With the 119th Congress now reporting for duty, the legislative process for passing the REPAIR (Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair) Act will need to begin anew. The previously proposed Right to Repair bill (H.R. 906), introduced by returning Rep. Neal Dunn (FL-02), would have effectively enabled independent repair shops and consumers to gain access to the same repair data that manufacturers’ authorized dealers have.
This is especially important as trucks add new technology and electronics.
“There are things that go on in the engine that you just can’t figure out unless you can get this electronic information,” explained Marc Karon, president of Florida-based aftermarket distributor Total Truck Parts back in 2023, when the last version of the REPAIR Act was introduced. “You can’t determine which injector is not working correctly, or if there’s an ECU that’s not working correctly.”
Darry Stuart, former chairman of the American Trucking Associations’ Technology & Maintenance Council and current president and CEO of DWS Fleet Management Services, noted that for technicians to get this information, they need the OEM’s tools and diagnostic software.
“A lot of the repairs today are built around emissions—or electronics or harnesses—and the fleets can spend hours and hours trying to figure it out, especially if they don’t have the software,” he said.
Read more: Right to Repair conflict explained
It seems pretty straightforward—give everyone the same access to vehicle repair data so trucks can be fixed faster and by more shops—but the debate over if Right to Repair should be a legislative priority is as complex as the vehicles themselves.
Kacey Frederick, associate editor at Fleet Maintenance affiliate Ratchet+Wrench, recently examined both sides of the discussion to present some of the opinions on the table. She spoke with two experts:
Scott Benavidez, owner of Mr. B’s Paint and Body Shop Inc. in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and chairman of the Automotive Service Association’s Board of Directors
Lisa Foshee, senior vice president of the Auto Care Association’s Government Affairs and General Counsel
Shop-to-shop differences
New vehicles are typically covered by warranties, with work done by dealers and large third-party repairs that have access to OEM data. But if the vehicle is out of warranty, or the fleet can’t send their vehicle to an authorized shop, problems can arise.
Foshee cited a 2024 ACA survey in which 63% of respondents reported difficulty accessing repair data either daily or weekly. Furthermore, 51% reported having to send up to five vehicles to a dealer each month due to data access restrictions. For fleets that have diagnostic techs in-house, sending trucks offsite takes the vehicle out of service for longer and requires additional resources such as a driver to drop off and pick up the vehicle at the dealer.
Opponents of Right to Repair have their reasons for being skeptical of the legislation as an answer, though; particularly, how government involvement will impact the operations of smaller shops.
“I think our biggest concerns were having the government regulate shops and regulate that kind of information,” Benavidez said. “They do not have the capacity to do it. They do not have the people in place to do it. It was better to be able to problem-solve it ourselves, with direct contact with the OEMs.”
A Memorandum of Understanding between ASA, the Society of Collision Repair Specialists, and many different automakers outlined the relationship between shops and OEMs, though Foshee argued that the MOU applies only to data from scan tools plugged into the OBD-II port, and does not cover everything transmitted wirelessly and stored virtually.
Benavidez, meanwhile, advocated for making the process outlined in the MOU work before turning to federal regulations.
Data access at a price
The topic of data access brings up another crucial point, though: is it fair to force OEMs to hand over repair data to shops for free? As Benavidez pointed out to R+W, it isn’t practical to force companies that have invested money researching and developing this data to simply hand it over, when even dealerships usually must pay for that same data.
However, the REPAIR Act doesn’t call for this data to be given away for free. The language of the bill only asks that it is offered at the same price it is for dealerships.
“The REPAIR Act in no way asks for the data to be provided for free. That is not on the table,” Foshee said. “If you charge the dealership $1,000 a month, then that's what you should charge the aftermarket. But at no point has the aftermarket asked for the data for free.”
With shops already having to compete on a plethora of aspects like customer service and trustworthiness, Foshee contends that the REPAIR Act will offer a level playing field for both dealerships and independent shops.
The idea of a level playing field is a dominant force behind the push for R2R. In that same vein, the bill also emphasizes the importance of aftermarket parts—something some opponents have questioned the motives of. But R2R proponents counter that it isn’t conducive to fair competition for OE parts to be the only ones propped up as a solution.
See also: ACA, MEMA give updates on aftermarket, Right to Repair at AAPEX keynote
An Industry Looking for Answers
The push for R2R comes from an anxiety many shops are feeling—small, independent shops, who may not have the relationship with manufacturers that others do, trying to level an uneven playing field.
Concerns from both sides of the aisle are valid, but the over 60% of repair shops surveyed by the ACA who report having trouble accessing data are still looking for solutions. Time will tell if the 119th Congress will provide any.
And the aftermarket sector is sure to press the issue to ensure the next version of the REPAIR Act doesn’t get stalled in subcommittees. On the heavy-duty side, MEMA is expected to provide right to repair updates during the Heavy Duty Aftermarket Dialogue on Jan. 20.
Check back on Fleet Maintenance next week to follow our coverage.
