Overview
For two years, this rule sat like a quiet tripwire in the FAR. Today it goes live: if you’re a federal contractor, you can’t fly a “FASC-prohibited” drone to do your job, and you can’t spend federal money to buy or operate one.
The fight isn’t really about drones. It’s about who gets to sit inside America’s critical workstreams—construction documentation, inspections, research fieldwork—and whether “cheap and excellent” foreign hardware can be treated as a national security liability.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
The FAR Council is where national security policy becomes a clause every contractor has to live with.
FASC is the quiet switchboard: its list decides what becomes forbidden overnight.
SAM.gov is where the list lives—and where compliance becomes searchable and enforceable.
GSA OIG supplied the plot twist: the rule wasn’t theoretical—contractors were still flying flagged drones.
Timeline
-
The deferred ban goes live
Rule ChangesContractors are now barred from operating FASC-prohibited drones during performance and from using federal funds on them.
-
Senators demand answers from big contractors
InvestigationHassan and Peters press major construction firms about DJI use and compliance at sensitive government facilities.
-
White House elevates drone threat politics
StatementAn executive order frames UAS as a homeland threat, pushing agencies toward tighter controls and faster enforcement.
-
Watchdog finds prohibited drone use on a federal build
InvestigationGSA’s inspector general flags a contractor using a drone tied to a DoD-identified Chinese military company designation.
-
SAM posts the list—narrow, for now
StatementSAM.gov announces the covered-entity list and says it currently mirrors the Consolidated Screening List only.
-
FAR 52.240-1 drops into contracts
Rule ChangesDoD, GSA, and NASA issue an interim FAR rule creating the clause and formally staging the prohibition.
-
NDAA sets the fuse
LegalThe FY2024 NDAA enacts the Drone Act with an immediate procurement ban and a delayed operations/funding ban.
-
The Drone Act moves through Congress
LegalThe American Security Drone Act advances, framing drones as a procurement and security issue, not a gadget market.
-
FASC is born
Rule ChangesCongress creates FASC to manage federal supply-chain risk. Years later, it becomes the drone ban’s list-maker.
Scenarios
Contractors Rip-and-Replace: ‘Approved Drones’ Become a New Line Item
Discussed by: Government contracts law firms tracking FAR 52.240-1 compliance; defense trade press covering approved-drone ecosystems
Agencies enforce the clause through proposals, audits, and invoice scrutiny, and primes push the requirement down to subs. Contractors pivot to vetted ecosystems (including government/defense-oriented platforms) and rewrite workflows: fewer ad-hoc flights, more scheduled imaging, more paperwork, and higher per-mission costs that get priced into bids.
The List Expands—and a ‘Normal’ Drone Brand Becomes Toxic Overnight
Discussed by: Compliance teams watching SAM.gov announcements; Hill offices signaling broader China-tech restrictions
Today’s pain is manageable if the list stays narrow. The real shock is if FASC adds additional entities beyond the Consolidated Screening List: programs that were “fine yesterday” become instant violations, and contractors scramble for waivers, replacement hardware, or non-drone alternatives (satellite, fixed cameras, manual inspection).
Waiver Culture: Agencies Quietly Keep Some Missions Flying
Discussed by: Contracting community and agency program offices weighing mission need versus security risk
If replacements can’t meet mission requirements fast enough—especially for specialized inspection, mapping, or remote work—agencies lean on exemptions and waivers written into contracts. That keeps certain projects moving but creates uneven enforcement: well-connected programs get exceptions, smaller vendors eat the disruption.
Congress Treats Drones Like Huawei: A Wider China-Tech Clampdown Follows
Discussed by: Lawmakers pushing bans on Chinese drone makers; national security reporting on PRC-linked supply chains
FAR 52.240-1 becomes the starting gun, not the finish line. Congress and regulators broaden restrictions through telecom rules, import scrutiny, and additional procurement prohibitions aimed at specific manufacturers—turning “federal compliance” into a market-wide collapse for targeted brands, even outside government work.
Historical Context
Kaspersky Ban (Federal software restriction)
2017What Happened
The U.S. government moved to bar a widely used foreign cybersecurity product from federal systems over national security fears. The ban forced agencies and contractors to swap tools that were technically effective but politically untenable.
Outcome
Short term: Federal users rushed to replace software and prove compliance.
Long term: “Country-of-origin risk” became a durable procurement filter, not a one-off.
Why It's Relevant
This drone rule is the same playbook: security logic overrides convenience, and compliance becomes contractual.
Section 889 (Huawei/ZTE telecom equipment procurement restrictions)
2018–2020What Happened
Congress restricted federal procurement tied to certain Chinese telecom gear, then widened the scope through contracting and supply-chain attestations. It turned hidden infrastructure dependencies into compliance liabilities.
Outcome
Short term: Contractors mapped supply chains and replaced equipment to keep eligibility.
Long term: Certification, disclosure, and flow-down clauses became standard operating procedure.
Why It's Relevant
FAR 52.240-1 is structurally similar: a list-driven ban, plus contractor search duties and subcontract flow-down.
Blue UAS / Trusted Drone Programs (building an approved ecosystem)
2020sWhat Happened
Defense and national security buyers shifted from ‘best commercial product’ to ‘approved, cyber-verified product.’ Vendor lists became competitive moats, and compliance became a product feature.
Outcome
Short term: Limited supply and higher costs, but clearer rules for sensitive missions.
Long term: A parallel “trusted” market forms alongside the consumer/commercial market.
Why It's Relevant
As bans tighten, the story turns from prohibition to substitution—who can scale trusted alternatives fast enough.