The voluminous data to get to the bottom of acted quickly to make sure that we could get to the bottom of this. So you dont have you havent been able to get since they reported back monday, you dont have will you be able to share with us your what they submitted . We will dig in to all that information and we will be more than happy to brief you and the committee on what we find. What has been your response to the reports and the under reporting, 1,700 cases by honda as relates to how you all are supposed to function . My personal response was shock and frustration that honda has failed so significantly to follow the act. Again, we issued a special order to honda to get to the bottom of this and to push them to discover not only about the 1,700 failures but what other failures are associated with their reporting of Early Warning data and information. We are our team has gotten back that information also just recently. Were digging through that information. And to determine they have basically admitted third guilt. Now the question that were trying to determine is how many different ways did they fail . How many different ways might we have to consider fining them to the full extent of the law . Have you communicated with the other auto companies, all of them in terms of what honda did and to make sure that in fact the other companies have not followed that same type of pattern in. We have two steps along those lines. One in my expectation as would you have exasked me that question. So today im calling on every automaker to do an audit of their Early Warning reporting and provide to that us to ensure they are fully following the act and can demonstrate that to us. We are looking at other measures potentially compelling them to provide such information. But i think every automaker should take the responsible shep of doing their own audit to determine an ensure that they are appropriately following the act. And if they are not, report that information to us and fix the problem immediately. Now, you indicated in your testimony that you have been responsible for takata quadrupling their testing. Have you determined that by quadrupleing that rate, would that be sufficient to generate the needed data to understand the current problems . No. In fact, i was very encouraged to hear first of all, we continue to push takata to do more. Second, i was encouraged to hear toyota, ford and honda agreed to do additional testing. We issued a general order to each and every automaker involved to require them to provide us with all the information they have on testing. We are trying to push the entire industry to ramp up their testing. We are also working to stand up some Test Facilities of our own so that we can verify the work that theyre doing. Henry waxman appreciate it. I yield back. Chair recognizes full Committee Ranking member, mr. Waxman. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. On november 18, nitsa announced it was calling toen takata and ought mowe automakers to expand the recall of defective driver side airbags to a National Recall. They based the decision to expand the recall on airbag failures that occurred outside of the highhumidity areas covered by the regional recall. Mr. Freedman, you have determined humidity is no longer a key factor or contributing factor to represent tured in these airbags . Have you determined that consumers outside of high humidity regions are potentially in danger from ruptures . Regarding passenger side airbags, all the data continues to point to an issue associated with high temperatures and high humidity over long periods of time. On the drivers side airbag, while humidity may still be a contributing factor, it is now clear based on the evidence that that is not simply the dominant factor which is why we have called on them and made clear to them while we accept regional recalls where the evidence supports it, the evidence does not no longer supports a recall limited to those freefshous areas. In september, Ranking Member interest david j. Friedman dwoused a bill that all recalls occur on a national be a sis sis. Cars are mobile and move from state to state. You can commit to reevaluate the procedure that allows for regional recalls based on climb mat or environmental conditions . Ranking member, each and every day we are looking at how question do more and better for the American Public. This issue is certainly cause us to continue to look into this issue. The committee has received takatas testing results from over 2,500 airbags that were collected as part of the regional recalls or Safety Improvement campaigns. These results are a bit perplexing. They show no ruptured from the drivers side airbags but they show more than 60 ruptures of passenger side airbags. In the case of one auto manufacturer with one type of airbag, one of the one of every eight airbags from southern florida vehicles ruptured during tests. Can you help us understand why they have asked for a National Recall on the drivers side airbags but lass not done so with the passenger side airbags even though takata test results seem to show higher risk for those airbags . Airbags . So if you look at chart a, the red dots are multiple cases during the testing of where there have been failures in passenger side airbags. Each and every one of of the failures in the real world and in testing have all happened in areas of high temperature, high humidity, consistent exposure to those areas. In this case, we must follow the data. And the data on the passenger side clearly indicates that the problem is in those areas. That said, our investigation is far from over. We are pushing for additional testing. And if we receive any evidence indicating that the problem is broader, we will act and we will act quickly to protect the American Public. Is the issue with the drivers side airbags a different issue than with the passenger side airbags . Whats the difference that makes you confident in calling for a National Recall only on the drivers side airbag . We are following the data and thats the basis for our decision. We do know that there are design differences between passenger side and drivers side airbags. Let me be clear. As takata and the automakers indicated, they have not yet gotten to the bottom of the root cause of the issue. Thats a critical step that we are pushing for. We are involved in because getting to the root cause will help dramatically clarify things for consumers, for autd toe makers, for suppliers and for the actions that each and every one must take. Thats a critical step and we will continue to push ourselves and industry to get to the bottom of this. Thats one of the reasons why we are now looking to get under contract hopefully within a week an expert in propellants and airbag production and design so that we can have added expertise on top of the experts we already have to get to the bottom of this as quickly as possible. We will leave no stone unturned in our efforts. Honda failed to report 1,729 serious accidents resulting in injuries or deaths to nitsa between 2003 and 2014. Eight of these incidents involved takata airbags. Can you explain how this information could have been used if honda had reported it like it was supposed to and can nitsa penalize honda for this failure to report . In your view, would increasing penalties help ensure manufacturers report the information they are supposed to do . Ranking member, the way we would use and the way we use all all of the Early Warning information is to spot trends, cases where there are mow tenl defects. Any time an automaker fails to provide that mfgs to us, it leaves us more hamstrung in our ability to find problems quicker and to get the problems fixed sooner. We are one of the things that we are determining right now, based both on han das admission of their failure and on the information they have provided is to what degree penalties are appropriate. But i can assure you, we will hold them accountable to the full extent of the law. That said, as you indicate, our maximum penalty for any single incident is 35 million. Sadly for too many car companies, thats pocket change. That needs to change. Under the gm act, the president and secretary have called for the maximum penalty to be increased to at least 300 million so that it will send a clearer message. We have worked over the last six years and have fined automakers more than 160 million using our authority. More than any administration ever has before. But it is clear to us that we need a bigger stick. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Waxman. Now recognize the vice chairman, mr. Lance. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Im interested in the time frame moving forward in answer to the congresswomans question you said it might be weeks or months. Id like a little more specifics on that. Your november 26 letter, there was a response on december 2, a response with which you fundamentally disagree. And i would imagine i disagree as well. What is your next step . Thank you, vice chairman. Our next step my team already began once we received that the information from takata on monday in response to our special order and yesterday in response to our recall demand, we are did iing into that data. We are evaluating their arguments. We are marshaling our evidence. Is their argument in the threepage response that they gave you . That is the extent of their argument. Rather weak tea, in my judgement. I agree. Whats the time frame . Because the American People need to be assured that their automobiles are safe. What is your next step, when will that occur in. Our next step after evaluating all of that information would be to issue an initial determination, initial decision of a defect to takata and the automakers. After that, we would hold a public hearing. How soon can you initiate that . As soon as humanly possible. The key, because we want to protect the American Public, we need to make sure we build the trongest case possible because at the end of the day, if takata and the automakers continue to refuse to act, we are going to have to take them to court. We want to make sure that we have a case prepared that will win in that circumstance. You can build a court case over time. Can you estimate for the committee and through the committee to the American People when your next step will be taken . We have begun our next step of diving into the data. That doesnt answer my question. The next legal step. Not just diving into the data. When will you next do something officially regarding takata and the automakers . I apologize. But at this point, because theres voluminous data from takata, i cant give you an exact estimate. My team is working furiously and as quickly as possible. As i indicated earlier, it could be weeks, it could be months. But it wont be many months if it is. I could see something if that occurred by the first of february and i would hope sooner than that, then what happens . We will hold the hearing. If they refuse the hearing has to be held within what time frame . The safety act does not establish the specifics. Does not 45 days or 30 days . Right. The safety act does not establish that. From our perspective, it should be time of the essence. I agree. What happens after that . Then after that, we will if the evidence still points to the need for a broader recall, we will issue a final determination. That will compel takata and automakers to act. If they fail to act, then we will have to work with the Justice Department to bring them to court and force that action. Its the Justice Department that brings takata, potentially, and the anufacturers to court . I would have to get back to you on the exact process. But my understanding is, yes, that we would work with the Justice Department. This is a civil action . I believe that is the case, yes. And then do you refer situations for criminal prosecution . Under certain circumstances the law does allow us to do that. And for example, hondas significant under reporting under the act, is that then referred to a doj for civil action or for criminal action or for both . We have the authority and we expect honda, frankly, to come in and agree to a significant Penalty Associated with that. That gregg harper would be a civil peoplety in. Yes, that we wont have to move to the Justice Department on that specific matter. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I have yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. The chair recognizes the gentleman from mississippi. Thank you, mr. Chairman. What is a reasonable period of ime to notify someone . Automakers are required by law to notify nitsa within five days of either determining a defect or five days of when they should have known that there was a defect. Under regulation, they have no more than 60 days to get a letter like this into the hands of consumers notifying them that this is an important safety recall and that they must take action. That said, even that 60 days to me is longer than i would like to see, which is why we have a vin took that every american can go to at afercar. Gov vinlookup. You will be alerted if theres a recall for your vehicle. You can sign up for added alerts from our app. Its important for the public, the driving public and passengers in those vehicles to know when theres a safety issue, correct . Its critically important. Any recall is an unreasonable risk to safety, automakers must act quickly to inform consumers. Consumers should act quickly to get their vehicles repaired. Explain how nitsa knew honda underreported yet delayed doing nything. In 2012 we became aware of a limited number of unreporting 1,700 . At the time we were is that limited . Why wasnt something if were talking about time limits being important, nitsa didnt meet your own standard. We were only aware of eight. It was only recently that we aware of the 1,700 problems based on the eight. We forced honda to update reports. Once we found out that the problem was bigger, we went after honda. We forced them under oath to provide us extensive information. We will hold them accountable for their failings. Nothing was really done on those eight at that point. Those eight were important to the eight incidents that were involved, obviously, were they not . They were important. We made sure once we discovered this that honda reported that information to us so that we could act on it. At the end of the day, the safety of the American Public is always our top priority. Making sure that we have that information was critical. It sounds good. It doesnt seem that was the case in 2012. I will move on and ask you at the november 20 Senate Commerce committee hearing, you said nitsa acknowledged a plan authorizing dealers to disable potentially defective passenger side airbags with Replacement Parts unable, as long as they tell consumers no the to put someone in that passenger seat. Is nitsas acknowledgement an endorsement . Should it be an opinion for all manufacturers of vehicles with passenger side airbags subject to recall. If the first and foremost priority should be getting the passenger airbags fixed. I understand. But is this an acknowledgement that this is the appropriate plan until you can get a replacement . If the parts arent available and if the vehicle doesnt have an occupant set that would disable the airbags, then, yes, its an appropriate step to take in the interest of safety. Can i ask this . As the nations top Highway Safety traffic official, can you tell this subcommittee you will put in the policy supporting this . Is that in writing . This is it has been part of our standard process. One, if a part is broken, then an automaker can disable it without facing legal penalties. We made that clear to the automakers. Is that a werent formal policy of nitsa . No. Will it become one . We will investigate that. Let me ask you, you heard you were in here for the testimony on the first panel . Yes. Did you hear when mr. Shimzu at takata discussed manufacturing versus design and he classified this as a manufacturing issue . Do you believe its a manufacturing problem or design problem . Or do you not know at this point . I would argue his testimony was inconsistent. He was clear that the industry is not clear yet on the root cause of the problem, which is why we are pushing to get to the bottom of it. I know we dont know yet. But do you view the propellant as the prime suspect right now . Its clear the propellant is involved. That said, we know other manufacturers in the 90s used the same propellant. Were looking to determine whether there have been any ruptures associated with those. We have not found it. If there are no representuptures with those, its an indication that if you have good design and manufacturing, the propellant may be safe to use. But clearly, no matter what, if you dont have the appropriate design and you dont have the appropriate manufacturing, you failed to live up to your responsibility. Even some previous takata scientists have indicated early that using an ammoniaum nitrate protell atlanta was not safe. We are asking the exact same questions, which is why we have compelled under oath all information from takata on all the changes that they have made to the propellant and why we are bringing in michael c. Burgess m. D. Outside expertise who has had experience with these propellants. Thank you. My time has expired. Thank you. Does dr. Burgess wish to is any questions . Yes. Thank you. You are recognized for five minutes. I thank the chairman for the courtesy of the recognition. Hank you for being here. We have had a chance to interact on other subcommittees in other roles, particularly with ignition problems earlier this year. Let me ask you a question. Mr. Yarmoth of kentucky posed a question to takata and posed to generally to the manufacturers. But his time was running short. He said he would request an answer in writing. His question basically was, how can we be confident the replacement airbags are safe. Let me pose that question to you. Theres a recall going on. Various manufacturers are providing Replacement Parts. To the extent, can the public be reassured that these Replacement Parts are safe . We believe that the Replacement Parts, for example, on the passenger side are safer than the ones that are in the vehicles. The data points to a time of over ten years before the failures h