This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
FederalRegister.gov retrieves relevant information about this document from Regulations.gov to provide users with additional context. This information is not part of the official Federal Register document.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Receipt of petition.
Allwin Powersports Corp. (Allwin) has determined that certain LS2 Rapid II Helmets do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 218, Motorcycle Helmets. Allwin filed a noncompliance report dated November 10, 2025, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA (the “Agency”) on November 21, 2025, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This document announces receipt of Allwin's petition.
Send comments on or before September 21, 2026.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
All comments and supporting materials received before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the fullest extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice.
All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this ( printed page 53935) petition is shown in the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
Jayton Lindley, General Engineer, NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (325) 655-0547.
I. Overview: Allwin determined that certain LS2 Rapid II Helmets do not fully comply with paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 218, Motorcycle Helmets (49 CFR 571.218).
Allwin filed a noncompliance report dated November 10, 2025, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Allwin petitioned NHTSA on November 25, 2025, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of Allwin's petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Equipment Involved: Approximately 6,607 LS2 Rapid II Helmets, manufactured between July 17, 2023, and June 30, 2025, were reported by the manufacturer.
III. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 218 includes the requirements relevant to this petition. The standard requires that when a helmet is subjected to the conditioning procedure specified in paragraph S7.2, the penetration test striker must not contact the surface of the test headform.
IV. Noncompliance: Allwin explains that the subject helmet does not comply with penetration requirements in ambient, low temperature, and high temperature conditions on the left rear location.
V. Summary of Allwin's Petition: The following views and arguments presented in this section, “V. Summary of Allwin's Petition,” are the views and arguments provided by Allwin. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. Allwin describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Allwin states that the subject helmets were tested for compliance with DOT standards nine times between their internal testing and ACT Labs contract tests and found to be compliant in all testing locations, including the left rear side. However, recent testing by Southwest Research at the request of NHTSA, found that the left rear side of the helmet did not comply with penetration standards. Allwin states that it has ceased all sales and discontinued the subject helmets.
Allwin asserts that the risk of penetration by foreign objects during a motorcycle accident are “extremely low” and presents findings from various studies to support this claim.
Allwin states that certain European helmet standards (ECE 22.05 and Snell M2025D) do not require a penetration test because of the low risk of penetration in a real-world scenario and the required weight and thickness helmets would need to comply with a penetration test.
Allwin notes the views of David R. Thom, (an expert witness, consultant, and all-around expert in the field of helmet safety and collision and injury dynamics) that the helmet penetration test is unnecessary because of the low probability of this type of injury occurring during a motorcycle accident.
Allwin concludes by stating its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety and its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject equipment that Allwin no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant equipment under their control after Allwin notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2026-16983 Filed 8-19-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
2 comments have been received at Regulations.gov.
Agencies review all submissions and may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof). Submitted comments may not be available to be read until the agency has approved them.