Mixed testimony as committee holds second hearing on digital product repair bill

The Senate Community and Regional Affairs Committee heard two hours of public testimony on March 25 during a second hearing for Senate Bill 111, the digital product repair measure, with witnesses sharply divided over the bill’s scope and safety implications.

Senator Dunbar, sponsor of SB 111, told the committee she intends to offer amendments at a later hearing, including language to address medical devices, and asked the public not to conflate claims not connected to the bill. “There is no limitation on the ability of shops to sell parts, for example, that's not in the bill,” she said at the start of testimony.

Opponents — including equipment dealers, trade associations and repair‑safety coalitions — argued SB 111 is written too broadly and would create safety, environmental and commercial problems. Alex Schafer, executive director of the Engine Technology Forum, said manufacturers have already provided mechanisms for repair in the agricultural sector and that SB 111 could increase illegal tampering with emissions controls: “Right to repair legislation like SB 111 isn't needed ... [it] will increase air pollution in Alaska,” he said, citing EPA enforcement actions including a 2023 consent agreement involving a Fairbanks company.

Dealership representatives said mandatory pricing or requirements to provide parts and software at dealer wholesale would undercut local dealers’ ability to stock parts and provide warranty and field support. Chuck Winters, who identified himself as representing AER (a John Deere dealer on the Kenai Peninsula), said the bill’s parts‑pricing mandate would “financially harm our business and the prosperity of our employees.” Kelly Droop, regional manager for Pape Kenworth Alaska, described the significant investment dealers make in parts inventories, training and remote support and warned the bill would harm Alaska customers if dealers cannot maintain margins and stock.

Industry groups including TechNet, the Consumer Technology Association and the Repair Done Right Coalition expressed concern that SB 111’s definition of “digital product” is overly broad and could sweep in critical infrastructure, industrial systems and medical devices. Rose Feliciano of TechNet said the draft “is capturing a whole heck of a lot more stuff than simply your cell phone or your John Deere tractor.” Darby Gottlieb of AdvaMed, representing medical device manufacturers, asked that federally regulated medical devices be exempted and said patient safety considerations differ from consumer electronics.

Several witnesses representing Alaska businesses, nonprofits and technicians supported the bill as written or with amendments. Diane Chapman, state director for Alaska Environment, said broader repair access would reduce e‑waste and gave geographic examples of limited access to manufacturer service providers: “More than a third of Alaskans, including all residents of Fairbanks and Juneau, live more than 100 miles from an authorized repairer of Apple products,” she said, adding that local repair options increase community resilience. Matthew Totti, a heavy equipment technician, and Ivan Hazleton, an information‑technology repair technician, testified that local repair access reduces downtime and costs for equipment owners in remote parts of the state.

Committee members asked witnesses for clarifications about existing MOUs between manufacturers and agricultural groups, dealer practices for selling software and parts today, and potential carve‑outs for off‑road equipment. Several witnesses cited existing MOUs (for example between John Deere and the American Farm Bureau) as private‑sector solutions. Senator Dunbar closed by reiterating that the committee expects to work on amendments and possibly a committee substitute before further action.

No committee vote was taken on SB 111 at this hearing; the committee closed public testimony and scheduled further work on amendments.