The leadership of the American Truck Dealers (ATD), led by Chairman Scott Pearson, Vice Chairman Kevin Holmes and ATD Truck Dealer of the Year winner Will Bruser, submitted a letter Tuesday to ranking members of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee and Senate Commerce Committee in opposition of H.R. 1566/S. 1379, the newest version of the 'Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair Act, also known as the REPAIR Act.
Speaking on behalf of the more than 140,000 employees of ATD members nationwide, ATD’s leadership stated its opposition to the REPAIR Act and 'Right to Repair' bills that are “overly broad and raise serious privacy, intellectual property, vehicle safety and cybersecurity concerns.”
[RELATED: Point. Counterpoint. Where trucking stands on the REPAIR Act]
In the letter, sent to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ATD spoke of the important differences between light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and the necessity of having laws and regulations that understand those differences. ATD wrote “H.R. 1566/S. 1379 is overbroad as it would regulate a heavy-duty vocational truck such as a school bus, refuse hauler, or cement mixer the same as a family sedan.”
ATD President Jacqueline Gelb echoed those sentiments to TPS on Tuesday.
“Medium- and heavy-duty trucks have long been regulated differently from light-duty cars due to the unique and diverse applications these trucks are required to perform. H.R. 1566/S. 1379, legislation intended for consumers who own light-duty vehicles, employs the broad definition of motor vehicle that mistakenly covers commercial trucks and fails to recognize the important functions that trucks must perform each day,” she said.
Additionally, ATD leaders question if new legislation to support the maintenance and repair of commercial vehicles is even necessary. Gelb noted the new bills are similar to those introduced in previous Congresses, which failed to advance out of committees of jurisdiction.
“No evidence we are aware of has been presented indicating that independent repair shops are being denied the information or tools needed to repair medium- and heavy-duty trucks,” ATD wrote. “In fact, service information is readily available from manufacturers, and the industry has long participated in the National Automotive Service Task Force, which provides a reliable mechanism for resolving disputes over repair data access. Additionally, truck dealers often sublet repair work to independent repairers when appropriate.”
“Truck manufacturers have been complying with the 2015 MOU since it was finalized,” added Gelb. “H.R. 1566/S. 1379 is an attempt by third-party shops to circumvent the financial investment and regulatory requirements that truck dealers make to ensure they can service their customers' trucks. In addition, current legislation would ignore decades of intellectual property law and allow for the copying of parts, which could impact safety and emissions technologies.”
The letter also touches on cybersecurity risks ATD believes could occur if manufacturers were required to disclose technical information to third parties for vehicle service and repair, as well as a provision that could force a manufacturer to provide any ‘aftermarket parts manufacturer’ the information necessary to “produce or offer compatible aftermarket parts, meaning parts not made by the original equipment manufacturer.
ATD stated this provision “raises serious concerns regarding intellectual property rights as this information is not required for the purpose of servicing or repairing a truck.”
Finally, ATD noted the bills include provisions that could fine dealers more than $51,000 per violation for failing to comply with a new paperwork requirement during new equipment sales.
“This legislation is overbroad, unnecessary and adds needless red tape at a time when the truck industry is already facing economic challenges from regulations that have increased costs and decreased commercial truck sales,” ATD stated.
