Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
What is in this article?
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
- Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
Here is a suggested process to help states make FirstNet opt-in/opt-out decision
DECISION POINTS
D1: Initiate an RFI/RFP Process for a Public Private Partnership (PPP)?: If a state wishes to maintain its options regarding the FirstNet State Plan and the Radio Access Network (RAN) deployed within its borders, or simply wishes to identify potential alternatives to the FirstNet plan for comparison purposes, the state will have to develop an alternative plan.
The most likely approach in developing an alternative plan is to initiate a Request For Information or Request For Proposal (RFI/RFP) process. Some states have already initiated this process and it is suspected that others are considering this approach. Given the current estimated timeline that anticipates the delivery of FirstNet State Plans to all 56 states and territories around May 2017, many would argue that states will need to initiate this process by the first quarter of 2017, if not before, if they have intentions to do so. Waiting much beyond the beginning of 2017 likely will not leave states with sufficient time to execute the process in time to meet the deadlines imposed by the legislation.
It is also important to note that states deciding to pursue the RFI/RFP process must do so with funding outside of the State and Local Implementation Grant Program (SLIGP) process, as this has not been approved by NTIA as a valid SLIGP activity.
Those states that decide to take this path will proceed to process step P2 to develop the RFI/RFP. States that decide not to take this path will proceed to decision point D3.
There may be some states that will look to learn from other states that have done RFIs or RFPs. While most states have been very forthcoming sharing information with other states throughout this whole process—and there will certainly be useful information to be gained by reviewing other states RFI/RFPs—each state’s situation is unique. It is the author’s opinion that each state will need to do its own RFI/RFP, if it wishes to get an accurate assessment of the partnering opportunities and potential approaches in their particular state.
D2: Do the RFI/RFP Responses Provide a Viable Plan?: This decision point asks if the responses received from the RFI/RFP issued by the state provide a viable alternative plan. At this point, the state will have performed the RFI/RFP evaluation process described in P3 and will make their decision based on those results.
Those states that decide the responses provide a likely viable approach for an alternative plan will proceed to process step P4 to develop the alternative plan.
Those states that do not receive any responses that offer a viable alternative plan will return to the path that takes them to decision point D3.
D3: Develop a Public-Safety-Only Plan?: This decision will be faced by states who decide not to pursue an RFI/RFP and by those that issue one, but do not get a viable partner or do not see a viable PPP plan. The decision to pursue a public-safety-only plan will mean that the state is willing to take on the responsibility of building and operating their state’s RAN without a commercial partner. This means that the state will be solely responsible for the network, and it only will be capable of deriving revenue from public-safety users of the network, since the legislation prohibits states or FirstNet from offering service directly to commercial users.
However, in addition to the revenue generated, states may be able to realize cost savings by taking advantage of the synergies the NPSBN may share with other ongoing or planned state projects. A public-safety-only plan also will mean that the state believes it will have enough revenue from public-safety users to operate, maintain and enhance the network, or it is willing to allocate funding to supplement the revenue in order to maintain the network and to ensure all network capacity is available for public safety at all times.
This approach has not received much open discussion to date to the author’s knowledge. But there appears to be nothing to prohibit it, as long as the state can meet the technical requirements of the network and is willing to meet the financial commitment to both build, operate and maintain the network, as well as provide a negotiated revenue stream to FirstNet.
While it is anticipated that very few states will consider this approach, this option should at least be discussed as a possible path. We all know many states today fund statewide Land Mobile Radio (LMR) networks to support the first responder mission and promote interoperability.
When it comes to justifying the cost effectiveness of this alternative plan to the NTIA, the state likely will have to commit to providing FirstNet a revenue stream from the use of the spectrum, just as a nationwide partner will be required to do for each state. The value of this revenue stream is expected to vary significantly by state, depending on the population, size and demographics of that state. We do know that FirstNet is requiring a nationwide partner to pledge a minimum of $5.625B total over 25 years for all 56 state and territories. What we don’t know now, and what states will likely not know when making their opt-in/opt-out decision, is how that figure will be distributed across the states.
Those states that decide to take this path will proceed to process step P5 to develop their alternative plan.
States that do not or cannot take on this responsibility and have already chosen not to pursue an alternative plan through a PPP effectively will have made the decision to opt-in, because they will not have an alternative plan to compare to the FirstNet state plan.