The Refinish Operations Insurance Says Are 'Built In' (They're Not)

Your adjuster told you color sand and buff is built into the refinish time. What he didn't mention is that the refinish operations not included in insurance estimates are documented in writing, in the very system his company uses, available to anyone who knows where to look.

He didn't manufacture that claim out of thin air. He repeated it because it usually works. Most shops either don't know where the documentation lives, or they assume the adjuster has some authority they don't. He doesn't. And proving it takes about five minutes once you know the source.

What "Not Included" Actually Means in the P-Pages

Every major estimating system publishes a guide to what is and isn't included in its calculated labor times. CCC calls it the Guide to Estimating (the P-pages). Mitchell has the CEG. Both are publicly available through DEG (degweb.org) and through your estimating platform directly.

Here's what Mitchell's CEG Section 28 says, verbatim: "The performance of finish sand and buff operation is NOT INCLUDED in the Mitchell refinish labor time." Same section, same document: "The performance of de-nib and finesse operation is NOT INCLUDED in the Mitchell refinish labor time."

The ASA Not-Included Chart, published through Collision Advice and DEG, lists color sand and buff, denibbing, and finish sand and buff as separate, billable operations across all three major estimating platforms. The formulas are right there: three-tenths of a refinish hour per panel for finish sand and buff, two-tenths for denib. These aren't gray areas. They're published standards.

Paint manufacturers back this up. Nissan has a position statement confirming that denib and finish sanding are required operations at both OEM manufacturing plants and collision repair shops. Toyota and Lexus have the same. AkzoNobel, Axalta, BASF, PPG, and Sherwin-Williams all participated in the SCRS Blend Study and confirmed that these are legitimate, time-consuming operations that belong on every estimate where they occur.

What Refinish Operations Not Included in Insurance Estimates Are Actually Costing You

Here's how to run a quick diagnostic on your own shop. Pull your last 10 repair orders. Count how many had large panels refinished. Now count how many of those estimates included color sand and buff, denib, or finish sand and buff as separate line items. If the answer is less than half, you have a documentation gap.

The "Who Pays for What?" survey run by Collision Advice found that only 35% of shops get paid "always" or "most of the time" for finish sand and buff. Only 40% for denib. That's not because carriers have a right to deny those operations. It's because most shops either don't bill for them or accept the pushback without documentation.

On a 2023 Chevy Silverado with a full-panel refinish on the bed, hood, and left quarter, denib on all three panels plus finish sand and buff adds up fast. Two-tenths per refinish hour for denib, three-tenths per hour for sand and buff, across three panels at a standard labor rate of $50 to $55 per hour: you're looking at $80 to $120 per vehicle, gone, because the adjuster said "built in" and you let it stand.

Multiply that across 30 or 40 ROs a month and you're giving away $2,400 to $4,800 per month in operations that are documented as yours to bill. That's not recoverable by volume. You get it back by billing correctly.

The SCRS Blend Study adds another layer. Conducted with five major paint manufacturers and audited by DEKRA, the study found that blend operations take, on average, 31.59% more time than a full refinish, not the 50% less time that the three major estimating systems had been allocating. CCC and MOTOR have since updated their systems to allow shops to input their own blend values. Mitchell has not changed its formula as of mid-2024. If you're on Mitchell, your blend time may still be calculated at half of full refinish, meaning you're leaving additional time on the table on every blended panel.

When the Adjuster Invents His Own Authority

This is where the situation gets more specific. Some adjusters, when pushed, will cite outside sources to claim they have authority to deny these operations. One adjuster on a recent supplement fight cited JD Power as the basis for denying denib and color sand and buff.

JD Power is a consumer satisfaction survey company. They measure how happy policyholders are with their claims experience. They survey drivers and rank insurers on customer service metrics. They have no published standards on collision repair labor times, no position statements on not-included operations, and no authority whatsoever on what is or isn't included in a refinish labor calculation.

Their 2025 U.S. Auto Claims Satisfaction Study measures things like "how quickly was the claim resolved" and "how satisfied were you with the rental car experience." That's what JD Power does. When an adjuster cites JD Power to justify denying denib, the correct response is to ask for the specific JD Power publication that defines refinish labor inclusions, because it does not exist.

The Bottom Line

The P-pages are not an opinion. The ASA Not-Included Chart is not a negotiating position. The paint manufacturer position statements are not suggestions. These are the published standards that govern what is and isn't in a base refinish labor time, and every one of them says color sand and buff, denibbing, and finish sand and buff are separate, billable operations.

When an adjuster says these are "built in," he is making a claim that contradicts his own company's estimating system documentation. Your job is to put the correct documentation in front of him before he has a chance to default to denial. Tools like Estimate Optimizer automatically flag these operations against OEM and estimating system standards so the documentation is already in the file before the supplement goes out.

Every estimate is a legal document. Start treating color sand and buff the same way.