For those in the public-safety community not accustomed to following activity at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington, D.C., you should know that there is an effort underway to undermine the authority of local public-safety officials to make decisions about the communications technology we deploy and the systems we choose to operate. It is taking the form of an all-out campaign to convince the FCC to transfer the 4.9 GHz spectrum band – a 50-megahertz block of nationwide spectrum designated specifically for public-safety agencies – to the FirstNet Authority (FNA), which has an exclusive and non-public contract with AT&T for service under the “FirstNet” brand.

For more than two decades, we in public safety have been able to use the 4.9 GHz band to serve our local needs. Thousands of licenses have been issued to agencies across the country, and this spectrum is critical for important local operational needs.  Most importantly, it’s available for us to use as we need and see fit, and not part of a nationalized process controlled by a central authority that can only provide a limited set of basic, quasi-commercial AT&T products to choose from. 

Over the past year, an anonymous group known as “the Public Safety Spectrum Alliance (PSSA)” has pushed the FCC to dramatically change course and take away local control of the 4.9 GHz band. PSSA, FNA, and AT&T instead want to give the band to FNA and hence AT&T, which would use it to serve commercial customers as well as public safety. Just this week, AT&T weighed in with its support. It’s no wonder why – AT&T could gain handsomely from this change.

Under the PSSA and FNA proposal, we would have to contract through FNA and AT&T to use this spectrum and even rely on them to deploy infrastructure in our own communities. I don’t know about you, but the sheriffs we work with would much rather be in control of how they use this spectrum and allowed the freedom to deploy a network that meets their needs.  We also like having our non-centralized 4.9 GHz networks as a backup option in the case of network failures that sometimes impact commercial networks, including those supporting AT&T’s FirstNet brand. 

We don’t know who is backing the PSSA or its allies because they don’t disclose any details about their supporters. But it’s pretty clear that this effort is a trojan horse for a spectrum grab fueled by AT&T. Under the PSSA plan, AT&T would be given this spectrum, free of charge, to use for both public safety and its own commercial purposes.  That would be quite a gift.  A recent study valued this spectrum at a staggering $14 billion, which would represent an enormous giveaway of a public resource via a somewhat shadowy process.  

In support of the FCC and its current policy preserving local control and use of the 4.9 GHz band, NSA is part of a broad and diverse coalition of public-safety organizations, critical-infrastructure providers, enterprise entities, local government officials from around the country, and commercial wireless companies.  Parts of these groups have formed two different coalitions opposed to the PSSA plan – the Coalition for Emergency Response and Critical Infrastructure (CERCI) and the 4.9 GHz Coalition.  These groups recently filed a joint letter at the FCC in which they explained the principles that unite them regarding the future of the 4.9 GHz spectrum band.

The PSSA is getting little support for its proposal in the face of overwhelming support for the status quo favoring local authority, and this is causing the PSSA and its allies to lash out and attack those that disagree with them.  Earlier this week the editors of All Things FirstNet (ATFN) grossly misrepresented a filing submitted to the FCC by Verizon (a CERCI member) in an effort to claim that Verizon and CERCI are against public safety and local authority. To the contrary, Verizon has actively worked to ensure that local authority in the 4.9 GHz spectrum band is preserved, and it’s my understanding Verizon actually serves more public-safety customers than AT&T/FirstNet. The posting by ATFN is ludicrous on its face, and I encourage you to read the Verizon filing, which makes plain Verizon’s support for public safety in general and retaining local public-safety control of the 4.9 GHz band in particular.

In order to avoid further misrepresentations by the PSSA and its allies, I would like to set the record straight in terms that no party can misconstrue or misunderstand:   

1. CERCI and its members unequivocally oppose taking the 4.9 GHz band away from local public safety either to give it to AT&T or to auction it to the highest bidder. CERCI is on the record arguing that no commercial use be allowed in the band, except for the operations of critical-infrastructure industry (CII) where approved in advance by public safety. Similarly, Verizon has stated that it does not want the 4.9 GHz spectrum band to be put to ANY commercial use. However, if the FCC decides to go down that ill-advised path, Verizon stated the agency must do so in a manner that avoids favoring one commercial provider over another, avoids giving away the spectrum for free, and utilizes a competitive process. And Verizon proposed that any proceeds from such a competitive process go to public safety priorities such as NG911.
2. The PSSA proposal would allow full use of the band by AT&T’s commercial customers. In addition to requiring public safety to pay for access to use AT&T’s FirstNet-branded network, AT&T would also be able to let its commercial users onto the band. CERCI and its members (including Verizon) do not support any commercial use of the 4.9 GHz band. Will the PSSA and AT&T commit to the same? 
3. The PSSA proposal will not protect current users. The PSSA proposal would in fact freeze current uses, force state and local public-safety licensees to hand over currently unused spectrum to FNA/AT&T, and disregard investments in the band already made by local public-safety users.
4. FirstNet does not need the 4.9 GHz spectrum band to serve public safety. As Verizon pointed out, and AT&T recently highlighted, AT&T provides its FirstNet customers with priority access to Band 14 and to all other AT&T 5G commercial spectrum.  Though AT&T no doubt wants more commercial spectrum, FirstNet clearly does not need more spectrum, given its users have access to all AT&T’s bands.
5. There is one large corporation that stands to benefit from a transfer of the 4.9 GHz spectrum band to FirstNet, namely AT&T. The PSSA proposal would result in a $14 billion windfall to AT&T. As a matter of fact, AT&T filed in support of PSSA’s proposal last week. 
6. CERCI and its allies are not opposed to FirstNet. Many CERCI members are FirstNet customers and want the FNA to be successful. But supporting FNA does not mean blindly following the ambitions of the PSSA and its corporate sponsor to have a profitable monopoly over all public-safety users and their communications, devices, spectrum, and networks. There are multiple reports from the Commerce Department Inspector General raising concerns about FNA management and AT&Ts compliance with its contract.  Is now really the time to give them more spectrum (that they do not need)? 
7. The FCC and FNA do not have the authority to adopt the PSSA proposal. Last, but certainly not least, a detailed analysis on the record before the FCC demonstrates that the FCC lacks authority to grant the spectrum to the FNA and that the FNA is not statutorily authorized to receive it. So, in addition to all the policy reasons the FCC should disregard the PSSA proposal, it happens to be plainly illegal.

It’s time to stop the misrepresentations and falsehoods about opponents of the PSSA’s attempted spectrum giveaway to AT&T. Instead, let’s focus on keeping local public safety officials in control of their own destiny and allow them to serve their communities as they know best.