Relations between the U.S. government and several major telecoms including Sprint continue to be strained by the unfolding saga surrounding the NSA's surveillance program. When the public caught wind of the telecom sector's role in these processes – such as allowing the federal government to listen in on phone calls and intercept other forms of communication – a great deal of blame was placed at the feet of the industry. The ensuing public relations fallout seems to have taught many organizations to exercise more caution when complying with government requests.
That newfound reticence was on display recently when Sprint, AT&T and Verizon Communications pushed back on the government's attempts to use their data warehouses to temporarily store information collected through surveillance programs. The industry's hesitance to expand its role in these efforts suggests that support may be growing among telecoms to distance themselves from government operations.
Sprint once again took center stage in the latest development in the frayed relationship between telecoms and the government. Reuters reported that the Obama administration recently filed a suit against Sprint in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, claiming that the company violated anti-fraud law when it allegedly submitted erroneous expense claims. Like other telecoms, Sprint has assisted federal investigators' surveillance efforts when presented with court-ordered wiretaps or "pen registers" that record information regarding phone calls. Part of that agreement requires telecoms to keep the necessary equipment up to date and fully functional to be ready when needed. The government pays out a reimbursement for many of these expenses.
Sprint faces overcharge allegations
U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag stated that Sprint submitted inaccurate expense reports to several law enforcement agencies over the course of a period spanning more than three years. As a result of these alleged improprieties, the telecom is accused of requesting reimbursements more than 50 percent above actual costs, totaling approximately $21 million in overcharges. Government officials claim Sprint used these funds to pay for upgrades to its network infrastructure and services.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Sprint reduced its fees in accordance with a 2006 FCC ruling, but did not bring those expenses down to requested levels, according to the federal government. If these charges prove to be true, Sprint would be in violation of the False Claims Act, which would allow the government to recoup as much as three times the amount federal agencies overpaid to the offending party.
