Cybersecurity Policy Report, Opposition to Drone Covered List Challenges Filed at FCC, (Apr 7, 2026)

By Jeff Williams

The Department of Defense and others have urged the FCC to reject a petition for reconsideration filed by SZ DJI Technology Co. Ltd. (ET docket 26-22) (CPR, Jan. 23) and an application for review filed by Autel Robotics Co. Ltd. (ET docket 26-23) with respect to the December 2025 addition of foreign-produced uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) and UAS critical components to the Commission’s “covered list” of equipment and services deemed a national security risk to U.S. communications networks (CPR, Jan. 5).

DoD noted in its filing that it was a “participant in the Executive Branch interagency body with appropriate national security expertise that determined UAS and UAS critical components produced abroad pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and the security and safety of U.S. persons” and said the determination was made in compliance with the department’s role as “an appropriate national security agency identified in the Secure Networks Act (U.S.C. §1601(c)(4) and as required under section 1709 of the FY 2025 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act].”

During the determination process, DoD said, it “gave full weight to both classified and unclassified information available” to it.

“For years, the DoW [the administration’s term for the Department of Defense] and other U.S. national security agencies have raised concerns about the national security risk posed by foreign-produced UAS and UAS critical components, including those made by entities identified in section 1709 of the FY 2025 NDAA,” DoD said.

The Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) urged the FCC to reject SZ DJI’s reconsideration petition, saying it did not meet the Commission’s “well-established standard for reconsideration” and “instead seeks to relitigate issues already fully considered and resolved.”

The FCC’s decision regarding SZ DJI was “grounded in specific statutory direction from Congress, informed by consistent findings across multiple federal agencies and departments, and implemented through a process that afforded DJI appropriate notice and opportunity to be heard,” AUVSI said. “Granting the Petition would undermine regulatory certainty, disrupt a broader, deliberate alignment of federal policy across agencies, and weaken market signals on which manufacturers and investors are already acting.”

Among its arguments, AUVSI said the Commission’s decision was “not an isolated determination, but part of a coherent, government-wide approach. Over the past six years, multiple federal agencies with independent authority and expertise have each arrived at consistent conclusions regarding DJI,” including determinations about the company's ties to the Chinese government, human rights abuses, and security risks.

The group did not discuss Autel’s application for review.

Chris McGuire called claims by SZ DJI and Autel that the FCC lacked adequate evidence and statutory authority to make its SZ DJI and Autel decisions “meritless,” saying there was a “voluminous public record” that “demonstrates that DJI and Autel products, including both drone and non-drone devices, pose unacceptable risks to U.S. national security.”

Congress has “ample basis to target DJI and Autel specifically, and the Executive Branch’s interagency National Security Determination provided the Commission with the requisite authority to update the Covered List,” Mr. McGuire said.

News: FederalLegislation LitigationEnforcement DataSecurity