WASHINGTON-AT&T Corp. decided not to bid on a potentially lucrative government-wide wireless telecommunications contract, called Federal Telecommunications Service 2000, stating the procurement contract put forth by the General Services Administration earlier this year constitutes “de facto regulation of the wireless industry.”
The giant joins rival Sprint Corp., which dropped out of the running last summer. The only entity bidding on the contract so far is GTE Corp., and a prominent senator is promising to look into the entire GSA procurement mechanism.
“We will be an aggressive player in the wireless market but not in this procurement,” said Bernie McKay, AT&T’s government-markets vice president for strategy, marketing and planning. “What the government wants is unique business operating standards, a ubiquitous system nationwide.”
McKay added GSA’s proposal goes against recent government efforts to buy services under off-the-shelf commercial terms. Instead of having to buy products and services from GSA-approved vendors, agencies now are able to sign up with any company that meets their needs.
“Between the telecom act and multiple federal procurement-reform laws that have been passed during the past two years, the government was being pushed toward going to the marketplace directly for service,” McKay said. “This procurement was oblivious to all that. If any market research had been done, it doesn’t show in this request for proposals.”
According to McKay, the GSA wanted to ensure potential bidders would be able to provide nationwide wireless services-including paging, cellular, personal communications services, enhanced specialized mobile radio and mobile data-on a one-stop-shopping basis for nearly at-cost prices.
McKay said while providing nationwide coverage is no problem for many wireless carriers, “doing it to conform to uniform government standards is. We wonder how much of this proposal was based on changing the cellular industry rather than on contracting to use it.”
“Out of one side of its mouth, GSA says government agencies want a wireless network,” McKay said. “Then it says agencies only want to spend $3 million for wireless service over the next eight years. To put a system in place for the government would cost more than $3 million.”
In an Oct. 15 letter to David Barram, acting GSA administrator, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), chairman of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, admonished the agency to take full advantage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 when it comes to awarding new telecom contracts, “including competition in local and end-to-end services … We are concerned that the GSA Federal Telecommunications Service is not making appropriate plans to take advantage of the Act.”
Stevens pointed out GSA to date has not submitted contract-performance specifications for the post-FTS 2000 program and its components. It also has not turned in a business plan approved by Barram and the Office of Management and Budget; Stevens told Barram to include such items in GSA’s report to Congress due Dec. 1.
