FCC Proposal Aims to Enhance Oversight of Drone Software and Supply Chains
FCC Considers New Disclosure Requirements for Drone Manufacturers
Proposed Rulemaking Overview
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is exploring new regulations that may require drone manufacturers to disclose detailed information about the hardware and software used in their products. This initiative was outlined in the FCC’s Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published in the Federal Register on August 7, which invites public comment on the proposed changes.
Among the various proposals, a significant focus is on the requirement for equipment certification applicants to submit a Hardware Bill of Materials (HBOM) and a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM). This requirement aims to enhance transparency in the commercial drone industry.
Insights from Industry Experts
Will Dawson, Director of the Agricultural Drone Initiative, emphasized the importance of the FCC’s proposals in a recent analysis. He noted that the Third Report and Order could represent a pivotal moment in drone regulation, indicating a shift towards stricter oversight of software components following previous hardware regulations.
Dawson stated, “The FCC’s Third Report & Order may be this year’s most consequential, and least noticed, piece of drone regulation.” He highlighted that while hardware manufacturing can be relocated, software security concerns cannot be addressed solely through on-shoring data management.
Details of the Proposed HBOM and SBOM Requirements
Scope of the Proposal
The FCC’s Third Further Notice encompasses a wide range of potential changes to the equipment authorization system, including:
- Certification requirements
- Import restrictions
- Changes to the Covered List
- Enforcement procedures
- Supply-chain disclosures
Dawson pointed out that the proposed HBOM and SBOM requirements are particularly noteworthy. The FCC would mandate that every certification applicant submit a signed HBOM and SBOM detailing each component’s producer, production location, and the percentage of value attributed to each country. This information would need to be updated within 30 days of any changes.
Considerations for Software and Firmware
In addition to hardware disclosures, the FCC is contemplating whether equipment containing software or firmware from entities on the Covered List should be prohibited from receiving authorization. Alternatively, the FCC may consider a presumption against authorization that applicants could challenge.
The Commission has acknowledged that Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and their critical components often rely on applications and remote platforms for configuration and updates, raising important questions about the origins of both software and hardware components.
Recent FCC Actions and Their Implications
Finalized Regulations
Some aspects of the FCC’s July actions are already in effect. The Third Report and Order has closed what the FCC termed the “component part loophole,” prohibiting the authorization of devices containing logic-bearing hardware components from entities on the Covered List. Additionally, the FCC clarified that its marketing rules apply to online marketplaces, requiring them to display the FCC ID for certified devices at the point of sale.
This regulatory framework builds on previous FCC measures regarding drones, including the addition of UAS and UAS critical components produced in foreign countries to the Covered List, subject to certain exemptions.
Potential Impact on Commercial Drones
While the proposals extend beyond agricultural drones, they highlight how component and software requirements could significantly impact commercial platforms. Agricultural drones often integrate various systems, including flight controllers, communication equipment, and navigation systems, many of which fall under the FCC’s definition of UAS critical components.
If implemented, the HBOM and SBOM requirements would necessitate detailed supply-chain documentation as part of the FCC certification process. Furthermore, restrictions related to Covered List software or firmware could influence the authorization of equipment based on software provenance.
As these proposals remain under consideration, they signal a potential increase in FCC scrutiny of drone hardware, software, and firmware. Manufacturers and suppliers may soon need to provide comprehensive documentation regarding not only the drones themselves but also the components and software integrated within them.