Cleanroom Connection LLC

Know which PPE item gets skipped first when things get busy?
Eye and face protection.

It happens on tasks that "feel" lower risk. Open containers, liquid transfers, anything with aerosol potential. And that's usually exactly where incidents happen.

USP 800 is pretty clear on when splash protection is required. The question is whether your team is applying it consistently, not just when it feels necessary.

Do you have a system for reinforcing this? We'd love to hear how other teams handle it 👇

One SKU or two?
That's actually one of the practical questions behind the pre-saturated vs. dry wipe decision.

If your cleaning protocol is a single-step wipedown with a single agent applied consistently across surfaces, a pre-saturated wipe is the simpler procurement choice. One canister, no separate disinfectant supply to manage.

If your protocol requires sequential disinfection steps, you need either two separate pre-saturated SKUs or dry wipes that allow you to apply different agents in sequence. Most USP 797 ISO Class 5 primary engineering control protocols are sequential. Sporicide first. IPA second. Dry sterile wipes support both steps without a substrate change.

Cleanroom Connection has been helping compounding pharmacies, biotech labs, and electronics manufacturers source the right wipes for their environment for over 20 years. We don't just ship product. We help teams match the right format to their ISO class, protocol, and compliance requirements.

PPE compliance doesn't end when you take the gown off.
Used PPE from hazardous drug areas is managed as hazardous waste. That means your disposal procedures need to be just as dialed in as your donning procedures.

It's one of the steps that gets glossed over in busy environments. And it's one of the things auditors look at.

Is disposal part of your standard PPE training, or does it get added on as an afterthought? Drop your answer 👇

USP 800 changed the glove conversation in pharmaceutical compounding.

Before USP 800, a sterile powderless nitrile glove was generally sufficient for most ISO 5 compounding tasks. USP 800 added a specific requirement: gloves used for hazardous drug handling must pass ASTM D6978 permeation testing.

That test matters because not all nitrile gloves resist chemical pe*******on equally. Thickness, formulation, and manufacturing process all affect permeation rates. A glove that looks identical to a chemo-rated glove on the shelf may not carry the certification your USP 800 protocol requires.

At Cleanroom Connection, we stock chemo-rated nitrile gloves with ASTM D6978 certification alongside standard sterile options. The difference is documented on the product data sheet, not just the packaging.

If you're not sure whether your current gloves meet USP 800 requirements, drop a question in the comments.

Hospital infection control isn't solving the same problem as a manufacturing cleanroom.

The goal isn't hitting a particle count. It's stopping pathogen transmission between patients, staff, and visitors, often under isolation precautions rather than routine gowning. PPE selection has to match the transmission route, not general cleanliness.

Our guide covers how different industries need different cleanroom environments. Link in the comments.

Here's a glove compliance detail that catches a lot of facilities off guard.

A pharma-grade sterile glove and an electronics-grade low-particulate glove are not the same product. They're not even close to interchangeable.

Pharmaceutical compounding under USP 800 requires gloves with ASTM D6978 permeation certification. That test measures how well the glove resists chemical pe*******on from hazardous drug compounds. Most general cleanroom gloves don't carry that certification.

Electronics fabs have a different concern. Human skin sheds particles constantly. At ISO 3 and ISO 4 tolerances, even a glove that passes pharmaceutical sterility standards may generate too many particles per cubic meter. The particle generation spec on the product data sheet is what matters, not the sterility certificate.

Cleanroom Connection breaks down exactly where these two sets of requirements diverge and what to look for when sourcing for each environment. If you're managing glove procurement for either setting, it's worth knowing the difference before your next order.

Drop a comment if you have questions about your specific environment.

Two facilities. Same ISO 5 classification. Completely different gloves.

That's not a sourcing quirk. It's the reality of how contamination risk actually works in cleanrooms. ISO class sets the particulate ceiling. It doesn't tell you whether you're protecting a drug compound from the operator, protecting the operator from a hazardous drug, or preventing a static charge from destroying a microchip before it's ever touched.

At Cleanroom Connection, we work with both pharmaceutical compounding teams and electronics manufacturers. The glove questions they ask sound similar on the surface. The answers are almost never the same.

Pharmaceutical environments under USP 797 need sterile, powderless gloves. Add USP 800 hazardous drug handling and the glove needs ASTM D6978 permeation certification. That's a specific bar, and a lot of gloves don't clear it.

Electronics fabs running at ISO 3 or 4 care about something different entirely. Particle generation per unit area of glove surface. ESD protection. A pharma-grade sterile glove won't necessarily pass those thresholds.

We put together a full breakdown covering both environments, where the requirements overlap and where they diverge.

If you're managing ISO Class 3 or 4 environments, the wipe substrate is your primary selection driver, not the saturation format.

Those classifications require knitted polyester or low-particulate foam. The particle release profile of the substrate matters more in those environments than whether the wipe comes pre-loaded with a solution.

ISO Class 5 through 8 offer more flexibility in substrate, but the compliance requirements tighten in other areas, specifically around sterility in the Class 5 zone.

Cleanroom Connection stocks dry wipe formats across multiple substrates: knitted polyester, nonwoven polyester, poly-cellulose blend, foam, and microfiber. Each has a distinct particle-release profile and chemical compatibility rating. Getting that match right matters.

We put together a guide that breaks it all down. If you're sourcing wipes for a new protocol or updating an existing one, it's a solid starting point.

Here's something many cleanroom teams don't realize until it becomes a problem.

Pre-saturated and dry wipes aren't interchangeable. Choosing the wrong format for your cleaning protocol doesn't just affect performance. It can create a compliance gap that shows up in your environmental monitoring results.

Dry wipes are the right choice when your protocol requires sequential disinfection. Say your USP 797 procedure calls for a sporicide application first, then an IPA wipe-down. You can't do that with a single pre-saturated product. You'd need two separate SKUs, or dry sterile wipes that allow you to apply each agent sequentially.

Pre-saturated wipes are excellent for single-agent routine decontamination in ISO Class 6, 7, and 8 environments. Consistent chemical load, less room for operator error, simpler procurement.

Cleanroom Connection put together a full breakdown of both formats, including substrate differences, USP 797 and USP 800 requirements, and when each format belongs in your facility.