Evaluation of Decontaminated N95 Respirators 

Date Tested: 5/4/2020 – 5/7/2020 

Respirator Model(s): 3M 8210, 3M 8210V, Moldex 1512, 3M 8000, Crosstex GPRN95 

Tests: Filtration with NaCl (modified version of STP-0059), Manikin Fit Factor with Static Advanced Headform, and Strap 

Integrity with Tensile Testing 

Decontamination Method: Vaporized Hydrogen Peroxide (VHP), 7% 

Sealed Connex box with VHP system, 3-hour saturation environment with 24 hour exclusion/drying for biologic indicator 

result 

Decontamination Cycles: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 cycles 

While decontamination and reuse of FFRs are not consistent with standard and approved usage, these options 

may need to be considered when FFR shortages exist. This assessment was developed to quantify the filtration 

efficiency and manikin fit factor1 of an N95 respirator that has been decontaminated. This assessment is not to 

determine the effectiveness of the decontamination procedure at killing pathogenic microorganisms. The results 

provided in this report are specific to the subset of samples that were provided to NPPTL for evaluation. These 

results may be used to update the CDC guidance for Crisis Capacity Strategies (during known shortages). 

125 respirators that were unworn and not subjected to any pathogenic microorganisms were submitted for 

evaluation. This included 25 respirators that were subjected to 1 cycle of the VHP decontamination process, 25 

respirators subjected to 2 cycles, 25 respirators subjected to 3 cycles, 25 respirators subjected to 4 cycles, and 

25 respirators subjected to 5 cycles. No controls were provided. Figure 1 photos document the procedures 

used. The samples were tested using a modified version of the NIOSH Standard Test Procedure (STP) TEB-APRSTP-0059 to determine particulate filtration efficiency. The TSI, Inc. model 8130 using sodium chloride aerosol 

was used for the filtration evaluation. For the laboratory fit evaluation, a static manikin headform was used to 

quantify changes in manikin fit factor. The TSI, Inc. PortaCount® PRO+ 8038 in “N95 Enabled” mode was used 

for this evaluation. Additionally, tensile strength testing of the straps was performed to determine changes in 

strap integrity. The Instron® 5943 Tensile Tester was used for this evaluation. The full assessment plan can be 

found here. 

Filtration Efficiency Results: All respirator samples measured more than 95%. See Tables 1, 4, 7, 10, and 13. 

Manikin Fit Factor Results: The manikin fit factor showed passing fit factors (greater than 100) for all samples at 

all provided decontamination cycles of the following models; 3M 8210, 3M 8210V, and Moldex 1512. The 

manikin fit test procedure used in this assessment did not show any detriments in fit associated with the 

decontamination method used for these models. 

The 3M 8000 and Crosstex GPRN95 could not be reliably assessed for manikin fit, as the results after testing one 

sample of each showed manikin fit factors < 100. Because of the limited number of samples provided, the 

remaining samples for these models were not assessed for manikin fit. No controls were provided to confirm 

1The American Industrial Hygiene Association defines the Manikin Fit Factor as “An expression related to the amount of leakage measured through the 

face or neck seal of a respirator mounted to a manikin under specified airflow and environmental conditions. If the challenge to the seal is an airborne 

substance, it is the ratio of its airborne concentration outside the respirator divided by the concentration that enters the respirator through the seal. If the 

challenge is airflow or air pressure, conditions and assumptions for quantifying leakage must be specified. Leakage from other sources (e.g., air purifying 

elements) must be essentially zero. The respirator may be mounted to the manikin without sealants; be partially sealed to the manikin; or be sealed to the 

manikin with artificially induced leaks.” 
whether the inadequate fit was due to the decontamination method or the respirator model itself. See Tables 2, 

5, 8, 11, and 14.

Strap Integrity Results: No visual degradation of the straps was observed. Changes in strap tensile strength were

not assessed, as no control respirators were provided. While the exact correlation between the force exerted by 

straps and fit is not well understood, higher force values may be associated with a tighter fit of the respirator to 

the face. Significant reductions in this force would be associated with a loss of elasticity of the straps, thereby 

reducing their ability to create a tight fit. See Tables 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15.
Figure 1. Laboratory Test Photos
Table 1. Filter Efficiency Evaluation – 3M 8210

Notes:

• The test method utilized in this assessment is not the NIOSH standard test procedure that is used for certification

of respirators. Respirators assessed to this modified test plan do not necessarily meet the requirements of STP0059, and therefore cannot be considered equivalent to N95 respirators that were tested to STP-0059.

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated 

Sample #

Flow Rate

(Lpm)

Initial Filter 

Resistance

(mmH2O)

Initial Percent 

Leakage (%)

Maximum 

Percent 

Leakage (%)

Filter 

Efficiency 

(%)

3M 8210, VHP, 1 cycle

Min Fil Eff: 97.26%

Max Fil Eff: 99.53%

1

85 7.6 0.249 0.630 99.37

2

85 6.8 2.23 2.47 97.53

3

85 7.1 0.292 0.743 99.26

3M 8210, VHP, 2 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 99.36%

Max Fil Eff: 99.41%

1

85 7.4 0.238 0.643 99.36

2

85 7.0 0.257 0.609 99.39

3

85 7.3 0.196 0.594 99.41

3M 8210, VHP, 3 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.60%

Max Fil Eff: 99.50%

1

85 6.9 1.85 2.40 97.60

2

85 7.7 0.577 0.675 99.33

3

85 7.1 0.213 0.505 99.50

3M 8210, VHP, 4 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 99.31%

Max Fil Eff: 99.52%

1

85 7.4 0.171 0.480 99.52

2

85 7.2 0.275 0.694 99.31

3

85 7.1 0.253 0.646 99.35

3M 8210, VHP, 5 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 99.09%

Max Fil Eff: 99.49%

1

85 6.9 0.354 0.910 99.09

2

85 7.1 0.200 0.510 99.49

3

85 7.7 0.398 0.835 99.17
Table 2. Manikin Fit Evaluation – 3M 8210

Manikin Fit Factor of Decontaminated N95s

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated

Sample #

mFF Normal 

Breathing 1

mFF Deep 

Breathing

mFF Normal 

Breathing 2

Overall 

Manikin Fit 

Factor

3M 8210, VHP, 1 cycle

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210, VHP, 2 cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210, VHP, 3 cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

181 86 111 115

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210, VHP, 4 cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 195 200+ 199

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210, VHP, 5 cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

Notes:

• Per OSHA 1910.134(f)(7), if the fit factor as determined through an OSHA-accepted quantitative fit testing protocol 

is equal to or greater than 100 for tight-fitting half facepieces, then the fit test has been passed for that respirator.

• This assessment does not include fit testing of people and only uses two exercises (normal and deep breathing) on 

a manikin headform. 

• This assessment is a laboratory evaluation using a manikin headform and varies greatly from the OSHA individual 

fit test. This headform testing only includes normal breathing and deep breathing on a stationary (non-moving) 

headform; therefore, fit results from this assessment cannot be directly translated to using the standard OSHAaccepted test. Instead, this testing provides an indication of the change in fit performance (if any) associated with 

the decontamination of respirators. 
Table 3. Strap Integrity Evaluation - 3M 8210

Tensile Force in Respirator Straps of Decontaminated N95s

(recorded force values are at 150% strain)

Respirator Model, Decon 

Method, # of cycles Straps from Treated Sample # Force in TopStrap (N)

Force in Bottom 

Strap (N)

3M 8210, VHP, 1 cycle

1 5.019 4.917

2 5.073 4.834

3 5.043 4.980

Decontaminated Strap Average 5.045 4.910

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210, VHP, 2 cycles

1 5.083 5.012

2 5.133 4.916

3 5.000 4.952

Decontaminated Strap Average 5.072 4.96

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210, VHP, 3 cycles

1 5.155 4.824

2 4.982 4.852

3 5.044 4.993

Decontaminated Strap Average 5.060 4.890

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210, VHP, 4 cycles

1 5.133 4.985

2 5.037 4.828

3 5.051 4.892

Decontaminated Strap Average 5.074 4.902

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210, VHP, 5 cycles

1 4.860 4.826

2 5.001 4.851

3 4.972 4.856

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.944 4.844

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A
Table 4. Filter Efficiency Evaluation – 3M 8210V

Notes:

• The test method utilized in this assessment is not the NIOSH standard test procedure that is used for certification

of respirators. Respirators assessed to this modified test plan do not necessarily meet the requirements of STP0059, and therefore cannot be considered equivalent to N95 respirators that were tested to STP-0059.

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated 

Sample #

Flow Rate

(Lpm)

Initial Filter 

Resistance

(mmH2O)

Initial Percent 

Leakage (%)

Maximum 

Percent 

Leakage (%)

Filter 

Efficiency 

(%)

3M 8210V, VHP, 1 

cycle

Min Fil Eff: 98.24%

Max Fil Eff: 98.94%

1

85 8.5 1.30 1.76 98.24

2

85 8.3 0.707 1.20 98.80

3

85 8.5 0.642 1.06 98.94

3M 8210V, VHP, 2 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.57%

Max Fil Eff: 98.79%

1

85 8.3 0.783 1.21 98.79

2

85 8.5 0.935 1.43 98.57

3

85 8.3 0.946 1.40 98.60

3M 8210V, VHP, 3 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.30%

Max Fil Eff: 98.53%

1

85 8.3 1.12 1.70 98.30

2

85 8.7 1.06 1.47 98.53

3

85 8.4 1.13 1.58 98.42

3M 8210V, VHP, 4 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.97%

Max Fil Eff: 99.10%

1

85 8.4 1.00 1.48 98.52

2

85 8.5 1.48 2.03 97.97

3

85 9.9 0.435 0.904 99.10

3M 8210V, VHP, 5 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.34%

Max Fil Eff: 98.62%

1

85 10.0 1.34 1.38 98.62

2

85 9.0 1.23 1.66 98.34

3

85 8.8 1.04 1.60 98.40
Table 5. Manikin Fit Evaluation – 3M 8210V

Manikin Fit Factor of Decontaminated N95s

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated

Sample #

mFF Normal 

Breathing 1

mFF Deep 

Breathing

mFF Normal 

Breathing 2

Overall 

Manikin Fit 

Factor

3M 8210V, VHP, 1 

cycle

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 90 146 131

5

200+ 192 200+ 198

3M 8210V, VHP, 2 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 146 196 177

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210V, VHP, 3 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200 123 200+ 165

5

200+ 177 200+ 192

3M 8210V, VHP, 4 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

3M 8210V, VHP, 5 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

Notes:

• Per OSHA 1910.134(f)(7), if the fit factor as determined through an OSHA-accepted quantitative fit testing protocol 

is equal to or greater than 100 for tight-fitting half facepieces, then the fit test has been passed for that respirator.

• This assessment does not include fit testing of people and only uses two exercises (normal and deep breathing) on 

a manikin headform. 

• This assessment is a laboratory evaluation using a manikin headform and varies greatly from the OSHA individual 

fit test. This headform testing only includes normal breathing and deep breathing on a stationary (non-moving) 

headform; therefore, fit results from this assessment cannot be directly translated to using the standard OSHAaccepted test. Instead, this testing provides an indication of the change in fit performance (if any) associated with 

the decontamination of respirators. 
Table 6. Strap Integrity Evaluation - 3M 8210V

Tensile Force in Respirator Straps of Decontaminated N95s

(recorded force values are at 150% strain)

Respirator Model, Decon 

Method, # of cycles Straps from Treated Sample # Force in TopStrap (N)

Force in Bottom 

Strap (N)

3M 8210V, VHP, 1 cycle

1 3.643 3.966

2 3.743 3.938

3 3.628 3.883

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.671 3.929

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210V, VHP, 2 cycles

1 3.553 4.006

2 3.486 3.847

3 3.979 3.571

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.673 3.808

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210V, VHP, 3 cycles

1 3.686 4.010

2 3.661 3.721

3 3.819 4.080

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.722 3.937

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210V, VHP, 4 cycles

1 3.774 3.648

2 3.863 3.702

3 3.887 3.648

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.841 3.666

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8210V, VHP, 5 cycles

1 3.854 3.744

2 3.849 3.813

3 3.837 3.917

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.847 3.825

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A
Table 7. Filter Efficiency Evaluation – Moldex 1512

Notes:

• The test method utilized in this assessment is not the NIOSH standard test procedure that is used for certification 

of respirators. Respirators assessed to this modified test plan do not necessarily meet the requirements of STP0059, and therefore cannot be considered equivalent to N95 respirators that were tested to STP-0059. 

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated 

Sample #

Flow Rate

(Lpm)

Initial Filter 

Resistance

(mmH2O)

Initial Percent 

Leakage (%)

Maximum 

Percent 

Leakage (%)

Filter 

Efficiency 

(%)

Moldex 1512, VHP, 1 

cycle

Min Fil Eff: 97.91%

Max Fil Eff: 98.79%

1

85 9.4 1.21 1.21 98.79

2

85 9.5 1.96 1.96 98.04

3

85 9.6 2.09 2.09 97.91

Moldex 1512, VHP, 2 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.74%

Max Fil Eff: 99.05%

1

85 9.9 0.950 0.950 99.05

2

85 11.7 1.18 1.18 98.82

3

85 10.1 1.26 1.26 98.74

Moldex 1512, VHP, 3 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.80%

Max Fil Eff: 98.59%

1

85 9.0 1.41 1.41 98.59

2

85 9.7 1.67 1.67 98.33

3

85 8.8 2.20 2.20 97.80

Moldex 1512, VHP, 4 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.76%

Max Fil Eff: 98.78%

1

85 8.8 2.24 2.24 97.76

2

85 9.2 1.40 1.40 98.60

3

85 9.3 1.22 1.22 98.78

Moldex 1512, VHP, 5 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.55%

Max Fil Eff: 98.74%

1

85 9.1 2.45 2.45 97.55

2

85 9.4 1.87 2.27 97.73

3

85 10.7 1.13 1.26 98.74
Table 8. Manikin Fit Evaluation – Moldex 1512

Manikin Fit Factor of Decontaminated N95s

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated

Sample #

mFF Normal 

Breathing 1

mFF Deep 

Breathing

mFF Normal 

Breathing 2

Overall 

Manikin Fit 

Factor

Moldex 1512, VHP, 1 

cycle

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 127 132 147

5

200+ 143 137 156

Moldex 1512, VHP, 2 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

191 79 104 109

Moldex 1512, VHP, 3 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

Moldex 1512, VHP, 4 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

Moldex 1512, VHP, 5 

cycles

Static Advanced 

Medium Headform 

(Hanson Robotics)

4

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

5

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+

Notes:

• Per OSHA 1910.134(f)(7), if the fit factor as determined through an OSHA-accepted quantitative fit testing protocol 

is equal to or greater than 100 for tight-fitting half facepieces, then the fit test has been passed for that respirator.

• This assessment does not include fit testing of people and only uses two exercises (normal and deep breathing) on 

a manikin headform. 

• This assessment is a laboratory evaluation using a manikin headform and varies greatly from the OSHA individual 

fit test. This headform testing only includes normal breathing and deep breathing on a stationary (non-moving) 

headform; therefore, fit results from this assessment cannot be directly translated to using the standard OSHAaccepted test. Instead, this testing provides an indication of the change in fit performance (if any) associated with 

the decontamination of respirators. 
Table 9. Strap Integrity Evaluation - Moldex 1512

Tensile Force in Respirator Straps of Decontaminated N95s

(recorded force values are at 150% strain)

Respirator Model, Decon 

Method, # of cycles Straps from Treated Sample # Force in TopStrap (N)

Force in Bottom 

Strap (N)

Moldex 1512, VHP, 1 cycle

1 3.167 3.180

2 3.150 3.196

3 3.215 3.229

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.177 3.202

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Moldex 1512, VHP, 2 cycles

1 3.198 3.279

2 3.171 3.351

3 3.133 3.341

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.167 3.324

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Moldex 1512, VHP, 3 cycles

1 3.142 3.334

2 3.204 3.309

3 3.445 3.293

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.264 3.312

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Moldex 1512, VHP, 4 cycles

1 3.208 3.148

2 3.193 3.217

3 3.341 3.371

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.247 3.245

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Moldex 1512, VHP, 5 cycles

1 3.061 3.208

2 3.078 3.179

3 3.040 3.182

Decontaminated Strap Average 3.060 3.190

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A
Table 10. Filter Efficiency Evaluation – 3M 8000

*evaluated on manikin

Notes:

• The test method utilized in this assessment is not the NIOSH standard test procedure that is used for certification 

of respirators. Respirators assessed to this modified test plan do not necessarily meet the requirements of STP0059, and therefore cannot be considered equivalent to N95 respirators that were tested to STP-0059. 

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated 

Sample #

Flow Rate

(Lpm)

Initial Filter 

Resistance

(mmH2O)

Initial Percent 

Leakage (%)

Maximum 

Percent 

Leakage (%)

Filter 

Efficiency 

(%)

3M 8000, VHP, 1 cycle

Min Fil Eff: 98.69%

Max Fil Eff: 98.99%

1

85 14.0 0.880 1.01 98.99

2

85 10.1 0.633 1.17 98.83

3

85 10.3 0.585 1.14 98.86

4

85 n/a*

5

85 9.9 0.712 1.31 98.69

3M 8000, VHP, 2 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.33%

Max Fil Eff: 99.05%

1

85 9.3 0.672 1.35 98.65

2

85 9.8 0.688 1.25 98.75

3

85 9.4 0.816 1.67 98.33

4

85 11.0 0.518 0.961 99.04

5

85 10.9 0.569 0.948 99.05

3M 8000, VHP, 3 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.00%

Max Fil Eff: 98.80%

1

85 9.9 0.583 1.23 98.77

2

85 8.9 0.833 1.50 98.50

3

85 9.4 1.27 2.00 98.00

4

85 10.3 0.634 1.20 98.80

5

85 9.6 0.833 1.41 98.59

3M 8000, VHP, 4 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.74%

Max Fil Eff: 99.18%

1

85 9.4 0.648 1.26 98.74

2

85 10.7 0.835 1.23 98.77

3

85 10.6 0.738 1.11 98.89

4

85 11.3 0.559 0.987 99.01

5

85 12.7 0.453 0.816 99.18

3M 8000, VHP, 5 

cycles

Min Fil Eff: 98.78%

Max Fil Eff: 99.16%

1

85 11.6 0.841 1.09 98.91

2

85 10.4 0.752 1.15 98.85

3

85 10.1 0.751 1.22 98.78

4

85 9.6 0.708 1.15 98.85

5

85 11.1 0.571 0.844 99.16
Table 11. Manikin Fit Evaluation – 3M 8000

Manikin Fit Factor of Decontaminated N95s

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated

Sample #

mFF Normal 

Breathing 1

mFF Deep 

Breathing

mFF Normal 

Breathing 2

Overall 

Manikin Fit 

Factor

3M 8000*, VHP, 1 

cycle

Static Advanced Large

Headform (Lunar 

Studios)

4

69 68 85 73

*Model unable to achieve adequate fit on manikin. Due to limited sample size, remaining samples were not assessed for 

manikin fit. Remaining samples for remaining cycles were assessed for filter penetration.

Notes:

• Per OSHA 1910.134(f)(7), if the fit factor as determined through an OSHA-accepted quantitative fit testing protocol 

is equal to or greater than 100 for tight-fitting half facepieces, then the fit test has been passed for that respirator.

• This assessment does not include fit testing of people and only uses two exercises (normal and deep breathing) on 

a manikin headform. 

• This assessment is a laboratory evaluation using a manikin headform and varies greatly from the OSHA individual 

fit test. This headform testing only includes normal breathing and deep breathing on a stationary (non-moving) 

headform; therefore, fit results from this assessment cannot be directly translated to using the standard OSHAaccepted test. Instead, this testing provides an indication of the change in fit performance (if any) associated with 

the decontamination of respirators. 

• BOLD overall manikin fit factor < 100.
Table 12. Strap Integrity Evaluation - 3M 8000

Tensile Force in Respirator Straps of Decontaminated N95s

(recorded force values are at 150% strain)

Respirator Model, Decon 

Method, # of cycles Straps from Treated Sample # Force in TopStrap (N)

Force in Bottom 

Strap (N)

3M 8000, VHP, 1 cycle

1 3.969 3.800

2 4.040 3.887

3 4.175 3.860

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.061 3.849

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8000, VHP, 2 cycles

1 4.149 3.938

2 4.189 4.113

3 4.167 4.018

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.168 4.023

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8000, VHP, 3 cycles

1 4.365 4.104

2 4.286 4.144

3 4.361 4.063

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.337 4.104

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8000, VHP, 4 cycles

1 3.970 4.090

2 4.186 3.986

3 4.328 3.875

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.161 3.984

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

3M 8000, VHP, 5 cycles

1 4.267 4.011

2 4.370 4.069

3 4.348 3.932

Decontaminated Strap Average 4.328 4.004

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A
Table 13. Filter Efficiency Evaluation – Crosstex GPRN95

*evaluated on manikin

Notes:

• The test method utilized in this assessment is not the NIOSH standard test procedure that is used for certification 

of respirators. Respirators assessed to this modified test plan do not necessarily meet the requirements of STP0059, and therefore cannot be considered equivalent to N95 respirators that were tested to STP-0059. 

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated 

Sample #

Flow Rate

(Lpm)

Initial Filter 

Resistance

(mmH2O)

Initial Percent 

Leakage (%)

Maximum 

Percent 

Leakage (%)

Filter 

Efficiency 

(%)

Crosstex GPRN95, 

VHP, 1 cycle

Min Fil Eff: 99.09%

Max Fil Eff: 99.66%

1

85 7.5 0.337 0.337 99.66

2

85 6.8 0.557 0.736 99.26

3

85 6.4 0.586 0.912 99.09

4

85 n/a*

5

85 7.9 0.598 0.623 99.38

Crosstex GPRN95, 

VHP, 2 cycles

Min Fil Eff: 99.03%

Max Fil Eff: 99.62%

1

85 6.7 0.783 0.783 99.22

2

85 6.9 0.384 0.384 99.62

3

85 6.5 0.916 0.967 99.03

4

85 6.3 1.04 1.07 98.93

5

85 6.4 0.913 0.922 99.08

Crosstex GPRN95, 

VHP, 3 cycles

Min Fil Eff: 97.85%

Max Fil Eff: 99.28%

1

85 6.4 0.423 0.725 99.28

2

85 6.2 1.12 1.20 98.80

3

85 6.2 1.12 1.16 98.84

4

85 6.0 2.11 2.15 97.85

5

85 6.2 1.93 2.05 97.95

Crosstex GPRN95, 

VHP, 4 cycles

Min Fil Eff: 96.78%

Max Fil Eff: 99.22%

1

85 6.2 1.50 1.54 98.46

2

85 6.2 2.32 2.38 97.62

3

85 6.3 2.00 2.08 97.92

4

85 6.3 2.75 3.22 96.78

5

85 6.3 0.712 0.777 99.22

Crosstex GPRN95, 

VHP, 5 cycles

Min Fil Eff: 96.84%

Max Fil Eff: 99.13%

1

85 6.4 1.97 2.00 98.00

2

85 6.5 1.04 1.05 98.95

3

85 6.3 2.70 3.16 96.84

4

85 6.6 0.825 0.870 99.13

5

85 6.2 1.44 1.47 98.53
Table 14. Manikin Fit Evaluation – Crosstex GPRN95

Manikin Fit Factor of Decontaminated N95s

Respirator Model, 

Decon Method, # of 

cycles

Treated

Sample #

mFF Normal 

Breathing 1

mFF Deep 

Breathing

mFF Normal 

Breathing 2

Overall 

Manikin Fit 

Factor

Crosstex GPRN95*, 

VHP, 1 cycle

Static Advanced Large

Headform (Lunar 

Studios)

4

6 5 6 5

*Model unable to achieve adequate fit on manikin. Due to limited sample size, remaining samples were not assessed for 

manikin fit. Remaining samples for remaining cycles were assessed for filter penetration.

Notes:

• Per OSHA 1910.134(f)(7), if the fit factor as determined through an OSHA-accepted quantitative fit testing protocol 

is equal to or greater than 100 for tight-fitting half facepieces, then the fit test has been passed for that respirator.

• This assessment does not include fit testing of people and only uses two exercises (normal and deep breathing) on 

a manikin headform. 

• This assessment is a laboratory evaluation using a manikin headform and varies greatly from the OSHA individual 

fit test. This headform testing only includes normal breathing and deep breathing on a stationary (non-moving) 

headform; therefore, fit results from this assessment cannot be directly translated to using the standard OSHAaccepted test. Instead, this testing provides an indication of the change in fit performance (if any) associated with 

the decontamination of respirators. 

• BOLD overall manikin fit factor < 100.
Table 15. Strap Integrity Evaluation - Crosstex GPRN95

Tensile Force in Respirator Straps of Decontaminated N95s

(recorded force values are at 150% strain)

Respirator Model, Decon 

Method, # of cycles Straps from Treated Sample # Force in TopStrap (N)

Force in Bottom 

Strap (N)

Crosstex GPRN95, VHP, 1 cycle

1 0,757 0.748

2 1.037 1.079

3 1.052 1.169

Decontaminated Strap Average 0.949 0.999

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Crosstex GPRN95, VHP, 2 

cycles

1 0.771 0.751

2 0.744 0.734

3 0.657 0.674

Decontaminated Strap Average 0.724 0.720

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Crosstex GPRN95, VHP, 3 

cycles

1 0.504 0.658

2 0.483 0.638

3 0.678 0.660

Decontaminated Strap Average 0.555 0.652

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Crosstex GPRN95, VHP, 4 

cycles

1 0.591 0.647

2 0.641 0.655

3 0.521 0.656

Decontaminated Strap Average 0.584 0.653

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A

Crosstex GPRN95, VHP, 5 

cycles

1 0.530 0.655

2 0.700 0.687

3 0.680 0.708

Decontaminated Strap Average 0.637 0.683

Control N/A N/A

% Change

((Deconned - Controls) / Controls) N/A N/A