NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Structure complaints
32 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Aug 14, 2026
Structure
I am reporting a severe manufacturing defect involving the Blizzard Pearl paint (Paint Code 070) on my 2014 Toyota Corolla. The exterior paint is actively peeling and delaminating from the vehicle body panels in large, brittle chunks, exposing the bare metal underneath.This issue presents a distinct safety hazard to both myself …
Read full complaint
I am reporting a severe manufacturing defect involving the Blizzard Pearl paint (Paint Code 070) on my 2014 Toyota Corolla. The exterior paint is actively peeling and delaminating from the vehicle body panels in large, brittle chunks, exposing the bare metal underneath.This issue presents a distinct safety hazard to both myself and other drivers on the road. The paint detaches unexpectedly while driving at highway speeds, causing flying debris that can distract or impact the windshields of trailing vehicles. Furthermore, the structural degradation and exposed metal can lead to premature rust, compromising the integrity of the body panels over time.Toyota has previously acknowledged this specific adhesive failure between the factory primer layer and the metal sheet body under a prior Warranty Enhancement Program (Customer Support Program 19N01). However, the peeling continues to spread to new panels, creating an ongoing road hazard. I am requesting that the NHTSA investigate this widespread defect as a structural safety issue.
NHTSA ODI #11756992
Mileage unknown · Apr 29, 2026
Structure
The factory white paint on my 2014 Toyota Corolla has been peeling and delaminating in large sheets down to the primer and bare metal. This appears to be a paint adhesion failure, not normal wear or surface chipping. The vehicle has not been in any accidents, repainted, or subjected to improper care. The problem developed gradua…
Read full complaint
The factory white paint on my 2014 Toyota Corolla has been peeling and delaminating in large sheets down to the primer and bare metal. This appears to be a paint adhesion failure, not normal wear or surface chipping. The vehicle has not been in any accidents, repainted, or subjected to improper care. The problem developed gradually and has continued to worsen over time. Large sections of paint detach from body panels such as the hood, roof, trunk, and sides. Paint has come off while driving and during routine car washing. This condition presents a safety concern because pieces of paint can separate at driving speeds and become road debris, which could strike other vehicles or create hazards for nearby drivers. In addition, exposed metal body panels are vulnerable to corrosion, which may affect the long‑term safety and integrity of the vehicle. No warning lights or messages were present prior to the paint failure. A Toyota dealership visually confirmed the peeling paint and indicated this issue has been observed on other Toyota vehicles with white paint. No repair was offered without full repainting at the owner’s expense. The affected areas are visible and available for inspection upon request.
NHTSA ODI #11734621
Mileage unknown · Mar 8, 2026
Structure
After having my vehicle washed at a car wash, paint began to peel. The vehicle at the time had only 42000 miles. Toyota repair apologized for the paint problem (V70 white) and said they would provide me with a car rental for 1-2 weeks while its repainted as there is a recall for the paint (again apologised for the inconvience). …
Read full complaint
After having my vehicle washed at a car wash, paint began to peel. The vehicle at the time had only 42000 miles. Toyota repair apologized for the paint problem (V70 white) and said they would provide me with a car rental for 1-2 weeks while its repainted as there is a recall for the paint (again apologised for the inconvience). After discovering the recall expired, the insurance technician said he would call me back in 1-2 days as the vehicle is no longer under the recall (Does the paint repair itself after that time period)? The technician never called me back. The cost to repaint the vehicle is 7-$14000, more than the value of the vehicle with only 4 years worth of miles driven
NHTSA ODI #11722847
Mileage unknown · Mar 7, 2025
Structure
White paint and clear coat is peeling off vehicle in large sections. It started around the windows and door frames but now almost half the vehicle is missing the paint. I was told by a local mechanic that Toyota had a recall but when I went to Meridian Toyota, they said the recall was for 10 years from the manufacturer date whic…
Read full complaint
White paint and clear coat is peeling off vehicle in large sections. It started around the windows and door frames but now almost half the vehicle is missing the paint. I was told by a local mechanic that Toyota had a recall but when I went to Meridian Toyota, they said the recall was for 10 years from the manufacturer date which was 10/13. This is a 2014 vehicle so we didn’t purchase it until 2014. I went at the end of 2024 and they refused to help with it since it was manufacturers date and not 10 years from the year of vehicle. The vehicle is now starting to rust due to a known problem from Toyota which they refuse to fix. My family has had 7 Toyota vehicles which we love but I am extremely disappointed that you won’t fix this problem which is in no way our fault. The paint in the pictures attached has actually gotten worse in the past few months. Please help resolve this situation.
NHTSA ODI #11646901
Mileage unknown · Jan 14, 2025
Structure
THE PAINT ON MY CAR IS COMING OFF IN SHEETS AND CHUNKS AS I GO DOWN THE ROAD. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM WITH WHITE PAINT ON TOYOTA'S VEHICLES MANUFACTURED DURING YEARS THAT INCLUDE MY CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAID THERE HAD BEEN A PROGRAM TO FIX THIS PROBLEM BUT IT EXPIRED, I THINK THIS SH…
Read full complaint
THE PAINT ON MY CAR IS COMING OFF IN SHEETS AND CHUNKS AS I GO DOWN THE ROAD. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM WITH WHITE PAINT ON TOYOTA'S VEHICLES MANUFACTURED DURING YEARS THAT INCLUDE MY CAR. I TOOK IT TO THE DEALER AND THEY SAID THERE HAD BEEN A PROGRAM TO FIX THIS PROBLEM BUT IT EXPIRED, I THINK THIS SHOULD BE REPAIRED ASAP TO AVOID FUTURE DAMAGES & ISSUES
NHTSA ODI #11635993
Mileage unknown · Jul 15, 2023
Air BagsEngineStructureCrash
We was on Highway and a Buck jumped out , my passenger was freaked out knowing no Air Bags deployed. I was escorted home by police and Contacted Toyota ,they sent a [XXX] to come take my sensors off the car and Never contacted me again, told me to sign into Toyota page and they'd get back to me. Now my car just sits Smashed in …
Read full complaint
We was on Highway and a Buck jumped out , my passenger was freaked out knowing no Air Bags deployed. I was escorted home by police and Contacted Toyota ,they sent a [XXX] to come take my sensors off the car and Never contacted me again, told me to sign into Toyota page and they'd get back to me. Now my car just sits Smashed in Garage, it was in great shape before and I was gonna trade it in. INFORMATION Redacted PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6).
NHTSA ODI #11532493
80,000 miles · Dec 19, 2019
Air BagsStructureWheelsCrashInjury
COLLIDED AT 60+ MPH ON 190 BY DIESEL LARGE TRUCK MAJOR FRONT AND SIDE DAMAGE AND NO AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT OF ANY KIND. HIS TRUCK WAS FINE AND NONE OF MY SIDE NOR FRONTAL AIRBAGS WENT OFF. MY HEAD SLAMMED INTO THE DRIVER'S WINDOW AND MY NECK AND BACK ARE REALLY HURTING. THIS HAPPENED JUST A COUPLE DAYS AGO.
NHTSA ODI #11290098
51,000 miles · Nov 24, 2019
Structure
I BOUGHT A 2014 CERTIFIED TOYOTA COROLLA S AT TOYOTA CULVER CITY LAST JULY 2017, MAINTANANCE OF MY VEHICLE IS ALWAYS SERVICE AT THIS LOCATION EVER SINCE I GOT IT. THE OTHER DAY WHILE CLEANING MY VEHICLE I NOTICED THAT THE PAINT ON THE CORNER SIDE OF MY HOOD IS PEELING OFF. THOUGHT THAT IT WAS JUST NORMAL SO I BOUGHT A TOYOTA TOU…
Read full complaint
I BOUGHT A 2014 CERTIFIED TOYOTA COROLLA S AT TOYOTA CULVER CITY LAST JULY 2017, MAINTANANCE OF MY VEHICLE IS ALWAYS SERVICE AT THIS LOCATION EVER SINCE I GOT IT. THE OTHER DAY WHILE CLEANING MY VEHICLE I NOTICED THAT THE PAINT ON THE CORNER SIDE OF MY HOOD IS PEELING OFF. THOUGHT THAT IT WAS JUST NORMAL SO I BOUGHT A TOYOTA TOUCH UP PAINT AND TRIED TO TOUCH UP THE PEELING PAINT BUT EVER TIME I BRUSH IT LIGHTLY TO ADD THE TOUCH UP PAINT THE PAINT ON MY HOOD WILL PEEL OFF. I CHECKED GOOGLE TO SEE IF IM THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS ENCOUNTER THIS PAINT ISSUE. BUT ITS NOT JUST ME. I CHECKED IF THERE ARE ANY RECALLS FROM TOYOTA ABOUT THE PAINT JOB BUT NOTHING.
NHTSA ODI #11282079
80,000 miles · Sep 26, 2019
Structure
I WAS DRIVING DOWN A SECLUDED STREET AT ABOUT 20MPH WHEN I HEARD A LOYD EXPLOSION ON MY RIGHT SIDE OF MY CAR. MY PASSENGER SIDE MIRROR HAD EXPLODED. THE MIRROR ITSELF WAS SHATTERED AND HANGING DOWN, THE BACK PANEL WAS FOUND IN SOME BUSHES ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET. I WAS DRIVING UP THE STREET SO CARS WERE ON MY LEFT. THERE WAS N…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING DOWN A SECLUDED STREET AT ABOUT 20MPH WHEN I HEARD A LOYD EXPLOSION ON MY RIGHT SIDE OF MY CAR. MY PASSENGER SIDE MIRROR HAD EXPLODED. THE MIRROR ITSELF WAS SHATTERED AND HANGING DOWN, THE BACK PANEL WAS FOUND IN SOME BUSHES ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET. I WAS DRIVING UP THE STREET SO CARS WERE ON MY LEFT. THERE WAS NO ONE WALKING PAST, NOR WERE THERE ANY BICYCLES OR ANYTHING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD THAT COULD CAUSE SUCH DAMAGE. IT WAS VERY FRIGHTENING. I SPENT ALMOST 30MINUTES WALKING UP AND DOWN THE STREET TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED AND NOTHING MADE SENSE. THE MIRROR DID NOT TURN IN, AS WOULD HAPPEN IF I HAD HIT SOMETHING. THERE IS A BLACK MARK ON MY CAR DOOR FROM THE GLASS PIECE SLAMMING INTO IT FROM THE EXPLOSION.
NHTSA ODI #11258283
66,890 miles · Mar 18, 2019
Air BagsStructureUnknown Or OtherCrashInjury
IN MARCH 1 2019 AT 840 PM I WAS DRIVING MY TOYOTA COROLLA 2014 HEADING SOUTH ON ARCH STREET IN PITTSFORD VERMONT. I DROVE DOWN THE ROAD WENT OVER A LITTLE HILL AND AS I CAME OVER THE TINY HILL IN MY VISION I SAW A DRIVING CAR COMING TOWARDS ME IN THERE APPROPRIATE LANE, WITH THERE HEADLIGHTS ON, THEN I SAW A PARKED CAR BLOCKING …
Read full complaint
IN MARCH 1 2019 AT 840 PM I WAS DRIVING MY TOYOTA COROLLA 2014 HEADING SOUTH ON ARCH STREET IN PITTSFORD VERMONT. I DROVE DOWN THE ROAD WENT OVER A LITTLE HILL AND AS I CAME OVER THE TINY HILL IN MY VISION I SAW A DRIVING CAR COMING TOWARDS ME IN THERE APPROPRIATE LANE, WITH THERE HEADLIGHTS ON, THEN I SAW A PARKED CAR BLOCKING 70 PERCENT OF MY LANE. I HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO HIT THE PARKED CAR. WHEN I HIT THE CAR MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. I DON'T REMEMBER ANYTHING AFTER MY FACE HIT THE STEERING WHEEL. MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY! I HAVE BROKEN BONES IN MY FACE AND CAN'T SEE CLEARLY OUT OF MY RIGHT EYE. I'VE GONE TO A EYE MD WHO IS A RETINA SPECIALIST AND SHE SAYS I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE OUT OF MY RIGHT EYE. I DO HAVE A LAWYER BUT I BELIEVE IF I WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS DEFECT THAN I WOULD HAVE HAD THIS FIXED AND WOULD HAVE HAD THE PROPER DEPLOY OF THE AIR BAG WHICH THEN I WOULD NOT BE LOSING MY SITE. I WAS GOING 35 MPH.*DT*JB
NHTSA ODI #11189840
Official recalls
2Jan 17, 2020
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing (Toyota) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Corolla, 2011-2013 Matrix, 2012-2018 Avalon, and 2013-2018 Avalon Hybrid vehicles. During certain crashes, the air bag electronic control unit (ECU) may malfunction, possibly disabling the deployment of the air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: In the event of a crash, air bags and/or seat belt pretensioners that do not deploy as intended may increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the ECU and install a noise filter between the air bag control module and its wire harness, as necessary, free of charge. Owners were notified of the safety risk beginning March 2, 2020. A second letter notifying owners of the remedy repair will be mailed between March 16, 2020 and June 27, 2020. Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-888-270-9371. Toyota's numbers for this recall are 20TB03, 20TA03 and 20TA05.
Oct 17, 2013
Toyota Motor Engineering & manufacturing North America, Inc. (Toyota) is recalling certain model year 2013-2014 Camry and Camry HV, model year 2013 Avalon and Avalon HV and model year 2014 Corolla vehicles. In the affected vehicles, the windshield wiper switch assembly may short circuit. As such, these vehicles fail to conform to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, No. 104, "Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A short circuit could cause inoperative windshield wipers, reducing driver visibility and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the wiper switch assembly, free of charge. The recall began on November 8, 2013. Owners may contact Toyota at 1-800-331-4331.
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
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.