Illustration2002 GMC YUKON XL. *TR
2002 GMC Yukon Xl
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2002 GMC Yukon Xl do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 68.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Yukon Xl years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
200–25K
1025–50K
1950–75K
1375–100K
9100–150K
9150K+
80 reports with mileage · 15 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 19 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 10 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
5 crash reports1 fire reports2 injury reports
Parking Brake complaints
8 reportsIN MAY 2005 MY VEHICLE FAILED STATE INSPECTION DUE TO PARKING BRAKE COULD NOT HOLD VEHICLE. PRIOR TO HAVING THE REPAIRS DONE I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I HAD PURCHASED IT AND WAS TOLD THERE WAS NO RECALL AT THIS TIME. I THEN HAD THE PLACE WHERE THE INSPECTION WAS DONE REPAIR THE VEHICLE. IN APRIL OF 2006 I NOTICED MY B…
Read full complaint
IN MAY 2005 MY VEHICLE FAILED STATE INSPECTION DUE TO PARKING BRAKE COULD NOT HOLD VEHICLE. PRIOR TO HAVING THE REPAIRS DONE I CONTACTED THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I HAD PURCHASED IT AND WAS TOLD THERE WAS NO RECALL AT THIS TIME. I THEN HAD THE PLACE WHERE THE INSPECTION WAS DONE REPAIR THE VEHICLE. IN APRIL OF 2006 I NOTICED MY BRAKES WERE SQUEAKING WHEN I WAS IN REVERSE. I TOOK IT IN FOR REPAIR AND WAS TOLD THE BACK PADS THAT WERE REPLACED LAST YEAR NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. I CONTACTED GM AND WAS TOLD THERE WAS NOTHING TO BE DONE BECAUSE THERE IS NO RECALL ON MY VEHICLE. THIS IS A 2002 GMC YUKON I BOUGHT NEW IN 2001. IT HAS 56000 MILES ON IT. I DO NOT FEEL I SHOULD BE HAVING THIS MANY PROBLEMS. THE GM REP WAS NOT HELPFUL AT ALL. I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER GM VEHICLE AGAIN. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE PARKING BRAKE FAILED TO PASS INSPECTION. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE PARKING BRAKE WAS REPLACED.
PARKING BRAKE FAILURE. PARKING BRAKE NO LONGER HOLDS VEHICLE IN PLACE. DEALER CLAIMS LININGS WORE PREMATURELY. PARTS WERE NOT IN STOCK, SO WAITING FOR REPAIR. VERY SIMILAR TO PARKING BRAKE RECALL ON 2001 GMC SIERRA PICKUP RECALL #05V161000. *NM
I HAVE A 2002 GMC YUKON. IT HAS 70,000 MILES ON IT. I RECENTLY TRIED TO GET IT INSPECTED. IT FAILED BECAUSE OF THE PARKING BRAKE. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL GM PRODUCTS THAT HAVE THIS SAME PROBLEM. I TOOK MY VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER. THE TOLD ME THAT THERE HAS BEEN SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THE PARKING BRAKE AND IT HA…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2002 GMC YUKON. IT HAS 70,000 MILES ON IT. I RECENTLY TRIED TO GET IT INSPECTED. IT FAILED BECAUSE OF THE PARKING BRAKE. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL GM PRODUCTS THAT HAVE THIS SAME PROBLEM. I TOOK MY VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALER. THE TOLD ME THAT THERE HAS BEEN SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH THE PARKING BRAKE AND IT HAS BEEN RE-DESIGNED. THEY ALSO SAID THAT IT WAS NOT RE-CALLED BEAUSE IT IS NOT A SAFETY ISUE.(ALTHOUGH I COULD NOT GET A SAFETY INSPECTION BECAUSE OF IT). I AGREED WITH THE DEALER TO PAY 50% OF THE COST TO FIX IT. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED I NOTICED ON THE RECEIPT, AND THE CASHIER ACKNOWLEDED IT, THAT IT WAS COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. THE NEXT DAY THE DEALER CALLED WANTING TO COLLECT $150.00 FOR THE REPAIRS. I FEEL THIS SHOULD BE A RECALL. I WOULD LIKE FOR SOMEONE TO LOOK INTO THIS MATTER AND E-MAIL ME THE RESULTS.
DURING 2004 STATE VEHICLE EMISSIONS AND SAFETY INSPECTION IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT WORK. AS A RESULT VEHICLE FAILED INSPECTION AND WILL NOT PASS UNTIL ISSUE RESOLVED. WHEN PARKING BRAKE IS PRESSED, THE PEDAL EASILY REACHES THE FLOOR AND DOES NOT HOLD VEHICLE. GMC CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NOTIFIED 01/25/05. NO…
Read full complaint
DURING 2004 STATE VEHICLE EMISSIONS AND SAFETY INSPECTION IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT WORK. AS A RESULT VEHICLE FAILED INSPECTION AND WILL NOT PASS UNTIL ISSUE RESOLVED. WHEN PARKING BRAKE IS PRESSED, THE PEDAL EASILY REACHES THE FLOOR AND DOES NOT HOLD VEHICLE. GMC CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NOTIFIED 01/25/05. NOT SURE ON RESOLUTION. DEALER WANTS TO REPLACE ENTIRE REAR BRAKE ASSEMBLY, QUOTE HIGH COST FOR WORK, NOT COVERED UNDER EXTENDED WARRANTY, DEALER BLAMING ON NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR. INSPECTION PLACE COMMENTED ON SIMILAR ISSUES WITH ALL OTHER GMC YUKON 2002 MODEL. *NM
DURING 2004 STATE VEHICLE EMISSIONS AND SAFETY INSPECTION IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT WORK. AS A RESULT VEHICLE FAILED INSPECTION AND WILL NOT PASS UNTIL ISSUE RESOLVED. GMC CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NOTIFIED 12/21 AND DIAGNOSIS AND REPAIR TO BEGIN 12/22. WHEN PARKING BRAKE IS PRESSED, THE PEDAL EASILY REACHE…
Read full complaint
DURING 2004 STATE VEHICLE EMISSIONS AND SAFETY INSPECTION IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT WORK. AS A RESULT VEHICLE FAILED INSPECTION AND WILL NOT PASS UNTIL ISSUE RESOLVED. GMC CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NOTIFIED 12/21 AND DIAGNOSIS AND REPAIR TO BEGIN 12/22. WHEN PARKING BRAKE IS PRESSED, THE PEDAL EASILY REACHES THE FLOOR AND DOES NOT HOLD VEHICLE. *JB
THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT ENGAGE WHEN DEPRESSED ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR. THE OWNER HAS CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER AND THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY STATED THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG. THE OWNER RECEIVED A SECOND OPINION AND WAS TOLD THAT THE POSITIONING OF THE PARKING BRAKE WAS DEFECTIVE. PROVIDE FURTHER DETAILS. *JB
Official recalls
105V379000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
Aug 29, 2005
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES MAY EXPERIENCE UNWANTED ANTILOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) ACTIVATION. THIS CONDITION IS MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR IN ENVIRONMENTALLY CORROSIVE AREAS. THIS RECALL WILL BE LAUNCHED IN THE "SALT BELT" STATES OF CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ONLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CAN CAUSE INCREASED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKE APPLICATIONS, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS ARE TO REMOVE THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR AND THOROUGHLY CLEAN THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR MOUNTING SURFACE ON THE BEARING, APPLY RUST INHIBITOR TO THE CLEANED SURFACE, GREASE THE MOUNTING SURFACE, REINSTALL THE WHEEL SPEED SENSOR, AND CHECK THE PEAK-TO-PEAK OUTPUT VOLTAGE TO ENSURE THE WHEEL SPEED SIGNAL IS WITHIN SPECIFICATIONS. THE RECALL BEGAN SEPTEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438 OR GMC AT 1-866-996-9463.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
3DP05009 · Parking Brake Failure
Opened Dec 20, 2005 · Closed May 31, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Parking Brake; Parking Brake:conventional; Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Parking Brake:conventional
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
Parking Brake
ODI'S REVIEW OF COMPLAINT DATA RECEIVED SINCE THE CLOSE OF EA04-011 REVEALED NO INDICATION THAT THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.MORE DETAILS CAN BE FOUND IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ENCLOSED IN THE DP05-009 PUBLIC FILE.ODI RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION IN THE FUTURE SHOULD CONDITIONS WARRANT.
PE05020 · Unwanted LOW-SPEED Abs Activation
Opened Apr 28, 2005 · Closed Sep 13, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip:control Unit/module
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:antilock/traction Control/electronic Limited Slip
IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 29, 2005, GM NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WAS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1999 THROUGH 2002 C/K PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH ANTI-LOCK BRAKE SYSTEM (ABS) WHEEL SPEED SENSOR CORROSION THAT MAY RESULT IN UNWANTED ABS ACTIVATION AND EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCES DURING LOW-SPEED BRAKING (RECALL 05V-379).GM'S RECALL COVERS APPROXIMATELY 804,000 VEHICLES CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE FOLLOWING 14 SALT-BELT STATES:CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, MASSACHUSETTS, MAINE, MICHIGAN, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WEST VIRGINIA.THE RECALL PROCEDURE WILL INVOLVE REMOVING THE SENSOR, CLEANING THE MOUNTING SURFACE, APPLYING A RUST INHIBITOR (ZINC-X) TO THE SURFACE, AND REINSTALLING THE SENSOR.IF NECESSARY, THE SENSOR WILL BE REPLACED. THE POPULATION AND FAILURE REPORT DATA GIVEN IN THIS RESUME ARE FOR THE FULL REGION THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY ODI AS THE SALT-BELT.THAT INCLUDES DELAWARE, IOWA, MARYLAND, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, WISCONSIN AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN ADDITION TO THE 14 STATES INCLUDED IN 05V-379.THE STATES COVERED BY GM'S RECALL HAVE THE HIGHEST INCIDENT RATES FOR THE SUBJECT CONDITION, ACCOUNTING FOR 91% OF THE INCIDENTS, BUT ONLY 24% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.ODI'S ANALYSIS DETERMINED THAT 840 OF THE COMPLAINTS, 244 OF THE CRASHES, AND 16 OF THE INJURIES IDENTIFIED IN THIS INVESTIGATION OCCURRED IN THOSE STATES.THE RESULTING INCIDENT AND CRASH RATES ARE 96.2 AND 28.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES RESPECTIVELY (NOTE:RATES ARE BASED ON VEHICLE SALES, NOT REGISTERED VEHICLES). THE CORRESPONDING NUMBERS IN THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS OF THE SALT-BELT ARE 399,000 VEHICLES, 81 INCIDENTS (20.3 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 3 CRASHES, AND NO INJURIES.THE STATISTICS IN THE REMAINING 30 STATES ARE 2,406,000 VEHICLES, 168 INCIDENTS (7.0 PER 100,000 VEHICLES), 31 CRASHES, AND ONE INJURY.GM AND ODI ARE CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE PROBLEM EXPERIENCE IN STATES THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM WILL PROVIDE ODI WITH UPDATED COMPLAINT, FIELD REPORT, AND WARRANTY DATA IN NOVEMBER 2005.ODI AND GM WILL REVIEW THAT DATA AND ASSESS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE CURRENT SCOPE OF THE RECALL AT THAT TIME.
EA02015 · Throttle Sticking Closed
Opened Aug 1, 2002 · Closed Jan 12, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
THIS INVESTIGATION INVOLVES THE GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION (GM)THROTTLE BODY (TB) UTILIZED IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999-2002 SILVERADO, SIERRA, TAHOE, SUBURBAN, AVALANCHE AND YUKON (SUBJECT VEHICLE(S)) WITH 4.8L, 5.3L, AND 6.0L ENGINES. THE TB VALVE MAY INTERMITTENTLY STICK IN A CLOSED POSITION.IN SUCH A SITUATION, AN OPERATOR MAY APPLY ADDITIONAL ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE TO INCREASE ENGINE SPEED.THE APPLICATION OF ADDITIONAL ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE, TO OPEN A STUCK THROTTLE VALVE, MAY OPEN THE THROTTLE VALVE MORE THAN INTENDED AND, IN TURN, ACCELERATE THE ENGINE AND VEHICLE MORE THAN INTENDED AND REASONABLY EXPECTED BY THE DRIVER.ON AUGUST 1, 2002, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), OF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (NHTSA), OPENED THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS.THE INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT TWO FACTORS MAY CAUSE THE DEFECT: 1) TB MANUFACTURING PROCESS PROBLEMS; AND 2) ACCUMULATION OF DEPOSITS (A PCV SYSTEM BY-PRODUCT) ON OR AROUND THE TB THROTTLE VALVE AND BORE.ODI CONCLUDES THAT THE TB PERFORMS IN A DEFECTIVE MANNER AFTER ANALYZING GM?S DATA SUBMISSIONS, AND TEST DATA COLLECTED BY THE VEHICLE RESEARCH AND TEST CENTER (VRTC).FIFTY-NINE CRASHES ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF GM?S TB DEFECT.THE MAJORITY OF THE CRASHES INVOLVE A SINGLE VEHICLE, ENGAGING IN A CLOSE QUARTER VEHICLE MANEUVER (OR LOW SPEED), AND CAUSING ONLY MINOR PROPERTY DAMAGE.FOUR OUT OF THE FIFTY-NINE CRASHES INVOLVE INJURY, AND THOSE INJURIES WERE MINOR.ALTHOUGH GM?S TB IS DEFECTIVE, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE GATHERED, ODI HAS FOUND THAT THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL FORCE REQUIRED TO OPEN A STUCK THROTTLE VALVE IS NEGLIGIBLE, AND THE THROTTLE VALVE DOES NOT STICK IN THE OPEN POSITION.THEREFORE THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA02-015) WILL BE CLOSED AT THIS TIME.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FOR A DETAILED DISCUSSION OF THE TB COMPONENT AND TESTING, PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED REPORT.