A push by military contractors could alter pending legislation that would have empowered servicemembers to repair equipment. Lobbyists are pitching a subscription service instead.

Changing the pads on your car’s brakes is a pretty straightforward and inexpensive process on most vehicles. However, many modern vehicles having electronic parking brakes giving manufacturers a new avenue to paywall simple DIY repairs.

Most EVs will rarely, if ever, need to replace their mechanical brake pads as in most driving situations the car will be predominantly relying on regenerative braking to slow down. A hot hatch like the Ioniq 5N, however, might go through brakes a lot faster if it spends a lot of time at the track, which is what happened with Reddit user [SoultronicPear].

Much to their chagrin, despite buying the required $60/wk subscription to the National Automotive Service Task Force (NASTF) and the $2,000 interface tool, [SoultronicPear]’s account was suspended because it was not intended for use for anyone but “service professionals.” Not exactly a Right-to-Repair friendly move on Hyundai’s part. After trying a number of different third party tools, they finally found a Harbor Freight T7 bidirectional scan tool was able to issue the parking brake retract command to perform the pad swap, albeit not without throwing some error codes in the process.

Electrification of vehicles should simplify repairs, but manufacturers are using it to do the opposite. Perhaps they should read our Minimal Motoring Manifesto? There is a glimmer of hope in the promises of Slate and Telo, but we’ll have to see if they make it to production first.

As Congress hammers out the final version of the fiscal 2026 defense policy bill, Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren is putting pressure on a leading industry group to stop opposing bipartisan right-to-repair efforts aimed at giving the Pentagon greater control over fixing its own equipment.

In a letter to the National Defense Industrial Association, the Massachusetts senator called the organization’s opposition to reform proposals in the House and Senate versions of the legislation a “dangerous and misguided attempt to protect an unacceptable status quo of giant contractor profiteering.”

“Your organization’s attacks are based on unproven conjectures and self-serving projections, making clear there is no real basis to oppose the defense right-to-repair effort other than to protect profits of some of the largest defense contractors in the country,” Warren said in the letter.

The reforms aim to help the Defense Department obtain more technical information to allow troops to repair their gear in theater, enhancing readiness, saving taxpayer dollars and strengthening innovation.

“NDIA’s last-ditch efforts to oppose commonsense and bipartisan legislation that is a Trump administration priority appears to be a desperate attempt to cling to a status quo that makes big defense contractors billions of dollars a year at taxpayer expense. Instead of fighting reform efforts, NDIA should commit to working with DoD to protect service members and promote a healthy and competitive industrial base,” she added.

The military services have long faced contract-imposed restrictions on how they can repair and maintain equipment and weapons, leaving them dependent on original manufacturers to conduct necessary fixes in the field, which is costly and time-consuming. 

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, for example, recently pointed to a Black Hawk helicopter part to show how contractor restrictions drive up costs. The original equipment manufacturer refuses to repair or replace a small screen-control knob that grounds the aircraft when it breaks — forcing the Army to purchase an entire new screen assembly for $47,000. Driscoll said the Army could make the knob for just $15.

The right-to-repair issue has been gaining momentum and bipartisan support from Congress — and both the House and Senate included provisions in their versions of the 2026 defense policy bills. 

The House version of the bill includes a Data-as-a-Service Solutions for Weapon System Contracts provision, which would require DoD to negotiate access to the technical data and necessary software before signing a contract. That includes detailed manufacturing or process data, digital networks and models, software-related information, and operational and training information — all to be accessible as a service through various methods like online, in person or via machine-to-machine encryption.

Meanwhile, Senate lawmakers included a provision in their version of the annual bill that would require contractors to provide detailed instructions for repair and maintenance. 

“The Defense Secretary may not enter into a contract or agreement for the procurement, sustainment, or subsequent modifications of covered defense equipment unless the contract or agreement requires that the contractor deliver, or offer as a negotiated price option, Instructions for Continued Operational Readiness to the secretary upon delivery of the equipment,” the provision states.

The contractor would have to provide the department with the rights to diagnose, maintain and repair the equipment — and the department could withhold payment to the contractor until the company delivers those instructions. 

NDIA argues that the “instructions for continued operational readiness” that Congress wants DoD to have include “data, tools and software for operations, maintenance, installation and training, which could include sensitive and proprietary technical and manufacturing data and IP developed at the contractor’s private expense.” The group warns the proposal would allow DoD to provide those parts, tools and information to any authorized third-party contractor, including a company’s direct competitors under this proposal. 

In its white paper, NDIA said these efforts will “hamper innovation and DoD’s access to cutting-edge technologies by deterring companies, including traditional contractors, nontraditionals, and small businesses, from contracting with the DoD over concerns of forcing disclosure of IP; increasing legal, safety, and compliance risks; and introducing contractual and licensing conflicts.”

Some stakeholders, however, remain unconvinced.

“I’ve talked to folks that crafted the Senate language, and they don’t agree with that characterization at all. We’re almost dealing with perceptions here. I don’t see any real separation between the objectives in the House or in the Senate versions, but it’s in the particulars on how they do it,” Jerry McGinn,  the director of the CSIS’ Center for the Industrial Base, told Federal News Network.

In her letter to the industry group, Warren accused NDIA of “attacking these reforms with vague and threatening claims that don’t stand up to scrutiny,” including assertions that right-to-repair efforts would “hamper innovation.”

“The opposite is true. Small businesses have said that a defense right to repair law would create new business opportunities in the defense industrial base, not deter them from doing business with the military…Embracing competition will only grow the industrial base further,” Warren said.

“Your argument that such a right would deter companies from working with DoD is not supported by reality and appears to be a late-in-the game effort meant to confuse and scare members of Congress and muddy the terms of the debate,” she added.

In April, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the Army to incorporate right-to-repair provisions in all new and existing contracts as part of the service’s sweeping transformation initiative. 

Stan Soloway, president and CEO of Celero Strategies and federal acquisition expert, said the debate is just the latest iteration of the government’s decades-long tug of war with industry over intellectual property and data rights. Ultimately, those issues need to be resolved early in a program’s life cycle and not moments of crisis.

“It is true that there have been very difficult negotiations between the parties when the government has sought data it believes it needed. Historically, the government has too often treated IP and tech data as a zero-sum game, demanding access far more broadly than needed. Meanwhile, industry has sometimes been overly zealous in protection of its IP and tech data rights. The lack of trust is real and endemic,” Soloway told Federal News Network.

NDIA declined to comment and referred questions on the matter to their aforementioned white paper.

The post Senator accuses defense industry of blocking Congress’ right-to-repair reforms first appeared on Federal News Network.

© (Photo Credit: 1st Lt. Ryan DeBooy)