Lincoln MKZ Investigations

9 ODI actions on file.

• RQRQ22004RECALLOpened 8/8/2022
  Front Brake Jounce Hose Failures
  SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS

  On August 8, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation based on 50 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) alleging front brake jounce hose ruptures on model year (MY) 2013-2018 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles. A ruptured front brake hose results in a brake fluid leak. As a result, the driver may experience an increase in pedal travel and a reduction in the rate of deceleration, increasing the risk of a crash. It should be noted that the subject vehicles identified fell outside the scope of NHTSA Safety Recall 20V-469, which addressed front brake hoses rupturing on certain MY 2015-2018 Ford Edge and 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX vehicles. The result causes a brake fluid leak, lengthening the distance needing to stop the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.On March 10, 2023, Ford Motor Company (Ford) submitted to NHTSA Safety Recall 23V-162 (Ford Recall 23S12) to address front brake jounce hoses that may rupture. Ford found the rupture occurs from a localized failure of the internal reinforcement braid due to cyclic fatigue through tensile/bending and torsional inputs during suspension and steering articulations. The supplier for the front brake jounce hoses is Hitachi. This recall affects the subject vehicles equipped with non-hybrid engines and the suspect front brake jounce hoses (a total of 1,280,726 vehicles). The recall covers subject vehicles built from February 3, 2012 to July 19, 2017 when the suspect hoses were used in vehicle production. The remedy is for dealerships to replace both front brake jounce hoses with new hoses that have a revised braid material at no cost. The vehicles equipped with hybrid engines are excluded from the recall because the internal hose pressure is much lower due to the regenerative braking provided by the hybrid brake system. No failures of brake hoses on hybrid vehicles have been reported to ODI or Ford.Ford's actions address ODIs concerns at this time. Hybrid vehicles will be monitored for related failures. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by new circumstances.The 103 ODI numbers cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following ID numbers:11511014, 11510867, 11510318, 11509030, 11505993, 11504989, 11504400, 11502147, 11502082, 11501820, 11501283, 11498439, 11498296, 11496842, 11496335, 11494931, 11494851, 11494252, 11493001, 11492084, 11492070, 11491444, 11491274, 11488858, 11488027, 11487627, 11487416, 11487233, 11486150, 11484924, 11484526, 11484080, 11483948, 11483926, 11483739, 11483723, 11482773, 11482690, 11481077, 11480788, 11480294, 11480052, 11479338, 11479334, 11479252, 11479247, 11479187, 11479094, 11479048, 11478985, 11478953, 11478729, 11478216, 11476892, 11476282, 11470558, 11468994, 11467109, 11466294, 11462746, 11461217, 11456065, 11455367, 11444848, 11436419, 11436376, 11430685, 11428329, 11425083, 11421026, 11420738, 11420735, 11420298, 11418197, 11403926, 11397549, 11366991, 11366757, 11361016, 11359968, 11354569, 11352165, 11350344, 11348799, 11343929, 11343205, 11331947, 11329020, 11319596, 11310529, 11292271, 11288455, 11254787, 11253479, 11253244, 11234622, 11230669, 11230050, 11228240, 11221111, 11143630, 11129392 and 11120228.

• EAEA21002OPENOpened 9/17/2021
  Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
  AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:DRIVER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE

  From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

• RQRQ19005RECALLOpened 12/19/2019
  Door Latch Failures
  LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES:DOORS:LATCH

  In December 2019, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation based on 235 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) alleging doors failed to latch when closed, and/or inadvertently opened while driving, on model year (MY) 2012-2014 Ford Fiesta, and 2013-2014 Fusion and Lincoln MKZ. Some VOQs reported the failure occurred after the latch had been remedied under a prior recall which involved fracture of the latch pawl spring tab due to thermally induced cyclic fatigue. Other VOQs alleged a similar failure in vehicles not previously recalled. A latch with a fractured pawl spring tab typically results in a ?door will not close? condition, however in certain somewhat rare circumstances, may result in the door coming open while driving. In response to ODI?s investigation, Ford has announced three field actions, as discussed below.On March 23, 2020, Ford submitted Safety Recall 20V-177 (Ford 20S15), a regional recall campaign to address door latch failures in vehicles not previously recalled under Safety Recalls 15V-246, 16V-643 and 17V-210. The recall affects vehicles currently or ever registered in certain high ambient temperature states (see 20V-177 for affected states). As a remedy, Ford will replace all four door latches free of charge.On August 24, 2020, Ford issued a non-safety regional field action (Ford 20R01) to address door latch failures on the same model/MY vehicles not covered under 20V-177 (i.e., not currently/ever registered in affected states). According to Ford, spring tab failure rates for vehicles covered by this action are about half that of the 20V-177 vehicles. Under this action, dealers will replace all door latches, free of charge, if either; a) the vehicle exhibits a related latch concern, or b) if the vehicle owner expresses a concern about the latches in their vehicles. Details can be found under NHTSA TSB No. 10190990, a copy of which is available in this investigative file available at NHTSA.gov.On June 8, 2020, Ford submitted Safety Recall 20V-331 (Ford 20S30) addressing vehicles previously remedied under NHTSA Recalls 15V-246, 16V-643 and 17V-210, where the repair may not have been properly completed, specifically not all of the door latches were replaced, or replaced correctly. This recall involves an inspection of the latches, with the option for a consumer self-inspection; owners could view the date codes on their latches (and confirm child safety locks are present on the rear doors) and then submit the information to Ford?s mobile app or website. A dealership inspection option was also available. Any vehicle found to have unreplaced defective latches requires the replacement of all door latches as directed by Ford.Regarding the 4,494 reports cited above, 1,485 involve scope-related failures (with 13% alleging door opening), and the remaining 3,009 reports involving remedy concerns (with 18% alleging door opening - note ODI was unable to verify the allegations of door opening). The three ODI injuries were all relatively minor. Ford?s reported injury incidences include one (unconfirmed) report of an ejection, three minor injuries with the others involving undisclosed injuries. Ford?s crashes involved two (unconfirmed) crashes alleging the incident door contacted another vehicle and three involving doors striking other property.The recalled vehicles include MY 2011-2015 Ford Fiesta, 2013-2016 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, 2015 Ford Mustang and Lincoln MKC, 2013-2015 Ford Escape and Ford C-MAX, 2012-2015 Ford Focus and 2014-2016 Ford Transit Connect.Ford's actions address ODI's concerns at this time. ODI will take further action if warranted by new information. The reference (OD

• EAEA18002RECALLOpened 4/18/2018
  Extended Braking Distance
  SERVICE BRAKES, AIR:ANTILOCK:CONTROL UNIT/MODULE

  On April 18, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Engineering Analysis (EA) 18-002 to investigate reports of braking concerns in model year (MY) 2006-12 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, and MY 2006-11 Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with Continental Automotive System?s ABS hydraulic control units (HCUs). Complainants report that after an ABS braking event (initiated by slippery or uneven surfaces) the brake pedal moved towards the floor and the vehicle stopping distance increased beyond driver expectations.Inside the HCU are four hydraulic normally closed (NC) valves with zinc-coated moving armatures that control the flow of brake fluid. Unstable brake fluid can degrade over time, allow the brake fluid to gel, and corrosion to form on the armatures. The high-viscosity gelation and corrosion can cause the armatures to become stuck (open). In some cases, braking returns to normal when the armature(s) subsequently become unstuck. The intermittent condition proves difficult to diagnose with complainants reporting having (non-HCU) repairs conducted only to have the condition return.During the investigation, 14 HCUs from complaint vehicles were recovered, including seven from reported crashes. NHTSA?s Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) disassembled the HCUs, removed the four NC valves in each, and confirmed 22 of the 56 NC valves contained stuck armatures. On seven of the 14 HCUs, both front wheel armatures were stuck, on nine of the 14 HCUs two or three armatures were stuck. And 52 of the 56 NC armatures exhibited corrosion of the zinc coating. Forces required to extract stuck armatures from the valve sleeve were measured to range from 1.1 to 18.0 lbs. VRTC also conducted ABS braking tests on a variety of test surfaces that showed HCU failures cause increases in pedal travel and braking distances. Testing also showed that if the driver was able to apply four times the brake pedal force and two times the brake pedal travel, then high-vehicle decelerations could be achieved, however, single or multiple wheel lockups were also occurring.Based on Ford?s response to ODI?s July 20, 2018 information request letter, and complainants' reports to NHTSA, ODI identified a population of vehicles with an elevated level of field failure compared to vehicles produced both before and after.Further evaluation of Ford?s response identified that the brake fluid used to produce these vehicles, a specific formulation of a DOT3 fluid provided by CCI Corporation between February 2006 and July 2009, differed from the brake fluid used in other vehicle populations. ODI used the correlation of fluid specification and elevated field failures to identify a vehicle population exhibiting a defect trend. The complaints, crashes and injuries cited above, and the 14 recovered HCUs involve vehicles from this population.On December 18, 2019, Ford submitted safety recall (19V-904) to remedy HCU failures on the MY 2006-2010 Ford Fusion, Lincoln MKZ, and Mercury Milan vehicles manufactured with the suspect CCI brake fluid formulation. Ford will function test the HCU and replace the DOT 3 brake fluid with an improved DOT 4 brake fluid. If the HCU fails the function test, Ford will install an HCU with a different armature coating (black oxide). HCUs with black oxide coating were fully phased into Ford?s new vehicle production by MY 2016; these HCUs do not appear to be experiencing armature corrosion. ODI notes that the non-recalled EA18-002 subject vehicles, which were manufactured with a different specification brake fluid, did not display an elevated level of field failures like the recalled vehicles.Based on available information, Ford?s rec

• EAEA15002RECALLOpened 2/27/2015
  Door Latch Failure
  LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES:DOORS:LATCH

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened an investigation based on consumer allegations of doors failing to latch and/or inadvertently opening on model year (MY) 2011-2013 Ford Fiesta, MY 2013 Ford Fusion and MY 2013 Lincoln MKZ vehicles. All of the affected vehicles share the same door latch design.ODI has received 281 unique reports related to the alleged problem, with over 100 claiming that the door(s) opened inadvertently while the vehicle was in motion. There were no crashes reported however three separate injuries were indicated, all caused by a rebounding door striking a consumer after they attempted to close it. In response to ODI's Information Request (IR) letter, Ford Motor Company (Ford) responded with 1,102 unique reports related to the alleged problem. There were no injury claims but there were two claims of low speed accidents occurring involving the door opening while driving and damaging property. Ford also submitted 10,883 warranty claims related to door latch failures.Many customers indicated that the door would not latch at all and accordingly they decided to restrain the door by other means (looping the seatbelt through the door, or using rope or tape) in order to drive the vehicle.Some customers also reported multiple door latch failures occurring on the same vehicle on different doors occurring months apart.On April 23rd, 2015 Ford notified ODI that it would conduct a safety recall (15V-246) to remedy door latches failures on certain MY 2011-2014 Ford Fiesta and MY 2013-2014 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles.According to Ford, the pawl spring tab located within the door latch can break off, or separate and result in a ?door will not close condition.The recalled vehicles include Fiesta vehiclesmanufactured from the start of the MY 2011 to May 2013 and Fusion and MKZ vehicles manufactured from the start of the MY 2013 year until May 2013.In May 2013 Ford reports that it made a manufacturing quality control change, specific to the spring tab, to improve the performance of the existing part.The door latch spring tab was redesigned and the new latch was phased into production in December 2014 with a new part number.Ford will replace all four door latches on the affected vehicles with the new latch design currently in production.The recall action initiated by the manufacturer appears to address the safety risks of concern to ODI.Accordingly, the investigation is closed.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the identification (ODI) numbers found in the attached list.

• PEPE14030RECALLOpened 10/2/2014
  Electric power steering failure
  STEERING:ELECTRIC POWER ASSIST SYSTEM

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a preliminary evaluation to investigate complaints of the loss of power steering while driving. The subject vehicles are equipped with a rack mounted Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) unit.Some of the complaints alleged that the steering assist failed and resulted in increased steering efforts that contributed to a loss of control and in some cases a crash.The EPAS system was manufactured by TRW Automotive for Ford and was designated as Generation I.These units were first produced and put into vehicle production in July 2008 beginning with the model year (MY) 2010 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan.The system is comprised of a mechanical steering rack-and-pinion gear with torque sensor, electric assist motor, motor position sensor and a power steering control module (PSCM). The PSCM is self-monitoring and designed to detect faults within the system and can store diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) if a problem is detected.There are 29 potential DTCs the system can detect.Many of these allow the system to go into reduced-assist steering mode by using the default vehicle speed signal should the live speed signal be lost, if voltage to EPAS system falls below 10.7 or goes above 17 volts, the temperature at the PSCM goes above 105C (221F), or if high friction is detected.Some DTCs will cause the system to go into manual steering mode (no assist). On July 1, 2015, Ford filed a Defect Information Report (DIR) identifying a safety related defect in TRW GEN I EPAS systems installed in some of the subject vehicles (NHTSA Recall 15V-340, Ford No. 15S18).The DIR indicated that intermittent electrical connections caused by quality issues associated with conformal coat contamination and ribbon cable pin misalignment within the steering gear motor may lead to a loss of the motor position sensor signal, resulting in a sudden loss of power assist while driving.The recall covers approximately 393,623 vehicles built from September 2010 through February 2012:2011-12 Fusion built SEP 2010 - FEB 2012; 2011-12 Lincoln MKZ built SEP 2010 - FEB 2012; 2011 Milan built SEP 2010 - DEC 2010; 2011-13 Taurus built SEP 2010 - FEB 2012; 2011-13 Flex with 3.5L GTDI engine built SEP 2010 - FEB 2012; and 2011-13 MKS, MKT with 3.5L GTDI engine built SEP 2010 - FEB 2012.The repair consists of updating the PSCM software to prevent a loss of steering assist while driving. The revised software will provide audible and visual warnings to the driver. If one or more of the following DTCs are stored, C1B00-62, C200B-2F, C200B-61, C200B-62, C200C-2F, C200D-49, U0300-00, U2011-49, U2011-61, U3000-46, U3000-49, U3000-61, U3000-72, U3000-96, P07AE-09, the dealer will replace the EPAS system at no charge to the owner.ODI's analysis of failure data for this PE identified a total of 2,584 complaints to ODI and Ford and 9,967 Ford warranty claims related to the alleged defect.The recalled vehicles account for 1,634 of the complaints and 7,311 of the warranty claims.ODI's analysis identified 40 complaints alleging crashes that may be related to loss of steering assist while driving, 20 of which involved vehicles included in Ford's recall.The information available for the alleged crashes were not sufficient to assess specific causes of the incidents or to verify EPAS malfunctions in each case.Most of the crashes were low-speed impacts with curbs or roadside objects resulting in wheel or minor body damage.None of the injury claims indicated medical attention was required.In addition, statistical modeling of the failure data by NHTSA's National Center for Statistics and Analysis projected 10-year failur

• EAEA12009RECALLOpened 12/12/2012
  Floor mat interference with accelerator
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL

  On May 27, 2014, Ford Motor Company submitted recall 14E-028 (Ford recall #14S07) to correct a safety-related problem with certain driver's side Ford optional all-weather floor mats sold for use in model year 2006 through 2011 model year Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr, and Lincoln MKZ vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant (HAP) from November 9, 2007, to October 31 ,2010.NHTSA testing determined that the original accessory all-weather mat with a single retention clip (Figure 1), may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle with the mat retained by the clip and rotated clockwise.Both the single- and double-clip (Figure 2) all-weather floor mats may interfere with the accelerator pedal return to idle when the mats are not secured by the retention clip(s).Testing showed that this can occur if the mats are moved forward from the clipped position approximately two inches into a position in which the rear edge of the mats will abut the retention clip(s) when installed singly and align with the clip(s) when stacked on another floor mat.The pedal interference incidents reviewed by the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) include 1 crash and 9 incidents with allegations of brake friction materials smoking and/or requiring repair for heat related damage.The crash incident occurred after the parking brake was applied at speed, resulting in loss-of-control vehicle yaw event caused by lock-up of the rear tires.The spin-out resulted in a side impact collision with an oncoming vehicle in an opposing lane of traffic. For the 29 incidents with sufficient information available to make an assessment; 23 (79%) were controlled by the driver either shifting to neutral, turning the engine off, or both; 4 (14%) were ended by the driver either kicking the pedal free (2) or pulling the mat away from the pedal (2); and 2 (7%) were ended by the pedal freeing itself from the mat with no apparent driver action.None of the drivers who reacted to the incident by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off reported any difficulties with either action.The subject mats were sold by Ford and Lincoln dealers directly to customers as an optional accessory equipment item or, beginning in November 2007, the mats were also available as a factory installed accessory if ordered with a new vehicle.Ford estimates that approximately 82,579 affected driver's side all weather floor mats were sold worldwide; either over the counter through Ford dealerships or as original equipment.Owners that purchased the subject all-weather floor mats as a factory installed accessory with their new vehicle will be notified to return their all weather floor mats to their Ford or Lincoln Dealership in exchange for replacement mats.Owners of all other potentially affected vehicles will be notified that, if they have an affected Ford driver's side all weather floor mat, they should return their mats to the dealership in exchange for replacement mats.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 10327597, 10332233, 10334211, 10335336, 10339330, 10348772 (and duplicate 10342572), 10372674, 10379562, 10415911, 10426255, 10434107, 10521053, 10554966.This investigation is hereby closed.

• PEPE10019CLOSEDOpened 5/28/2010
  Accel Pedal Interference - Acc Floormat
  VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL

  Unsecured mats may interfere with accelerator pedal return to idle. A heel blocker in the floor pan provides a platform that may lift an unsecured mat into contact with the pedal. Ford introduced new pedals as a running change early in model year (MY) 2010 vehicles. Analysis of complaints received by ODI and Ford show elevated rates of pedal entrapment incidents in MY 2008 through early 2010 production vehicles. Incidents typically occur following hard pedal applications to pass slower traffic or when merging into faster traffic. Drivers allege continued high engine power after releasing the accelerator pedal and difficulty braking, including reports that the incident was controlled by shifting to neutral or turning the engine off. Drivers and service technicians reference observing evidence of mat interference or note unsecured Ford or aftermarket all weather floor mats in post-incident inspections.Based on information gathered during the Preliminary Evaluation the population being investigated has been narrowed to model years 2008 to 2010.This investigation has been upgraded to an engineering analysis on MY 2008 through early-2010 vehicles (produced through September 2009) to further assess the scope, frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect.The VOQs associated with the opening of this Engineering Analysis are: 10479693, 10415911, 10379562, 10372674, 10345830, 10342572, 10339330, 10335336, 10334211, 10332233, 10331160, 10329659, 10327597, 10320011, 10232027, 10214131

• PEPE08060CLOSEDOpened 10/14/2008
  TIRE VALVE CRACKING
  TIRES:VALVE

  ON OCTOBER 14, 2008, ODI OPENED PE08-060 TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CRACKED AND LEAKING SNAP-IN TIRE VALVES IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2007 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY.THE VALVES WERE SUPPLIED TO FORD BY TOPSEAL AUTO-PARTS, A SUBSIDIARY OF THE SHANGHAI BAOLONG AUTOMOTIVE CORPORATION IN CHINA.VALVES MADE BY TOPSEAL FOR AFTERMARKET SALE WERE THE SUBJECT OF TWO RECENT SAFETY RECALLS BY TECH INTERNATIONAL (08T-018) AND DILL AIR CONTROLS (08T-028), THE LATTER OF WHICH WAS INVESTIGATED BY ODI IN PE08-036 AND EA08-022.THE DEFECT CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY THE AFTERMARKET TIRE VALVE RECALLS BOTH INVOLVED INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING DUE TO ISSUES WITH THE SUPPLY OF ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS TO TOPSEAL FOR A PERIOD FROM JULY TO MID-NOVEMBER 2006.THE AFTERMARKET VALVES WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A BLEND OF EPDM AND NATURAL RUBBER, USING A RELATIVELY LOW PERCENTAGE OF EPDM (EPDM PROVIDES INHERENT RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING).HENCE, THE NEED FOR ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS AND THE PROBLEMS WITH CRACKING WHEN THOSE CHEMICALS WERE MISSING OR OUT OF SPECIFICATION IN SOME LOTS OF VALVES.BOTH RECALL CAMPAIGNS INVOLVED INSPECTION PROGRAMS TO IDENTIFY AND REPLACE VALVES WITH VISIBLE SURFACE CRACKING.ALTHOUGH THE TOPSEAL VALVES SUPPLIED TO FORD ALSO APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE ANTI-OZONANT SUPPLY ISSUES IN MID TO LATE-2006, FORD INDICATED THAT ITS VALVES WERE MADE AT A DIFFERENT TOPSEAL PRODUCTION LINE AND WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF EPDM RUBBER TO MEET MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATIONS FROM FORD.ODI'S ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA PROVIDED BY FORD SHOWED THAT PROBLEMS WITH CRACKED TIRE VALVES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER FOR MY 2007 VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007.FORD RESPONDED BY IMPLEMENTING CHANGES IN ITS MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SNAP-IN RUBBER TIRE VALVES AND ALSO INCREASING THE QUALITY AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS FOR VALVES IMPORTED FOR USE IN ITS VEHICLES.WHILE THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES ARE ELEVATED FOR SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007, THE RATES OF LEAKING VALVES ARE WELL BELOW ONE PERCENT OF PRODUCTION FOR EACH OF THE PEAK MONTHS FOR ALL OF THE AFFECTED MODELS.A SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH TIRE PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEMS (TPMS) WHICH WARN THE DRIVER WHEN ANY TIRE PRESSURES DROPS BELOW 25 PERCENT OF RECOMMENDED INFLATION PRESSURE. AS OUTLINED IN A LETTER TO ODI DATED APRIL 6, 2009, FORD HAS AGREED TO SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS OF CERTAIN MY 2007 AND 2008 FORD, LINCOLN AND MERCURY VEHICLES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CRACKING CONCERN. LETTERS WILL BE SENT TO OWNERS OF VEHICLES BUILT FROM NOVEMBER 2006 THROUGH MAY 2007.OWNERS CAN OPT FOR A FREE DEALER INSPECTION.VALVES EXHIBITING SURFACE CRACKS OR AIR LEAKAGE RELATED TO OZONE ATTACK WILL BE REPLACED BY FORD UNDER ITS NORMAL WARRANTY TERMS.FORD EXPECTS TO SEND THE LETTER BY APPROXIMATELY MID-MAY 2009. BASED ON THE USE OF TPMS IN THE MAJORITY OF SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE RELATIVELY LOW RATES OF REPAIRS ASSOCIATED WITH LEAKING VALVES AND RESULTANT TIRE DAMAGE, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE ACTIONS FORD HAS AGREED TO TAKE WILL PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION FOR VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT DURING THE PERIOD WHEN VALVES WITH INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING WERE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN USED IN VEHICLE PRODUCTION.FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE AN EFFICIENT ALLOCATION OF AGENCY RESOURCES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO