FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 3, Pages 1878 to 2785, February 21 - March 16, 2012 Page: 1,897
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
additional funds for the replacement radios,84 but claims that BAH and M/A-COM incurred costs in
rendering the Newark Air Train system compatible with the new radios, i.e., "re-engineering and
reprogramming" of the existing system.ss Port Authority submits that the need for these engineering and
programming changes was not foreseeable until the work commenced.6
35. Sprint Position. Addressing the Kennedy Airport project, Sprint notes that M/A-COM
logged 164 hours for coordinating 42 radio deliveries, programming, and field work. Sprint contends
that, although "the first radio or two may have required some additional or unique efforts due to logistics
and the nature of the installation, the rest should have followed an established process that should have
required little or no oversight from the engineering or project management teams."87 Yet, Sprint notes,
M/A-COM spent 4 hours of "project management" time per radio. Sprint offers 16 hours for M/A-
COM's project management effort and makes no separate allocation for BAH.88
36. With regard to the technical issues at Newark Airport, Sprint denies that it has refused to
reimburse Port Authority for resolving the issues.8" However, it submits that there is no breakdown or
detail of costs for the "various tasks" Port Authority claims M/A-COM and BAH performed." Sprint
claims that M/A-COM logged 72 hours just overseeing the certification and reprogramming of the new
Newark Airport radios and accessories9' at a cost for project management that exceeded the actual cost of
resolving the technical issues.92 Sprint therefore offers 24 hours for M/A-COM's effort and nothing for
BAH's undocumented services.
5. MDT Rack Redesign.
37. Port Authority Position. Port Authority assumed that the police Mobile Data Terminals
(MDT) could be replaced without need to change their mounting racks. " It later discovered, however,
that the racks had to be redesigned and replaced. This discovery was not made, Port Authority asserts,
until after the FRA had been signed and the work started.
38. Sprint Position. Sprint questions the amount of vendor resources expended on the redesign
and replacement of the MDT rack and suggests that Port Authority "exercised no restraint on the vendor's
staffing and level of effort in oversight or project management.""9 Sprint asserts that Port Authority failed
to provide a cost breakdown for the MDT redesign."6 It notes that M/A-COM claims to have expended 36
hours overseeing the billing, programming and delivery/installation of the new MDT racks and 42 hours
s Id. at 12-13.
87 Sprint PRM at 22.
92 Id. at 22-23.
9 Port Authority PRM at 13.
" id. Exhibit I (Affidavit of James Buchanan) at 19.
9 Sprint PRM at 23.
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.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
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/m1/38/: accessed October 19, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.