Government officials anxious for FirstNet clarity while contemplating long-term plans

Last week, the city of Boston and the Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications System Authority (BayRICS) submitted a legal brief requesting that the U.S. Court of Federal Claims decide the Rivada Mercury protest against the FirstNet procurement process “without any unnecessary delay.”

Neither Boston nor BayRICS offered any input into the merits of the Rivada Mercury lawsuit—a wise choice, given the fact that all meaningful details of the case have been closed to the public—but they expressed a desire for a quick resolution of the matter “so that the important build out of the FirstNet network can proceed.”

This sentiment was shared by most in the critical-communications industry, whether they support FirstNet or oppose the initiative to build a nationwide public-safety broadband network. At this point, industry stakeholders are just anxious to have some semblance of certainty regarding the endeavor, so they have the information needed to formulate long-term strategies for their critical-communications systems.

When will FirstNet be built in my area? What kind of reliability and performance can be expected? How much will it cost to subscribe to FirstNet services? What kind of coverage will be provided in my jurisdiction? Who will qualify for prioritized access to the network? These are just some of the questions that have been asked repeatedly by public safety, as well as others in the critical-communications industry—governments, utilities, transit authorities and vendors.

To date, such questions are unanswered, and they promise to remain that way until FirstNet is able to award its nationwide contract to one of the bidding teams participating in the nationwide procurement process (AT&T’s bid is the apparent selection of the evaluation team, based on statements in legal documents and SEC filings).

This uncertainty has created headaches throughout the critical-communications community. This is particularly true of officials representing public-safety entities that ordinarily would need to update land-mobile-radio (LMR) networks during the next three to five years.

Many of these officials are stuck in a seemingly no-win situation made even more difficult by the fact that no one knows what FirstNet will become and whether LTE mission-critical push-to-talk (MCPTT) will meet public safety’s needs. One of the few certainties they have today is that making the wrong choice could cost them their jobs.

Consider the following two nightmare scenarios. Although they are polar opposites, both are possible, based on what we know today.

Nightmare Scenario #1: The decision is made to not upgrade the LMR network. Instead, money is saved by not investing in the LMR system—or just making low-cost patches—with the hope that public safety can migrate to MCPTT on FirstNet or some sort of prioritized commercial LTE offering. Unfortunately, MCPTT does not prove to work well enough to meet public safety’s needs.