1. Tell us something about your career journey or personal experiences that isn't included in your official bio.

What my official bio doesn't mention is that I've been playing rock music before live audiences since 1976—and I'm still at it. Music has been the constant thread running alongside my telecommunications career, and it's given me some of my most meaningful industry connections.

I'm proud to be part of "Band Plan," an industry band founded by former WIA President and FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein that brings together wireless professionals from across the country. We've played everywhere from Orlando to Denver to the Hard Rock Soundwaves stage in Atlantic City—there's something special about sharing a stage with colleagues you might otherwise only see across a conference table.

I also played at IWCE 2024 with "Wireless Transit Authority"—a band featuring telecom lawyer Alan Tilles, industry veteran Ira Grossman, James Smith from MCA, keyboardist Don Wilkins, and Nashville session drummer Charlie Morgan, whose credits include 13 years touring with Elton John and sessions with everyone from Kate Bush to Tina Turner. Playing IWCE with musicians of that caliber was a career highlight that had nothing to do with telecommunications—and everything to do with it at the same time.

Music taught me that the best performances come from listening to each other and creating something that’s special where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

2. What are the key challenges with the current Part 90 signal booster rules, and how does SBC's petition aim to address them?

The core problem is that the FCC's Part 90 rules require "express consent" from frequency licensees before operating a signal booster on their frequencies—but there's no framework for how to efficiently obtain and document that consent. It's like requiring a driver's license without having a standardized process or a defined place to store the records.

This regulatory gap has real consequences. Improperly deployed signal boosters cause harmful interference to public safety radio communications—degrading the very systems they're intended to support. The record documents substantial costs: San Francisco reported $1.67 million in interference-related expenses over ten years and extrapolated a nationwide impact exceeding $1 billion across the approximately 3,000 P25 systems operating in the country. Fairfax County, Virginia spent $400,000 on testing equipment alone to address interference incidents. These aren't one-time expenditures—public safety agencies continue to expend resources investigating interference and remediating improperly deployed systems year after year.

SBC filed our Petition for Rulemaking—RM-12009—in July 2025 asking the FCC to create a clear authorization framework. We're not asking for new regulations; we're asking the Commission to provide implementation structure for rules that already exist. The framework would leverage established frequency coordinators, creating a market-based solution that reduces burden on government while ensuring systems work correctly.

The response has been overwhelming. The comment period closed with 68 filings showing 100% validation that the problem is real and 98.5% support for the FCC to proceed to rulemaking. APCO, IAFC, IACP, and NASFM all filed supportive comments. That's a remarkable level of consensus across public safety stakeholders.

Our session Streamlining ERCES Deployments: Examining SBC's Petition to FCC for Part 90 Signal Booster Rules Reform (Wednesday, March 18, 11:30 am) will do a deep dive into this topic.

3. How can streamlining ERCES deployments improve public safety and emergency response times?

When first responders enter a building during an emergency, their radios need to work. Period. If firefighters can't communicate with incident command, if police can't coordinate a response, if EMS can't call for backup—people die. Emergency Responder Communication Enhancement Systems—ERCES—exist specifically to eliminate deadly wireless coverage gaps inside buildings.

But here's the problem: deploying an ERCES today is unnecessarily complicated. Building owners face inconsistent local requirements, unclear consent procedures, and a shortage of qualified installers. Fire marshals struggle with compliance verification. And improperly deployed systems sometimes cause interference to the very public safety networks they're meant to support—because there's no standardized framework ensuring they're installed and maintained correctly.

Streamlining deployment means establishing clear, consistent standards that everyone can follow. It means implementing an authorization framework so systems can be registered and tracked. And it means reducing the friction that currently delays deployments while buildings remain unsafe.

The public safety benefit is direct: faster deployments mean more buildings have working systems sooner. Better-designed systems mean fewer interference problems. Proper maintenance requirements mean systems work when they're needed. Every improvement in the deployment process translates to first responders who can communicate when lives depend on it.

4. How do you see the FCC's evolving policies impacting the future of wireless communication and public safety systems?

We're in a pivotal moment at the FCC. Chairman Carr has initiated a "Delete Delete Delete" policy focused on eliminating unnecessary regulations—and I think that's very compatible with what SBC is asking for. Our Signal Booster petition doesn't add new regulatory burden; it fills a gap that's causing confusion and wasted resources across the industry.

The Commission is also moving aggressively on spectrum. Auction authority was restored in mid-2025 after a two-year lapse, and the FCC has announced the AWS-3 auction for June 2026 with an Upper C-band auction proposed for 2027. Just this week, Chairman Carr announced that the FCC will vote to expand unlicensed use in the 6 GHz band, creating a new category of higher-power devices that can operate outdoors—supporting everything from AR/VR to IoT to indoor navigation. More spectrum and more wireless capacity are coming—but that capacity only matters if signals can reach users inside buildings where they spend most of their time.

That's also why indoor coverage assessment matters—and why SBC has communicated to the Commission on closing that gap in our Section 706 NOI comment filing, as we will discuss in our session Breaking the Outdoor-Only Tradition: Why the FCC Should Measure Wireless Coverage Where Americans Actually Use It (Tuesday, March 17, 1:45 pm). We also take a look at this topic in a session led by SBC Founder Seth Buechley: "911 Inside" - Addressing Indoor Emergency Location Challenges and Coverage Gaps (Monday, March 16, 11:30 am).

I expect we'll see increasing advocacy and public sentiment to address indoor wireless coverage in regulatory frameworks—whether through enhanced Section 706 reporting, building code coordination, or recognition of the expanding role of cellular in public safety communications, with FirstNet being a prime example.

For public safety systems specifically, the FCC's policies around spectrum sharing, interference management, and equipment authorization will directly shape what's possible. Getting these policies right isn't just a regulatory exercise—it determines whether first responders can communicate inside the buildings where emergencies actually happen.

5. What are the potential implications of this shift for public safety, particularly in areas like schools, hospitals, and high-density buildings?

Schools, hospitals, and high-density buildings represent exactly the environments where in-building wireless coverage matters most—and where current regulatory gaps create the greatest risk.

In schools, the convergence of Alyssa's Law requirements for panic alert systems with ongoing debates about cell phone policies creates urgent need for reliable indoor wireless infrastructure. You can't have effective emergency communication if the building blocks cellular signals. And you can't implement smart device management policies if you don't have the underlying connectivity infrastructure to support them.

Hospitals present unique challenges: critical care environments, electromagnetic interference concerns, and complex building structures with RF-blocking materials. In today's healthcare environment, physicians need continuous communication with their offices and resources as they navigate multiple practice locations, hospital affiliations, and telehealth sessions—they prefer to associate with hospitals that have reliable wireless infrastructure. First responders also need continuous coverage inside hospitals, whether transporting patients, coordinating with staff, or managing incidents. The convergence of LMR and cellular—exemplified by FirstNet—blurs the line between these use cases and creates infrastructure investment opportunities that can serve both communities.

High-density buildings—stadiums, convention centers, high-rises—concentrate large numbers of people in structures that often block wireless signals. When an emergency occurs at a major event or in a crowded building, responders face both the greatest communication challenges and the highest stakes. These are precisely the scenarios where properly functioning ERCES systems save lives.

Clearer regulatory frameworks would give building owners confidence to invest, give first responders assurance that systems work, and ultimately create safer environments for the people who occupy these buildings every day. Our Executive Director Chief Alan Perdue examines the School Safety aspect this subject in his session The Technology Gap: Why School Safety Plans Fail Without Wireless Communications (Monday, March 16, 9:40 am).

A very vigorously debated policy subject, cell phone bans in schools, concerns the conflict between student emotional well-being and classroom distractions with parental rights and student safety. Our session Cell Phone Bans in Schools: Exploring Alternatives to All-or-Nothing Solutions (Tuesday, March 17, 9:40 am), led by SBC Board Member and School Safety Work Group Chair Eric Toenjes, brings both sides of that discussion in a presentation / town hall format. I would not miss that session for anything!

6. How can wireless carriers and regulators collaborate to ensure accurate and meaningful coverage measurements that reflect real-world usage?

Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 mandates that the FCC report annually on the availability of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans. This is a critical question that gets to the heart of what SBC has been advocating. Current coverage measurements—the data that drives billions of dollars in infrastructure investment and informs regulatory decisions—focus almost entirely on outdoor propagation models. But that's not where people use wireless services. Americans spend 90% of their time indoors, 70-80% of wireless usage occurs inside buildings, and over 70% of 911 calls originate from mobile devices indoors. You can't accurately assess coverage availability while ignoring where people actually use their phones.

The solution requires collaboration, not confrontation. Carriers have legitimate concerns about measurement complexity, competitive sensitivity, and the cost of enhanced reporting. Regulators need accurate data to fulfill statutory obligations. The middle ground involves leveraging existing data sources that both sides can trust.

Third-party measurement platforms like Ookla and OpenSignal already collect billions of indoor measurements from real user devices. This crowdsourced data reflects actual user experience without requiring carriers to disclose proprietary network details. The FCC's Broadband DATA Act explicitly authorizes using third-party data when predictive models prove insufficient—and the technical realities of 5G propagation make this exactly the situation Congress anticipated.

SBC has proposed that the Commission incorporate indoor coverage assessment into Section 706 reporting, using technology-neutral approaches that respect carrier innovation while providing the accurate picture that sound policy requires. This isn't about naming and shaming carriers—it's about understanding where coverage gaps exist so resources can be directed appropriately.

International benchmarks show this is achievable. Singapore, Hong Kong, and South Korea have all implemented indoor coverage evaluation frameworks. The question isn't whether it's technically possible—it's whether we have the regulatory will to align our assessments with how Americans actually use wireless services.

As stated previously, we will do a deep dive on this in our session Breaking the Outdoor-Only Tradition: Why the FCC Should Measure Wireless Coverage Where Americans Actually Use It (Tuesday, March 17, 1:45 pm).

7. What can attendees expect to gain from your sessions at IWCE 2026?

SBC’s leadership and I will be participating in multiple sessions at IWCE 2026, each addressing a different dimension of in-building and challenging-environment wireless communications. Here are four session I am presenting that I'd like to highlight:

Streamlining ERCES Deployments: Examining SBC's Petition to FCC for Part 90 Signal Booster Rules Reform (Wednesday, March 18, 11:30 am) pairs me with Stephen Devine, CTO of APCO International. We'll examine SBC's proposed authorization framework and provide the latest updates on the FCC proceeding status as of March 2026.

Breaking the Outdoor-Only Tradition: Why the FCC Should Measure Wireless Coverage Where Americans Actually Use It (Tuesday, March 17, 1:45 pm) features tech analyst Dean Bubley and Bryan Darr from Ookla. We'll examine why measuring only outdoor coverage creates a fundamental disconnect from reality when Americans spend 90% of their time indoors. The session will provide updates on whether the FCC's 2025 Section 706 report addressed indoor coverage and discuss next steps for stakeholders.

Cell Phone Bans in Schools: Exploring Alternatives to All-or-Nothing Solutions (Tuesday, March 17, 9:40 am) brings together education policy expert Thomas Toch of Georgetown's FutureEd and Eric Toenjes from Graybar. We'll explore the tension between legitimate concerns about classroom distraction and parent demands for emergency communication access. The session examines cases like Uvalde and Parkland to understand how communications availability—or failures—impacted outcomes, and explores technology-enabled alternatives beyond binary ban/no-ban policies. This is a town hall format with audience polling and participation.

Communications Where There Is None (Monday, March 16, 9:40 am) brings together Joe Hanna, San Bernardino Fire Chief Dan Munsey, Brittany Haile from Qualcomm, Stephen Devine from APCO, and me to examine sidelink technology—the 3GPP-standardized approach to device-to-device communications when networks are unavailable. Whether it's in-building, heavily wooded terrain, mountainous areas, or networks rendered inoperable by disaster, first responders need connectivity. This session explores how sidelink fills that critical gap with non-proprietary, network-agnostic, interoperable capabilities.

Two additional sessions feature other SBC leadership:

The Technology Gap: Why School Safety Plans Fail Without Wireless Communications (Monday, March 16, 9:40 am) features SBC Executive Director Alan Perdue and SBC Founder Seth Buechley. Metal detectors, cameras, and secure doors are critical—but without reliable communications inside the building, emergency response will fail. This session unpacks how wireless dead zones undermine response times, complicate coordination between first responders, and increase risks for students and staff.

"911 Inside" - Addressing Indoor Emergency Location Challenges and Coverage Gaps (Monday, March 16, 11:30 am) features Seth Buechley alongside TJ Kennedy from GeoComm, retired Western Fire Chiefs' Jeff Johnson, and NENA's April Heinze. This session examines SBC's "911 Inside" initiative addressing two critical challenges: wireless dead zones where 911 calls can't be made, and difficulty accurately locating callers inside buildings when calls are possible. The panel explores device-based hybrid solutions, Height Above Ground Level measurements, and our proposal for a National Indoor Wireless Coverage Map.

Across all of these sessions, attendees will leave with actionable intelligence on the technology and regulatory developments shaping public safety communications for years to come.

8. What are you most excited about for IWCE 2026, and how do you think the event will impact the industry?

For the Safer Buildings Coalition, IWCE is the center of our in-building wireless and mission critical communications universe. IWCE turns 50 this year! For five decades, this event has brought together public safety, utilities, transportation, and enterprise professionals to work through the hard problems in critical communications. That mission matters more now than ever.

The current regulatory climate is creating real momentum. Our FCC petition demonstrated overwhelming industry consensus that current rules need updating. Legislative initiatives like Alyssa's Law are driving investment in school safety infrastructure. The Commission is moving aggressively on spectrum while also facing calls to address indoor coverage assessment. Meanwhile, the convergence of public safety LMR and commercial cellular—exemplified by FirstNet and emerging Sidelink technologies—is reshaping how we think about critical communications infrastructure.

The public safety in-building market has never been stronger, and professionals in this space need a venue to learn, collaborate, meet, and discuss. IWCE is that venue. The conversations that happen at IWCE will shape partnerships, inform product development, and influence policy for years to come.

As an Advisory Board member, I'm proud that IWCE continues to expand its coverage of in-building wireless and school safety topics. These aren't niche concerns—they're central to the mission of ensuring reliable communications when it matters most.

And I'm looking forward to seeing colleagues from across the industry and sharing some war stories. We'll once again host the Annual SBC Member Reception, Dinner, and Meeting at the Convention Center on Tuesday, March 17th—always the in-building wireless social event of the year.

John Foley's sessions: https://agenda.iwceexpo.com/speaker/foley-john/62319