Wireless industry consultant and public safety advocate Andy Seybold says he has “serious reservations” about the request for proposals (RFP) issued last month by the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) (TRDaily, Jan. 13). “As I dig deeper into the RFP I find, over and over again, that what appeared to be a good revision to the first RFP draft still contains too many constraints and hard and fast requirements that will, I am sure, result in fewer responses to the RFP,” Mr. Seybold said in his weekly e-mailed public safety commentary.

“I also do not believe the responses that are received will be 100% compliant. The biggest issue for me is that the business case, which was workable before, is no longer valid. The extra coverage requirements, extra penalties, and guaranteed payments now make partnering with FirstNet a costly venture with little or no way to recoup the initial large investment. Nor do I see a way to reach a cash positive point that would begin to provide a return on the investment for many years, if at all.”

 Mr. Seybold also noted that carriers are also planning for the FCC’s incentive auction, which begins next month, adding that “most companies will look at the two opportunities and choose the 600-MHz auctions over the FirstNet opportunity.”

 “I believe what FirstNet decides to do and what changes it agrees to make will determine whether there will be any potential partners willing to work with FirstNet,” he suggested. “I am hoping changes will be made and the due date will be extended. Public Safety deserves more than only one or two (or no) choices for a solid partner.”

Mr. Seybold said that no single company “can meet all of these requirements,” and he said it’s difficult for bidders to submit creative proposals and still comply with all the requirements.

 “The penalties for missing goals are over the top and there is only a vague published target to use as a baseline,” he added. “The RFP states that the bidder may not receive the revenue from secondary usage of the spectrum in an opt-out state, which contradicts previous FirstNet written statements. … The risk/reward is not attractive as the RFP is currently structured, and the potential returns do not come close to justifying the investment.”

 Mr. Seybold also complained that offerors will have to develop their proposals before getting answers to questions they have about the RFP if they are to meet the April 29 deadline for submitting proposals. – Paul Kirby, paul.kirby@wolterskluwer.com

Courtesy TRDaily