EPA’s finalized revisions to NSPS Subpart KKKKa significantly change how new and modified stationary combustion turbines must demonstrate NOₓ compliance. If your facility constructed, modified, or reconstructed a turbine after December 13, 2024 , this rule likely applies. For electric utility power plants, independent power producers (IPPs), and industrial facilities with onsite generation, the update introduces: Stricter NOₓ emission limits New subcategorization based on utilization and efficiency Continuous compliance expectations (including startup and shutdown) Expanded reliance on CEMS and data validation This is a structural shift in how compliance is demonstrated.   When Does Subpart KKKKa Apply? Subpart KKKKa applies to stationary combustion turbines ≥10 MMBtu/hr that were constructed, modified, or reconstructed after December 13, 2024. The final rule became effective January 15, 2026. Turbines subject to KKKKa are no longer subject to Subparts GG or KKKK. Facilities should confirm: Construction commencement dates Whether recent changes qualify as “modification” or “reconstruction” Heat input rating Subcategory classification   What Changed: Key Technical Differences 2006 Subpart KKKK 2026 Subpart KKKKa >850 MMBtu/hr: 15 ppm @ 15% O₂ >850 MMBtu/hr (high utilization): 5 ppm @ 15% O₂ Size-based categories Utilization + efficiency criteria Traditional SSM interpretation Standards apply at all times Under Subpart KKKK (2006), large natural gas turbines (>850 MMBtu/hr) were typically limited to 15 ppm NOₓ @ 15% O₂. Under Subpart KKKKa (2026 revisions): High-utilization turbines (>45% capacity factor): 5 ppm @ 15% O₂ Low-utilization turbines with ≥38% design efficiency: 25 ppm @ 15% O₂ Low-utilization turbines with <38% efficiency: 9 ppm @ 15% O₂   The rule now integrates utilization rate and design efficiency directly into the regulatory structure. This means compliance is no longer based solely on turbine size and fuel type. Subpart KKKKa also clarifies that standards apply at all times , removing historical startup/shutdown exemptions and reinforcing continuous compliance expectations. A Large Operational Shift: Continuous Compliance for NSPS Subpart KKKKa The most significant practical change is EPA’s increased emphasis on continuous monitoring. Traditional Model New KKKKa Model Periodic stack test Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems Quarterly / annual Rolling averages Snapshot compliance Continuous compliance Data validation & reporting For turbines using SCR or post-combustion controls, continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) are required to demonstrate compliance with stringent limits such as 5 ppm NOₓ @ 15% O₂ on rolling averages. This shifts compliance from: Periodic stack testing → Continuous, data-driven performance demonstration Facilities must now ensure: Monitoring systems operate during all load conditions QA/QC procedures are robust and documented Data validation workflows are audit-ready Electronic reporting processes are accurate and timely   What Facilities Should Be Reviewing Now Facilities subject to Subpart KKKKa should treat this as a compliance program refresh. Key focus areas include: Applicability and affected unit inventory 12-month capacity factor calculations SCR performance capability and tuning CEMS configuration and certification Startup and shutdown monitoring procedures Recordkeeping structure and retention policies Reporting calendars and notification tracking Facilities planning future turbine installations should also evaluate how design efficiency and projected utilization will influence subcategory classification. How Alliance Technical Group Supports KKKKa Programs If you are assessing impacts or building a KKKKa compliance strategy, Alliance Technical Group can support your environmental team through: Applicability analysis and compliance matrix development Site-specific emissions testing and operating limit validation CEMS selection, installation support, and QA/QC programs Data validation and reporting system development Recordkeeping framework design and pre-submittal reviews Our regulatory specialists and emissions testing experts work alongside facility teams to build defensible, technically sound programs aligned with current NSPS requirements. Glen Capra Technical Advisor Manager

The United States Environmental Protection Agency finalized the repeal of specific amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (EGUs), commonly referred to as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), that were promulgated on May 7, 2024.   The rule takes effect April 27, 2026, and restores specific compliance provisions that facilities have historically relied on under 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart UUUUU .  This article summarizes what changed, what didn’t, and what it means for coal and oil-fired electric generating units (EGUs) going forward.  What Did the EPA Repeal in 2026?  The EPA removed three major elements of the 2024 amendments, each of which would have tightened emissions or monitoring requirements. These repeals are documented in the rule and are listed below.   1. Stricter Filterable PM (fPM) Limit   Repealed: 0.010 lb/MMBtu for existing coal units  Restored: 0.030 lb/MMBtu (2012 standard)  Also reverses the associated tighter metal HAP limits.  2. Mandatory PM CEMS Requirement   Repealed: PM CEMS as the only compliance method  Restored: Flexibility to use:   Quarterly stack testing  PM CPMS  PM CEMS  3. Tightened Mercury Limit for Lignite Units   Repealed: 1.2 lb/TBtu  Restored: 4.0 lb/TBtu  What Was Not Repealed?  The EPA removed only three elements of the 2024 amendments. All other provisions of the 2012 MATS rule and the 2020 Residual Risk and Technology Review (RTR) remain fully enforceable. Key Requirements That Remain in Effect  All original 2012 emission limits (PM, metals, acid gases, Hg, SO₂ surrogate)  All 2012/2020 work practice standards  All performance testing requirements (Methods 5, 29, 26A, 320, 30B, etc.)  Continuous monitoring requirements (Hg CEMS, sorbent traps, HCl/HF CEMS, SO₂ CEMS, PM CPMS)  Electronic reporting through ECMPS  2020 residual risk findings  All Subpart UUUUU definitions, test methods, appendices, and rule text (except where directly tied to the repealed 2024 amendments)  As a result, facilities must continue to maintain existing monitoring systems, meet emissions limits, and comply with performance testing and reporting requirements under 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart UUUUU .    Additional Updates to Electronic Reporting  The EPA also clarified electronic reporting requirements under the MATS rule. These revisions do not alter the underlying reporting requirements but update references and file format specifications used for electronic submissions.   Removed references to “ECMPS” and replacing with “ECMPS Reporting Tool”  Revised the XML file format to “any file format specified by the Administrator”    What This Means for Power Plant Operators  The 2026 repeal simplifie s MATS compliance by returning to a familiar regulatory framework. Operators regain flexibility in monitoring methods, face less stringent fPM and Hg limits, and may benefit from reduced compliance costs.  At the same time, the core structure of MATS—emission limits, monitoring, reporting, and work practices—remains unchanged. Facilities must continue to meet all 2012 MATS and the 2020 Residual Risk and Technology Review (RTR) requirements.  How Alliance Technical Group Can Help  Alliance Technical Group supports power plants and industrial facilities with MATS compliance programs, including stack testing, monitoring strategy support, CEMS, QA/QC procedures, and ECMPS reporting .  If you are evaluating how the 2026 MATS repeal may impact your compliance approach, Alliance Technical Group can help review your current program and identify any adjustments needed to remain aligned with the rule.   Susan Butler-Kennedy, QAP Regulatory Manager, ACS/DAS Susan has 25+ years of experience in the power industry, helping power plants and related facilities comply with various environmental laws and regulations. Her expertise lies in the communication, analysis, and documentation of Federal and State air emission compliance. She holds a Bachelor of Science ('92) and a Master of Science ('96) from Auburn University.

On February 12, 2026, the EPA finalized the rescission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), concluding that this Section does not provide statutory authority to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from motor vehicles for climate purposes (“the February 2026 Rescission”). 1  This action follows a multi-agency review initiated in early 2025. The agency has further stated its intent to reconsider all regulations that rely on the Endangerment Finding, including those GHG provisions promulgated under Section 111 of the CAA. What Has Been Proposed and Changed for Industrial Sources   While the February 2026 Rescission directly addresses only mobile sources, it signals a broader shift in federal GHG regulatory policy.    The EPA has proposed or finalized several actions affecting industrial facilities:   On September 12, 2025, EPA proposed permanently removing GHG reporting obligations under 40 CFR Part 98 all source categories, except for Subpart W (reporting delayed until RY2034), including petroleum refineries, power plants, and most other industrial facilities. Rescinded the Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) that would have imposed fees on methane emissions from oil and gas facilities.    Initiated regulatory shift for stationary sources under Section 111, including pursuing to repeal all GHG emissions standards for the power sector. 2    Finalized on December 3, 2025, extended compliance deadlines for oil and natural gas facilities under NSPS OOOOb/c. 3    Timing and Legal Considerations   Any comprehensive repeal of GHG regulations for stationary sources would require successful defense of the February 2026 Rescission against inevitable litigation before it can pursue a similar challenge to the Section 111 authorities that underpin NSPS rules. With less than three years remaining in the current presidential term, some regulatory reconsiderations may extend beyond this administration.    The Bottom Line   While the rescission signals a shift in regulatory direction, final outcomes will depend on rulemaking completion and court decisions. Most stationary source requirements remain in place today. Facilities should avoid assuming immediate elimination of GHG-related obligations.      Alliance continues to monitor federal and state regulatory developments closely. If you have questions about how these proposed changes may affect your facility, our team can help assess your current obligations and planning considerations.      1   https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-rescission-greenhouse-gas-endangerment#rule-summary    2   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/06/17/2025-10991/repeal-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-standards-for-fossil-fuel-fired-electric-generating-units     3   https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-operations/2025-interim-final-rule-extend-compliance

Environmental Journal Recognizes Firms for Business Achievement in Growth, M&A, IT, AI, Technology, Project Merit, Industry Leadership and Social Contribution San Diego, Calif. (January 2026)  —Environmental Business Journal®* (EBJ), an independent business research publication that has provided strategic market intelligence to the environmental industry* since 1988, has honored Alliance Technical Group with a Business Achievement Award for Mergers & Acquisitions in 2025.  “In a year of growth but some volatility for the $570-billion U.S. environmental industry in 2025, a number of companies distinguished themselves with business model evolution, new practices, technical innovation, M&A, or signature projects that merit the special recognition of an EBJ Business Achievement Award. With traditional environmental markets in infrastructure, air quality, remediation, water and wastewater, as well as energy transition and climate resilience, it is understandable that companies report growing demand for environmental technology and services,” said Grant Ferrier, editor of Environmental Business Journal and chair of the EBJ Business Achievement Award selection committee. “Pivoting with political change and overcoming the multiple challenges of inflation, supply chains, wage increases, labor shortages and changing markets has almost become routine for the resilient leaders in the environmental industry.” Alliance Technical Group was recognized for accelerating its growth strategy through a series of acquisitions and mergers that expanded North American coverage, deepened technical expertise, and strengthened its ability to deliver fully integrated, end-to-end environmental compliance solutions. The additions of Global Analyzer Systems Ltd., ESC Spectrum, Environmental 360, Slipstream Environmental Services, Earth Analytical Sciences, Inc., and Element One were selected for their complementary capabilities, enhancing Alliance’s position as North America’s leading provider of stack testing, CEMS, engine testing, and LDAR services, supported by advanced DAS technology, emissions monitoring, combustion expertise, and comprehensive laboratory analysis. Expanded U.S. and Canadian coverage improved localized service delivery across major industrial regions, while unified technical teams enabled tailored solutions across diverse regulatory environments. ESC Spectrum’s best-in-class DAS capabilities, combined with expanded monitoring and laboratory services, improve data accuracy, streamline reporting, and strengthen compliance confidence. By consolidating services under a single provider, Alliance simplifies compliance management for clients and delivers a seamless, client-centered experience from measurement and analysis through program management and regulatory reporting. The 2025 EBJ awards will be presented live and in-person at the EBJ Business Achievement Awards banquet at Environmental Industry Summit XXIV on April 1-3, 2026 in San Diego, along with CCBJ Business Achievement, Lifetime Achievement and 50-Year Company anniversary awards. About Alliance Technical Group Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance), headquartered in Decatur, AL, is the premier environmental services and solutions company dedicated to helping facilities achieve their environmental goals and navigate regulatory changes through the company’s On-site Testing and Monitoring, Environmental Compliance, and Laboratory Testing and Analysis offerings. Driven by innovation, committed to service, and focused on client success, Alliance delivers on the promise of responsiveness, reliability, and results. Learn more about how Alliance helps clients maximize their environmental opportunities: www.alliancetg.com Environmental Business Journal has been published since 1988 by Environmental Business International Inc., an independent research and publishing company focused on the environmental and climate change industries. * Environmental Business Journal® provides strategic market intelligence to executives and investors in 13 business segments of the environmental industry including environmental consulting & engineering, remediation & industrial services, water & wastewater equipment, air quality & pollution control equipment, hazardous waste management, resource recovery, solid waste management, water/wastewater infrastructure, renewable energy and environmental instrumentation & information systems.

Decatur, Alabama, January 8, 2026 - Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance), the leading provider of environmental testing services and solutions, announced the acquisition of Earth Analytical Sciences , Mid-Continent Testing Laboratories, Inc. , and Element One, Inc. , three established environmental testing laboratories serving clients across North America. The acquisitions were completed at the end of 2025. The addition of these organizations expands Alliance’s analytical capabilities and strengthens its growing North American network. Together, the three labs enhance Alliance’s ability to deliver high-quality analytical data across air, water, soil, and waste matrices while maintaining consistent service and turnaround times. Earth Analytical Sciences, Mid-Continent Testing, and Element One each bring specialized technical expertise, experienced teams, and strong regional client relationships. Their locations strengthen Alliance’s presence across key industrial and regulatory markets, improving geographic coverage and supporting faster, more efficient sample processing for clients across the United States and Canada. “These laboratories have built their reputations by doing the work the right way and standing behind their data,” said Chris LeMay, Chief Executive Officer of Alliance Technical Group. “By bringing these teams into Alliance, we are expanding our lab capacity and geographic reach while continuing to deliver the dependable results and regulatory insight our clients rely on.” Jordan Laster, Senior Vice President, Laboratory & Analytical at Alliance, added, “Each of these organizations operates with a strong technical foundation and a clear commitment to quality. Integrating them into our network allows us to increase analytical capacity, share best practices across locations, and provide our clients with consistent, defensible data backed by experienced professionals.” Clients of Earth Analytical Sciences, Mid-Continent Testing, and Element One will continue working with their existing lab teams, with access to Alliance’s broader technical resources and national environmental services platform. The acquisitions support Alliance’s continued investment in infrastructure and its strategy to build a laboratory network that delivers consistent, high-quality environmental testing services across North America. About Alliance Technical Group Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance), headquartered in Decatur, AL, is the premier environmental services and solutions company dedicated to helping facilities achieve their environmental goals and navigate regulatory changes through the company’s On-site Testing and Monitoring, Environmental Compliance, and Laboratory Testing and Analysis offerings. Driven by innovation, committed to service, and focused on client success, Alliance delivers on the promise of responsiveness, reliability, and results.

New York, NY – January 6, 2026 – Blackstone (NYSE: BX) announced today that funds affiliated with Blackstone Energy Transition Partners and other Blackstone funds (“Blackstone”) have acquired Alliance Technical Group (“ATG”), a leading provider of environmental testing, monitoring, and compliance services. Founded in 2000 and headquartered in Alabama, ATG has grown into one of the largest full-service environmental compliance providers in North America, with more than 2,200 employees located in 60-plus offices and labs across the U.S. and Canada. ATG delivers a comprehensive suite of solutions – including source and lab testing, continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS), and leak detection and repair, among others – to help businesses maintain regulatory compliance and safety, while driving efficiency through ATG’s data-driven insights. Chris LeMay, Chief Executive Officer at Alliance Technical Group, said: “Blackstone’s investment is a testament to our strong organic and strategic growth as a trusted market leader in the testing, inspection and compliance sector. With our partners at Blackstone, we look forward to continuing to scale and support our customers in navigating a complex, evolving regulatory landscape.” Darius Sepassi, Senior Managing Director, and Mark Henle, Managing Director, at Blackstone , said: “Alliance is a clear market leader in emissions testing and monitoring, providing mission-critical services that directly support customers’ compliance and operational performance. Chris and the ATG management team have built a diversified platform with a strong reputation for technical quality and reliability. Together, we are excited to leverage Blackstone’s scale and resources to help support ATG’s continued growth, serving its existing and new customers across the power, energy and industrial sectors.” David Foley, Global Head of Blackstone Energy Transition Partners, added: “Our investment strategy focuses on identifying leading businesses that we believe are positioned to disproportionately benefit from the growing demand for electricity and the broader energy transition. We are excited to back Alliance, which plays a critical role in helping energy and industrial facilities operate safely, efficiently, and in compliance with environmental regulations.” Alliance Technical Group represents the latest in a number of recent transactions Blackstone Energy Transition Partners has announced behind its high-conviction investment themes in electricity demand growth and the ongoing energy transition, including  Maclean Power Systems , Wolf Summit Energy ,  Hill Top Energy Center ,  Shermco ,  Enverus , Lancium,  Westwood , and others. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed. Harris Williams and RBC acted as financial advisor and Kirkland & Ellis acted as a legal advisor to Blackstone. Piper Sandler served as financial advisor and Jones Day served as a legal advisor to Alliance. About Blackstone Energy Transition Partners Blackstone Energy Transition Partners is Blackstone’s strategy for control-oriented equity investments in energy-related businesses, a leading energy investor with a successful long-term record, having committed over $27 billion of equity globally across a broad range of sectors within the energy industry. Our investment philosophy is based on backing exceptional management teams with flexible capital to provide solutions that help energy companies grow and improve performance, thereby delivering more reliable, affordable and cleaner energy to meet the growing needs of the global community. In the process, we build stronger, larger scale enterprises, create jobs and generate lasting value for our investors, employees and all stakeholders. Further information is available at  https://www.blackstone.com/our-businesses/blackstone-energy-transition-partners/ . About Blackstone Blackstone is the world’s largest alternative asset manager. Blackstone seeks to deliver compelling returns for institutional and individual investors by strengthening the companies in which the firm invests. Blackstone’s over $1.2 trillion in assets under management include global investment strategies focused on real estate, private equity, credit, infrastructure, life sciences, growth equity, secondaries and hedge funds. Further information is available at  www.blackstone.com . Follow @blackstone on  LinkedIn ,  X (Twitter) , and  Instagram . About Alliance Technical Group Alliance Technical Group, LLC (Alliance), headquartered in Decatur, AL, is the premier environmental services and solutions company dedicated to helping facilities achieve their environmental goals and navigate regulatory changes through the company’s On-site Testing and Monitoring, Environmental Compliance, and Laboratory Testing and Analysis offerings. Driven by innovation, committed to service, and focused on client success, Alliance delivers on the promise of responsiveness, reliability, and results. Learn more about how Alliance helps clients maximize their environmental opportunities: www.alliancetg.com

Facilities with commercial, industrial, or institutional refrigeration systems face a January 2026 compliance deadline. Under 40 CFR Part 84, the EPA has established two regulations that may apply to stationary sources: the Technology Transitions Rule (Subpart B) and new monitoring/recordkeeping/reporting requirements (Subpart C).   With proposed changes to compliance deadlines and a January 2026 deadline coming up, facility stakeholders should know how these regulatory provisions affect their facilities.   This article breaks down both regulations and gives you actionable steps to meet EPA requirements.  Common EPA Refrigerant Compliance Challenges  Contractor Management Gaps  Most facilities rely on contractors for refrigeration maintenance, creating a compliance risk. Your facility remains responsible for EPA refrigerant compliance even when contractors perform the work. Unless you have explicit agreements, verification processes, and oversight mechanisms, you may have compliance gaps.  Integrating New Chemicals into Existing Programs  Facilities with existing refrigerant management programs must expand them to include HFC substitutes that were exempt under old rules. This means identifying newly regulated refrigerants, updating inventory systems, revising recordkeeping procedures, training staff, and modifying reporting protocols.  Understanding Which Rules Apply  Both Subpart B and Subpart C can apply to the same facility with different triggering criteria. A cold storage warehouse, for example, may be subject to equipment replacement timelines under Subpart B while simultaneously facing monitoring requirements under Subpart C.  How Alliance Offers Specialized Consulting   Most air quality consultants don't actively track 40 CFR Part 84. At Alliance, we're one of the few air consulting firms that actively follow these refrigerant regulations, tracking proposed changes and monitoring compliance deadlines.  Tracking EPA Regulation Updates  The EPA's proposed revisions highlight that refrigerant regulations continue to evolve. Our value is helping you comply with current requirements while keeping you informed about what's coming next, enabling proactive rather than reactive approaches.  Ready to ensure your facility's EPA refrigerant compliance? Schedule a consultation with our air quality specialists today.  Kristine Davies Project Director, Air Quality Christoff Orr Project Manager, Air Quality

When a stack operates at very low flow rates, differential pressure often falls below the readable range of standard EPA instruments. Emissions still need to be measured, but conventional methods lose accuracy under these conditions, creating risk for both data integrity and regulatory compliance.  This scenario is increasingly common as facilities optimize processes, reduce throughput, or cycle equipment. Low-flow conditions challenge even experienced emissions professionals and demand advanced technical evaluation.  This article outlines the key issues that arise during low flow emissions testing and the alternative methods available to address them.  What Happens When the Stack or Duct Flow Falls Below EPA Thresholds   Under EPA reference methods, most flow measurements require a minimum differential pressure of 0.05 inches of water column . When the flow is too low to meet this threshold:  A standard inclined manometer becomes unstable or unreadable .  Small pressure fluctuations appear as noise rather than measurable signal.  Temperature and gas composition variations increase uncertainty.  Some flow devices lose calibration accuracy in low-velocity conditions  Compounding this, low-flow sources can present additional complications such as:  Elevated or fluctuating temperatures  Gas streams with non-air composition  Particulate loading that interferes with sensors  Restrictions that can cause unacceptable back-pressure to the process  In these environments, conventional measurement techniques are insufficient , and a more tailored engineering approach is required.  Alternative Measurement Methods for Low Flow Emissions Testing   When low flow prevents the use of standard EPA methodology, technical teams must evaluate alternative strategies. A structured solution framework typically includes:  1. Instrument Sensitivity Adjustment   Upgrading to a lower-range or digital manometer with higher resolution can resolve many borderline low-flow scenarios.  2. Technology Assessment for Alternative Flow Devices  Depending on gas characteristics and source configuration, several devices may be considered:  Vane anemometers  for moderate-temperature, clean gas streams  Hot-wire anemometers  for low-velocity, low-particulate environments  Critical orifice systems  where predictable flow control is possible  Direct plumbing to dry gas meters  when stable volumetric measurement is feasible  Tracer gas injection techniques  for complex or i naccessible stacks  3. Engineering Calculations Using Plant Data  If reliable fuel flow, fuel composition, and combustion efficiency data are available, EPA methodologies allow deriving stack flow via calculation rather than direct measurement.  4. Mechanical or System Modifications (When Necessary)  Some cases require temporary or permanent adjustments, such as:  Installation of an in-line dry gas meter  Construction of a temporary test stack  Additional sampling personnel and instrumentation for tracer-based methods  Each option must be evaluated for compatibility, safety, impact on the process, and regulatory acceptance. Quick Answer: How do you accurately measure emissions when a source operates at extremely low flow rates? Our teams address low-flow conditions through four approaches: upgrading to digital manometers with higher resolution, deploying alternative devices like vane anemometers or tracer gas systems, using engineering calculations based on fuel data, or modifying the sampling system. Method selection depends on gas temperature, particulate loading, and regulatory requirements. Proper planning avoids the $10,000-$40,000+ costs associated with failed testing and remobilization.  Before the Test: Validation and Verification Steps Implementing the selected strategy requires detailed technical planning:  Instrument compatibility checks  (temperature ranges, gas composition, particulate resistance)  Sensitivity and accuracy verification  against the required test method  Assessment of system back-pressure implications  before deploying any device that restricts flow  Calibration traceability  to ensure EPA compliance  Field validation  under actual operating conditions before beginning regulated testing  Experienced emissions professionals must balance measurement feasibility, cost, and regulatory requirements to avoid invalidating test results.       What Proper Low-Flow Measurement Delivers  A properly engineered low-flow measurement strategy yields:  Accurate and defensible flow data  suitable for EPA reference methods- avoiding the 2-4 week retesting delays and $10,000-$40,000+ remobilization costs that result from invalid data.  Reduced uncertainty  in emission rate calculations - preventing significant errors like the 20%+ velocity increase that results from misreading 0.02 delta P as 0.03, which invalidates test results and requires costly retesting.  Minimized operational impact  to the facility -   solutions beyond stack modifications or fabricating spool pieces can be evaluated with your technical team, avoiding facility shutdowns or process modifications that can cost $10,000 - $50,000+ per day in lost production.  Compliance confidence  during audits, reviews, and regulatory submissions – eliminating the risk of failed demonstrations that trigger enforcement actions, penalty assessments, or permit delays    By selecting the right combination of instrumentation and methodology, even difficult low-flow sources can be measured reliably.    Alliance TA Team: Expertise for Complex Emissions Testing  Low-flow conditions present some of the most technically challenging scenarios in emissions testing. They require specialized knowledge, careful technology selection, and a deep understanding of both equipment limitations and EPA methodology.  Alliance’s Technical Advisory (TA) Team , led by Glen Capra , has the expertise to analyze these situations, recommend the most effective measurement techniques, and guide field teams and clients through implementation. Our specialists evaluate each source on a case-by-case basis to ensure accurate, compliant, and cost-effective results.  If you are facing low-flow measurement challenges—or want to proactively plan for them—reach out to Alliance’s TA Team for expert guidance and customized technical solutions.  Glen Capra Technical Advisor Manager glen.capra@alliancetg.com

Stack testing isn’t just about capturing emissions; it’s about interpreting them correctly. Understanding how detection limits affect results can help your facility avoid costly surprises. When planning a stack test, one of the most common concerns from both new and existing source owners/operators is: What if the emission levels of a regulated pollutant are extremely low—possibly even below detectable limits? How will a “non-detect” (ND) result impact the emission unit’s compliance status with the permitted emission limits? These are valid questions. They underscore why understanding and evaluating non-detects (NDs), Method Detection Limits (MDLs), and In-Stack Detection Limits (ISDLs) before scheduling a stack test is critical. What is a Method Detection Limit? A Method Detection Limit (MDL) is defined as the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. It is determined through a specific analytical procedure using a sample matrix containing the target analyte. Per EPA guidance, if a pollutant is not detected during testing, the result should be reported as the method’s MDL. To accurately report an MDL for a given pollutant or test method, the testing team or analytical laboratory must conduct an MDL study as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Learn more about EPA testing procedures. MDL vs. ISDL – What’s the Difference? It’s important to distinguish between the analytical MDL and the in-stack detection limit (ISDL): The analytical MDL is determined by the laboratory analyzing the collected samples. It reflects the sensitivity of the lab’s instrumentation and methodology. The ISDL, on the other hand, is tied to the actual sampling process in the field. It can be influenced and adjusted by modifying stack sampling parameters—such as increasing the sample volume by extending the sampling duration. For wet chemistry methods that rely on laboratory analysis, both MDL and ISDL are critical to ensure a test result is meaningful and valid. The Impact on Emissions Compliance Failing to account for MDLs and ISDLs can result in: Invalid test results: Making your test data unusable for permit demonstrations. Compliance uncertainty: When non-detect results are reported above your permitted limits, regulatory agencies may assume worst-case scenarios. For example, if your permit limit is 0.001 ppm but the lab reports "< 0.003 ppm ND," you may be considered out of compliance even if actual emissions are negligible. Costly retests: A failed stack test due to incorrect detection limits can cost $10,000-$50,000+ to repeat, not including production downtime and expedited lab fees. Proper planning prevents these expensive do-overs. Regulatory scrutiny: This can result in issued violations and required corrective action plans. How Alliance Technical Group Can Help At Alliance Technical Group, our Technical Advisors are subject matter experts who carefully evaluate all critical elements before any test program is scheduled. Some of the key considerations we focus on include: Evaluating permitted emission limits Selecting the appropriate stack test method Assessing how ND, MDL, and ISDL values will affect the integrity and outcome of your test program If you’re unsure how a non-detect result might impact your compliance status or stack test results, reach out to our experts directly. Our team is here to guide you through the process and ensure you’re making informed, compliant decisions. Understanding Detection Limits in Depth Detection limits play a crucial role in environmental compliance. They help determine whether emissions are within acceptable levels. Understanding these limits can prevent regulatory issues and financial losses. The Importance of Accurate Testing Accurate testing is essential for compliance. It ensures that emissions are monitored correctly. This helps facilities avoid penalties and maintain their operational licenses. Common Misconceptions About Detection Limits Many people misunderstand detection limits. They may think that a non-detect result means no emissions. However, this is not always the case. It is vital to interpret these results correctly. Best Practices for Stack Testing To ensure accurate results, follow best practices for stack testing. This includes: Properly calibrating equipment Following standardized testing procedures Training personnel on testing methods Conclusion In conclusion, understanding detection limits is vital for compliance. It helps facilities avoid costly mistakes. By working with experts, you can ensure that your stack testing is accurate and reliable.

In the complex world of environmental regulations, staying ahead of the curve is critical. On May 8, 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) finalized amendments to rules that will significantly impact compliance requirements for the gasoline distribution and terminals industry. These updates, aimed at reducing emissions and enhancing environmental stewardship, present new challenges that will be multi-faceted. What to Know First About the 3 Revised Rules Effective July 8, 2024, these three finalized USEPA rule amendments apply to bulk gasoline  terminals, distribution facilities, and pipeline facilities: 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart XXa:  New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for bulk gasoline terminals. 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart R:  National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for gasoline distribution facilities (major sources). 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart BBBBBB:  NESHAP for gasoline distribution bulk terminals, bulk plants, and pipeline facilities (area sources). Compliance deadlines for existing facilities extend to May 8, 2027, but proactive planning is essential. Stay Ahead of the Compliance Curve with Confidence Taking proactive steps now to evaluate, plan and execute any needed modifications to your facility or compliance programs is the best strategy to ensure you can demonstrate compliance for every affected source. Consider that over 9,000 sources across the U.S. are also affected, so waiting too long is risky. The supply-chain of equipment and resources, including expert testers, labs, and consultants cannot meet the demand at one time. Quick Glance of Significant Revisions Lower VOC emission limits for new, modified, or reconstructed bulk gasoline terminals Reduced loading rack emission limits Increased cargo tank vapor-tightness requirements Additional controls for storage tanks Enhanced leak detection and repair requirements Revised monitoring and operating requirements for control devices You may end up needing new controls, performance evaluations, new installs/upgrades, or programming changes for your CEMS, or just finding the best LDAR technicians in your area. Stay tuned, as my team and I from Alliance will be sharing specific details about each updated gasoline rule requirement, and how we can help to ensure you’re meeting your compliance obligations. Read our latest update regarding Appendix K requirements, reshaping bulk gasoline terminals' LDAR programs. → About the Author Kristine Davies, Project Director, Air Quality, Environmental Consulting With nearly 20 years of expertise in environmental consulting, complemented by a decade of experience in manufacturing and environmental engineering, Kristine excels in air quality permitting and compliance, specializing in Title V, PSD, NNSR, and minor source permitting. She is proficient in NSPS, NESHAPs, RACT regulations, emissions quantification, and emissions inventory submittals, making her a versatile leader in the field. Discover All That Is Alliance  As your strategic partner in environmental testing, monitoring, and analysis, we have a full suite of technical and compliance services for all your environmental needs.  Analytical & Environmental Lab Services | Stack Testing | Temp CEMS | CEMS | LDAR | Ambient Air | Engine Testing & Emissions Solutions | Software & Technology | Environmental Consulting Services: Air & Water Quality, Natural Resource Management Contact Alliance for end-to-end solutions that support your compliance and operational excellence. info@alliancetg.com

All Bulk Gasoline Terminals currently fall under one of two regulations:   40 CFR 63 Subpart R (MACT R) for Major Sources of HAP  40 CFR 63 Subpart BBBBBB (NESHAP 6B) for Area Sources of HAP What Changed: Appendix K Requirements   for Bulk Gasoline Terminals The modifications to these regulations require instrument monitoring in place of AVO requirements. Facilities must choose between Method 21 or OGI monitoring, as outlined in Appendix K, to comply with bulk gasoline terminal requirements. Compliance Deadline: NESHAP 6B and MACT R with Appendix K   Existing sources: May 8, 2027  New sources: Upon startup  NSPS XXa: Earlier Compliance Dates May Already Apply   If you construct, modify, or reconstruct your affected facility after   June 10, 2022 , you are subject to NSPS XXa . This requires a quarterly Method 21 or OGI LDAR program, as outlined in Appendix K upon startup following construction, modification, or reconstruction.   Choosing Your Monitoring Method: Method 21 vs OGI   Method 21 uses a portable hydrocarbon detector to measure concentration at individual components. Surveyors physically access each valve, flange, pump seal, and connector with the instrument.  Optical Gas Imaging (OGI) monitoring , as outlined in Appendix K, utilizes infrared camera technology to visually detect hydrocarbon emissions across broad areas without requiring component-by-component contact.  When OGI Makes Sense   OGI cameras survey significantly more equipment per day than Method 21,  operating   6x to 22x faster . They eliminate the need for manlifts or scaffolding—depending on your site’s configurations—which  reduces both safety risks and costs. OGI also removes the requirement to maintain a detailed component inventory. Instead, facilities only need to identify equipment subject to LDAR requirements and provide a route map,  allowing for less burdensome compliance documentation. Overall, OGI reduces technician headcount, minimizes risk exposure, and simplifies data management. Please note that Method 21 may be a better fit for sites with an existing component inventory or state- or local-level Method 21 requirements already in place.   End-to-End LDAR Solutions for Bulk Gasoline Terminal Compliance   If your facility is subject to these regulations or you expect to become subject, now is the time to prepare.   We can help you determine applicability, prepare a plan, conduct inspections, manage the program, and prepare your reports.   Alliance provides nationwide Method 21 and OGI expertise backed by certified camera operators, licensed drone pilots, and experienced LDAR professionals. Our team helps facilities meet evolving survey requirements and strengthen their compliance programs with complete, reliable coverage.   Let's talk.

The EPA is using elevated fenceline readings as an entry point to take a deeper dive into other compliance programs, such as tanks, wastewater systems, and your facility's root cause analysis and corrective action response.   In September 2025, the EPA published an enforcement alert  that signals a new era of scrutiny for benzene fenceline monitoring compliance under MACT Subpart CC. With the first enforcement case concluded in Spring 2025 and more actions expected, this appears to be an expansion of the agency's broader Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP (BWON) and storage tank enforcement initiatives. Fenceline monitoring has evolved from a compliance requirement into an investigative tool that can trigger comprehensive inspections of related air quality programs.    What's Driving EPA Enforcement to Use Benzene Fenceline Monitoring Results?  The EPA has identified recurring compliance issues during facility inspections:  Common Problem Areas:  Storage tanks containing high benzene content materials (benzene, reformate, light naphtha, pyrolysis gasoline)  Marine vessel loading operations with vapor control failures  Wastewater treatment systems including uncontrolled DAF systems, junction boxes, and oil/water separators  Beyond identifying emission sources, many facilities are failing to conduct adequate root cause analyses and implement timely corrective actions when benzene action levels are exceeded—violations that can trigger significant enforcement actions.  The Stakes Are High  The Spring 2025  enforcement case   demonstrates what's at risk. The EPA took action against a facility with fenceline concentrations exceeding 900 µg/m³ and annual averages reaching 290 µg/m³—more than 30 times the 9 µg/m³ action level. EPA alleged violations related to untimely root cause analysis and ineffective corrective actions, along with violations related to BWON, LDAR, storage tanks, and flares. The facility was required to install real-time monitoring systems and implement comprehensive emission control measures as part of the settlement agreement, in addition to a civil penalty of $35 million.  Advanced Monitoring Solutions for Fenceline Programs   While this alert focuses on petroleum refineries under MACT Subpart CC, chemical manufacturing facilities subject to the HON will face similar fenceline monitoring programs in the near future—and the same root cause analysis and corrective action implementation expectations will apply.  The EPA's alert emphasizes using "best practices for finding root causes" of action level exceedances. These best practices require advanced monitoring technologies, all of which Alliance Technical Group  offers:  Optical Gas Imaging (OGI)  – Infrared cameras provide rapid screening across large refinery areas to identify fugitive emissions and leaks  Benzene-Specific PIDs  – Handheld photoionization detectors with parts-per-billion sensitivity pinpoint benzene emissions at specific equipment interfaces  Real-Time Monitoring Systems  – Gas chromatographs and continuous monitors provide near real-time measurements that correlate with wind direction and operational conditions  GMAP Technology  – Mobile geospatial monitoring solutions deliver real-time, actionable data to identify unknown emission sources and conduct rapid root cause investigations  Each of these technologies addresses specific gaps the EPA has identified in current compliance programs, providing facilities with the tools needed to meet regulatory expectations and demonstrate environmental stewardship.  Partner with Alliance for Proactive Compliance  The regulatory and enforcement environment surrounding benzene is intensifying, and the path forward requires more than just awareness—it demands action and expertise.  For over 25 years, Alliance Technical Group has been helping refineries and chemical manufacturing facilities navigate complex air quality compliance challenges with proven monitoring technologies and experienced technical support. From site specific monitoring plans to initiating root cause analysis or providing expertise in corrective actions plans, Alliance provides a better way to handle compliance.   Don't wait for an enforcement action to strengthen your compliance program. Let Alliance be your partner in protecting your facility and staying up to date with regulatory best practices.    Contact Alliance Technical Group today to discuss how we can help your facility meet EPA's fenceline monitoring requirements and build a robust, defensible compliance program.

A Strategic Partnership That's Paying Off What began as a collaborative innovation between ESC Spectrum and EPRI has evolved into a defining capability within Alliance’s Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) business unit, which acquired ESC Spectrum in July 2025.  We didn't just expand our market leading CEMS capabilities; we strengthened our position as the industry's end-to-end provider for air emissions monitoring and reporting solutions. EPA Part 75:Successful Application of IP CEMS at LG&E’s Cane Run Generating Station Alliance and LG&E successfully installed and certified an Integrated Path (IP) CEMS on a gas turbine unit that is subject to 40 CFR Part 75, with relative accuracy certification completed in August 2025. This set the stage for a groundbreaking achievement: LG&E Cane Run became the first facility to successfully submit quarterly emission reports to the EPA via ECMPS using IP CEMS data while their conventional CEMS was out of service — a historic first under Part 75.   This milestone demonstrates that IP CEMS isn't just a backup technology; it's a viable, EPA-recognized solution for emissions monitoring and reporting.   Our hardworking team is pictured here after the IP CEMS passed its certification RATA in August 2025. (L to R) - Walt Mummert (RATA Lead, LGE), Daniel Champagne (Design Engineer, Alliance), Cindy Whitaker (Manager, Air Monitoring and Testing, LGE), and Joe Ward (Client Success Manager, Alliance). Adding to this momentum, the Clean Air Power Division (CAPD) of the EPA recently made changes to their Part 75 technical manual that sanctions the methodology used by our IP CEMS and removes the requirement for obtaining P75 Administrator approval for use of this methodology.  This regulatory endorsement opens doors for utilities and industrial facilities nationwide to adopt this innovative technology with confidence. The IP CEMS Advantage Traditional CEM systems have served the industry for decades, but they come with inherent limitations, including sample system biases, potential failure points, and significant O&M costs. Using Unisearch Associates , Inc. optical analyzers to measure gas concentrations along an optical path across a stack or duct downstream of an emissions source, our IP CEMS delivers: Faster, more representative measurements  that provide real-time insights into your emissions profile Elimination of sample system biases  that can compromise data quality and regulatory compliance Reduced failure mechanisms  that translate to better uptime and reliability Lower O&M costs and reduced operational burden , freeing up your team to focus on what matters most   For facilities struggling with aging CEMS infrastructure, facing budget constraints, or simply seeking to enhance their emissions monitoring capabilities, IP CEMS offers a path forward that doesn't require compromise.   Have questions about IP CEMS or how it might fit your facility's needs? Let's start a conversation ⮕   Want to learn more? Watch our in-depth interview with the IP CEMS experts below, featuring the same innovative team that developed this technology at ESC Spectrum and now continues to advance it as part of Alliance Technical Group. Alliance Technical Group is committed to advancing air quality monitoring through innovative technologies and strategic partnerships. Our IP CEMS solution represents the next generation of emissions monitoring—delivering accuracy, reliability, and cost-effectiveness in a single integrated platform.

Alliance Technical Group's GMAP service is a breakthrough in how we monitor and manage air quality. GMAP, which stands for Geospatial Measurement of Air Pollution, is like a high-tech detective for air pollution. It's a mobile service, meaning our team can travel around, gathering information on various air pollutants. It uses sophisticated technology to analyze this data and create detailed maps showing where these pollutants are most concentrated, helping to pinpoint the sources of pollution. Understanding Air Quality Challenges Air pollution is a complex issue. It's not just about the amount of pollutants in the air, but also about understanding how they move and change over time. Traditional stationary monitoring methods only give us a snapshot of the situation, often missing the bigger picture. Pollution doesn't stay put; it spreads and changes with the wind, weather, and other factors. GMAP's ability to move and track pollution in real time gives us a much clearer view of what's happening with our air quality. How GMAP Makes a Difference GMAP is essentially a mobile laboratory. Our team is equipped with advanced instruments to measure different types of air pollutants at numerous points across the facility, including along the fenceline and surrounding roadways. These instruments include multiple gas analyzers and highly accurate GPS systems for mapping. This technology allows for real-time, on-site air quality assessments, which are crucial for quick and effective environmental management. Alliance also collects weather data, bringing together gas analyzers, wind data, and GPS to generate maps. Wind direction is essential to this process as it allows our team to backtrack from the observed pollutant concentration to the potential emission source(s). Picture a petroleum refinery that needs to ensure it's not exceeding pollution limits. GMAP can be brought in to monitor the air both within and around the facility boundary at any location accessible by vehicles (including the facility fenceline, neighboring communities, etc.), giving instant feedback and helping to pinpoint potential areas of concern relevant to environmental regulatory compliance. Tech Trends and Advancements The technology behind GMAP is part of a larger trend towards smarter, more connected environmental monitoring systems. We're seeing a rise in the use of real-time data analysis, Internet of Things (IoT) devices, and advanced mapping software in environmental science. These tools are making it possible to understand and respond to environmental challenges more quickly and accurately than ever before. Benefits of GMAP Real-time Data and Analysis : The ability to gather and analyze data in real time is a significant advantage. It enables quicker responses to potential environmental hazards and helps in making informed decisions to mitigate risks. Advanced Mapping and Analysis : GMAP's geospatial mapping program enhances the understanding of air pollutant dispersion and source identification, which is crucial for effective air quality management. Mobility and Flexibility : Alliance's GMAP can move across a facility and monitor in real time, a significant advantage compared to stationary monitoring devices. This allows for a full picture of pollutant concentrations across the entire site and is less dependent on wind direction. Contribution to Public Health and Environment : By ensuring better compliance with air quality standards and providing accurate data on pollutant levels, GMAP plays a crucial role in protecting public health and the environment. Potential Results and Impact By providing real-time, accurate information about air pollution, GMAP can have a significant impact on: Improved Public Health : By identifying and addressing pollution sources more quickly, we can reduce exposure to harmful pollutants, leading to healthier communities. Increased Corporate Responsibility : Businesses can use GMAP to monitor their own emissions, helping them to operate more sustainably and responsibly. With its real-time data capabilities, mobile flexibility, and advanced analytical tools, GMAP provides a whole new performance standard for today's air quality challenges. The Alliance team continues to take significant strides forward in our ability to help our clients safeguard their environments and public health. As industry professionals continue to seek effective and actionable insights, Alliance's GMAP demonstrates how technology and environmental stewardship can work hand in hand for a healthier, more sustainable future.

We are proud to share that Alliance has once again been recognized as a Candidate Experience (CandE) Award winner for 2025.   The CandE Awards recognize employers worldwide that demonstrate a strong commitment to delivering a high-quality candidate experience throughout the entire hiring journey.   About The CandEs The Candidate Experience (CandE) Benchmark Research and Awards Program is the first program of its kind, focusing on elevating and promoting quality candidate experiences through a fair, transparent, and positive recruitment process. Now part of Survale, the CandE Benchmark Research Program evaluates companies through a combination of employer self-assessments and detailed feedback from job candidates. What This Means for Alliance This recognition reflects the care and effort Alliance delivers to provide transparency, fairness, and consistent communication to all job candidates . It’s proof that even in a challenging hiring market, our dedication to people and relationships sets us apart.   As Ron Machamer, Client Strategy Manager at Survale, shared, “In a slower hiring market, every candidate interaction is a chance to strengthen your employer brand, or weaken it. This year’s CandE Awards winners have again demonstrated their commitment to making impactful process improvements and we are delighted to recognize their work in raising the bar in recruitment and candidate experience.”   Winning this award again shows that Alliance is not only keeping pace, but we’re also leading the way. We want to take a moment to celebrate this achievement and the collective effort that made it possible, thanks to our people here at Alliance.   Our Commitment to Future Talent   We are excited to build on this momentum and continue improving our processes. We remain committed to excellence in recruitment and candidate engagement. Find your next job at Alliance ->

When Everything Stops   First comes a pressure drop. Then product escapes—onto the ground or into the air. Left unchecked, these issues can cause equipment damage, safety risks, and environmental harm.   Whether you’re dealing with a suspected leak in an exchanger or trying to bring a vacuum system back online, the urgency is the same: find the issue fast, fix it even faster.  Your team needs answers — not theories. That’s where Alliance’s helium tracer gas testing comes in.  When You Need Us Most — Planned or Not   Many of our clients find us in two key situations:  Unplanned emergencies  — A system crash, suspected exchanger leak, or unexplained pressure drop sends your team scrambling for answers fast.  Planned turnarounds or shutdowns  — You're proactively validating equipment such as exchangers, vessels, piping, instrumentation before bringing them back online.  The need is the same in both cases: leak testing that’s fast, reliable, and sensitive enough to catch what others miss .  When you call, we respond. For emergency situations, we can have a crew on-site within 12 hours. For planned outages, we’re ready to quote, schedule, and support testing as part of your overall outage plan — from weeks to months out.    The Real Cost of Undetected Leaks   Missed leaks can lead to:  Product loss and reduced profit  Unplanned shutdowns or extended outages  Environmental or safety violations  Rework during commissioning        What Is Helium Tracer Gas Testing?      Helium tracer gas testing is a non-destructive method used to locate and measure even the smallest cracks or holes in equipment. By introducing helium — a stable, inert gas — into the system and using a helium mass spectrometer, we identify leak paths with unmatched accuracy. Our instruments can detect leaks as small as 5 x 10⁻⁸ atm-cc/sec.     To put that into perspective, that’s like:  Detecting a leak smaller than a pinhole  Finding a crack thinner than a strand of hair  Spotting a flaw smaller than a grain of salt — divided a thousand times    This level of sensitivity is ideal for critical systems in petrochemical, energy, and industrial settings.      Why Helium Compared to Other NDT Methods?   Helium offers key advantages over traditional Non-Destructive Tests (NDT) methods like X-ray, PT (penetrant testing), UT (ultrasonic), MFE (magnetic flux leakage), and MT (magnetic particle testing):  Inert and non-toxic – Won’t react with hydrocarbons or pose personnel hazards  Non-condensable – Ideal for systems that can’t tolerate moisture or contamination  Ultra-small molecule size – Flows through micro-cracks that water or dye can’t reach  Minimal atmospheric background – Easy to detect even trace amounts  Safe and non-flammable – Unlike hydrogen blends or pressurized gases  Cost-effective – Compared to shutdowns, lost product, or premature tear-downs  Helium allows us to find problems without risking additional damage or downtime.    How to Find a Leak   There are two primary test methods, based on whether the system is in or out of service:  Detector Probe Method   (most common)   The detector-probe helium leak test is conducted by pressurizing a component with helium gas and then scanning the component by “sniffing” for the presence of helium with the detector probe. The mass spectrometer is monitored to verify the presence of helium leakage.  Tracer Probe Method   The tracer-probe test is conducted by placing the component under a vacuum and connecting it to the mass spectrometer. The tracer probe is then used to “spray” helium around the component under test. If a leak is present, the helium will be drawn into the part due to the differential pressure. The mass spectrometer is monitored to verify the presence of helium leakage.    Note: While some systems can be tested during operation, exchangers and pressure vessels typically require shutdown to ensure accurate results.    Why Test Proactively?   Leaks that go undetected aren’t just annoying — they’re expensive. Product loss, safety hazards, environmental liability, and unplanned downtime all add up. And in critical systems, even a small leak can snowball into a full-blown operational risk.  Proactive helium testing helps you:  Validate repairs before re-commissioning  Avoid repeat outages from missed defects  Protect against emissions or safety violations  Reduce risk of unplanned shutdowns or catastrophic failures  In short, it’s a small step that prevents big problems.    Why Choose Alliance for Locating a Leak   Alliance’s process is grounded in ASME Section V, Article 10 , ensuring we follow best practices for helium mass spectrometer leak testing.  Unlike vendors who offer helium testing as a secondary service, we have a dedicated team solely focused on tracer gas testing. That means:  Faster response times — Mobilization typically begins within 2–4 hours, with on-site arrival within 12 hours for emergency jobs  Deeper technical expertise & comprehensive planning  Purpose-built equipment maintained to the highest standards  Smoother coordination on jobsites during outages and emergency repairs  You’re not getting generalists. You’re getting a specialized helium testing team that knows your environment, your schedule constraints, and your goals.        Frequently Asked Questions Can you support our scheduled turnaround window?  Yes. We can align with your planning window or mobilize quickly in unplanned situations. Mobilization typically begins within 2–4 hours, and we aim to arrive on-site within 12 hours when needed.  How fast do we receive results?  A field report is provided immediately after testing. Final, formal documentation is emailed shortly after the job is complete.  Can we receive a copy of your testing procedure?  Yes. We follow ASME Section V, Article 10 and can send our procedures ahead of time or while on-site.  How long will the test take?  Test times vary based on system size and complexity. We also accommodate your facility's access and safety protocols.  Do you repair leaks if found?  We don’t perform repairs, but we do remain on-site at your request to retest any areas after repair work is completed.  What do you need us to provide?  Just plant air, nitrogen, and 110V power. Our crews are otherwise fully self-sufficient.