Notice2026-19791
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP26-005
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 28, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Abstract
This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a petition, DP26-005, submitted by Mr. Nathaniel W. Bowe III (Petitioner) to the Administrator of NHTSA (Agency) by a letter dated May 30, 2026, under 49 U.S.C. 30162 and 49 CFR part 552. The Petition requests that the Agency initiate a safety defect investigation into allegations of inadvertent airbag deployments in certain Model Year (MY) 2011 to 2017 Honda Odyssey vehicles (the Subject Vehicles). The Petition alleges that these inadvertent deployments may injure vehicle occupants or distract the driver and cause a collision. The Petition further alleges that the Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) and Supplemental Restraint System (SRS) status are in conflict and inaccurate data is being recorded for the airbag system. NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has determined that the issues raised in the Petition are not likely to result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists. This determination is based on ODI's technical review of available information, which included: (1) consumer complaints submitted by the Petition; (2) consumer complaint information in the Agency's databases; and (3) other relevant information in possession of the Agency. As a result, further investigation of the issue raised by the Petition is not warranted, and the Agency, accordingly, has denied the Petition.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 186 (Monday, September 28, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 186 (Monday, September 28, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61289-61291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-19791]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2026-2146]
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP26-005
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Denial of a petition to open a defect investigation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a
petition, DP26-005, submitted by Mr. Nathaniel W. Bowe III (Petitioner)
to the Administrator of NHTSA (Agency) by a letter dated May 30, 2026,
under 49 U.S.C. 30162 and 49 CFR part 552. The Petition requests that
the Agency initiate a safety defect investigation into allegations of
inadvertent airbag deployments in certain Model Year (MY) 2011 to 2017
Honda Odyssey vehicles (the Subject Vehicles). The Petition alleges
that these inadvertent deployments may injure vehicle occupants or
distract the driver and cause a collision. The Petition further alleges
that the Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) and Supplemental Restraint
System (SRS) status are in conflict and inaccurate data is being
recorded for the airbag system. NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation
(ODI) has determined that the issues raised in the Petition are not
likely to result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle
safety exists. This determination is based on ODI's technical review of
available information, which included: (1) consumer complaints
submitted by the Petition; (2) consumer complaint information in the
Agency's databases; and (3) other relevant information in possession of
the Agency. As a result, further investigation of the issue raised by
the Petition is not warranted, and the
[[Page 61290]]
Agency, accordingly, has denied the Petition.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Sean A. Hays, Vehicle Defect
Division A, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 202-366-9318. Email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b7c4d2d6d999d699dfd6cec4f7d3d8c399d0d8c1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cffe9ede2a2eda2e4edf5ffcce8e3f8a2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Introduction
Any interested person may petition NHTSA to request that the Agency
initiate an investigation to determine whether a motor vehicle or item
of replacement equipment complies with an applicable motor vehicle
safety standard or contains a defect that relates to motor vehicle
safety. 49 U.S.C. 30162(a)(2); 49 CFR 552.3. Upon receipt of a properly
filed petition, the Agency conducts a technical review of the petition,
material submitted with the petition, and any additional information.
49 CFR 552.6. The technical review may consist solely of a review of
information already in the possession of the Agency or it may include
the collection of information from the motor vehicle manufacturer or
other sources. Id. The Agency will grant or deny the petition after
conducting a technical review and considering appropriate factors.
These factors may include the nature of the complaint, allocation of
agency resources, agency priorities, the likelihood of uncovering
sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a defect, and the
likelihood of success in any necessary enforcement litigation. See 49
U.S.C. 30162(a)(2); 49 CFR 552.8.
2. Defect Petition Summary
In a letter dated May 30, 2026, the Petition requested that NHTSA
``initiate a formal Defect Petition (DP) proceeding to investigate the
un-commanded and anomalous deployment behavior of the Supplemental
Restraint System in the target vehicle population.'' The Petition
supported this request by citing multiple online complaints in various
user forums as well as 10 consumer complaints found on NHTSA's website.
The Petition states that a systemic electronic, software, or
mechanical defect causes critical safety systems to trigger without an
appropriate environmental stimulus, such as physical impact, a rollover
event, or G-force threshold breach. The Petition states that this
behavior constitutes an extreme safety hazard, as unexpected deployment
can cause severe blunt force trauma to occupants, permanently damage
hearing, obstruct driver visibility, and cause immediate loss of
vehicle control. NHTSA has based its decision on a review of the
material cited by the Petition, pertinent information in NHTSA's
databases, and other relevant information in possession of the Agency.
3. Office of Defects Investigation Analysis
An air bag is a supplemental vehicle occupant restraint system that
deploys a cushion designed to inflate in milliseconds during a
collision. The cushion prevents vehicle occupants from striking hard
interior surfaces and, in some cases, exterior surfaces. Air bags are
designed to work in conjunction with seat belts, the primary occupant
restraint system. Seat belts restrain occupants keeping them in place
for the air bag to provide proper protection and to mitigate injury
from air bag deployment.
An airbag system consists of an airbag cushion, an inflator module,
an airbag Electronic Control Unit (ECU), and impact sensors. When a
crash begins, impact sensors located on the vehicle exterior begin to
measure impact severity. If a crash is severe enough, the sensors send
a signal to the system's ECU, which then signals the inflator to fill
the air bag.
Frontal air bags for both the driver and front passenger have been
required under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208
(Occupant Crash Protection) since MY 1999 in all light passenger
vehicles. Side air bags (both curtain and thorax) are not specifically
required by an FMVSS but are offered as standard equipment in most new
light passenger vehicles in order to comply with FMVSS No. 214 (Side
Impact Protection) and No. 226 (Ejection Mitigation).
ODI reviewed 9 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs), one Early
Warning Reporting (EWR) Death & Injury (D&I) report, and several TREAD
(Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation)
Field Reports alleging inadvertent airbag deployment in the Subject
Vehicles. Multiple VOQs and the D&I report mention inadvertent
deployment: 3 VOQs alleged inadvertent deployment of frontal air bags,
6 VOQs and the D&I report alleged inadvertent deployment of side
curtain air bags, and 4 VOQs and the D&I report alleged inadvertent
deployment of side thoracic air bags. Several complaints allege that
the inadvertent deployment of airbags occurred while traveling over
potholes, road debris, or during minor curb strikes. All complaints
allege that there was no warning prior to the inadvertent deployment.
In general, different types of air bags are designed for different
types of impacts. For instance, frontal air bags are generally designed
to deploy during frontal impacts; side curtain air bags are generally
designed to deploy both during rollovers and impacts to the sides of
the vehicle; and side thorax air bags are generally designed to deploy
during impacts to the sides of the vehicle. While these are broad
categories of crash scenarios, the specific conditions under which
deployment is intended are multifaceted and dependent on complex
algorithms. Differences in particular variables can make a deployment
an intended part of the design in one scenario and not in another
similar scenario.
Although the reports described above all contain allegations of
inadvertent deployment, the conditions under which those reported
deployments occurred differ widely. The reports ranged across different
types of airbags, different combinations of airbags, and different
driving scenarios preceding the deployment. Based on the data available
to ODI, there is no clear pattern or factor to prompt the alleged
inadvertent deployments. Thus, ODI's review did not identify a trend of
a vehicle defect regarding any type of airbag in the Subject Vehicles.
Moreover, ODI did not identify any reports of inadvertent air bag
deployment that resulted in a loss of vehicle control. ODI is likewise
not aware of any crashes or severe injuries involving the Subject
Vehicles that resulted from inadvertent deployment of the air bags.
ODI recognizes that inadvertent air bag deployments can create
dangerous safety hazards. For instance, an inadvertent deployment can
surprise a driver, leading to a loss of vehicle control; or if an
inadvertent deployment occurs when an occupant is out of position, the
force of the deployment may injure the occupant. Inadvertent
deployments have been the basis for past NHTSA recalls and
investigations. Here, the Petition cites one such recall: Recall 26V-
227, which concerns inadvertent deployment of the side curtain and
thoracic air bags in MY 2018 to 2022 Honda Odyssey vehicles (the
``Recalled Vehicles'') due to the air bag ECU containing incorrect
deployment parameters. Although this recall involved Honda Odyssey
vehicles in adjacent model years to the Odyssey vehicles that are the
subject of this Petition, ODI understands certain key differences to
exist between the two groups of Odyssey models. Honda introduced a new
generation of the
[[Page 61291]]
Odyssey line in 2018. This new generation involved a large-scale
redesign and a new vehicle platform compared to the previous model
years. As a result, the vehicles covered by the Petition differ from
the recalled vehicles in many characteristics, including physical
dimensions, engines, transmissions, and airbag ECU algorithms. Given
these differences, ODI's review has not identified evidence that the
reports of inadvertent deployment in the Odyssey models covered by the
Petition correlate to Recall 26V-227.
The Agency has thoroughly assessed the material submitted by the
Petition, consumer complaint information in NHTSA's databases, and
other relevant information already in possession of the Agency. Based
on this review, NHTSA does not believe that the issues presented by the
Petition indicate the likelihood of a safety-related defect that would
warrant a formal investigation. After full consideration of the
available information, the Petition is denied.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d) and 49 CFR part 552; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.95(a).\1\)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The authority to determine whether to approve or deny defect
petitions under 49 U.S.C. 30162(d) and 49 CFR part 552 has been
further delegated to the Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
Eileen Sullivan,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2026-19791 Filed 9-25-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 28, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.