[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50481-50486]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20502]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
[Docket No. 120509050-2325-02]
RIN 0660-XC001
Development of Programmatic Requirements for the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program To Assist in Planning for the Nationwide
Public Safety Broadband Network
AGENCY: National Telecommunications and Information Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) issues this Notice to announce requirements for the State and
Local Implementation Grant Program authorized by section 6302 of the
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Act). The Notice
describes the programmatic requirements under which NTIA will award
grants to assist state, local, and tribal governments with planning for
a nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network.
DATES: The programmatic requirements for the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program become effective August 21, 2012.
ADDRESSES: The programmatic requirements for the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program will be posted to the NTIA Web site at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura M. Pettus, Program Specialist,
Office of Telecommunications and Information Applications, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4812, Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-5802. Please direct media inquiries to
NTIA's Office of Public Affairs, (202) 482-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On February 22, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Middle
Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Act).\1\ The Act meets a
long-standing priority of the Obama Administration to create a single,
nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network that will, for
the first time, allow police officers, fire fighters, emergency medical
service professionals, and other public safety officials to communicate
with each other across agencies and jurisdictions. Public safety
workers have long been hindered by incompatible, and often outdated,
communications equipment and this Act will help them to do their jobs
more safely and effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public
Law 112-96, 126 Stat. 156 (2012) (Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Act establishes the First Responder Network Authority
(FirstNet) as an independent authority within NTIA and authorizes it to
take all actions necessary to ensure the design, construction, and
operation of a nationwide public safety broadband network (PSBN), based
on a single, national network architecture.\2\ FirstNet is responsible
for, at a minimum, ensuring nationwide standards for use of and access
to the network; issuing open, transparent, and competitive requests for
proposals (RFPs) to build, operate, and maintain the network;
encouraging these RFPs to leverage, to the maximum extent economically
desirable, existing commercial wireless infrastructure to speed
deployment of the network; and overseeing contracts with non-federal
entities to build, operate, and maintain the network.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 47 U.S.C. 1422 (b), 1426(b)(1).
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Act charges NTIA with establishing a grant
program to assist state, regional, tribal, and local jurisdictions with
identifying, planning, and implementing the most efficient and
effective means to use and integrate the infrastructure, equipment, and
other architecture associated with the nationwide PSBN to satisfy the
wireless broadband and data services needs of their jurisdictions.\4\
Up to $135 million in grant money will be available to NTIA for the
State and Local Implementation Grant Program.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(a).
\5\ 47 U.S.C. 1441(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To implement the new program, NTIA must establish requirements, in
[[Page 50482]]
consultation with FirstNet, by August 22, 2012. These requirements
include: Determining the scope of eligible activities that the grant
program will fund, defining eligible costs, and prioritizing grants for
activities that ensure coverage in rural as well as urban areas.\6\ The
U.S. Secretary of Commerce appointed the FirstNet Board of Directors on
August 20, 2012, and NTIA initiated consultations with FirstNet on the
requirements for the State and Local Implementation Grant Program. NTIA
may refine further the programmatic requirements announced in this
Notice based on these ongoing consultations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Overview of Public Comments
On May 16, 2012, NTIA issued a Request for Information (RFI)
seeking public comment on various issues related to the development of
the State and Local Implementation Grant Program.\7\ Specifically, the
RFI requested comment on how FirstNet should conduct the consultation
process with regional, state, tribal, and local jurisdictions; how to
incorporate existing public safety governance and planning authorities
into the development of the PSBN; how best to leverage existing
infrastructure for use in the PSBN; what state and local actions should
be eligible grant activities; and issues related to state funding and
performance requirements.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Development of the State and Local Implementation Grant
Program for the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network, Request
for Information, 77 FR 28857 (May 16, 2012) (RFI). NTIA has posted
all comments received in response to the RFI on its Web site at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-register-notice/2012/comments-development-state-and-local-implementation-grant-program.
\8\ Id. at 28858-59.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA received approximately 70 comments from a wide range of
stakeholders, including states, local and tribal governments, federal
and state agencies, trade associations, private companies, consultants,
and individuals. The majority of the comments discuss each of the
issues identified in the RFI, and NTIA relied on the comments for
guidance to frame the requirements of the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program, particularly to develop the overarching
direction of the program as it relates to the collection of data and
the consultation process with FirstNet.
In some cases, the comments address matters not specifically
covered in the RFI, such as the need for a web-based repository of
information, the need for clarification on the applicability of vendor
conflict of interest rules, the importance of developing the PSBN
business models, and the necessary considerations for network
sustainability.\9\ While these comments raise important issues, many of
these matters are within the purview of FirstNet and are better left
for its consideration as it carries out its responsibilities under the
Act. As a result, NTIA has not incorporated these concerns into the
requirements for the State and Local Implementation Grant Program, but
will pass the information along to FirstNet for its consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, e.g., State of New York at 2, 4, and 7, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_new_york_response_to_ntia_grant_rfi_june_15_2012.pdf; State of Texas at 9, 14,
available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_texas_rfi_v10.1_061512.pdf; Motorola Solutions, Inc. at 2, 7-8, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/final_ntia_rfi_comments.pdf;
Operator Advisory Committee (OAC) at 10-11, 13-14, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/psst-oac_ntia_rfi_response_finalv3.pdf; Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications
System Authority (LA-RICS) at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_rfi_laricscomments_final.pdf;
Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 8-9, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/mid-atlantic_swics_comments_on_ntia_rfi_6-15-2012_final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Data Collection
Overwhelmingly, the commenters agree that FirstNet must establish a
standardized process before the states engage in any data collection
activities.\10\ The state commenters, in particular, point out that it
would not be an efficient use of their resources to begin collecting
data that might not be useful or necessary during their consultations
with FirstNet.\11\ Many commenters provide helpful input about the data
the states should collect and how they could best identify the assets
and infrastructure that FirstNet might leverage for the PSBN.\12\
Recommended assets to identify and evaluate include existing radio
tower sites, fiber and microwave links, and government-owned properties
that might be suitable for new wireless infrastructure, such as
building rooftops and water towers.\13\ Several commenters also
recommend that FirstNet create a standard template, along with a
standardized database, for the states to use to collect and submit
information on asset inventories.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Arizona Department of Homeland Security at 9, available
at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/azdohs.pdf; Carlos Delatorre
at 9, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/carlos_delatorre_comments.pdf; National States Geographic Information
Council (NSGIC) at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/nsgic_response_061412.pdf; Michael A. Scales, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-register-notice/2012/comments-development-state-and-local-implementation-grant-program?page=1#comment-29357; National Governors Association at 2,
available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/letter_to_ntia_re_state_and_local_implemenation_grant_final_signed.docx.pdf;
National Association of State Chief Information Officers (NASCIO) at
3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/nascio_response_to_ntia_psbn_grant_program_final.pdf; FEMA Region 5
Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Group
(RECCWG) at 6-7, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/fema_region5_reccwg_ntia_rfi_responses_june_2012_ver7.pdf;
Ventera at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_public_comments_sligp.pdf; Commonwealth of Kentucky at 1,
available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/kybroadbandrfi.pdf;
Rhode Island Broadband Program Director at 12, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_rfi_response_001.pdf; State of
Utah at 5, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_utah_ntia_rfi_response_final_6-15-12.pdf; State of North
Dakota at 5-6, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/north_dakota_firstnet_planning_rfi_response_120509050-1050-01.pdf; Raytheon at 2, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/raytheon_rfi_response_to_ntia__15-jun-12.pdf.
\11\ See State of California at 5, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/california_state_response.pdf; State
of South Dakota at 1, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/national_public_safety_broadband_public_comments.pdf.
\12\ See State of South Dakota at 1; Arizona Department of
Homeland Security at 4-5; Carlos Delatorre at 3; State of Oregon at
1, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/oregon_rfi_comments.pdf; NSGIC at 2; State of Georgia at 1-3, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_georgia_response_06-14-2012.pdf; LA-RICS at 3-5; Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 9; FEMA Region 5
RECCWG at 2, 12-13; OAC at 3-5; BayRICS at 3-4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/bayrics_ntia_rfi_slpgp.pdf; Motorola
Solutions at 3, 7-9; PCIA-The Wireless Infrastructure Association at
5-6, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_state_and_local_grant_program_rfi_pcia_comments_6-15-12_final.pdf;
Alcatel-Lucent at 5-8, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/alu_comments_on_ntia_ps_rfi.pdf; Tilson Government
Services, LLC at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/tilsonrficomments.pdf; Raytheon at 6; Connected Nation at 4,
available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/cn_letter_on_firstnet_rfi_6_15_2012_final.pdf; Northrop Grumman Information
Systems at 2-4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/northrop_grumman_comments.pdf; North Central Regional Broadband
Data Consortium at 2-4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ncrbdc_comments.pdf.
\13\ See Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 8; Arizona Department of Homeland
Security at 4-5; NSGIC at 2.
\14\ See Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 8; State of Georgia at 5; State
of New Jersey at 5, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/new_jersey_ntia_rfi_sligp_response_6_15_2012.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Consultation Process With FirstNet
Many commenters believe that preparing to consult effectively with
FirstNet will require states to dedicate their already limited
resources, specifically funds and personnel, to this task.\15\ The
comments emphasize that effective consultations with FirstNet will
require a significant amount of
[[Page 50483]]
planning and preparation for all stakeholders that could span several
months, if not years.\16\ The states, in particular, observe that
without grant funds to hire staff, conduct meetings with the various
stakeholders, and develop the necessary governance structures, the
states cannot consult with FirstNet in a meaningful way.\17\ Many
commenters agree that state, local, and tribal jurisdictions lack the
staff and/or technical ability to manage a project of this size without
federal support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See State of Colorado Governor's Office of Information
Technology at 2, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/colorado_office_of_information_technology_comments.pdf (stating
that the collection of relevant data ``will take significant effort
in both human and capital resources'').
\16\ See California Emergency Management Agency at 3, available
at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/california_state_response.pdf.
\17\ See State of Nevada at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_nevada_ntia_docket_no_120509050-1050-01.pdf (``Implementation and planning grants must be
used to fund that data collection and assessment effort in addition
to the other tasks required to establish the State's network
requirements.''); State of Mississippi at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_ms_response_to_ntia_rfi_final_6_15_12.pdf (``Grant funding should also be used to provide
the support for dedicated state staff and consultants to develop
essential data for FirstNet as well as funding to support outreach
and education efforts directly related to the PSBN.'').
\18\ See State of Georgia at 1 (``Very few, if any, States or
locals have the staff and technical expertise to manage a project of
this size, complexity and importance on a full time basis.''); State
of New York at 2 (``Many states lack the state and local resources
to collect this data.''); State of North Dakota at 1-2 (grant funds
should be available for staffing requirements and planning
activities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA agrees that FirstNet is in the best position to develop
standards for the collection of data on assets and infrastructure that
might be used or incorporated into the PSBN.\19\ As a result, NTIA
believes that it would not be a prudent use of grant funds to allow the
states to undertake data gathering and collection activities, such as
asset inventories, before FirstNet has developed guidance on the
information it will need. Additionally, NTIA understands that
coordination with FirstNet will involve a substantial amount of time
and planning and many states face significant resource constraints,
particularly with staffing levels, to participate effectively in this
effort.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Commonwealth of Massachusetts at 4, available athttp://
www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/mass_eopss_final_june_14_2012-2.pdf; State of Oregon at 5-6; State of Georgia at 5; APCO
International at 5, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/apco_comments_on_ntia_rfi.pdf; LA-RICS at 9; State of Montana at
3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/montana_response_ntia_npsbn_rfi_061412.pdf; OAC at 10; State of Nevada
at 2-3; State of Colorado Governor's Office of Information
Technology at 2.
\20\ See South Dakota Bureau of Information & Telecommunications
at 1, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/national_public_safety_broadband_public_comments.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based in large part on this feedback, and in keeping with the
intent of the Act, NTIA believes that, given the funds available and
the need for FirstNet to make initial decisions on the data collection
process, it can make the most efficient and effective use of grant
dollars by focusing the State and Local Implementation Grant Program on
planning and development activities in preparation for consultations
with FirstNet.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 47 U.S.C. 1442(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Establishment of Programmatic Requirements for the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program
A. Funding Distribution
Consistent with the statutory framework, NTIA plans to design the
State and Local Implementation Grant Program as a formula-based,
matching grant program to assist states, in collaboration with
regional, tribal, and local jurisdictions, with activities related to
planning for the establishment of a nationwide public safety broadband
network.\22\ NTIA is not announcing procedures for the submission of
grant applications in this Notice nor is it accepting applications at
this time. NTIA intends to release a Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO)
notice that will provide information on topics including: The amount of
funding available for award and how NTIA will allocate funds to
applicants, instructions on the application process, and the evaluation
criteria for application review. Subject to activities of FirstNet,
NTIA expects to issue a FFO and open the application window during the
first quarter of calendar year 2013. This time frame will allow NTIA to
complete the administrative functions it must undertake to prepare to
award grants under this program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA plans to distribute the funding available under this grant
program in two phases, and will consider the input solicited through
the RFI to develop a methodology to distribute the available funds.\23\
The commenters suggest numerous factors as relevant to allocating these
funds, including: Population; \24\ population density; \25\ land mass;
\26\ geography and topography; \27\ risk, threat, and vulnerability;
\28\ probability of disaster; \29\ expected level of effort required
for completion; \30\ existing critical infrastructure; \31\ number of
highway miles; \32\ demand and marketing components; \33\ number of
regional/local/tribal governmental entities using the network; \34\
number of first responders using the network; \35\ effective signal
propagation; \36\ amount of uncovered rural broadband customers; \37\
prioritization of rural areas; \38\ areas with backhaul deficiencies;
\39\ length of international borders; \40\ and amount of tribal
lands.\41\ Additionally, some commenters propose that NTIA provide each
state with an initial, equal distribution of funds to enable the states
to accomplish certain planning tasks.\42\ NTIA will take this input
into account and consider those factors that can be quantified in
developing the formula it will use to allocate the available grant
funds among eligible applicants. NTIA will announce this formula when
it issues the FFO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See RFI, 77 FR at 28859.
\24\ See State of Georgia at 12; LA-RICS at 20; State of New
York at 10.
\25\ See Commonwealth of Massachusetts at 12; USDA-Rural
Utilities Service (USDA-RUS), available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-register-notice/2012/comments-development-state-and-local-implementation-grant-program#comment-29426.
\26\ See State of South Dakota at 5.
\27\ See State of Oregon at 16; State of Montana at 8; State of
Maine at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/firstnetrfiresponse.pdf; Florida at 18, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/florida_response_to_ntia_rfi_state_and_local_implementation_grant.pdf; Tilson Government
Services, LLC at 11.
\28\ See Arizona Department of Homeland Security at 15; State
of Georgia at 12; BayRICS at 12-13.
\29\ See State of Texas at 13.
\30\ See Carlos Delatorre at 18-19; Florida at 18; State of
North Dakota at 13; Washington State Interoperability Executive
Committee at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/wa_siec_response_to_ntia_rfi_06152012.pdf.
\31\ See State of Georgia at 12; State of Maine at 3; FEMA
Region 5 RECCWG at 15; North Central Regional Broadband Data
Consortium at 13-14.
\32\ See State of Nevada at 6-7; State of Utah at 14; State of
Mississippi at 20.
\33\ See APCO International at 7.
\34\ See Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 11; Florida at 18; OAC at 22.
\35\ See FEMA Region 5 RECCWG at 15; OAC at 22.
\36\ See State of Maine at 3.
\37\ See State of Nevada at 7; State of Mississippi at 20.
\38\ See Mendocino County, California at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/mendocinocommentsonntiafirstnetrfi.pdf.
\39\ See State of Utah at 14.
\40\ See State of Texas at 14; State of North Dakota at 13;
Washington State Interoperability Executive Committee at 3.
\41\ See State of North Dakota at 13.
\42\ See, e.g., Commonwealth of Massachusetts at 2, 4 (proposing
that NTIA give each state $500,000 to establish and operate a Public
Safety Broadband office).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Eligible Applicants
The 56 states and territories are eligible for grants under the
State and Local Implementation Grant Program. The Act directs NTIA to
make grants to states; thus, each state and territory choosing to apply
for a grant should
[[Page 50484]]
submit an individual application during the application window. An
applicant may decide, however, to collaborate or coordinate with other
states and regions in preparing application submissions, as is
contemplated in the statute.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA will specify in the FFO the exact contents of the application
package that applicants must submit during the application window.
There are several items, however, that NTIA will likely require, and
applicants may prepare to address them in advance of the FFO's
publication. First, the Act directs each state to certify in its
application for grant funds that the state has designated a single
officer or governmental body to serve as the coordinator of the grant
funds.\44\ This designated officer or governmental body will also be
responsible for determining the method of consultation between FirstNet
and the state.\45\ Multiple commenters urge NTIA to give the states
flexibility in making this decision.\46\ Commenters point out that
states are best equipped to identify the most appropriate office or
governmental body suited to this task, which may vary from state to
state, as well as the personnel qualified to act in this capacity.\47\
Accordingly, NTIA will give states flexibility in determining which
state officer or governmental body to designate as the coordinator of
the grant funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(d).
\45\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(2)(B).
\46\ See State of Oregon at 2; State of California at 3;
Nebraska at 2, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/1399_001.pdf; Florida at 4.
\47\ See Minnesota at 4, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ecn_ntia_rfi_grant_filing_06_15_2012_d4_final.pdf; State of New York at 3; State of Hawaii at 5-6, available
at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_hawaii_sligp_rfi_response.pdf; State of Georgia at 3; State of Texas at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, in response to concerns expressed by some commenters and
consistent with the intent of the statute, NTIA will likely ask
applicants to describe how they plan to collect input from local and
tribal jurisdictions to ensure that their public safety needs are
adequately represented during the consultation process with FirstNet
and in the coordination of the grant funds.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See 47 U.S.C. 1442(a); see also National Congress of
American Indians at 2-3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ncai_comments_on_sligp_06152012f.pdf (NTIA and FirstNet
must ``institute rules and reporting requirements to ensure that
tribal governments are included in the planning and implementation
process''); NASCIO at 2-3 (``The State and Local Implementation
grant program should encourage states to leverage all pre-existing
relationships to ensure coordination and input into the planning
process.''); State of Alaska at 1, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/state_of_alaska_response_to_ntia_rfi.pdf (``Any mechanisms that mandate involvement of federal,
local, and tribal users would not be unreasonable to the degree that
involvement levels could be determined by the states.''); New Mexico
Department of Information Technology at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/rfi_response_final_15jun12.pdf
(suggesting each state ``provide a plan for ensuring inclusion of
local and tribal entities via aggregate structure''); LA-RICS at 6
(``NTIA should allow each State to determine the best method for
undertaking [involving tribal entities] and include a description
and plan in its grant application.''); Commonwealth of Massachusetts
at 2-3 (saying that it should be a stipulation for funding that
``the responsible state governing body ensures that local and tribal
(if applicable) participation in the planning process is present'');
APCO International at 1 (``[S]tates must place the highest priority
on establishing or enhancing governance structures that ensure
adequate representation of local jurisdictions in their respective
[S]tates.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, NTIA requested comment on how the existing public safety
governance and planning authorities in each state might be incorporated
into the consultations with FirstNet about the PSBN.\49\ While each
state may be at different stages in their development of their public
safety governance structures, the commenters generally agree that the
states should use established governing bodies in the PSBN
consultations.\50\ Because the governance structures tend to vary from
state to state, NTIA will likely ask the states to discuss how they
will leverage their existing governance structures in the PSBN
consultations. Finally, because these public safety governance
structures have traditionally focused solely on interoperable Land
Mobile Radio (LMR) voice communications, NTIA anticipates asking
applicants to describe how they intend to expand the expertise of their
governance structures to include representatives with an understanding
of broadband and Long Term Evolution (LTE) technology to facilitate
their consultations with FirstNet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ RFI, 77 FR at 28858-59.
\50\ See State of Montana at 3-4 (``[T]o facilitate the planning
and deployment [of the PSBN,] an already established governing body
and governance structure in each individual [S]tate should be
utilized.''); FEMA Region 5 RECCWG at 3 (``[T]here is no need to
establish a new governance structure, even though there is now a new
technology to govern,'' since the governance structures in place or
being developed should already include representatives of multiple
disciplines as well as local and tribal responders.); Florida at 7-8
(finding that even though the underlying technology is changing, the
mission of the Interoperability Governing Bodies (IGBs) remains, and
therefore, ``existing IGBs should continue to have principle [sic]
responsibility for interoperability within the NPSBN''); Minnesota
at 8 (``[E]xisting IGBs should continue to have principle [sic]
responsibility for interoperability within the NPSBN.''); New Mexico
Department of Information Technology at 5-6 (stating that the
current governance structures can and should be considered for use
with the PSBN); Montgomery County, Maryland at 6, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/comments-montgomerycountymd.pdf
(emphasizing that existing public safety governance and planning
authorities' voices must be heard in the program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Allowable Grant Activities
The State and Local Implementation Grant Program will support
activities related to planning for the establishment of the nationwide
PSBN. NTIA received detailed input from the majority of commenters
regarding the types of activities that it should allow under the grant
program to accomplish this objective.\51\ Some of the activities that
commenters identify include ensuring that states have an appropriate
framework in place to consult with FirstNet,\52\ developing and
managing personnel/administrative positions,\53\ conducting
meetings,\54\ arranging travel,\55\ and providing public outreach and
education as well as internal training.\56\ Commenters further note
that some states may need to work with their legal teams to evaluate
any potential local legal barriers, negotiate necessary agreements, and
develop standard Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) to govern access to
assets and infrastructure that may used in the PSBN.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See RFI, 77 Fed. Reg. at 28859.
\52\ Section 6206(c)(2)(A) of the Act directs FirstNet to
consult with regional, state, tribal, and local jurisdictions about
the distribution and expenditure of any amounts required to carry
out the network policies that it is charged with establishing,
including (i) construction of a core network and any radio access
network build-out; (ii) placement of towers; (iii) coverage areas of
the network, whether at the regional, state, tribal, or local level;
(iv) adequacy of hardware, security, reliability, and resiliency
requirements; (v) assignment of priority to local users; (vi)
assignment of priority and selection of entities seeking access to
or use of the nationwide public safety interoperable broadband
network; and (vii) training needs of local users. 47 U.S.C.
1426(c)(2)(A).
\53\ See State of South Dakota at 4; Arizona Department of
Homeland Security at 13; State of Oregon at 12; State of California
at 8; APCO International at 6; LA-RICS at 17; Anjee Toothaker at 2,
available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/june_15_2012_ltr_to_natl_telecomm_and_info_admin.pdf; FEMA Region 5 RECCWG
at 12; Florida at 14; State of North Carolina at 5, available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_rfi_comments_by_north_carolina.pdf; Dr. Michael Myers at 14, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/meyers_rfi_response.pdf.
\54\ See LA-RICS at 17; Mid-Atlantic SWICs at 10-11; State of
Montana at 6; Commonwealth of Kentucky at 2; State of New York at 7;
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe 911 at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ntia_rfi_comments_from_crst_911_corp_v2.pdf; State of Texas at 11.
\55\ See Carlos Delatorre at 15; Michael A. Scales; State of
Utah at 11; State of Mississippi at 16; National Congress of
American Indians at 6.
\56\ See State of Oregon at 12; State of California at 8;
Commonwealth of Massachusetts at 9; State of Georgia at 9; Florida
at 15.
\57\ See NACo, NLC, USCM & NATOA at 3, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/response_to_rfi_on_grant_structure_final.pdf; State of South Dakota at 3; State of
California at 1-2; LA-RICS at 5; State of New Jersey at 4; State of
Nevada at 4; State of Texas at 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50485]]
NTIA anticipates structuring the State and Local Implementation
Grant Program into two phases of funding for planning activities. The
first phase will focus on initial planning and consultation activities,
including strategy and timeline development, meetings, governance
planning, and outreach and education efforts. The second phase will not
begin until FirstNet has consulted with the state-designated contact
about the matters listed in the Act, including defining coverage needs,
user requirements, and network hardening and resiliency
requirements.\58\ The second funding phase will address states' needs
in preparing for additional consultation with FirstNet and planning to
undertake data collection activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA will detail the full scope of allowable activities under the
grant program in the FFO; however, NTIA will likely require recipients
to show that they have accomplished the following activities by the end
of the grant period of performance: (1) Established a governance
structure, or expanded existing structures, to consult with FirstNet;
(2) developed procedures to ensure local and tribal representation and
participation in the consultation process with FirstNet; (3) created a
process for education and outreach, through program development or
through other efforts, among local and tribal officials, public safety
users, and other stakeholders about the nationwide public safety
broadband network; (4) identified potential public safety users of the
public safety broadband network; (5) developed standard MOUs to
facilitate the use of existing infrastructure, or identified the legal
barriers to creating standard MOUs and described potential remedies;
and (6) developed staffing plans that include local and tribal
representation to participate in the public safety governance structure
and to prepare for data collection activities in consultation with
FirstNet. NTIA also will consider having grant recipients prepare a
comprehensive plan, similar in concept to their existing Statewide
Interoperability Communications Plans (SICPs), describing the public
safety needs that they expect FirstNet to address in its design of the
nationwide PSBN, as well as how they intend to satisfy each of the
elements enumerated above, including milestones that demonstrate their
progress.
If sufficient funds are available, NTIA may permit grant recipients
that have satisfactorily completed the milestones associated with these
initial planning requirements to use funds for supplemental activities
related to preparing for any FirstNet data collections, such as
determining staffing levels to dedicate to these tasks, designating a
state point of contact for data collection, where appropriate, and
evaluating the feasibility of using public/private partnerships. At
present, NTIA does not expect to include the compiling of asset and
infrastructure inventories as an allowable activity until FirstNet has
developed a standardized process to govern data collection activities.
D. Funding Restrictions--Eligible and Ineligible Costs
Grantees may only use funds awarded under the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program to pay eligible costs. Eligible costs are
consistent with the cost principles identified in the applicable Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars \59\ and in the grant
program's authorizing legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ Allowable costs are determined in accordance with the cost
principles applicable to the entity incurring the costs. For
example, the allowability of costs incurred by State, local or
federally-recognized Indian tribal governments is determined in
accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-87, ``Cost
Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments,'' 2 CFR
Part 225.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on input received from multiple commenters, eligible costs
under the planning grant program will likely include the following
categories of expenses:
1. Hiring staff and consultants required for the planning process
(such as project managers, program directors, engineers, grant
administrators, financial analysts, accountants, and attorneys);
2. Holding planning meetings with state agencies, local and tribal
stakeholders, and regional partners;
3. Covering travel costs for state, local, and tribal
representatives to attend planning meetings (such as preparing for
FirstNet consultations and attending state, regional, and national
meetings that address public safety broadband issues);
4. Developing, modifying, or enhancing state plans and governance
structures, including efforts to adapt existing public safety
governance authorities, such as the Statewide Interoperability
Coordinators (SWIC), Statewide Interoperability Executive Committees
(SIEC), and Statewide Interoperability Governing Bodies (SIGB), to
include public safety broadband stakeholders and expertise, and
determining the role of the state Chief Information Officers (CIO),
Chief Technology Officers (CTO), or Chief Budget Officers (CBO);
5. Conducting communications, education, and outreach activities
with state, local, tribal, and regional stakeholders;
6. Developing standardized MOUs and other types of agreements to
facilitate access to and use of existing infrastructure;
7. Identifying potential public safety users for the public safety
broadband network;
8. Administrative services and supplies necessary to prepare for
and manage the grant program;
9. Legal services related to the planning process; and
10. Training costs related to the planning process.
NTIA does not envision allowing funds awarded under the State and
Local Implementation Grant Program to be used for activities related to
site preparation, broadband deployment, installation, construction, or
the acquisition of equipment used to provide wireless broadband
services, including LTE-related activities.
E. Rural Coverage Prioritization
The Act provides that the State and Local Implementation Grant
Program shall include requirements to prioritize grants for activities
that ensure coverage in rural as well as urban areas.\60\ Some
commenters note that states with a higher percentage of rural areas may
face unique challenges; thus, designing a one-size-fits-all approach to
ensuring rural coverage may not be appropriate for all
circumstances.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(c).
\61\ See State of South Dakota at 4; State of Georgia at 10;
Arizona Department of Homeland Security at 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In designing the formula that it will use to allocate funds under
the grant program, NTIA intends to avoid a solely population-based
approach and will consider additional factors that affect rural
coverage. Additionally, NTIA agrees that the states will need
flexibility in determining the most effective means by which FirstNet
can provide adequate rural coverage. While the FFO will describe in
detail the exact contents of the application package, NTIA anticipates
having the states address how they will prioritize their grant
activities to ensure coverage in rural areas, including providing
specific plans and metrics to demonstrate how they will achieve these
requirements.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See State of Mississippi at 17; OAC at 20-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50486]]
F. NTIA Consultations With FirstNet on the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program Requirements
As previously discussed, the Act directs NTIA to consult with
FirstNet to establish the requirements of the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program not later than 6 months after the date of
the Act's enactment, or by August 22, 2012. The Act also required that
FirstNet be established no later than August 20, 2012. The Act's
framework, which essentially placed the creation of FirstNet and the
development of the grant program requirements on parallel tracks,
proved challenging for NTIA as it attempted to fulfill the statutory
mandate to consult with FirstNet in establishing the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program. As noted, NTIA has only started to
consult with the newly-formed FirstNet Board on the grant program
requirements outlined in this Notice. NTIA expects these consultations
to proceed over the next few months as NTIA continues to prepare the
FFO in which the State and Local Implementation Grant Program
requirements will be described more fully.
Dated: August 16, 2012.
Lawrence E. Strickling,
Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information.
[FR Doc. 2012-20502 Filed 8-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-60-P