Q&A

You can view and apply for open positions through the Careers page on our website. Each posting includes a detailed job description and application instructions.

Once your application is received, our recruiting team reviews it against the role requirements. If your background aligns, a member of our team will reach out to discuss next steps.

Timelines vary depending on the role and number of applicants. Most candidates can expect initial updates within 2–4 weeks of applying.

Due to the volume of applications we receive, we are not able to provide individual status updates for every applicant. If you are selected to move forward, our team will contact you directly.

We strive to communicate outcomes whenever possible; however, due to application volume, not all candidates may receive a personalized update.

Yes, we periodically offer internships and entry-level roles. These opportunities will be posted on our Careers page when available.

Our process typically includes an initial recruiter conversation, followed by one or more interviews with hiring managers and team members. Some roles may include technical or case-based assessments.

We foster a collaborative, quality-driven environment focused on innovation, continuous improvement, and client success. Our team values integrity, accountability, and professional growth. Our ESOP based culture is a differentiator that makes us a destination employer.

We provide a competitive benefits package that includes health insurance, retirement plans, paid time off, and professional development opportunities.

Yes. We are committed to employee development through training, mentorship, and defined career pathways. Our engineering career path is defined to promote internal growth opportunities.

Performance Validation has over 2,000 calibrated temperature or temperature/humidity data loggers. Our inventory of temperature mapping equipment covers a wire variety of ranges and applications. See our application table.

Availability is dependent upon current and upcoming project needs. Contact PV for current availability to meet your specific needs.

Equipment rental cost is dependent upon quantity and duration. PV has a standard weekly rental rate, but discounts are available for large quantity and/or long duration rentals. Contact PV for a customer specific price quote based on your needs. 

All of our projects are maintained on a first come/first served schedule. PV works hard to accommodate all our customers’ needs. Certainly, the sooner you contact us for upcoming needs, the more likely we will be able to meet them. Staff and/or equipment availability are our constraints, so the more flexibility you have the more likely we can meet your need. Due to the demand for and calendar restraints of seasonal mapping work, needs for January-March and July-September require as much lead time as possible. Contact PV to schedule your upcoming mapping needs today. 

PV maintains all of our mapping equipment on an annual calibration schedule.  The equipment is multi-point calibrated across the entire instrument range by NIST standards to manufacturer specifications by accredited 3rd party metrology labs or by the manufacturer. All equipment is provided with current calibration documentation.  PV has an internal CAPA program to assess and report any calibration failures for impact to our customers. While this is acceptable for most customers, a separate post-use calibration of equipment is available for additional cost.  Contact PV for additional details.

Yes, PV only provides 21 CFR Part 11 compliant systems for thermal validation within a cGMP environment. In addition to being specified as such by the manufacturer, our systems have been internally validated by PV and have been fully documented to be compliant with current regulations regarding data recording, reporting, and storage. PV can provide copies of the internal validation documentation to our customers or can readily share this documentation as part of a supplier audit, upon request.

Typical information PV needs to provide an accurate quote for a specific need includes: What is needing mapped (space, equipment, qty., temp/RH requirements, etc.), a drawing/layout of the space to be mapped (with dimensions and racking if possible), schedule (when is it available to be mapped, when does it need completed by), is a full Qualification needed or just a temperature mapping, and does PV need to provide mapping protocols? Contact PV for a customer specific price quote based on your needs.

Airflow visualization is a documented study used to visually demonstrate how air moves through a cleanroom, isolator, RABS, biosafety cabinet, laminar flow hood, filling line, or other controlled environment. The study uses a visible tracer, commonly referred to as “smoke” or “fog,” to show airflow direction, turbulence, dead zones, eddies, ingress, egress, and the impact of personnel or process interventions.

For regulated manufacturing environments, airflow visualization is often used to support contamination control, cleanroom qualification, aseptic process design, and regulatory expectations for demonstrating appropriate airflow behavior.

The terms are often used interchangeably. “Smoke study” is the traditional industry term, while “airflow visualization” is generally the more technically accurate term.

In most pharmaceutical and cleanroom applications, the purpose is not simply to create smoke; it is to create a visible tracer that allows trained reviewers to evaluate airflow patterns and determine whether the airflow supports the intended contamination control strategy.

PV can support airflow visualization in a wide range of controlled environments, including cleanrooms, isolators, restricted access barrier systems, biosafety cabinets, laminar airflow hoods, filling lines, compounding areas, weighing booths, transfer hatches, pass-throughs, and other critical processing areas.

The exact study design depends on the room classification, equipment configuration, process risk, contamination control strategy, and intended use of the area.

Typical information needed includes the facility location, number and type of areas to be studied, equipment drawings or layout drawings, room classifications, process descriptions, expected operating states, number of intended scenes, required deliverables, target schedule, gowning or access requirements, and whether PV will be developing the protocol, executing an existing protocol, or supporting both protocol and final report development.

Photos, layout drawings, airflow diagrams, and a preliminary scene list are especially helpful for developing an accurate estimate.

Deliverables commonly include protocol development or protocol support, on-site execution, video capture of airflow visualization scenes, documented scene review, final video organization and delivery, and a final report or execution summary.

Depending on the project scope, deliverables may also include still images, scene-by-scene observations, deviation support, technical justification, remediation recommendations, or regulatory response language.

PV selects the tracer technology based on the application, the area classification, customer requirements, equipment compatibility, and contamination control expectations.

Water-based fog is often preferred for critical cleanroom and aseptic applications because it provides visible airflow tracing without leaving the same type of persistent residue associated with many glycol-based smoke products. Glycol-based smoke may still be appropriate in certain applications where extended visualization time or high-volume smoke generation is needed.

The correct question is not simply “water or glycol?” The correct question is which tracer is fit for purpose for the specific study, environment, and risk profile.

Yes, water-based fog can be an appropriate and scientifically sound tracer for airflow visualization when properly generated, introduced, visualized, and documented. In critical cleanroom applications, water-based fog is often preferred because it can provide effective visualization while minimizing residue and contamination concerns.

As with any tracer, the key factors are particle behavior, visibility, introduction technique, study design, and whether the tracer is appropriate for the environment being evaluated.

Not in the absolute sense. In practical cleanroom airflow visualization, the tracer needs to be suitable for demonstrating airflow patterns under the conditions of the study.

For properly generated micron-scale droplets, the most important considerations are whether the tracer follows the airflow with sufficient fidelity, remains visible long enough to evaluate the airflow pattern, and does not introduce unacceptable contamination risk. Neutral buoyancy may be discussed in standards and technical literature, but study quality depends on the overall suitability of the tracer and the execution method.

Airflow visualization studies commonly evaluate static conditions, dynamic operating conditions, and specific process interventions.

Static conditions may show baseline airflow behavior with equipment operating but without personnel activity. Dynamic conditions may include operator movement, material transfer, equipment loading or unloading, door openings, glove or RTP use, filling operations, scale use, peristaltic pump use, EM setup, or other representative activities that could affect airflow.

Dynamic studies show how airflow behaves during actual or simulated operations. This is important because airflow that appears acceptable during static conditions may change when personnel, equipment, materials, or process interventions are introduced.

Dynamic visualization helps determine whether routine operations create turbulence, backflow, stagnant areas, or contamination pathways that could affect product, components, critical surfaces, or the surrounding clean environment.

Project duration depends on the number of areas, number of scenes, facility access requirements, gowning requirements, production availability, protocol complexity, and review expectations.

A small study may require only a short execution window, while a large isolator, filling line, or multi-room project may require several days or weeks of preparation, execution, review, and final reporting. PV can help develop a realistic execution schedule once the scope and scene list are understood.

In some cases, yes, but this depends on the process, facility procedures, contamination control requirements, and whether the tracer can be safely and appropriately introduced during operations.

Many studies are performed during simulated operations rather than active production. Simulated execution allows the team to reproduce representative activities while maintaining appropriate control over product, materials, personnel movement, camera placement, and tracer introduction.

A good airflow visualization study has a clear protocol, scientifically appropriate tracer selection, representative operating conditions, well-planned camera angles, controlled tracer introduction, trained execution personnel, and objective review criteria.

The goal is not simply to generate visible fog. The goal is to produce clear, interpretable evidence that supports a defensible conclusion about airflow behavior and contamination control.

Common issues include poorly visible tracer, excessive tracer generation, tracer introduced in a way that disrupts the airflow, inadequate lighting, limited camera angles, incomplete scene coverage, unclear acceptance criteria, undocumented dynamic conditions, and lack of alignment between the protocol and actual process risk.

PV helps avoid these issues through front-end planning, protocol development, experienced execution teams, and technical review of the resulting video evidence.

Yes. PV can support protocol development, scene list development, acceptance criteria, execution strategy, and final report language.

For regulated environments, acceptance criteria should be specific to the area and process being evaluated. Generic criteria are often not sufficient for complex systems such as isolators, RABS, transfer hatches, pressure sinks, air traps, or areas where airflow behavior must be interpreted in relation to a specific contamination control strategy.

Acceptance criteria should define what acceptable airflow behavior means for the specific area being studied. This may include unidirectional airflow, absence of adverse turbulence, no backflow from less-clean to cleaner areas, no airflow from contaminated or lower-classified zones toward critical surfaces, adequate clearance of tracer, and no observed airflow pattern that could compromise the intended contamination control strategy.

The criteria should be tied to the process, room classification, pressure cascade, equipment design, and criticality of the operation.

Yes. PV can support technical responses, study justifications, protocol explanations, final report language, and remediation strategies related to airflow visualization.

This may include explaining why a specific tracer was selected, how the study was executed, how scenes were reviewed, how acceptance criteria were applied, and how observed airflow patterns support the contamination control strategy.

PV approaches airflow visualization as a technical contamination control study, not simply a video recording exercise. The team considers tracer selection, particle behavior, airflow dynamics, equipment design, process risk, camera placement, lighting, operator movement, and regulatory defensibility.

This approach helps produce clear visual evidence and practical conclusions that can withstand internal quality review, customer scrutiny, and regulatory questions.

Commissioning providers should be well rounded in terms of education and experience. ANSI-accredited third-party certification programs, such as the Certified Commissioning Professional (CCP) as administered by the building Commissioning Certification Board, provide independent verification of a candidate’s education and work experience and require candidates to pass a competency exam. Most of our commissioning providers hold the CCP credential, and we encourage and support all our new employees to work towards achieving this certification. 

The term “third-party commissioning” is typically used to describe a contractual relationship in which the commissioning provider is accountable directly to the Owner and is independent of any other entity involved in the project (for example, members of the design or construction teams). This independence helps to ensure that the commissioning provider executes their work scope as with the Owner’s best interests in mind.

Yes, our commissioning experts are well versed in the LEED requirements related to commissioning. We are a proud member of USGBC and have completed over 250 projects that have achieved LEED certification. We also have several LEED Accredited Professionals on staff who can help identify synergies between commissioning and associated LEED credits.

Existing Building Commissioning (EBCx) is a systematic process for optimizing a building’s operations. By making improvements to existing equipment and systems, building owners and operators can achieve greater energy efficiency, reduce costs, and create a more comfortable and healthier environment for occupants. Energy savings of between 6-16% can be realized from proper implementation of the EBCx process.

Existing building commissioning can help realize energy savings for all buildings, though there are a few indicators that can make your building an especially good fit. These factors include recently rising energy costs, upward-trending energy usage, frequent occupant complaints, systems with digital controls, and larger buildings (> 50,000 square feet). Our experts can help determine if your building may qualify for utility provider incentive programs which can pay for up to 100% of your commissioning provider’s cost.

Building commissioning is a quality assurance process to verify that a new building’s major systems (e.g. heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), lighting, plumbing, controls, etc.) are properly designed, installed, and operating as intended. LEED v5 (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design version 5) makes Fundamental Commissioning and Verification a mandatory prerequisite for all certified projects. This ensures the building actually achieves its sustainability and performance goals, rather than just meeting design requirements on paper. By involving an independent Commissioning Authority (CxA) to test and fine-tune systems, owners and developers benefit from early detection of issues, improved energy efficiency, and better indoor air quality and occupant comfort. In fact, commissioning supports LEED’s energy and environmental goals by optimizing system performance, reducing operational problems, and helping maintain long-term efficiency. This reduces costly post-construction fixes and helps ensure the building performs as intended, saving energy and operating costs over its lifespan. [cxplanner.com] [verdicalgroup.com]

LEED v5’s Fundamental Commissioning covers an expanded scope of activities compared to LEED v4/v4.1. A qualified Commissioning Authority (CxA) must be engaged by the design phase (earlier than before) to help develop the Owner’s Project Requirements (OPR) and perform at least one design review. The CxA then oversees commissioning of all major energy-related systems – including HVAC, electrical, plumbing, controls, renewable energy systems, and now the building enclosure (envelope), which LEED v5 makes a required part of fundamental commissioning. During construction, the CxA verifies equipment installation and conducts functional performance testing of systems to ensure they meet the OPR. LEED v5 has also added tasks to fundamental commissioning that were optional in earlier versions: for example, reviewing equipment submittals, verifying the owner’s staff training program, performing site visits at key milestones, and developing an ongoing commissioning plan for post-occupancy. These robust requirements mean commissioning is an integral, start-to-finish process in LEED v5, providing a whole-building approach to quality and performance from design through operations.

Enhanced Commissioning is an optional LEED v5 credit (not a prerequisite) that goes beyond the basic “Fundamental” commissioning. Projects can earn additional LEED points by opting for enhanced commissioning, which provides deeper oversight and extended activities to maximize building performance. For example, Enhanced Commissioning typically includes comprehensive verification of system documentation (creating a detailed systems manual), ensuring operators receive effective training, seasonal or post-occupancy performance checks (such as a follow-up review around 10 months after opening), and ongoing monitoring or monitoring-based commissioning for continuous performance tracking. Under LEED v5, some tasks that were previously part of Enhanced Commissioning (like envelope commissioning and early CxA engagement) are now included in the mandatory fundamental scope. However, the Enhanced Commissioning credit still adds value by focusing on long-term optimization (and offering distinct paths for advanced monitoring or intensive envelope testing). While Enhanced Commissioning is not required for basic certification, many owners and developers pursue it to earn extra LEED points and gain greater confidence in their building’s long-term efficiency, reliability, and occupant satisfaction.