Should FirstNet system be designed from the inside out?

Such solutions certainly are possible, as public safety will be using the same technologies—LTE and Wi-Fi—as the carriers. But indoor coverage is not everywhere. Many local governments have laws requiring owners of new buildings to provide communications support for public safety within the structures, but retroactively requiring older buildings and facilities to provide this kind of communications support likely would be much more difficult to execute politically.

Operationally, there are other challenges, specifically as they relate to fire departments. Earlier this month, FirstNet board member Jeff Johnson—former president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC)—noted during a session at APCO 2014 that fire departments typically turn off power to a burning structure. Theoretically, the small-cell system could run on some sort of backup power, but that backup power would add to the expense of the system and might still be considered a fire hazard, unless engineered specifically to not be (again likely adding more expense).

Others argue that it would make more sense for firefighters to use deployable systems that they can carry into a building with them. While there has been considerable progress in the development of deployable LTE systems for outdoor use, I can’t recall any deployable systems designed specifically for indoor use (I’m sure our readers will point some out to me, if they exist). The 3GPP standards body is developing a peer-to-peer platform to work in a manner similar to direct mode in LMR systems, but many question whether LTE devices will have the necessary power to be effective in these scenarios.

Financially, one of the big questions is who should pay for indoor-coverage systems that are designed to support public-safety users. Many point to the carriers, because they have infrastructure and money to do it. Others point to building owners, noting that they should be responsible for safety within their facilities. And, of course, there is government, which supports FirstNet and public safety, in general.

Indoor coverage is yet another vexing question facing FirstNet. It is one that former FirstNet Chairman Sam Ginn vowed would be answered in the early days of the organization, and Johnson reiterated its importance earlier this month.

There are many potential ways to address the indoor-coverage problem technologically, politically and financially—and for FirstNet and the states that are starting to engage in consultation sessions, it should be a key topic of discussion. My belief is that any states that come up with a way to provide indoor coverage should be viewed in a very favorable light by FirstNet when considering early deployments, because it would allow FirstNet to build the macro network much more efficiently.