FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 3, Pages 1878 to 2785, February 21 - March 16, 2012 Page: 1,894
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
to split apart the existing Enhanced Digital Access Communication System ('EDACS') into two separate
and independent systems, a process known as the split-system transition, a necessary solution that could
not be foreseen at the time the FRA was executed."'5 Further, Port Authority states that splitting the
system required a 163-page Task Plan 46 prepared by BAH with M/A-COM's assistance, to ensure that the
system would continue to function while operated in split mode.47 Port Authority also claims that M/A-
COM provided on-site support to address any EDACS system issues that arose as the split system was
25. Sprint Position. Sprint claims that M/A-COM spent excessive time in assisting BAH with
preparing the Task Plan. M/A-COM billed 46 hours for documenting material to be included in the Task
Plan and another 80 hours reviewing the plan that BAH produced.49 Sprint offers to pay for 16 hours of
M/A-COM's documentation effort and 32 hours of its review process.5 Sprint contends that it should not
be required to pay any of BAH's costs associated with preparation of the Task Plan because Port
Authority did not adequately document the time expended and the tasks performed by BAH. Sprint
claims that BAH "simply had multiple persons billing 8 hour days for weeks and months at a time
without keeping the expected detailed records as to what specific tasks these people were
26. Although Sprint questions whether splitting the EDACS system was unforeseeable,' it
acknowledges that during mediation it agreed to pay part of the cost "to try to move the review process
along and not because Nextel believed that the Port had provided any justification for having undertaken a
massive and very likely avoidable rework of the EDACS system without any prior consultation with
Nextel."" Sprint claims that even had it agreed that splitting the system was necessary, the services
provided by BAH and M/A-COM were excessive.54 Sprint notes that Port Authority's PRM offers no
specific rationale for M/A-COM and BAH spending hundreds of hours to produce a Task Plan for a
temporary split system.55
2. Dual Personality Programming to Accommodate the EDACS Split
27. Port AuthorityPosition. The split system required that Port Authority's radios operate on
both pre-rebanding and post-rebanding channels."6 Therefore Port Authority had M/A-COM determine
which Port Authority radios could be retuned on these channels and which older radios had to be re-
flashed to accommodate them.57 Port Authority claims that it was necessary for BAH to develop "special
' Id. at 17-18.
52 Id. at 18. Sprint adds that Port Authority should have brought the PAPD's concerns to Sprint immediately so that
Sprint "'could have demonstrated that the rework was not necessary." Id.
* Port Authoritv PRM at 10.
Federal Communications Commission
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 3, Pages 1878 to 2785, February 21 - March 16, 2012, book, March 2012; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94252/m1/35/: accessed June 27, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.