Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
1240–25K
5425–50K
3150–75K
3075–100K
11100–150K
9150K+
259 reports with mileage · 123 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.
Engine. Review the 97 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Power Train. Review the 95 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
Electrical System. Review the 38 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
22 crash reports0 fire reports11 injury reports
What owners actually said
382 reports
Mileage unknown · Jul 9, 2022
Power Train
My 2013 Honda CR-V EXL AWD started shuttering at slow take off speed just before shifting into 2nd gear and just before 3rd gear. It had around 76,000 miles on it. Looked up forums about this and contacted dealership to make appointment. On 06/20/2022 I had the transmission flushed and new fluid and they said that was the first …
Read full complaint
My 2013 Honda CR-V EXL AWD started shuttering at slow take off speed just before shifting into 2nd gear and just before 3rd gear. It had around 76,000 miles on it. Looked up forums about this and contacted dealership to make appointment. On 06/20/2022 I had the transmission flushed and new fluid and they said that was the first thing that they would recommend to do. They said no software update was available. Solution lasted only a week. The shutter started back so I checked fluid and it appeared low so I took back to dealership and yes I checked after it was warm, when I got it to dealership it was at the right level, puzzling maybe it wasn’t on level surface when I checked ,nonetheless, I told them the shutter was back and they said it sounded like torque converter was bad and needed replacement but they didn’t have time to do a diagnosis and it would cost me to get diagnosed. I’ll have to get another appointment. The very next day the shutter is way worse than before and it made a weird noise in reverse. This shutter is dangerous not only is it a distraction but if you pull out in front of someone thinking you have enough time and this occurs it could cause a life threatening problem. I hope Honda will recall for this issue. I’ve seen where it has been and still is an issue for several year models not only 2013.
NHTSA ODI #11473078
Mileage unknown · Jul 3, 2022
Unknown Or Other
For the past few months my car vibrates whenever i decrease in speed or change to lower gears. The whole car vibrates. I have brought it to the dealer recently and they advised of faulty transmission after i paid for diagnostic /inspection. There has also been several incidents where the car has been stuck in park. It even happe…
Read full complaint
For the past few months my car vibrates whenever i decrease in speed or change to lower gears. The whole car vibrates. I have brought it to the dealer recently and they advised of faulty transmission after i paid for diagnostic /inspection. There has also been several incidents where the car has been stuck in park. It even happened when i placed the car in park while at a stoplight.
NHTSA ODI #11472190
66,000 miles · Apr 5, 2022
Suspension
The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 30 MPH, the vehicle started shaking and shuddering. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact drove to a local mechanic where the vehicle was diagnosed and the contact was informed that the rear axles needed to be replaced. The vehicle…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated while driving approximately 30 MPH, the vehicle started shaking and shuddering. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact drove to a local mechanic where the vehicle was diagnosed and the contact was informed that the rear axles needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 66,000.
NHTSA ODI #11459669
Mileage unknown · Jan 21, 2022
EnginePower Train
Engine makes rattling sound on cold start-up. VTC actuator found to be defective by Honda mechanic and replaced. Vehicle vibrates/shudders when at a stop. Mechanic also found timing chain was off by one tooth and was fixed. Vibration/shuddering continues despite repairs. Vibration is noticeable on front seats. Concerned about en…
Read full complaint
Engine makes rattling sound on cold start-up. VTC actuator found to be defective by Honda mechanic and replaced. Vehicle vibrates/shudders when at a stop. Mechanic also found timing chain was off by one tooth and was fixed. Vibration/shuddering continues despite repairs. Vibration is noticeable on front seats. Concerned about engine and safety as engine causes seats to vibrate.
NHTSA ODI #11448420
80,000 miles · Jan 20, 2022
Power Train
The contact's mother owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact's mother informed him that she had experienced hesitation between shifting gear and the indication shown on the gear selector. There was no warning light illuminated. His mother also informed him that the vehicle would stall upon the depression of the accelerator pedal wit…
Read full complaint
The contact's mother owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact's mother informed him that she had experienced hesitation between shifting gear and the indication shown on the gear selector. There was no warning light illuminated. His mother also informed him that the vehicle would stall upon the depression of the accelerator pedal without warning. The manufacturer had been notified of the failure and they informed him that there were no recalls on the vehicle. Upon investigation, the contact linked the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 13V143000 (Power Train). The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 80,000.
NHTSA ODI #11448188
Mileage unknown · Jan 17, 2022
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
I don't know what's wrong with it, it has been shuddering on low speeds. I just bought it yesterday and I'm devasted that I just got a 16,000 car and the same night I'm driving it and it's doing this. I have done research and this is no doubt a defect in many other people's car. This needs to be addressed how is this not a serio…
Read full complaint
I don't know what's wrong with it, it has been shuddering on low speeds. I just bought it yesterday and I'm devasted that I just got a 16,000 car and the same night I'm driving it and it's doing this. I have done research and this is no doubt a defect in many other people's car. This needs to be addressed how is this not a serious defeat and safety issue. You start off or pull out from a red light and it doesn't want to go, this IS a safety/accident concern. Please respond and please help. Honda has always been one of the best vehicles I have owned 5 in my lifetime, but I seen many many reviews with people pleading for Honda to fix this issue and they are turning their backs...not good for Honda to say the least. Regards, Teresa
NHTSA ODI #11447726
Mileage unknown · Dec 23, 2021
Power Train
The car periodically shudders during acceleration on smooth road services over the last 2 years. Initially, I thought the vibration was due to changes in road surface. However, I notice the vibration or shuddering occurs with acceleration-in 2nd or 3rd gear. When I take my foot off the gas pedal, the vibration/shuddering disap…
Read full complaint
The car periodically shudders during acceleration on smooth road services over the last 2 years. Initially, I thought the vibration was due to changes in road surface. However, I notice the vibration or shuddering occurs with acceleration-in 2nd or 3rd gear. When I take my foot off the gas pedal, the vibration/shuddering disappears. Other family members were telling me this is a transmission problem when this problem first occurred. On Honda vehicle blogs, I see this complaint is echoed by other 2013 Honda CRV owners. I contacted Honda today. They told me there is no national campaign or recall for my vehicle regarding this issue. They will create a case for this complaint but at this time, they will not offer me assistance with the repair. CRV's from other model years have had this issue and recalls were initiated. Please offer me the same support from Honda for the same problem. Years ago, we had a 1991 Honda Accord that developed a transmission problem. We arranged for the repair of the transmission. Years later we found out there was a recall for the same issue for which we were not notified. After many calls and letters, Honda eventually reimbursed us for that repair. Please assist us with our current problem. Thank you.
NHTSA ODI #11444811
65,000 miles · Nov 24, 2021
EngineSuspension
The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving 25-35 MPH, the vehicle started shuddering inadvertently. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact was able to continue to drive the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had been reoccurring while driving. The dealer and the manufacture…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2013 Honda CR-V. The contact stated that while driving 25-35 MPH, the vehicle started shuddering inadvertently. There were no warning lights illuminated. The contact was able to continue to drive the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure had been reoccurring while driving. The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The approximate failure mileage was 65,000.
NHTSA ODI #11441578
Mileage unknown · Oct 31, 2021
Power TrainSuspensionUnknown Or Other
Transmission shakes or quivers around 25-30 mph. At speed above 35mph right rear suspension (axle) shakes, quivers. I was checking For a recall because of all the complaints of same issues on honda owners website. The car is becoming unsafe to drive. This is the first effort I have made to research problem. The Honda website in…
Read full complaint
Transmission shakes or quivers around 25-30 mph. At speed above 35mph right rear suspension (axle) shakes, quivers. I was checking For a recall because of all the complaints of same issues on honda owners website. The car is becoming unsafe to drive. This is the first effort I have made to research problem. The Honda website indicated a 2013 crv Recall but not for my vin number.
NHTSA ODI #11438822
Mileage unknown · Oct 27, 2021
Power TrainUnknown Or Other
It’s vibrating while accelerating at low speeds between 20mph till 40mph the shaking is horrible when i went to honda they told me i have to change the fluid but not grantee to fix thus problem
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) is recalling certain 2013-2023 Honda Accord, Civic Coupe, Civic Sedan, Civic Hatchback, Civic Type R, CR-V, HR-V, Ridgeline, Odyssey, Acura ILX, MDX, MDX Hybrid, RDX, RLX, TLX, 2019-2022 Honda Insight, Passport, 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid, 2018-2019 Honda Clarity PHEV, Fit, and 2015-2020 Honda Accord Hybrid, Pilot, Acura NSX vehicles. The fuel pump inside the fuel tank may fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Fuel pump failure can cause an engine stall while driving, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will replace the fuel pump module, free of charge. Owner letters were mailed September 6, 2024. Owners may contact Honda customer service at 1-888-234-2138. Honda's numbers for this recall are KGC and KGD. This recall is an expansion of NHTSA recall numbers 21V-215 and 20V-314.
Honda is recalling certain model year 2012-2013 CR-V, Odyssey, and model year 2013 Acura RDX vehicles. During sub-freezing temperatures, the brake-shift interlock blocking mechanism may become slow and allow the gear selector to be moved from the Park position without pressing the brake pedal. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 114, "Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the gear selector is moved from the park position without pressing the brake pedal it can allow the vehicle to roll away, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Honda will notify owners and instruct them to take their vehicle to a Honda or Acura dealer. The dealer will install an updated brake shift interlock blocking mechanism free of charge. The recall began on May 13, 2013. Owners may contact Honda at 1-800-999-1009. Honda's campaign recall numbers are S96, S97, and S98.
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
2
EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
EA19001 · Electrical Overstress
Opened Apr 19, 2019 · Closed Sep 19, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags: Air Bag/restraint Control Module
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.