Why timing matters

This inability to project when mission-critical voice over broadband will be available to public-safety entities is a source of frustration for decision-makers, from federal power brokers to radio-communications directors in cities and counties.

For lawmakers and FCC commissioners, the timing question makes it difficult to establish laws and rules to implement sound spectrum policy. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers are wrestling with proposals to reallocate the 700 MHz D Block spectrum to public safety and help fund a nationwide LTE network for first responders. If the broadband network is able to address public safety’s need for both data and voice communications — instead of just data — the investment of spectrum and funding is much more palatable politically.

In addition, public-safety officials have said that they are willing to return narrowband spectrum in various bands to the federal government, which can then auction those airwaves to help reduce the massive federal deficit. But public safety only will be willing to clear the airwaves if it is certain that mission-critical voice functions are supported via broadband networks.

The vast disparity in the projected timing for this development is having a profound impact on long-term planning at local levels. For some public-safety entities, officials are debating whether an existing LMR system can last long enough to serve the voice-communications needs until a broadband-voice option is available.

Of course, some licensees don’t have the luxury of even that amount of time, because the FCC has mandated that all public-safety LMR systems operating at 512 MHz and below be narrowbanded to 12.5 kHz channels by the end of next year. For entities that have been able to refresh their systems during recent years, the cost and effort associated with narrowbanding may not be terribly cumbersome.

However, for entities like New York City, narrowbanding is expected to cost more than ?$100 million — money that Deputy Chief Charles Dowd, who oversees the police department’s massive communications system, would rather invest in broadband infrastructure that could address the NYPD’s voice and data needs.

If entities like the NYPD meet the FCC’s narrowbanding mandate, the migration to LTE likely will be hindered, because funding is too tight for public-safety agencies to deploy and maintain both a new LMR and a new LTE system, said Morgan Wright, vice president of Alcatel-Lucent‘s global public-safety segment.

“If you make me spend all of my CapEx money to narrowband, you will make sure that LTE is relegated to a data-transport network for much longer than it should be,” Wright said, repeating a mantra heard from prospective public-safety customers. “You’re going to get raked over the coals if you buy a brand-new P25 system and then say, ‘We’re just going to throw that into the trash and go to this new, fancy LTE network.’ It’s not going to happen. By law, it can’t. Once you invest in a capital asset, there are laws that say you have to use that capital asset for its projected lifespan.

“At the end of the day, it’s about money. If the money is being spent for one thing, it will not get spent on the other. And public-safety agencies … do not have the money to run two brand-new networks side by side for the next 15 years.”