualication of Coating Applicators for Application of Coatings
to Steel Surfaces may be used to qualify applicators.
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
A.2.3 Union or Labor Requirements: Some jurisdictions
may be restricted to union shops.
A.3 PROTECTION OF EXISTING PLANT FACILITY AND
EQUIPMENT: Identify all the steps that should be taken by
the contractor and/or owner to protect the existing plant facility
and equipment from the planned operations. Establish hold
points to verify that the proper protection is in place prior to
proceeding with operations. Identify on plans or in the scope
of work if the coating is or may be hazardous.
A.4 SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: All employers must
prepare a safety plan, including both facility owners and contrac-
tors. When contractors are working at a particular facility, their
site-specic safety plan must incorporate the relevant issues.
The safety plan used is likely to be an amalgamation of the stan-
dard safety plan of both the owner and the contractor. Depending
upon the particular situation, the plan may be prepared by
the facility owner, the contractor, or by both working together,
but it should be understood and approved by both parties. All
employers must provide personal protective equipment (PPE),
including specic equipment such as respirators, and training
in its use. Safe working conditions are the responsibility of
the employer. Such responsibility is more easily dened at a
xed facility where all the workers are employed by the same
company than at a complex construction site where there are
many different companies working together. Nevertheless,
all safety precautions must be made, and it is the employers
responsibility to ensure that safety issues are recognized, and
the risks are minimized. Any details not completely understood
should be resolved in the pre-construction conference and at
subsequent other conferences. All HAZCOM requirements,
including labeling and material safety data sheets, must be
met. The SSPC Painting Manual Volume 1Good Painting
Practice provides additional guidance on safety issues in the
coating industry.
A.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE: The owner shall notify the
contractor if lead, cadmium, chromium-containing paints or
other hazardous materials are to be removed. The contractor
should identify the requirements to remove lead, chromium,
or cadmium-containing paints, or other toxic materials. The
owner should also indicate the extent of responsibility of the
contractor for generating, containing, collecting samples,
testing, and disposing of hazardous waste.
A.6 ACCESS FOR INSPECTION: The contractor should
provide for reasonable access to the work for the owners
inspectors, including use of the contractors scaffolding, work
platforms, and safety apparatus.
A.7 OWNER-FURNISHED ITEMS AND SERVICES: It is
often necessary and/or economically benecial to the owner to
make various items and services available to the contractor.
These may include: laydown/storage areas, electric power,
potable water, restrooms, etc. For any utilities provided, the
7-62
owner should identify locations, pressures, amounts, ttings,
voltages, and other pertinent operating details. The contractor
should identify any owner-furnished items or services.
A.8 WARRANTY/GUARANTEE: The most common
warranty for coating work is a one-year warranty against defec-
tive materials and job quality. Extended period performance
warranties are becoming more common, and, when utilized,
should be formulated to correlate with the specic coating
systems selected. When warranties are utilized, it should be
clearly stated who is to be responsible for the warranty and
what conditions will trigger the warranty repair, any required
inspection schedules, what is expected of the warranty repairs,
etc.
A.9 PERSONNEL AND COATING CONSUMPTION
RECORDS: Information regarding personnel resources and
coating quantities can be benecial in preparing cost estimates
for similar work. Tracking mechanisms should be dened in
the contract documents. Also, owners should request copies
of contractor inspection reports and daily logs for their les.
A.10 TYPE OF CONTRACT: The SSPC Painting Manual
Volume 1Good Painting Practice provides a detailed descrip-
tion of the types of contracts, bids, and proposals.
A.11 ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR OWNER-
CONTRACTOR RELATIONS
A.11.1 Identification of Owner and Contractor
Representatives: The contractor and owner should each
appoint an authorized representative to whom all required
notications are given, through whom contract changes are
processed, and who is responsible for contract coordination
and resolution of non-conformances and other problems.
Ensure that all personnel are familiar with responsibilities and
procedures and that the authorities of engineer, inspector, eld
supervisor, and coating manufacturers representative are
dened. In particular, identify the person who is responsible
for inspection and that persons afliation (e.g., owners repre-
sentative, third party, or other). Review procedures established
for handling and disposing of waste.
A.11.2 Interface with Plant Operation: The contract
should identify all plant operations and operations of other
contractors that will be ongoing in the work area. The contract
should outline how the coating work will interface with these
operations and what precautions will be necessary. Special
efforts should be made so that conicting operations, such as
welding and spray coating, do not occur simultaneously in the
same area.
A.12 PREPARE CONTRACT AND SCHEDULE: It is
useful to prepare a list of the various activities required in
securing the contracts and the time allotted for each of these.
Typical elements of this schedule are as follows:

a. Prepare Contract Documents
b. Notice Inviting Proposals
c. Pre-Bid Conference
d. Pre-Bid Demonstration/Inspection
e. Proposal Due Date
f. Post-Bid Meetings and Clarications
g. Negotiations, if allowed
h. Contract Award
i. Pre-Job Conference/Demonstration
j. Contract Start Date
k. Contract Termination Date
l. Owner Acceptance Date
m. Warranty Date
n. EEO requirements
Specic sample clauses for these and other details required
in obtaining contracts may be found in SSPC-TR 4/NACE
80200.
A.13 ARRANGE AND CONDUCT PRE-BID
CONFERENCE: All prospective or qualied bidders are invited
to attend a meeting with the owners representative to review the
bid package. This review would normally include an explanation
of the surface cleaning and application requirements, the nature
of the structure, its condition, access to the structure, special
restrictions (e.g., on blast cleaning safety requirements), and
answer any questions the contractor might have. Ordinarily,
an actual visit to the structures or facility to be coated should
be required. Many contractors are reluctant to attend pre-bid
meetings because of the cost and time, or simply because they
do not want to let their interests be known. For major and critical
projects, experienced owners often make pre-bid attendance
mandatory because it eliminates problems that occur when
contractors are not familiar with the structure or the terms of
the specications. Some public agencies do not permit such
meetings because they feel that the additional travel expense
is unfair to contractors from remote locations.
A.14 REVIEW BID AND AWARD CONTRACT: This
operation is usually strictly governed by owner legal policies
and requirements. The contractor who has met the previous
requirement with the lowest bid is generally awarded the
contract in the competitive bidding system.
A.15 PRE-JOB CONFERENCE: This meeting is held
between the owner and the contractor hired to do the job.
Owners may need to include representatives from their internal
safety and environmental departments in these meetings.
The contractor should bring the eld superintendent and the
company principal or company representative. The purpose of
this meeting is to review in detail the specic work assignments,
schedules, needs for coordination, and procedures for formal
and informal communication. The conference must include a
review of the work area pointing out safety hazards, facilities,
and equipment that require protection or special care, and
safety and emergency systems available.
7-63
SSPC-PA Guide 5
September 1, 2002
Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004
A.16 PROCURE COATINGS ACCORDING TO
SPECIFICATION: Either the owner or the contractor may
procure the coatings. In either case, it is necessary to verify
that the coatings meet the specication. The owners inspector
should verify that the agreed-upon coating materials supplied
to the job site are properly labeled, that proper certications
have been obtained, and that samples are retained for testing
by the owners laboratory, an independent laboratory, or for
future reference. Any exceptions or replacements should be
noted. Pre-sampling, testing, and approval prior to shipment
can help assure that approved material arrives on the job. This
can help prevent job delays.
A.18 Quality Assurance/Quality Control: Quality
Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) are important
parts of any maintenance program. The purpose of the
QA/QC program is to ensure that the processes and work
products are in conformance with the specied criteria. The
CSI specication format includes QC under Part 3. Execution.
The CSI approach requires the contractor to execute the QC
program. The contractor is responsible for quality control. The
processes need to be veried, which requires the contractor to
perform various inspection functions related to the QC effort.
The owner is responsible for quality assurance and should
be functioning to provide this assurance role. In other words,
the owner should assure that the contractor is providing the
necessary quality control. (This concept is often misinterpreted
as meaning the QC program will be executed by the owner,
utilizing in-house personnel or independent third party inspec-
tors, with the contractor providing no quality control effort.)
Qualied personnel are essential to the execution of the QC
as well as the QA program. Qualied inspector qualication
programs, such as NACE Internationals CIP4 or equivalent
for individual inspectors, or SSPC-QP 5 for coating and lining
inspection companies, are excellent tools for obtaining qualied
inspectors. The inspectors can be utilized in either a quality
control role or a quality assurance role. The content of the QC
program as described in the specication is also important.
The QC program must include appropriate methods and tools
with suitable references. Inspection frequency, distribution, and
data analysis methods must also be described. The correct
amount of inspection is important. Inadequate inspection may
not identify serious deciencies. There are numerous guides,
such as Inspection of Coatings and Linings: A Handbook of
Basic Practice for Inspectors, Owners, and Speciers, and
ASTM D 3276, which may be used to develop project-specic
coating inspection plans. Over-inspection may increase the
cost of the coating project while returning little or no additional
benets.