There is no argument about the importance of resilient, reliable and secure communications to the nation’s utilities and other critical-infrastructure entities. And few would argue against the notion that utilities and critical-infrastructure entities need broadband connectivity in the future, particularly to take advantage of capabilities enabled by smart-grid technologies, many of which are bandwidth-intensive and/or latency-sensitive.

Despite this, utilities and critical-infrastructure entities in the United States generally have no clear path to make dedicated, reliable broadband services a reality, because they lack a key ingredient: the necessary spectrum to support private broadband networks on licensed airwaves.

Some within the critical-infrastructure community have expressed hope that federal officials would recognize the need and dedicate spectrum for this purpose, much like Congress and the FCC did to address public safety’s broadband-communications needs in the 700 MHz band. But this was a huge struggle for public safety, despite the fact that the community had some key advantages:

(1)     Time—Public safety amassed the 20 MHz of broadband spectrum over a prolonged period, beginning with legislation associated with the 1996 Telecommunications Act and concluding with the law that created FirstNet in 2012. In the interim, the FCC had to reconfigure the 700 MHz band plan to enable broadband instead of wideband uses as technology changed; this was an alteration that was practical, in large part, because of the delays associated in making the spectrum available.

(2)     Carrier support—Public safety’s desire for the D Block airwaves seemed to be little more than a pipe dream, but that changed dramatically when Verizon and AT&T expressed support for the notion of dedicating the spectrum to first responders. Many have argued that this position was simply a desire by the two carrier giants to prevent another commercial carrier from being able to compete against them in the band, but there is no doubt about the importance of these carriers’ lobbying support on Capitol Hill.

(3)     Government-based structure—With the exception of some private ambulance companies, the public-safety community is comprised of government entities, not for-profit corporations.

(4)     Tremendous public awareness—Providing support for public safety is relatively easy from a political standpoint, because it is always in the public consciousness. Public safety legitimately impacts all voters. Public safety is involved in the lead item for most newscasts. And, for those who don’t follow the news, there are numerous police/fire/EMS shows on television most nights.

(5)     High-profile incidents—There was a rash of high-profile incidents during the previous decade that maintained a spotlight on the need for public-safety communications that helped fuel the political will necessary to get spectrum allocations made. From a man-made catastrophe like 9/11 to a series of natural hurricane and earthquake events, there were constant reminders and after-action reports of the need for improved public-safety communications.

Contrast this with the situation facing utilities and critical-infrastructure entities. People typically only think about utilities when they pay their bills or during a power outage, which happens rarely. And I can’t say that I remember any hit TV shows based on utility personnel doing their jobs.

Perhaps more important, the largest utilities are for-profit enterprises that carriers would like to claim as customers, so the political dynamics structurally are very different—Congress giving (or even discounting) spectrum to a for-profit enterprise is very different than dedicating it to another government entity.