An act relating to creating a right to repair for medical devices
H.160 would create a new “right to repair” framework for medical devices and other FDA-approved medical equipment sold or used in Vermont. It requires original equipment manufacturers, or their authorized repair providers, to make available to independent repair providers and health care facilities the documentation, parts, tools, and certain training materials needed to diagnose, maintain, and repair medical equipment, all on “fair and reasonable terms.” The bill also covers equipment with electronic security locks or other security-related functions, requiring access to the documentation, tools, and parts needed to reset those features during repair.
The bill defines key terms broadly, including medical equipment, parts, tools, health care facilities, independent repair providers, and original equipment manufacturers. It sets pricing and access standards for documentation, tools, and parts, while allowing manufacturers to protect trade secrets and preserving existing authorized repair arrangements unless those agreements attempt to waive the bill’s requirements. It also states that manufacturers and authorized repair providers are not liable for damage caused by independent repair providers or health care facilities during repair work. Violations are treated as unfair and deceptive acts in trade and commerce, enforceable by the Attorney General under Vermont consumer protection law, and the act would apply to equipment and parts sold or in use on or after its effective date of July 1, 2025.
If enacted, the bill would add a new subchapter to Title 9 of Vermont law establishing repair-access obligations for medical device manufacturers and authorized repair networks. It would expand legal access to service information, diagnostic tools, replacement parts, and training for hospitals, clinics, and independent repair businesses, while also creating enforcement authority under Vermont’s consumer protection statutes. The bill would affect OEMs, authorized repair providers, independent repair providers, and health care facilities operating in the state, and would apply prospectively to medical equipment and parts sold or already in use after the effective date.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests a generally pro-consumer and pro-repair policy approach rather than a contested partisan debate. The bill’s sponsors frame it as a consumer protection and commerce measure intended to improve access to repairs for medical devices. No committee transcript or vote history is provided here, so there is no documented public sentiment beyond the bill’s stated purpose and structure.
The main points of potential contention are the scope of manufacturer obligations and the balance between repair access and proprietary protections. Manufacturers may object to being required to provide documentation, tools, parts, and training on terms equivalent to those offered to authorized repair providers, especially where security locks, software access, or updated functionality are involved. Health care facilities and independent repair providers are likely to support the bill because it expands repair options and may reduce downtime and costs. The bill attempts to address manufacturer concerns by preserving trade secret protections, but it also voids contract terms that would waive the new repair-access duties, which could be another area of dispute.