The First Responder Network (FirstNet) and
Next-Generation Communications for
Public Safety: Issues for Congress

Linda K. Moore
Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
July 28, 2016
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42543


The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Summary
Congress included provisions in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (P.L.
112-96) for planning, building, and managing a new, nationwide, broadband network for public
safety communications, by creating the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet). The act
allocated 10 MHz of additional radio frequency spectrum to accommodate the new network and
required that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) assign a license to FirstNet,
comprising the newly designated frequencies plus 10 MHz previously assigned to states by the
FCC for public safety use. In addition, the act designated federal appropriations of over $7 billion
for the network and other public safety needs. These funds are provided through new revenue
from the auction of licenses to the commercial sector in other spectrum bands.
The establishment of FirstNet is an important step toward reaching what has been a national goal
since September 11, 2001: the provision of interoperable communications for first responders.
The immediate goal for FirstNet is to provide a broadband network nationwide to carry data,
although it will provide an option for voice communications as well. The cost of constructing and
maintaining a nationwide network is estimated by many experts to be in the tens of billions of
dollars over the long term. The law anticipates that most of these costs will be covered by
partnerships between FirstNet and the private sector in return for commercial access to FirstNet’s
spectrum.
In order to maintain control over the quality and nature of communications, many states are likely
to continue to invest in and maintain their own Land Mobile Radio (LMR) networks that operate
on narrowband frequencies under the jurisdiction of state and local public safety agencies.
Information available to the public indicates that FirstNet intends to discourage states from
building and operating their own networks within FirstNet, in part by limiting the amount of
spectrum available for this purpose. FirstNet has taken the position that state autonomy in
network design decisions and management will jeopardize FirstNet’s ability to provide a network
that meets its coverage and service goals.
P.L. 112-96 was signed into law on February 22, 2012, setting in motion the process of setting up
FirstNet as an “independent authority within the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration,” as required by the act; laying out the parameters for partnerships, and state,
tribal and federal participation; and meeting requirements either statutory or practical. After
extensive consultation with stakeholders and potential partners in preparing proposals for
partnering with FirstNet, the initial phases of organization culminated with the deadline for
submitting proposals to build and operate the nationwide network, on May 31, 2016. The
successful bidder for the contract to build and operate FirstNet may be announced as early as
November 2016.
Once the contract is awarded, as the network becomes operational, the potential level of public
safety agency participation should be better understood, providing opportunities to evaluate the
success of FirstNet in meeting the goals Congress set for it in 2012. Among the provisions of the
act is a requirement that the Government Accountability Office, before the end of FY2022,
recommend to Congress what actions should be taken in regard to the ending of FirstNet’s
authority, mandated for review by 2027.
Congress continues to exercise vigilance in the development and deployment of FirstNet through
periodic hearings in both the House and Senate.

Congressional Research Service

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
The Request for Proposal ................................................................................................................ 2
FirstNet Network Strategy ............................................................................................................... 2
Network Design ........................................................................................................................ 4
State Public Safety Radio Networks ......................................................................................... 5
State Participation: The Opt-Out Provision ..................................................................................... 6
State and Community Network Participation .................................................................................. 8
Risks and Rewards .................................................................................................................... 9
Advantages of FirstNet’s Comprehensive Network Strategy................................................... 11
Other Advantages ..................................................................................................................... 11
Disadvantages of FirstNet’s Comprehensive Network Strategy ............................................. 12
NTIA Grant Programs ................................................................................................................... 12
State and Local Implementation Grant Program ..................................................................... 12
Network Construction Fund .................................................................................................... 13
GAO Study .................................................................................................................................... 14
OIG Report on FirstNet ................................................................................................................. 15
Discussion of Other Provisions in the Spectrum Act to Improve Public Safety
Communications ......................................................................................................................... 16
Spectrum Assignment .............................................................................................................. 17
Public Safety Trust Fund ......................................................................................................... 18
FirstNet: Limit on Expenditures ....................................................................................... 19
FirstNet: Fee Income and Other Revenue ......................................................................... 19
Planning Authority .................................................................................................................. 19
Statutory Obligations .............................................................................................................. 21
Timeframe ............................................................................................................................... 22
Next Generation 9-1-1 ............................................................................................................. 23
Roaming and Priority Access Within the 700 MHz Band ....................................................... 24

Figures
Figure 1. Small Cell Neighborhood Micro Network ....................................................................... 4

Contacts
Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 25

Congressional Research Service

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Introduction
The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) is a federal agency that includes private sector
and other non-federal representation on its board of directors. FirstNet was created by Congress
with provisions in Title VI (Spectrum Act) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of
2012 (P.L. 112-96) to ensure the deployment and operation of a nationwide, broadband network
for public safety communications. It is established as an “independent authority”1 within the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), part of the Department of
Commerce.
In addition to establishing the structure and goals for FirstNet, Congress provided $7 billion for
costs related to planning and deploying the broadband network, and a $135 million grant program
to assist states with plans to connect to FirstNet’s broadband network.2 These funds are provided
from revenue realized through auctioning licenses for radio frequency spectrum, as designated in
the act. The anticipated cost of building and operating a nationwide core broadband network—
and the interoperable radio networks that connect to it—is significantly in excess of the amount
appropriated. The act therefore provides for public-private partnerships with FirstNet or with
states, and for fees (charged to states and other users) to ensure that FirstNet becomes self-
sustaining. To attract private sector partners, FirstNet can offer access to its assets, including radio
frequency spectrum capacity, in return for financial payment or other support. FirstNet holds a
license for 20 MHz of broadband spectrum,3 assigned by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), as required by the act. The act allows states that meet specified requirements
to lease spectrum from FirstNet and thereby negotiate their own partnerships that share spectrum
in Radio Area Networks for their state or region. The act requires that FirstNet deploy its network
using the fourth-generation wireless technologies of Long Term Evolution (LTE).4 LTE is a
powerful cellular technology with industry standards that are consistently being upgraded to
expand its capabilities. LTE is also a platform for commercial carrier-expansion into fifth-
generation (5G) wireless communications and the Internet of Things.
There are many challenges for public safety leaders and policymakers in establishing the
framework for a nationwide network that meets state, local, tribal and territorial needs for robust,
interoperable emergency communications. Currently, for example, state emergency
communications needs are typically met by separate networks using different technologies.
Furthermore, each state has its own laws and procedures for building, managing, and funding
communications infrastructure. Among the challenges facing FirstNet is establishing a
governance model that accommodates current investments and future needs of its clients without
compromising the coherence of a national network.

1 P.L. 112-96, Section 6204 (a).
2 P.L. 112-96, Section 6202 (b) (2) (B).
3 The spectrum license issued to FirstNet is for two 10 MHz channels of paired spectrum at 758-768 MHz and 788-798
MHz, plus guard bands at 768-769 MHz and 798-799 MHz to mitigate interference from adjacent channels. For
purposes of allocation and assignment, spectrum is segmented into bands of radio frequencies measured in cycles per
second, or hertz. Standard abbreviations for measuring frequencies include kHz—kilohertz or thousands of hertz;
MHz—megahertz, or millions of hertz; and GHz—gigahertz, or billions of hertz. The designation can refer to an entire
band, such as the 700 MHz band, or to specific frequencies within a band.
4 P.L. 112-96, Section 6203 (c) (2).
Congressional Research Service
1

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

The Request for Proposal
FirstNet officials face enormous pressure to produce a functional network in a timely manner,
reflecting widespread concerns that public safety communications will not be adequate for
response and recovery if a catastrophic national emergency occurs. Among the timelines that the
winning bidder5 must meet is geographical coverage for 95% of the country within six months of
receiving the contract. This obligation suggests that participation of one of the four nationwide
carriers (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile) to carry FirstNet traffic will be essential, even if the
carrier acts as a subcontractor and not a lead partner. Agreements with rural carriers may also be
used to meet rural coverage goals. The winning contractor must guarantee priority access to
public safety on the 20 MHz of spectrum capacity that FirstNet brings to the table. The
requirements for buildout using FirstNet spectrum (referred to as Band 14) are 20% coverage of
population within the first year of operation and 60% coverage within two years.
Also within six months, the winning contractor is expected to submit simultaneously to 56 states
and territories, as required by the act, a plan for how FirstNet would be deployed within that state
or territory (tribal areas are covered in state plans). FirstNet will make available $6.5 billion of its
federal funding for the buildout. The bidder must indicate the cost of each state’s buildout within
the context of its cost model. States that successfully meet the criteria to build their own network
within FirstNet will be eligible for a proportionate share of the $6.5 billion,6 provided in the form
of a grant. The total cost to build out the network is estimated by most experts to be in excess of
$30 billion over 10 years.
The successful bidder will sign a contract for 25 years, expiring in FY2042. Annual payments
totaling at least $5.625 billion over the period of the contract are required as a guarantee that
FirstNet will be financially self-sustaining.
Although the bid may be awarded as early as November 2016,7 the decision may be delayed if
additional time is needed to evaluate the proposals.
FirstNet Network Strategy
Achievements since the FirstNet board first met officially in September 2012 include a number of
Requests for Information (RFI), notably the September 2014 Request for Information for
Comprehensive Network Solution(s).
8 This document proposed a comprehensive broadband

5 To the extent that public information is available, it appears that most if not all of the bidders are consortia of
companies assembled to meet the diverse needs of the public safety network. The FirstNet RFP requires bidders to
make proposals that address 16 core objectives such as cybersecurity, network reliability, and pricing.
6 In FirstNet’s Special Notice, the “Proposed Pricing Methodology, Level of Government Funding” proposes that
“potential offerors may be required to propose how much of the $6.5 billion in Government funding that FirstNet will
make available is needed to deploy, operate and maintain the NPSBN, based on their proposed solution given the level
of value available as described in (2) below. Potential offerors would be required to propose the timing of when the
funding is required to achieve the initial operating capability milestones that are detailed in the draft RFP documents.”
7http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=25dedd7c-815b-4b3d-a420-
4f4324d01041&Statement_id=ec8d2396-ecd6-4787-bcc6-6c0152203066&ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-
9d35-56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&MonthDisplay=3&YearDisplay=2015.
7 Hearing, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, “FirstNet Oversight: An Update of the Status
of the Public Safety Broadband Network,” June 21, 2016, testimony of Michael Poth, Chief Executive Officer,
FirstNet, June 21, 2016, https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/52af162c-90dd-42bb-bc1f-
31b8f2d4693b/7C9C152E53812C3B20625C527735C423.mr.-poth-testimony.pdf.
8 FirstNet, Request for Information for Comprehensive Network Solution(s), September 17, 2014,
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

network solution for FirstNet that would reach from core network management requirements to
include local area networks in many communities, as well as some devices used to access the
network.9 A Second Notice, issued by the Department of Commerce for comment on March 9,
2015,10 provided FirstNet’s perspective on the intent of Congress in enacting language that allows
states to build their own network. The discussion in the Second Notice also supplemented the
Public Notice on Statutory Interpretations,11 issued in September 2014. A number of important
issues are raised in these formal statements of proposed interpretation, including possible
definitions of “public safety” and “rural.”
A third public notice12 concerning the definition of “public safety” was released after a FirstNet
board meeting on April 24, 2015.13 Also on April 24, the proposed acquisition approach14 and the
draft Request for Proposal(s) (RFP)15were considered in a closed meeting. The draft RFP builds
on proposals from previous notices and RFIs. The planning process for 2015-2016 centered on
circulating the draft Request for Proposal(s) and a final RFP. FirstNet conclude that the contract
or contracts would be awarded through the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) process16
According to FirstNet, “key goals are to meet the needs of public safety and to provide extensive
coverage so Federal subscribers and other public safety users can count on the network when they
are on the job.”17 Network coverage includes deployable units, such as vehicles equipped to
connect with the network, and local area networks operated by FirstNet. “Incident commanders
and officials will have local control over the network so, for example, they can assign users and
talk groups and determine who can access applications.”18 The underlying premise of the strategy
is that the chosen network solutions will allow FirstNet to “control and operate” national and
regional core network infrastructure, Radio Access Networks (RANs) in states that opt-in, as well

(...continued)
http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/
Request%20for%20Information%20for%20Comprehensive%20Network%20Solutions.pdf.
9 Congressional Research Service was informed of the outline for FirstNet’s comprehensive network strategy in
discussion with NTIA officials between July and September 2012.
10 FirstNet, Second Notice, March 9, 2015, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/
FirstNet_Second_Public_Notice_0.pdfplus; also published in Federal Register, Vol. 80, No. 49, Friday, March 13,
2015, 1336-13351 (Docket Number 150306226-5226-01); comments due by April 28, 2015.
11 FirstNet, Public Notice on Statutory Interpretations, September 17, 2014, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/
files/firstnet-public-notice-middle-class-tax-relief-job-creation-act-of-2012.pdf.
12 FirstNet, “Further Proposed Interpretations of Parts of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012,” at
http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/firstnet-third-notice-final-prepublication-version.pdf.
13 FirstNet, Special Board Meeting Agenda, http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/FirstNet-April-24-2015-Meeting-
Agenda.pdf
14“FirstNet’s Proposed Acquisition Approach,” April 24, 2015, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/firstnet-
special-notice-and-draft-rfp-documents_0.pdf.
15 FirstNet, Special Notice and supporting documents for draft RFP, Federal Business Opportunities, Solicitation
Number D15PS00295, at https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=
55fa4d3227d5ac0173e4613e04368c86.
16 As a federal agency, FirstNet is required to follow federal procurement processes but the act does not mandate the
use of FAR. Some legal experts might argue that the contracts to be negotiated through the RFP process are not subject
to FAR. For more information on FAR, see CRS Report R42826, The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Answers
to Frequently Asked Questions
, by Kate M. Manuel, L. Elaine Halchin, and Michelle D. Christensen.
17 Fact Sheet, “FirstNet and Federal Departments and Agencies,” October 2014 at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/
files/federal-information-fact-sheet-1.pdf.
18 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
3


The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

as devices, applications, and other functions.19 To achieve this level of coverage, FirstNet’s
“acquisition strategy centers on maximizing the network’s value to public safety while meeting its
financial sustainability obligations under the Act.”20
Network Design
Although many details have not been made public, the general architecture of FirstNet’s
broadband network has been presented at numerous public events and is available on the FirstNet
website.21 The network design shows what is referred to as a heterogeneous network, or HetNet.
It depicts the Radio Access Network to include both macro and micro networks. In simple terms,
high towers with base stations, known as eNodeB in LTE network design, are referred to by the
wireless industry as a macro network; a variety of small cell22 network designs are referred to as
micro networks. The macro network is often described as providing coverage over distance and
the micro network as providing capacity as well as extra coverage at the local level.23
Figure 1. Small Cell Neighborhood Micro Network

Source: 4G Americas, Meeting the 1000X Challenge: The Need for Spectrum, Technology and Policy Innovation,
October 2013, Figure AI-1, p. 130, http://www.4gamericas.org/documents/
2013_4G%20Americas%20Meeting%20the%201000x%20Challenge%2010%204%2013_FINAL.pdf.

19 Ibid.
20 FirstNet, Request for Information for Comprehensive Network Solution(s), September 17, 2014,
http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/
Request%20for%20Information%20for%20Comprehensive%20Network%20Solutions.pdf.
21 “FirstNet LTE Overview,” at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/LTE%20Overview-.pdf. The version
referenced in this report is dated March 2, 2015.
22 Small cells are low-powered radio access nodes that are used to boost capacity and manage network interference and
connectivity. The types of small cells include Femtocells, typically used in a home; Picocells, that may serve a
business; Metrocells, for urban areas; and Microcells, the largest in terms of geographic coverage, used primarily in
rural areas. The term small cells is used by the Small Cell Forum as an umbrella term for operator-controlled, low-
power radio access nodes using licensed or unlicensed spectrum.
23 A more detailed discussion of the evolution of wireless network concepts appears in CRS Report R43595, Mobile
Technology and Spectrum Policy: Innovation and Competition
, by Linda K. Moore.
Congressional Research Service
4

link to page 7 The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Revised by CRS to include a small cell deployment for public safety operations.
The trend in the evolution of network coverage is depicted in Figure 1. In this configuration, the
micro network has become the predominate provider of mobile communications coverage and
capacity through contiguous small cell networks. The tower of the macro network (eNodeB)
assures nationwide connectivity and provides additional coverage. Small cell networks are by and
large autonomous, providing coverage for their area and connecting to other small cell networks
or cellular towers when needed. These micro networks are local in nature but fully interoperable
across wide geographic areas. For FirstNet, a network strategy that shifts the majority of routine,
public safety mobile communications onto shared spectrum in small cell networks will free much
of the 20 MHz spectrum license for secondary use by commercial carriers. Only in times of a
major emergency would public safety users make heavy demands on the macro network and
spectrum licensed to FirstNet.
In an LTE network, it is the eNodeB macro coverage infrastructure—not the micro network—that
requires a significant spectrum assignment to operate efficiently. During the period 2011-2012,
when the Spectrum Act was drafted and enacted, the Radio Area Network would have consisted
primarily of high-site towers with base stations (eNodeB).24 Since the Spectrum Act was passed,
communications technologies have evolved in ways not fully anticipated at the time.25 Congress,
therefore, may have assumed that a state with a successful plan to opt out and create its own
public-private partnership would be granted a statewide license for 20 MHz to operate a Radio
Area Network using eNodeB towers and base stations. Micro networks, however, can operate
within the 20 MHz assignment, essentially sharing the spectrum, but may require no more than
1.5 x 1.5 MHz for a basic LTE network. Therefore, if FirstNet decides that only micro network
capacity will be made available for a state-operated Radio Area Network, then the state will have
a sub-license for a relatively small amount of spectrum that may be difficult—perhaps
impossible—to leverage in a public-private partnership.
State Public Safety Radio Networks
Since September 11, 2001, state and local agencies—aided by federal grant programs—have
invested in improving the reliability and interoperability of mission critical voice communications
over Land Mobile Radio (LMR) networks. The 2014 National Emergency Communications
Plan26 prepared by the Department of Homeland Security emphasizes the need to continue
investment in these networks to provide communication for first responders until such time as
FirstNet is deployed and capable of handling mission-critical voice communications over

24 P.L. 112-96, Sec. 6202 (b) states that the network consists of “(1) a core network that—(A) consists of national and
regional data centers, and other elements that may be distributed geographically, all of which shall be based on
commercial standards; and (B) provides the connectivity between—(i) the radio access network; and (ii) the public
Internet and the public switched network, or both; and (2) a radio access network that—(A) consists of all cell site
equipment, antennas, and backhaul equipment, based on commercial standards, that are required to enable wireless
communications, with devices using the public safety broadband spectrum; and (B) shall be developed, constructed,
managed, maintained, and operated taking into account the State, local, and tribal planning and implementation grant
program, under section 6302 (a).”
25 In 2012, small cell deployments now commonly used by the industry to expand their LTE networks were considered
experimental, for example comments in President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST),
Realizing the Full Potential of Government-Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth, July 20, 2012, at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012.pdf.
25 FirstNet, Second Notice, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/FirstNet_Second_Public_Notice_0.pdfplus.
26 Last published, March 10, 2016, https://www.dhs.gov/national-emergency-communications-plan.
Congressional Research Service
5

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

broadband.27 These networks may also be essential for local and state backup service when access
to FirstNet has been preempted by a large-scale emergency, or they may be an alternative to using
FirstNet.
State Participation: The Opt-Out Provision
FirstNet is required to consult with regional, state, tribal, and local authorities regarding decisions
such as those concerning the costs of the policies it formulates, as required in the law, including
expenditures for the core network, placement of towers, coverage areas, security, and priority
access for local users. Consultation will be through a state-selected coordinator as specified in the
act.28 Appointment of an individual or governmental body as the Single Point of Contact (SPOC)
is required as a condition of state participation and eligibility to receive grants established by the
act.29
Every state has one or more agencies that plan for public safety, homeland security, and
emergency communications. To be eligible for grants from the Department of Homeland Security,
a state establishes a Statewide Interoperability Coordinator (SWIC) to administer its Statewide
Communication Interoperability Plan (SCIPs).30 SCIPs are written to conform with federal
guidelines and requirements, such as the National Emergency Communications Plan. States may
decide to use the existing SWIC as the required single point-of-contact or may choose to appoint
a separate coordinator. Each state and other participants have appointed a coordinator to work
directly with FirstNet.31 The coordinator (SPOC) is responsible for managing FirstNet activities
in his or her state. Often this includes revising the existing SCIP to include broadband
communications.
The governor of each state is to be notified by FirstNet when it has completed its requests for
proposals regarding construction, operation, maintenance, and improvement of a nationwide
network. The governor or his designee will receive the details of the proposed plans and
notification of the amount of funding available to the state if it participates in the FirstNet
program.32
The act only identifies two options for a state: join FirstNet or build a statewide Radio Access
Network subject to the provisions of the act. The act does not include specific provisions for a
state that chooses to build its own Radio Access Network without opting out of FirstNet, although
providing such an option may be within FirstNet’s charter. A state might, for example, choose to
build its own data management center or mobile access routers while also sharing FirstNet’s
infrastructure for regional and national coverage. The act also is silent on whether states may
choose to opt out of the broadband network entirely, choosing neither to join FirstNet nor to build

27 Department of Homeland Security, National Emergency Communications Plan, November 12, 2014, p .7: “… the
primary means to achieve mission critical voice communications.” At http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/2014%20National%20Emergency%20Communications%20Plan_October%2029%202014.pdf.
28 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (2) (B).
29 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (d).
30 See “Statewide Interoperability Coordinators,” at http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_1286986920144.shtm.
31 Hearing, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
“Oversight of FirstNet and the Advancement of Public Safety Wireless Communications,” testimony of Samuel Ginn,
Chairman, FirstNet, November 21, 2013. List of state contacts at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/spoc-list-
directory-20150113.pdf.
32 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (1).
Congressional Research Service
6

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

a broadband network on the frequencies assigned to FirstNet.33 Some states may prefer to
concentrate their resources on improving mission-critical voice networks and acquire broadband
access from a commercial provider or through other means. FirstNet, through its partners, intends
to provide service in all states, even if a state chooses not to be a customer or otherwise
participate in the network.34
The Spectrum Act specifies that a state that chooses to build its own Radio Access Network must
submit an alternative plan for construction, operation, maintenance, and improvement of the
Radio Access Network within the state. The state has 90 days to agree to participate or to notify
FirstNet, the NTIA, and the FCC of its intent to deploy its own part of the Radio Access Network,
and an additional 180 days to provide its plan to the FCC.35 The state must demonstrate to the
FCC, which the law requires to review the plan, that its planned Radio Access Network would
comply with minimum technical requirements and be interoperable with FirstNet.
If a state’s plan is approved it will be eligible to apply for a grant, administered by the NTIA, that
will be funded from the Network Construction Fund created by the act. The amount available
may be less than what would have been provided if the state had opted in to the FirstNet program,
because the grant will be applied only toward building the Radio Access Network and may be
subject to matching grant requirements. Approval of the grant is contingent on meeting additional
requirements established by the NTIA, including sustainability, timeliness, cost-effectiveness,
security, coverage, and services that are comparable to FirstNet.36 The state would be required to
pay a user fee for access to FirstNet’s core network.37 It would not be permitted to enter
commercial markets or lease access to its network except through a public-private partnership.
FirstNet has determined that any revenue to the state from a partnership must be used only for
costs associated with its participation in FirstNet. If a state’s plan meets FCC and NTIA
requirements, then the NTIA may approve lease authority for FirstNet to grant a sub-license to a
state, to operate on some portion of the FirstNet spectrum.
On July 19, 2016, the NTIA published notice of its proposal for evaluating State Alternative Plan
Programs for states that wish to opt out of FirstNet.38 If a state’s plan has met the initial approval
of the FCC, it must then demonstrate to the NTIA that it meets technical and financial
requirements. To the general parameters provided in the Spectrum Act, the NTIA has added
several specific criteria for states that parallel requirements for contractors, including:
 The State Alternative Plan Proposal submission and the related request for a
spectrum lease will be treated as a single request for a grant (even though the
state may choose not to request a grant as described in the Spectrum Act) in
accordance with provisions of the Federal Grants and Cooperative Agreement
Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-224).

33 A discussion of courses a state might choose appears in a blog post on medium com: Bill Schrier, “FirstNet: More
Choices than Just Opt-In/out,” February 7, 2015, https://medium.com/@BillSchrier/firstnet-more-choices-than-just-opt-
in-out-cb47b306b62c.
34 FirstNet, Second Notice, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/FirstNet_Second_Public_Notice_0.pdfplus.
35 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (2) and (3).
36 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (3) (D).
37 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (f).
38 Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 138, July 19, 2016 46907 et seq., “State Alternative Plan Program (SAPP) and the
First Responder Network Authority Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network,”
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-19/pdf/2016-17034.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

 The forthcoming Federal Funding Opportunity announcement will include
additional details regarding the technical capabilities required of a state, in
addition to those published in the July 19 notice.
 States must submit their application to the NTIA within 60 days of FCC approval
of the alternative plan.
 State network plans must adhere to the same policies as those applied to FirstNet.
 States will be required to provide information on how it will manage its Radio
Access Network, including, for example, its staffing plan and budget documents.
 States must disclose partnership agreements and address funding risks; NTIA
may require surety bonds to ensure network construction is completed.
 Deadlines for the state plan must match those presented in FirstNet’s plan for the
state.
 A state plan that relies on new buildouts of the network (“greenfield”) might not
qualify as cost effective.
 In evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a state’s alternative plan, NTIA will
include as a factor its assessment of the value of cross-border economies of scale
that may be lost.
State and Community Network Participation
The following discussion focuses on key statements from FirstNet that seem to indicate the
agency’s current plans for state, tribal, territorial, and local participation in the network. FirstNet
may later choose to alter its plans.39
FirstNet’s deployment strategy reportedly will
 Include state-based eNodeB’s in FirstNet’s core services, thereby bringing
the entire 20 MHz spectrum license under the full control of FirstNet and its
federal contractors.40 This decision, if implemented, represents a change in an
earlier statement that proposes including the eNode B as part of the Radio
Area Network.41
 Provide local area network capacity and connections as an extension of
FirstNet, limiting state authority to providing fill-in capacity for some under-
served areas.42
 Assign to FirstNet contractors the responsibility of identifying additional
partners or subcontractors to act under the authority of the contractor; this
might include, for example, negotiating an agreement with a local power
company for access to its infrastructure.43

39 The discussion is based on currently available information as of the publication date of this report.
40 CRS meeting with FirstNet officials, February 13, 2015.
41 FirstNet, Public Notice on Statutory Interpretations, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/firstnet-public-
notice-middle-class-tax-relief-job-creation-act-of-2012.pdf. The Special Notice, “Terms of Reference,” reiterates the
proposed definition but does not provide a conclusive description of RAN.
42 CRS meeting with FirstNet officials, February 13, 2015.
43 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
8

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

 Assign negotiations for access to existing state, local, or tribal infrastructure
to contractors, to be pursued after the contract has been issued.44
 Extend coverage to rural areas where there is currently little or no
commercial service through new, federally funded build-out to the
commercial networks of partners chosen through the RFP process.45
A major goal of this network design is to maximize the value of spectrum by capturing its full
value, nationwide, in order to provide sufficient funding for rural coverage. 46 FirstNet therefore
believes that allowing states to build their own RANs “potentially takes with it subscriber fees
and/or excess network capacity fees that would have helped fund the FirstNet network in all other
states.”47
Apparently not included in FirstNet’s planning process is an analysis of the costs to be assumed
by states as a consequence of its business plan. These costs include the continued operation and
possible expansion of state and local LMR voice networks; the cost of integration of LMR and
broadband infrastructure; the costs of forfeiting to FirstNet the potential economies of scale in
network construction and operation; and the cost of lost opportunities for competition and
innovation in wireless services at the state and local level. It remains to be seen what the winning
contractor to deploy FirstNet will offer to states to offset costs that states are likely to bear in
order to participate in FirstNet.
Risks and Rewards
FirstNet appears to be making decisions about the network design that are evolving as new
information is gathered and analyzed. It claims that a federalized network is the “only solution”48
that meets its goals of providing nationwide coverage, interoperability, and assured access. In the
Second Notice it concludes that allowing populous states to opt out of FirstNet and build their
own public safety broadband networks, monetizing the value of the 20 MHz of spectrum assigned
for that purpose, will beggar their more rural neighbors who cannot so readily capture the value
of excess capacity. This is a presumption of market failure that is not supported by information
made public by FirstNet and is inconsistent with the many positive analyses of the economic
value of small cell networks, community broadband, and the Internet of Things.49

44 Hearing, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, “Three Years Later: Are We Any Closer to
a Nationwide Public Safety Network,” March 11, 2015: oral testimony of Ms. Susan Swenson, Chairwoman, FirstNet.
Ms. Swenson further explained that FirstNet had found it difficult to negotiate for access to state and local
infrastructure as part of its pilot with the Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS). See
also FirstNet, “Early Builder’s Blog, February12, 2015, at http://www.firstnet.gov/newsroom/blog/early-builders-blog-
la-rics.
45 Ibid.
46 “We believe as a general matter that Congress did not intend for a few, high density states to be able to withhold
material funding for all the other States under the Act.” Second Notice, op.cit.
47 FirstNet, Second Notice, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/FirstNet_Second_Public_Notice_0.pdfplus.
48 This phrase has reportedly been used in many discussions between FirstNet staff and Members of Congress or their
staff. It was also used in the February 13, 2015 CRS meeting with FirstNet officials.
49 Examples of sources that discuss potential value or wireless broadband for rural, suburban, and urban areas include
Small Cell Forum case studies, including rural and remote areas (http://scf.io/en/documents/
047_Extending_rural_and_remote_coverage_using_small_cells.php); NTIA, Broadband USA: An Introduction to
Effective Public-Private Partnerships for Broadband Investments
(http://scf.io/en/documents/
047_Extending_rural_and_remote_coverage_using_small_cells.php);and testimony at Senate and House hearings on
the Internet of Things (Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, February 11, 2015; House,
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
9

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

The value of economies of scale in building and operating wireless networks has long been
recognized by telecommunications experts and policymakers. The FCC, for example, has
modified its policies to make it easier for wireless companies to expand through mergers and
acquisitions in order to benefit from scale economies.50 These and related FCC decisions are
based on, among other considerations, improving coverage through macro networks to customers
for wireless services. When FirstNet refers to the importance of economies of scale, it is
apparently referring to geographic coverage through macro networks.51
The economics for small cell networks, however, enable profitability by providing economies of
scope, with many different types of services to multiple customer segments in a small area.
Economies are provided not through macro network coverage but by micro network capacity to
accommodate many customers with different technology needs. Many wireless network experts
believe that dense deployments of small cells in an area served by a single eNodeB tower will
increase efficiency and reduce costs while increasing capacity to handle many different markets.52
Although urbanized areas are seen by many as the primary market for expanding small cell
services, the benefits may also be important in rural or remote areas. Experts suggest that, in
addition to serving public safety, a rural small cell configuration could support, for example,
transportation improvements, education, job search, agricultural and forestry management, new
efficiencies in municipal government and services, and economic growth.53 Economies of scale at
the macro level may also be available in states with a low population density. A cost-effective
network solution may be achieved by adjacent states combining their resources to provide
coverage with eNodeBs and maximizing the utility of small cell networks at the local level. For
state and local public safety agencies, maximizing the value of spectrum may be less important
than achieving sufficient levels of scale and scope to meet their requirements.
FirstNet refers to the need to monetize the value of its spectrum holdings to expand coverage,
based on the existing commercial footprint for LTE, not the footprint of statewide or local public
safety networks. It does not estimate the value to states and communities of small cell networks
and the wireless component of community broadband that may be transferred to FirstNet’s
commercial partners. FirstNet’s plans appear to capture for its own use most of the value of
spectrum used to provide both coverage and capacity. This value is unknown but potentially far
greater than what FirstNet can lawfully54 spend on improving its network or by reducing user
fees. The excess value of the spectrum and access to local markets that FirstNet is using to barter
for goods and services, therefore, will in most cases go to FirstNet’s contractual partners, not to

(...continued)
Committee on Energy and Commerce, March 24, 2015).
50 FCC News, “FCC Announces Wireless Spectrum Cap to Sunset Effective January 1, 2003,” November 8, 2001.
Report and Order FCC-01-328. See Docket No. 01-14, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, released January 23, 2001, at
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-28A1.pdf.
51 FirstNet, “Stakeholder Quarterly Webinar,” April 2, 2015, presentation on FirstNet Second Notice by Eli
Veenendaal, Attorney-Advisor, at http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/
Stakeholder_Qtrly_Webinar_20150402.pdf.
52 See, for example, Qualcomm, “1000x: More Small Cells; Hyper-Dense Small Cell Deployments,” June 2014. For
presentation slides, see http://www.slideshare.net/qualcommwirelessevolution/web-bringing-1000x-closer-to-reality-
hyper-dense-small-cells-wirelessnetworks-052014.
53 See, for example, Computerworld, “Verizon Boosts Role in Farm Services and Smart Cities,” by Matt Hamblen,
May 1, 2015, at http://www.computerworld.com/article/2917932/internet-of-things/verizon-boosts-role-in-smart-cities-
and-farms-services.html.
54 The act requires FirstNet to reinvest in the network any excess receipts from the fees it is authorized to collect, P.L.
112-96, Section 6207 (b).
Congressional Research Service
10

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

the states and communities intended by the act to be the primary beneficiaries of FirstNet’s
actions. Economists might describe this as a monopoly surplus.
Advantages of FirstNet’s Comprehensive Network Strategy
Advantages of a federalized network, cited by FirstNet,55 include
 Swift execution. Adding public safety access to existing commercial LTE
infrastructure provides a turn-key solution for immediate access to a
potentially large number of public safety agencies, federal agencies, and
others;
 Extension of LTE service to rural areas that currently have no commercial
broadband service and might not have public safety communications
coverage;
 Streamlined access for federal partners. Instead of negotiating with each state
or regional network, federal agencies need only negotiate with FirstNet to
gain immediate access to the entire network;
 National reach in times of emergency and assured access to federal incident
commanders and officials;
 Economies of Scale. FirstNet requires full control of many assets in order to
maximize their value throughout the network; and
 Sustainability. Development of small cell networks under FirstNet’s control
allows for most traffic to be off-loaded on to local networks that require
minimal spectrum, freeing spectrum for customers with a higher dollar-value
for FirstNet.
Other Advantages
A number of advantages offered by FirstNet could be available in many other governance or
business models. These include
 Operation of core network (Evolved Packet Core) services such as
enforcement of rules for interoperability and other policies and rules,
operations, performance and security management, and subscriber databases;
 Purchasing power. Negotiated discounts for equipment through buying
cooperatives;
 Research and development, standardization, and negotiations with standards
bodies;
 Widespread adoption of broadband technologies to improve, enhance, and
extend the effectiveness of emergency responders; and
 Development of best practices for cybersecurity and enforcement of network
security procedures.

55 These advantages were, for example, highlighted in presentations at FirstNet’s “Stakeholder Quarterly Webinar,”
April 2, 2015 (http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/Stakeholder_Qtrly_Webinar_20150402.pdf) as well as in other
documents.
Congressional Research Service
11

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Disadvantages of FirstNet’s Comprehensive Network Strategy
Some disadvantages of a federalized network might be
 Loss of state autonomy. States have a consultative role but many decisions
rest with FirstNet. States also lose control of spectrum assets, potentially
limiting their ability to develop capabilities and services that are of value to
them but not to FirstNet’s customers for nationwide service;
 Devaluation of state and federally funded investments in existing public
safety communications networks. Although contractors may, after receiving a
contract, negotiate with states and localities for access to their assets, the
value and availability of those assets have not been openly stated in the
FirstNet planning process;
 Displacement of local competitors by the FirstNet contractor in local and
state broadband development. Smaller communities may not be able to
generate sufficient business for two or more broadband service providers. To
achieve financially viable programs, they might be restricted to using the
incumbent (FirstNet) provider;
 Displacement of partners for broadband development. Desirable partners
(such as a rural utility) may not be available for local projects because of
contractual obligations to FirstNet;
 Loss of market power for state public safety customers. If fees from state and
local public safety agencies are a small part of FirstNet’s revenue stream,
states lose some of their bargaining power in negotiating for improved
services or other requests; and
 Increased risk through lack of diversified assets. Risks include operational
risks such as a system wide failure or cyberattack; financial risks such as
monopoly pricing; competitive risks in some markets controlled by FirstNet
contractors that may lead to reduced innovation; and the risk of poor
management decisions with systemwide impact.
State reactions in weighing risks and rewards of network participation may lead to another risk:
limited participation, negating much of the intended value of FirstNet.
NTIA Grant Programs
The NTIA, in consultation with FirstNet, has responsibility for carrying out two grant programs:
the State and Local Implementation Grant Program (SLIGP); and grants from the Network
Construction Fund to states that are permitted to build their own Radio Access Networks.
State and Local Implementation Grant Program
The State and Local Implementation Fund was allocated $135 million56 from the Public Safety
Trust Fund for grants to be made available to all 56 states and territories to develop a plan on how
to use a nationwide public safety broadband network to meet their emergency communications
needs. The distribution of available funds among the states is established by the NTIA, which

56 P.L. 112-96, Section 6413.
Congressional Research Service
12

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

administers the State and Local Implementation Grant Program in consultation with FirstNet. The
program is conceived as a matching grant program. Federal grants from the fund are not to
exceed 80% of the projected cost to the state; however, the NTIA may make the decision to waive
the matching funds requirement.
The NTIA decided to plan for funding in two phases. Grants for both phases totaled over $116
million. Grants for the initial phase were awarded to 54 of the 56 eligible states and territories in
FY2013. The state of Mississippi and the territory of the Northern Mariana Islands did not receive
grants. The first phase of funding, totaling about $58 million, has helped states conduct outreach
with public safety and state and local officials to determine their needs, gaps, and priorities for
public safety wireless broadband and to prepare for formal consultations with FirstNet. Grants in
the second phase may be used by states to collect data identifying and prioritizing where public
safety broadband coverage is needed; identifying potential users and their capacity needs;
detailing current providers and procurement mechanisms; and similar needs.57 Reportedly,
NTIA has recently decided no federal grant monies (SLIGP) can be used to explore any
option other than “opt in”. FirstNet itself recently asked for review of its interpretations
of the Law (“second notice”), and those interpretations also tend to restrict the ability of
states to explore options to build their own. It is clear NTIA does not want states doing
coverage and financial modeling, even though such work would result in improved
FirstNet plans for each state.58
The second phase of grants, also for $58 million, was announced in 2015. Awards went to states
to collect data identifying and prioritizing where coverage is needed and identifying potential
users and other information to facilitate network deployment.59
Network Construction Fund
The Spectrum Act requires that $7 billion, reduced by the amount needed to establish FirstNet, be
available for a Network Construction Fund established in the Treasury to be used by FirstNet for
costs associated with building the nationwide network and for grants to states that qualify to build
their own networks.60 The amount to be made available for the fund has been set at $6.5 billion
by FirstNet and the NTIA.
The act effectively creates three types of expenditures from the Network Construction Fund but
does not specify how funds would be allocated for (1) expenditures by FirstNet on construction,
maintenance, and related expenses to build the nationwide network required in the act; (2) by the
NTIA to make payments to states that are participating in FirstNet; and (3) by the NTIA for grants
to those states that qualify to build their own Radio Access Networks.61

57 NTIA Press Release, “NTIA Announces Second Phase of Funding for State and Local Implementation Grant
Program,” March 23, 2015, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2015/ntia-announces-second-phase-funding-state-
and-local-implementation-grant-program.
58 Bill Schrier, the Chief Seattle Geek Blog, “Live Long and Prosper: Impressions from the SPOCs Meeting,” April 19,
2015, at https://schrier.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/live-long-and-prosper-impressions-from-the-spocs-meeting/.
59 NTIA Press Release, NTIA Announces Second Phase of Funding for State and Local Implementation Grant
Program,” March 23, 2015, https://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2015/ntia-announces-second-phase-funding-state-
and-local-implementation-grant-program.
60 P.L. 112-96, Section 6413.
61 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (e).
Congressional Research Service
13

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

GAO Study
The Spectrum Act requires that, before the end of FY2022, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) is to recommend to Congress what actions should be taken in regard to the ending of
FirstNet’s authority, mandated to occur in 2027. Additionally, at the request of the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, GAO has prepared an evaluation of
FirstNet’s organization, including business decisions contained in the request for proposal; use of
commercial, federal, state, local, and tribal infrastructure in deploying the network nationwide;
and financial sustainability. GAO presented preliminary findings as testimony at a Commerce
Committee hearing on March 11, 2015,62 and issued a final report on some of these issues on
April 28, 2015.63
In testimony, GAO summarized the progress FirstNet has made in meeting its responsibilities but
noted that it had not put in place a number of measures that GAO considers important. Notably,
GAO found that FirstNet has not fully assessed the risks associated with its planning efforts (such
as conflict of interest); has not established Standards of Conduct; and is not fully evaluating the
information from five “early builder” projects.64
The full report expands on the information provided in testimony. The full report includes, for
example, a timeline and other information regarding the development of FirstNet; more details
about the “early builder” program; and some insight into FirstNet’s planning process. Regarding
the interaction of planning and the cost of building the network, GAO’s comments include these
observations:
 “As part of its planning and market research, FirstNet has developed a cost
estimate for its public safety network that met most of the best practices
against which we evaluated it.”
 “FirstNet’s cost estimate, including the assumptions it is based on, are not
public because of the highly sensitive nature of the information it contains.”
 “We did not assess FirstNet’s cost estimate against all the characteristics
established in our Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide. Specifically, we
did not assess whether FirstNet’s estimate was ‘credible’ or ‘accurate’
because the estimate and its associated documentation were deemed business
sensitive.”

62 Hearing, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, “Three Years Later: Are We Any Closer to
a Nationwide Public Safety Network,” March 11, 2015: Testimony of Mark L. Goldstein, Director, Physical
Infrastructure Issues, GAO at http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=782a6761-b54b-4e6b-
918d-6bd28b287f34.
63 GAO, Public-Safety Broadband Network: FirstNet Should Strengthen Internal Controls and Evaluate Lessons
Learned
, GAO-15-407, April 2015, at http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/669861.pdf.
64 The early builder projects refer to four recipients of BTOP (Broadband Technology Opportunities Program) grants
from the NTIA that also qualified for temporary sub-leases of the spectrum license held by FirstNet as well as Harris
County, TX, which qualified for a license but did not receive a BTOP grant. These programs are intended to provide
valuable lessons for FirstNet as it prepares to deploy nationwide. The four early builders with BTOP grants were Los
Angeles County, CA (LA-RICS); Adams County, CO; New Jersey; and New Mexico. LA-RICS later withdrew. Three
recipients with BTOP grants that did not qualify as early builders are Charlotte, NC; San Francisco, CA; and
Mississippi. More information regarding the early builders is on the FirstNet website. Information on BTOP grant
programs appears in CRS Report R41775, Background and Issues for Congressional Oversight of ARRA Broadband
Awards
, by Lennard G. Kruger.
Congressional Research Service
14

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

 “We did not analyze the quantitative input and output of the cost model
because the data included procurement sensitive information, and we would
therefore be unable to report our findings in a public report.”
 “Therefore we cannot say if the estimate is in line with the credible and
accurate characteristics of our Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.”65
OIG Report on FirstNet
Criticism by a member of the board of FirstNet, in April 2013—regarding a lack of transparency
in information provided to the Board, and other issues—led to a review of practices by the Office
of Inspector General (OIG.).66 The primary focus of the review had two main objectives, to
determine whether the Department of Commerce (DOC)
 had adequate processes in place to ensure that FirstNet Board members
properly filed financial disclosures and identified potential conflicts of
interest; and
 used appropriate contracting processes and requirements.
The overall finding is that some monitoring procedures were inadequate, including, for example,
a finding that “FirstNet contracting practices lacked transparent award competition, sufficient
oversight of hiring, adequate monitoring, and procedures to prevent erroneous costs.... ”67
In its review, the OIG looked at the roles of the NTIA, the DOC Office of General Counsel, and
two agencies within DOC that were assigned direct responsibilities to assist FirstNet; the Bureau
of Census and NIST were asked to award and manage contracts with outside entities to provide
assistance to FirstNet. The OIG did not specifically review activities of the NTIA Office of Public
Safety Communications, created to assist FirstNet with administrative tasks, including staffing.
The OIG review determined that nearly $11 million had been inappropriately spent, much of it
going for consulting work that did not meet contractual definitions of deliverables. The OIG
referred to this consulting work as “work products” and questioned the expenditures. The DOC
responded that it conducted relevant contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement
laws and regulations and monitored performance, and that the contracts produced “first-rate
feasibility research, technical analysis, strategic planning, and outreach services from highly
specialized consultants, whose work product has laid the groundwork for executing FirstNet’s
mission.”68
The OIG made recommendations to the Secretary, the General Counsel, the Chair of FirstNet, and
the DOC’s Senior Procurement Official regarding various procedures and responsibilities. A joint
response from FirstNet, the NTIA, and the General Counsel concurred with the specific
recommendations from the OIG, although not all the findings. In general, they defended their
actions in the context of unique requirements and time constraints in setting up FirstNet.

65 GAO, Public-Safety Broadband Network: FirstNet Should Strengthen Internal Controls and Evaluate Lessons
Learned
, GAO-15-407, April 2015, p. 32, at http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/669861.pdf.
66 OIG, First Responder Network Authority: FirstNet Must Strengthen Management of Financial Disclosures and
Monitoring of Contracts, Final Report No. OIG-15-013-A, December 5, 2014, at http://www.oig.doc.gov/
OIGPublications/OIG-15-013-A.pdf.
67 Ibid., cover memorandum.
68 Ibid., p. 36.
Congressional Research Service
15

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

The OIG review covered a limited range of issues linked to oversight procedures. Although it did
not go into detail, the OIG noted “inconsistent administration”69 and several instances of
significant time lags in the performance of DOC officials. For example, “6 months after the
Board began regular meetings, senior NTIA and Office of General Counsel officials were still
debating [the monitoring] of potential conflicts of interest.”70 OIG found that most of the lapses
occurred in the year after the FirstNet board held its first official meeting in September 2012. The
review observed that “neither a business plan nor a network plan were completed or delivered to
FirstNet during the 1-year performance period of the contracts.... ”71
The OIG has established a team to audit and evaluate FirstNet activities. Additionally, it operates
a fraud, waste, and abuse hotline for the Department of Commerce, which has received
complaints regarding FirstNet. The OIG conducts follow-up on these complaints.72
Testimony at a Senate hearing on June 21, 2016,73 provided an update of OIG oversight of
FirstNet activities. OIG reported ongoing improvements in implementing internal controls and
risk assessment at FirstNet. Testimony highlighted several short- and long-term risks for FirstNet,
such as the need for successfully managing the choice of contractor; setting competitive prices;
and effective consultation with state and other authorities that are FirstNet’s target customer base.
Discussion of Other Provisions in the Spectrum Act
to Improve Public Safety Communications
Following is a discussion of other major provisions in the act that pertain to public safety
communications, including provisions to improve the nation’s 911 emergency call system.74
Among federal agencies designated by the act to provide consultation and support are the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the
Office of Emergency Communications (OEC). The FCC manages commercial and non-federal
spectrum use, including spectrum allocated to public safety. The NTIA manages federal spectrum
resources and, along with NIST, is an agency within the Department of Commerce. OEC is part
of the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications, Department of Homeland Security.

69 Ibid., p. 5.
70 Ibid., p. 6.
71 Ibid., p. 12.
72 Hearing, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, “Three Years Later: Are We Any Closer to
a Nationwide Public Safety Network,” March 11, 2015: testimony of The Honorable Todd J. Zinser, Inspector General,
U.S. Department of Commerce, http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=
25dedd7c-815b-4b3d-a420-4f4324d01041&Statement_id=ec8d2396-ecd6-4787-bcc6-6c0152203066&
ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d35-56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&
MonthDisplay=3&YearDisplay=2015.
73 Hearing, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, “FirstNet Oversight: An Update of the
Status of the Public Safety Broadband Network,” June 21, 2016, Testimony of Andrew Katsaros, Principal Assistant
Inspector General for Audit and Evaluation, Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General,
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/efc4c1fd-6dff-4ca4-a79d-
b2b4d470ee71/9013D88B9BB87AF29D2F242012682DC2.mr.-katsaros-testimony.pdf.
74 The information in this and following sections has appeared in earlier versions of this report.
Congressional Research Service
16

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Spectrum Assignment
Radio frequency spectrum is an essential resource for wireless communications. The energy in
electronic telecommunications transmissions converts electro-magnetic spectrum (airwaves) into
signals to deliver voice, text, and images. These signal frequencies are allocated for specific
purposes, such as television broadcasting or WiFi,75 and assigned to specific users through
licenses. Allocating sufficient spectrum for wireless emergency communications has long been a
concern for Congress. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33), for example, directed the
FCC to allocate 24 MHz of spectrum in the 700 MHz band for public safety use.76
With the passage of the Spectrum Act, some existing public safety licenses in the 700 MHz
band77 and an additional license for commercial use (known as the D Block)78—together totaling
22 MHz—have been re-designated by Congress for a federal license for paired spectrum at 758-
768 MHz and 788-798 MHz, plus guard bands at 768-769 MHz and 798-799 MHz to mitigate
interference from adjacent channels. As required by the act, the initial, 10-year license to use
these frequencies was assigned by the FCC to FirstNet. It is renewable for an additional 10 years,
on condition that FirstNet has met its duties and obligations under the act.79
A total of 34 MHz of spectrum capacity will therefore be available for public safety networks
within the 700 MHz band: the 22 MHz designated for broadband, and 12 MHz allocated for
narrowband communications, primarily voice.80 Additionally, there are public safety networks on
adjacent frequencies within the 800 MHz band. Time and technological advances may someday
bring these spectrum assets together, but at present there are three distinct public safety network
technologies in use or planned within the 700 MHz and 800 MHz bands. These are broadband
communications at 700 MHz; interoperable narrowband communications at 700 MHz; and
narrowband communications at 800 MHz. Some of the narrowband networks at 700 MHz and
800 MHz can share infrastructure and radios but older narrowband networks at 800 MHz are
often not easily integrated with narrowband networks being built on 700 MHz frequencies.
The act also gives the FCC the authority to “ ... allow the narrowband spectrum to be used in a
flexible manner, including usage for public safety broadband communications ... ” subject to
technical and interference protection measures.81 States, therefore, might be able to convert some
existing narrowband networks to broadband use in addition to service from FirstNet.
The act requires that public safety users return frequencies known as the T-Band.82 These are
frequencies between 470 and 512 MHz allocated for television that have been made available for
public safety use in 11 urban areas.83 Since the transition to digital television, radio transmissions
on some of these frequency assignments have experienced interference and the public safety
agencies that use them are considering moving to new networks at 700 MHz. Other areas have

75 WiFi, for wireless fidelity, operates on unlicensed frequencies that are not assigned to a specific owner but instead
are available to support any device approved by the FCC.
76 47 U.S.C. §309 (j) (14).
77 763-768 MHz, 793-798 MHz, 768-769 MHz and 798-799 MHz.
78 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz; P.L. 112-96, Section 6001, (2).
79 P.L. 112-96, Section 6201.
80 769-775 MHz and 799-805 MHz.
81 P.L. 112-96, Section 6102.
82 P.L. 112-96, Section 6103.
83 Metropolitan areas: Boston, MA; Chicago, IL; Dallas/Fort Worth, TX; Houston, TX; Los Angeles, CA; Miami, FL;
New York, NY/Newark NJ; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; San Francisco/Oakland, CA; and Washington, DC.
Congressional Research Service
17

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

recently invested to upgrade networks built on the T-Band frequencies and are concerned about
the loss of this communications capacity. The act requires that the FCC act by February 2021 to
establish a relocation plan that would free up the T-Band for reassignment through competitive
bidding. Proceeds from the auctions of T-Band frequencies are to be available for grants to cover
relocation costs.84 There are no requirements in the law as to how the NTIA, the designated grants
administrator, is to structure the grant program or determine eligible costs. The law also does not
address technical complications that may arise because of adjacent commercial assignments not
included in the rebanding.
Some of the earliest spectrum assignments for public safety are in channels below 512 MHz.
Public safety and other license-holders in designated channels below 512 MHz are required to
reband their holdings to conform to an FCC mandate to improve spectrum efficiency.85 This
narrowbanding requirement, as it is called, requires that assigned channels be reduced from a
width of 25 khz to 12.5 khz, thereby freeing up new spectrum capacity for public safety and other
uses. The deadline to meet the narrowbanding requirement was January 1, 2013. To accommodate
public safety license holders in the T-Band that now fall under requirements established in the
act, the FCC has ruled to exempt them from the narrowbanding requirements.86
Public Safety Trust Fund
The law provides for transfers from a Public Safety Trust Fund, which is established in the
Treasury by the act, to receive revenues from designated auctions of spectrum licenses.87 The
designated amounts are to remain available through FY2022, after which any remaining funds are
to revert to the Treasury, to be used for deficit reduction. Auction proceeds are to be distributed in
the following order of priority:
 To the NTIA, to reimburse the Treasury for funds advanced to cover the
initial costs of establishing FirstNet: not to exceed $2 billion.
 To the State and Local Implementation Fund for a grant program: $135
million.
 To the Network Construction Fund for costs associated with building the
nationwide network and for grants to states that qualify to build their own
networks: $7 billion, reduced by the amount advanced to establish FirstNet.
 To NIST for public safety research: $100 million.
 To the Treasury for deficit reduction: $20.4 billion.
 To the NTIA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for a
grant program to improve 911 services: $115 million.
 To NIST for public safety research, phase two: $200 million.
 To the Treasury for deficit reduction: any remaining amounts from
designated auction revenues.

84 The National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC) prepared a report that provided an overview of T-
Band assignments, some of the problems created by the act’s requirements, and possible alternative solutions. NPSTC,
T-Band Report, March 15, 2013; link to PDF at http://www.npstc.org/, “NPSTC Releases T Band Report.”
85 Details at http://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/public-safety-spectrum/narrowbanding.html.
86 FCC, “Waiver of Narrowbanding Deadlines for T-Band (470-512 MHz) Licenses,” Docket No. WT 99-87, released
April 26, 2012.
87 P.L. 112-96, Section 6413.
Congressional Research Service
18

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

In compliance with the act, the FCC conducted two auctions in 2014-2015 (Auctions 96 and 97)
that generated sufficient revenue to meet the funding requirements of the act summarized above.88
FirstNet: Limit on Expenditures
The act caps FirstNet’s administrative expenses at $100 million in total over the first 10 years of
operation. Costs attributed to oversight and audits are not included in the expense cap.89
FirstNet: Fee Income and Other Revenue
Congress gave FirstNet the authority to obtain grants, and to receive payment for the use of
network capacity licensed to FirstNet and of network infrastructure “constructed, owned, or
operated” by FirstNet.90 Specifically, FirstNet is authorized to collect network user fees from
public safety and secondary users91 and to receive payments under leasing agreements in public-
private partnerships.92 These partnerships may be formed between FirstNet and a secondary user
for the purpose of constructing, managing, and operating the network. The agreements may allow
access to the network on a secondary basis for services other than public safety.93 The act requires
that these fees be sufficient each year to cover annual expenses of FirstNet to carry out required
activities,94 with any remaining revenue going to network construction, operation, maintenance,
and improvement.95 There is a prohibition on providing service directly to consumers; this does
not impact the right to collect fees from a secondary user or enter into leasing agreements.96
Planning Authority
The Spectrum Act created FirstNet as an independent entity within the NTIA. FirstNet is required
to plan for and establish an interoperable broadband network for public safety. The act requires
that state and local agencies and tribal authorities have a consulting role in the development,
deployment, and operation of the nationwide network. The act further provides an opportunity for
states to plan and build their own Radio Access Networks within the framework of the nationwide
broadband network.97 Unless renewed, this authority expires in 2027.98
When Congress creates an independent entity within the federal government, it may have the
obligation to achieve a specific goal, usually within a specific time frame.99 As an independent
entity, FirstNet—the First Responder Network Authority—has been given both goals and

88 For additional information on the auctions, see CRS Report R44433, Framing Spectrum Policy: Legislative
Initiatives
, by Linda K. Moore.
89 P.L. 112-96, Section 6207 (b).
90 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (b) (4).
91 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (a) (1).
92 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (a) (2).
93 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (a) (2) (B).
94 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (b).
95 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (d).
96 P.L. 112-96, Section 6212.
97 Current information on FirstNet’s activities, including network design and state planning, is available at
http://www.firstnet.gov.
98 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (f).
99 For examples, see CRS Report RS22230, Congressional or Federal Charters: Overview and Enduring Issues, by
Henry B. Hogue.
Congressional Research Service
19

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

timeframes. It has been instructed by Congress to exercise all powers specifically granted by the
act and “such incidental powers as shall be necessary”100 to create a nationwide broadband
network for public safety. The law requires FirstNet to become a self-funding entity, independent
of government subsidies.101 FirstNet is to take “all actions necessary to ensure the building,
deployment, and operation” of the network in consultation with federal, state, tribal, and local
public safety entities, the Director of NIST, the FCC, and the public safety advisory committee.102
FirstNet appears therefore to be an autonomous organization, with broad powers to carry out its
mandate, within the requirements established by the law. It has, for example, sole power to select
the program’s manager and its agents, consultants, and other experts subject to the requirement
that they be chosen “in a fair, transparent, and objective manner.”103 However, FirstNet, except
for certain exemptions provided in the act, must follow federal agency requirements, notably in
hiring and procurement, slowing down the process for establishing FirstNet as a going concern.104
FirstNet is headed by a board of 15 members of which 12 are appointed by the Secretary of
Commerce according to criteria established by the act, which are intended to provide both
representation from key stakeholders and expertise. The other three members of the board are
designees of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the Attorney General of the
United States, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The Secretary of
Commerce is required to appoint a chairman of the board for an initial term of two years.105
As part of its management of the network, FirstNet is required, at a minimum
 To establish network policies, including development of detailed requests for
proposals to build the network, and operational matters such as terms of
service and billing practices.106
 To consult with states on network-related expenditures, as part of the
preparation of policies and requests for proposals.107
 To enter into agreements to use existing communications infrastructure,
including commercial and federal infrastructure, “to the maximum extent
economically desirable.”108
 To ensure the construction, maintenance, operation, and improvement of the
broadband network, taking into account new and evolving technologies.109
 To enter into agreements with commercial networks to allow public safety
roaming on their networks.110

100 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (a) (1).
101 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208.
102 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (b) (1).
103 P.L. 112-96, Section 6205 (b) (1).
104 Hearing, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
“Oversight of FirstNet and the Advancement of Public Safety Wireless Communications,” testimony of Samuel Ginn,
Chairman, FirstNet, November 21, 2013.
105 P.L. 112-96, Section 6204.
106 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (1).
107 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (2).
108 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (3).
109 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (4).
110 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (5).
Congressional Research Service
20

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

 To represent the interests of the network’s users before standards-setting
boards, in consultation with NIST, the FCC, and its own Public Safety
Advisory Committee.111
FirstNet is required to create a public safety advisory committee to assist in carrying out its
mandate.112 There are no requirements in the statute as to the composition of the committee. By-
laws adopted at the organizing meeting of the FirstNet Board of Directors on September 25,
2012, created a Public Safety Advisory Committee.113 It was further agreed that the members of
the committee would be chosen from the Advisory Committee to SAFECOM, within the
Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security. The
organizations chosen to be represented on the committee were announced on February 20,
2013.114 State and local government interests are represented through a subcommittee of PSAC.115
Statutory Obligations
Examples of statutory obligations for Congress and the Administration in the direction of FirstNet
include the following.
Membership on FirstNet board. The members of the FirstNet board are to be chosen by the
Secretary of Commerce, within the parameters established in the act. The Department of
Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Office of Management and Budget each have
one member on the board in permanence. The Secretary of Commerce is required to appoint a
chairman of the board for an initial term of two years.116
Grant programs for planning. The NTIA is to establish and administer the State and Local
Implementation Fund. Grant provisions are to be decided in consultation with FirstNet,117 but not
necessarily in accordance with decisions made by the FirstNet board and executive management.
Grant programs for state networks. The NTIA is to administer grants from the Network
Construction Fund to states that qualify to build their own Radio Access Networks and choose to
apply for a grant.118
Funding for FirstNet and participating states through the Network Construction Fund. The NTIA
is to determine the funding level available to each state for the buildout of the nationwide
broadband network, if the state chooses to participate in FirstNet.119
Spectrum leases for state networks. The NTIA sets the terms and is responsible for enforcing the
requirement that states qualifying to build their Radio Access Networks must sublease spectrum
through FirstNet, the assigned license-holder.120

111 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (c) (7).
112 P.L. 112-96, Section 6205 (a).
113 Board Resolution 1, By-Laws, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/
firstnet_resolution_no._1_on_bylaws_adopted_9.25.12.pdf.
114 NTIA, “FirstNet Names members of Public Safety Advisory Committee,” February 20, 2013,
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2013/firstnet-names-members-public-safety-advisory-committee.
115 Information on current activities of and participation in PSAC are available in the PSAC Fact Sheet,
http://www.firstnet.gov/sites/default/files/PSAC%20Fact%20Sheet_050316_1.pdf.
116 P.L. 112-96, Section 6204.
117 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (a).
118 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (3) (C) (iii) (I).
119 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (1) (C).
Congressional Research Service
21

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

License review. The FCC is required to review the initial 10-year license assigned to FirstNet and
consider its renewal based on performance criteria.121
Performance review. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), within 10 years, is to
prepare a report providing recommendations on “what action Congress should take” regarding the
mandated termination of authority of FirstNet in 2027.122
Fee schedule. The NTIA is to review and approve the annual schedule of fees charged to public
safety agencies and other users for access to FirstNet’s resources.123
Annual audit. The Secretary of Commerce is to contract for an annual audit of FirstNet’s finances
and activities. The reports are to be submitted to Congress, the President, and FirstNet.124
Report to Congress. FirstNet is required to submit annual reports to Congress on its “operations,
activities, financial conditions, and accomplishments.”125 The designated appropriate
congressional committees are, in the Senate, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation; in the House, the Committee on Energy and Commerce.126
Timeframe
The requirements of the Spectrum Act must be substantially met and the viability of the project
demonstrated no later than the end of FY2022, if not sooner. The State and Local Implementation
Fund and the Network Construction Fund expire in 2022, with any balances reverting to the
Treasury. By 2022, GAO must have assessed the performance of FirstNet and provided a report to
Congress; and the FCC must decide whether or not to renew the licenses for the public safety
broadband network. Within this 10-year timeframe, there are few deadlines beyond requirements
for the initial establishment of the planning and implementation framework.
Many of the important steps for building the network have no required deadline. Some
milestones, such as rural coverage, are mandated in the act, but the deadlines are not specified.
There are, for example, no deadlines in provisions that require FirstNet to
 Develop requests for proposals that include a requirement for timetables.127
 Consult with states on establishing state and local planning processes.128
 Complete the request for proposal process that is to be given to each state
governor regarding the request for proposal and its details, and the funding
level for each state as determined by the NTIA.129
Mandated deadlines for states include

(...continued)
120 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (3) (C) (iii) (II).
121 P.L. 112-96, Section 6201 (b).
122 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (g).
123 P.L. 112-96, Section 6208 (c).
124 P.L. 112-96, Section 6209.
125 P.L. 112-96, Section 6210.
126 P.L. 112-96, Section 6001 (3).
127 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206, (c) (1).
128 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206, (c) (2).
129 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (1).
Congressional Research Service
22

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

 Within 90 days of receipt of notice from FirstNet, the governor shall choose
either to participate in deployment of FirstNet or to conduct its own Radio
Access Network deployment within the state.130
 Within 180 days of giving notice to opt out of FirstNet, the governor shall
complete requests for proposals for a state network.131
No deadline is established in the statute for the FCC to approve or disapprove state proposals for
their own portion of the nationwide broadband network.132 There are also no specified deadlines
for a state to apply to the NTIA for a grant to construct the Radio Access Network and to lease
spectrum capacity from FirstNet, if FCC approval is received for a state network.133 However, one
condition of eligibility for a grant to a state to build its own Radio Access Network is that the
state’s plan must demonstrate “the ability to complete the project within specified comparable
deadlines.... ”134
Next Generation 9-1-1
Today’s 911 system is built on an infrastructure of analog technology that does not support many
of the features that most Americans expect to be part of an emergency response. Efforts to splice
newer, digital technologies onto this aging infrastructure have created points of failure where a
call can be dropped or misdirected, sometimes with tragic consequences. Callers to 911, however,
generally assume that the newer technologies they are using to place a call are matched by the
same level of technology at the 911 call centers, known as Public Safety Answering Points
(PSAPs). However, this is not always the case. To modernize the system to provide the quality of
service that approaches the expectations of its users will require that the PSAPs and state, local,
and possibly federal emergency communications authorities invest in new technologies. As
envisioned by most stakeholders, these new technologies—collectively referred to as Next
Generation 911 or NG9-1-1—should incorporate Internet Protocol standards. An IP-enabled
emergency communications network that supports 911 will facilitate interoperability and system
resilience; improve connections between 911 call centers; provide more robust capacity; and offer
flexibility in receiving and managing calls. The same network can also serve wireless broadband
communications for public safety and other emergency personnel, as well as other purposes.
Recognizing the importance of providing effective 911 services, Congress has previously passed
three major bills supporting improvements in the handling of 911 emergency calls. The Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-81) established 911 as the number to
call for emergencies and gave the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authority to
regulate many aspects of the service. The most recent of these laws, the NET 911 Improvement
Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-283), required the preparation of a National Plan for migrating to an IP-
enabled emergency network. Responsibility for the plan was assigned to the E-911
Implementation Coordination Office (ICO), created to meet requirements of an earlier law, the
ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-494). Authorization for the ICO terminated on September
30, 2009. ICO was jointly administered by the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

130 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302, (e) (2).
131 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302, (e) (3) (B).
132 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302 (e) (3) (C) (i).
133 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302, (e) (3) (C) (iii).
134 P.L. 112-96, Section 6302, (e) (3) (D) (i) (III).
Congressional Research Service
23

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

Spectrum Act provisions re-establish the federal 9-1-1 Implementation Coordination Office (ICO)
to advance planning for next-generation systems and to administer a grant program.135 ICO is to
provide matching grants to eligible state or local governments or tribal organizations for the
implementation, operation, and migration of various types of 911 and IP-enabled emergency
services, and for public safety personnel training.136 States that have diverted fees collected for
911 services are not eligible for grants under the program.137
Provisions in the act regarding 911 programs include
 GAO is required to study how states assess fees on 911 services and how
those fees are used.138
 The General Services Administration is required to prepare a report on 911
capabilities of multi-line telephone systems in federal facilities and the FCC
is to seek comment on the feasibility of improving 911 identification for calls
placed through multi-line telephone systems.139
 The FCC is to assess the legal and regulatory environment for development
of NG9-1-1 and barriers to that development, including state regulatory
roadblocks.140 The FCC is also to (1) initiate a proceeding to create a
specialized Do-Not-Call registry for public safety answering points, and (2)
to establish penalties and fines for autodialing (robocalls) and related
violations.141
 ICO, in consultation with NHTSA and DHS is to report on costs for
requirements and specifications of NG9-1-1 services, including an analysis
of costs, and assessments and analyses of technical uses.142
 Immunity and liability protections are provided—to the extent consistent
with specified provisions of the Wireless Communications and Public Safety
Act of 1999—for various users and providers of Next Generation 911 and
related services, including for the release of subscriber information.143
The act also requires FirstNet to promote integration of the nationwide public safety broadband
network with PSAPs.144
Roaming and Priority Access Within the 700 MHz Band
In its National Broadband Plan, the FCC indicated that it wanted to make commercial networks
in the 700 MHz band available for public safety use and requested that Congress confirm the
FCC’s authority to act.145 The Spectrum Act provides the FCC with statutory authority to

135 P.L. 112-96, Section 6503, “Section 158 “(a).
136 P.L. 112-96, Section 6503, “Section 158 “(b).
137 P.L. 112-96, Section 6503, “Section 158 “(c).
138 P.L. 112-96, Section 6505.
139 P.L. 112-96, Section 6504.
140 P.L. 112-96, Section 6509.
141 P.L. 112-96, Section 6507.
142 P.L. 112-96, Section 6508.
143 P.L. 112-96, Section 6506.
144 P.L. 112-96, Section 6206 (b) (2) (C).
145 FCC, Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, http://www.broadband.gov/download-plan/.
Congressional Research Service
24

The First Responder Network and NextGeneration Communications for Public Safety

establish rules in the public interest to improve the ability of public safety networks to roam on
commercial space and to gain priority access.146
FirstNet is empowered by the act to enter into agreements with commercial providers that would
allow public safety network users to roam on partnering networks.147 The act does not state
whether roaming agreements may be negotiated by states that opt out and receive spectrum leases
from the NTIA to operate their own Radio Access networks. Agreements might also cover rules
for priority access in times of high demand for network capacity. Priority access can take several
forms, such as “ruthless pre-emption,” in which non-public-safety transmissions are immediately
terminated to make way for emergency communications, or negotiated priority agreements that
might, for example, place public safety users at the head of the line for network access as capacity
becomes available. The act stipulates that the FCC’s authority may not require roaming or priority
access unless (1) the public safety and commercial networks are technically compatible; (2) the
commercial network is reasonably compensated; and (3) access does not preempt or otherwise
terminate or degrade existing traffic on the commercial network.148 Within these limits, the FCC
appears to have some leeway to use its regulatory authority to support public safety in
negotiations with partners. The FCC cannot, under the act, mandate ruthless pre-emption,
although the act does not preclude contractual negotiations that would allow it.
The act’s provisions for roaming and priority access do not require a commercial vendor to make
additional investments to insure technical compatibility, and the act’s language might be
interpreted as precluding an FCC mandate to that effect. Full-spectrum roaming is considered by
many to provide advantages for public safety and also for the public at large. For example, it
makes more network capacity available for shared emergency communications of all types, not
just for first responders. Many believe that full-spectrum access supports competitiveness among
wireless carriers—in particular assisting small wireless carriers serving rural areas to offer new
broadband services—by providing access to all customers within the band.

Author Contact Information

Linda K. Moore

Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
lmoore@crs.loc.gov, 7-5853


146 P.L. 112-96, Section 6211.
147 P.L. 112-95, Section 6206 (c) (5).
148 P.L. 112-96, Section 6211.
Congressional Research Service
25