| Asset Type | Industrial jetty – steel assets including piles, headstocks, deck beams, pipework, and handrails. |
| Environment | C5 Marine (Very High Marine) external exposure and C2 to C3 internal exposure. |
| Standards | AS/NZS 2312.1, AS/NZS 2312.2, ISO 12944, and AS 4312. |
| Services | Condition assessment, coating management plan, and net present value (NPV) analysis. |
| Analysis Horizon | 25 year whole of life analysis. |
Background: Assets at End of Life
Quick Answer
- A coating management plan defines how an operator will manage coating renewal across assets over a planning horizon.
- It combines condition data with Net Present Value (NPV) modelling to compare intervention options.
- The output is an evidence based renewal strategy with defined intervention timelines and indicative costs.
The facility was constructed under a concession agreement and became operational in the early 2000s. Original coating systems specified for the steel assets were appropriate for the C5-Marine environment. Piles were coated with an ultra-high build solvent-free amine-cured epoxy at a nominal 1,000 microns dry film thickness. Headstocks, deck beams, and pipework received a similar ultra-high build epoxy at 500 microns. Handrails and ancillary steelwork used a duplex system: hot-dip galvanising plus a three-coat paint system.
These original coatings provided the expected 10 to 15 years to first major maintenance. By the time the concession period ended, the original systems had reached end of life. The duplex handrails were also at the end of their first durability cycle at approximately 20 years, consistent with expected performance in a C5-Marine environment.
A coating management plan is only as reliable as the condition data behind it.
Talk to RemedyAP About Your Assets
Non-Conforming Refurbishment Coating
Prior to handover, refurbishment coating works were carried out on the steel assets. Review of the applied system against the applicable specification identified multiple non-conformances.
The original aged coatings were not removed before the new system was applied. Measured dry film thickness of the combined system was approximately double the specified value, a direct consequence of overcoating. QA and QC records for the refurbishment works were absent.
Zinc-rich primers provide cathodic protection to the steel substrate. This mechanism requires the primer to be in direct contact with a correctly prepared steel surface. When applied over an existing aged coating, the zinc primer cannot protect the steel as intended. The protective function of the entire coating system was compromised from the point of application.
2025 Condition Assessment Findings
RemedyAP conducted condition assessments of the steel assets in 2025. These confirmed further progression of coating failure since an earlier inspection cycle. The key findings were:
- Widespread breakdown across major steelwork, with condition ratings of 4 to 5 on the IPWEA five-point scale
- The overcoat system showed cracking, edge corrosion, and undercutting consistent with adhesion failure at the interface with the original coating
- One to two percent coating breakdown mapped across major steelwork components
- External perforations and leaks observed on pipework; internal pipework condition remained unknown
The Remedy AP assessment attributed the rapid deterioration to improper surface preparation prior to overcoating and the complete absence of inspection and quality oversight during application. These findings provided the data required to develop the coating management plan and evaluate renewal scenarios.
Renewal Scenarios and NPV Analysis
Three coating renewal strategies were evaluated. Each scenario assumed urgent and immediate repairs were completed within the first 12 months. The NPV cost analysis was conducted over a 25-year horizon using discount rates of 3, 5, and 7 percent, consistent with NSW Government cost-benefit analysis guidance (TPG23-08).
Scenario 1: Periodic Maintenance
Spot repairs at an escalating rate, doubling every three years from 3 percent breakdown in Year 3, followed by full removal and replacement in Years 14 to 15. Spot repair cost rate: $5,000/m2. This value accounts for the distributed work fronts and exponential cost of access over water.
NPV outcome: approximately $9.7 million at a 5 percent discount rate.
This scenario carries the highest risk. Spot repairs on a coating system with underlying adhesion failure provide limited durability. Breakdown is likely to accelerate, bringing forward the full replacement and increasing total cost.
Scenario 2: Staged Renewal
Sectional full blast and repaint at approximately 20 percent of total surface area every two years over a 10-year period. Cost rate: $1,100/m2 representing improved efficiency in establishing access over water.
NPV outcome: approximately $4.4 million at a 5 percent discount rate.
This scenario balances cost across budget years. Each completed stage delivers 15 or more years to first major maintenance. Multiple full-enclosure setups increase unit cost compared to a single campaign.
Scenario 3: Full Replacement
Full blast and repaint of all coated steelwork commencing in Year 6, delivered over two years. Cost rate: $900/m2.
NPV outcome: approximately $3.2 million at a 5 percent discount rate.
This scenario delivers the lowest whole-of-life cost. A single mobilisation achieves economies of scale, a uniform coating system, and the highest long-term confidence in service continuity. It requires capital planning and budget alignment ahead of Year 6.
Recommendation
The whole-of-life analysis demonstrated a clear order of cost efficiency across all discount rates tested. Scenario 3 is the lowest-cost option. Scenario 2 is next most cost-effective. Scenario 1 carries the highest cost and the greatest risk of unplanned interventions.
RemedyAP recommended full renewal of all coated steelwork within 6 to 7 years using an appropriate coating system applied under full containment and independent QA and QC supervision. The recommended system required a full protective coating specification as a separate engagement, with coating inspection and hold point verification throughout application. For the pipework, viscoelastic tape was identified as a fit-for-purpose corrosion protection alternative given the overcoating history.
A detailed pipework survey was recommended before the full renewal programme is confirmed. Ultrasonic thickness measurement, borescope inspection, and pigging are required to establish internal pipeline condition. The internal condition remains a critical information gap and a credible risk of unplanned intervention.
Independent QA and coating specification are critical to getting renewal right.
Speak to Our Team About Your Next Programme
What a Coating Management Plan Delivers
A coating management plan gives the asset owner a defensible basis for capital planning. It replaces reactive maintenance decisions with a scheduled, evidence-based programme.
For this facility, the CMP demonstrated that periodic patching was not a cost-effective long-term strategy. Bringing forward a full renewal delivered a $6.5 million reduction in NPV cost compared to periodic maintenance and eliminated the risk of accelerating unplanned failures.
A coating management plan is the planning instrument that follows a condition assessment. Where the condition assessment identifies what has failed and why, the CMP defines what to do about it, in what order, and at what cost. Where renewal works then proceed, independent coating inspection provides the hold-point verification that the new system is applied to specification and will achieve its intended service life.
Why RemedyAP for Coating Management Planning
A coating management plan is only credible if the condition data behind it is accurate and the NPV modelling reflects realistic intervention costs. Both require direct experience with how coating systems perform in the field, not just how they are specified.
RemedyAP combines inspection capability with the technical depth to interpret findings against AS/NZS 2312, ISO 12944, and whole-of-life cost frameworks. The condition assessments, renewal scenarios, and cost modelling are produced by the same team. That removes the interpretation gap that occurs when inspection findings are handed to a separate planner.
RemedyAP develops coating management plans for industrial and civil infrastructure, helping asset owners prioritise maintenance, optimise lifecycle costs, and make evidence based renewal decisions.
Conclusion
This coating management plan demonstrates how condition assessment data and NPV modelling combine to identify the lowest whole-of-life renewal strategy for steel assets in a C5-Marine environment. The analysis confirmed that bringing forward a full coating renewal programme, rather than managing deterioration through periodic repairs, delivers the lowest total cost, the least operational disruption, and the highest confidence in asset continuity. A coating management plan makes that decision defensible before capital is committed.
