By Amara Osei

Five federal departments announced on November 9 a new interagency agreement that could reduce federal safety reviews of previously evaluated counter-drone systems to as little as 24 hours.

The decision establishes one process for evaluating counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS) before federal agencies deploy them. The White House Task Force to Restore American Airspace Sovereignty led the effort, while the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) says the memorandum of understanding (MOU) standardizes safety review.

The agreement covers five federal departments:

• Department of Transportation
• Department of War
• Department of Homeland Security
• Department of Energy
• Department of Justice

Under the agreement, participating agencies will coordinate with the FAA and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) during system development and testing. They will also share technical requirements, testing information and operational data, giving each agency a common evidence base for deployment decisions.

The FAA will assess potential risks to other aircraft and recommend safeguards or airspace restrictions when necessary. That division of responsibility preserves the agency’s aviation-safety role even as the process seeks faster deployment.

FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said: “The safety of our National Airspace System is the Federal Aviation Administration’s top priority.” He added: “This agreement builds on the work already underway with our federal partners and establishes a consistent process to ensure counter-drone technologies can be used without compromising aviation safety.”

How much faster could reviews become?

Reuters reported that FAA official Liam McKenna said the agency has approved more than 1,000 counter-drone coordination requests involving the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security. McKenna said reviews of some previously evaluated systems could take as little as 24 hours.

The 24-hour possibility applies only to some previously evaluated systems, rather than establishing a universal review period. The announcement identifies neither specific systems approved under the process nor a timetable for new federal deployments.

For manufacturers, consistent testing and review procedures could clarify the requirements for federal deployments and reduce delays. The commercial benefit therefore centers on regulatory predictability, with some already evaluated systems potentially facing 24-hour reviews.

Why did safety incidents shape the accord?

The agreement follows several federal efforts to strengthen counter-drone capabilities along the southern U.S. border. In April, the FAA and the Pentagon reached an agreement governing the use of high-energy laser counter-drone technology.

In February, the FAA temporarily halted flights at El Paso International Airport after a laser counter-drone system operated without a completed FAA safety review. Reuters reported that a subsequent incident involving a military laser system and a Customs and Border Protection drone led to expanded flight restrictions near Fort Hancock, Texas.

Those incidents demonstrated the risks of deploying counter-drone systems without sufficient federal coordination. The November 9 agreement addresses that coordination gap through shared technical requirements, common testing information and FAA risk review.

What changes for industry and local agencies?

State, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) agencies are preparing to expand counter-drone capabilities with new federal authorities and grant funding. The fiscal year 2027 (FY2027) Counter-UAS Grant Program provides $250 million to help eligible jurisdictions protect public events and critical infrastructure, with applications due November 16.

Although the accord directly governs participating federal agencies, its testing procedures and safety standards could influence future SLTT deployments. Federal procedures may therefore become a practical baseline for agencies operating under separate authorities.

The agreement itself supplies no new money, despite the separate $250 million grant program. It also does not expand existing legal authorities or eliminate aviation safety requirements, so faster reviews remain conditional on FAA assessment and applicable restrictions.

What remains unresolved?

The accord standardizes evaluation, but it identifies no specific systems approved under the process. No deployment schedule accompanies the November 9 announcement, leaving no dated timetable for federal agencies or the manufacturers seeking to supply them.

For companies, the strategic gain is clearer compliance requirements and potentially shorter delays, including 24-hour reviews for some previously evaluated systems. For civil aviation, the test is whether common controls can accelerate deployment without repeating the February El Paso flight halt or the expanded Fort Hancock restrictions.

The immediate consequence is procedural: five departments now use one federal evaluation process, supported by the FAA and FCC. The strategic consequence is equally bounded, because the process carries no new funding or legal power beyond those already in force.