How do I get equipment off the FCC Covered List?

It is a published list of communications equipment and services that the US government has determined pose an unacceptable risk to national security. Congress directed the Commission to publish it in the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, and the first list appeared on March 12, 2021 naming five companies.

It now also carries whole categories defined by where the equipment is produced: uncrewed aircraft systems and UAS critical components, added December 22, 2025; routers, added March 2026; and power inverters and advanced robotic devices, added July 28, 2026.

Source: Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, Pub. L. 116-124, § 2(a); FCC Public Notice DA 21-309, March 12, 2021; UAS December Public Notice, 40 FCC Rcd 10215, December 22, 2025; FCC Public Notice DA 26-286, March 23, 2026; FCC Covered List entries, July 28, 2026.

The FCC publishes the list. It does not originate the determinations behind it. The Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act points the Commission at enumerated determination sources, and section 889(f)(3) of the 2019 NDAA is one of them.

The category entries rest on National Security Determinations by the agencies the Act names. The two determinations of July 27, 2026 behind the power inverter and advanced robotic device entries came from the Department of War. The Commission publishes the entry that follows. It also modifies the entry when the determination changes, which is what happened to the power inverter entry on August 20, 2026.

Source: Pub. L. 116-124, § 2(a); 47 CFR §§ 1.50002, 1.50003; National Security Determinations of July 27, 2026; FCC Public Notice DA 26-870, August 20, 2026.

Units authorized before the listing keep their authorization. The FCC has not touched end-user operation. What changes is everything forward of that, because no new model in the category can obtain an authorization, and the Commission has begun taking back the right to import and market previously authorized covered equipment.

Section 2.903(a) bars covered equipment from obtaining an authorization. By its own terms it says nothing about use, import or marketing. Import and marketing are reached through sections 2.803 and 2.1204, which condition both on holding an authorization that has not been limited under section 2.939(e).

That limitation has been used once already. DA 26-635 prohibited import and marketing of previously authorized covered equipment added to the list in 2024 or earlier, effective July 16, 2026. Three further proposals are pending against later additions, and a proposal is not law. When the Bureau closed the door the first time it refused sell-through, in-transit relief and spare parts, and it allowed ten days from Federal Register publication. Our comment on one of the pending proposals is at DA 26-758.

Source: 47 CFR §§ 2.903(a), 2.803(b), 2.1204(a)(1), 2.939(e); FCC Public Notice DA 26-635, 91 FR 41023, July 6, 2026.

No. All equipment on the Covered List is prohibited from obtaining an equipment authorization, and the streamlined SDoC route is closed as well. The Commission states in its own guidance that a new type cannot evade the Covered List restrictions by relying on SDoC. A device becomes eligible again only by ceasing to be covered.

Source: 47 CFR § 2.903(a); FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026.

Four routes exist today, each with a different decider. The first is to qualify as a domestic end product under 48 CFR § 25.101(a). Both July 27, 2026 determinations define a foreign-produced article as one that would not qualify, so a device that does qualify sits outside the entry. That means US manufacture plus a domestic component-cost floor of 65 percent today, rising to 75 percent from 2029.

The second is a category exit. Power inverters gained two on August 20, 2026. An inverter eligible for the 26 U.S.C. § 45X advanced manufacturing credit is outside the entry, and so is one that is not utility-interactive as UL 1741 defines that term. Advanced robotic devices have neither exit.

The third is a Conditional Approval, which removes the named device from the list. The fourth is a revision by the determining agency, after which the Commission modifies the entry. DA 26-870 is what that looks like in practice.

One route people ask about does not exist. The commercially-available-off-the-shelf exception does not travel with the domestic end product definition, and COTS components still count toward the calculation. The Commission has said so for robotics and inverters alike.

Source: National Security Determinations of July 27, 2026; 48 CFR § 25.101(a); FCC Public Notice DA 26-870, August 20, 2026; FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026.

Conditional Approval removes a named foreign-produced device from the Covered List, which makes it eligible to obtain an ordinary equipment authorization through a Telecommunication Certification Body. It is not itself an equipment authorization.

The application is an email to conditional-approvals@fcc.gov as a machine-readable PDF, or to drones@fcc.gov for uncrewed aircraft. The FCC forwards it. The Department of War reviews advanced robotic devices. The Department of War or the Department of Homeland Security reviews power inverters, routers and UAS.

Any entity involved in producing the device can apply, and an application may cover a class of devices rather than a single model. Applications in the inverter and robotics categories close January 1, 2028. Grants carry conditions, and the register states that a UAS grant remains effective so long as the entity abides by the onshoring plan outlined in its application and passes updated vetting of the products.

Source: FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026; Conditional Approval guidance to the National Security Determinations of July 27, 2026; FCC Covered List, Conditional Approvals tab, pulled September 10, 2026.

As of the register pull of September 10, 2026: 18 for UAS, 21 for routers, one for advanced robotic devices, and none for power inverters.

That single robotics grant is the first Conditional Approval in the category on the published register. It went to Husqvarna AB on September 9, 2026 for four robotic platforms. As of that same pull, no power inverter Conditional Approval has ever been granted, by the Department of War or by the Department of Homeland Security.

Only grants are published. Applications and denials are not, so no firm’s approval rate is checkable by anyone.

Source: FCC Covered List, Conditional Approvals tab, pulled September 10, 2026; FCC Public Notice DA 26-957, September 9, 2026.

The Commission does not publish filing-to-grant intervals. What the register shows are dates. Advanced robotic devices were added to the Covered List on July 28, 2026, and the first Conditional Approval in that category published on September 9, 2026. Power inverters were added the same day and still have none. In the UAS category, grants have published in batches every one to two weeks.

Source: FCC Covered List, Conditional Approvals tab, pulled September 10, 2026; FCC Public Notice DA 26-957, September 9, 2026; FCC Covered List entries, July 28, 2026.

It tests where the device is made and what it is made of, rather than who owns the maker. Both July 27, 2026 determinations defined a foreign-produced article as one that would not qualify as a domestic end product under 48 CFR § 25.101(a), which is the Buy American standard: manufactured in the United States, with domestic components above a cost floor of 65 percent today and 75 percent from 2029.

The Commission states that the nationality of the producing entity is not relevant to whether a device is foreign-produced, and that the action is country neutral. Allied-country production sits inside the definition for that reason.

For power inverters the definition moved on August 20, 2026. An inverter eligible for the § 45X credit is outside it, as is one that is not utility-interactive under UL 1741. The connectivity prong moved the other way and now reaches Ethernet and other wired connections, and it reaches a device designed, equipped or configured to accept such a component.

Source: National Security Determinations of July 27, 2026; 48 CFR § 25.101(a); FCC Public Notice DA 26-870, August 20, 2026; FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026.

“Produced by” is the test for the entity-based half of the list, and the Commission expressly declined to adopt a comprehensive definition of it. What it gave instead is an interpretation. The test is substantial responsibility for, or control over, any major stage of the process by which a device comes into existence, which reaches design and development and not only manufacture and assembly. More than one entity can produce one device. The applicant, or the SDoC responsible party, is ordinarily assumed to be among the producers. The Commission restated the test as a totality of the circumstances in a final rule published September 11, 2026.

On redesign, the Commission said it makes no assertion that its intent is to consider originating design IP as a sole factor. That is a declination to assert. It is not an exemption, and a substantially redesigned device does not sit outside the term because of it.

On re-sourcing, the direction of travel runs the other way. From October 13, 2026 the permissive-change rules bar a change that would make a device covered, and the Commission names two cases: a shift in production to a Covered List entity, and a change that costs a device its domestic end product status. The moment to check a sourcing decision is before the change.

Source: FCC 25-71, Second Report and Order, ET Docket 21-232, ¶ 53, released October 29, 2025; FCC 26-50 Third Report and Order, 91 FR 57798, published September 11, 2026, effective October 13, 2026.

Routers produced in a foreign country went on the Covered List in March 2026. The register shows 21 router Conditional Approvals as of September 10, 2026. Every router Conditional Approval carries a termination date. The earliest falls October 1, 2027. UAS grants are structured the other way. Since the July 21, 2026 determination they remain effective indefinitely, conditioned on the onshoring plan in the application and on updated vetting.

Routers are also where hardware relief has been granted. At least five party-specific waivers of the permissive-change bar have issued on expedited petition, all for covered routers, all expiring in May or June 2027. As of September 2026 no hardware waiver has been granted for inverters, robotic devices or UAS.

Source: FCC Public Notice DA 26-286, March 23, 2026; FCC Covered List, Conditional Approvals tab, pulled September 10, 2026; OET Orders DA 26-491, DA 26-571, DA 26-572, DA 26-641 and DA 26-642, May to June 2026.

Advanced robotic devices produced in a foreign country were added July 28, 2026. Uncrewed aircraft systems and UAS critical components were added December 22, 2025. The Commission’s own FAQ answers the scope questions the determinations leave open, and the answers turn on the component test rather than on autonomy.

An automated guided vehicle that follows predefined paths can fall inside the definition. A pool-cleaning robot that works underwater and at the surface is not excluded. A mechanical platform imported with no compute, sensors or RF is not covered as imported. The Commission closes that exit in the next sentence, because adding RF-emitting components to such a platform renders the device covered equipment. There is no import-and-finish route.

Import solely for re-export is permitted, as is import of small batches for product development or testing, provided the devices are not marketed or sold. Sales to the federal government and federal use are exempt from the Covered-List-related FCC restrictions.

Source: FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026; 47 CFR § 2.1204(a)(3), (a)(5).

Software and firmware, yes, under a waiver. Hardware, no, unless OET grants a petition.

On October 28, 2025 the Commission revised 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b) and 2.1043(b) to exclude equipment prohibited under § 2.903 from the permissive-change procedures, effective December 26, 2025. It reaches Class I and Class II alike, and it reaches devices authorized before the listing. A Class I change that requires no filing is barred as well, because such changes are approved by rule.

OET waived that back in for software and firmware updates that mitigate harm to US consumers, at least until January 1, 2029. The notices say “at least until,” which is a floor OET set for itself rather than a vested right, and OET has already moved one of these dates once. Hardware stays prohibited by rule, and relief for hardware exists only by expedited petition, granted case by case and one year at a time.

There is no re-certification moment that resolves this. Equipment authorizations do not expire and there is no renewal procedure. What triggers a fresh certification is a change in the grantee’s name, ownership or control, so a merger or acquisition is the re-screening event. Our comment on the rulemaking behind this is at FCC 26-50.

Source: 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b), 2.1043(b), 2.927(a), 2.929(b)(3); FCC 25-71, 90 FR 53227, November 25, 2025, effective December 26, 2025; OET Public Notice DA 26-789, July 28, 2026.

It does not work, because the Commission reads “produced by” broadly enough that the nameplate is not the test. Changing a nameplate does not change who had substantial responsibility for a major stage of the work. More than one entity can produce one device. The applicant is ordinarily assumed to be among the producers. A Covered List entity also may not be licensed as a second-party manufacturer under 47 CFR § 2.929(b)(3).

On August 11, 2026 the Commission revoked both equipment authorizations held by Odyssey Robot LLC, effective immediately, under the streamlined path at 47 CFR § 2.939(d), for a false covered-equipment certification. On August 31, 2026 the Enforcement Bureau imposed seven forfeiture orders of $25,000 each against seven of the nine entities named in its July drone public notice, for failing to answer a Letter of Inquiry. Those investigations were prompted by a public code repository that fingerprints a proprietary communication protocol and by trade-press reporting.

Read the second case precisely. The violation found in those seven orders is non-response. The Commission did not find that the companies are fronts or that they sell covered equipment, and the shell-company framing belongs to the reporting rather than to the orders.

Source: FCC 25-71, ¶ 53, released October 29, 2025; 47 CFR §§ 2.929(b)(3), 2.939(d); Order of Revocation DA 26-839, August 11, 2026; Forfeiture Orders DA 26-912, DA 26-913, DA 26-914, DA 26-915, DA 26-918, DA 26-920 and DA 26-921, August 31, 2026.

Section 889 is a different regime from the Covered List. The statute binds executive agencies. It reaches private parties through two carriers.

The first is the FAR. Clause 52.204-25 goes in all solicitations and contracts, and no dollar threshold appears in FAR 4.2105. Paragraph (e) flows the substance of the clause down through every tier, including subcontracts for commercial products and commercial services. Paragraph (b)(2), the prohibition on using covered equipment, is expressly excluded from that flow-down. A subcontractor inherits the ban on providing, not the ban on using.

The second is 2 CFR § 200.216, which prohibits recipients and subrecipients from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to procure covered telecommunications equipment or services. It binds a school district that never holds a federal contract.

Reasonable inquiry has a definition. It is an inquiry designed to uncover any information in the entity’s possession about the identity of the producer, and it excludes the need for an internal or third-party audit. The rule fixes what the inquiry must be designed to find and stops short of requiring an audit. It does not bless a signature with no file behind it. Our federal practice page is at Gatewell Federal.

Source: Pub. L. 115-232, § 889; 48 CFR §§ 4.2105, 52.204-24, 52.204-25(a), 52.204-25(e), 52.204-26; 2 CFR § 200.216.

Establish covered status by product and by producer across your bench. A “does not use” representation, a customs answer and a customer’s diligence request all rest on the same file.

Keep records that can produce the disclosure a “does” answer requires. FAR 52.204-24(e) asks, per item, for the entity that produced the covered equipment with its unique entity identifier and CAGE code, the brand and model number, and an explanation of the proposed use.

Know your grandfathering position precisely. Use of already-purchased equipment is untouched. Import and marketing are not. When the Commission closed that door for the 2024-and-earlier entries it allowed ten days from Federal Register publication and refused sell-through, in-transit relief and spare parts.

Source: 48 CFR § 52.204-24(e); FCC Public Notice DA 26-635, 91 FR 41023, July 6, 2026.

Three separate tracks, with three different magnitudes.

Authorizations. 47 CFR § 2.939 carries the powers to revoke and to limit. The streamlined § 2.939(d) path was exercised on August 11, 2026 against Odyssey Robot LLC for a false covered-equipment certification. The § 2.939(e) limitation bars import and marketing without revoking anything.

Failure to answer the Enforcement Bureau. Seven forfeiture orders of $25,000 each issued on August 31, 2026 under § 503(b)(1)(B) of the Act. The base forfeiture for that failure is $4,000 and the statutory maximum for a single act is $188,491, so $25,000 is a mid-range figure rather than a maximum.

The affiliate-disclosure duty at § 2.903(d), which runs against the named entities rather than against buyers. Two notices of apparent liability have proposed the statutory maximum of $188,491: FCC 26-7 against Zhejiang Dahua Technology on February 19, 2026, and FCC 26-60 against Hytera and ZTE on August 28, 2026. Both remain proposed. A notice of apparent liability proposes a penalty and is not a collected fine.

Source: 47 CFR §§ 2.939(d), 2.939(e), 2.903(d), 1.80(b)(10), 1.80(b)(11); Order of Revocation DA 26-839, August 11, 2026; the seven Forfeiture Orders of August 31, 2026; FCC 26-60, August 28, 2026; FCC 26-7, February 19, 2026.

Both, doing different work. Gatewell Group is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. Filings are prepared with supervising counsel.

A Conditional Approval does not turn on a legal argument. It turns on an operating record of who owns you, who supplies you, and whether your US manufacturing plan is real. That is diligence and documentation. Legal opinions, and anything that has to be argued, belong with counsel.

The Commission’s own guidance states the problem in its own words. An applicant “will need to be able to have sufficient evidence that the device in question was not produced in a foreign country to make this certification, but there is no specific documentation or evidence required.” The obligation is to hold sufficient evidence. The standard for sufficiency is not specified anywhere in the guidance.

Source: FCC Covered List FAQs on advanced robotic devices and power inverters, read September 8, 2026.

Fixed fees, staged against milestones, no hourly meters. Published prices are fixed and are not negotiated, and the diagnostic computes the exact number within each band.

Covered-List Exposure Diagnostic, $7,500 to $15,000, fixed. Two weeks. Covered status by product, grandfathering position, viable pathway, and a documented risk-factor assessment against published grant patterns. Half credits against a full engagement. The diagnostic sets the fixed fee for the engagement that follows.

Conditional Approval filing, $95,000 to $125,000 for a single model and $150,000 to $300,000 for a product family. Ownership and corporate-structure record, supply-chain disclosure, US manufacturing plan, and agency correspondence through grant.

Vendor-bench diligence, $15,000 to $50,000 across a portfolio, for importers, distributors and project developers. US onshoring plan, $65,000 to $125,000 and up. Annual attestation and monitoring, $15,000 to $46,000 and up per year.

The full schedule and every published fee band is at Services.

Los Angeles. The office is at 811 W 7th Street, Suite 900, Los Angeles, California 90017.

We act for manufacturers from Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Europe, for the US subsidiaries that carry their compliance file here, and for the American importers, distributors, integrators and developers who buy from them. Korean, Japanese and Mandarin inquiries are answered in language.

Office, phone and the intake form are at Contact.