FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 3, Pages 1878 to 2785, February 21 - March 16, 2012 Page: 1,907
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
professional services rendered." BAH staff hours are listed, but with no indication of what staff services
were provided, e.g., multiple hours of staff time are billed for "agency wide 800 MHz radio conf'
without further identification of what the individual staff member did during those hours.'89 Moreover,
we are unpersuaded by Port Authority's argument that the FRA does not require Port Authority to provide
documentation of services provided to the level of detail requested by Sprint. Even assuming arguendo
that the FRA did not so provide,90 the Commission's Minimum Necessary Cost Standard demands that
the licensee provide sufficient documentation to carry its evidentiary burden. That, at minimum, requires
a description of specific services performed and the costs incurred. Otherwise, it is not possible to
determine whether the services were necessary and performed at minimum cost, e.g.. whether a service
was performed in support of a disallowed task such as the "split" of the EDACS system.
1. BAH Technical Support to Vendors
70. Port Authority claims that BAH provided technical support to unnamed vendors that lacked
the expertise and equipment to provide the services they were retained to provide.'91 BAH's invoices,
however, lack sufficient detail for us to determine what costs are attributable to BAH providing such
technical support. Moreover, to the extent that BAH had to perform extra work because Port Authority
retained unqualified vendors, the responsibility for such excess costs rests with Port Authority, not
2. Internal Costs
71. Port Authority's claim for $283,509.04 for internal staff oversight of the rebanding process
shares the same infirmity as BAH's submissions. We cannot tell from the information submitted what
Port Authority's staff specifically did in support of the rebanding effort, thus rendering it impossible to
ascertain whether the funds requested meet the Minimum Necessary Cost Standard.
3. M/A-COM Costs
72. M/A-COM has provided more detailed documentation than BAH in connection with its
services performed under the Change Notice.'93 However, M/A-COM's invoices for "Project
Management" indicate that M/A-COM often charged far more for management of project tasks than the
cost of performing the task itself. For example, M/A-COM invoiced $32,800 for management of $12,600
of work at the Newark Airport.'94 In order for us to accept such disproportionate charges as reasonable,
the burden falls on the licensee to explain how they are necessary to the rebanding effort and not
excessive. Port Authority has provided no such explanation. Indeed, Port Authority has provided little or
s89 Port Authority PRM at Exhibit F.
'1 0 The FRA requires Change Notices to " be accompanied by reasonable documentation supporting the need for and
scope of the change(s) and any proposed increase or decrease in the Cost Estimate." Port Authority PRM, Exhibit B
(FRA) at 8. The FRA also includes a form for recording internal time. The form includes columns for entering,
inter alia. name of the individual performing services, the "description of activities." and "actual hours worked." Id.
at 42. There is no record evidence that Port Authority provided that form or its equivalent.
19' Port Authority PRM at 15.
192 See, e.g. State of Oklahoma and Sprint Nextel Corp.. WT Docket 02-55. Memorandum Opinion and Order. 26
FCC Red 15457 12 (PSHSB 2011); State of Indiana and Sprint Nextel Corp.. WT Docket 02-55, Memorandum
Opinion and Order, 26 FCC Rcd 1023, 1028 (PSHSB 2011). ("We agree with Sprint, that, because Indiana chose
EMR as its vendor. Indiana is responsible for EMR's action or inaction, in deploying radios without the post-
rebanding frequencies installed.")
193 See Port Authority PRM at Exhibit G.
'" Sprint PRM at 22-23.
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.
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/m1/48/: accessed May 30, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.