Cooling Tower Locations for Service and Water Treatment in 2026

Say a treatment and mechanical service department in Dayton prices annual work for one two-cell cooling tower at $31,680. Direct delivery costs of $19,440 leave $12,240 in annual gross profit. That account deserves more prospecting effort than another afternoon calling buildings that have no tower your crew can service.

Find the equipment first. Before sending an estimator across town, you need a location backed by evidence that the equipment fits your service scope, plus a way to reach the person who can explain the maintenance agreement and authorize a visit. Counting rooftop fans will not settle that.

Asset Search by PorchRocket finds visible cooling towers on roofs and equipment pads, cross-references imagery with public data and property records, and returns a reviewed decision for each candidate. The account model below follows the two-cell installation through five years, then shows what a territory of 180 accepted locations could support.

Which cooling towers belong on a service prospect list?

Start with open and closed-circuit towers your crew can maintain, then separate equipment classes before counting sites or assigning a service offer.

An open tower exposes its circulating water to air. A closed-circuit tower adds a separate process-fluid loop, but still has an external water circuit when operating wet. CDC explains that both designs need the same basic maintenance protocols and can release aerosols containing Legionella. The word “closed” does not remove the water management job. See CDC’s cooling tower control guidance.

Let the technical lead choose. A treatment company looking for either circuit arrangement within its existing service area needs a different search from a mechanical contractor that wants only factory-assembled equipment its crew knows how to repair without bringing in another specialist. A refurbishment team could specify larger installations and defer the repair decision until inspection.

Classification	What it distinguishes	Instruction for the prospect inventory
Open circuit	Direct contact between circulating water and air	Include when the water program and mechanical scope fit your crew
Closed circuit	Separate process-fluid loop and external spray-water circuit	Record separately; confirm the proposed service covers the correct loop
Factory-assembled or field-erected	How the equipment was constructed	Use as a qualification field when evidence supports it
Crossflow or counterflow	Air direction relative to falling water	Confirm from equipment records before specifying replacement components
Wet/dry arrangement	Equipment able to use different heat-rejection modes	Ask the operator which modes are used and when

The construction and airflow distinctions come from the ASHRAE cooling tower chapter. The labels describe different things. A field-erected tower can also be open circuit and crossflow; those labels should not create three prospects.

Keep evaporative condensers in a separate category if your team services them. Ask for the equipment record before treating a similar-looking enclosure as interchangeable with a tower. Reject ordinary rooftop air conditioning units from a tower-only campaign.

I would count one campus as one site, retain individual equipment observations beneath it, and count the buying organization separately. Two visible cells do not automatically mean two maintenance contracts. The installed-base mapping guide explains that site-to-equipment relationship for manufacturers and service networks.

Legionella rules and cooling tower registries in 2026

New York City requires monthly Legionella sampling during tower operation, while New York State and Vancouver maintain their own registration and maintenance requirements.

The current NYC schedule took effect May 8, 2026: samples must be collected monthly, no more than 31 days apart, and the qualified person must report the collection date within five days. A proposal based on the city’s old quarterly sampling interval needs revision. The NYC Health Department’s current requirements state the change explicitly.

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 188-2021 establishes minimum Legionellosis risk management requirements for building water systems. Read it alongside the jurisdiction’s adopted requirements and the site’s maintenance program. Put the governing edition and the responsible roles in the contract file. A reference to “ASHRAE compliance” alone leaves too much of the service scope unwritten.

Jurisdiction	Verified requirement relevant to a service proposal	How I would use it in territory planning
New York City	Registration; monthly Legionella sampling with a 31-day maximum interval; sample-date reporting within five days	Identify the current qualified person and the contract’s sampling responsibilities
New York State	State registration; registry updates every 90 days while operating; inspections before seasonal startup, every 90 days in use and after maintenance; certification by November 1	Retain state identifiers and put inspection and certification responsibilities on the account calendar
Vancouver, British Columbia	Operating permits for towers and evaporative condensers; Legionella pneumophila testing at startup and each calendar month of operation	Use the permit map as a starting source and check the operating season

The New York State requirements also say NYC towers must be registered with the city. Those are separate records to reconcile, not duplicate sales accounts. State inspection intervals and city sampling intervals describe different tasks.

Vancouver’s operating permit page provides another municipal example and links to its public map. Its requirements do not establish a schedule for a U.S. territory. Asset Search’s standard coverage is the contiguous United States; other regions are available on request.

A second NYC change took effect November 3, 2026. Chapter 206’s enacted text replaces annual city certification with twice-yearly filings in January and July, unless department rules specify other dates. It also extends inspection and test record retention from three to ten years. Keep the state’s November 1 certification separate from the city filings. Put each obligation and its responsible role on the account calendar; older city guidance still describes annual certification and three-year retention.

What belongs in a cooling tower maintenance contract?

A cooling tower proposal should assign water treatment and mechanical work separately, with named responsibilities for inspections, records and the site’s operating calendar.

Begin with the equipment schedule. Ask the operator to identify each tower and cell and explain what it serves, so you can agree on a work window and write down which parts of the system are included before either side starts discussing the annual price. Spell out the exclusions. If condenser-water pumps are outside the agreement, put that in the scope the buyer signs.

I would price the following work packages separately, even when one company performs all of them:

• Treatment visits and consumables, with the site’s water program defining monitoring and response tasks.
• Mechanical inspections and scheduled service, with a written allowance for labor and a separate approval process for repairs.
• Planned cleaning events, including the access arrangements and shutdown work assigned to each party.
• Sampling coordination and reporting, with the laboratory and submission responsibilities identified.

Local requirements affect that scope. NYC says systems must be cleaned at least twice per calendar year and disinfected regularly, with further action when results require it. Its guidance also identifies qualifications for chemical application and laboratory analysis. Those tasks need the appropriate providers, even when a mechanical contractor holds the main agreement. See NYC’s inspection and disinfection guidance.

For operating NYC towers, include summertime hyperhalogenation between July 1 and August 31, a follow-up Legionella test 3 to 31 days afterward, and the declaration due within 30 days of treatment. Assign the treatment provider and the System Permission Owner’s filing responsibility. That scheduled work belongs in the annual scope before the buyer compares competing service fees.

Water performance can provide a second conversation beyond the renewal price. DOE recommends evaluating conductivity and cycles of concentration with a treatment specialist. Its example shows that increasing from three to six cycles can reduce makeup water by 20% and blowdown by 50%, subject to water chemistry. Use that as a reason to review operating records, not as savings assigned to a photographed tower. See DOE’s cooling tower management guidance.

Request operating records before pricing the review. Tell the owner which treatment reports and water-use information the specialist needs, then define the report the owner will receive. Price that work on its own scope.

For contract structure and renewal planning, use the commercial HVAC maintenance agreement guide. For city, county and school work, Bid Control by PorchRocket for HVAC contractors finds public opportunities and keeps bid papers and addenda together. A tower inventory identifies the facility; the public solicitation defines the work being purchased.

Planning rebuilds and replacements from service records

Use installation age to prioritize assessments, then compare repair scope and operating performance before recommending a cooling tower rebuild or replacement.

The historical service-life evidence is more nuanced than a fixed retirement year. Table 3 in the 2019 ASHRAE Handbook’s owning and operating cost chapter reports a median greater than 22 years for metal cooling towers in its sample of 170 units, with 24 replaced. The greater-than sign matters: the table includes equipment still in service. It does not say every tower should be replaced at 22.

For a 2026 campaign, I would use documented age to schedule an assessment and inspection findings to scope the capital proposal. Assign one salesperson when maintenance renewal and replacement discussions concern the same account.

Ask for installation and major-work dates. Record the casing’s history separately from later component work, and have the operator confirm those dates before assigning an age to the installation.

The field survey should answer the question your estimate depends on. Can the proposed repair be done within the permitted shutdown? Which components require work? What access and lifting arrangements must be priced? Has the building’s required duty changed? Give the estimator those answers before requesting a replacement quote.

DOE recommends comparing retrofit and maintenance options against replacement costs and benefits. Follow that comparison in the proposal: scope, downtime, operating implications and the next assessment date. A customer choosing a repair still needs the equipment maintained afterward.

Keep the sales forecast tied to the buyer’s decision. “Assessment requested” belongs in a different stage from “replacement funded.” Record the budget meeting date, the person approving the scope, and what information remains outstanding. A tower on a roof has no purchasing deadline until the account supplies one.

For an equipment maker or refurbisher, that distinction prevents an installed-base count from becoming an inflated replacement forecast. The tower record identifies a place to investigate. The accepted survey supplies the repair opportunity.

How to find cooling towers near you

Combine registry records with a systematic imagery search inside your service territory, then resolve questionable equipment before assigning a sales visit.

Start with the delivering branch. I would draw a travel-time boundary around the crew’s working day and exclude equipment it cannot support before buying research, particularly when the immediate job is to fill a technician’s Tuesday route rather than expand into another market. The boundary belongs in the order.

Where public records exist, check their coverage and terms first. NYC Cooling Tower Registrations publishes currently registered systems and reported test dates, excluding decommissioned systems. Addresses are entered by registrants. Preserve the source record and retrieval date, then reconcile the address with the equipment location. Multiple registrations on one parcel need separate equipment records beneath the same site.

The New York State Cooling Tower Registry Weekly Extract has different boundaries: its metadata says statewide excluding NYC, and its rows represent laboratory sample results. Multiple rows can describe the same tower. It also limits researchers to statistical reporting and analysis, so use another permitted source for the prospect file. A public download is not automatically a sales directory.

Search beyond those addresses. CDC’s October 2026 cooling tower identification guidance identifies hospitals, hotels and larger offices among candidate building types, along with industrial processes such as plastics manufacturing. It also notes that permitting and registration records can be outdated or incomplete. Use building type to direct attention, then require evidence of the equipment.

Review roofs and nearby pads in a defined grid. Mark each investigated site so the next reviewer knows what was covered. Keep the image date attached to the observation, and compare another view when the first does not settle the classification. Avoid treating a search-result pin as the equipment location.

CDC’s cooling tower photo examples are a good training reference. They show top and side fans, different shapes, and rooftop AC units that should not be counted as towers. Side-mounted fans can be difficult to see from an overhead view. Your review should have an unresolved category for that case.

An equipment maker can use this process to look beyond its registered units. Asset Search searches across brands and existing directories, using aerial and satellite views with property records and public datasets. Buyer-defined rules guide the search, and people review each candidate before delivery.

The asset inventory from aerial imagery guide covers the broader workflow. For this campaign, write the search question narrowly: find visible tower installations that meet the department’s equipment scope and territory, with enough evidence to choose the next action.

What a reviewed cooling tower location record should contain

Require a stable site identifier, dated evidence and a disposition, then connect the equipment observation to its parcel and owner.

A spreadsheet row should explain why the site was included and give the service manager enough detail to send a technician out with one question to settle, so the visit adds evidence instead of repeating the desk review from the beginning. Make that question answerable.

Use this delivery specification for the pilot.

Field	Example or required format	Decision it supports
Site identifier	A permanent internal ID	Match future updates to the same installation
Location	Address and equipment coordinates	Find the correct building and equipment area
Parcel and owner	Parcel identifier, owner and record date	Start ownership research
Equipment observation	Apparent tower arrangement and visible cell count where supported	Assign the right technical review
Evidence	Dated views linked to the observation	Review what was visible at that time
Registry reference	Source identifier and retrieval date, when found	Reconcile the public record
Disposition	Fits, rejects or unresolved	Decide whether outreach or more investigation comes next
Reason	The search rule met or failed	Audit inclusion and exclusion decisions
Field check	One question that would settle an unresolved case	Scope the next authorized visit
Contact	Owner information; decision-maker contact where applicable	Reach the operating or purchasing role

Define “fits” as meeting the agreed search criteria. It does not certify the system’s water quality or establish an immediate repair requirement. Those answers come from the responsible technical team and its records.

For a screened enclosure, the field check might be to confirm the equipment type from the nameplate or mechanical schedule. For two adjacent installations, it might be to establish whether they belong to one operating account. Give the reviewer one question to settle, not a vague instruction to “verify site.”

Retain rejects as well. If an enclosure was excluded because it was ordinary rooftop AC equipment, that reason saves someone from adding it to the tower campaign again next quarter. Asset Search returns every candidate disposition, including unresolved sites with the check needed to decide them.

Test the awkward records. Before expanding the territory, import a site with several equipment observations and an unresolved candidate into the receiving system, then ask the salesperson to find the evidence and assign the next action without help from the person who prepared the file.

Reaching the person who buys tower service

Start with the operating contact, confirm who owns the maintenance agreement, and identify the person who approves its renewal or capital work.

Keep those roles in separate fields. Ask whether the tower serves the building or a tenant’s process and whether an outside management firm controls the agreement, so the next call goes to someone who can discuss its scope instead of another contact holding the same owner mailing address.

For a first call, I would use a short request tied to the service you can deliver:

We service cooling towers within this territory and are reviewing installations that fit our treatment and mechanical work. Who manages your tower agreement, and when do you review its scope? We can price the scheduled work once we understand your equipment and operating calendar.

Ask for a review date. If the answer is “we already have a provider,” ask whether they review backup coverage or planned shutdown work separately.

Scope the visit before dispatch. Request the equipment schedule and enough service history to identify the work under discussion, then put the expected survey output in the appointment confirmation with the access arrangements and the name of the person meeting your estimator at the building.

For water treatment outreach, lead with the program review and service responsibilities. For a mechanical department, lead with the equipment scope and shutdown planning. A refurbishment team should ask about the assessment and budget process. All three can start from the same location, but they should not send the same offer.

If the buyer manages other properties, ask permission to include those sites in the next review. Record the relationship under one account and keep each installation’s evidence separate. That makes a portfolio conversation possible without counting the first signed agreement several times.

Use the property manager outreach guide for follow-up structure. The cooling tower file should retain the next contact date and the specific document or decision expected from that conversation.

The five-year value of a two-cell tower

The two-cell account produces $12,240 in annual gross profit and about $41,146 over five years after allowing for an 80% annual renewal probability.

The opening account breaks down as follows. Replace each package with your scoped price.

Annual package	Assumed billing calculation	Annual revenue
Treatment service and supplies	12 monthly packages at $1,180	$14,160
Scheduled mechanical work	4 visits at $1,560	$6,240
Planned cleaning work	2 events at $4,320	$8,640
Program documentation and laboratory coordination	Annual allowance	$2,640
Total account revenue	Sum of the packages	$31,680
Direct delivery costs	Labor, travel, materials, laboratory work and subcontracted tasks	$19,440
Annual gross profit	$31,680 minus $19,440	$12,240

The direct-cost allowance includes labor burden and the expenses needed to deliver those packages; sales work and the inventory purchase sit in the acquisition budget below, while general overhead, tax and financing costs remain outside the gross-profit calculation. Replacement and emergency work contribute nothing here.

Customer lifetime value here means the gross profit expected from one signed account over the planning period. Year one is signed. Each subsequent year has an 80% chance of renewal conditional on the account having continued to that point. Revenue and annual delivery cost stay constant, and future cash flows are not discounted.

The arithmetic is $12,240 x (1 + 0.80 + 0.64 + 0.512 + 0.4096) = $41,145.984, or $41,146 rounded. That counts 3.3616 expected service years. Carry the unrounded value through each calculation and round displayed totals to whole dollars.

Two signed accounts therefore support about $82,292 in expected five-year gross profit. That is the service book’s value before acquisition costs. It is also why a narrowly matched tower list can justify investigation even when only a small share of locations become customers.

Keep the project version separate. For a rebuild opportunity, calculate the quoted project’s revenue minus its estimated delivery cost, then weight that gross profit by the chance of winning the approved scope. Do not multiply a possible rebuild by annual renewal factors or add it to every service account.

Use the customer lifetime value calculator to replace the annual profit and retention assumptions. If your department only performs treatment, remove the mechanical and cleaning packages it does not earn before comparing acquisition cost with account value.

What is a verified tower location worth?

At two signed accounts from 180 accepted locations, the model assigns about $457 in expected five-year gross profit to each accepted site before acquisition costs.

Work backward from the account target. The territory plan starts with 180 distinct accepted sites, reaches substantive conversations at 54, obtains 12 authorized surveys, sends eight proposals and signs two accounts. The stage rates are 30%, about 22%, about 67% and 25%, respectively. Only 1.1% of the original locations become accounts.

Those locations must meet the same definition used in the pilot. Rejected equipment and unresolved cases stay in the research file; they do not silently enlarge the accepted-site denominator. Existing customers also belong in a separate count when the campaign’s objective is new accounts.

Assume 20 outreach hours at a loaded sales rate of $47, 24 survey hours at $78, and 12 proposal and follow-up hours at $47. Those assumed branch rates produce 56 staff hours and $940 + $1,872 + $564 = $3,376. Outreach includes file setup and account reconciliation. The survey allowance is two total staff hours for each of 12 sites, including travel. Increase it when the territory requires longer visits, and add any incremental selling expenses to the acquisition budget.

Let Q be the scoped Asset Search quote and V be the unrounded account value of $41,145.984. Total acquisition spending is Q + $3,376. Customer acquisition cost at two wins is (Q + $3,376) / 2. Five-year lead-list ROI is (2 x V - Q - $3,376) / (Q + $3,376). Enter the quote into the lead-list ROI calculator before committing to the larger territory.

Outcome from 180 sites	Accounts signed	Expected five-year gross profit	After $3,376 in sales work, before the search quote
Low	1	$41,146	$37,770
Base	2	$82,292	$78,916
High	3	$123,438	$120,062

Hold account value and sales spending steady. Changing only the wins shows how much the purchase depends on conversion, and I would approve the next territory only when the low case clears the quoted acquisition cost and the branch has room to deliver the work at its budgeted margin.

For a same-hours comparison, hold the 56-hour sales budget fixed. If broad building outreach wins one account while tower-qualified outreach wins two, expected account gross profit doubles from $41,146 to $82,292. The extra signed account supplies the gain. Compare both sourcing costs before calling either campaign more profitable.

The result to track is signed gross profit per sales hour, followed by delivery margin at renewal. A large location file with no surveyed opportunities has not earned its cost.

Route density and the cost of serving the account

Put accepted towers into service-day clusters because travel time consumes the same paid technician hours that must support the agreement’s gross margin.

Extend the planning model with a route comparison. Assume a nearby account needs 28 minutes of round-trip travel per monthly treatment visit, while an isolated account needs 66. At a loaded field labor rate of $58 per hour, the difference is 12 x 38 / 60 x $58 = $440.80 per year. That calculation covers travel labor only; vehicle expense would be another input.

Travel is already in direct costs. Revise that allowance for the site being priced; adding the same savings again would overstate the five-year value.

I would score location fit before outreach with four questions: can the branch meet the agreed response expectation, does the stop fit an existing route, can the required service be scheduled, and does the crew cover the equipment? A nearby tower that fails the equipment test should still be rejected.

Put travel minutes and the proposed service day beside the account’s annual gross profit. That lets a sales manager compare a dense group with a farther installation offering a larger invoice. Use the route density calculator to test the travel allowance against your branch’s hours and costs.

If your department also services backup power, keep a separate standby generator inventory for compatible accounts. Shared ownership can justify one purchasing conversation, but generator work still needs its own equipment qualification and service estimate.

How to build a cooling tower service book, step by step

Use a 30-day launch to define acceptable sites, test an Asset Search pilot and send the first qualified accounts into a documented sales process.

1. Days 1 and 2: set the service boundary. Choose the branch, travel-time limit and equipment scope. State whether the campaign includes treatment, mechanical service, refurbishment or a combination. Name the service manager responsible for accepting the technical rules.
2. Days 3 and 4: define a countable site. Separate accounts from installations and cells. Write inclusion rules and exclusions. Decide what evidence is enough for a fit and what single field check should resolve each common ambiguous case.
3. Day 5: request the Asset Search pilot. Use the cooling tower search request to specify the territory and accepted equipment. Request dated views, parcels, owner information and all dispositions in your import format. Choose per accepted result terms when the buying unit is a qualified site; review the scope and quote before the paid pilot starts.
4. Days 6 through 12: reconcile the first delivery when it arrives. Use the agreed pilot schedule to confirm these dates. Match sites against your customer file and available registries. Have the technical lead review uncertain classifications and the sales manager check whether account relationships are grouped correctly.
5. Days 13 through 16: load and assign the file. Import accepted sites into the CRM with one responsible salesperson per account. Keep rejects and unresolved cases available for review. Add proposed service days and the document needed before a survey can be booked.
6. Days 17 through 22: reach operating contacts. Ask who manages the agreement and when its scope is reviewed. Request permission for the survey and the equipment records needed to price it. Record the next action even when the review date falls outside this month.
7. Days 23 through 27: scope the first proposals. Build the work packages from site records and the authorized visit. Check local requirements, provider qualifications and shutdown arrangements. Enter the labor and travel allowances before approving the quoted gross margin.
8. Days 28 through 30: make the expansion decision. Count accepted sites, conversations, surveys and proposals. Replace the model’s conversion assumptions with the evidence collected so far. Expand only as the branch can work the next group, and schedule follow-ups for accounts whose purchasing decision comes later.

The month ends with a tested search specification and an assigned pipeline. Some accounts will still be waiting for a budget review. Keep their dates visible instead of treating every unsigned proposal as a lost job.

Choosing between public registries and a custom search

Use a public registry for an initial address set, Asset Search for a reviewed tower inventory, and Ground Control for broader rooftop HVAC prospecting.

I would choose the source around the question. A registry lookup can be enough when you already know the site and need its registration reference. A territory expansion needs the equipment classification and ownership work across all the places you intend to sell.

Approach	Best fit	Work your team should plan next
Asset Search	Custom cooling tower criteria across a defined territory	Review the pilot, resolve flagged field questions and approach accepted accounts
Public cooling tower registry	Starting addresses and registration references in a covered jurisdiction	Reconcile records with the current site and your equipment rules
Manual imagery review	A small, tightly bounded research task	Record coverage and dates, review ambiguities and research owners
Ground Control rooftop HVAC list	Building prospecting based on visible rooftop HVAC	Qualify the equipment for your specific service offer

For a broader equipment campaign, Ground Control by PorchRocket filters buildings by business type, size and visible rooftop HVAC, including 2+ or 5+ visible units. Commercial lists cost $10 to $20 per building, arrive within 48 hours after payment, and wrong matches receive credit within 30 days. The rooftop HVAC list is the self-serve option for that building-level task. Use Asset Search when acceptance depends on identifying cooling towers specifically.

For the tower campaign, I would start with per accepted result pricing and a small paid pilot credited toward the full order. Agree on duplicate handling and disposition rules before delivery. Per completed investigation terms fit a named-site research assignment; a subscription fits recurring territory editions and monitoring. Asset Search also offers success-based terms tied to an agreed outcome.

Inspect a sample before expanding. Ask the estimator to review an accepted installation alongside an unresolved candidate and a rejection, then identify what work remains before each record can be used; that review tests the delivery against the decisions your department needs to make.

When to refresh a cooling tower inventory

For service territory planning, I would refresh quarterly and recheck account responsibilities before renewal outreach, with more frequent monitoring reserved for installation changes.

Choose a cadence around the decision. A branch planning next quarter’s outreach needs a reviewed territory edition. An equipment maker watching new construction might want a more frequent change feed. Weekly review can fit that watch; near-real-time alerts are available where daily satellite coverage exists. Match the scope to the evidence available in the area.

Asset Search rechecks sites as new imagery arrives and returns changes with before-and-after dates. Keep the observation date separate from the date your salesperson called. A new image does not refresh an old contact conversation, and a new contact does not establish that the visible equipment changed.

Revisit the rules when your service changes. If a refurbishment method expands the equipment your team can accept, Asset Search can re-answer previously investigated sites using evidence already held, often without waiting for another image. Archive the earlier edition so your technical lead can compare decisions.

Do not erase removed or superseded equipment records. Mark the change and retain the history under the site identifier. Then ask the account contact what the change means for its service agreement before adding replacement revenue to the forecast.

What Asset Search delivers to cooling tower service teams

The fastest way to build a cooling tower prospect inventory is to give Asset Search your territory and equipment acceptance rules. It cross-references aerial and satellite imagery with property records and public datasets, then people review every candidate. You receive locations, parcels, owners and dated evidence, with fits, rejects and unresolved answers. For a service department, per accepted result terms align the order with sites that meet the agreed rules. Start with a small paid pilot credited toward the full order, delivered in the format your team uses.

Specify the work the delivery needs to support. An aftermarket team expanding dealer coverage needs a different account handoff from a treatment branch filling a weekly route. The Asset Search cooling tower request starts with what to find and where; PorchRocket comes back with a scope and quote.

Your cooling tower order should give the team:

• Locations and parcel references that your team can join to its own site identifiers for later updates.
• Dated views and the observed facts supporting each equipment decision, ready for technical review.
• Owner information and decision-maker contact where applicable, with purchasing responsibility left for the account conversation.
• Every disposition, including rejection reasons and the field check that settles each unresolved site.
• CSV, Excel, GIS-ready files or an import for the CRM or dealer system, agreed during the pilot.
• A refresh option that returns territory changes and re-evaluates sites when your equipment rules change.

These are target accounts whose equipment fits your work; the owners have not requested quotes. Your team brings the service offer and earns the appointment. There is no software to learn, imagery to buy or analyst team to hire for the search.

Tell us what to find, and put the next service proposal in front of a building with the equipment your crew can serve.