The FCC is asking for public comments on a proposal that could have a major impact on the drones and technology we use every day. This is one of those times when drone service providers need to get involved. Comments are due September 2, 2026, under PS Docket No. 26-189.
And before we go any further, this is the FCC, not the FAA.
_____________________________________________________________________
The FCC is considering prohibiting the continued importation and marketing of certain previously authorized foreign-produced drones and critical components on its Covered List that it considers “military-grade.”
The problem is how the FCC is defining military-grade. Their proposed definition includes thermal imaging, LiDAR, drone docking stations, drones weighing 55 pounds or more, and certain coordinated or swarming systems, including drones designed for light shows.
If you’re a DSP, some of that probably sounds less like military equipment and more like Tuesday morning. That’s exactly why you need to comment.
_____________________________________________________________________
The FCC Is Asking If They Got This Wrong. Hint: they got it HORRIBLY WRONG!!!!!
One of the questions the FCC specifically asks is whether its list adequately identifies military-grade UAS. More importantly, they ask whether they included equipment that should not be considered military-grade.
This is where we need real-world examples:
- Do you use thermal for roof inspections? Tell them.
- Do you use thermal to inspect solar panels or electrical infrastructure? Tell them.
- Do you use LiDAR for mapping, surveying or construction?
Tell them!
Do you use a drone dock for recurring inspections?
Tell them!
The point isn’t simply to say, “Thermal isn’t military-grade.” Explain what you actually use it for. Show the FCC that these are technologies being used every day by legitimate American businesses.
_____________________________________________________________________
The FCC Thinks The Economic Impact Will Be Minor. I have one response: “Male Bovine Scat!“
This is probably the biggest opportunity for DSPs to make a difference.
The FCC has tentatively concluded that the economic and supply-chain impacts of this proposal will be “relatively minor and contained.”
Really?
If that doesn’t describe what would happen to your business, tell them.
And bring numbers.
Let’s say you have $12,000 invested in a thermal platform. The closest replacement that actually meets your requirements costs $25,000. That’s not a minor impact to a small business!
And don’t just compare the price of two aircraft.
- What about batteries?
- Payloads?
- Chargers?
- Controllers?
- Software?
- Training?
- Calibration?
- RTK equipment?
- Docks?
- API integrations?
- Downtime?
Changing manufacturers can mean changing an entire ecosystem. The FCC specifically asks commenters to provide data and specific evidence of economic costs.
Give it to them!
_____________________________________________________________________
Are There Really Equivalent Alternatives? Short answer, no. Long answer, HELL NO!
The FCC also wants to know whether domestically produced alternatives are available and whether transitioning to trusted equipment would be cost-effective.
This is another question DSPs are uniquely qualified to answer.Don’t just say, “There isn’t an alternative.”
Explain why.
Maybe another aircraft exists, but it doesn’t support your sensor. Maybe the thermal resolution isn’t sufficient. Maybe it doesn’t integrate with your software. Maybe it doesn’t have the flight time your mission requires. Maybe you can’t get one for six months. Or maybe the system you use today costs $8,000 and the realistic replacement costs $25,000.
That’s a lot of “maybes”!
Those details matter.
“An alternative exists” and “an equivalent commercially viable alternative exists” are two very different things. Tell the FCC which one applies to you.
_____________________________________________________________________
Tell Them What Happens to Your Customers
Don’t stop with your own equipment costs.
What happens downstream? If your equipment costs double, does a $500 inspection become a $750 inspection?
- Do you stop offering a particular service?
- Does your customer decide drone inspections are too expensive?
- Does that mean somebody goes back to climbing onto a roof or tower instead?
- Does a utility conduct fewer inspections?
- Does a small surveying company become less competitive?
These are real-world consequences!
The FCC specifically asks whether the national security benefits of this proposal outweigh the economic and supply-chain impacts.
Give them the information they need to make that determination.
The FCC Is Also Asking About Timing
The FCC proposes a 180-day implementation period after final action is published. Is that enough? NO, that’s asinine.
If your company has planned fleet purchases, customer contracts, dock installations, expansion plans or other commitments, explain how the timeline would affect them. Again, don’t just say 180 days isn’t enough.
Tell them why.
_____________________________________________________________________
How Do You Comment?
You do not need to hire an attorney.
You don’t need to write a 30-page legal filing.
And you definitely don’t need to sound like a lawyer.
Go to the FCC Electronic Comment Filing System at FCC.gov/ECFS.
Then tell your story:
- Who are you?
- What does your company do?
- What equipment do you use?
- What commercial mission does it perform?
- What did your current system cost?
- What is the closest realistic alternative?
- Is there a realistic alternative?
- What would that replacement actually cost?
- What capabilities would you lose?
- What happens to your customers?
- And finally, what do you want the FCC to change?
That’s a useful comment.
Don’t Just Write “Don’t Ban DJI”
This is important.
A thousand comments saying “Don’t ban DJI” aren’t nearly as useful as a thousand DSPs providing actual business data. Make your comment about your business, your missions and your customers.
If the FCC says the economic impact will be “relatively minor and contained” and you know that isn’t true for your business, prove it.
If the FCC says alternatives are available and you’ve actually researched those alternatives, tell them what you found.
If the FCC calls technology you use every day “military-grade,” explain what you actually use it for.
The FCC is asking these questions.
We need to answer them.
Comments are due September 2, 2026.
Don’t assume DSPA, a manufacturer, another association or somebody else is going to tell your story for you.
Nobody knows the impact on your business better than you do. Put that experience in the record.
We also have a video for this. Watch that as well: https://youtu.be/2cls5MHfi38
It’s incredibly important EVERY drone owner comment on this. The FCC needs to hear from all of us. If we don’t have 10,000 comments, I’ll be very disappointed.
