Five Departments Sign a Counter-Drone MOU That Gives the FAA a Safety Review, but the Text Is Unpublished

Five federal departments announced on Nov. 9 that they have signed a memorandum of understanding on how the government tests and fields counter-drone systems. The Department of Transportation, the Department of War, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Energy and the Department of Justice are the five departments. The agreement is led by the White House Task Force to Restore American Airspace Sovereignty. According to the FAA's announcement, it sets up an interagency process to evaluate counter-drone technologies and deploy them to protect aviation safety and advance national security.

As described in the release, the main thing the agreement does is give the Federal Aviation Administration a defined review of proposed systems. The main problem is that nobody outside government can read it. The agencies have not published the MOU. When DefenseScoop asked for more detail, a Pentagon spokesperson said the department had "nothing further to add beyond the release." DroneXL reported that DHS had not released the text either. For now, the press release is the only public description of the agreement.

What the release actually says

The language that matters is short. DefenseScoop quoted the release as saying the FAA "will quickly review and conduct safety risk assessments of proposed systems." It adds that "if the FAA believes additional risk mitigation is needed it can implement its own protective measures, including restricting airspace."

That gives the aviation regulator two things. First, the FAA gets a formal safety review of proposed counter-drone systems before they are deployed. Second, if the FAA is not satisfied, it can act on its own, including by restricting airspace. The release does not say how fast "quickly" is or whether the FAA can stop a deployment outright. It also does not say how disagreements between the FAA and an operating agency get settled. Those are the details that would normally be in the text of an MOU.

FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said the agreement "establishes a consistent process." The FAA release says the arrangement builds on two earlier steps: the temporary flight restriction along the southern border, and the FAA's safety assessment of the Department of War's high-energy laser counter-drone system. Transportation Secretary Duffy and Energy Secretary Chris Wright are also quoted in the release.

How it fits next to the July rule for local police

The MOU covers federal departments. A separate rule already covers state and local police. On July 1, DOJ and DHS put an interim final rule into effect that implements the SAFER SKIES Act for state, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement and correctional agencies. It was published in the Federal Register on July 6 at 6 CFR Part 124 and 28 CFR Part 124, under Docket FBI-2026-0001. Public comments were due Sept. 4.

The rule sets up two levels of certification: one for detection and warning, and a higher one for mitigation. The FBI's National Counter-UAS Training Center (NCUTC) is the designated school for both. An SLTT agency that turns on mitigation must notify the notification point designated by the FAA for real-time C-UAS coordination "within five minutes of activation or as soon as operationally practicable." The rule also covers airspace approval, spectrum coordination, reporting and privacy protections.

The two frameworks handle the FAA's role in different ways. Under the July rule, the FAA-designated notification point is told about local mitigation within minutes after it starts, which works like real-time air traffic awareness rather than a prior review. Under the new MOU, as described, the FAA reviews and risk-assesses proposed systems before they are fielded and keeps the power to restrict airspace if it sees a problem. Read together, the July rule decides who may defeat a drone and with what training. The MOU appears to govern which systems the federal departments may deploy, and under what airspace conditions. Without the text, it is unclear whether the MOU's review process will ever apply to equipment that local agencies certified under the July rule end up using.

The laser claim and the El Paso record

The sharpest line in the announcement came from Secretary of War Hegseth. He said the department has "demonstrated on the Southern Border that next-generation counter-drone defenses, including high-energy lasers, can be deployed rapidly and safely alongside civilian aviation."

The public record from this year is mixed. DroneXL lists several events:

Feb. 10: Airspace around El Paso was closed after a LOCUST laser was fired at party balloons.
Feb. 26: A CBP drone worth roughly $30 million was destroyed near Fort Hancock.
DroneXL counts 14 canceled flights tied to the disruptions.
April 10: The FAA found that the lasers posed no increased risk to fliers.

The FAA's April finding is likely the safety assessment the release says the new MOU builds on. But that finding came after the February events, which DroneXL says closed airspace, canceled 14 flights and destroyed a roughly $30 million CBP drone. DroneXL argues that an FAA review of the kind the MOU describes is what federal agencies should have done in February, and reports the agencies had argued for months over whether their duty to coordinate with the FAA meant asking permission or giving notice.

The Pentagon says it has defeated more than 300 drones along the border. DroneXL notes that only two of those targets have been publicly identified. It is hard to judge from outside how safe "rapid and safe" deployment has been when nearly all of the engagements are undescribed.

The backdrop: bases, the World Cup and payload drones

The agreement was announced alongside a Commercial Drone Alliance forum. According to DefenseScoop, it comes after drone incursions over military installations, including Fort McNair. At the forum, Devin Kowalski, an assistant director in the FBI's Critical Incident Response Group, described the bureau's planning for drones that carry payloads.

Domestic counter-drone work has also been shaped by large events. DroneXL reported that FBI Director Patel cited more than 700 drones seized during the World Cup. FEMA's first $250 million round of counter-drone grants went last December to 11 states hosting or supporting World Cup matches and to the National Capital Region.

The Nov. 16 FEMA deadline

A second $250 million round is open now. Per DroneXL:

State applications are due at 5 p.m. ET on Nov. 16.
Selections are scheduled for Dec. 2.
Awards are scheduled for Dec. 10.

The money does not change who may defeat a drone. Per DroneXL, jammers and takeover systems are allowed only for law enforcement and correctional agencies whose officers are trained, or scheduled for training, at the FBI's NCUTC, consistent with the July rule's two-level certification.

That leaves states writing grant applications for equipment while the federal process for evaluating such systems has just been reorganized under a document they cannot read. A state can still meet the training and certification requirements it already knows about. What it cannot yet tell is whether the FAA review described in the MOU will affect any of the systems it plans to buy.

Why It Matters

Counter-drone systems such as jammers, takeover tools and high-energy lasers work in the same airspace and radio spectrum that civil aviation relies on. The February El Paso-area episodes, as DroneXL tells them, show how laser engagements can close airspace, cancel flights and destroy an expensive federal drone. On paper, the Nov. 9 MOU addresses that gap: the FAA gets a formal risk assessment before deployment and keeps its own power to restrict airspace.

But the agreement's practical effect depends on details the agencies have not released. Those include how fast the reviews happen, whether the FAA can block a system or only add conditions, and how the process connects to the July 1 rule now governing local police. Until the text is published, operators, airports, grant applicants and the public are relying on a press release. Hegseth's claim that lasers can be deployed safely alongside civilian aviation is also hard to check while only two of more than 300 border engagements have been publicly described.