The need to use cleaning methods other than traditional CFC‐113 solvent for hi‐rel electronics imposes more rigid cleanliness testing. In the past, this was mainly limited to ionic contamination control, but this is probably insufficient by itself when using other methods. This paper discusses the various methods for which instrumentation is available, from the practical standpoint. This should satisfy all the requirements of both procurement agencies and manufacturers. Particular emphasis is placed on the fact that most existing standards are out‐of‐date and should be urgently revised. It is suggested that the standards be based on statistically valid test results rather than the simpler, but risky, go/no‐go methods. These probability limit levels should be modulated according to the use to which the circuitry will be put and the technology used in its manufacture. Above all, emphasis is placed on testing methods that are more scientifically based with less empirical guesswork.