FirstNet RFP outlines financial penalties for contractor, if public-safety adoption targets are missed
What is in this article?
FirstNet RFP outlines financial penalties for contractor, if public-safety adoption targets are missed
Providing communications to the primary user group of fire, EMS and law enforcement has been the expected focus of the FirstNet since its conception, there has been considerable industry debate about the manner in which traffic the extended primary user group—for instance, utilities, governments, healthcare entities and transportation providers—should be treated on the network.
Prioritization and preemption issues are not addressed in the RFP, other than the requirement that such functionality must be included in the network. Details about how that will work operationally are still being formulated.
Whether the contractor meets its public-safety adoption goals is based on the number of device connections utilized by public-safety users.
“For the purposes of this disincentive mechanism, FirstNet defines a device connection as a device on a post-paid contract with an eligible NPSBN user that has been generating billable revenue for three consecutive months. Each device connection will be assigned to the state or territory based on the registered billing address of that device connection. The connection targets will serve as the basis for the disincentive mechanism structure further described below.”
FirstNet officials have estimated that there are 4 million to 12 million public-safety users in the U.S., depending on how broadly the public-safety-entity definition is interpreted.
One potential complication in this formula is the use of Internet of Things (IoT) devices, such as sensors and wearables. For instance, a first responder in the field could utilize several different devices at an incident scene, but each of the devices could utilize separate connections or the data traffic could be aggregated via a wearable gateway and be transmitted over a single connection. How those devices are calculated could impact whether the contractor has to pay a disincentive penalty.
Another potential complication cited by some industry sources is the growth of cybercrime and cyberattacks, which introduces the possibility of a potential new wave of public-safety users—for instance, key security personnel in data centers—that may not have been considered part of public safety under a traditional definition but may be relevant today.
FirstNet went about this
FirstNet went about this wrong all along from day one. The RFP leaves you wondering what planet FirstNet has been operating from.
Rather that set and enforce clear standards for the access to and use of the spectrum by the PSE’s; and then leaving it up to the PSE’s to develop their own solutions (with interoperability, security, etc); they created a manifesto. One lacking in common sense and a normal way to have done this.
FirstNet has set it up – presumably wanting respondents – and then
threatening all potential respondents in the RFP. Within the RFP came dire warnings, and within the RFP they published draconian measures (The maybe- if they feel like enforcing them- or is it if they like you or not enforcing them) to the respondent if they don’t meet some whimsical standards or non-dimensional dimensions.
I cannot imagine FirstNet does not have the set agenda to limit the actual respondents to a single carrier; to be chosen from as many as two existing carriers with some for good measure partners thrown in. The RFP isn’t some new way of doing business it is an example of power gone wrong.
What are they serving up in those closed door FirstNet meetings?
Instead of getting state and
Instead of getting state and local departments to buy-in to FirstNet directly, they expect a carrier to put in the system without local government buy-in and design participation and then sell bandwidth to who knows who? This is simply an act of desperation before the entire FirstNet concept collapses in failure due to a lack of interest by potential public safety users. Odds are better in Vegas than FirstNet succeeding without major changes to their RFP.