NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Seat Belts complaints
26 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Nov 17, 2025
Air BagsElectrical SystemSeat BeltsCrashInjury
The driver seat belt dont work and once in a great while it will work but even whenever it does latch it still shows the seat belt isn't on and that noise keeps going off but after a while the noise goes off but the symbol is still on the dash board. I recently got hit from behind (09/15/2025) at a red light and no air bags depl…
Read full complaint
The driver seat belt dont work and once in a great while it will work but even whenever it does latch it still shows the seat belt isn't on and that noise keeps going off but after a while the noise goes off but the symbol is still on the dash board. I recently got hit from behind (09/15/2025) at a red light and no air bags deployed. Im not sure if they were suppose to deploy but either way my seat belt dont work. And I know this isn't a safety matter but my radio doesn't turn off when I turn off my car and I can't lock/unlock my doors with the key fob I have to lock it with the key on the driver door. I have to take the fuse out for the radio so my battery won't die and so the radio turns off.
NHTSA ODI #11699858
Mileage unknown · Feb 3, 2023
Air BagsElectrical SystemSeat BeltsCrash
12/09/2019, The ECU did not have adequate protection against certain electrical noise that occurred during the collision. Airbags did not deploy in the event of under ride collision, a freak accident involving wildlife crossing the street. Seat belt pretensioners did not engage. I called Allstate insurance that same day. Had I …
Read full complaint
12/09/2019, The ECU did not have adequate protection against certain electrical noise that occurred during the collision. Airbags did not deploy in the event of under ride collision, a freak accident involving wildlife crossing the street. Seat belt pretensioners did not engage. I called Allstate insurance that same day. Had I not worn my seat belt, I might have gone through the windshield. Safety was in danger, and not protected. Meineke informed me the oil housing component, fused onto the component that allows for an oil change because it was made with a plastic material, that is an incorrect material, Oxygen sensor lit up after that finding. Vehicle is not available for inspection upon request. Tyler Law Enforcement might have inspected the vehicle in general. My VIN for my vehicle does not describe the style of my vehicle, which is a 2016 Toyota Carolla Sport, Red.
NHTSA ODI #11505391
Mileage unknown · Jun 16, 2021
Seat Belts
My seat belt has to be messed around with a lot in order to release my seat belt. I have to press at least 3 to 4 times super hard before my seat belt releases.
NHTSA ODI #11421221
Mileage unknown · Mar 16, 2021
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
I WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT IN 8/19 WHERE I WAS HIT FROM BEHIND. I WAS INJURED AND NOW I FOUND OUT THERE'S A RECALL ON THE AIRBAGS AND THE SEATBELTS. THE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE SEATBELT DO NOT TIGHTEN TO KEEP ME FROM BREAKING MY NOSE AND DAMAGING MY C4/C5/C6/C7 IN MY NECK. THE CAR WAS TOTALED AND I NO LONGER HAVE IT IN …
Read full complaint
I WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT IN 8/19 WHERE I WAS HIT FROM BEHIND. I WAS INJURED AND NOW I FOUND OUT THERE'S A RECALL ON THE AIRBAGS AND THE SEATBELTS. THE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY AND THE SEATBELT DO NOT TIGHTEN TO KEEP ME FROM BREAKING MY NOSE AND DAMAGING MY C4/C5/C6/C7 IN MY NECK. THE CAR WAS TOTALED AND I NO LONGER HAVE IT IN MY POSSESSION. THE ACCIDENT IS WELL DOCUMENTED
NHTSA ODI #11403301
94,000 miles · Feb 2, 2021
Air BagsSeat Belts
THE AIRBAG LIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE CAR STARTED BLINKING RED WHEN THE CAR IS OFF, WHEN THE CAR IS ON THE LIGHT SAYS THE AIRBAG IS OFF. I TOOK IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALER LIKE I WAS RECOMMENDED TO DO AFTER CHECKING THE RECALL WEBSITE. AUTO NATION TOYOTA AT 12111 GULF FREEWAY IN HOUSTON TEXAS FOR THEM TO FIX THE PROBLEM.AFTE…
Read full complaint
THE AIRBAG LIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE CAR STARTED BLINKING RED WHEN THE CAR IS OFF, WHEN THE CAR IS ON THE LIGHT SAYS THE AIRBAG IS OFF. I TOOK IT TO THE TOYOTA DEALER LIKE I WAS RECOMMENDED TO DO AFTER CHECKING THE RECALL WEBSITE. AUTO NATION TOYOTA AT 12111 GULF FREEWAY IN HOUSTON TEXAS FOR THEM TO FIX THE PROBLEM.AFTER IN LESS THAN AN HOUR THE SERVICE ATTENDANT CALLED ME AND TOLD ME THAT THE CAR NEEDED THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS REPLACED AND THE AC AND ENGINE FILTERS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND IT WAS GOING TO COST 4 OR 5 HUNDRED DOLLARS TO FIX. WHEN I TOLD HER I JUST WANTED THE AIRBAGS FIXED SHE TOLD ME THE CAR WAS READY AND I COULD COME AND PICK IT UP. WHEN I GOT THERE TO PICK IT UP THE AIRBAG LIGHT WAS STILL ON AS IF NOTHING WAS DONE TO FIX THE PROBLEM. WHEN I TOLD HER THAT THEY DID NOT FIX THE CAR THAT THE AIRBAG LIGHT WAS STILL ON. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE IS A LOT OF WORK INVOLVED IN FIXING THE PROBLEM TO WHERE THE LIGHT WOULD GO OF SUCH AS SENSORS, ELECTRICAL, AND COMPUTER RESETTING. AND THAT THEY ARE ONLY REQUIRED TO REPLACE THE AIRBAG. I RESPONDED WITH "THAT WAS NOT WAS I WAS INFORMED. I WAS INFORMED THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO REPAIR THE PROBLEM AND REPAIRING THE PROBLEM MEANS THAT THE LIGHT WOULD GO OFF IN ITS ORIGINAL STATE OR HOW WOULD I KNOW THAT THE PROBLEM IS FIXED." HE SAID I WAS INFORMED WRONG ESPECIALLY IF I GOT THE INFORMATION OFF THE INTERNET. IN OTHER WORDS, HE WAS TELLING ME THAT IT WAS TOO MUCH WORK FOR THEM TO REPAIR FOR FREE. SO WHAT DO I DO NOW, AM I SUPPOSE TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE IN AN UNSAFE CAR I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE I WAS NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR THE SERVICES THAT TO BE REPAIRED THEN THEY WERE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL. THAT TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE PRICE GOUGING AND DOING ILLEGAL BUSINESS PRACTICES AND SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE IMMEDIATELY .
NHTSA ODI #11394371
57,000 miles · Dec 10, 2020
Air BagsSeat Belts
IT HAPPENED WHILE IT IS THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND CAR WAS CERTIFIED! THEY JUST UPDATED THE SOFTWARE DISABLING SOMETHING AND COVER UP LIKE ERASING THE FACE OF THE PROBLEM INSTEAD OF SOLVING IT. 01/17/2020 TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, USA, INC. MANUFACTURER SAFETY RECALL ISSUED NHTSA #20V024 RECALL #20TA03 SAFETY RECALL 20TA03 …
Read full complaint
IT HAPPENED WHILE IT IS THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND CAR WAS CERTIFIED! THEY JUST UPDATED THE SOFTWARE DISABLING SOMETHING AND COVER UP LIKE ERASING THE FACE OF THE PROBLEM INSTEAD OF SOLVING IT. 01/17/2020 TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, USA, INC. MANUFACTURER SAFETY RECALL ISSUED NHTSA #20V024 RECALL #20TA03 SAFETY RECALL 20TA03 (REMEDY NOTICE) - MULTIPLE MODELS AND MODEL YEARS - INCOMPLETE OR NONDEPLOYMENT OF AIRBAGS AND/OR SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS MAY OCCUR STATUS: REMEDY AVAILABLE HTTPS://VINRCL.SAFERCAR.GOV/VIN/VINLOOKUP RECALLS RESULTS BY VIN - VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER PRINT SHARE VIN: [XXX] YEAR: 2016 MAKE: TOYOTA MODEL: COROLLA NUMBER OF OPEN RECALLS: 1 NHTSA RECALL NUMBER: OPENS NEW WINDOW TAKES AWAY FROM VIN LOOKUP SECTION>20V024RECALL DATE: JANUARY 17, 2020 MANUFACTURER RECALL NUMBER: 20TA03 SUMMARY: THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH AN ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNIT (ECU) FROM A SPECIFIC SUPPLIER THAT IS DESIGNED TO RECEIVE SIGNALS FROM CRASH SENSORS AND DEPLOY THE AIRBAGS AND SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS. THE ECU MAY NOT HAVE ADEQUATE PROTECTION AGAINST CERTAIN ELECTRICAL NOISE THAT CAN OCCUR IN CERTAIN CRASHES, SUCH AS SEVERE UNDERRIDE CRASHES. THIS CAN LEAD TO INCOMPLETE OR NONDEPLOYMENT OF THE AIRBAGS AND/OR SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS. SAFETY RISK: AIRBAGS AND SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS THAT DO NOT DEPLOY AS INTENDED CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF INJURY IN A CRASH. REMEDY: ANY AUTHORIZED TOYOTA DEALER WILL INSTALL A NOISE FILTER BETWEEN THE AIRBAG CONTROL MODULE AND ITS WIRE HARNESS FREE OF CHARGE. RECALL STATUS: RECALL INCOMPLETE MANUFACTURER NOTES: IF THE MANUFACTURER HAS FAILED OR IS UNABLE TO REMEDY THIS SAFETY RECALL FOR YOUR VEHICLE IN A TIMELY MANNER, PLEASE CONTACT THE NHTSA VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT: 1-888-327-4236 OR TTY: 1-800-424-9153 OR FILE AN ONLINE COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA. REDACTED TO PROTECT PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *CC
NHTSA ODI #11382954
7,000 miles · Jun 9, 2020
Air BagsSeat Belts
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HER DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE AND ACTIVATED WHILE ENGAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO TOYOTA CHULA VISTA (650 MAIN ST, CHULA VISTA, CA 91911) TO BE REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS). FOLLOWING THE REPAIR OF THE AIR BAGS,…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2016 TOYOTA COROLLA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT HER DRIVER'S SIDE SEAT BELT SENSOR WAS DEFECTIVE AND ACTIVATED WHILE ENGAGED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO TOYOTA CHULA VISTA (650 MAIN ST, CHULA VISTA, CA 91911) TO BE REPAIRED UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 20V024000 (AIR BAGS). FOLLOWING THE REPAIR OF THE AIR BAGS, THE FAILURE RECURRED IMMEDIATELY UPON USING THE SEAT BELT. THE CONTACT THEN TOOK THE VEHICLE TO VALLEY HI TOYOTA (14612 VALLEY CENTER DR, VICTORVILLE, CA 92395) WHERE SHE WAS INFORMED THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO PAY A DIAGNOSTIC FEE TO DETERMINE THE FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER HAD NOT BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD YET TO BE REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 7,000.
NHTSA ODI #11328038
60,000 miles · Apr 15, 2020
Air BagsSeat BeltsSteeringCrashInjury
INVOLVED IN COLLISION ON OCTOBER 14, 2019. VEHICLE LIABLE FOR COLLISION HIT THE FRONT OF LEFT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE. AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, SAFETY RESTRAINT DID NOT OPERATE CORRECTLY. SUFFERED INJURIES TO LEFTS SIDE OF BODY, HEAD, NECK, LEG, FRONT AND BACK. BODY PROPELLED FORWARD TOWARDS WHEEL AND DASH ARM, SHOULDER AND ONE C…
Read full complaint
INVOLVED IN COLLISION ON OCTOBER 14, 2019. VEHICLE LIABLE FOR COLLISION HIT THE FRONT OF LEFT SIDE OF MY VEHICLE. AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY, SAFETY RESTRAINT DID NOT OPERATE CORRECTLY. SUFFERED INJURIES TO LEFTS SIDE OF BODY, HEAD, NECK, LEG, FRONT AND BACK. BODY PROPELLED FORWARD TOWARDS WHEEL AND DASH ARM, SHOULDER AND ONE CONTACTED VEHICLE AND HEAD HIT STEERING WHEEL. WENT TO ER. SEEKING TREATMENT FOR INJURIES FOR 6 MONTHS NOW AND ONGOING. *TR
NHTSA ODI #11321186
145,000 miles · Mar 29, 2020
Air BagsSeat BeltsCrashInjury
I WAS IN CAR ACCIDENT AND REAR ENDED MY AIRBAGS FAILED DEPLOY AND SEAT BELT SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS TO STOP FORCE MY BODY FELT RAGGED DOGGED AS BEING HIT MY NECK FELT IT WAS GOING SNAPPED I WAS SCARED FOR LIFE.I WAS ON CITY CITY STREET STOPPED AT RED LIGHT WHEN REAR ENDED BY LARGE SUV. I GOT LETTER FROM TOYOTA SAYING I NEED HAV…
Read full complaint
I WAS IN CAR ACCIDENT AND REAR ENDED MY AIRBAGS FAILED DEPLOY AND SEAT BELT SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS TO STOP FORCE MY BODY FELT RAGGED DOGGED AS BEING HIT MY NECK FELT IT WAS GOING SNAPPED I WAS SCARED FOR LIFE.I WAS ON CITY CITY STREET STOPPED AT RED LIGHT WHEN REAR ENDED BY LARGE SUV. I GOT LETTER FROM TOYOTA SAYING I NEED HAVE AIRBAG REPLACE, AND WHEN WENT DEALER ON FRIDAY 9:00 AM THE RECH JOHN KELLER REFUSE TO SERVICE FOR RECALL, AND TOLD ME HE LOOKED UP VIN AND MY CAR DIDN'T NEEDED IT TOYOTA OF HB REUSE TO REPAIR IT.
NHTSA ODI #11319675
Mileage unknown · Mar 21, 2020
Air BagsSeat Belts
I RECEIVED A LETTER REQUESTING RECALL.
NHTSA ODI #11318880
NHTSA investigations
2EA21002 · 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.