Fischer Holds Senate Commerce Subcommittee Hearing, Presses Witnesses on Better FirstNet Oversight for Public Safety

Fischer questioned whether additional market incentives within the FirstNet system would be feasible not only to spur innovation, but also to give public safety agencies the best possible coverage and choice amongst providers. At the same time, Fischer highlighted the critical need to maintain strict network security with any potential updates to FirstNet.

Today's hearing informed Senate deliberations on the reauthorization of the FirstNet Authority. The federal authorization for FirstNet is set to expire in February 2027.

Witnesses included Sheriff Michael A. Adkinson, Acting Chair of the First Responder Network Authority Board; Scott Agnew, President of FirstNet and Public Safety Mobility at AT&T; Cory Davis, Vice President of Verizon Frontline at Verizon; and Mel Maier, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director of APCO International.

Click the image above to watch a video of Senator Fischer's questioning

Click here to download audio

Click here to download video

Competition and Incentives for Responsible Network Stewardship:

Fischer: Competition, where feasible, can be a safeguard for the public, and that includes driving innovation and choice for government partners. Mr. Maier, you've mentioned that FirstNet has already spurred more competition, such as for device costs. Do you believe that there are additional areas to introduce competition within the FirstNet system?
Maier: I think that what has happened is amazing. We had no one competing for public safety's attention. When cellular networks were first formed, I carried a bag phone in my patrol car. I was quite cutting edge. I had 15 minutes a month to use, so I couldn't go over. Competition became part of the FirstNet package. When priority and preemption was presented, we had that wireless priority system, the GETS system, all those things that the federal government was providing, they're now available through FirstNet.

Fischer: When you look, at the future, though, what do you see as additional devices?

Maier: Additional is going to be the continued support for new devices and new technologies being merged into the networks, competition that can lower costs, competition that can increase the bandwidth and the spectrum that we're using, as well as really coordinating efforts that help predict better outcomes in the field. Communicating against those three networks is terrific. Verizon Frontline, thank you. T-Mobile, T-Priority, that's terrific. FirstNet, that is terrific. Let's get them out in the field and in people's hands.

Fischer: Thank you. Sheriff Adkinson, if there were more providers within the system, would there be network security tradeoffs? How secure would it be?

Adkinson: Yeah, I think there's a couple things to consider when we talk about that. The reality of it is that I don't want a situation like tyranny of the commons, right? But when it becomes everybody's responsibility, it becomes no one's responsibility. From an authority standpoint, there has to be very clear lines, delineation of who we hold responsible for outcomes. That would be a challenge. Just bluntly, that's a challenge.

Having said that, every option should be reviewed if it's to the benefit of the people we serve. So, I don't think that there's anything you would ever say 100% no to, but I always am very reticent when we talk about entering into a closed system, leaving the opportunity to point fingers. And I think the responsibility of the authority is to hold people accountable, and I think that is the sole purpose of it. I'm actually agnostic to the providing of it. Quite frankly, that's not my job to pick winners or losers. My job is to make sure, the Board's job is to make sure, that we get a delivery of service that meets the needs of the people we serve.

Improving FirstNet Board's Oversight of AT&T's Performance:

Fischer: Sheriff Atkinson, the Commerce Department Inspector General previously found gaps in the Board's oversight of performance metrics and milestones of FirstNet. FirstNet's initial response even challenged the IGs findings, asserting they were just working goals and not quantifiable metrics. So, what new performance standards or monitoring methods have the board approved so that we can ensure compliance with contract terms and with the law?
Adkinson: Thank you, Senator, for that question. As I stated before, I think that there's six new board members, correct, that just came on this last October, and the first thing we did was go back through these Inspector General reports. There's obviously also three permanent members that provide oversight to the Board, which is OMB the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security, who are also obviously permanent members of that. We, as a board, started saying what performance measures matter. What performance matters are actual returns on investment, and started a working group to do that, to make sure that those things are being monitored, those things that matter, we start asking some tough questions.

I want to talk about OIG specifically, because I think this is important. You know, if you want to have accountability, you have to have authority. And I'm not a real fan of not being able to hold people that I give directions to accountable, because otherwise I'm simply suggesting, and I don't like suggesting, if I'm being blunt. I think there's a responsibility as tax stewards of taxpayers' authority and money. These are taxpayers' funds, in my opinion, that we as a board should be able to hold the executive director and or the Authority staff accountable as appropriate. There has to be some level accountability.
Fischer: You mentioned that in your opening comments about when you were talking about changes when we reauthorize FirstNet. Can you hit those points for us again?

Adkinson: I want to make sure I'm answering your question correctly, all three points in that regard real quick. Yeah, absolutely. So first and foremost, I think there should be an expansion of the public safety seats on the Board so that we don't lose what is the tenor and direction of what this Board should be about. It's looking after the interest of public safety and making sure that doesn't become a secondary interest, so that, I think that should be codified. Two, the staggering of terms, so that we don't end up in a situation. You know, again, we have six new Board members, plus two current vacancies, and I'm actually just the acting chair at this point. Those are the kind of things that we need to give the Secretary of Department of Commerce the opportunity to make those corrections as appropriate. And I think that helps for continuity and consistency in government. Three, which is too many captains on the ship. We have to have the ability to make decisions that matter and hold accountable. If you're going to ask me to be accountable, I suggest that I need the authority to do that, and there are some clear things that I think we can go back that, that I can give you examples of where that was challenging.

Fischer: As you look at the current statute, do you think that the performance benchmarks and device connection targets are being met?

Adkinson: I think there should be stricter, more outlined and more defined performance measures. That's in the best interest of the people we serve. Quite frankly, it's in the best interest of AT&T. Nobody loses with us being more accountable and having performance measures, it is the right thing to do.