Cost of Public Safety Broadband Network Remains Unclear

"We are kind of painting on a white canvas,” said Matt Dowell, senior manager at Deloitte & Touche. “This process is going to take a while. We have until Aug. 22, not quite six months, to appoint the board, probably another year, year and a half to get FirstNet up and running.” Meanwhile, 22 different jurisdictions that have gotten waivers from the FCC could be building early networks in the spectrum, he said. “There can be some confusion. … States are really going to have to focus on working with FirstNet and vice versa."

The spectrum bill allocates $7.2 billion for a national network. Questions remain about whether that amount will be enough and what other costs might arise, panelists said.

"It’s unclear,” said Brett Kilbourne, deputy general counsel of the Utilities Telecom Council. “There’s a big question in terms of what the overall cost of the network is going to be, whether that $7 billion is necessarily going to be enough.” No one has said with any authority how much will be enough to build the network, Kilbourne said.

"I don’t know that $7 billion is enough to build a network,” Dowell said. “But I also don’t believe that that was Congress’s sole intent. … At the end of the day FirstNet needs to be a self-sustaining entity so they're going to have to charge user fees.” FirstNet also is permitted under the bill to lease spectrum in a public-private partnership, he said. “I can see some opportunities for funding.”

Questions also remain about exactly what Congress intended for the new public safety network approved by the spectrum bill, Dowell said. “There were absolutely no committee reports so we're left with the legislation itself,” he said. FirstNet will have a 15-member board, but only three members have been designated, Dowell said. “Really we're in a wait-and-see mode as to how the overall governance structure will work."

Local governments continue to have questions about the new network and about rules that will allow some states to opt out of taking part in the national network, said Stephen Traylor, executive director of NATOA. “We like what we got,” he said. “It was a big win for public safety and local communities. … Local governments are sort of like the cheerleaders right now.” Cities and counties are ready to work with the public sector to get the network built, he said. “This is a great opportunity for public-private partnerships. … Nobody wants to see this thing fail.”

NATOA has told members they need to talk to their state governments about getting the network built, Traylor said. Local officials need to make clear to state officials, “'We want to be a part of the discussions. When you're talking with FirstNet, these are the points we want you to share with them.'” Local officials also need to have a clear view of “what does your jurisdiction have to offer, what can it bring to the table,” he said. “You have to have as much data as possible.”

"For years and years public safety’s main problem has been interoperability,” said Roger Wespe, government affairs manager at the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials. “At its most basic level public safety needs a nationwide, seamless interoperable broadband network for first responders.” Public safety builds to jurisdictions and geography, not to populations, he said. “It’s not just as easy as saying, ‘Hey, let’s get out there and have a single, national standard.’ You've got geographical challenges, you've got population challenges."

Broadband US TV also webcast a second discussion Wednesday of the incentive auction provisions that were a big part of the spectrum bill as well.

"It’s going to put into practice, really for the first time ever, some fairly pioneering economic theory,” said Trey Hanbury, director of spectrum proceedings at Sprint Nextel. “If we get it right it has wonderful potential. If we get it wrong not only will we not generate money for the Treasury [and] fail to deliver the spectrum that’s going to keep our wireless industry and our economy as a whole humming, but we do have the real risk of curtailing over-the-air television for the millions and millions of Americans who rely on it each day.”

The legislation offers an “excellent beginning in terms of trying to solve a long-term challenge,” said Alcatel-Lucent Vice President Kevin Krufky. “We'll certainly be pushing for as fast of deployment as possible.”

The auction will be a “win” for some broadcasters, said Peter Tannenwald, of Fletcher, Heald. “I guess that depends on whether you want to stay in broadcasting or cash in on your spectrum,” he said. “For broadcasters who are doing poorly … it’s an opportunity. We don’t know how good of [an] opportunity it is yet, but it is an opportunity.” For broadcasters who don’t want to sell, the spectrum repacking provisions are “a little bit of a threat,” Tannenwald said. “Certainly, the spectrum repacking is not going to be helpful, but it sort of depends."

Larry Krevor, Sprint government affairs vice president, said many questions remain for carriers as well. “There’s a lot of uncertainty over how much spectrum will become available, when it will become available … will it be paired spectrum or spectrum that has to be used in an unpaired fashion,” Krevor said. “Unfortunately, uncertainty is really the bane of business."

The incentive auction also will limit the amount of TV white spaces available for “super Wi-Fi,” said Michael Calabrese of the New America Foundation. A lot depends on how many broadcasters take part in the auction, he said. “There will certainly be fewer of these white space channels remaining,” he said. “That probably will not have a big effect in the rural and small town markets. The biggest risk is really in the biggest metropolitan areas such as New York and Los Angeles. … You may wind up possibly with no white space left, except for, conceivably, the separation between the up and down link channels on the new LTE band plan, if there is one.”