In its document
"EPA Motor Vehicle Aftermarket Retrofit Device Evaluation Program", an "EPA-approved" test methodology is described specifically for evaluating devices that claim to save fuel or reduce emissions. (
EPA link source: fuelsaving.info)
Based on that document, Pulstar's test procedure as outlined on its web site does not meet the EPA's standards for making fuel saving claims.
I would think that if a company genuinely believes they have a legitimate fuel saving product on hand, they would submit to the "gold standard" EPA approved test regimen.
If after entering the program, independent testing by approved methodology appears to indicate a significant (>5%) fuel efficiency improvement - and the company is claiming an average of 6% for Pulstars -then
the EPA itself will perform confirmatory tests.
When you consider the financial windfall from being able to trumpet "EPA confirmed results" in product marketing,
why wouldn't a company take this route?