States Seek Broad Powers from FirstNet for Localized Network Rules

California supports giving FirstNet discretion to consider a “broad range of users” but believes all state, tribal and local agencies should have limited discretion to develop reasonable user definitions within FirstNet’s “ceiling” definition, said the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. Florida urged FirstNet to give the states the power to determine the scope of users on the network. The Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications Systems Authority (BayRICS) and the Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications Systems Authority (LA-RICS) sought similar local latitude in assigning FirstNet users. The National Public Safety Telecommunications Council also said FirstNet could “set a definitional ‘ceiling’ for user categories as broadly as legally allowable” and then allow state and other agencies to develop their own operational approaches up to the FirstNet ceiling.

Several states, including Colorado, Florida and Pennsylvania, said they were concerned about FirstNet's classifying opt-out states as a third category of user. “Public safety is a primary user whether the network is deployed in an opt-in or out scenario, as its users need unlimited usage plans and a high-capacity solution that will encourage widespread adoption,” Pennsylvania said. Opt-out states “should have the same rights and privileges as states that accept FirstNet’s plan for RAN [regional access network] deployment,” NPSTC said.

AT&T said it’s “concerned that FirstNet may be inclined to adopt a broader interpretation of public safety entity that does not faithfully implement the plain language of the statute.” FirstNet should follow a narrower interpretation of the Spectrum Act, since a “broad interpretation could crowd the network with various users and impede first responders’ access to the network in the event of an emergency,” AT&T said. T-Mobile said it believes FirstNet should use a broad interpretation of the PSBN's “secondary users” to allow more network users who would get access and be subject to network user fees.

APCO said it “strongly disagrees with FirstNet’s analysis” of what users can be classified as a public safety entity. “FirstNet’s interpretation focuses on determining the broadest legally defensible interpretation at the cost of overlooking the fundamental premise” of the Spectrum Act, APCO said. An “overbroad interpretation risks defeating the purpose of the act: serving our nation’s first responders.”

The Texas PSBN said it believes the “rural areas” definition included in the Rural Electrification Act (REA) is inadequate for the purposes of satisfying FirstNet’s requirements for establishing substantial rural coverage. The REA defines a rural area as “any city, town, or incorporated area that has a population of less than 20,000 inhabitants, and is NOT contiguous or adjacent to a city or town that has a population greater than 50,000 inhabitants.” A “thoughtfully modified and customized” definition would be preferable, the Texas PSBN said, saying Texas defines a rural county as having a population density of fewer than 160 persons per square mile. NPSTC suggested a similar population density -- between five and 159 persons per square mile – as an alternative definition for rural area.

California said it believes FirstNet should allow individual states to separately define what constitutes “rural” given that a uniform definition that satisfies every state isn’t possible. Pennsylvania also said it wants states to have the power to self-define what constitute rural and other areas, saying it's concerned that FirstNet’s definition of “wilderness areas” includes the state’s agricultural areas, which “would potentially hamper the State's public safety mission.”

NTCA said it supports using the REA definition of rural areas for FirstNet, saying the definition “is well known to many if not most of those providers and government entities that exist in, regulate, or interact with rural America. It also introduces a needed measure of consistency, as it makes little sense to have different definitions for different programs and agencies.” FirstNet should reject defining areas with five or fewer persons per square mile as “frontier,” which would put them outside FirstNet’s duty to establish substantial rural coverage, NTCA said in its filing. People “living in such areas have every right to the same level of emergency services as those living in more populated areas,” NTCA said.

California said it’s concerned that “key elements” of FirstNet’s network “do not meet the criteria described in FirstNet’s Core and Radio Access Network (RAN) definitions.” Problematic components include the backhaul transport connecting the RAN with the Core, as well as the backhaul connecting the Core with geographically distributed databases and application servers, the state said. Florida and Pennsylvania separately said they believe FirstNet should remain flexible when creating its network architecture to provide options for states to meet their broadband needs. A flexible network architecture design will allow distribution “of some core elements regionally to provide for enhanced reliability, security, and privacy of the network and public safety traffic while still maintaining interoperability,” Pennsylvania said.

California said it supports FirstNet’s definition of an “open, transparent, and competitive” RFP process and wants the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) standards applied to FirstNet’s RFP practices. Florida, Pennsylvania and Vermont also said they believe FirstNet should adopt the FAR standards for its RFP practices. FirstNet should consult with the states “to ensure their specific requirements are factored into” the RFP process, Florida said.

Industry groups split on using FAR standards for FirstNet’s RFP process. APCO said it believes FirstNet shouldn’t adopt FAR standards because “FirstNet should be free of limiting laws and regulations that apply to federal agencies, such as for acquisition and hiring.” PCIA said it tentatively supports FirstNet using FAR, saying the federal standards “will allow the agency to meet its mandate.”