Don’t Break the Band That Security Systems Depend On

Reliability isn’t optional in life-safety systems. Alarm panels, motion sensors, glass-break detectors, leak sensors and medical alert devices all depend on wireless communication that works consistently every time it’s needed.

That’s why a current debate at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) deserves close attention from the security industry. A proposal under consideration would allow high-power transmissions in portions of the lower 900 MHz band, spectrum that security systems and other low-power wireless technologies have relied on for decades.

The policy discussion has largely centered on whether interference is likely. But for security dealers and integrators, the more practical question is different: what happens if those assumptions prove wrong once these systems are deployed in the real world?

When life-safety systems are involved, even intermittent failures can have serious consequences.

A Foundation for Security Systems

Wireless connectivity has become essential infrastructure for modern security installations.

Almost every professionally installed security system relies on sub-GHz wireless communication in the lower 900 MHz band. This spectrum enables devices such as intrusion sensors, door and window contacts, smoke detectors and panic buttons to transmit small bursts of data reliably across an entire property.

There are good reasons for that design.

Lower-frequency wireless signals travel farther and penetrate building materials such as brick, metal and concrete far better than higher-frequency alternatives like Wi-Fi. They also require far less power to transmit, allowing sensors to operate for years on small batteries.

These characteristics are critical for devices that must remain operational for long periods without maintenance. They also allow installers to place sensors where they are most effective, not just where power or network connectivity is available.

The result is an ecosystem that has supported security systems for decades.

Why the FCC Is Examining This Spectrum

The United States faces a real and widely recognized national security challenge: the country currently lacks a robust backup system for GPS.

Critical infrastructure — from aviation and shipping to financial networks and emergency services — relies heavily on GPS for positioning, navigation and timing (PNT). If GPS were disrupted, the impact could be severe.

Federal agencies including the FCC and the Department of Transportation are actively exploring alternatives. Multiple technologies are under development, including terrestrial radio systems, satellite-based solutions and fiber-based timing networks.

Federal agencies are investigating a wide range of alternative GPS technologies, from Low Earth Orbit satellite systems to broadcast-based positioning networks and fiber-distributed timing solutions. Across all the proposed solutions, only one would require any spectrum reallocation.

A company called NextNav, has asked the FCC to reconfigure part of the lower 900 MHz band to allow high-power 5G signals. NextNav would use a small portion of the requested bandwidth to develop a ground-based backup PNT system. It would subsidize this solution by licensing the rest to cellular telecommunications providers.  

For over 40 years, the Lower 900 MHz spectrum has been available to “unlicensed” users: low-power devices that share the airwaves. NextNav’s petition would crowd the billions of existing unlicensed users into a narrower sliver of bandwidth, adjacent to the newly minted 5G spectrum. At the same time, the company also requests that existing interference protections for the low-power devices be removed.

NextNav’s petition has raised alarms across multiple industries. Everyone involved recognizes the urgent need for GPS alternatives, but introducing high-power transmissions into this spectrum could destabilize wireless infrastructure that already protects millions of homes and businesses.

Why Interference Matters in Security Systems

Wireless coexistence is not new. The lower 900 MHz band already hosts many different types of low-power devices operating side by side.

But the systems currently sharing the band were designed to coexist with other low-power applications, not with high-power 5G signals.

If this petition becomes reality, customer impacts will vary depending on their proximity to a 5G transmitter. Some customers might experience total system failure. For others, problems may not appear immediately; but even limited interference could manifest in ways that will cause ongoing headaches for security dealers, such as:

• Intermittent device connectivity.
• Unexpected signal drops.
• Sensors requiring repeated transmissions to reach a hub.
• Shortened battery life.
• Hard-to-diagnose service calls.

In security and life-safety applications, these intermittent problems can be critical failures. A motion sensor might fail to transmit a signal at a critical moment. A leak detector might miss an event. A panic button might take longer than expected to reach the monitoring center.

Such events undermine the reliability that security systems are built to provide.

And when customers experience these failures, they rarely blame spectrum policy. They call their dealer.

The Hidden Cost: Service & Liability

For security dealers and integrators, reliability issues translate directly into operational and reputational risk. Intermittent wireless interference can create some of the most frustrating service scenarios in the industry. Problems may appear sporadically, disappear during testing and resist conventional troubleshooting. Truck rolls increase. Diagnostics become difficult. Customers grow frustrated. In the worst case, a system failure during a real emergency could raise liability questions for installers and monitoring providers, even if the root cause lies outside the equipment itself.

The Role of Industry Standards Organizations

Many security industry organizations have been working closely with policymakers to provide technical input and export the risks of NextNav’s proposal — including the Z-Wave Alliance, a nonprofit standards development organization representing manufacturers, silicon providers and technology companies that collaborate to maintain and evolve the Z-Wave wireless standard.

Rather than representing the interests of a single company, standards organizations can draw from the experience of manufacturers, installers, and service providers across an entire technology ecosystem.

In the case of the lower 900 MHz debate, that means bringing real-world deployment insight to a policy discussion that could affect millions of installed systems. The perspectives of impacted individuals matter, too, though. Now is the time to make your voice heard.

A Path Forward

As the FCC evaluates potential changes to the lower 900 MHz band, it’s important that policymakers understand how these systems operate in the field.

Security professionals have decades of experience designing, installing and maintaining wireless life-safety systems in real environments, not controlled laboratory conditions. That practical perspective can help ensure that efforts to strengthen national infrastructure do not inadvertently weaken the systems already protecting homes and businesses.

Anyone can weigh in on this issue by submitting to the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System. Select “Express Comment” and search for Proceeding 24-240: “WTB and OET Seek Comment on NextNav Petition for Rulemaking.”

All dealers need to do is share their concerns — a paragraph or two will do. Security dealers can wholeheartedly support GPS resilience while advocating for the spectrum they rely on. NextNav’s proposal is only one of several potential approaches to GPS resilience currently under evaluation — and it’s the only one that would interfere with wireless security and life safety device communications. 

The goal should not be choosing between GPS resilience and existing infrastructure. The goal should be strengthening both.