Medical Equipment Right to Repair Act
House Bill 460 creates a new Article in Chapter 66 titled the “Medical Equipment Right to Repair Act.” It would require original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of medical imaging equipment and medical radiation therapy equipment used in North Carolina to provide owners, hospitals, and independent repair providers with access to the support documentation, tools, and parts needed to diagnose, maintain, and repair that equipment. The bill defines key terms broadly, including medical imaging equipment such as MRI, CT, X-ray, fluoroscopy, ultrasound, and mammography devices, as well as radiation therapy equipment and related support systems.
The bill also requires OEMs to share updated documentation with known owners and independent repair providers, provide documentation at no charge except for actual printing and shipping costs, and make tools available without unnecessary authorization or registration barriers. It further requires OEMs to provide access to security-related information needed to reset or access electronic locks, and to offer owners and independent repair providers the same training materials or courses that are offered to authorized repair providers. The act would take effect July 1, 2025, and apply to equipment in use on or after that date.
If enacted, the bill would expand repair access rights in North Carolina for medical imaging and radiation therapy equipment by imposing affirmative disclosure and access duties on OEMs and their authorized repair networks. It would also amend Chapter 66 by adding a new Article 52 and make violations actionable as unfair or deceptive trade practices under Chapter 75, allowing both injured parties and the Attorney General to sue. The bill preserves trade secret protections, voids contract terms that attempt to waive the statute’s requirements, and limits liability for damage or injury occurring during repair, diagnosis, or maintenance.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill’s structure and sponsors, the measure appears to be a consumer- and competition-oriented right-to-repair proposal aimed at improving service access and reducing manufacturer control over repairs. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided context means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from discussion history, but the bill’s framing suggests a policy goal of broadening repair access for hospitals and independent technicians.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the scope of OEM disclosure obligations, especially the requirement to provide tools, parts, security-related access, and training materials to independent repair providers on terms comparable to authorized providers. Manufacturers may object to the breadth of access requirements, the prohibition on restrictive contract terms, and the use of unfair or deceptive trade practice enforcement. By contrast, hospitals, owners, and independent repair providers would likely support the bill as a way to reduce repair delays, lower costs, and improve equipment uptime. The bill’s explicit protection of trade secrets and liability limitations appear designed to address some manufacturer concerns, but those provisions may not fully resolve disputes over cybersecurity, proprietary software, and service network control.