WASHINGTON, D.C. – September 29, 2026 – INCOMPAS, the competitive communications and AI infrastructure association, filed reply comments yesterday with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the Commission’s Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on strengthening the equipment authorization program against national security risks to the communications supply chain. A secure equipment supply chain is essential to the infrastructure that INCOMPAS members build and to the country’s economic and national security. Security and growth are not competing goals, well-designed protections keep critical infrastructure secure while strengthening America’s ability to innovate and compete.
The following statement can be attributed to Staci L. Pies, Senior Vice President of Government Relations and Policy at INCOMPAS:
“The record reflects broad agreement on what INCOMPAS and commenters across the communications and technology sectors have said — secure supply chains do not require universal reporting, registration, certification or expiration mandates that are not tied to an identified risk. Congress gave national security agencies the authority to determine which equipment poses an unacceptable threat and gave the Commission the responsibility of implementing those determinations. Rules that stray from that structure would burden trusted products and the companies building the networks, cloud facilities, and data centers that American leadership in AI and advanced technologies depends on, without making the country more secure.
INCOMPAS supports targeted action against clearly identified threats and looks forward to working with the Commission on a framework that protects national security while allowing infrastructure investment to move forward.”
In its filing, INCOMPAS emphasized several key points:
- The FCC should implement Covered List determinations according to their terms and should not expand them into general supply chain authority.
- The Commission should reject universal hardware and software bill of materials filings, which would require applicants to submit information they often cannot obtain or verify and would concentrate sensitive data in a government repository.
- Equipment should not be subject to certification or registration requirements solely because it belongs to a Covered List “sector.”
- The proposed 40-unit importation limit would impede legitimate testing, security research and product development, and should be replaced with a workable threshold and a prompt review process.
- Fixed terms for equipment authorizations are unnecessary, and any expedited revocation process must preserve notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond.
###
