Go, or No Go? New LA-RICS public-safety LTE plan gives NTIA, FirstNet a lot to consider

According to the CAP, there are two primary swaths of coverage that are expected to deliver 256 KB/s uplink speeds, and that certainly is light years ahead of the speeds available over a land-mobile-radio (LMR) system. That throughput rate would meet the public-safety broadband definition from several years ago, but some question whether it would meet the heightened expectations of today’s public-safety users, who are used to higher speeds delivered by ultra-dense commercial networks for their personal use.

One question that has been raised repeatedly by industry observers is whether Los Angeles-area public-safety users would use this revised LA-RICS LTE network on a regular basis, or if they would opt to use a commercial network “when the sun is shining,” as first responders like to say. I have no idea whether this would be an issue. However, if it happens, it could lead to an unrealistic picture of how much broadband gets used public-safety personnel while on the job, if the scope is limited solely to the traffic on the LA-RICS network.

Of course, the focus of LA-RICS, FirstNet and public-safety broadband is not usage during “sunny days”; it is about delivering a broadband network that will provide first responders with communications during times of emergency, when commercial networks hit capacity limits or are otherwise unavailable.

Thankfully, LA-RICS would be built on the FirstNet spectrum at 700 MHz, so it offers public safety the inherent advantage of not contending with commercial users for bandwidth capacity.

On the physical side of the ledger, the presumption is that the sites that were part of the original plan will be public-safety grade and built to withstand the rigors of the local environment, such as earthquakes. What’s less clear is how resilient the 15 cell-on-wheels (COW) located at state-owned facilities will hold up under trying conditions. The same questions have been asked about the New Jersey system, which does not have traditional fixed towers and consists entirely of deployable sites.

One potential red flag that has not been discussed much is the possibility that some vendor could file a protest against the CAP being executed, on the grounds that the revised LA-RICS plan it is such a dramatic shift in scope that it really is a new project—and, therefore, should be rebid entirely. Given the short timeline to do this project, the protest would not have to be successful to undermine the LA-RICS effort. 

While theoretically and legally possible, I would be surprised if any vendor did this, because a protesting company would not have a chance to win the contract. In addition, I doubt that they would not want to be perceived negatively by FirstNet before a potentially very lucrative RFP is issued during the next year.