The final legislation governing Pentagon spending dropped a bipartisan provision that would have guaranteed the military the right to repair its own equipment, prompting immediate criticism from its authors, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-MA, and Tim Sheehy, R-MT, who accused Congress of siding with defense contractors over service members.
Both chambers had passed versions of the reform, and the White House publicly supported the measure, which would have required contractors to provide the Pentagon with the technical data needed to perform repairs in-house — rather than flying out manufacturer technicians at added cost. The final National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) omits that mandate, a move Warren and Sheehy say will leave troops facing the same barriers to fixing equipment whenever contractors assert proprietary rights.
"For decades, the Pentagon has relied on a broken acquisition system that is routinely defended by career bureaucrats and corporate interests. Military right to repair reforms are supported by the Trump White House, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, entrepreneurs, small businesses, and our brave servicemembers," Warren and Sheehy said after the text of the legislation was released. "The only ones against this common-sense reform are those taking advantage of a broken status quo at the expense of our warfighters and taxpayers."
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) repeatedly has warned that the Pentagon’s lack of access to technical data is one of the biggest drivers of soaring sustainment costs, estimating that broader repair rights could save the department "billions" of dollars over the life cycles of major weapons systems.
GAO reviews of aircraft, ships and ground vehicles have found that when contractors retain exclusive control over repair information, the military is forced into long-term vendor support arrangements that are far more expensive than in-house maintenance. (Armin Weigel/picture alliance via Getty Images)
The Trump administration had backed the reform, with Statements of Administration Policy supporting both the House and Senate versions earlier in the fall. Service secretaries also endorsed the effort, and War Secretary Pete Hegseth issued new acquisition guidance in November instructing the military to plan for "organic depot-level maintenance and repair" in major systems.
US COULD LOSE NEXT MAJOR WAR DUE TO PENTAGON'S 'BROKEN' ACQUISITION SYSTEM
In May 2025, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll publicly pledged that the Army would ensure right-to-repair provisions were included in future Army contracts — aligning the service with the broader congressional push for greater access to technical data. But advocates said a service-by-service approach wasn’t enough and pushed to codify and expand right to repair across all branches to prevent contractors from controlling critical maintenance information.
The F-35 program offers one of the clearest examples of how restricted repair rights drive up costs.
GAO has found that the Pentagon still lacks key technical data needed to perform many F-35 repairs organically, forcing the services to rely on Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors for everything from software maintenance to component overhauls. That dependence has helped push sustainment costs so high that the Pentagon warns it cannot afford to operate the planned fleet without major changes.
GAO reported that greater access to repair data could save the department billions over the jet’s projected life cycle, reduce turnaround times for broken parts, and allow military depots to take on work that is currently outsourced back to the contractor.
The F-35 program offers one of the clearest examples of how restricted repair rights drive up costs. (Samuel King Jr./U.S. Air Force)
The consequences of contractor restrictions are already visible across the force. A mechanic deployed for an exercise in Korea "was prohibited from conducting maintenance on a generator because the warranty would be voided," leaving the unit with the choice of voiding the warranty or losing equipment needed for training, according to a comment filed on Regulations.gov.
Marines stationed in Japan were forced to "pack() up and ship() back (engines) to contractors in the (U.S.) for repairs," leaving the engines offline for months, former Marine Corps logistics officer Elle Ekman wrote in The New York Times.
Even basic shipboard systems have been affected. Navy Secretary John Phelan told lawmakers that during a visit to the USS Gerald R. Ford, six of the ship’s eight ovens — responsible for preparing more than 15,000 meals a day — were broken. Sailors said they knew how to fix the ovens but were not allowed to and had to wait for contractors instead, according to a War Department readout. When shipboard elevators stopped working, the crew similarly had to call in the manufacturer.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Advocates say these examples illustrate why Congress sought to codify military right to repair in the first place — and why they argue the issue is far from resolved. Warren and Sheehy have already vowed to push another legislative fix in 2026, while watchdog groups say they will press the Pentagon to use its existing authority to demand greater data access in new contracts.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-backed-military-right-repair-plan-stripped-from-congress-final-defense-bill