Public-safety groups disagree on ‘public-safety entity’ definition, including utility usage of FirstNet

Two key public-safety communications organizations—the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) and the National Public-Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC)—express opposing views on the subject of whether critical-infrastructure entities such as utilities should be considered public-safety entities that could be eligible for priority access to the 700 MHz broadband system being built by FirstNet.

In a proceeding designed to explore legal interpretations impacting FirstNet, APCO stated that it “must strongly disagree” with the notion that an electric utility could be considered a public-safety entity. In contrast, NPSTC—a coalition of public-safety communications groups, including APCO—expressed support for a broader interpretation of “public-safety entity” than the traditional definition of fire, EMS and law-enforcement departments.

“Some utility’s day-to-day operations—such as meter reading—may be more secondary, but during a major incident, utilities may rise up to an emergency-support level,” the NPSTC response states. “Even within the public-safety category, the same individual may warrant a higher priority at some times than at others. The requisite prioritization for a given user can vary across different incidents and even at different times within the same incident.”

This position aligns with the interpretation of a public-safety entity that was proposed by the FirstNet legal staff—the FirstNet board has not yet taken a position on the matter publicly—in the proceeding. In a public notice, the FirstNet legal staff proposed that an “entity may offer other services in addition to a non-de minimus amount of public-safety services and still qualify as a public-safety entity” and that “an electric utility could come within the definition of public-safety entity.”

But APCO officials believe such interpretations are incorrect, noting that Section 337 of the Communications Act defines public safety services as services “the sole or principal purpose of which is to protect the safety of life, health or property” and that it was not the intent of federal lawmakers when they created FirstNet in 2012.

“An electric utility, or any equivalent entity, does not fall within the definition of public-safety entity,” the APCO filing states. “Any conclusion to the contrary would be a plainly wrong reading of the Act’s provisions, and a stark departure from Congress’s intent to create a dedicated network for first responders.

“If Congress intended a broad definition of the kinds of entities that would be considered ‘public-safety entities,’ it certainly could have mentioned groups like utilities, highway departments, or building inspectors, etc., rather than reference existing statutes with language like ‘sole or principal purpose of which is to protect the safety of life, health or property’ and ‘emergency-response providers.’

Public-safety representatives lobbied Congress for several years to reallocate 10 MHz of prime 700 MHz spectrum—known as the D Block—for public-safety use. In 2012, Congress reallocated the D Block, established FirstNet and dedicated $7 billion in funding for the buildout of a nationwide broadband system.