https://urgentcomm.com/wp-content/themes/ucm_child/assets/images/logo/footer-new-logo.png
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Multimedia
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • Commentary
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • All Things IWCE
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Resources
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • IWCE
    • Conference
    • Special Events
    • Exhibitor Listings
    • Premier Partners
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Register for IWCE
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
    • Cookie Policy
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • Mission Critical Technologies
    • TU-Auto
  • In the field
    • Back
    • In the field
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Internet of Things
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Call Center/Command
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Network Tech
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Operations
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Regulations
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • Organizations
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
Urgent Communications
  • NEWSLETTER
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Omdia Crit Comms Circle Podcast
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • All Things IWCE
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
    • UC eZines
    • Sponsored content
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • Conference
    • Why Attend
    • Exhibitor Listing
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Join the Event Mailing List
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Cookie Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • TU-Auto
  • newsletter
  • In the field
    • Back
    • Internet of Things
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Cybersecurity
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
acc.com

What just happened? A review of key factors considered during the FirstNet ‘opt-in/opt-out’ decision period

What just happened? A review of key factors considered during the FirstNet ‘opt-in/opt-out’ decision period

  • Written by raidee
  • 1st October 2018

Meanwhile, if there was a failure in an “opt-out” state, it was unclear how it would be unraveled—after all, FirstNet represents uncharted territory on many levels, so there was practical playbook, and certainly no firm legal precedent.

For instance, it was not clear exactly how or when an “opt-out” initiative would be determined to be a failure. Would an alternative RAN in an “opt-out” state be allowed to perform at a subpar level for days, weeks or months before someone determined that a change was necessary? If a change was made, how would it be implemented? Would the state even retain control of the network, or would the infrastructure be controlled by creditors/investors associated with the alternative-RAN vendor? Should the “opt-out” state have a chance to correct the perceived problems and/or rebid the initiative, or should FirstNet immediately begin providing service in the state?

These questions are just the tip of the iceberg of potentially difficult scenarios, especially if an “opt-out” state became entangled in a vendor bankruptcy or other litigation proceeding.

Verizon was not a viable option in an “opt-out” scenario. One of the biggest questions asked throughout the FirstNet procurement process and the “opt-in/opt-out” period was: Where was Verizon? After all, Verizon was the one entity that potentially could have offered a low-risk solution comparable to the one that AT&T put on the table, either on a nationwide basis or as the provider of an alternative RAN in an “opt-out” state.

Verizon officials have said the company did not bid on the nationwide FirstNet RFP, because Verizon viewed it as a spectrum deal, and Verizon did not need spectrum. Other industry sources have noted that Verizon already is the market leader in public-safety broadband, so there would not be much to be gained from bidding on the nationwide FirstNet contract.

But numerous sources indicate that Verizon did participate in some procurements in which states sought an alternative-RAN contractor—conditioned on the state’s governor deciding to pursue the “opt-out” alternative. Rhode Island was one—based on public statements from Rivada Networks Chairman and CEO Declan Ganley—but the others are not known, because Verizon declined to discuss its RFP responses.

Of course, the one exception was in California, where Verizon very publicly announced its intention to submit a bid but ultimately decided against doing so. Verizon indicated that it did not bid in California because of “onerous” mandates from FirstNet, claiming that FirstNet and AT&T were “rigging the game to stifle true competition.”

Verizon officials repeatedly expressed their vehement opposition to the FirstNet policy decision that all FirstNet public-safety traffic—from both the “primary” and “extended primary” groups—must be routed through the FirstNet core network run by AT&T.

AT&T and FirstNet officials have said this approach is necessary to ensure that security, prioritization and interoperability functions are executed properly, whether a subscriber was in an “opt-in” or “opt-out” state. In contrast, representatives of Verizon and other carriers contended that LTE services are enabled through the core network, so mandating that traffic be routed through the FirstNet core would mean that the “opt-out” state would lose control of the user experience. Some even argued that the arrangement would be tantamount to a provider giving its customers to AT&T.

Verizon officials stopped short of publicly declaring this “core problem” to be a non-starter for the company, but it effectively was, as resolving this issue was—directly or indirectly—a condition of its proposals to state RFPs, according to several sources. Once the FCC determined that the “core problem” was outside its jurisdiction and left the matter to NTIA and FirstNet, there was no clear path for states to meet this condition, particularly in the compressed timeframe associated with the “opt-in/opt-out” decision.

Furthermore, when Verizon announced in August that it would build its own public-safety LTE core to mirror the FirstNet/AT&T offering, some state officials argued that public safety would be better served by having both telecom giants vie for first-responder business with their own public-safety LTE core networks. Many in the first-responder community agreed, although the lack of clarity whether such systems would be reliably and securely interoperable was troubling.

So, while Verizon promised to be an option for public-safety agencies making subscription decisions, Verizon was not a viable alternative for governors making “opt-in/opt-out” decisions. Some other established wireless providers also expressed concern about the FirstNet core arrangement, while even more decided that the FirstNet model was not the best opportunity for them during the nationwide FirstNet procurement.

Rivada Networks was the top choice for potential “opt-out” states. Among the vendor candidates that did not have an established wireless, Rivada Networks emerged as the most enthusiastic and best-prepared choice for states contemplating the “opt-out” alternative.

Rivad Networks recognized the FirstNet opportunity and began explaining the potential value of Band 14 spectrum to public-safety representatives as early as 2013—in fact, even some of the company’s biggest detractors acknowledge that Rivada Networks played a big role raising public-safety awareness of FirstNet in its early days.

Tags:

Related Content

  • Electric-vehicle (EV) batteries improve but sustainability lags
  • Africa's IoT 'Uber for tractors' highlighted at Evolution Expo
  • LMR licensing activity improves from 2020, still behind pace of pre-pandemic lows
  • What just happened? A review of key factors considered during the FirstNet ‘opt-in/opt-out’ decision period
    Newscan: Ransomware group REvil demands $70 million in Kaseya supply-chain attack

Commentary


Updated: How ‘sidelink’ peer-to-peer communications can enhance public-safety operations

  • 1
27th February 2023

NG911 needed to secure our communities and nation

24th February 2023

How 5G is making cities safer, smarter, and more efficient

26th January 2023
view all

Events


UC Ezines


IWCE 2019 Wrap Up

13th May 2019
view all

Twitter


UrgentComm

How AT&T won DFW Airport’s $10 million private 5G business dlvr.it/Spj4Pt

27th May 2023
UrgentComm

Russia’s war in Ukraine shows cyberattacks can be war crimes dlvr.it/Spj3c2

27th May 2023
UrgentComm

FCC grants 700 MHz Band 14 license renewal to FirstNet Authority dlvr.it/Spj2Ny

27th May 2023
UrgentComm

Broadband for Critical Communications Everywhere Providing Connectivity When Seconds Count dlvr.it/Sph602

26th May 2023
UrgentComm

How vehicle insurance and autonomy intertwined dlvr.it/SpglBb

26th May 2023
UrgentComm

World’s least-expensive self-driving vehicle revealed dlvr.it/Spgc88

26th May 2023
UrgentComm

Voice calling is finally making its way onto 5G dlvr.it/SpdtYW

26th May 2023
UrgentComm

With many cities facing a fiscal cliff as ARPA funding ends, debt ceiling debate continues on Capitol Hill dlvr.it/Spdsnq

26th May 2023

Newsletter

Sign up for UrgentComm’s newsletters to receive regular news and information updates about Communications and Technology.

Expert Commentary

Learn from experts about the latest technology in automation, machine-learning, big data and cybersecurity.

Business Media

Find the latest videos and media from the market leaders.

Media Kit and Advertising

Want to reach our digital and print audiences? Learn more here.

DISCOVER MORE FROM INFORMA TECH

  • American City & County
  • IWCE
  • Light Reading
  • IOT World Today
  • Mission Critical Technologies
  • TU-Auto

WORKING WITH US

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Events
  • Careers

FOLLOW Urgent Comms ON SOCIAL

  • Privacy
  • CCPA: “Do Not Sell My Data”
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms
Copyright © 2023 Informa PLC. Informa PLC is registered in England and Wales with company number 8860726 whose registered and Head office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG.