Defect Petition DP26-003: Fuel smell and loss of motive power

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has completed its review of a petition dated February 5, 2026, requesting an investigation into model year (MY) 2006 Nissan Frontier vehicles. The petition alleged that the vehicles pose an imminent fire hazard due to a powerful and persistent odor of raw gasoline emanating from the vehicle, indicating a breach in fuel system integrity. The petition also alleged that the vehicles can experience sudden engine stalling during startup and operation, creating an unreasonable risk of collision or loss of vehicle control. The petition further asserted these symptoms are identical to conditions addressed in previous NHTSA recalls (Recalls 10V-075, 07V-435, and 10V-517) arguing that the issues persist in the 2006 MY Nissan fleet despite these past actions and asserting that a safety defect is not subject to expiration. The subject vehicle is a model year 2006 vehicle that has been in service for approximately 20 years. Standard automotive components including fuel hoses, rubber seals, gaskets, electrical relays, and engine sensors have a finite useful lifecycle and are subject to environmental exposure, operational stress, and natural degradation over extended time frames. ODI routinely distinguishes between a manufacturing or design defect and normal lifecycle wear-out, such as in Denial of DP18002, 87 FR16823, finding underbody component issues late in vehicle life to be indicative of normal wear and tear failures. Isolated component failures on high-age vehicles do not, in themselves, establish the presence of an actionable safety defect across a vehicle fleet. ODI conducted a technical review of available information, which included consumer complaint information, related recall information, and other relevant data in possession of the agency. After review, ODI determined the cited recall campaigns do not provide compelling support for the petition’s allegations. Recall 07V-435 pertained exclusively to model year 1997-2001 Nissan Pathfinder and Infiniti QX4 vehicles to address corrosion of the lower fuel filler tube bracket in specific salt-belt states and did not involve the MY 2006 Nissan Frontier platform. Merely experiencing a general symptom such as a fuel odor on a 20-year-old vehicle does not establish a link to a localized corrosion issue on an entirely different vehicle generation produced years prior, and the Agency is not aware of a trend of fire complaints on subject vehicles with over 20 years of exposure. Recall 10V-075 addressed a fuel sender float arm contacting an internal tank embossment causing the fuel gauge on certain MY 2006 and 2008 Frontier vehicles to inaccurately display fuel level when empty. That campaign was directed strictly at instrument gauge accuracy and engine stalling from fuel exhaustion, not a physical fuel leak or breach of fuel system integrity. Recall 10V-17 addressed silicon oxide accumulation on Engine Control Module relay contacts within the Intelligent Power Distribution Module on select MY 2005-2006 vehicles. After approximately 20 years of operational service and environmental exposure, engine stalling can be caused by a wide range of normal, age-related maintenance conditions, and the presence of engine stalling on a 20-year-old vehicle does not, by itself, indicate the presence of the original manufacturing defect addressed in Recall 10V-517. Associating general, late-life vehicle symptoms with historic recall campaigns on multi-decade-old vehicles does not satisfy the requirement to present specific data establishing a defect trend that poses an unreasonable risk to safety. Furthermore, NHTSA’s oversight of recall execution ensures that campaign parameters (such as affected VIN ranges and build dates) are chosen based on specific defect determinations; therefore, individual component degradation on high-age vehicles outside these parameters is more likely to represent routine wear and tear rather than an unaddressed safety defect trend. NHTSA does not believe that the issues presented indicate the likely existence of a safety-related defect that would warrant a formal investigation. After full consideration of the available information, and of NHTSA’s enforcement priorities, the petition is denied. NHTSA reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances.