What The FCC May Not Have Known!

The FCC, like any organization, is always going to be vulnerable to criticism about certain matters. Ever since the infamous Janet Jackson Super Bowl escapade, there has been unrelenting pressure from Congress, telling the agency that it hasn’t done enough to control indecency over the airwaves. On the other hand, free speech proponents claim the Commission already has gone too far in acting as a National Nanny. Broadcasters complain that the Commission isn’t sufficiently sympathetic about the over-the-air television viewers who may be left behind if the DTV transition is accelerated. Rural telcos lament that the FCC has given away the store to wireless competitors by allowing them to tap into the Universal Service Fund coffers. Wireless argues that the Commission has not always been quick to forbear from regulatory obligations that should not be needed in a competitive environment. And the amateurs decry their diminished clout in an agency that once quaked at the very mention of their name.

But there is one area in which complaints about lack of FCC diligence would seem unjust, at least in recent years: the agency’s investigations into public safety spectrum requirements and its search for spectrum to address those needs. A combination of domestic terrorist events, in particular those that occurred on 9/11, an administration that places a very high priority on homeland security and has put its money where its mouth is, and an increasingly cohesive public safety community that has kicked its political presence into high gear have produced unprecedented focus on the communications needs of first responders and the rest of the public safety constituency.

At any point, there are multiple, overlapping Congressional and FCC inquiries into this subject, most of which also highlight interoperability issues. Those efforts have resulted in recent public safety allocations of 24 MHz at 700 MHz and 50 MHz at 4.9 GHz, both of which will support advanced technology applications, with the latter specifically earmarked for broadband services. Of course, 700 MHz will have limited availability in the populated markets where it is most needed, unless and until Congress flexes its political muscle and adopts a date certain for completion of the DTV migration that will clear this band for other uses.

Interestingly, however, the most recent FCC investigation into emergency response providers’ spectrum needs had a slightly different twist. It was triggered by a provision under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which directs the Commission to report to Congress on this subject by the end of 2005. However, the Act, and therefore the FCC’s inquiry, also asked to what extent commercial wireless systems can be used to satisfy those requirements.

The FCC probably expected to hear from Nextel, SouthernLINC, Cingular and other national or regional carriers that have trained their marketing sights on this very large user constituency. There is no question that many public safety officials now carry cell phones in addition to their other communications devices. They also are using those networks for a variety of public safety activities and undoubtedly will continue to do so, particularly as the concept of VPNs becomes more familiar.

But an interesting thing happens when you ask radio dealers and service shops about public safety spectrum needs. What the FCC may not have known without the comments filed by EWA is that local operators have been serving the public safety market for years. Without much fanfare, they have used their own systems to provide local government users with two-way dispatch, mobile data, microwave, paging and even Internet access services on VHF, UHF, T-band, 800/900 MHz and a variety of licensed and unlicensed microwave bands. The applications range from primary mission critical functions, to mission critical back-up, to E-911 support, and to AVL capability, along with day-to-day administrative responsibilities. Indeed, EWA members reported providing service to just about every imaginable variety of government and quasi-governmental institution.

Local dealers often have long-standing relationships with the governmental entities they serve. They may be able to tailor their system parameters to satisfy the specific coverage and reliability standards a public safety entity needs. Importantly, they have the back-up generator capability that enables these systems to return to the air after a natural disaster often long before larger, wireline-dependent networks are functioning. They had forged public-private partnerships with their governmental counterparts to meet even mission critical needs long before the FCC and Congress began to tout the benefits of such arrangements.

Unlike some of their larger, more ambitious competitors, the local dealer community has no vision of supplanting public safety’s need for its own private systems. The day may come when police, fire and other agencies providing mission critical functions will be comfortable relying entirely on third party systems. You just shouldn’t hold your breath until that day arises. But dealers have a growing opportunity to supplement internal public safety systems with a broad variety of cost-efficient service offerings that may be attractive to municipalities that must balance competing demands for limited financial resources. Many are doing so already, and all should at least explore their options.

Now if we could only get the FCC or the Federal Government to cough up some unencumbered VHF and UHF spectrum and could get our hands on DHS dollars to fund deployment, the government might find that emergency response providers’ needs are at least one step closer to resolution.