CoatingsPro Magazine - CoatingsPro Plus January 2022
AMPPLIFY: AMPP QP Accreditation Programs Overview
Dave Evans and Jim Kunkle 2021-12-29 06:33:46
The SSPC: Society for Protective Coatings’ Qualification Procedure (QP) program began in 1986 as a certification program with “industrial paint.” The industry wanted to come up with consensus standards on how to qualify what field contractors were performing on marine and industrial structures.
Over time, the QP program has developed and continues to be kind of the flagship program for quality in this industry.
Today, there are roughly 10 QP-related programs:
-
SSPC-QP 1, Field Application to Complex Industrial and Marine Structures
-
SSPC-QP 2, Field Removal of Hazardous Coatings
-
SSPC-QP 3, Shop Painting Accreditation Program
-
SSPC-QP 5, Accreditation for Coating and Lining Inspection Companies
-
SSPC-QP 6, Contractor Metallizing Accreditation
-
SSPC-QP 7, Painting Contractor Introductory Program
-
SSPC-QP 8, Installation of Polymer Coatings and Surfacings on Concrete and Other Cementitious Surfaces
-
SSPC-QP 9, Standard Procedure for Evaluating the Qualifications of Commercial Painting and Coating Contractors
-
Bonus: SSPC-QN 1, Nuclear Coating Supplement
-
Bonus: SSPC-QS 1, Standard Procedure for Evaluating a Contractor’s Advanced Quality Management System
Some of those go through consensus standards, and they go through periodic reviews. The key ones really originated in the beginnings of the ’90s as we moved into lead regulations, especially domestically here in the United States. Again, I know hazardous coatings are an issue globally, but definitely domestically here, when we start getting into the ’92/’93 timeframe, there were lead lawsuits, so QP 2 was born. That was dealing with the qualification of contractors who would remove hazardous coatings, such as lead paint, and then also how they would contain that, how they would protect the workers, the general public, and then also the environment as well.
That particular program was very monumental, because again, it tied in the regulations that were coming out. And, as regulations change, the programs and standards can be very dynamic to adjust with new technologies with current trends in the industry, best practices, and the like.
The key ones that I’d like to focus on are QP 2 and QP 3. The latter deals with the blast and paint shops. It is based off the joint industry standard with the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), which has improved quality performance in shops.
Accreditation programs are critical for the industry; they have quality in mind. But they’re also there to protect the asset owner, the facility owner, and, generally overall, the whole industry.
This works out very well for the asset owner and for the facility owner. Now, they have a process and a procedure that they can integrate when it comes to the qualification of contractors or blast and paint shops. But now, also, they can tie in the inspection firm and weave into a total package when it comes to project work with QP 5.
QP 5 gives asset owners a heightened level of assurance that the coatings job is going to be delivered in accordance with the specification that they’ve had developed. It offers a degree of documentation and a paper trail that is almost unprecedented in the industry.
QP 6 deals with metallizing, or thermal spray, that can be done in shops or in the field. We’re seeing a lot of the combination of the two being done.
QP 8 deals with the qualification of concrete coatings and other kinds of cementitious types of preparation and surface treatments.
QS 1 deals with the quality system, and that accreditation really requires a little bit more in-depth auditing of processes, the procedures, and also looking at the acceptance in the culture within the organization that the quality is sound. It establishes a higher level of excellence for the standard, so that an owner who specifies or has a project or a need for a QS 1-quality type standard is expecting a different level of excellence out of the applicator than what you normally would on a project not requiring it.
When we look at the Accreditation Program, we’re looking at process paperwork procedures, but we’re really watching, observing, inspecting, documenting, and then making sure that the practice is done properly in the field.
Let’s equate it to the medical industry: If you have a cold or the flu, you may go see a general practitioner, but if you need a surgeon, you’re probably going to go see a specialist. And so the QS standard takes it one step further and specifically audits items that are pertinent to our industry. Whereas a QP 1 audit might not be as focused, we’re looking at things that are specifically purposed in the industrial coatings business in a QS 1 audit.
When it comes to working with owners, engineers, and specification firms that work in and around coatings specifications and project requirements, we educate and provide information to them to let them know that they need to consider looking at their entire corrosion and coatings strategy and looking to integrate multiple QP requirements.
For example, if a contractor has QP 1, they should consider looking at the aspect of the QP 5 inspection firm. And again, tying everything together.
It is a partnership. It requires the contractors, the owners, the asset owners, and AMPP to collaborate and work together. Our auditor’s position is one of being not a guide through the process, but certainly to advise them in what they could do to help achieve the accreditation if they needed to make an improvement. We’re collaborative in our nature because that’s the way that everybody’s going to grow together. We’re firm believers that it takes a village to accomplish the movement of the accreditation program and make it valuable for everybody.
Disciplinary actions seldom mean a positive thing, but the QP accreditation programs have built in discipline since the ‘90s. They are revised with changes in the industry and with ethics and other best practices. The disciplinary action criteria, or DAC as we like to call it here at AMPP, are not viewed as sledgehammers on a contractor. Rather, the DAC is really an effective tool to let contractors know that they need to adhere to the program. It also provides the owners with an opportunity or a vehicle to communicate with AP if they’re having any issues, challenges, or concerns.
If there are any types of ethics violations, if there are any major safety or environmental regulatory issues that might come down through that review, it is an opportunity to work with our customers for improvement. We see it as more of a collaborative effort on AMPP’s part to help rectify a situation that’s been identified — to the benefit of both the owner and the contractor as we work through it to make it in compliance with the program.
If there’s an ethical complaint, that’s investigated by a completely separate arm from QP. That applies to the whole AMPP organization. But if there’s a finding, the QP program is going to work diligently with the contractor to try to get those things resolved in a timely basis so that they’re resolved forever.
The idea here is not to remove an accreditation if we don’t have to; that is absolutely a last resort. There’s a long and very detailed communication process that occurs long before that ever happens. So to be perfectly clear, it’s certainly not one strike and you’re out. That’s not it at all. It’s very fair. The program is about continuous improvement.
We operate on the premise that you’re innocent till proven guilty. There are so many things that you hear in the marketplace about this, that, and the other thing. We take a posture that we’re going to investigate everything, that there's two sides to every story, and probably the truth is somewhere in the middle. What we do is work diligently to achieve that by communicating with the contractor, getting all the facts, and then putting together an improvement program that works to clear the issue. There are some things that are certainly out of our hands, but with the majority of them, where we can have an influence to make things better, we're absolutely going to take that posture.
Value-Added Benefits for Asset and Facility Owners
When you take a look at the long-term performance of a bid that included QP requirements, chances are that the length of that coating’s extended service life received by the owner is going to be much greater than on projects where they don’t require a QP-accredited contractor. We certainly understand the low-bid principle. The owner should think twice about accepting the lowest qualified bidder because that will make a real difference in the quality of the project — more so than if he or she gets a QP-accredited contractor. Achieving the QP accreditation by a contractor indicates that he or she has met a standard that certainly defines a high level of quality and has met the requirements of any one of the QP standards. Meeting these requirements allows them to differentiate themselves against other operations that have not been able to achieve that accreditation. It’s really important to consider both of those items.
The other benefit that is very powerful for facility owners and asset owners is the qualification when they’re looking at not only the training of the craft workers but also the qualification and the certification — not only when it comes to surface prep coating application, or even on the quality system, but also when they’re looking at the quality assurance work that is done. As far as what the auditor is looking for, there are two things that either the applicator or the blaster has met:
1.Certain qualifications that are listed within the standard — that they’re verifiable and that they have a proven degree of performance when it comes to meeting the standard;
2.That they look at the complexity of the crew, meaning that within the various QP standards, there are requirements for the number of qualified workers that have to be present on the crew.
The auditor is making sure that the contractor is providing trained individuals on the specific project that they’re working on to make sure that the requirements of the QP standard are met as are those of the specifications.
Now, for the facility and asset owners, AMPP is not an association to just put in the spec and then go through and do the process. AMPP works with the facility owner and the asset owner when it comes to writing their specifications. They are given some sample language that they can put into their specifications and into their job notifications when it comes to contractors.
When it comes to specifications and project bid work, owners should incorporate language first and foremost. Especially in North America, what goes into a specification has to be very exact. A lot of times, when writing in something like one of the QP standards, having that verbiage correct can be difficult. AMPP is more than happy to provide sample verbiage that an engineer owner or contract specifier can write into a spec, each step of the way, to make sure that the verbiage is correct and that what’s being specified is exactly what is wanted.
Also look at this on a global basis. For example, we might have international owners for whom the language might need to be different because of their regulations and business laws. It’s not a one size fits all, but having the basics and making sure that the standard is specified and that the program requirement is specified, that’s key.
Look at how to communicate within your organization so that everyone knows that the asset owner is requiring QP and understands what it entails. We’re here to help; that’s what we do.
Advantages for Contractors, Paint Shops, and Inspection Firms
There are a high number of contractors in shops and inspection firms that obtain QP accreditations because they need to be in compliance with the owner’s or the asset owner’s specification to have QP. In addition to being compliant, a lot of contractors want to differentiate themselves against their competitors.
The QP process can be an arduous one. Initially, it’s a lot of looking at your company and looking at the QP standard and the audit criteria, and making sure all the parts and pieces are in place, and then actually practicing it for a while to make sure that your operations work that way. But what happens is that you find that a lot of contracting companies take it one step beyond and say, “You know, initially I wanted to do it because I wanted to chase that kind of work; it was opportunistic. Now, it’s turned into that we want our companies to achieve those kinds of quality standards, so we operate that way.” And then, in turn, what these contractors see is that they’re able to bid a lot of different kinds of work because, essentially, the doors are open to them.
Looking at achieving accreditation gives contractors an opportunity to really look internally at improvements they can make. There is going to be some investment; they’re going to have to invest some time, money, and resources into craft workers, into their inspection team when it comes to quality and quality control, and then into business practices internally.
But achieving a QP accreditation may help contractors impact their bottom lines by gaining efficiencies due to the process. And that relates directly to the hours saved avoiding safety, training, and quality issues. It helps them to become much more efficient, and their profitability improves dramatically.
Note: The content in this article consists of excerpts from a podcast episode. Listen and watch it on demand at www.coatingspromag.com/podcasts.
JIM KUNKLE, PCS, manager, Business Development, at AMPP, holds both a master’s in communication and Information Systems and a BSBA in Communications Management from Robert Morris University. Kunkle is a qualified SSPC Level 1 Inspection Technician for Protective Coatings Inspector and Concrete Coatings Inspector. in 2017, he earned his Protective Coatings Specialist Certification.
DAVE EVANS, director of QP and coatings credentialing and business development for AMPP, currently manages the QP accreditation program in addition to being heavily focused on business development. He has been working collaboratively across AMPP to drive greater momentum to its core coatings certifications and educational programs. Evans holds NACE CIP III and SSPC PCS credentials, and has been a NACE CIP instructor for 33 years. For more information, contact: Dave Evans, dave.evans@ampp.org.
©Association for Materials Protection and Performance. View All Articles.