By Nathan Proctor
Associations representing manufacturers of everything from toasters to tractors, including medical devices, oppose rules requiring the military buy fixable equipment
Five years ago, The New York Times published a column, which was somewhat of a landmark in our work to support Americans’ Right to Repair: “Here’s One Reason the U.S. Military Can’t Fix Its Own Equipment,” written by then-Marine Captain Elle Ekman.
Captain Ekman, a logistics officer, described how restrictions regarding who repairs equipment, imposed by the manufacturers, undermined the operations of American military personnel. For example, they had to box and ship engines back to the U.S. or were unable to service generators because of various contractual restrictions.
Issues around the military’s Right to Repair have continued to crop up over the past five years. During Congressional hearings this spring, Sen. Elizabeth Warren asked the Secretary of the Navy, Carlos Del Toro, “Would having a stronger focus on Right to Repair issues during the acquisition process … help the Navy cut costs and boost readiness at the same time?”
His response? “Very much so.”
One of the relatively few pieces of legislation Congress will pass this session will be the National Defense Authorization Act, which funds U.S. defense spending and guides how that money is spent. Among the instructions being considered in this legislation in the Senate are new bipartisan rules, proposed by Sen. Warren, that would require the military to include reasonable access to repair materials – parts, tools and service instructions – as part of any purchase contract.
The proposal, found in Section 828 of the legislation, is fairly simple: “The head of an agency may not enter into a contract for the procurement of goods or services unless the contractor agrees in writing to provide the Department of Defense fair and reasonable access to all the repair materials, including parts, tools, and information, used by the manufacturer or provider or their authorized partners to diagnose, maintain, or repair the good or service.” This would not prevent the manufacturer from reflecting these requirements in the cost of the contract.
One might expect weapons manufacturers would object. What I wasn’t expecting was for manufacturers of kitchen appliances, and tractors and medical equipment to weigh in against this section. But in late August, 404 Media published a letter signed by dozens of trade associations calling for lawmakers to reject Right to Repair requirements.
Given that the letter has signers listed alphabetically, AdvaMed is listed first.
Many of the biomeds that I have met in my advocacy around medical Right to Repair started as technicians in the Armed Services, and most, if not all, of these biomeds have stories about manufacturers refusing to assist urgent requests to assist them in repairing devices.
We all recognize that medical device repair must be done to the highest safety standards, because lives are on the line. But lives are on the line in other ways, too.
Lives are on the line in field hospitals in battle zones, where a timely repair could save the life of someone serving our country. And restrictions to repair materials can mean that the only people there to service equipment have to face manufacturer-imposed barriers to that work.
I think that’s wrong. There are things which are more important than a business model. If you agree, I hope you will contact your member of Congress and tell them to support the military’s Right to Repair.
