U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

95–291 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–666 

EXAMINING TAKATA AIRBAG DEFECTS 

AND THE VEHICLE RECALL PROCESS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

NOVEMBER 20, 2014 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

CORY BOOKER, New Jersey 

JOHN E. WALSH, Montana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Ranking 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

DAN COATS, Indiana 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

ELLEN L. DONESKI, Staff Director 

JOHN WILLIAMS, General Counsel 

DAVID SCHWIETERT, Republican Staff Director 

NICK ROSSI, Republican Deputy Staff Director 

REBECCA SEIDEL, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on November 20, 2014 ...................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Nelson .................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Thune ................................................................................... 2 

Statement of Senator McCaskill ............................................................................. 4 

Letter submitted by Hon. Claire McCaskill dated June 20, 2014 from 

Reginald Modlin, Regulatory Affairs—Director, Chrysler Group LLC 

to Frank Borris, Director, Office of Defect Investigation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration .............................................................. 33 

Letter dated December 1, 2014 to Hon. Claire McCaskill from Rick 

Schostek, Executive Vice President, Honda North America ..................... 41 

Statement of Senator Heller ................................................................................... 5 

Letter dated November 21, 2014 to Hon. Dean Heller from Rick Schostek, 

Executive Vice President, Honda North America, Inc. .............................. 28 

Statement of Senator Klobuchar ............................................................................ 23 

Statement of Senator Ayotte ................................................................................... 25 

Statement of Senator Markey ................................................................................. 29 

Statement of Senator Blumenthal .......................................................................... 31 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 47 

Statement of Senator Rubio .................................................................................... 49 

WITNESSES

Lieutenant Stephanie Erdman, Destin, Florida .................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 

Hiroshi Shimizu, Senior Vice President, Global Quality Assurance, Takata 

Corporation ........................................................................................................... 11 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

Rick Schostek, Executive Vice President, Honda North America, Inc. ............... 14 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

Scott G. Kunselman, Senior Vice President and Head of Vehicle Safety and 

Regulatory Compliance, Chrysler Group LLC ................................................... 17 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 18 

David J. Friedman, Deputy Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation ........................................ 54 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 59 

APPENDIX

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 

Hiroshi Shimizu ................................................................................................... 69 

Response to written questions submitted to Rick Schostek by: 

Hon. Bill Nelson ............................................................................................... 70 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 71 

Hon. Claire McCaskill ...................................................................................... 73 

Hon. Richard Blumenthal ................................................................................ 73 

Hon. Deb Fischer .............................................................................................. 74 

Response to written questions submitted Scott G. Kunselman by: 

Hon. Bill Nelson to ........................................................................................... 74 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 75 

Hon. Claire McCaskill ...................................................................................... 76 

Hon. Richard Blumenthal ................................................................................ 76 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 

David J. Friedman ............................................................................................... 77 

(1) 

EXAMINING TAKATA AIRBAG DEFECTS 

AND THE VEHICLE RECALL PROCESS 

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room SR– 

253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Bill Nelson, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Good morning, everyone. Senator Thune and I 

have been looking forward to this. We want to thank the witnesses 

for coming. 

We are here to investigate the link between defective airbags and 

the numerous injuries and deaths across the country—indeed, 

across the globe. 

More than 7.8 million vehicles in the U.S. have been recalled because of defective airbags, and, just this week, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced that it was calling on 

all automakers to expand that recall from a few states, what they 

called a regional recall, to the entire country. 

Well, the first thing that needs to be done is to take care of consumers. Automakers need to get a replacement part so that the airbags can be replaced. That needs to be sent to the dealers. And 

they need, because of people potentially driving around with a defective airbag in their steering wheel and dashboard, the dealers, 

the automobile makers need to provide a loaner vehicle or a rental 

car for those whose cars cannot be immediately fixed. 

General Motors recently took that kind of step for certain models 

with faulty ignition switches, and there is no reason why the automakers covered by this notice should not be required to take the 

same kind. 

I think it is absolutely imperative, in view of the fear that has 

gripped the public by virtue of what has already been said and 

what will be stated in this hearing today, that a loaner or a rental 

car would be provided for someone if they cannot get their replacement of their defective airbag on the recall list done immediately. 

The owners should have a right to expect that the cars that they 

drive are as safe as possible. And so that is going to be what we 

are going to be facing in the next immediate future as we dig into 

the question of what, in fact, is the problem. 

Now, I have written to Secretary Foxx urging him to impose civil 

penalties up to the full extent of his law on any company that reVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
2 

fuses to provide drivers with an alternative form of transportation 

if they are going to have to wait to have their car repaired. 

The American people have a right to know about the story behind this airbag recall, and so that is why we are here today. 

Now, let me just show you some of the items. 

This is part of the steering mechanism. It would be facing the 

driver like this, and it would look like this in the wheel of the 

steering column. And, of course, the chemicals inside this mechanism—upon impact, the chemical reaction causes an inflation of the 

airbag. 

And, upon close examination, you will see the little holes around 

the mechanism that the gas that is created by the chemical reaction comes out, inflates the airbag. And it is a device that has 

saved many, many people’s lives. 

This compound, ammonium nitrate, seems to have a problem. 

Long about the turn of the year 2000, when it was changed as the 

compound, perhaps some of the metal as well and when the explosions occur, instead of the gasses forming to fill the airbag, additionally it explodes with such force that this metal shreds it. 

And, as a result, what you see, in this particular case of an airbag, metal has shredded it. Here is a big hole. Here is another 

hole. And the very device that is supposed to save lives becomes 

a device that is taking lives. So that is absolutely unacceptable. 

Now, after the opening statements of the prospective Chairman 

and Ranking Members, I have asked an Air Force active-duty first 

lieutenant, who happens to be stationed at the large Eglin Air 

Force Base in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, to be our first witness 

and she will give you a firsthand account as to what her encounter 

has been with a defective airbag. 

Let me turn to our Ranking Member, Senator Thune, our future 

Chairman of this committee. 

Senator Thune, thank you for participating. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator THUNE. Well, thank you, Senator Nelson, for serving as 

Chairman of this morning’s hearing to examine the alarming 

Takata airbag recalls and the actions of the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration. These are currently issues that belong on the Commerce Committee’s agenda, and I appreciate very 

much your calling this hearing to examine these issues in greater 

detail. 

I first want to thank Lieutenant Stephanie Erdman for being 

here today. Thank you also for your service to our country. We appreciate you coming here to tell your story and help inform this 

committee. 

This hearing is an important one, and our discussion today will 

explore matters of public safety and accountability. Ensuring the 

safety of America’s motorists is a priority, but the public’s trust has 

been shaken due to the record number of recalls this year and the 

beliefs many have about problems in the industry and at NHTSA. 

This year, record fines have been levied against Toyota, GM, and 

Honda. Now, with the latest news of problems with Takata airbags, 

3 

we are again faced with examining an apparent failure with serious safety consequences. 

Today, we will be asking Takata, NHTSA, and other stakeholders increasingly familiar questions about how these faulty 

products made it into consumers’ vehicles, when the problem was 

first discovered, and what steps, if any, could have been taken 

sooner that may have saved lives or prevented injuries. 

In this case, many would especially like to know whether the allegations reported in The New York Times that Takata knew of and 

hid risks related to airbags years ago are true. Questions also exist 

about NHTSA’s approach to these recalls and the wisdom of the 

agency’s initial decision to request regional, rather than national, 

recalls—a decision which NHTSA has since reversed for some of 

the affected vehicles. 

The troubling string of recalls this year should be a wake-up call. 

I believe we can do a better job of addressing safety issues as they 

arise and holding automakers, their suppliers, and NHTSA accountable to their shared mission of ensuring safety on America’s 

roadways. 

In recent years, Congress has enacted, and NHTSA has sought 

to implement, a robust early reporting regime. The major automakers and other manufacturers have also instituted or sought to 

improve internal safety reporting systems that encourage employees to report safety problems. But reports of employees whose concerns may have been ignored, silenced, or possibly even covered up, 

persist. 

I believe we can do more to ensure that NHTSA is informed of 

potential defects as early as possible. That is why later today I, 

along with Senator Nelson, will be introducing the Motor Vehicle 

Safety Whistleblower Act. I am pleased that Senators Heller and 

McCaskill, who have been at the forefront of the Committee’s efforts on the GM recalls, are also sponsors of this legislation. 

This bill will incentivize employees who uncover serious allegations of vehicle defects or violations of motor vehicle safety laws 

that could lead to death or serious bodily injury to provide voluntarily that information to the Department of Transportation. If 

such information leads to DOT or Department of Justice enforcement actions that total more than a million dollars in penalties, the 

whistleblower would be eligible to share in a portion of total penalties collected. 

This bill will also protect whistleblowers’ identities and allow 

NHTSA to share information with the Department of Justice and 

other Federal agencies where appropriate. Other agencies have 

similar programs, including programs that incentivize individuals 

to report information to the Securities and Exchange Commission 

and to the IRS. 

If there are potential whistleblowers with important information 

to help NHTSA identify more defects, we want them to come forward so that these problems can be identified earlier in the process. I think we would all agree that it is better to address a problem before injuries or deaths occur, if at all possible, rather than 

relying primarily on fines imposed after the fact. 

I look forward to working with stakeholders and my colleagues 

as we continue oversight on these safety matters. 

4 

We will undoubtedly revisit many of these issues when we consider the President’s nominee to lead NHTSA. Having written 

President Obama twice in the last 8 months urging him to fill 

swiftly the NHTSA administrator position at NHTSA that has now 

been vacant for 343 days, I am pleased the President finally announced his intention to nominate Dr. Mark Rosekind on the eve 

of this hearing. This nomination is long overdue, and I look forward to reviewing the nominee’s qualifications and his plan for 

NHTSA in a timely manner. 

Finally, I urge all of my constituents watching this hearing to 

pay attention to any recalls or field actions and, if you determine 

your vehicle is subject to a recall, to get it repaired quickly by an 

authorized repair facility. 

I want to thank the witnesses for being here today, and I look 

forward to your testimony. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator Thune. 

We want our two leaders in the Subcommittee to make a short 

opening statement. 

The Chair of the Subcommittee, Senator McCaskill. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

I find it troubling, but, more importantly, I am sad that I am not 

surprised, that we find ourselves examining another example of 

manufacturers’ failure to fulfill safety obligations that could have 

saved lives. 

Honda is under investigation for failure to provide early-warning 

reports to NHTSA related to the deaths the company has linked to 

Takata airbags. Takata itself is also under investigation by NHTSA 

and Federal prosecutors over troubling claims that it might have 

known a long time before it notified its auto manufacturer customers of the public safety defects associated with millions of its 

airbags. 

Ten automakers have now recalled at least 7.8 million vehicles 

in the United States under either safety recalls or service campaigns related to defective Takata airbags. What I want to try to 

get to the bottom of at this hearing is what is the difference and 

isn’t that difference important—a safety recall versus a service 

campaign. 

There seems to be some confusion among the driving public 

about the scope and severity of these recalls, and part of that is 

because not all the manufacturers are treating this the same, using 

the same language, and we have failed to have clarity from NHTSA 

in this regard. 

In this committee’s Consumer Protection Subcommittee, we have 

held three auto safety hearings since General Motors recalled 2.6 

million vehicles earlier this year for a defective ignition switch that 

was largely ignored by the company and Federal auto safety regulators for more than 10 years. 

Sadly, I think today we will hear many of the same themes we 

heard in the GM investigation: an industry that fears no consequences for not complying with the law, companies more focused 

5 

on defending against private litigation than promoting safety, and 

a regulator that lacks both the resources and technical expertise to 

effectively do its job. 

I am pleased that the President has finally nominated a candidate to serve as NHTSA’s Administrator, a position that has been 

vacant for nearly a year—a critical year. I look forward to hearing 

from him, particularly in regards to his plans to strengthen the 

agency’s oversight of the auto industry. 

Dr. Mark Rosekind has been nominated, and he certainly has a 

resume ́ that reflects years of work in the area of automobile and 

transportation safety. This committee should move quickly on a 

hearing to consider his nomination. I certainly have a lot of questions. 

As we head into a new session of Congress, this committee 

should also make legislation reauthorizing NHTSA a priority. We 

aren’t going to agree on everything, but I think there is enough 

common ground on the reforms that are needed to act without 

delay. I look forward to working with the new Chairman in that 

regard and all of the members of this committee in the next Congress. 

Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Heller, the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DEAN HELLER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA 

Senator HELLER. Chairman, thank you. And I will keep my statement brief. 

But before I begin, I want to acknowledge the lives that were lost 

due to the Takata airbags and would like to thank Lieutenant 

Erdman for being here today. Thank you for your service to this 

country and for sharing your story with this committee today. 

Mr. Chairman, I think this is the year of the airbags. GM had 

defects with airbags that would not deploy, and now we have 

Takata airbags that send shrapnel into the face of those that are 

driving. 

As this committee knows, I know a little bit about cars. I race 

them, I build them, I break them, and I fix them. Probably break 

them more than I race them, but that just seems to be the way it 

works out. But I will tell you the most terrifying thing a driver experiences is a crash, and, at that moment, the only thing that matters in their lives is that airbag. 

We have common themes emerging from all of our hearings this 

year from this committee and our subcommittee: It has taken far 

too long from the information found within the company that there 

is a defect and then getting these cars off the road. 

Today, I am proud to stand with Senator Thune, Senator Nelson, 

and Senator McCaskill on introducing legislation that would bring 

this information forward faster by rewarding whistleblowers. It is 

my hope and it is our hope that the Motor Vehicle Safety Whistleblowers Act will solve the problems that we are seeing time and 

again with these recalls, that employees in these companies have 

raised concerns about defects and those warnings have not been 

properly vetted. It is my hope that a significant monetary payout 

6 

will get this information to the public faster and faster means saving lives. 

Today, this committee has Takata here. We need to know what 

they knew and when they knew it. I am very troubled by the New 

York Times article that alleges that there may have been a coverup. 

And I am glad to have NHTSA here. Just yesterday, the President submitted his nomination for NHTSA Administrator to the 

Senate, and I have called on the President to do this for months 

now. We will review this nominee. I am hopeful we will be able to 

process him accordingly. NHTSA needs a Senate-confirmed administrator. It has been almost a year, and I fear that the trust the 

public has in this agency has been eroded greatly. 

One of the major concerns that I have is that NHTSA is not able 

to recognize these defects fast enough. NHTSA is far too important 

for that to happen, and I want to work with NHTSA and my colleagues on solutions to that. 

As you know, Nevada will be producing cars very soon, with the 

new Tesla Giga center. We need to make sure that NHTSA can 

handle these cars of the future as well as the cars that we have 

here today. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to the testimonies, 

look forward to this hearing. 

Senator NELSON. With the indulgence of the Committee, we want 

to get on into the testimony. After the lieutenant, we will have the 

next panel. The Chairman will defer his questions so we can get 

the members plenty of time to have their questions. And then we 

have a third panel, which is the administration, NHTSA. 

So let’s get right to it. 

Lieutenant, we are certainly appreciative that you would be willing to step forward. 

First Lieutenant, United States Air Force, Stephanie Erdman, a 

graduate of the University of Texas system, ROTC graduate, one 

of her first duty stations, of which she is a compliance and testing 

officer in the Air Force Testing and Evaluations Command at Eglin 

Air Force Base. 

And if you all can turn the posters, you can start to see something of the impact. She was driving a 2002 Honda, and this is 

what happened to her. The shredded airbag, just like the one that 

I showed you here on the left poster. This is what the car looked 

like. She had a passenger. You can see the airbag still inflated in 

the car. 

And, unfortunately—and she has given us permission—when the 

lieutenant was being carried to the hospital, that is what she 

looked like. 

So, Lieutenant Erdman, if you would share with us your story 

of what happened. 

STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT STEPHANIE ERDMAN, 

DESTIN, FLORIDA 

Lieutenant Erdman: Yes, sir. 

Good morning, everyone, ladies and gentlemen. My name is 

Stephanie Erdman. I am honored to be here today to serve as the 

7 

voice for the people who have been forever silenced because of exploding Takata airbags. 

On behalf of everyone who has suffered because of these defective Takata airbags, I would like to thank the Committee for holding this hearing. I hope that no other families will have to go 

through the terrible ordeal that my family and I have had to endure because this happened to me. 

On September 1, 2013, my life was changed forever. I was driving my 2002 Honda Civic on Highway 98 near Eglin Air Force 

Base, Florida, where I was stationed. I was on my way to get some 

groceries with a friend. As I was driving, a car took a left in front 

of me, and our cars collided. 

When the impact occurred, shrapnel from my car’s airbag shot 

through the airbag cloth and embedded into my right eye and 

cheek. I was instantly blinded on my right side. I felt gushing blood 

running down my neck. I was terrified. 

When I got to the hospital, they did a CT scan of my face. The 

image showed that there was a metallic foreign object which had 

punctured and fractured my right nasal bone, and the tip of the 

shrapnel had embedded in my right sinus. 

Since that day, I have endured multiple surgeries and therapies. 

I have more to go still. My vision will never be the same. I will 

never be the same. 

My accident involved a moderate frontal impact. The headlights 

on the front of the vehicle weren’t even broken. My passenger only 

had mild scrapes and bruises. I should have not been injured in the 

shocking and terrifying way that I was. 

What happened to me was gruesome. The photo that the EMT 

took of me with the shrapnel embedded in my eye is scary to look 

at, but I believe it is necessary to grab the attention of those who 

have the ability to do something and keep this from happening to 

anyone else. 

It is easy to think that I am the only one who has suffered because of this accident, but it has also been exceptionally tough on 

my family. They try to be strong for me, and I see it, but I can tell 

that whenever I talk about it they are also hurting. I know I have 

physical scars about this tragedy, but people who care about me 

have scars, as well. They are just the kind you cannot see. 

These companies should have done everything they could. They 

claim that they notified customers as soon as they found out about 

the problem, that they expanded the recalls as they learned about 

each set of additional potentially affected vehicles as soon as they 

could. I believe that the facts show differently. 

It has been 6 years since the first recall covering these deadly 

Takata airbags. What just started at 3,940 vehicles has now 

ballooned into over 7 million vehicles. But the exact same vehicle 

in one state is not even recalled in the next state over. I do not 

understand how crossing a border simply means that that vehicle 

is now safe. 

I do not also understand why the dealerships that sell these vehicles and service them are not notifying customers. American 

Honda Motor Company claims that they notified the Honda-certified dealership where I bought my Civic about the recall for the 

driver-side airbag in February 2010. I took my car into the dealerVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
8 

ship for service three times after they supposedly received the information. The Honda dealership never told me about the recall, 

they never performed the recall repairs on my vehicle, and they 

never warned me about what might happen if my airbags deployed. 

They did nothing. 

I have also learned that Honda claims they have sent a recall notice to my house in 2010. They have records showing that the envelope containing critical information was returned to them as undeliverable. Instead of trying to notify me in another way, they did 

nothing to warn me. 

It is in honor of my family and friends who support me so very 

much that I ask the Committee to demand real answers. It is in 

honor of the families and friends of all who have been injured by 

these defective Takata airbags that I ask the Committee to insist 

that these companies explain why they waited so long to identify 

all of these potentially deadly vehicles. And it is in honor of those 

who cannot be here today because they have been hurt or killed by 

these dangerous products that I ask the Committee to get to the 

bottom of why these companies did not try harder to warn us. 

I am so honored to be here today to have the opportunity to tell 

my story, but please understand that I am just one of many people 

who have been affected by these deadly airbags. I am hopeful that 

Congress will look at a way to improve the recall notification process. I hope there will be no more mothers taken from their children 

or no more fathers blinded by the exploding airbags. I ask the 

Committee to do everything in its power to make sure every vehicle 

with a defective airbag is made safe. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Lieutenant Erdman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE ERDMAN

Ashley Parham. Gurjit Rathore. Hai Ming Xu. And my name is Lt. Stephanie 

Erdman. 

Thanks to the gracious invitation of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation, I am honored to be here today to serve as the voice 

for the people who have been forever silenced because of the failure of companies 

to address the dangers of exploding airbags. 

On behalf of everyone who has suffered because of these defective airbags, I would 

like to thank the Committee for holding this hearing. It is my sincere hope that no 

other families will have to go through the terrible ordeal that my family has had 

to endure because of what happened to me or experience the same kind of terror 

that myself and others who have been injured and killed because of these defective 

airbags have felt. 

On September 1, 2013, my life changed forever. I was driving my 2002 Honda 

Civic on Highway 98 West near Destin, Florida on my way to get some groceries 

with a friend. As I was driving, a car turned left in front of my Honda and we 

crashed. 

When the impact occurred, shrapnel from my car’s airbag inflator shot through 

the airbag cloth and embedded in my right eye and neck. I was instantly blind on 

my right side. And then I felt gushing blood. It was terrifying. I thought I was going 

to bleed out. 

When I got to the hospital, they did a CT of my face. The imaging showed that 

a metallic foreign body had punctured and fractured my right nasal bone, and the 

tip of that shrapnel had embedded itself in my right sinus. Since that day, I have 

endured multiple surgeries and therapy. I have more of them to go. My vision will 

never be the same. I will never be the same. 

An accident only has to involve a mild impact to trigger the airbags to deploy. 

My accident involved a moderate frontal impact. I should have gotten a few bumps 

9 

and bruises like the passenger in my car. I should not have been injured in the 

shocking and terrifying way that I was. 

What happened to me was gruesome. The photo that the EMT took of me with 

the shrapnel in my eye is scary to look at. But I believe it is necessary to get the 

attention of those who have the ability to do something to stop this from happening 

to someone else. 

It is important to me to talk about this problem. It is helpful to me to talk about 

it so that I can learn to deal with the trauma that I had to endure and that still 

haunts me to this day. Just like I am haunted by what could have happened if a 

family member or a friend was driving my car. I could never forgive myself if this 

had happened to one of them in my car. 

It is easy to think that I am the only one who has suffered because of my accident. But it has also been exceptionally tough for my family. They try to be strong 

for me, and I see it. But I can tell that, whenever I talk about it, they are also hurting. I know that I have physical scars from my tragedy. But the people who care 

about me have scars, too. They are just the kind you cannot see. 

These companies say they have done everything they could. They claim that they 

notified consumers as soon as they found out about the problem. That they expanded the recalls as they learned about each set of additional potentially affected 

vehicles just as soon as they could. I believe the facts show differently. 

It has been six years since the first recall covering these deadly airbags. What 

started with just 3,940 vehicles has now ballooned into more than seven million vehicles on the roads in the United States. But the exact same vehicle in one state 

is not even recalled in the state next door. I do not understand how that is acceptable. I do not understand how a company can take the position that just crossing 

a border means that the vehicle somehow becomes safe. 

I also do not understand why the dealerships that sell and service these vehicles 

are not notifying consumers. American Honda Motor Company claims that they notified the Honda-certified dealership where I bought my Civic about the recall for 

the driver’s side airbag in February of 2010. I took my car into that dealership for 

service three times after they received the recall notice for my car. They never told 

me about the recall. They never performed the recall repair on my vehicle. And they 

never warned me about what might happen if my airbag deployed. 


1120ERD1.eps
10 

I have also learned that Honda claims they sent a recall notice to my house in 

2010. They claim that they have records showing that the envelope with that critical 

notice was returned to them as undeliverable. Instead of trying to notify me another 

way, they did nothing to warn me. They did nothing to try and make sure that me 

and my family were safe before the accident happened. It was not until September 

4, 2013—three days after my accident—that Honda called and left a message on my 

phone about the recall. 

It is in honor of my family and friends, whose support means so very much to 

me, that I ask the Committee to demand real answers to questions like these from 

Takata and from the auto manufacturers that knew about this problem long before 

it began ruining lives and taking lives. 

It is in honor of the families and friends of all those who have been injured by 

these defective airbags that I ask the Committee to insist that these companies explain why they waited so long to identify all of the potentially deadly vehicles. 

And it is in honor of those who cannot be here today because they have been hurt 

or killed by these dangerous products that I ask the Committee to get to the bottom 

of why these companies did not try harder to warn us about this issue as soon as 

possible so that no one else suffers the consequences of their inaction. 

I believe in personal responsibility. I believe in admitting that you are wrong 

when you are wrong. I believe in holding companies accountable for their actions. 

The safety of the American public was not held paramount by these companies. 

These companies did not play by the rules when they failed to timely and fully notify NHTSA and customers like me about this defect. Something must be done to 

stop this deadly trend that we see time and time again in the auto industry. I am 

hopeful that NHTSA’s recall management division also takes more responsibility for 

overseeing recall campaigns so that they improve completion rates and make sure 

that all affected vehicles are included. 

I am so honored to be here today and to have the opportunity to tell my story. 

But please understand that I am just one of many people, along with their families 

and friends, who have suffered because of these defective airbags. 

I am hopeful that Congress will look at ways to improve the recall notification 

process. I hope there will be no more mothers taken from their children or fathers 

blinded so they can never again truly enjoy playtime with their sons. But I worry 

that, once all of the attention that is now focused on these deadly products subsides, 

these companies will not follow through with making sure that the defective airbags 

in every last one of these affected vehicles are removed. I ask that the Committee 

do everything in its power to make sure that each and every vehicle affected by this 

defect is made safe. 

Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. We will do that, Lieutenant. 

Lieutenant Erdman: Thank you, sir. 

Senator NELSON. You have our promise. And that is why we had 

this hearing today. And we want to thank you for the courage of 

you stepping forward to come and tell your story. 

Between what the lieutenant has said and the pictures, I think 

you get the picture. So, with the Committee’s permission, I would 

like to get right on into the next panel. 

Thank you, Lieutenant. You are very kind. Appreciate it. 

All right, if we could ask the next panel, please, to come up. 

Mr. Hiroshi Shimizu, he is the Senior Vice President, Global 

Quality Assurance, for the Takata Corporation, the manufacturer 

of the airbags; Mr. Rick Schostek, Executive Vice President of 

Honda North America; Mr. Scott Kunselman, Senior Vice President, Vehicle Safety and Regulatory Compliance, the Chrysler Corporation Group. 

Gentlemen, thank you for coming. Please be seated. 

Mr. Shimizu, we will start with you. You are very accommodating to speak in English, and this committee appreciates that. 

You have with you a translator if there is any difficulty. And for 

you making the effort to speak in English today, we want you to 

know that we appreciate it. 

11 

Mr. Shimizu, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HIROSHI SHIMIZU, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, 

GLOBAL QUALITY ASSURANCE, TAKATA CORPORATION 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Thank you. 

Chairman Nelson and Ranking Member Thune and distinguished 

members of the Committee, my name is Hiroshi Shimizu, and I am 

Senior Vice President for Global Quality Assurance for Takata Corporation. I am honored to appear before this committee to offer the 

perspective of Takata Corporation on the important issues under 

examination at today’s hearing. 

Takata’s mission is to make products that save lives and prevent 

serious injuries. Whenever one of our products does not perform as 

expected, it is our first priority to understand the root causes of the 

issue. If we identify a problem in our product design, production, 

or installation, we do not hesitate to take the necessary steps to ensure that the problem is addressed properly and promptly. 

All of us at Takata know that the airbag inflator ruptures that 

have been the subject of recent recalls involve very important 

issues of public safety. Even though millions of Takata airbags 

have inflated properly, saving lives and avoiding serious injuries in 

hundreds of thousands of accidents, any failure of an airbag to perform as designed in an automobile accident is incompatible with 

Takata’s standards for highest quality assurance. 

We are deeply sorry about each of the reported instances in 

which a Takata airbag has not performed as designed and a driver 

or passenger has suffered personal injuries or deaths. Our sincerest 

condolences go out to all those who have suffered in these accidents 

and to their families. 

Takata is working closely with automakers and the NHTSA to 

support the ongoing recalls and the regional field actions. And we 

are devoting extraordinary resources to producing quality replacement kits on the schedule necessary to fulfill all of the automakers’ 

orders. 

We are also devoting extensive efforts and attention to answering 

requests for information about these matters from NHTSA and 

other investigators. We are committed to being fully transparent 

with the government. 

Takata strongly agrees with the position stated by NHTSA on 

November 9, 2014, that the current focus of the ongoing field actions and the recalls should remain the specific regions of high absolute humidity. Our best current information supports the view 

that these regions must be the priority for the replacement of suspect inflators. It is imperative that all owners of the affected vehicles in these regions respond to the recall notices at the earliest opportunity. 

We are confident that the airbags Takata is producing today, including the replacements for recalled units, are safe. We have confidence in the integrity of our engineering and our current manufacturing processes. We believe that, properly manufactured and 

installed, the airbags we are producing today will work as designed 

to save lives for the expected life of the automobiles. 

While each instance of an airbag failure is terrible and unacceptable to Takata, it is also important to remember that Takata airVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
12 

bags continue to deploy properly as they were designed to do in 

real world accidents, and our airbags are helping to save lives and 

prevent injuries on the road every day. 

As we move forward, Takata will continue to cooperate closely 

with automakers and with governmental regulators, and we will 

take whatever actions are determined to be necessary in the public 

interest and that will best advance the goal of safety for the driving 

public. 

Finally, as the Committee is aware, English is not my native language. I will do my best to answer questions in English, but I may 

ask for a clarification and I may need assistance from my interpreter here from time to time for help in understanding the Committee’s questions. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Shimizu follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HIROSHI SHIMIZU, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR GLOBAL

QUALITY ASSURANCE, TAKATA CORPORATION

Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Thune, and distinguished Members of the 

Committee, my name is Hiroshi Shimizu, and I am Senior Vice President for Global 

Quality Assurance for Takata Corporation. I am honored to appear before this Committee to offer the perspective of Takata Corporation on the important issues under 

examination at today’s hearing. 

Takata’s mission is to make products that save lives and prevent serious injuries. 

Whenever one of our products does not perform as expected, it is our first priority 

to understand the root causes of the issue. If we identify a problem in our product 

design, production, or installation, we do not hesitate to take the necessary steps 

to ensure that the problem is addressed properly and promptly. 

All of us at Takata know that the airbag inflator ruptures that have been the subject of recent recalls involve very important issues of public safety. Even though millions of Takata airbags have inflated properly, saving lives and avoiding serious injuries in hundreds of thousands of accidents, any failure of an airbag to perform as 

designed in an automobile accident is incompatible with Takata’s standards for 

highest quality assurance. We are deeply sorry and anguished about each of the reported instances in which a Takata airbag has not performed as designed and a 

driver or passenger has suffered personal injuries or death. Our sincerest condolences go out to all those who have suffered in these accidents and to their families. 

Takata is working closely with the automakers and the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (‘‘NHTSA’’) to support the ongoing recalls and regional field 

actions, and we have devoted extra resources to producing quality replacement kits 

on the schedule necessary to fulfill all of the automakers’ orders. We are also devoting extensive efforts and attention to answering requests for information about 

these matters from NHTSA and other investigators. We are committed to being fully 

transparent with regulators and investigators. 

In response to reports of accidents involving ruptured airbag inflators, the automakers have announced various recalls involving different models of Takata airbags. 

Those recalls began in 2008 when Honda, in consultation with Takata, initiated 

a series of recalls for driver-side airbags following reports of three incidents of inflator ruptures in 2007. These recalls involved inflators manufactured exclusively for 

Honda in 2000 and 2001. From 2007 to 2010, Takata collaborated with Honda to 

conduct numerous tests of inflators returned from the field and to review our entire 

inflator manufacturing process, and these efforts led to the expansion of the initial 

Honda recalls. These recalls of Honda driver-side inflators focused primarily on specific manufacturing and product-handling issues we had identified, including issues 

with the pressing of propellant wafers at our production facility at Moses Lake, 

Washington. We have taken steps to address the specific production issues identified 

in connection with these Honda recalls. 

From 2009 to 2012, there were a limited number of reports of inflator ruptures 

involving passenger-side airbags manufactured from 2000 to 2002. Those reports resulted in a 2010 recall of passenger-side airbags installed in vehicles that were exclusively sold in Asia. Separately, several automakers announced global recalls of 

passenger-side airbags beginning in 2013. Since then, there have been several addiVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
13 

tional incidents of inflator ruptures involving both driver-side and passenger-side 

airbags that were not covered by the earlier recalls. Almost all of these incidents 

involved vehicles that spent their lives mostly in areas of high absolute humidity, 

such as Puerto Rico and South Florida, and were at least six years old at the time 

of the accident. 

Our best current judgment is that the root causes of these inflator ruptures likely 

involve a combination of three factors: (1) the age of the unit; (2) persistent exposure 

over time to conditions of high absolute humidity; and (3) potential production 

issues, which we have worked to identify and address. 

Based on this engineering analysis, and at NHTSA’s suggestion, multiple automakers began regional field actions focused on areas of the United States that experience higher levels of heat and absolute humidity. Several automakers have recently converted these field actions into regional recalls. These ongoing regional actions and recalls are targeted at vehicles sold or registered in Puerto Rico, Hawaii, 

Florida, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Several automakers have expanded these actions to additional areas along the Gulf Coast and other coastal areas, including 

Southern California. 

One important function of these regional actions is to retrieve inflators from the 

field for purposes of data gathering, testing, and further analysis. In the past several months, we have tested and analyzed thousands of returned airbag inflators, 

both from within the areas of high absolute humidity and from outside those areas, 

and we are working to increase our capacity for testing. We are regularly sharing 

the results of this ongoing testing and analysis with the automakers and NHTSA. 

So far, these ongoing tests have not shown any ruptures in inflators retrieved from 

vehicles outside the areas of high absolute humidity. The tests have resulted in 

some failures of inflators retrieved from within those areas, with some notable variations in the test results for different models of inflators and for different makes 

of automobiles. We are continuing to analyze these results and to learn from them. 

In the meantime, Takata strongly agrees with the position stated by NHTSA on 

November 9, 2014 that the current focus of the ongoing field actions and recalls 

should remain the specific regions of high absolute humidity. Our best information 

supports the view that these regions must be the priority for the replacement of airbags. It is imperative that all owners of the affected vehicles in these regions respond to the recall notices at the earliest opportunity. 

Takata has added new production capacity to meet the demand from automakers 

for airbag replacement kits needed in response to the regional actions and recalls. 

We are currently producing more than 300,000 replacement kits per month and will 

be increasing those production levels beginning in January. We believe we will be 

able to meet the demand currently expected from automakers for these replacement 

units. 

We are confident that the airbags Takata is producing today, including the replacements for recalled units, are safe. We have confidence in the integrity of our 

engineering and our current manufacturing processes. We believe that, properly 

manufactured and installed, the airbags we are producing today will work as designed to save lives for the expected life of the automobile. 

While each instance of an airbag failure is terrible and unacceptable to Takata, 

it is also important to remember that Takata airbags continue to deploy properly 

as they were designed to do in real-world accidents, and our airbags are helping to 

save lives and prevent injuries on the road every day. More than 200 million cars 

and light trucks are registered in the United States, and NHTSA has estimated that 

around half of one percent of these vehicles experience an airbag deployment each 

year. Many of those airbags are Takata products. That means that Takata airbags 

help to save hundreds of lives and prevent thousands of serious injuries every year 

in the United States. 

As we move forward, Takata will continue to cooperate closely with the automakers, with NHTSA, and with government regulators in Japan and around the 

world to address the potential for inflator rupturing. We will take whatever actions 

are determined to be necessary in the public interest and that will best advance the 

goal of safety for the driving public. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be pleased to answer questions from the Committee. 

Senator NELSON. Of course, you will have that assistance. And 

one of the things that we will want you to answer is about the 

change to ammonium nitrate and the problems that occurred thereafter. 

14 

Mr. Schostek, now, you are a representative of Honda, being the 

Executive Vice President at Honda North America. Also talk to us 

about the recalls and the provisions of loaners and/or rental cars. 

Mr. Schostek? 

STATEMENT OF RICK SCHOSTEK, EXECUTIVE VICE 

PRESIDENT, HONDA NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Thank you, Chairman Nelson, Senator Thune, 

and members of the Committee. My name is Rick Schostek. I am 

Executive Vice President with Honda North America. On behalf of 

more than 28,000 Honda employees in the U.S., 1,300 automobile 

dealers, and more than 600 North American suppliers, thank you 

for the opportunity to be here today. 

I want to begin by expressing our deepest sympathies to those 

individuals and families who have been affected by these tragic incidents. We offer our sincere apologies to the families of those who 

have died, to those who have been injured, including Lieutenant 

Erdman, and to those who have been in any way inconvenienced 

due to the defects in Takata airbags in our vehicles. 

Airbags save thousands of lives each year, but we recognize that 

even one customer who is injured or loses their life when an airbag 

does not perform as intended is one too many and is completely unacceptable. 

We understand the urgency of the current situation and are taking proactive steps to encourage Honda and Acura owners to get 

their vehicles repaired. Specifically, to meet the needs of our customers related to these airbag recalls, we have posted written messages prominently on our websites to reassure our customers that 

we have procedures in place to address their individual needs. 

Customers with affected vehicles who desire alternative transportation until their car is fixed have access to loaner cars and 

rental vehicles at no cost to the customer. And we are working in 

our service and parts divisions with our dealer network to ensure 

that replacement inflators are available where and when they are 

needed. 

Like many automakers, Honda looked to Takata for the supply 

of airbag components because Takata was an internationally recognized safety systems supplier. As the manufacturer of the complete 

vehicle, we relied on Takata for its expertise in this specific area 

of technology. We provided our performance requirements, and 

Takata designed the airbag components to those criteria. 

Beginning with the 2001 model year, Takata began to supply 

Honda with a new generation of airbag components. By 2004, we 

had sold several million vehicles equipped with these Takata airbags. It was then, in 2004, when we learned of an airbag inflator 

rupture in one of our vehicles and reported that to NHTSA. This 

remained the only airbag inflator rupture we were aware of until 

3 years later. 

Since 2007, we have been involved in a safety investigation of 

Takata airbag inflators. Takata identified specific manufacturing 

issues as the primary factors of the rupture events. 

Starting with a recall in November 2008 and with every subsequent recall, we gathered component parts from the time period 

that corresponded to Takata’s manufacturing issues and provided 

15 

those to Takata for further investigation. Additionally, we recalled 

vehicles that were outside of the range Takata had identified for 

the purpose of additional analysis. 

As new evidence identified new risk, Honda acted to expand our 

recall population. The investigation process has, since 2007, been 

designed to replace defective Takata inflators and also to seek out 

data using the public recall process. The investigation continues to 

this day. 

With regard to the 2004 inflator rupture, Takata advised us that 

their analysis demonstrated that it had distinctly different characteristics compared to the ruptures that led to the first recall. 

At Honda, the founding principle of our company places the highest priority on the quality of our products and the satisfaction of 

our customers. Now, today, we are operating with even greater energy and greater focus to quickly address our customers’ needs and, 

with every action of our company, dedicating ourselves to honor the 

relationship we have with our customers. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Schostek follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICK SCHOSTEK, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, HONDA NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Thune and members of the Committee. My 

name is Rick Schostek. I’m an Executive Vice President with Honda North America—a company that works in support of all Honda companies in North America— 

and I’m based in Ohio. On behalf of the more than 28,500 associates working for 

Honda in the United States, as well as our nearly 1,300 automobile dealers in the 

U.S. and more than 600 suppliers in North America, thank you for this opportunity 

to share our perspectives on this very serious automotive safety issue. 

I want to begin by expressing our deepest and heartfelt sympathies to those individuals and families who have been affected by these tragic incidents. It is truly 

heartbreaking to all of us at Honda. We offer our sincere apologies to the families 

of those who have died, to those who have been injured—including Ms. Erdman— 

and to those who have been in any way inconvenienced due to the defects in Takata 

airbags in our vehicles. 

Airbags save thousands of lives each year. But we recognize that even one customer who is injured or loses their life when an airbag does not perform as intended, is one too many, and is completely unacceptable. 

Regarding the multiple recalls we have conducted let me first say that Honda is 

a company built upon a commitment to providing satisfaction to our customers. We 

take great pride in the quality of our products, the vast majority of which are built 

here in North America. And we stand behind the safety of these products. 

We understand the urgency of the current situation, and are taking proactive 

steps to encourage Honda and Acura owners to get their vehicles repaired at an authorized dealership. 

We have a well-respected service division dedicated to supporting our dealers in 

meeting the needs of each customer throughout the lifetime of vehicle ownership. 

Specifically, regarding the effort to reach out and meet the needs of our customers 

related to the airbag recalls: 

• We have posted written messages prominently on our websites to reassure our 

customers that we have procedures in place to address their individual needs. 

• Customers with affected vehicles who desire alternative transportation until 

their car is fixed have access to loaner cars and rental vehicles—at no cost to 

the customer—if we experience a situation where a dealers’ service capacity or 

the availability of replacement air bag inflators is insufficient to meet the customer’s needs. 

• We continue to work with Takata in an effort to increase parts availability to 

meet the needs of customers in the expanded population of recalls. 

• And we are working within our own service parts division and with our dealer 

network to ensure that our existing inventory of replacement airbag inflators 

is available when and where they are needed. 

16 

• We have dedicated resources to promptly investigate all reports of potential 

rupture, contacting owners or their representatives when we learn of potential 

ruptures through media, law enforcement or other sources. 

So, we have taken, and continue to take action to address the needs and concerns 

of our customers related to the series of recalls in our vehicles with Takata airbag 

inflators. 

Like many automakers, Honda looked to Takata for the supply of airbag components because Takata was an internationally-recognized safety systems supplier. As 

the manufacturer of the complete vehicle, we relied on Takata for its expertise in 

this specific area of technology. We provided our performance requirements and 

Takata designed the airbag components to those criteria. 

Beginning with the 2001 model year, Takata began to supply Honda with a new 

generation of airbag components. By 2004, we had sold several million vehicles 

equipped with these Takata airbags, when we learned of an airbag inflator rupture 

in one of our vehicles, and reported it to NHTSA. This remained the only airbag 

inflator rupture we were aware of until three years later. 

Since 2007, we have been involved in a safety investigation of Takata airbag inflators. Throughout this investigation, Takata identified specific manufacturing issues 

as the primary factors of the rupture events. Starting with a recall in November 

2008, and with every subsequent recall, we gathered component parts from the time 

period corresponding to Takata’s manufacturing issues and provided those to Takata 

for further investigation. Additionally, we recalled units that were outside the range 

Takata had identified, for the purpose of analysis. 

As new evidence identified new risk, Honda acted to expand our recall populations. The investigation process has, since 2007, been designed to replace defective 

Takata inflators and to seek out data using the public recall process. The investigation continues to this day. 

With regard to the 2004 inflator rupture, Takata advised us that their analysis 

demonstrated that it had distinctly different characteristics compared to the ruptures that led to the first recall. 

Honda has conducted seven recalls and two safety improvement campaigns in the 

U.S. related to Takata driver and front passenger airbag inflators. These actions 

represent our continued due diligence and focus on the safety of our customers. 

It is our practice to actively communicate with our customers who own an affected 

vehicle in order to get them to take immediate action to have their vehicle repaired. 

Over and above the required first class mail notification, we provide multiple notices 

in English and Spanish, as well as other means of reaching customers, both directly 

and indirectly. We plan to continue these activities for all recalls. 

We also have employed other communications techniques in an effort to increase 

the completion rate for our recalls. We consulted with the U.S. Postal Service to try 

new methods to get people to open their recall mailings. We also have used overnight delivery. We have called more than 700,000 hard-to-reach customers by phone, 

using our customer relations staff, our dealers, and automated calls. 

Based on our efforts, we have experienced completion rates that are considered 

high for the recall of older model vehicles. Still, we are concerned when multiple 

recall notices go unheeded by some registered owners. We want our customers to 

complete each and every recall. 

Toward this goal, we would like to offer a suggestion for consideration that we 

believe would greatly improve the response rate to recall notices. 

Many states require owners to obtain a tailpipe emissions test before a vehicle 

can be registered, and certain states decline vehicle registration renewals until outstanding emissions recall repairs have been completed. In a similar way, as the Inspector General commented in October 2011, if each state required that open recalls 

related to safety issues be addressed, if parts are available, before allowing the vehicle to be registered, this simple step would greatly reduce the risk of injuries related 

to unrepaired older model vehicles. Further, all dealerships and independent repair 

facilities could be required to check for, and notify the customer of, any open recalls 

before returning a vehicle to the customer. This is something we already ask all of 

our dealers to do. 

However, at this time, such requirements do not exist in the United States. 

So, Honda will continue to work to alert owners about recalls and to encourage 

owners with an affected vehicle to take immediate action to have their vehicle serviced at their authorized dealership. 

At Honda, the founding principle of our company places the highest priority on 

the quality of our products and the satisfaction of our customers. Now, we are operating with even greater energy and focus to quickly address our customers’ needs 

17 

and concerns and, with every action of our company, dedicating ourselves to honor 

the relationship we have with our customers. 

Again, I very much appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee 

today, and now I will be happy to address your questions. Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Schostek, you didn’t say anything about 

loaners or rental cars. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Mr. Chairman, I believe I did. Customers with affected vehicles who desire alternative transportation in the form of 

loaners or rental cars have them available to them at no cost. 

Senator NELSON. Immediately? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. We have them in place now, sir. 

Senator NELSON. For all of your dealers across the country? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. In the form of loaners, we have expanded our 

loaner program, and we also have the option of rental cars. We will 

take care of our customers, sir. 

Senator NELSON. OK. Let the record show that that has been 

said. We have certainly had contrary information to this point. If 

that is the case, then I certainly want to congratulate you, for the 

obvious reasons. 

All right. Mr. Kunselman. 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Yes. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Kunselman, Senior Vice President, Vehicle 

Safety and Regulatory Compliance, of Chrysler. 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT G. KUNSELMAN, SENIOR VICE 

PRESIDENT AND HEAD OF VEHICLE SAFETY AND 

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE, CHRYSLER GROUP LLC 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Yes. Thank you. 

Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Thune, members of the 

Committee, as stated, my name is Scott Kunselman. I am the Senior Vice President and Head of Vehicle Safety and Regulatory Compliance at Chrysler Group. I lead an organization with a mission 

of safeguarding our customers—a mission we embrace wholeheartedly. I would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity 

to appear today to discuss this important matter. 

Today’s automobiles are among the most sophisticated and complex consumer goods on the market. Auto manufacturers are more 

committed than ever to developing advanced safety technologies to 

reduce fatalities and injuries resulting from motor vehicle crashes. 

On a daily basis, we work to design, engineer, and manufacture vehicles to withstand a myriad of operating conditions. 

Promoting and ensuring vehicle safety is a responsibility shared 

by automakers, suppliers, government, and consumers. Chrysler 

Group looks forward to continuing this collective engagement with 

Takata and NHTSA to help address the current situation. 

Chrysler Group has been actively engaged with Takata and 

NHTSA since Takata first informed us in April 2013 that certain 

airbag inflators used by other auto manufacturers may malfunction 

on deployment. These inflators, described by Takata as the alpha 

population, have since been linked to at least four fatalities. 

This group of inflators has never been used in our vehicles. Our 

vehicles were equipped with Takata’s beta-population inflators. 

And in April 2013, Takata assured us that the manufacturing nonconformance that led to the alpha-population recall had been corVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
18 

rected. Chrysler Group engineers subsequently conducted a follow 

up investigation and confirmed the beta inflators benefited from an 

upgraded manufacturing process. 

In October 2013, we learned that one of our vehicles in southern 

Florida was subject to a high-pressure deployment involving a driver’s airbag and causing a personal injury. This remains the one incident of its kind involving one of our vehicles. In response to this 

incident and working with Takata, in consultation with NHTSA, 

we launched an investigation and conducted component testing. 

In May 2014, Takata again advised Chrysler Group of four incidents involving vehicles produced by other auto manufacturers. 

Those vehicles were equipped with Takata inflators similar to the 

inflators used in our vehicles. 

And then in June 2014, this year, Chrysler Group announced 

plans to replace beta-population inflators in certain vehicles registered or purchased in four areas known for high humidity, a factor believed to have played a role in high-pressure deployments. 

We will begin notifying affected customers on or before December 

19th, when they may schedule service for a replacement. Our action covers 371,000 vehicles in Florida, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and 

the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

It is important to understand the distinction between the alpha 

and beta populations. The alpha inflators are associated with the 

most severe events, a substantially higher incident rate, and were 

found to contain a defined manufacturing defect. None of our vehicles were built with an alpha-inflator population. 

Again, our vehicles were equipped with beta inflators. In our vehicles, these are known to have deployed as intended more than 

10,000 times across the U.S. and 830 times in the areas that I just 

mentioned that are covered by our field action. As I previously stated, there is one incident involving a high-pressure deployment in 

one of our vehicles. This took place in Florida, a state covered by 

the announced regional action. 

Chrysler Group continues to work with NHTSA as the situation 

evolves and will respond to the agency’s most recent request for additional information, which the company received on November 18. 

In closing, I would like to reiterate our belief that promoting and 

ensuring vehicle safety is a responsibility shared by automakers, 

suppliers, government, and consumers. Chrysler Group will continue to work collaboratively with Takata, NHTSA, and others to 

address this matter. 

I once again extend my thanks to the Committee for discussing 

this very important issue. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kunselman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SCOTT G. KUNSELMAN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND HEAD

OF VEHICLE SAFETY AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE, CHRYSLER GROUP LLC 

Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Thune, Members of the Committee . . . my 

name is Scott Kunselman and I am Senior Vice President and Head of Vehicle Safety and Regulatory Compliance at Chrysler Group LLC. 

I lead an organization with a mission of safeguarding our customers, a mission 

we embrace wholeheartedly. 

I’d like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to appear today to discuss this 

important matter. As you know, Chrysler’s review of our involvement with Takata 

airbags is ongoing. Hence, my testimony is based on my recollection today, and not 

19 

based on a comprehensive review of all relevant information under Chrysler’s possession or control. 

Today’s automobiles are among the most sophisticated and complex consumer 

goods on the market. Auto manufacturers are more committed than ever to developing advanced safety technologies to reduce fatalities and injuries resulting from 

motor vehicle crashes. On a daily basis, we work to design, engineer, and manufacture vehicles to withstand a myriad of operating conditions. 

Promoting and ensuring vehicle safety is a responsibility shared by auto makers, 

suppliers, government and consumers. Chrysler Group looks forward to continuing 

this collective engagement with Takata and NHTSA to help address the current situation. 

Chrysler Group has been actively engaged with Takata and NHTSA since Takata 

first informed us in April 2013 that certain air-bag inflators used by other auto 

makers may malfunction on deployment. These inflators, described by Takata as the 

Alpha population, have since been linked to at least four fatalities. 

They have never been used in our vehicles. 

Our vehicles were equipped with Takata’s Beta-population inflators. In April 

2013, Takata assured us that the manufacturing nonconformance that led to the 

Alpha-population recall had been corrected. 

Chrysler Group engineers subsequently conducted a follow-up investigation and 

confirmed the Beta inflators benefited from an upgraded manufacturing process. 

In October 2013, we learned that one of our vehicles in southern Florida was subject to a high-pressure deployment involving a driver’s-side air bag and caused a 

personal injury. This remains the one incident of its kind involving one of our vehicles. 

In response to this incident, and working with Takata and in consultation with 

NHTSA, we launched an investigation and conducted component-testing. 

In May 2014, Takata advised Chrysler Group of four incidents involving vehicles 

produced by other auto manufacturers. Those vehicles were equipped with Takata 

inflators similar to the inflators used in our vehicles. 

In June 2014, Chrysler Group announced plans to replace Beta-population inflators in certain vehicles registered or purchased in four areas known for high humidity—a factor believed to have played a role in high-pressure deployments. We will 

begin notifying affected customers on or before December 19th when they may 

schedule service. Our action covers approximately 371,000 vehicles in Florida, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

It is important to understand the distinction between the Alpha and Beta populations. The Alpha inflators are associated with the most severe events, a substantially higher incident rate, and were found to contain a defined manufacturing defect. None of our vehicles were built with an Alpha-population inflator. 

Our vehicles were equipped with Beta inflators. These are known to have deployed as intended more than 10,000 times in our vehicles across the U.S., with 830 

of those deployments occurring in the regions affected by our field action. As I previously stated, there is one incident involving a high-pressure deployment in one of 

our vehicles. This took place in Florida, a state covered by our announced regional 

field action. 

Chrysler Group continues to work with NHTSA as this situation evolves and we 

will respond to the agency’s most recent request for additional information, which 

the company received on November 18. 

In closing, I would like to reiterate our belief that promoting and ensuring vehicle 

safety is a responsibility shared by auto makers, suppliers, government, and consumers. Chrysler Group will continue to work collaboratively with Takata, NHTSA 

and others to address this matter. I once again extend my thanks to the Committee 

for discussing this important issue. 

Senator NELSON. Was that airbag deployment in south Florida, 

was it alpha or beta? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. It was from the beta population. 

Senator NELSON. And, therefore, of those that are in your vehicles, are you providing loaners and rental cars until they can get 

it fixed? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. As we deploy our field action, we will have 

rental cars available to those who need them. 

What I would reiterate, our number one goal, as you suggested 

at the opening, is to have the parts available and quickly service 

20 

the product. That is our number-one goal. When that can’t be accomplished, we will make loaner cars available. 

Senator NELSON. You said that is not until the middle of December. 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. We will launch that in the middle of December 

when the parts are available to initiate this action. 

Senator NELSON. So do they get loaners and rental cars in the 

next 3 weeks? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. In these 3 weeks’ time, concerned customers 

can contact us through our hotline, and we will on a case-by-case 

basis address those needs. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you for making that clear. 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Yes, sir. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Thune? 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Shimizu, you mentioned in your written testimony that you 

have confidence in your current engineering and manufacturing 

processes. My question is, what changes have you made to your 

manufacturing processes that give you the confidence to testify that 

the replacement Takata airbags are, in fact, safe? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, let me explain about the history of the recall—series of recalls. 

Since the 2007 or 2008 time period we have identified some 

issues identified, we identified the root cause of the issues, and we 

addressed these issues to fix the problems at the same time as we 

did the recall. Every time it happens, we identify the problems, we 

address all issues, and they are taken care of. 

And currently we believe the products we are producing right 

now are coming from the weather-controlled manufacturing processes. And we believe these products will work as designed and are 

safe. 

Senator THUNE. What change have you made in that process that 

leads you to believe that? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes. There are two major causes of the problems, 

according to what we studied in the past instances. 

One is density issues. The propellant was pressed from the powder, and we controlled the compression force to get the certain density. However, at that time, in the beginning of production, the 

compression force control did not work well and as we expected, according to investigation. So we changed the press machine, and 

now the new press machines can control the compression force for 

each cylinder. 

And then, at the same time, also, we have the device called autoreject device, which, if the compression force is not as designed, 

then it would detect that failure and the auto-rejection device 

would reject this propellant. So this device will take care of the 

issues of compression force, or you can say density issues. 

And the other one is humidity control. Ammonium nitrate is a 

material that has many advantages to its use; however, as is well 

known, it is sensitive to the humidity. So we put some special control of the humidity during the processes of propellant manufacturing and also inflator assemblies. 

However, because the handling issue existed in the past and also 

the humidity controls is well enough, so since then, we have conVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
21 

trolled the humidity during the process in the plant much tighter, 

so maybe, since then, we can control the humidity much better 

while we are manufacturing the propellant and the inflators. 

Senator THUNE. There are media reports, as I referenced earlier, 

that Takata may have been aware of the dangerous airbag defects 

as early as 2004. I know Takata has denied those allegations in the 

media, but we need answers from an independent source about 

when Takata became aware of the airbag defect and whether the 

defect was concealed from NHTSA. 

As you know, General Motors commissioned an internal investigation and released a public report on the ignition switch issue. 

Will Takata initiate an investigation and release a public report 

about whether there was any wrongdoing? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. According to the record of communication I confirmed, the date was May 2005 when we learned of the 2004 incident. And it was a communication including pictures also. That 

was the first time, according to my understanding, we started investigation of that incident. This was 2005. 

And if there was any communication with the automakers before 

that point, I am not aware of that because I was not directly involved. But, again, the record I confirmed shows the date as May 

2005. 

But, at that time, only pictures were available, no actual airbag 

model—the inflator was not available at this point. So we checked 

the pictures and we checked the production record, and, at that 

time, definitely the picture shows an anomaly. However, the record 

we checked doesn’t show any system error. And then we reported 

back to the automakers. 

Senator THUNE. Will you initiate an independent investigation? 

I know you are talking about some of the things that you looked 

into, but there is a real concern that Takata’s action here is not as 

independent as it should be. 

Have you given thought, or would you initiate some sort of an 

independent investigation, where someone outside the company 

takes a look at these things and reports back regarding whether or 

not there was wrongdoing? If not, why wouldn’t you do that? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, since I was not directly involved at that 

time, I can’t answer your question. 

Senator THUNE. I understand at that time you were not involved. 

My question is, prospectively, does it make sense to have an independent investigation similar to what General Motors did with the 

ignition switch issue? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes, Senator, I agree with that. And that is actually the reason we asked an independent research center to check 

our materials and processes too. So, actually, we are doing recently, 

but maybe not at that time. 

Senator THUNE. All right. We can revisit that issue. 

Very quickly, if I might, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Schostek, as we 

heard from Lieutenant Erdman, she referenced that her vehicle 

was serviced multiple times at dealerships after the recall but prior 

to the tragic accident. Is there some policy under which your dealers must notify a customer of safety matters when someone brings 

a car in like that? She didn’t receive notification until 3 days after 

her accident. 

22 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Indeed, Senator Thune, there is such a policy. 

And we failed Lieutenant Erdman, and our dealer failed Lieutenant Erdman. You heard her speak about notifications from Honda 

that she did not receive, so we did not effectively get word to her 

of her recalled vehicle. 

In addition, as she told you, she brought the car to a Honda dealer for other service. Her VIN number was not checked, and, as a 

result, we lost opportunities to repair her vehicle. We failed Lieutenant Erdman, and the dealer failed Lieutenant Erdman. 

We have a policy—our dealers are independent franchisees, as 

you know. We communicate to them regularly about the importance of checking each car when it comes in for service to see if 

there are any outstanding recalls. We communicated that in March 

of this year. We have communicated that a week or so ago. Very 

often we are doing that. 

If you would also look at the complete testimony I made, we are 

endeavoring to continuously improve the way we reach out to customers. I have to say, the populations involved in these recalls are 

older vehicles. It is harder to track down the current owner. 

That is not an excuse. We have to do better. We failed Lieutenant Erdman; our dealer failed Lieutenant Erdman. 

Senator THUNE. Because there are older vehicles, it would seem 

that the ideal time to provide notice is when somebody brings a vehicle in for service. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. I agree, Senator Thune, that, to our everlasting 

regret, we missed those opportunities. 

Senator THUNE. The mail is not the most effective way to get 

that message out there and these dealerships may be dropping the 

ball. So I am interested in knowing what you and Mr. Kunselman, 

with Chrysler—what the current policy is, and what you intend to 

do to improve notice in the future. 

My time is up, Mr. Chairman, but if I could get Mr. Kunselman 

to respond quickly to my question on what Chrysler’s current policy 

is and what it plans to do differently? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Certainly. 

Similar to what Mr. Schostek said, our policy clearly is to, 

through the dealership, communicate to consumers when they come 

to the dealership what open recalls are on their vehicle. In fact, the 

electronic systems that are available that identify the vehicle as it 

enters the dealership automatically has this information. It is readily available; they don’t have to work very hard to find it. 

It is our policy that they not only communicate but make every 

effort not to have that consumer leave the dealership without 

scheduling or performing that service on site. 

Senator THUNE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Kunselman, I would suggest that the next 

3 weeks might be critical and that you all need to be forward-leaning on that. 

And, Mr. Schostek, thank you for stepping forth and taking some 

responsibility, specifically with regard to the lieutenant. 

And, Mr. Shimizu, I would urge you, as Senator Thune has requested—and this committee will follow up—that this independent 

inquiry be quick and swift and public. 

23 

Senator Klobuchar? 

STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Thanks for holding this hearing. 

And thank you to our witnesses. 

I wish to say that I really believe there has to be a full investigation of what happened here. And I say this on behalf of a victim 

in my state, Shashi Chopra, who was driving in her car in North 

Oaks, Minnesota. It was a 2002 BMW, but this actually happened 

in 2013. And there had not been a recall. And that airbag exploded 

in her face, and she is permanently blind. 

And so that is why this looking back and trying to figure out 

what happened is very important to me. Why did it take Takata 

years to disclose the danger of the defective airbags despite numerous red flags? When did Takata know that the defective part was 

not limited to certain Honda vehicles? And did Takata conduct secret tests on those airbags and not report the findings? 

So, to me, those are really key questions on behalf of this constituent, in addition to the fact of how NHTSA handled this, which 

I am sure we will be dealing with with the next panel. 

So my first question, Mr. Schostek, is: Honda has been aware of 

these airbags for years, and you issued the first recall back in 

2008, and since then it has been expanded multiple times. Why do 

it that way? Why doesn’t Honda just order one expansive recall 

from the outset and avoid these additional recalls? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Yes, Senator. In 2007, we saw a series of inflator 

ruptures, defects, and began our investigation. In working with 

Takata, they identified specific manufacturing problems in their 

manufacturing plants that were related to the time that those inflators were produced which we put into our cars. 

We recalled based on that information. We expanded the recall 

when another different manufacturing issue was brought to our attention by Takata. And, in all, we did four recalls from 2008 

through 2011. 

I think it is important for the Committee to understand that 

those four recalls which we did had no geographic boundary. They 

had no geographic boundary. And the injuries that have occurred 

from ruptured—there have been 45 injuries because of ruptures in 

Honda vehicles. Forty-three of those correlate to the time of those 

Takata manufacturing concerns. And, to our regret, all four fatalities correspond to that same time. 

So we are talking about recalls that were done 2008 to 2011 because of different manufacturing issues that Takata made us aware 

of and where there was pretty strong data that shows this is where 

the majority of the problems have been occurring. And those recalls 

were not geographic—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I understand. Yes, I wasn’t saying they 

were regionally limited. It is just that you have these recalls after 

recalls after recalls when clearly there are these red flags. And the 

reason it matters so much to this constituent who is permanently 

blind is that, when this was in 2013, it just seems—and it is a different manufacturer. 

24 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. I understand. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. But if Takata had done a more global look 

at what was happening—by ‘‘global’’ I mean in all their airbags— 

I don’t think this would have happened. 

So I get to you, Mr. Shimizu. And that is, a November 6th New 

York Times article reported that Takata secretly conducted tests in 

2004 at your Auburn Hills, Michigan, location in response to the 

release-of-metal-fragments issue with the Honda Accord. And, according to the article, two of the steel inflators allegedly cracked 

during the test, and Takata executives ordered the testing data deleted and the airbag inflators destroyed. 

Takata has disputed the report, saying the story was based on 

some misunderstandings. What specifically about the report was 

inaccurate? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes, Senator. Again, regarding the incident of a 

Honda vehicle in 2004, according to my knowledge, Takata was informed in May 2005. And so there was no way we could do any 

tests related to that 2004 incident beforehand. 

And, also, the series of incidents is happened in 2007, and at 

that time actually we started an investigation to identify the problems. At that time, we had a series of tests of inflators, and all test 

results since 2007, the starting point of the investigation by us, are 

shared with automakers and also NHTSA. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. So just to get to the—we can go back 

to 2004 another time or in writing, but my issue is my constituent 

got blind in 2013. 

So, in 2010, BMW sent a letter to NHTSA that it was aware of 

the Takata airbags under Honda recalls—and, of course, she was 

driving a BMW—but that it had received documentation from 

Takata indicating that BMW vehicles were not affected. 

So what documentation did Takata provide to BMW? Because, 

remember, this is post-2007 now. We are not back in 2004; we are 

in 2013. 

So I am asking specifically about BMW. And if you don’t know, 

you can send it to me later, but I would like to know what documentation was provided to BMW about their situation. Because 

they told NHTSA that they knew about these problems with 

Honda’s recalls, but they had received documentation from Takata 

indicating that BMW vehicles were not affected. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, can I confirm one thing? Is it a driver-side 

airbag module you are talking about? 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I believe that this was the driver’s side, 

yes. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes. Let me answer based on what I know. 

We did the recall of the Honda vehicles at that time, and, as you 

mentioned, Senator, multiple times, is inflator code PSDI. And it 

is a dual-stage driver-side inflator. At that time, the inflator we 

supplied to BMW is a PSDI–4. And the PSDI–4 is a different construction of the inflator. It completely looks same from outside but 

is different from PSDI and produced in a different line. 

So that is the major reason, is that the PSDI was recalled but 

we answered to BMW that the PSDI–4 is a different structure so 

it won’t be—— 

25 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. And so when did you—this is my last 

question. When did you become aware that there were problems 

with the BMW airbags? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. I am sorry, I am not familiar with—I don’t know 

the actual date. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. All right. Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Just so it is clear to everybody what we are 

talking about, this is the middle of the steering wheel. This is the 

inflator and it fits in there. And then when the impact occurs, the 

explosion is supposed to come this way. But, as we said earlier, if 

the explosive force is too great, it breaks off this metal, and the 

metal starts coming through the middle. 

Every one of us at this hearing table have had constituents affected by this. In Florida, right in central Florida, we have had one 

death. And in the case of Corey Burdick, a fireman, a firefighter, 

he has no eye now for the rest of his life. Very similar to the situation of the lieutenant, but, in this case, the metal had penetrated 

his actual eye. So this is why we are so concerned about this and 

to get to the bottom of this. 

Senator Ayotte? 

STATEMENT OF HON. KELLY AYOTTE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator AYOTTE. I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking 

Member for holding this very important hearing. 

I wanted to follow up, Mr. Shimizu, on a question that Senator 

Klobuchar had asked you about with regard to the report in The 

New York Times about the 2004 secret tests by Takata. 

As I heard your testimony in response to her question, you said 

that Takata wasn’t informed until 2005 about a particular incident. 

And what incident was that? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. It was an incident that happened in 2004 in a 

Honda vehicle. And according to my information, the driver was injured. 

Senator AYOTTE. OK. And then you said that there were a series 

of incidents in 2007 that prompted an investigation within Takata? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes. 

Senator AYOTTE. When was NHTSA first notified of any of this? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. According to my knowledge, there were three incidents that happened during the year of 2007. That is the actual 

three to deeply investigate the root cause of the problems. 

Senator AYOTTE. With the 2005 incident, was there any investigation conducted within Takata? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. We did. We received the picture, not the actual 

module, but we received the picture, and our engineers checked the 

picture and also production record based on the serial number provided. And then, as I said, our engineer recognized an anomaly 

from the picture. However, the production record didn’t show any 

system error or any abnormality from the production record. 

And, at that time, there was not enough technical evidence at the 

time that we believed it required the further investigation or action 

at that time.j 

Senator AYOTTE. So you didn’t take any further steps to investigate the anomaly that your engineers saw. Did you report it to 

26 

anyone, or did you talk to NHTSA about it or Honda or anyone 

else? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. According to my understanding, we didn’t inform 

NHTSA at that time, but we reported back to Honda. 

Senator AYOTTE. Throughout this, I would like to understand 

whether Takata believes that, as it receives reports—and I would 

like to also inquire of Mr. Schostek of Honda. 

When it received reports of both incidents of injury and unfortunately these horrible incidents of death, when do you believe that 

you reported them to NHTSA? And do you believe you have complied with the TREAD Act? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Do you want me to answer that, Senator? 

Senator AYOTTE. Yes. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. And, if I might, to supplement the discussion you 

have been having with Mr. Shimizu, the first event of a rupture in 

a Honda vehicle occurred in 2004. We received notice of that event 

through our legal department in May 2004. We are still checking 

our records, but, as Mr. Shimizu said, what we can find now is that 

we provided that information to Takata in 2005. We did report that 

2004 event on our TREAD report, which is provided to NHTSA. 

As we were discussing, in 2007 there were several events, and 

it was at this time that we and Takata engaged in the beginnings 

of an investigation. Ultimately, in that investigation, Takata made 

us a presentation that showed the 2007 events and the manufacturing deficiencies that caused the defect and also compared it to 

that 2004 event. 

The 2007 event, those manufacturing times clearly show improper density in the inflator propellant. The 2004 event, ultimately it was fully investigated, and it shows a proper density for 

the inflator propellant. 

So it is not an excuse, Senator, but that information we could 

have gleaned maybe sooner in 2004 would not have helped us predict the events in 2007. As I look back on our activity, I think we 

acted with urgency, but do I think we could have moved faster in 

some respects? I absolutely do. 

Have we met our obligations to report under TREAD? We have 

not. And I think as the Committee may know, we have an ongoing 

internal review about that process and that information is due to 

be provided by Honda to NHTSA this coming Monday. We will provide it on time, and we will share with them any gaps or deficiencies in our TREAD reporting at that time. 

Senator AYOTTE. So I know that my time has expired here, but 

let me just say that I echo the comments of my colleagues. This 

really does warrant a thorough investigation, because these timeframes, the reporting requirements, the questions that have been 

raised. 

And, as you know, GM undertook this activity with regard to the 

ignition switch, and, given the seriousness of this matter, I would 

think that Takata and Honda would want to undertake the same. 

So let me urge you to do that, as well. 

And my time is up, but, Mr. Kunselman, let me just say I am 

troubled about the December 19 piece because I think you should, 

instead of waiting for people to call you with concerns, should affirmatively reach out to your customers while they are waiting till 

27 

December 19, regardless of how you view the beta airbag differently than the alpha. So I think that—I am very concerned 

about that December 19 date. 

Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator Ayotte, for underscoring 

that point. 

Senator Heller? 

Senator HELLER. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and to the Ranking 

Member, thank you also for having this and holding this hearing. 

Mr. Shimizu, I did read your testimony, and it does discuss your 

anguish, and I can understand that, your commitment to address 

this issue properly and promptly. However, I think there was something that was amiss in your testimony, and that was that nowhere 

does it say that Takata takes full responsibility. 

So I want to ask you right now, does Takata take full responsibility for this tragic defect? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Excuse me, can I ask my interpreter to confirm 

your question? 

Senator HELLER. Sure. 

[Confers with interpreter.] 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, can I confirm the tragedy this time— 

which tragedy are you talking about? 

Senator HELLER. I am talking about the five deaths. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Oh, five deaths. 

Senator HELLER. Do you take full responsibility for those tragic 

deaths? Does Takata take responsibility? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Excuse me. 

[Confers with interpreter.] 

Mr. SHIMIZU. I understand. We recognize the three victims’ case 

as relating to our products during accident. But to my understanding, two others are still under investigation. So—— 

Senator HELLER. So, OK, let’s take the three. Does Takata take 

full responsibility for those three deaths? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. My understanding is that our products in this accident were anomalies. So that caused an accident. From that sense, 

yes. 

Senator HELLER. OK. 

Mr. Schostek, I got a phone call from my wife. Recently, a ‘‘Good 

Morning, America’’ piece was done on this issue. And she is probably doing what every parent is doing in America today. We happen to own a 2007 Honda Civic. And we didn’t buy it brand-new, 

so we probably didn’t get recall notices on that. And my wife would 

remember if she did. 

And I am going to give to you the same question that she asked 

me. If our 18-year-old daughter were to drive that car today, a 

2007 Honda Civic, would she be safe? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator, we have several different analyses of 

what the problems are with these airbags in our vehicles. 

As I mentioned before, the recalls that we did in 2008 through 

2011, we have connected those to Takata manufacturing issues, 

and we urge customers—and those have no geographic limits—we 

urge customers to get those vehicles repaired because there is a 

risk. There is a risk. 

28 

With regard to the more recent regional recalls, where there is 

not as much information available as to what is the cause of the 

ruptures in the airbag—that is where there is a concern about humidity, and we have the same concern about humidity. We looked 

at the 45 injuries that have occurred; 17 of them have occurred in 

Florida, also Puerto Rico and Texas. The large majority of these 

issues are occurring in southern areas. 

So we are trying to understand if there is any additional risk out 

there. And when we find risk, we act to recall. It is our responsibility to recall those vehicles when we find risks. 

Senator HELLER. As a parent, we did run the VIN number 

through NHTSA’s site, and they said that a 2006 or earlier vehicle 

would have been subject to the recall but not 2007. 

How can you assure me today that a 2007 vehicle is safe for any 

young adult on the road to drive today? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator, with your indulgence and understanding 

that I am not sure of all the exact models as I sit here in terms 

of the breakpoints in the recalls, if that vehicle was subject to a 

recall, we want it fixed. If that vehicle was not subject to a recall, 

we have not determined risk, so we would deem it safe for the driver. 

[Mr. Schostek sent the following letter to Senator Heller the next 

day:] 

HONDA NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

Washington, DC, November 21, 2014 

Hon. DEAN HELLER, United States Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Senator Heller: 

I want to follow up our discussion yesterday morning about the safety of your 

daughter’s 2007 Civic. I hesitated to respond to your question only because I did 

not have readily available the details of the specific recalls, if any, applicable to your 

daughter’s vehicle. I have now had a chance to look into that question. 

The driver’s airbag inflator in your daughter’s vehicle was not made by Takata. 

It was made by Autoliv. The passenger airbag inflator was manufactured by Takata, 

specifically a PSPl-X model. We are unaware of any field ruptures of the PSPl-X 

inflator. It has not been subject to any recall or service campaigns in any part of 

the country. Incidentally, you should know that my own daughter, who lives in Tennessee, drives a 2008 Civic. It is equipped with precisely the same airbags. My wife 

and I are comfortable with her driving the car. 

I want you to know that Honda is committed to addressing the needs and concerns of our customers and making clear that we stand behind the safety and quality of our products. It is our priority to always act within the best interests of our 

customers. 

Sincerely, 

RICK SCHOSTEK, 

Executive Vice President. 

Senator HELLER. We had a conversation earlier in my office, and 

you said it was difficult to determine the safety of the device because of propriety reasons. 

Would I be accurate in assuming that you can’t be assured, 100 

percent assured, not knowing that the necessary changes were 

made in these airbags? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator Heller, we are not chemical propellant 

experts at Honda. There is proprietary technology involved. 

There have been improvements made by Takata as time has 

gone on. For example, there are differences in the shape of the proVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
29 

pellant wafer. I am not an engineer. To me, as a layperson, it 

makes sense that that different shape may result in a better manufacturing process. 

But, respectfully, Senator, I would defer questions about the intellectual property and the proprietary aspects of the chemistry to 

Takata. 

Senator HELLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, my time has run out, but I think I represent 

every parent across America, concerned with their young adults 

and the cars that they are driving today, as to whether or not they 

have an airbag sitting in front of them today that may cause severe 

injuries, as we have heard in testimony today, and even death. 

So, anyway, thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Heller, let the record show that the 

pauses that occurred to your two direct questions to the two gentlemen, that those pauses, I can say for this Senator, were painful. 

And perhaps on the basis of Mr. Schostek’s response, you better tell 

your daughter not to drive south in her Honda. 

Senator Markey? 

STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. 

In the audience today is Kim Kopf. Kim is sitting right over here. 

Her sister was killed in Arizona in November 2003 sitting in the 

passenger side of a Subaru model that contained defective Takata 

airbags. But that Subaru model has only been recalled in humid 

states, which Arizona certainly is not. 

So my first question to you is, Mr. Shimizu, would you, first of 

all, right now, given your testimony, agree with the position that 

NHTSA has taken, recalling—you have said so far that Takata 

strongly agrees with the position stated by NHTSA that the recalls 

be limited to the so-called humid states. 

But on Tuesday, NHTSA finally changed its position and called 

for a nationwide recall of all impacted driver-side Takata airbags. 

Does Takata support NHTSA’s new nationwide recall? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. I understand NHTSA’s change from regional recall 

to national recall. The reason behind is, I understand, one incident 

that happened in North Carolina. And—— 

Senator MARKEY. Do you agree or disagree with NHTSA’s call for 

a nationwide recall, Mr. Shimizu? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, it is hard for me to answer ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no.’’ 

So if you allow me—— 

Senator MARKEY. It is not hard for you to answer ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no.’’ 

Do you support the nationwide recall of airbags that the Department of Transportation has issued, yes or no? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Again, Senator, if we identify the Takata data from 

any incident to support NHTSA’s new directions, then we will definitely work together with NHTSA and automakers to take care of 

the issues. 

Senator MARKEY. I am going to take that as a no, you do not 

agree with the decision by NHTSA. And I just think you are plain 

wrong here. And I think that it is very disturbing, I think, to any 

American family who has a vehicle with a Takata airbag to think 

30 

that that is your position today after all that we have learned. I 

think that your company is making a big mistake in not supporting 

this recall wholeheartedly. 

Now, let me move on, if I can, to you, Mr. Schostek, and you, Mr. 

Kunselman. Kim Kopf’s sister was killed with a passenger-side 

bag. And I think that there is kind of a roulette-like quality to this, 

hoping that the airbag that was installed in people’s cars was on 

the driver’s side—that is now being recalled—but not the passenger’s side. 

I don’t think that is right. And I don’t think anyone should have 

to worry that any of their family members are in danger. Kim Kopf 

has lost her sister forever. 

Does Honda support a recall of passenger-side bags, as well, 

given what we now know about the ticking time bombs that each 

one of these airbags potentially is as a risk to American families? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator Markey, there are two confirmed airbag 

ruptures in testing—passenger airbag inflator ruptures—in Honda 

vehicles. We have not experienced any injuries. 

They are part of the SIC, or the safety improvement campaign. 

We have actually recalled passenger airbags in 10 states. We are 

actively working on that right now. Again, those are concentrated 

in the humid areas—— 

Senator MARKEY. Do you support passenger-side recalls that 

would be the equivalent of the driver-side recalls for these airbags, 

Mr. Schostek? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. We support passenger-side—we have ongoing a 

passenger-side airbag recall. And, for us, the key is to understand 

what the technical information is that—— 

Senator MARKEY. Do you support not a voluntary or geographic 

recall but a nationwide recall of passenger-side bags, yes or no, Mr. 

Schostek? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. As to a national recall, we have not refused. We 

are actively considering that, Senator Markey. Right now, our priority is in the southern states. 

Senator MARKEY. You should be saying ‘‘yes’’ right now to that, 

Mr. Schostek. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Sir, we—— 

Senator MARKEY. Mr. Kunselman, for Chrysler, yes or no, do you 

support a nationwide recall? Not voluntary, not geographic, nationwide. Do you support it, yes or no? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Respectfully, Senator, I want to point out that 

the answer to this question obviously is one that we interact with 

NHTSA on and make decisions quickly based on the data. I haven’t 

received that specific request, but I would respond quickly using 

our rigorous internal process to make that decision in a 5-day period. 

Senator MARKEY. Look it, these airbags are the same, whether 

they hurt the lieutenant or they killed Kim Kopf’s sister. They are 

the same. And they should be recalled. And each of you should be 

today saying that you support that wholeheartedly. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for making it 

so direct, yes or no, just like Senator Heller did, as well. 

Senator Blumenthal? 

31 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, I know that you are here in good faith, so I hope you 

won’t take anything I am going to say personally. But, you know, 

it strikes me that these airbags failed, but the system failed equally, if not more. 

And, first of all, I want to join Senator Markey in his calling for 

a national recall of all cars with these airbags on the passenger as 

well as the driver’s side. We have made that point previously, he 

and I. 

I am also calling on the Secretary of Transportation to immediately accelerate the replacement process, looking forward. At the 

current rate of production by Takata of 300,000 airbags a month, 

there is no way that there are going to be sufficient products available. 

So I ask you, will you cooperate in an accelerated replacement 

process so that competitors of Takata will be called upon to supply 

those products instead of Takata? 

To each of the—Mr. Schostek and Mr. Kunselman. 

Ms. KUNSELMAN. I can start. 

Obviously, I mention again that we have an obligation to our customers. Accelerating the production of parts and getting this process done quicker is directly—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And so that is a ‘‘yes.’’ 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. I agree. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And, Mr. Schostek, will you take nonTakata parts to replace those airbags? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator, we want to get these cars fixed. The 

safety of our customers is the highest priority. All options are on 

the table. We will look at every option. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I am going to ask the Secretary of 

Transportation to order that you do so, but I hope you will cooperate. 

You know, when I say the system failed, we are here because of 

delay, nondisclosure, as well as potential deception, and concealment. In fact, both of your companies entered into settlements that 

were deliberately and purposefully concealed in court orders. 

Damian Fernandez in Florida, Ashley Parham—the first in 2006; 

Ashley Parham in Oklahoma City in 2009; Jennifer Griffin, Orange 

County, Florida, 2009; Gurjit Rathore, Virginia, 2009; Kristy Williams in Georgia, 2010. The first was driving a Chrysler. The others were driving a Honda. Your companies settled with them. 

If that information had been made public, more people would 

know about this deadly defective airbag and fewer people would 

have been killed. Do you agree? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Respectfully—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek. 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Respectfully, I would highlight that that incident did occur in the fall of 2013. I highlighted it in my opening 

statement. And while it is our policy when we enter into confidential settlement terms, the existence of that incident was not concealed in any way. It was—— 

32 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. But the details were. And the devil and 

the death was in the details here. Don’t you agree? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. I would ask for a definition of ‘‘details,’’ respectfully. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, the details of how and why and 

what the role of the airbag was in that crash. 

Mr. Schostek, do you agree? 

And let me ask both of you, will your companies commit to declining from now on to enter into these kinds of secret settlements 

and concealing the facts surrounding crashes that result from defective products? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Yes, Senator. Two of the cases that you cite, with 

Ms. Parham and Ms. Rathore, we provided information about those 

inflator ruptures to NHTSA. We have talked about them to 

Takata—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. But not to the public. Your company deliberately concealed the facts that otherwise would have been known 

to the public as a result of this court action. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. I respectfully disagree. Ms. Rathore’s case was reported in the TREAD material. I understand your point that Ms. 

Parham’s was not. But we were in talking to NHTSA 16 days after 

that TREAD report was due, giving them all the information we 

had about inflators. 

With respect to confidential settlements, our legal system recognizes confidential settlements, but we do not intend to hide behind 

settlements. The safety information that comes out during lawsuits 

should be available to NHTSA, and, as appropriate, we could support the principle of other government entities as well. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Mr. Shimizu, I want to show you some 

standards that are used in testing American cars. These are standards used to test; they are specifically required by our American 

law to test. 

Were those standards used prior to the sending of those airbags 

to these American companies? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. I am not familiar with this, but I am sure the responsible person in the company knows about this. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, someone in your company knows 

about it, but you don’t know whether those standards were used? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Not in detail. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I would like to get an answer from 

you in writing after this hearing that these standards—they are 

U.S. car—24 standards. They apply to the substances used in the 

airbag, the hermetic sealing of those airbags to protect them from 

moisture. 

You are unable to provide this committee an assurance that 

those standards were used and applied. I want to know from someone in your company, under oath, whether those standards were 

applied to every airbag design, in other words if the designs were 

changed over the years, and whether they were tested with those 

standards when there were reports of defects. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, yes, if you allow me, I will talk to our responsible engineers, and then I will get back to the Committee as 

soon as possible. Is this acceptable? 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. 

33 

And let me just conclude. I hope that your companies will join 

in supporting the legislation that I have introduced, sunshine-inlitigation legislation, that would prevent these kinds of settlements 

that contributed to the problem. The courts ought not to be 

complicit. And I hope that your companies will cooperate and join 

in supporting this kind of legislation. 

Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you. 

Senator McCaskill? 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you. 

Mr. Shimizu, is your company the only company that uses ammonium nitrate that manufactures airbags? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, I don’t know in detail what kind of materials exactly our competitors are using, but I heard that some of 

our competitors are also using a similar kind of material. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, the information we have is there are 

four or five companies that make airbags and that your company 

is the only one that is using ammonium nitrate. 

Let me ask you this question. Are you still using ammonium nitrate in the manufacture of your airbags? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Yes, Senator. 

Senator MCCASKILL. OK. Well, that is worrisome to me. 

And let me now move to Chrysler and Honda. I am confused, and 

I guarantee if I am confused your customers are confused. 

The letter that Chrysler sent to NHTSA on June 20, 2014—I 

would like these three letters to be made part of the record, Mr. 

Chairman, if we could. 

Senator NELSON. Without objection. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

CHRYSLER—CHRYLSLER GROUP LLC 

Auburn Hills, MI, June 20, 2014 

Mr. FRANK BORRIS, 

Director, Office of Defect Investigation, 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Mr. Borris: 

This letter is Chrysler’s response to your request that Chrysler consider a regional 

field action to address a risk of airbag inflator failures that was described in a letter 

from Takata Holdings Inc. to the Office of Defect Investigations (ODI), dated 

June 11, 2104, and that was discussed in a conference call with several manufacturers, including Chrysler, on June 13, 2014. 

Although Chrysler has not at this time, made a determination of a defect in the 

subject airbag inflators, it is Chrysler’s intention to conduct a field action to replace 

the driver airbag inflators built between January 1, 2004 and June 30, 2007, as well 

as the passenger airbag inflators built between June 1, 2000 and July 31, 2004 in 

the Chrysler vehicles located in the regions identified by Takata (Florida, Hawaii, 

Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands). 

Chrysler is currently working with Takata to identify the serial numbers for the 

suspect inflators. This information will be used to establish the potentially affected 

vehicles in the regions identified by Takata. Once this affected vehicle population 

is identified, Chrysler will provide the information to the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA). 

As of this date, Chrysler is aware of only a single incident in a Chrysler vehicle 

involving the suspect inflators. 

Sincerely, 

REGINALD MODLIN, 

Regulatory Affairs—Director. 

34 


1120SMIT1.eps
35 


1120SMIT2.eps
36 


1120SMIT3.eps
37 


1120NANC1.eps
38 


1120NANC2.eps
39 


1120NANC3.eps
40 

Senator MCCASKILL. Listen to this paragraph. 

‘‘Although Chrysler has not at this time made a determination of 

a defect in the subject airbag inflators, it is Chrysler’s intention to 

conduct a field action to replace the driver airbag inflators between 

June’’ . . . ‘‘as well as the passenger airbag inflators between’’ . . . 

So I am guessing a lawyer wrote that paragraph, because then 

I have a letter from Honda that says, ‘‘We have determined a potential defect relating to motor vehicle safety exists.’’ That was 

written in 2008. 

And then we have another letter from Honda in 2014 saying, 

‘‘We have decided to conduct a safety improvement campaign. We 

have not made a determination that a safety defect exists.’’ 

Then you go down the list of the notifications, and I am going 

to start in June 2014. We have a service campaign, then a service 

campaign, then a Honda safety recall, and then a Mazda service 

campaign, and then a Mitsubishi service campaign, then a Nissan 

safety recall, then a Nissan service campaign, then a Nissan safety 

recall. Then we have a Subaru safety recall. Then we have a 

Subaru service campaign. 

Do you understand the issue here? What is going on here is a 

refusal to characterize a problem in a way that is clearly understandable to the consumer. 

We have had more recalls in the last year and a half in American 

car manufacturing than in the history of American car manufacturing, probably more in the last year than we have had in many, 

many years combined. The problem is I don’t think that people that 

are driving these cars understand the risk. Because you guys aren’t 

even comfortable with being consistent as to whether or not you 

are telling NHTSA it is a service campaign or a safety recall. 

In your mind, Mr. Kunselman, other than avoiding litigation and 

liability, why would you differentiate between a service call and a 

safety recall? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Yes, Senator. I would like to start by saying it 

is Chrysler’s policy that, regardless of which way these actions are 

initiated or how they are characterized, recall or field service campaign, the customer-facing information is identical. We file the 

same information with NHTSA, and the mailings that go to our 

customers are the same. 

Senator MCCASKILL. So do the mailings say that this is a safety 

recall and you are in danger and you need to get this car in? Or 

does it say, this is a notice that this part has been recalled, without 

any emphasis on safety? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. It is my understanding that it does characterize 

it as a safety concern, yes. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, I would like to see, for all of those 

ones that involve your companies, all the service campaign versus 

safety recall, I would like to see the notices that went to your drivers. I would like to see the language of those. 

And if, in fact, the language is the same that goes to the drivers, 

why is the language different to NHTSA? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. I guess the characterization, in terms of how 

we characterize these events—again, Chrysler is agreeing to do this 

with one incident and a lack of understanding of root cause. 

41 

I know this will sound like engineering terminology, but the 

thing that is still open in this instance with these beta inflators is 

an absence of a defined root cause. In absence of a defined root 

cause, it makes the next steps difficult in terms of what to do. 

I think this is a nuance of definition as to why you see these 

characterized this way. 

Senator MCCASKILL. And, Mr. Schostek, do you say the same? Is 

the reason that there is a difference in characterization to 

NHTSA—is your notification to your drivers identical as to whether 

or not it is a service campaign or a safety recall? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Yes, Senator, I think there is confusion here and 

the regulatory framework that we are operating under has certain 

terms that are part of that regulatory framework that we are 

using. 

I am not an engineer. I have asked the very same question you 

have asked: What is the practical difference for the customer? And 

I have been told: None. They need to bring their car in. 

Now, in terms of how we are looking for evidence of risk and so 

forth, that should be the manufacturers’ responsibility, working 

with suppliers and working with NHTSA. 

But, Senator, I would support, if we could make this clearer for 

consumers, Honda is happy to work with—— 

Senator MCCASKILL. Are you sending the same notification to 

your drivers whether or not it is a safety recall or whether or not 

it is a service campaign? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator, I would like to double check, but I believe they are very similar notifications whether it is a service campaign or a safety recall. 

[Mr. Schostek submitted the following letter on December 1:] 

HONDA—HONDA NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

Washington, DC, December 1, 2014 

Hon. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, United States Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Senator McCaskill: 

I want to follow up on our discussion about the letters consumers receive when 

Honda conducts a safety recall versus those related to a safety improvement campaign. You asked me whether the letters customers receive from Honda are identical. To answer that question, please see the attached letters to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), both dated June 19, 2014. 

At that time, Honda had identified a potential safety defect in passenger airbag 

inflators of certain 2002 and 2003 Honda and Acura vehicles. We initiated a safety 

recall based on that determination. Included in our communication to NHTSA was 

a draft letter to consumers that stated the nature of the problem as follows: ‘‘If an 

affected airbag deploys, the increased internal pressure may cause the inflator to 

rupture. Metal fragments could be propelled upward toward the windshield, or 

downward toward the front passenger’s foot well, potentially causing injury to a vehicle occupant.’’ The letter then directed vehicle owners to schedule an appointment 

with a dealership to have their vehicle repaired, at no cost to them. 

On that same day, at the request of NHTSA, Honda also initiated a safety improvement campaign (SIC) for the passenger’s airbag inflator in certain 2003, 2004, 

and 2005 Honda and Acura vehicles. Although the transmittal letter to NHTSA distinguished the SIC from a recall, our proposed letter to customers identified the action as a safety recall. Honda described the problem as follows: ‘‘If an affected airbag deploys, the increased internal pressure may cause the inflator to rupture. 

Metal fragments could be propelled upward through the windshield, or downward 

toward the front passenger’s foot well, potentially causing injury to a vehicle occupant.’’ Consumers also received the same instructions to take their vehicle to a dealership for repair at no cost to them. 

42 

I want you to know that Honda is committed to addressing the needs and concerns of our customers, especially when it involves a safety defect recall. Please feel 

free to call Ed Cohen or me at 202–661-4400 with any further questions you may 

have. 

Sincerely, 

RICK SCHOSTEK, 

Executive Vice President, 

Honda North America. 


1120NLEW1.eps
43 


1120NLEW2.eps
44 


1120NLEW3.eps
45 


1120NLEW4.eps
46 


1120NLEW5.eps
47 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Our interest is to tell that customer to please 

call, please come to a dealership, please get the part replaced, 

whether that replacement is for the purpose of an identified defect, 

which is the recall, or the purpose of getting more information, 

which is the safety improvement campaign. I think we should help 

the consumer by not having it be so unclear to them. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, I will tell you what. If I get a letter 

saying, ‘‘We are investigating something; would you bring your car 

in so you can help us?’’, I am busy. If I get a letter that says, ‘‘Hey, 

you know, if you drive this, you could have a piece of shrapnel embedded in your eye, if your daughter is sitting in the seat next to 

you she could be blinded or you could die,’’ that is a lot different 

than, ‘‘Hey, we are checking out an investigation; could you bring 

it in so we could check it out?’’ 

I mean, I think that too many lawyers are—I mean, we found 

this in GM, as you all know. You had to have followed it closely. 

There were lawyers that were trying to avoid litigation. There were 

not lawyers that were trying to make sure every consumer knew 

the danger. 

And we have to get out of this defensive crouch about liability 

litigation and get into an offensive position about making sure drivers are safe. And until your companies decide to do that, until 

NHTSA is a more able and aggressive partner in that, consumers 

are going to be in the dark. 

I mean, the exchange between Senator Heller about whether or 

not his daughter was safe was incredible. He is a United States 

Senator, and he is asking somebody in charge of the company that 

made his daughter’s car whether it is safe for her to drive it, and 

it was clear you weren’t sure how to answer it. That is a problem. 

We have a problem. 

So we are going to keep having these hearings, and we are going 

to keep working on legislation, and we are going to keep yelling at 

NHTSA until we get this right for the driving public. This is unacceptable. 

Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Cantwell? 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I would like to follow up on a couple of points that my colleagues have made. And I share their frustration and angst over 

this situation when there is such a pause or it is, ‘‘We are just 

doing what NHTSA says.’’ I think today’s hearing is a very good 

opportunity for us to discuss what are the changes to be made. Not 

what NHTSA requires today, but now that we are here, what do 

we need to improve the situation. 

But first I want to follow up on this airbag recall situation as it 

relates to the passenger side. So I wanted to ask you, Mr. Shimizu, 

would you be able to meet demand if it was for all the passengerside airbags? Would you be able to meet that demand? Or do we 

48 

need the Secretary to help in expediting this with other manufacturers? 

So I heard Mr. Schostek say, well, if that is—you know, to Mr. 

Blumenthal’s question, there was a little bit of—I read hesitancy 

into that, ‘‘Well, we will see what NHTSA says.’’ So I am asking 

you now, can you meet that demand on the passenger-side bags? 

If not, let’s get to the bottom line here. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. We committed to provide for replacement kits, 

which is in the beginning of this recall of the passenger-side airbag. 

Currently, we are producing 300,000 kits per month in total. 

And we understand we have to speed up preparing for replacement kits, so we will add two more lines in January. And that we 

also committed in the beginning, and we are going to do as committed, and the supply ability of replacement parts to increase to 

450,000 kits. 

And, also, we do some effort—so we have four inflator plants 

globally and then the plant in Mexico, which is mainly producing 

the inflator for replacement, but they are running at full capacity 

right now. We found out the German plant has some extra capacity, so we decided to move some of the products from Mexico to 

Germany to open up the capacity in Mexico so Mexico can open up 

some capacity to generate more inflators for replacement kits. 

Senator CANTWELL. So you are saying you have capacity. Is that 

what you are saying? You have capacity and the secretary doesn’t 

need to take action? 

It shouldn’t be a mystery here. We should be clear whether we 

need more capacity by other suppliers or not. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. We understand we have to speed up the replacement kits. Even if we increase to 450,000, that is maybe still not 

speedy enough. So we are discussing with automakers for any 

other option we can take to speed up the replacement. 

And answering to your questions, I am not sure what kind of 

things—— 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, maybe I will ask the other two. 

Mr. Schostek, do you think that we need to have the Secretary 

take action, yes or no? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. At the present time, we have enough supply for 

the demand, but the demand could change based on future actions. 

So I am not in a position to judge Takata’s ultimate capacity here. 

For us, all options should be on the table to get parts replaced in 

customer vehicles. 

Senator CANTWELL. OK. I have about a minute left, and I want 

to get to another point, but I am going to follow up on this with 

each of you and with the Secretary. 

But why are we not here today discussing why not make manufacturers responsible for 100 percent recall success? 

The gaps that I see—I mean, first of all, I don’t see an e-mail 

system here, I don’t see an AMBER Alert, and yet we have people 

who are dying. And we are hiding behind, ‘‘Well, we had an agreement, and we did a settlement,’’ and then in the settlement nobody 

really knew what was going on. 

My understanding is Germany has more like 100 percent recall 

success. We have a gap here with people who are second purVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:53 Jul 01, 2015 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\95291.TXT JACKIE
49 

chasers not knowing, because you are communicating with first, is 

my understanding, first buyers. 

So why not just say that you are responsible for getting 100 percent recalled? The cars are yours. They are out there in the public. 

There are lots of tools we can use. But why not set a better goal 

than what we have? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. One hundred percent would be what we would 

want to achieve, too. And that is what we are trying to achieve 

right now. We are trying different methods. We haven’t got 100 

percent. And especially in older vehicle populations, we have been 

unable to achieve 100 percent. 

I don’t know the average recall completion rate. I believe, but I 

would want to check further, I believe it is about 60, 70, 80 percent. To me, that is not good enough. 

Senator CANTWELL. And my understanding is that Germany is 

getting, like, 100 percent. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Right. And I would just submit, Senator, in my 

full written opening statement, we talk about that. Germany, to my 

understanding, has a process whereby, before a car can get registered, it needs to be checked if there are any outstanding recalls, 

similar to in some states in the United States where an emissions 

certificate precedes registration. 

Please don’t misunderstand. Honda is going to use any new tools 

or any innovative tools to find customers and get these recalls 

done. That is what we want to have happen. But there could be 

some support on the state level, where these programs are implemented for recommendations such as that. 

Senator CANTWELL. I think the more the manufacturers can talk 

about not what NHTSA does and requires today but what you 

would like to see, the better that will be. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Rubio? 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator RUBIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This question is to all three of the companies involved. Can you 

guarantee us here today that no one driving one of these vehicles 

outside of the territories currently covered—Florida, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the places with high humidity— 

if you were driving one of these vehicles with one of these devices 

in it outside of those territories, can you guarantee us that no one 

will be injured by this device in the way we have seen in other 

places? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Maybe I will start. 

As I mentioned in the opening statement, all issues from the past 

incidents or problems are already addressed and taken care of. And 

according to my understanding, I believe that the products we are 

producing right now, including replacement kits, are produced 

under well-controlled production processes and should work as designed and are safe. 

And regarding a regional recall, you mentioned over the four 

states for the high absolute humidity area, according to our record, 

50 

these areas are the focus due to the high absolute humidity environment—— 

Senator RUBIO. No, I understand. I am sorry, I don’t mean to cut 

you off. I have limited time. 

My question is pretty straightforward, though. If you bought a 

car and you have one of these cars with this device in it and you 

have spent the entire time in North Dakota or South Dakota or 

Wisconsin, not one of these places, can you tell us here today that 

you are confident that no one will be injured in the way we saw, 

for example, in Florida? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. If it is not currently under recall, covered by recall, 

I believe our products in the car works as designed and are safe, 

as I said before. 

Senator RUBIO. OK. So we are never going to read about a story 

of someone outside of these areas covered by the recall that has 

been injured in the same way that we saw, for example, in Florida. 

Is that your testimony? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. According to my knowledge, again, I believe these 

vehicles are considered to be safe. 

Senator RUBIO. OK. 

What about, then, did the other companies have a—— 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator Rubio, we have recalls outstanding that 

are connected to Takata manufacturing issues. We did these recalls 

2008 through 2011. They had no geographic limit. Those are 

uncompleted recalls, and I was just discussing with Senator Cantwell our struggles to get those completed. 

Those customers, we want them to come in. There is risk there. 

We want those customers to come in. We want to get to 100 percent—— 

Senator RUBIO. My question is people that are not covered by the 

recall for various reasons—where they purchased the car, et cetera. 

You are talking about the recalls that had nothing to do with geographic limits. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Yes, sir. 

Senator RUBIO. I am talking about the ones that do, the ones 

that—maybe that is not specific to your company. 

If your car is not currently covered under the existing recall, you 

have nothing to worry about? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. We have identified higher risk, sir, in the humid 

areas. And that is what we are still working on right now, to gather more information about those vehicles, both there and in nonhumid states. 

Senator RUBIO. Yes? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Senator, in my opening statement, I characterized this situation as an ongoing investigation. And at least once 

during the testimony I reiterated that, in the absence of a defined 

root cause for the beta population of vehicles, I think we would find 

it difficult to guarantee 100 percent as to the risk outside of the 

geographic regions identified. 

I believe the test data and the incidents confirm those areas are 

of high risk and of utmost important to deal with those first. But 

with the open status of the root cause, I could not affirm your question. 

51 

Senator RUBIO. To the best of your knowledge, with the minute 

that I have left, to the best of your knowledge, did any of your companies at any time calculate that the costs of conducting a recall 

outweighed the benefits of alerting consumers and therefore decided not to move forward with some of this earlier in the process? 

In essence, was there ever a time here where a calculation was 

made that it would cost so much financially to deal with this that 

we are better off not doing anything about it because the safety 

risks don’t justify it? Did that calculation ever happen at any of the 

three companies? 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. I can confidently say that that is not the case 

at Chrysler. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. To the best of my knowledge, no, sir. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Is not the case. 

Senator RUBIO. OK. 

My last question: If I am driving one of these cars now and I 

don’t live in one of the states covered or areas or products covered 

by the recall because of where they are geographically located, 

what should I do? Just go on about my life and not worry about 

it? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Sir, we have communicated to our dealers that if 

our customer has a concern, has a worry about driving a vehicle 

in one of—— 

Senator RUBIO. My question is, should they have a worry? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. We—— 

Senator RUBIO. If you are not covered currently by the recall but 

you are driving one of these cars, should you have a worry? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Again, we see the risk much higher in the humid 

states. And it is open as to what is the cause. That is what all of 

us are trying to get to right now, with regard to this regional SIC. 

Mr. KUNSELMAN. Senator Rubio, I would say that for the Chrysler vehicles not covered by the recall, I would drive them myself. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Rubio, they see the risk much higher 

in the humid states, but Associated Press reported on November 17 

that Honda had quietly decided to replace impacted Takata airbags 

nationwide rather than just in hot and humid states. And they also 

indicated in those reports that Honda had no intention of actually 

notifying customers in other states about the remedy. Instead, as 

stated, they would have to go to their dealer. 

So, Mr. Schostek, why did Honda believe it was appropriate to 

provide a remedy but not tell anybody? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. And, Chairman Nelson, this is not a secret or a 

quiet policy. It is on the NHTSA website, and it is there because 

we put it there. 

This was a communication to our dealers. Our dealers are asking 

the same kind of questions that Senator Rubio had. And we want 

to deal with our customers’ needs in the non-humid areas on an individual basis. If we find a customer that has a concern, we are 

asking our dealers to take care of that customer and replace that 

airbag, understanding that we believe the repairs are more priority 

in the humid areas, but we have an approach to our customers that 

we want to provide customer service. 

52 

It is not secret. We didn’t mean it to be quiet. We wanted to tell 

our dealers, if a customer comes in with a concern, please respond 

to that concern. 

Senator NELSON. So a dealer in Senator Thune’s state of South 

Dakota or Senator Markey’s state or Senator Klobuchar’s state— 

but we are a mobile society, and there are people in Massachusetts 

and Minnesota and South Dakota that drive south and come to 

Florida during all times of the year. 

Senator THUNE. Especially in January. 

Senator NELSON. Especially January, but when the kids are out 

of school, they come also in the heat of the summer to Disney 

World. 

Now, isn’t something missing here? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. We are trying to understand the reasons for the 

inflator ruptures, and we are collecting inflators from vehicles that 

have been in those humid states or ever been registered in those 

humid states or spent time in those states. We are doing our best 

to collect that information, sir. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Shimizu, this morning’s New York Times 

says, quote, ‘‘Two former Takata engineers said they and other employees had concerns over switching to a risky compound.’’ They 

are talking about the ammonium nitrate from the previous compound. 

Quote, ‘‘It is a basic design flaw that predisposes this propellant 

to break apart and therefore risk catastrophic failure in an inflator,’’ said Mark Lillie, a former senior engineer with Takata at its 

propellant plant in Moses Lake, Washington. Mr. Lillie recently 

shared his concerns with our Senate staff members. 

Quote, ‘‘It was a question that came up: Ammonium nitrate propellant, won’t that blow up?’’, said Michael Britton, a chemical engineer who worked with Mr. Lilly at the Moses Lake plant. The answer was, ‘‘Not if it stays in the right phase.’’ 

All right. Now, in addition, the media reported various problems 

at the Takata plant in 2001 and secret airbag tests in 2004. 

So why didn’t Takata take action on any of these kinds of concerns regarding the use of ammonium nitrate? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Senator, let me briefly explain about the material 

called ammonium nitrate. 

Senator NELSON. Please. 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Ammonium nitrate, as I said at the beginning, 

there are several advantage to using it, and then it has benefit to 

the users also, because of its chemical properties. But it is sensitive 

to moisture, as is well known, and if the moisture is not well controlled during manufacturing the propellant or assembling the inflator, maybe the performance—they don’t perform as designed, because that may influence the combustion characteristics. And that 

is well known in the industry. 

But talking about phase stability, according to my knowledge, 

the ammonium nitrate stays stable during the process or manufacturing processes. So, in my understanding, in other words, if we 

produce the propellant and inflator under the controlled, especially 

moisture-controlled, environment, it will be stable and safe. 

53 

And, of course, there are some errors that have happened during 

processing. On some occasions, we have had some failure modes appear, and so we did recalls in the past. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Shimizu, I did not interrupt you. I wanted 

to give you every opportunity to answer the question. That doesn’t 

answer the question. 

If, in fact, you knew about it as far back as 2001 and Takata was 

doing secret airbag tests with ammonium nitrate in 2004 and you 

have your own engineers, as quoted in today’s New York Times, 

saying what they said, that ammonium nitrate was the problem, 

then—Senators, any further questions in a second round? 

Senator MARKEY. May I ask one question? 

Senator NELSON. Please. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Schostek, until 2 days ago, most of the recent actions taken 

related to defective driver-side airbags were limited to so-called 

humid states. But three of the four deaths that were caused by exploding Takata airbags in Honda’s cars occurred in Oklahoma, Virginia, and California, not the humid states that this recall applied 

to. As the Chairman was just referring to, South Dakota or Minnesota or Massachusetts could have been in that category. 

When my staff asked NHTSA about these deaths, they were told 

that the vehicles involved had been recalled for a different Takata 

airbag manufacturing problem years ago but that they had not 

been repaired. 

There is just one problem with the explanation. When my staff 

put the vehicle ID number of two cars involved in 2013 and 2014 

fatalities through Honda’s recall data base, the database says that 

these cars’ airbags were repaired sometime after 2011. 

Either, one, your recall database is wrong, or, two, the defective 

airbag was replaced with another defective airbag, or, three, the 

driver received a brand-new airbag sometime after 2011 and the 

airbag still killed someone just a few years later. 

So, Mr. Schostek, which of those three options is it? 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Senator Markey, I believe it is option one, that 

our website has deficiencies. When we have multiple recalls that 

involve the same vehicle, our system was bringing up a message 

of ‘‘recall completed’’ for the ones that were superceded, if you will. 

It is our problem, sir; it is being fixed. We are due to report to 

NHTSA tomorrow about that. It is an embarrassing problem, in 

this day and age, that we have that technology problem on our 

website. 

Senator MARKEY. All right. So this goes back to Senator Heller’s 

question, and others, about the safety of families driving these vehicles. So what you are telling me is that someone buying a used 

Honda today could look up the car they want to buy on your recall 

data base, be told that a repair needed to fix a fatal safety defect 

was completed, even though it was not. 

And I think, again, that just goes to the whole question of whether or not the public should feel confident that they have a family 

member driving these vehicles. 

Mr. SCHOSTEK. Sir, I agree with you. That could happen today. 

I am bound and determined to check and make sure it can’t happen tomorrow and it won’t happen again. 

54 

Senator MARKEY. And I will just say again, Mr. Chairman, I 

don’t think it makes any sense for a passenger-side airbag recall 

not to occur. Otherwise, the passengers in these vehicles should 

just be in the backseat, because they are just really running a huge 

risk, given the fact they are the very same airbags that deployed 

and are ready to hit dangerously a passenger in our country. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. And, gentlemen, you need to know that I am 

going to be meeting with Secretary Foxx. I am going to request of 

him that he impose the maximum penalty allowed by law, even if 

that is a million dollars a day, on the automobile companies if you 

all are not providing a loaner or a rental car to the folks who potentially would be driving a deathtrap. It is as simple as that. 

Senators, we need to move on to the NHTSA person. 

Senator Blumenthal? 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Just one quick question to Mr. Shimizu. 

What is the maximum number of replacement parts that you will 

be able to provide per month? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. Currently, it is all provided from Mexico for the 

American market, 300,000 per month at this moment. But if we increase, it would be increased to 450,000 per month from January. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. 450,000 per month, that is the maximum? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. That is our plan right now. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And one more question. What steps have 

you taken to improve the assembly of the inflator, the container 

that Senator Nelson showed you? What steps have you taken to 

make the inflator more leak-proof and water-proof, in other words, 

more resistant to water coming into it or humidity? 

Mr. SHIMIZU. A couple steps already we have taken to improve 

the problems, improve the robustness. And we are discussing with 

our carmakers—the current product, as I said, is safe if they came 

out from well-managed processes. But if there is a way to improve 

the robustness against the humidity, we will continue to discuss 

about how we can improve the robustness of the inflator from now. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

OK, gentlemen. Thank you for your participation today. 

We will call up Mr. David Friedman, the Deputy Administrator 

of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA. 

Where is Mr. Friedman? 

Welcome, Mr. Friedman. Have you heard the testimony in the 

anteroom? 

STATEMENT OF DAVID J. FRIEDMAN, DEPUTY 

ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY 

ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have. 

Senator NELSON. OK. 

What we are going to do is forgo the statement because of the 

lateness of the hour. We are going to have our Senators, and you 

can make your points in response to the questions. I will defer my 

questions and do clean-up at the end. 

Senator Thune? 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

55 

Mr. Friedman, we are here today to discuss yet another apparent 

failure within the automobile industry. These issues with the faulty 

Takata airbags are just the latest in a long line of high-profile recalls that have been the focus of multiple hearings held by this 

committee and the House of Representatives this year. 

This is a general question, but I hope you can shed some light 

on why we are seeing such a flood of automotive safety issues recently. Do you believe that this recent experience indicates a broad 

and systemic problem within the automobile industry? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Ranking Member, one of the reasons why I think 

we are seeing this increase in recalls is because the auto industry 

is running scared. Because the auto industry realizes, one, that 

NHTSA has been pushing them hard to establish a new normal 

when it comes to recalls, where we expect them to recall vehicles 

quickly, to notify us quickly, and to find the problems quickly. 

I think they are also very concerned, as they should be, about the 

actions Congress has taken to shed a light on serious problems in 

the auto industry. And I think they are also reacting to the media 

attention that has been observed. They are cleaning out their closets. And it is truly a shame, the fact that it took all of this attention for them to do so. 

I asked 12 major automakers, I called them to Washington to 

talk to them about the need for a new normal when it comes to recalls. No more hiding information, no more hiding behind attorneyclient privilege, no more waiting until proof beyond a shadow of a 

doubt that there is a problem, no more fighting us when we have 

clear evidence of defects. They need to act much more quickly. 

And NHTSA needs to continue to act more aggressively and more 

quickly to keep them in line, as we have done over the last 6 years, 

with more than $160 million in fines. 

Senator THUNE. In 2010, NHTSA closed its examination into the 

scope and timeliness of Honda recalls involving Takata driver-side 

airbags, citing, ‘‘insufficient information to suggest that Honda 

failed to make timely defect decisions on information it was provided.’’ 

What was the insufficient information at issue? Knowing what 

you now know, should the agency have kept that inquiry open? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we are just beginning to look into the 

details of what happened at that time. I expect to be able to provide you more details on that going forward. 

My current understanding is that we understood that Takata 

had identified the batches that were involved with the manufacturing problems. But it has been made clear to us that Takata does 

not have good quality control and clearly does not have good recordkeeping, because further down the road they had to update 

their submissions in some of their recalls, indicating that they had 

not provided us with that information. 

That is one of the key reasons why we are demanding, under 

oath, that they answer and provide us all details going back to 

2000 about all of these recalls, all of the tests they have done on 

airbags. We need every bit of that information. We will pore 

through that. And if they failed to live up to the law, if the auto 

industry failed to live up to the law, we will hold them accountable 

to the full extent of the law. 

56 

I would say, though, one of the things we would like to see, as 

is included in the GROW AMERICA Act, is a significant increase 

in our ability to hold them accountable. Right now, we are limited 

to just $35 million for any single infraction. Frankly, for too many 

of these companies, that is pocket change. The Secretary and the 

President have asked for that to be increased to $300 million, and 

if you give us that authority, we will use it aggressively. 

Senator THUNE. So what you are saying, essentially, is not the 

insufficient information determination was made as a result of 

Takata’s failure to disclose to you the information that could have 

shed additional light on this problem and that NHTSA closed the 

inquiry because it thought Takata had satisfied all the questions 

that you had. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Based on our understanding—— 

Senator THUNE. That it was a failure on their part to provide information. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. We are looking into it to find that out. And that 

is why we are demanding they provide us that information under 

oath. 

Senator THUNE. You haven’t had a chance to look at it yet, but 

Senator Nelson and I and a few others on the Committee are introducing legislation today that would incentivize individuals who uncover serious allegations of vehicle defects or noncompliance with 

motor safety laws to blow the whistle and provide original information to government regulators and that, if that information leads 

to enforcement actions where more than a million dollars in monetary sanctions is involved, that that whistleblower could receive up 

to 30 percent of that. 

Is that a concept that you can support? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we welcome every bit of evidence, every 

bit of information that can help lead us to rout out any of these 

problems. I look forward to reading your legislation. I look forward 

to evaluating it. 

One of the things that I think would be crucial, in general but 

also with such a proposal, is to ensure that we have the resources, 

the people and the dollars, to follow up on those leads. 

We are getting this year alone over 70,000 consumer complaints. 

These are critical to us finding these problems. We get 6,000 reports a year from the auto industry. We need more people to be 

able to follow up on all that information. 

Senator THUNE. OK. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. Thanks. 

Senator NELSON. I agree with you, Mr. Friedman. You do need 

more resources. 

And thanks to Senator Thune for being willing to push forward 

on this question on the whistleblowers. 

Senator Klobuchar? 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Senator Nelson. 

First of all, I think you maybe heard me talk about the victim 

in our state who is permanently blinded, Shashi Chopra from 

North Oaks, Minnesota. She was driving her BMW in 2013. It was 

a 2002 model. And this is sad because this had been going on for 

so long. There is a New York Times report about secret tests by 

Takata in 2004, and now here you are in 2013. 

57 

Mr. Friedman, according to the family, they never received confirmation from NHTSA that their case was being reviewed. And I 

don’t know what actions, follow-up actions—because the family 

themselves filed something with NHTSA in 2013. And do you know 

if anyone ever reviewed the complaint that was filed by the family 

and what happened? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we are looking into this as we speak. I 

know your staff has alerted it to us just this week. But we put eyes 

on every single complaint that comes through NHTSA, that comes 

through our website, that comes through our hotline, that people 

mail in. We put eyes on all of them, and we follow up, and we try 

to piece together the information that that provides. 

I will look further into this to make sure that I can tell you exactly what happened with this. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. And, obviously, this complaint was 

filed after it happened, but just given how these recalls have trickled out, it might have helped someone else. And that is why we are 

concerned. 

Then going back in time, NHTSA’s call this week—now we are 

into this week—for a recall that expanded beyond the regional recall finally got at people in Minnesota who might be, actually, 

snowbirds. Believe it or not, some of them abandon our state during the winter, and so they actually spend their winter months in 

southern states. 

And their vehicles then—they drive down there, and then they 

drive back. So their vehicles are exposed for an extended amount 

of time to high humidity. And they were not included in the previous regional recalls, and you didn’t think there was a need to include those types of vehicles. 

What changed? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, if we could put up a couple of charts so 

that I can help make that clearer. 

This is a chart of the United States indicating the median dew 

point temperature, which is basically an indication of the total 

amount of water in the air. All of the initial incidents that occurred 

occurred in these regions that you see in brown or in Puerto Rico, 

which is also even more humid. 

So all the initial incidents that caused us to open this investigation—we started with three complaints. We acted rapidly based on 

those three complaints. We connected the dots that all three—there 

were three different car companies. All three had airbags from 

Takata. We connected those dots. We connected the dots, as well, 

that these were all in humid regions. 

We opened an investigation and got the auto industry to begin 

recalling vehicles in days. So we acted aggressively in this case, 

based on the information we had at the time. 

Now, because we didn’t want to see anyone else hurt from these 

problems, part of what we did is we pushed the auto industry. We 

said, ‘‘We can’t wait for another one of these incidents. You need 

to get out there and work with Takata, test airbags that are returned, so that we can figure out, is this a broader problem? We 

can’t sit here.’’ 

Now, as we did that, as we tried to gather that test data, we 

were also monitoring field incidents. 

58 

If you could put up the driver-side chart. 

Initially what we were working with on the driver-side airbags 

was three incidents—sorry, five incidents, pardon me—that were 

all in Florida, again, initially reinforcing the concept that this was 

a problem related to exposure to high temperatures and high humidity, in other words high median dew point temperature. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I am not sure, were they all in Florida, or 

were they in the southern part of the United States? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. So, initially, it was only these that were—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And then it got to some southern—OK. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Then there was an incident in California. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. When that incident happened, we made clear to 

Honda, and Honda acted, to extend their regional recall to that 

area. At that point, that could—could—have been an outlier. 

Then, at the end of last month, we received a complaint from an 

incident in North Carolina, here. We acted quickly. We reached out 

to the consumer. We verified that it was, in fact, an airbag rupture. 

Based on that data, the pattern is now clearly broken for the driver-side airbags. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. So, while all the incidents initially were around 

here, now we have an incident here and here—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—areas of much lower temperature and humidity. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Based on that information, we called on Takata 

and all the automakers involved with driver-side airbags to recall 

those vehicles. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. 

My last question is about not the humidity issue and expanding 

to the rest of the United States but the types of cars. And this is 

an issue for this family. This was a BMW car. And it is my understanding in 2010 they sent a letter; BMW told NHTSA that it was 

aware of the Takata airbags under Honda’s recalls but that Takata 

had told them that BMW vehicles were not affected. 

And so, did NHTSA receive that? And did this happen with other 

manufacturers, as well, that they just based this on Takata’s information? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. I believe that is accurate. 

One of the things, frankly, that needs to change and that needs 

to be more effective is suppliers and automakers need to do a better job of sharing incidents, especially when you have a common 

supplier. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Right now, all too often, automakers keep their 

incident data to themselves. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Can they legally share that information? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Well, this is one of the things, when I called all 

12 automakers to Washington, that I began discussing with them, 

is we have to figure out a way, without violating antitrust laws, 

that they can share critical safety information. There should be no 

barriers—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I agree. 

59 

1 In calendar years 2008 through 2011, Honda conducted a series of recalls to address a manufacturing defect concerning driver’s bag inflator ruptures on various MY 2001 through 2004 vehicles. In calendar year 2013, Honda, along with Toyota, BMW, Nissan and Mazda, initiated 

recalls to address a manufacturing defect concerning passenger bag ruptures in certain MY 2001 

through 2004 models. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—to sharing that critical safety information. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. About suppliers. Yes. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. And we also talked about suppliers. I was talking 

to them about Takata at the time because, both in the GM case 

and in the Takata case, part of the concerns here are communications between the auto industry and their suppliers. That has to 

get better. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Got it. All right. Maybe that is something 

we can work on. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Absolutely. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you, Mr. Friedman. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Markey? 

And, by the way, of course your written testimony will be a permanent part of the record. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Friedman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID J. FRIEDMAN, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify today about Takata air bag recalls. The Takata air bag defects involve a series of recalls spanning back to 2008 with multiple causes of the serious safety issue 

of fragmenting air bag modules. Understandably, people are concerned. I share that 

concern, which is why we acted quickly this year when we received evidence of a 

new defect. I welcome the opportunity to clarify the facts surrounding the different 

recalls of these air bags and to reassure you and the motoring public that NHTSA 

is pursuing its recalls and investigation of defective Takata air bags aggressively. 

NHTSA’s mission is safety, and we have helped reduce roadway fatalities to 

record lows by fighting dangerous behaviors such as impaired and distracted driving, pushing industry to make safer cars, and forcing recalls of approximately 100 

million defective vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment in the past 10 years. 

This year alone, we forced the largest child seat recall ever and fined automakers 

more than $55 million for mishandling recall requirements—bringing the total to 

over $160 million in the past six years. 

The Takata air bag recall story is more complicated than most recalls because, 

to date, there have been multiple issues leading to recalls involving 10 auto manufacturers and over 10 million vehicles since 2008. These recalls can be broken down 

into two categories: national recalls, along with their expansions, associated with 

identified manufacturing defects and the recent regional recalls—initiated by 

NHTSA as soon as the problem appeared—that preliminary data indicate were associated with prolonged exposure of some Takata air bags to regions of high absolute 

humidity (the combination of high temperatures and high relative humidity), which 

may be related to a manufacturing, design, or other defect not yet identified. 

Between 2008 and 2013, Honda, along with Toyota, BMW, Nissan and Mazda, 

took action to recall defective Takata air bags with manufacturing problems relating 

to fragmenting driver’s or passenger’s side inflators rather than face NHTSA enforcement.1 In 2014, Chevrolet recalled vehicles to address a newly discovered manufacturing problem. These recalls were national in scope because based on our 

present knowledge, the defects occurred in the manufacturing process of air bags 

that had been installed in an identifiable pool of vehicles sold nationwide. The four 

deaths in the United States that have been widely reported as attributable to rupturing Takata air bags all involved air bags associated with the national recalls that 

occurred prior to 2014. 

Tragically, in at least some of those cases, the air bag in the vehicle was not repaired even though the recall had begun. This loss of life is unacceptable and that 

is why we continue to expand our outreach to vehicle consumers through information tools like the VIN look up, recall alert smartphone applications and red letter 

60 

envelope direct mailings. In addition to NHTSA’s work, industry must step up to 

more aggressively reach out to consumers to help them get their vehicles repaired 

to keep them safe. For example, NHTSA has been pushing both the automobile and 

child seat manufacturers to take greater steps to alert and even incentivize owners 

to bring in their defective products. And, as the Administration proposes in the 

GROW AMERICA Act, rental car companies and used cars dealers should not be 

allowed to rent or sell vehicles without first fixing defects. 

Given our present knowledge, the recalls cited above are different from the air 

bag defect NHTSA identified, forced regional recalls on, and has been investigating 

this year. In 2014, soon after opening our investigation, NHTSA demanded, and obtained, the recall of more than four million vehicles because of evidence that air bag 

inflators were rupturing during crashes in geographic regions that have high levels 

of absolute humidity. To our knowledge, there are zero deaths in the United States 

associated with the 2014 recalls. But our concern for the threat of serious injury 

or worse compelled us to act very quickly. 

NHTSA began looking into this issue after connecting three separate consumer 

complaints of air bag ruptures from three different automakers. NHTSA staff identified that these three had a common supplier and common climatic conditions, and 

reached out to the supplier and automakers. This helped us identify three additional 

incidents and two other affected automakers. All six crashes that led to the initial 

regional recalls occurred in Florida or Puerto Rico between August of 2013 and May 

2014. 

NHTSA’s calls for recalls in 2014 by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Mitsubishi, 

Subaru, Chrysler, Ford, BMW, and General Motors are based on real data and a 

clear objective to protect those at demonstrated risk. Because of that risk and because of their use of the same or similar air bag inflators, we persuaded those 10 

auto manufacturers—including some that had no field incidents—to conduct recalls 

on early, limited information to save lives and prevent injuries. Our additional purpose in pushing for these actions was to obtain more data by testing the replaced 

air bags to see whether they would rupture. 

At our insistence, Takata is quadrupling testing of returned air bags, including 

those outside of hot and humid regions, to assist our effort to determine the full 

scope of the problem. We have also pressed the auto manufacturers to conduct their 

own testing of returned air bags. In addition, we are looking very carefully at any 

unusual air bag deployment incident we find that occurs in or outside of the present 

regions to determine whether it may involve the same, a similar, or a different defect. Finally, we are working to bring in outside expertise and secure appropriate 

testing facilities so we can expand the volume of and validate testing being done 

by the supplier and manufacturers. 

The initial data related to the current regional recalls indicate that vehicles with 

certain Takata air bags in regions prone to long-term, high humidity and temperatures pose a risk. At this time, we are evaluating evidence to determine whether 

or not the same can be said for other regions or in cases where people travel to 

these regions during periods of lower humidity. We are also evaluating the differences in the data between driver’s and passenger’s front air bags. Our investigation is far from over and we continue to seek and push for more information and 

we will take additional action as warranted. 

Based on the results of testing and on field data we continue to gather, NHTSA 

has expanded, and will continue to expand, the geographic scope and vehicles involved in these recalls as appropriate. In fact, on Monday, November 17, 2014, my 

staff contacted Takata, and then followed up with Honda, Ford, BMW, Chrysler, 

and Mazda, to call on them to initiate a national recall for specific driver’s side frontal air bags made by Takata. This decision was based on our evaluation of a recent 

driver’s side air bag failure in a Ford vehicle outside the area of high absolute humidity and its relationship to five previous air bag ruptures of the same or similar 

design. 

Some have called to expand the geographic area of all the vehicles currently subject to the regional recalls. We share a deep concern for those with vehicles outside 

the regions of high absolute humidity, which is why we have expanded the recalls 

based on the data and directed Takata to work with the manufacturers to get and 

test air bags from other parts of the country. To date, there have been no ruptures 

in those tests for passenger’s side front air bags, but we are pushing Takata and 

the manufacturers to accelerate efforts to get even more tests done around the nation, and we are evaluating field incidents as we are made aware of them. And, 

given the current limitations on the supply of replacement parts, NHTSA called on 

Takata to speed up the production of replacement parts. In response, Takata agreed 

to add two production lines early next year. NHTSA has also been in communication 

61 

with other air bag inflator manufacturers to assess what, if any, capability those 

companies have to fill the demand for replacement parts. 

The regional recalls of vehicles with defective Takata passenger side air bags ensure that the limited supply of replacement parts goes to vehicles in areas of demonstrated risk—Florida, the Gulf Coast and other areas of high absolute humidity. 

At this point, a national recall of all Takata air bags would divert replacement air 

bags from areas where they are clearly needed, putting lives at risk. While a national recall of all Takata air bags is not supported by the data as we now understand it, we will continue to follow the field and testing data wherever they may 

lead. Let me be clear to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Committee and the American people. As we find evidence supporting the need to expand the regional recalls 

or to move to a national recall of all Takata air bags, we will use all of our authority 

as necessary to ensure that such a recall takes place. 

Finally, in addition to requiring these recalls, NHTSA has taken quick and aggressive action as needed to compel the information we need from industry to protect motorists. We have issued Special Orders, which are equivalent to subpoenas 

under our statute, to Takata and Honda to produce documents and provide answers 

to our questions. As our investigation advances, we will continue to use every tool 

available to the agency to identify the cause and scope of the malfunctioning air 

bags and protect the motoring public. And, if we find evidence of wrongdoing, those 

responsible will be held accountable to the full extent of the authority Congress has 

provided to us, including but not limited to maximum civil penalties and agency orders. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to testify, and I am happy to answer your 

questions. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Markey? 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Friedman, how can you justify calling for a mandatory nationwide recall of Takata driver-side airbags while continuing to 

allow a patchwork of voluntary and regional recalls for Takata’s 

passenger-side airbags? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, two things. First of all, these regional 

recalls are not voluntary, period. I have in my hand letters, the 

same letters that each of the car companies are sending to all of 

the affected consumers that state, ‘‘Important Safety Recall Notice.’’ This is from Honda, who, frankly, I was frustrated to hear 

them even at times calling this a service campaign. This is a recall. 

They also very clearly state, ‘‘Honda has decided’’—— 

Senator MARKEY. Can I—why are you not making the same recall for passenger-side airbags? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, that is based on the data. 

If we could switch to the chart based on—yes, that test chart. 

Because we didn’t want to be in a position of waiting for another 

rupture, we pushed the auto industry and Takata to test airbags, 

not just in the affected regions but all over the country. 

Senator MARKEY. Can I just ask you to do this? Kim Kopf is sitting over here. Her sister died in a passenger-side airbag accident. 

So what do you tell Kim and her family about her sister and everyone else’s sister who is now sitting in that same passenger seat 

now in vehicles all across the country, given the fact that Kim has 

lost her sister? 

Why are the passenger-side airbags not being recalled? Her sister was driving a Subaru with a Takata airbag in a non-humid 

state. Why not issue that same recall order as a result for every 

passenger-side airbag as well? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator—and what I say to you: This is the first 

I have heard of your accident. Please, get us the details of what 

happened. I want to know what happened to your sister. It is an 

62 

utter tragedy, clearly, what happened to your sister. If we can get 

information from you on exactly what happened so that we can determine if this was an airbag rupture outside of those regions, you 

could help other Americans potentially protect themselves if there 

is data out there. 

We will always follow the data. We will always follow the information. That is why we have pushed the automakers to test this. 

The challenge that we face, Senator, is, without information—the 

Safety Act requires us, requires us, to act based on information 

about unreasonable risk. If I have no information about an unreasonable risk outside those areas, then I am not able to force the 

automakers to recall outside those areas. 

In a situation, especially with a—— 

Senator MARKEY. Look, you know, honestly—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—limited airbag supply—— 

Senator MARKEY. Can I just say this? Her—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—what you are potentially doing, Senator, if I did 

a national recall without the data—— 

Senator MARKEY. Her sister—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—is putting someone’s life at risk in Florida. 

Senator MARKEY. Her sister was in Arizona, okay? It goes up to 

110, 120 degrees in Arizona in the summer. That car can be driven 

over to southern California or driven over to Texas. It could be 

driven to Florida. You don’t know what any of these family members are going to be doing. It could be a used car that is sold and 

just taken to another state. 

I mean, it just seems to me that you, as the agency chief, should 

err on the side of safety, knowing that these vehicles move from 

state to state. As the chairman said, people are going to Florida 

from pretty much every state in order to escape the cold in the winter or to visit Disney World. And we know that. And once they hit 

those conditions, an accident could happen. 

And so why don’t we just recognize the mobile nature of our society, the danger that each person runs? 

And, by the way, I don’t accept the fact that there is no risk in 

really warm weather in Arizona or other states, because we have 

other states here that are outside the humid area that have had 

these incidents. 

So I just don’t know why you don’t say to all these families who 

have already lost people that the least that is going to happen is 

that no other family members of any other family in America is 

going to suffer the same fate. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, that is my solemn goal in doing all of 

our efforts, is to put safety first. If we have evidence that indicates 

this should be a national recall, we will do that. Right now—— 

Senator MARKEY. OK, but—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—the challenge, Senator, is, what you are asking 

me to do, without information, is to put someone’s life at risk in 

Florida based on a lack of information elsewhere in a situation 

where airbag supplies are limited. We are pushing Takata incredibly hard to—— 

Senator MARKEY. I just, honestly—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN.—get more airbags produced. 

63 

Senator MARKEY. You heard Takata today. Takata is not even 

saying they support your recall right now. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. It is ridiculous. It is frustrating. It is unacceptable. 

Senator MARKEY. How can you trust a company, Mr. Friedman, 

who, in answer to my question today about whether or not they 

support your nationwide recall for driver’s side, says they cannot 

give an affirmative answer to that? That is a frightening answer 

from a company who is responsible for ensuring that all information about the danger of these airbags is made public. 

You should just err on the side of safety, Mr. Friedman. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we—— 

Senator MARKEY. And, finally, if I can, Toyota believes that its 

passenger-side airbags being driven in some humid states are so 

dangerous that it told dealers to disable them and warned passengers not to sit in the passenger seats. 

Do you think Toyota was right to warn its dealers and vehicle 

owners in that manner? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, first, to address one of the previous 

issues of people in and out of states, first of all, let me be clear. 

The data indicates that the median time to failure for these airbags 

is 10 years. If you are coming in and out of these states or you are 

in them for only a short period of time, the data does not indicate 

that you are facing the same risk as someone who lives there. 

Further, if you look at the information—— 

Senator MARKEY. Answer the Toyota question before my time 

runs out. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, you can drive a vehicle without someone 

in the passenger seat, but even if you drive a vehicle without someone in the passenger seat, if that airbag ruptures, that driver is in 

danger. Therefore, disabling an airbag and putting a label on that 

vehicle saying ‘‘Do not put anyone in this passenger seat’’ is a way 

to protect the driver from a dangerous airbag. 

Senator MARKEY. So you approved Toyota’s plan to do that? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, it is not a question of approval. These 

are defective parts, and, therefore, they are broken parts. 

Senator MARKEY. OK. Well, if you did approve that plan, then 

why didn’t you tell other manufacturers with passenger-side 

Takata airbags to issue the same warning? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, as I said, we did not approve this one 

way or another. These are broken parts, and manufacturers are allowed to disconnect broken parts. 

Senator MARKEY. Here is the letter that came from NHTSA to 

Toyota. This letter serves to acknowledge Toyota Motor Engineering and Manufacturing—it is a notification from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of a safety recall which will be 

conducted pursuant to Federal law for the products listed below. 

And the product that we are referring to is the airbag that is in 

discussion. 

And it says in your letter that, as an interim measure, the dealer 

will disable the front passenger airbag and advise the customer not 

to use the front passenger seat until a replacement inflator is installed. 

So that is your letter to Toyota. 

64 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. That is accurate, Senator. That is our letter acknowledging—— 

Senator MARKEY. So, again, if that is the case, then why not 

have a similar letter go from every other manufacturer to warn 

people of a potential passenger-side airbag catastrophe? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, I believe there may be some confusion 

in the process here. We do not approve remedies. What that letter 

is is called a ‘‘recall acknowledgment letter.’’ That is us acknowledging to them what they told us. That is our way of holding them 

to the decisions that they have made. It is not our letter telling 

them what to do. It is simply us acknowledging their steps. 

Senator MARKEY. You know, it just kind of says to me that you 

are seeing yourself as some detached processor of a decision made 

by a manufacturer of vehicles, Toyota, that has tremendous implications for every other vehicle that has the same kind of Takata 

airbag, that a catastrophic consequence is possible. 

And I don’t understand how you can process something like this, 

agree with it essentially, hold the manufacturer to the implementation of it, and not simultaneously be saying, this is the warning 

bell going off, that if Toyota believes that this is so dangerous, that 

the other manufacturers, as well, should have the same responsibility to make sure that those airbags are recalled. 

So I just say to you, Mr. Friedman, that, from my perspective, 

there is a higher responsibility that, as an agency, we have to call 

you to. 

And I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. And you will acknowledge, because you heard 

the testimony today, that each of these automobile manufacturers 

are handling the recalls in a different way, which is all the more 

adding confusion. You heard Chrysler say they are not going to 

start until the middle of December. And you have to have concerns 

about whether these automakers are responding appropriately. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. I have serious concerns. We have actually had to 

push Chrysler before in previous cases to accelerate the production 

of parts, to get notices out to consumers. 

After hearing what they said, I don’t accept that there is any reason why they should wait to notify consumers about these recalls 

until they have the parts. Consumers need to know there is a risk 

in Chrysler vehicles because of these airbags. Consumers need to 

be aware of that risk. 

Senator NELSON. Do you have under law the ability to fine them 

if they don’t respond quickly to replace these defective airbags? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. We have authority under law to require an accelerated remedy. And if we determine that they have tools that they 

could be putting into place to provide a remedy more quickly than 

they currently are, yes, we can require them to act. 

We are currently in the process of trying to ask and determine 

that exact question. We have already pushed Takata to increase 

their production from about 300,000 units a month to about 

500,000 units a month. 

Senator NELSON. Do you have the legal authority to fine them on 

a daily basis if, in fact, they are not replacing the airbags? 

65 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. If we find that they could be doing more and they 

are failing to do so, absolutely. We can order them to accelerate the 

remedy, and if they don’t do it, we can fine them. 

Senator NELSON. OK. Well, if somebody is driving around in a 

lethal deathtrap, isn’t that enough evidence, without getting their 

airbag replaced, that you ought to start sticking it to the manufacturers with a severe financial penalty? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, my understanding of the Safety Act is 

that it requires us to—before we can do that, that it requires us 

to be able to demonstrate that they could be doing more than they 

are. 

So we started from the beginning, digging in, trying to understand. We are contacting other suppliers and trying to get them to 

be able to step up to supply more airbags to these car companies. 

Senator NELSON. I don’t want to beat up on you, but if you could 

meet Corey Burdick from central Florida, the father of two little 

boys, a firefighter, who now has no ability because he does not 

have an eye as a result of a piece of this shrapnel coming in his 

eye, then it would seem to me that that would give you the legal 

authority to whack it to these people to replace those defective airbags. 

Senator Blumenthal? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. 

Mr. Friedman, thanks for being here today. I take your comments about going after the automobile manufacturers and pushing 

them. I want to ask you about your responsibility. 

You have heard the head of Takata say today the maximum they 

can commit to produce are 300,000 replacement parts a month. 

Their hope, their hope, is to go to 450,000. They are unwilling to 

commit to anything more than 300,000 replacement parts a month, 

which means it will take 3 years. And even if they meet the 

450,000 goal, the hope, it will take more than 2 years. 

Isn’t that unacceptable? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Absolutely unacceptable. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And so will you commit to use the power 

that you have under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act—it is section 

30120(c)(iii), as you know—to order that the car manufacturers use 

replacement parts from other makers of airbags? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we will use all of our authority to the 

full extent—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I don’t want a vague answer. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I want, really, a ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ answer, because this is a pretty clear question. I know that you will use all 

of your authority to do the right thing in the public interest. 

I want to know that you will recommend to the Secretary of 

Transportation that you will order the automobile manufacturers 

to use replacement parts, even if it means Takata sharing proprietary information with them, so that Americans are kept safe on 

the roads for the next 2 to 3 years. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, if I can determine that that can be done 

safely, absolutely, I will. Absolutely. I have to—— 

66 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. How long will it take you to make that determination? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. We are in contact with two different airbag suppliers. We are asking them what their capacity is, what their compatibility is. There may need to be tests involved to ensure, because 

each airbag is tuned for each car, that they will be safe. 

We are hiring an expert in propellants in airbags—we are seeing 

a contract with an expert in propellants in airbags. We need to get 

all of these people involved in making sure—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I understand, you know, your testimony says that you have been in communication with other airbag 

inflator manufacturers to assess what, if any, capability those companies have to fill the demand for replacement parts. 

You have the power to order them to break exclusivity agreements, to share proprietary information. I want to know by when 

you will finish that determination. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, I will finish that as soon as we can determine if that is safe. I have to put the safety of those getting 

these replacement airbags first. I will do so, and we will do so as 

quickly as humanly possible with the resources Congress has provided us. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Mr. Friedman, would you agree with me 

that there is more than sufficient reason to believe that NHTSA 

was not furnished with enough information by the auto manufacturers about these defective products? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, I can’t prejudge a case, but we have, because of the exact same concerns that you have, we have demanded, under oath, information that will reveal exactly that 

thing. These are gut-wrenching incidents, and—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I know you have asked for this information under oath. But, you know, when I was a prosecutor, we 

had something called ‘‘probable cause,’’ which is enough to indict. 

I recognize you don’t have criminal authority. You would agree 

with me that there is pretty close to probable cause here to believe 

you weren’t given the information you need to protect the public. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, I am not a lawyer, so I don’t know the 

exact meaning of ‘‘probable cause.’’ But what I will say is that I 

don’t trust that Takata has provided us with—we know that 

Takata has not always provided the auto industry with accurate information of all the lots involved. We know that we haven’t always 

gotten the information that we need. 

We are looking into this. I have serious concerns, and we will 

hold them accountable based on the findings of our investigation. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. So far as the information that is concerned, the maximum penalty now is in the range of $30 million. 

As you know, Senator Markey and I and Senator Nelson, our 

Chairman, have proposed the Automaker Accountability Act, which 

would lift that $35 million cap on penalties—it would eliminate the 

cap. Would you support that legislation? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we will take all the authority you give 

us and use it to the full—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Do you support the legislation? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Senator, we want that raised. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. That is a ‘‘yes.’’ 

67 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. The Secretary has already asked for it to be raised to $300 million. Me personally, David Friedman, if you give 

me the authority to do more, I will gladly accept that. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, don’t you agree, as the current act- ing administrator, that $35 million, $300 million, may be inadequate for some cases, as this one, where people have died as a result of failing to report sufficient information? 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. There is no doubt that the greater the fines that 

we can levy on the automakers, the greater power we have to keep 

them establishing the new normal that we need from them: to always provide us with all the information we need and to quickly 

act on that information and to never fight us when we provide 

them with the data, like we are on driver-side airbags, that these 

recalls need to happen nationwide. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. My time has expired, but I just want to 

finish by making the request that, by the beginning of next week, 

you come back to this committee in writing, after consulting with 

the Secretary, about how quickly you will have a determination as 

to other companies that can provide these replacement parts and 

whether you will recommend to the Secretary—in other words, the 

timeline for finishing that process. And I hope it will be measured 

in days, not weeks. 

I know that the Secretary of Transportation—I have talked to 

him on a number of occasions—shares our concerns on this committee, very strongly shares concerns about the American public. 

And I commend him for not only sharing those concerns but also 

acting to appoint a NHTSA Administrator, which we welcome. 

And I would like you to give us a date by which you will make 

a recommendation as to how replacement parts will be accelerated 

under 30120(c)(iii) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act so that Americans can be provided with those replacement parts as quickly as 

possible. 

Because, otherwise, we will be waiting 2 to 3 years—under the 

most optimistic estimate, 2-plus years; under the more realistic estimate, 3 years—for Americans to be safe on American roads with 

these airbags in their cars. Because they simply can’t be replaced 

if there aren’t the parts to replace them. 

Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Friedman, I agree with you that you don’t 

have the resources that your little agency needs. And I really feel 

kind of sorry for your successor, who has now been named by the 

president, because as he goes through the confirmation process, 

needless to say there are going to be a lot of questions that are 

going to be asked of him with regard to the conduct of your agency 

on a going-forward basis. 

And just to put this into context, the amount of vehicles with 

Takata airbags worldwide, Senator Blumenthal, is something like 

100 million. In the U.S., the amount of Takata airbags are something like 30 million. So this could be a problem of gargantuan proportions that is going to need the aggressiveness of the Federal 

regulator to try to protect the public. 

And we appreciate the hot seat that you are on. I am going to 

be visiting with your boss, who is the Secretary of Transportation. 

I am going to ask him, as I have said earlier, to start socking it 

68 

to the folks that are dragging their feet, not answering questions, 

with the financial penalties that he has under law. And then we 

will try to change the law so as to eliminate that cap. 

I want to thank everybody for participating. 

The meeting is—and before I adjourn it, let me say that the 

record will remain open for 10 days. And all witnesses are expected 

to answer any and all questions for the record from the members 

of this committee. 

The Committee—— 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator NELSON. Yes. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. I apologize. I am wondering if I could just say one 

more thing to close. 

Senator NELSON. Of course. 

Mr. FRIEDMAN. NHTSA is an agency of people who wake up 

every day with nearly 100 reminders of how we need more resources and to work harder to protect the American public, because 

nearly every day 100 people die on our roads because of drunk 

driving, distracted driving, and vehicle defects. Each hour, we come 

to work with over 2,000 reminders of people who are injured, over 

2,000 people every hour, of our need for more resources and to continue to improve and act aggressively to save people’s lives. 

That is what every NHTSA employee and what I do every single 

day, is dedicate ourselves to protecting the American public. We 

will work aggressively in this case. I welcome your support. I welcome the added resources that you are looking to provide us. We 

will act aggressively to protect the American public. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Friedman, we appreciate that, and we appreciate the dedication of the Federal employees who often are not 

given that appreciation. And on behalf of the Committee, I express 

that. 

We now have a new problem that we are addressing, which is, 

in effect, a live hand grenade in front of a driver and a passenger 

in the vehicles that have been enumerated. And it must be addressed, and it must be addressed immediately. 

And, with that, thank you. And the meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:47 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(69) 

A P P E N D I X 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL TO

HIROSHI SHIMIZU

Question 1. USCAR–24 on ‘‘Inflator Technical Requirements and Validation’’ is a 

specification published by the United States Council for Automotive Research. It 

outlines testing procedures for the inflator module used in airbags and requires the 

inflator to undergo a number of tests in a variety of extreme conditions, including 

high humidity. USCAR represents a collaboration of Chrysler Group LLC, Ford 

Motor Company, and General Motors. 

Mr. Shimizu, does Takata require all of its inflators to pass USCAR–24 specifications? Please describe Takata’s understanding of its obligations under USCAR–24. 

Answer. Takata does not require all of its inflators to pass USCAR–24 specifications. The USCAR–24 specifications were developed by a private industry council 

and are not a Federal regulatory requirement. USCAR–24 was published in 2004 

and applies only to products delivered to Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors. Other 

automakers have prescribed their own testing specifications for inflators. 

Question 2. Takata has conceded that ammonium nitrate is the main ingredient 

for the inflator’s propellant, but this inexpensive chemical is known to have a tendency to absorb moisture. Therefore, it would be important for any inflator design 

to make sure the propellant is hermetically sealed. 

Mr. Shimizu, you said during the hearing that Takata has taken ‘‘a couple steps’’ 

to improve the problems the robustness of the product against the humidity. Please 

provide a more detailed technical description of what changes Takata has made to 

improve the safety of your inflators. Please provide information on specific changes 

made to the propellant formula as well as to the design and production of the inflator. For example, what have you done to make sure the propellant’s container is better sealed off from moisture? 

Answer. Takata has made many improvements in its inflator manufacturing processes and product handling since 2000. These include, among others, improvements 

in the press technology used to form propellant wafers and tablets in Takata’s propellant-manufacturing facility in Moses Lake, Washington, and improvements in 

plant-wide humidity control measures in Takata’s inflator-assembly plant in 

Monclova, Mexico. The two specific improvements highlighted by Mr. Shimizu were 

the following: 

First, beginning in September 2001, Takata utilized an ‘‘auto-reject’’ function 

that can detect and reject propellant wafers with inadequate compression by 

monitoring the compression load that had been applied. However, for the next 

year, that function could be turned on and off manually by the machine operator in the plant. No later than September 12, 2002, the machine was modified 

by the addition of an interlock feature that precluded production of propellant 

wafers without the auto-reject function in place. 

Second, some propellant wafers used in inflators produced at Takata’s plant in 

Monclova, Mexico, between October 4, 2001 and October 31, 2002 may have 

been exposed to uncontrolled moisture (ambient humidity) conditions. Those wafers could have absorbed moisture beyond the allowable limits. Production processes were revised by November 1, 2002 to assure proper handling and environmental protection of in-process propellant. Additional improvements in humidity 

control were instituted at Monclova more recently. 

With regard to the integrity of the inflator seal, each inflator and production lot 

undergo testing at the time of production. Every inflator coming off the production 

line is subjected to a helium leak test to check that the inflator vessel is properly 

sealed. Takata has improved the method used for the helium leak test to make the 

test more accurate. In addition, samples of every inflator production lot undergo 

weld-seam analysis, hydroburst structural testing, and ballistic performance testing. 

70 

Moreover, Takata has increased the thickness of the O-ring used in passenger-side 

inflators to improve the quality of the seal. 

Most of the inflators subject to recall use a propellant formulation called ‘‘2004,’’ 

which first went into production in 2000, and the replacement units for most of 

these inflators also contain the 2004 propellant formulation. Takata has introduced 

additional lines of propellant, including the ‘‘2004L’’ formulation, which went into 

production in 2008. Both the 2004 and 2004L propellant formulations use ammonium nitrate as the oxidizer, but the 2004L propellant uses a different fuel (BTA) 

from the fuel used in the 2004 formulation (BHT). In addition, all inflators using 

the 2004L propellant, and some inflators using the 2004 propellant, include desiccant in the design. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BILL NELSON TO

RICK SCHOSTEK

Loaner/Rental Car Availability 

Question 1. You indicated in your testimony that you are providing free access to 

loaner cars and rental cars to your customers who own vehicles with recalled, defective Takata air bags. Specifically, in your written testimony submitted to the Committee, you stated: ‘‘Customers with affected vehicles who desire alternative transportation until their car is fixed have access to loaner cars and rental vehicles—at 

no cost to the customer—if we experience a situation where a dealer’s service capacity or the availability of replacement air bag inflators is insufficient to meet the customer’s needs.’’ 

Similarly, the Honda website states that: ‘‘For customers concerned about the 

issue of Takata airbags in certain Honda and Acura vehicles, our customer service 

will make arrangements for, as appropriate, the replacement of airbag inflators and 

the provision of or reimbursement for temporary alternative transportation.’’ 

How does Honda define the terms ‘‘access to’’ and ‘‘as appropriate’’ in the context 

of offering loaner cars or rental car reimbursement to owners who cannot have defective Takata air bag inflators replaced in a timely manner? 

Answer. American Honda uses the terms ‘‘access to’’ and ‘‘as appropriate’’ because 

dealer vehicle programs can vary and not all customers request the same type of 

alternate transportation. For instance, not all dealers participate in our loaner car 

program and therefore, some customers are only offered rental cars. Similarly, some 

customers may only need a ride to work while their vehicle is repaired. Most dealers 

offer a shuttle service to address those needs. Honda’s policy is to use our best efforts to accommodate a customer who requests a vehicle. 

Question 1a. Has Honda issued a specific written policy to dealers to implement 

these statements? 

Answer. Honda’s Dealer Operation Manual includes our written policy for use of 

rental or loaner cars. The program’s primary purpose is to make available to service 

customers alternate transportation while their vehicle is being serviced or repaired. 

On November 26, this policy was changed for airbag inflator affected customers. The 

dealer has been empowered to authorize up to a 3 day rental without contacting the 

District Parts & Service Manager. After the 3 day period, we ask that the District 

Parts & Service Manager be notified. 

Question 1b. What steps is Honda taking to ensure that the loaner or rental cars 

offered to consumers are not subject to either the Takata recall, or any other safety 

related recall? 

Answer. The latest model affected by the Takata airbag inflator is the 2011 Element. Since rental car fleets and Honda loaners consist of new model vehicles, they 

are not affected by the inflator campaigns. For all recalls, American Honda mails 

recall notices to the registered owner. This includes vehicles that are owned by rental car companies. 

Recall Repairs 

Question 2. Do you include a provision in the franchise agreements with your 

dealerships that requires them to perform safety recall repairs prior to offering used 

cars of your brand/make for sale to consumers? 

Answer. Yes. In section 12.12 of the Honda and Acura Dealer Sales and Service 

Agreements, authorized Honda and Acura dealers specifically agree to ‘‘perform any 

and all warranty, campaign, recall, product-improvement or product-update service 

in compliance with instructions and directives issued by American Honda. . . .’’ 

With regard to safety recalls, the primary instructions and directives are contained 

in the Honda Service Operations Manual, and the Acura Dealer Operations Manual, 

which contain specific policies and procedures relating to parts and service support 

71 

for Honda and Acura owners. Section 7.2.1 of those Manuals both read, in pertinent 

part, as follows: ‘‘It is illegal for a dealership to sell or lease a new vehicle that is 

subject to a safety or emissions recall without first completing the recall procedure 

outlined in the applicable service bulletin. If a dealership sells or leases a vehicle 

subject to a safety or emissions recall to a customer without first completing the recall procedure, the dealership may be entirely responsible for all consequences, including any claims or lawsuits that may arise from the failure to complete a recall 

procedure prior to sale/lease, and the defense and indemnity of American Honda in 

such a claim or lawsuit.’’ 

Question 3. Do you include a provision in the franchise agreements with your 

dealerships that requires them to perform safety recall repairs prior to offering used 

cars of other brands/makes for sale to consumers? 

Answer. No, we do not, as we cannot compel Honda or Acura dealers to complete, 

nor can we compensate Honda or Acura dealers for completing, safety recalls on 

other brands/makes. In the automotive industry, compensation to dealers for completion of safety recalls can only be paid by the manufacturer of that brand/make; 

manufacturers cannot pay warranty or recall compensation to dealers of other 

brands/makes. Moreover, the genuine OEM parts needed to complete a safety recall 

can only be sourced from the manufacturer of that brand/make. For these reasons, 

only a dealer of a particular brand/make can be required to complete, and be compensated for, recall repairs on vehicles of that brand/make. 

Question 4. Do you compensate your franchised dealers the same for safety recall 

repairs as for retail repairs, based on the same hourly rate and the same time allowed for performing the repairs? 

Answer. Yes, American Honda compensates dealers for recall repairs in a manner 

identical to the compensation paid to dealers for warranty repairs. This question 

asks about two aspects of recall compensation, hourly rate and time allowance. 

With regard to the hourly rate each Honda and Acura dealer’s hourly labor rate 

for recall and warranty repairs is typically the same as for retail repairs. The primary, and unusual, exception is when the dealer’s requested hourly labor rate for 

recall and warranty repairs is materially higher than the labor rates of other repair 

facilities in the local market. 

The time allowance is a different matter, as in the auto industry, neither Honda/ 

Acura nor, to our knowledge, any other auto distributor, imposes time allowances 

on retail repairs. While all auto distributors set time allowances for each type of 

recall and warranty repair, there are no analogous time allowances for retail repairs. Dealers spend as much time as they spend on a given retail repair, and auto 

distributors have no control or even visibility into how long a dealer might spend 

on that repair. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

RICK SCHOSTEK

Increasing the Rate of Repairs 

Question 1. When a recall happens, it is rare that 100 percent of affected vehicles 

end up being repaired. There is a lot we could do to improve that rate—so I’d like 

to take a minute and talk to the automakers about how you notify vehicle owners. 

In addition to posting it on your website, it is my understanding that you use 

postal mail as the way you inform consumers about recalls. 

Well, it’s 2014—and so I think it is high time to add e-mail to the list of ways 

people are notified about a recall from their automaker. 

I’m not talking about replacing postal mail notifications, because there are still 

people who don’t use e-mail regularly, but do you think adding an additional electronic recall notification—like an e-mail—would improve repair rates for recalled 

cars? 

Answer. As I indicated in my testimony, Honda has experimented with numerous 

techniques to increase recall rates, including the use of phone calls, overnight mail, 

and bilingual letters (English and Spanish), just to name a few. Our experience is 

that e-mail provides some lift in response rates. With regard to the current safety 

improvement campaign, Honda has made 93,000 phone calls, mailed 132,000 post 

cards and sent 152,000 e-mails in addition to the first-class letters we have sent. 

As discussed below, while e-mail notification can be helpful, we do not always have 

access to e-mail addresses. In contrast, an owner’s address is typically on file with 

the various departments of motor vehicle registration in the states. 

Question 1a. When vehicles are purchased in your showrooms, do your dealers collect the e-mail of the buyer? 

72 

1Office of Inspector General, Audit Report, ‘‘Process Improvements Are Needed For Identifying 

and Addressing Vehicle Safety Defects, Rpt. No. MH–2012–001, Oct. 6, 2011, pp. 20–21. 

Answer. Dealers routinely ask customers for an e-mail address as part of the data 

collection process at time of purchase. It is not however, mandatory and some customers do not wish to provide it. Moreover, e-mail addresses change, and unlike 

physical addresses which are on file with state departments of motor vehicles, there 

is no established mechanism by which they are required to be updated. 

Question 1b. Mr. Schostek—you mentioned that in Europe, vehicles are required 

to have all safety recalls addressed each year when they are registered. This is 

much like emissions testing requirements that already occur today. What are the 

impediments to implementing such a requirement in the United States? Mr. 

Kunselman, can you answer as well? 

Answer. There are numerous issues that would need to be considered in pursuing 

such a proposal. Vehicle registration is an issue that is within the province of state 

law. While the burden would be on the states to adopt and implement such a proposal, there may be incentives at the Federal level that could encourage a state to 

adopt a requirement. A requirement that defects be remedied as a condition to registration would probably be easier to implement in a state with an emissions inspection requirement. It appears that about half of the states have regional emissions 

testing programs in some or all parts of the state. For those that do not, an alternative approach would need to be developed, perhaps tied to a database with the 

registering authority. Moreover, so that the requirement would not be overly burdensome, the system should be flexible, in order to account for factors such as the 

availability of parts and how recent the recall campaign was undertaken. 

The following is extracted from a report of the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation: 

High compliance rate for vehicle recalls. We found that three of the four nations 

we visited or contacted had a high compliance rate for vehicle recalls. For example, Japan has a recall compliance rate of about 80 percent, Germany 100 percent, and the United Kingdom 92 percent. In contrast, ODI considers a 65 percent recall compliance rate satisfactory. Canada reviews manufacturer recalls 

on a case-by-case basis and does not calculate an overall compliance rate. Further, Germany and the United Kingdom have laws in place that require the registration of a recalled vehicle with other governments, while the United States 

does not have a similar law. Through the registration system, the foreign counterparts can identify vehicles that do not meet safety regulation requirements 

and Germany can declare the vehicles legally inoperable until inspected and repaired according to recall requirements. This vehicle registration requirement 

may explain the higher compliance rates of ODI’s counterparts.1

Ensuring Dealers Make Repairs 

Question 2. Lieutenant Erdman testified that she had taken her car in to the dealer three times between when they were notified about the recall and when the accident occurred. But she was not told about the recall and nothing was repaired. 

As the automaker—and I’d like to get both Honda and Chrysler’s perspective on 

this—what proactive steps are you taking to ensure that doesn’t happen again—and 

your dealers check every single car coming in the door for open recalls? 

Answer. As noted in our response Senator Nelson’s Question 2 above, our Honda 

and Acura Dealer Sales and Service Agreement specifically rquires a dealer to ‘‘perform any and all warranty campaign, recall, product-improvement or product-update 

service in compliance with instructions and directives issued by American Honda.’’ 

The Honda and Acura Service Operations manuals provide additional detail as to 

how the obligation is to be met. Our field staff met with every dealer earlier this 

year to review our policy that requires every VIN be checked for open recalls. We 

have also sent numerous communications to dealers reminding them of our policy, 

including the most recent during which every Honda and Acura dealer was contacted during the week of November 30 by a member of our field staff. 

Question 2a. Do you believe that we need to make it a requirement under law 

that dealers perform those checks for all open recalls when cars come in their door? 

Answer. All dealerships and independent repair facilities could be required to 

check for, and notify the customer of, any open recalls before returning a vehicle 

to the customer. This is something we already ask all of our dealers to do. Additionally, as I testified, that all outstanding repairs for recalled vehicles be completed before a vehicle can be registered in a state. This procedure is not unlike the requirement that a vehicle pass emissions testing before it can be registered. 

73 

Question 2b. What are the impediments to implementing such a requirement in 

the United States? 

Answer. It is already a Federal requirement that all new recalled vehicles must 

be repaired prior to sale. Expanding this requirement to include vehicles in use 

would add a number of complications. For example, as a matter of practicality, it 

could only apply to dealers who are servicing vehicles that are of the same brand 

or brands that the dealer sells. Other dealers and independent shops do not perform 

repairs of recalled vehicles. In addition, there is a need to address a customer’s right 

to refuse the repair. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL TO

RICK SCHOSTEK

Question. You have endorsed a proposal by the Auto Alliance that rental car companies should be prohibited from renting unsafe recalled vehicles only when the 

manufacturer has issued a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning on the vehicles. Have you issued 

a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning in connection with recalled Takata airbags? If not, why 

not? 

Answer. Honda generally does not sell its vehicles to fleets and as such, has not 

taken a position on the legislation prohibiting rental car companies from renting unsafe recalled vehicles. As independent businesses, Honda and Acura dealers may, 

of course, sell vehicles to fleet owners. Honda is not a member of the Auto Alliance. 

Honda sends its recall notices to the owner of a vehicle, be it an individual or a 

fleet, and the notices each receives is identical. Unless all owners are advised not 

to drive a recalled vehicle, which would be highly unusual, it is up to the owner 

of the vehicle—not Honda or Acura—to determine whether or not to drive the vehicle until the repair has been performed. There have been no such instructions on 

the recall notices associated with the Takata–related recall notices. However, we 

urge owners to have repairs made on recalled vehicles as soon as possible. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL TO

RICK SCHOSTEK

Question 1. USCAR–24 on ‘‘Inflator Technical Requirements and Validation’’ is a 

specification published by the United States Council for Automotive Research. It 

outlines testing procedures for the inflator module used in airbags and requires the 

inflator to undergo a number of tests in a variety of extreme conditions, including 

high humidity. USCAR represents a collaboration of Chrysler Group LLC, Ford 

Motor Company, and General Motors. 

Mr. Schostek and Mr. Kunselman, do you believe Takata provided prompt and 

adequate documentation regarding testing completed in accordance with USCAR–24 

specifications, throughout the history of your respective company’s relationship with 

Takata? Please describe and provide documentation showing the nature of your 

communications with Takata and vice versa, on this topic. 

Answer. As of the time of this response, Honda is aware that it has specifications 

for Takata airbag inflators that contain within them testing procedures that Honda 

understands to be substantially similar to those required by USCAR–24. In addition, Honda understands that airbag inflators used by Honda are also commonly 

used by U.S. automobile manufacturers who apply USCAR–24. Therefore, airbag inflators used by Honda should have the same performance and satisfy the USCAR– 

24 standard. 

Question 2. National news outlets have reported that numerous cases involving 

the defect were settled out of court, and that the details of these settlements were 

sealed. 

Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, did you report these cases to NHTSA under 

your Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (or 

TREAD) Act obligations? 

Answer. Not all of the eligible claims alleging that a death or injury occurred as 

a result of a defect in a Takata airbag inflator were reported by Honda to the 

NHTSA as required by the TREAD Act. The audit of Honda’s TREAD reporting disclosed that there were 8 such claims that were required to be reported under the 

requirements of the TREAD Act that were not reported. However, separate from 

and in excess of the reporting required under the TREAD Act, Honda began providing the NHTSA in September of 2009 with detailed information in its possession 

regarding each confirmed rupture event. This communication continues today. 

74 

Question 2a. Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, before settling these cases, did 

you conduct any internal investigations and determine that there was documentation that you did not want to be revealed in discovery? 

Answer. Honda did not conduct any investigation prior to settlement of Takata 

airbag inflator claims that determined that there were documents that Honda did 

not want to produce in discovery. 

Question 2b. Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, did the terms of the settlements 

include any prohibition on conveying information to NHTSA or other appropriate 

authorities? Do you agree that such a prohibition would be contrary to Federal law? 

Answer. None of the settlement agreements regarding the Takata airbag inflator 

prohibited disclosure of the settlement terms if a party to the agreement is compelled to do so by an applicable government process or court order. Honda agrees 

that private settlement agreements cannot forbid the disclosure to the NHTSA or 

other appropriate authorities of information that must be provided to the NHTSA 

or governmental authorities. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. DEB FISCHER TO

RICK SCHOSTEK

Question. Mr. Schostek, I received a disturbing message from one of my constituents who is concerned about the lack of information concerning vehicles impacted 

by these recalls. She has a Honda Pilot that is her family’s only four wheel drive 

vehicle, but she is nervous every time she uses it. She has tried to contact Honda 

for months to get definitive information about whether or not her car may contain 

defective airbags, but she has not been able to get an answer. How can I get someone from your company to constructively communicate to my constituent on this 

matter? 

Answer. Thank you for your question following the Senate Commerce full committee hearing on ‘‘Examining the Takata Air Bag Recalls and NHTSA’s Recall 

Process,’’ which took place on November 20. As I emphasized during the hearing, 

the safety and satisfaction of our customers is Honda’s highest priority. 

Ms. Haddad contacted Honda’s Customer Relations with concerns about her 2004 

Honda Pilot, which is registered in Nebraska. When Ms. Haddad contacted Honda 

in early November, her vehicle was not subject to the regional safety improvement 

campaign being conducted for driver airbag inflators in II states and territories. 

Since that time, and as Honda announced during the House Energy and Commerce 

committee hearing on Takata airbag recalls on December 3, Honda has transitioned 

the regional safety improvement campaign for driver airbag inflators to a national 

campaign. As such, Ms. Haddad’s Pilot is now within the scope of affected vehicles. 

Honda’s Customer Relations department has been in touch with Ms. Haddad to inform her of her vehicle’s status. When she visits a Honda dealership for repairs, her 

driver airbag inflator will be replaced at no cost to her. If there is any delay in repairs or if Ms. Haddad desires alternative transportation while her vehicle is being 

fixed, Honda dealers have been instructed to provide rental or loaner cars to customers free of charge. 

We take our customers’ concerns very seriously and endeavor to address them to 

the best of our ability. If you or your staff has further questions regarding Honda’s 

recall process and policies, please do not hesitate to contact me or Ed Cohen. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BILL NELSON TO

SCOTT G. KUNSELMAN

Loaner/Rental Car Availability 

Question 1. In your oral testimony, you stated that Chrysler would likely make 

loaner or rental cars available to consumers who own vehicles with defective Takata 

air bags whose cars cannot be repaired in a timely manner. 

What is Chrysler’s specific policy regarding the provision of loaner cars or rental 

car reimbursement to owners who cannot have defective Takata air bag inflators replaced in a timely manner? 

Answer. Chrysler’s goal is to have the replacements parts available and quickly 

service the vehicle. Our policy is to make rental or loaner cars available to customers who need them as we deploy our field action. Customers can contact their 

dealer or us through our hotline, which is available on each vehicle brand’s website, 

and we will address their needs on a case-by-case basis. 

Question 1a. Has Chrysler issued a specific written policy to dealers to implement 

these statements? 

75 

Answer. Yes. On December 12, 2014, Chrysler issued a revised Warranty Bulletin 

to its dealers, clarifying that dealers have the discretion to provide loaner vehicles 

to customers affected by a safety recall, including the Takata airbag campaigns. 

Question 1b. What steps is Chrysler taking to ensure that the loaner or rental 

cars offered to consumers are not subject to either the Takata recall, or any other 

safety related recall? 

Answer. It is our understanding that, due to their age, no Chrysler vehicles in 

the current rental fleet are subject to any Takata inflator recalls. Rental cars are 

typically returned after 18 months of service and the Chrysler vehicles included in 

the Takata inflator recalls are 2007 MY or older. Additionally, Chrysler understands 

that the major rental car companies reached an agreement in 2012 to voluntarily 

stop renting or selling vehicles subject to a manufacturer recall. 

Recall Repairs 

Question 2. Do you include a provision in the franchise agreements with your 

dealerships that requires them to perform safety recall repairs prior to offering used 

cars of your brand/make for sale to consumers? 

Answer. Yes, this requirement is included in Chrysler’s Dealer Policy Manual, 

which is incorporated into Chrysler’s franchise agreements by reference. 

Question 3. Do you include a provision in the franchise agreements with your 

dealerships that requires them to perform safety recall repairs prior to offering used 

cars of other brands/makes for sale to consumers? 

Answer. Yes, this requirement is included in Chrysler’s Dealer Policy Manual, 

which is incorporated into Chrysler’s franchise agreements by reference. 

Question 4. Do you compensate your franchised dealers the same for safety recall 

repairs as for retail repairs, based on the same hourly rate and the same time allowed for performing the repairs? 

Answer. Yes. Prior to the launch of each recall, a time-study is completed to define the required labor to perform the repair. The dealer is compensated for the time 

defined in the study. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

SCOTT G. KUNSELMAN

Increasing the Rate of Repairs 

Question 1. When a recall happens, it is rare that 100 percent of affected vehicles 

end up being repaired. There is a lot we could do to improve that rate—so I’d like 

to take a minute and talk to the automakers about how you notify vehicle owners. 

In addition to posting it on your website, it is my understanding that you use 

postal mail as the way you inform consumers about recalls. 

Well, it’s 2014—and so I think it is high time to add e-mail to the list of ways 

people are notified about a recall from their automaker. 

I’m not talking about replacing postal mail notifications, because there are still 

people who don’t use e-mail regularly, but do you think adding an additional electronic recall notification—like an e-mail—would improve repair rates for recalled 

cars? 

Answer. As a normal business practice, Chrysler notifies affected consumers using 

methods beyond the regulatory requirement. After sending the initial required mailing and follow-ups for undeliverable addresses, Chrysler continues to notify customers every 6 months via first class mail until our completion rate thresholds are 

met. In cases where completion rates are not progressing at the expected rate, 

Chrysler may deploy other outreach methods to enhance performance, such as email. 

Question 1a. When vehicles are purchased in your showrooms, do your dealers collect the e-mail of the buyer? 

Answer. At the time of a purchase, our dealers request a buyer’s e-mail. 

Question 1b. Mr. Schostek—you mentioned that in Europe, vehicles are required 

to have all safety recalls addressed each year when they are registered. This is 

much like emissions testing requirements that already occur today. What are the 

impediments to implementing such a requirement in the United States? Mr. 

Kunselman, can you answer as well? 

Answer. There are always opportunities to improve the process. While there may 

be obstacles to implementing this potential requirement, Chrysler would be open to 

exploring this and other options. 

76 

For Industry, Ensuring Dealers Make Repairs 

Question 2. Lieutenant Erdman testified that she had taken her car in to the dealer three times between when they were notified about the recall and when the accident occurred. But she was not told about the recall and nothing was repaired. 

Question 2a. As the automaker—and I’d like to get both Honda and Chrysler’s 

perspective on this—what proactive steps are you taking to ensure that doesn’t happen again—and your dealers check every single car coming in the door for open recalls? 

Answer. When customers bring their vehicles to the dealership for service, it is 

Chrysler’s policy to clearly communicate to customers the open recalls that exist on 

that vehicle. All Chrysler dealers use electronic systems that require the VIN to be 

entered before any assessment of the vehicle can be completed. This system automatically notifies the dealership staff of open recalls as well as the complete vehicle 

history for work done in any authorized Chrysler dealership. It is Chrysler’s policy 

that dealers not only communicate information to customers about open recalls, but 

also make every effort to ensure that the customer’s open recall is serviced on site 

at that time or that the customer schedules an appointment to service the recall 

before leaving the dealership. 

Question 2b. Do you believe that we need to make it a requirement under law 

that dealers perform those checks for all open recalls when cars come in their door? 

Answer. As outlined in Question 2a, Chrysler already requires our dealers to perform checks for open recalls when cars come to a dealership. 

Question 2c. What are the impediments to implementing such a requirement in 

the United States? 

Answer. As noted, Chrysler has already instituted this practice. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL TO

SCOTT G. KUNSELMAN

Question 1. You have endorsed a proposal by the Auto Alliance that rental car 

companies should be prohibited from renting unsafe recalled vehicles only when the 

manufacturer has issued a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning on the vehicles. Have you issued 

a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning in connection with recalled Takata airbags? If not, why 

not? 

Answer. No, Chrysler has not issued a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning because the data 

to which we have had access does not support such a warning. 

Question 2. Ten years ago, Raechel and Jacqueline Houck were killed by a recalled Chrysler 2004 PT Cruiser, after the safety defect caused it to catch on fire. 

Did your company issue a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning to owners of those vehicles? 

Answer. Chrysler did not issue a ‘‘do not drive’’ warning in connection with Chrysler Recall D18 and does not agree that the recall condition caused the Houck vehicle 

to catch fire. 

Question 3. Knowing what happened to Raechel and Jacqueline, do you think that 

the rental company should have been allowed to rent them that car, without getting 

the safety recall performed first? 

Answer. Chrysler supports requiring that rental car companies ground all vehicles 

subject to a stop drive recall until they are repaired. For all other recalls, we support requiring that rental car companies ground vehicles until they are repaired, unless the rental car company: (1) provides customers with written notification of any 

un-remedied defect or noncompliance, including pre-remedy precautions; and (2) receives a written acknowledgement by the customer of receipt of notification. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL TO

SCOTT G, KUNSELMAN

Question 1. USCAR–24 on ‘‘Inflator Technical Requirements and Validation’’ is a 

specification published by the United States Council for Automotive Research. It 

outlines testing procedures for the inflator module used in airbags and requires the 

inflator to undergo a number of tests in a variety of extreme conditions, including 

high humidity. USCAR represents a collaboration of Chrysler Group LLC, Ford 

Motor Company, and General Motors. 

Mr. Kunselman, please describe Chrysler’s involvement, as a member of USCAR, 

in the development of these specifications. 

Answer. Chrysler, Ford and General Motors all contributed to the creation of the 

USCAR–24 specification (Inflator Technical Requirements and Validation), which 

77 

was released in June of 2002. The three companies also contributed to subsequent 

revisions published in June of 2004 and April of 2012. 

Question 1a. Mr. Schostek and Mr. Kunselman, do you believe Takata provided 

prompt and adequate documentation regarding testing completed in accordance with 

USCAR–24 specifications, throughout the history of your respective company’s relationship with Takata? Please describe and provide documentation showing the nature of your communications with Takata and vice versa, on this topic. 

Answer. To the best of my knowledge, Takata has provided prompt and adequate 

documentation regarding testing completed in accordance with USCAR–24 specifications throughout its relationship with Chrysler. All parts, including each Takata inflator used in a Chrysler vehicle, are documented by the supplier to be production 

ready. Proof of production ready status is submitted to Chrysler prior to the launch 

of a new vehicle or prior to the introduction of a substantial modification to an existing production part. Like other manufacturers, Chrysler refers to this practice as 

the Production Part Approval Process (‘‘PPAP’’). It is my understanding that all testing completed under USCAR–24 by Takata was included in its PPAP submission 

to Chrysler. 

Question 2. National news outlets have reported that numerous cases involving 

the defect were settled out of court, and that the details of these settlements were 

sealed. 

Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, did you report these cases to NHTSA under 

your Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (or 

TREAD) Act obligations? 

Answer. Yes. Chrysler is aware of only one incident causing injury involving a 

Chrysler vehicle. Chrysler reported this incident to NHTSA, as required, in the 

fourth quarter of 2013. 

Question 2a. Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, before settling these cases, did 

you conduct any internal investigations and determine that there was documentation that you did not want to be revealed in discovery? 

Answer. No. 

Question 2b. Mr. Kunselman and Mr. Schostek, did the terms of the settlements 

include any prohibition on conveying information to NHTSA or other appropriate 

authorities? Do you agree that such a prohibition would be contrary to Federal law? 

Answer. My understanding is that a confidential settlement in no way protects 

a manufacturer from its obligation to report under the Safety Act. I further understand that a prohibition, as posed in your question, would be contrary to Federal 

law. If a manufacturer uncovers a safety defect in the course of a product liability 

suit, the manufacturer is obligated under the Safety Act to report that defect to 

NHTSA and undertake a recall. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL TO

DAVID J. FRIEDMAN

Question 1. USCAR–24 on ‘‘Inflator Technical Requirements and Validation’’ is a 

specification published by the United States Council for Automotive Research. It 

outlines testing procedures for the inflator module used in airbags and requires the 

inflator to undergo a number of tests in a variety of extreme conditions, including 

high humidity. USCAR represents a collaboration of Chrysler Group LLC, Ford 

Motor Company, and General Motors. 

Mr. Friedman, to what extent is NHTSA involved in the development and acceptance of the USCAR specifications for inflators? 

Answer. USCAR–24 is an industry sponsored, industry only effort to establish its 

own criteria for manufacturing quality and processes when developing and validating parts from the suppliers which support the OEM vehicle manufacturers. 

There was no government involvement including from NHTSA in developing the 

USCAR 24–2 specification. 

Question 1a. Mr. Friedman, USCAR–24 specifications were last updated in April 

2013. Did this update reflect knowledge that NHTSA has had since at least 2008, 

regarding inflator vulnerabilities in certain environmental conditions such as high 

humidity? 

Answer. USCAR–24 effort remained an industry only group and there was no government involvement, including from NHTSA. The Takata air bag recalls in 2008 

were related to manufacturing problems. NHTSA did not have knowledge of the inflator vulnerabilities related to long term exposure to high absolute humidity until 

early to mid-2014. 

78 

Question 1b. Mr. Friedman, now that we know that Takata’s propellant can explode violently if exposed to any kind of moisture, what is NHTSA doing to make 

sure the next revision of USCAR–24 will subject inflators to more stringent requirements and testing? 

Answer. This is an industry only group and NHTSA has no expectation of being 

part of it. However, if NHTSA determines that air bag propellant presents a safety 

concern that warrants further agency action, the agency will determine whether regulation, additional enforcement, guidelines or a combination of activities would be 

the proper course of action to pursue. 

Æ 

79 

This page intentionally left blank.