The Federal Communications Commission is pushing hard to free up additional spectrum in some unlikely extremely high frequency ranges — some at 95 GHz or higher, for the next generation of wireless services.

Just a year ago in 2017, the FCC wrapped up its latest spectrum auction for the higher end of the UHF TV band, to be repurposed for mobile service use. But now the agency is seeking to find and reassign underused spectrum in much higher frequency bands that could be used for services like 5G wireless, machine-to-machine communications, intelligent road and vehicle networks, and other uses yet to be invented or envisioned.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel made it clear that smart spectrum allocation was critical for next generation wireless services.

“The point is the list is long — and we are looking at midband and millimeter wave to power the 5G future,” Rosenworcel said. “The propagation challenges are real, but so is the potential for capacity with network densification. Of course, what we need to do next is get these airwaves to market and unconditionally hold an auction this year.”

The FCC is contemplating auctions covering these frequencies in 2018:

3.5 GHz

Widely expected to draw the most interest, the Citizens Broadband Radio Service band was originally intended primarily for unlicensed users, but the wireless industry has lobbied heavily to get much of this spectrum reassigned for traditional long-term licensed use. Although very high frequency, the 3550-3700 MHz “innovation band” will have plenty of wide range of frequencies open for wireless data and mobile services. The wireless industry wants to deploy LTE service on this band, but they will likely compete with cable operators that are seeking their own stake of frequencies to launch their own wireless services.

This band will likely support last mile wireless connections at gigabit speed, fixed wireless broadband, and even in-home Wi-Fi that is significantly better than what you have now.

Because the band is so attractive, several different users are competing over who will be portioned what spectrum. The cable and phone companies want more for themselves, but other users, including consumers, want to reserve enough spectrum for unlicensed applications. The concern is deep pocketed companies may crowd out innovators and start-ups.

3.7 to 4.2 GHz

Some consumers may have accessed services on these frequencies without ever realizing it. This is the home of the “C-Band,” recognizable to any home satellite dishowner of the 1980s and 1990s. This range of frequencies is set aside for line-of-sight, very low powered satellite television — the kind that used to require a 10-12 foot wide satellite dish in the backyard to receive. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wants to open the band up to be shared with 5G wireless broadband, which has caused considerable controversy among satellite users who fear devastating interference.

There are proposals and counter proposals from the satellite industry and wireless companies over how to manage sharing this band. Most are coalescing around the idea of sequestering 100 MHz of spectrum at the low-end of the band and using 3700-3800 MHz for high-speed wireless broadband. Some want satellite operators to clear out of this section of frequencies voluntarily, others propose compensation similar to what was given to television stations to relocate their channel positions. Google is pushing for a plan that would offer mobile 5G service in large urban areas and 25 Mbps – 1 Gbps fixed wireless broadband in rural and residential areas.

But satellite companies and many satellite users are fearful of the impact of interference. Because satellite signals use very low power transponders on the satellite, ground based wireless broadband interference could wipe out satellite reception.

Tom Taggart, who owns several radio stations in West Virginia, says sharing spectrum was tried before and did not work well.

“This band, years ago, was shared with AT&T and other telcos for point-to-point long-distance links. Fixed, licensed paths that could be plotted and protected against for satellite installations,” Taggart told Radio World. “Our studios are 1,500 feet from an old MCI tower, at one time we had a metal screen behind our satellite dish to protect against ‘back-scatter’ from a path aimed away from us. Still, we had to convince MCI to shut down one channel so we could pick up a program from Premiere [a radio network distributing programming on satellite].”

Some industry plans propose registering C-Band satellite dishes, at a cost of $600-$1,600 per site, which would allegedly protect them from interference by requiring wireless broadband services to steer clear of the area.

“But I am not even sure what kind of broadband services are proposed,” Taggart said. “One might assume these would be omnidirectional sites, like a typical cell site. Even with some clever computer-engineered directional patterns, reflections off hillsides, billboards, buildings would be enough to overwhelm the tiny satellite signal. However, other articles described these services as ‘mobile.’ Even if my dish is registered, how can I resolve interference problems from a mobile device?”

The debate rages on because the frequencies involved, next to the even more popular CBRS band, are highly coveted.

4.9 GHz

After the events of 9/11 in 2001, the FCC has prioritized public safety communications, in hopes of improving the interoperability of different first responders’ portable radios. At that time, fire agencies could not easily talk to police, ambulance crews, or in some cases other fire crews arriving from different departments miles away.

Many agencies contemplating use of this band discovered equipment that supported 4.9 GHz was hard to find and extremely expensive. Most public safety agencies seeking grants or other funding to improve their communications equipment opted to transition to digital P25 networks that operate on much lower frequencies and use equipment that is now widely available and, in comparison, much cheaper. Many agencies are conservative about using new technology as well, concerned a communications failure could cost the life of a fire or police responder. As a result, of the 90,000 organizations certified for licenses in this band, only 3,174 have been granted. That represents a take rate of just 3.5%. The band, as one might expect, is effectively dead in most areas, underutilized in others.

“As the demand for wireless services continues to grow, it is imperative that the FCC takes steps to ensure underutilized spectrum bands are used efficiently,” said FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn. “This is as true for spectrum allocated to public safety as it is for the bands used to support commercial wireless broadband services.”

FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly is convinced wireless companies like AT&T and Verizon could use the frequencies more efficiently.

“It has been 16 years since the 4.9 GHz band was allocated to the public safety community, and it is still woefully underutilized,” said O’Rielly. “That is not sustainable in an environment in which every megahertz of spectrum, especially below 6 GHz, needs to be fully scrutinized and maximized in quick order. While the Commission’s original allocation was more than likely well-intentioned, it is way past time to take a fresh look at this 50 megahertz of spectrum.”

Although higher than 3.5 GHz, engineers believe there is a very credible case to be made to use the available spectrum for 5G fixed wireless services, delivering broadband at speeds up to 1 GHz from a small cell located nearby. It would have to be. At these frequencies, virtually anything blocking the line-of-sight between the antenna and the user will block the signal as well. With almost no constituency defending the 4.9 GHz turf, it is expected it will be repurposed for wireless broadband in areas where it isn’t in use for public safety communications.

24/28 GHz

Although the 28 GHz band has many licensed users already, the 24 GHz band does not, and the wireless industry is interested in grabbing vast swaths of spectrum in this band for 5G home broadband. Known as “millimeter wave spectrum,” these two bands are expected to be a big part of the 5G fixed wireless services being planned by some carriers. Verizon acquired Straight Path late in 2017, which had collected a large number of licenses for this frequency range. Today, Verizon holds almost 30% of all currently licensed millimeter wave spectrum, an untenable situation if you are AT&T, T-Mobile, or Sprint. T-Mobile has been the most aggressive seeking more spectrum to compete with Verizon in this frequency range, and has purchased almost 1,150 MHz covering Ohio for use with a 5G project the company is working on.

39 GHz

This band might as well be called “the controversial band” because AT&T made moves on these frequencies even before the FCC got around to discussing an auction for this band, likely also to be used for 5G fixed wireless. FiberTower originally held hundreds of licenses for wireless spectrum for several years, but did little with them, leading to suggestions the company was either hoarding the spectrum to resell to someone else or was incapable of deploying a network that used the frequencies. The company declared bankruptcy in 2012, eventually emerging in the spring of 2014 just in time to watch the FCC uphold the decision of its Telecommunications Bureau to cancel 689 of FiberTower’s licenses for failure to use them.

In February 2018, AT&T completed its acquisition of FiberTower for $207 million. According to AllNet Insights & Analytics, AT&T acquired more than 475 of FiberTower’s 39 GHz spectrum licenses, raising eyebrows among shareholders who lost their investments in FiberTower after it declared bankruptcy. Hundreds of the spectrum licenses that came with the AT&T deal were given a value of $0.00, allowing AT&T a sweetheart deal and shareholders hoping to recover more money from the bankruptcy liquidation extremely upset. In fact, had FiberTower remained in bankruptcy, it would eventually have surrendered all of its licenses, which would then be put up for auction by the FCC and would likely command much higher value among bidders. Verizon effectively paid triple the price for what AT&T got for a song in the FiberTower acquisition. Even more remarkable, the FCC approved the acquisition by AT&T despite the obvious fire sale price, and has ignored the consequences of what could come from an AT&T/Verizon duopoly across large swaths of 5G frequencies.

That brought a rebuke from Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) who accused both Verizon and AT&T of flipping public property for private gain.

“The FCC’s policies unambiguously required Straight Path and FiberTower to forfeit their unbuilt spectrum licenses,” Eshoo wrote. “But rather than auction the reclaimed spectrum and promote timely deployment, the FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau reached ‘resolutions’ with Straight Path and FiberTower than allowed them to profit handsomely from their wrongdoing. Following the ‘resolution,’ Straight Path sold its assets to Verizon for nearly $3.1 billion, and FiberTower is estimated to have sold its assets to AT&T for roughly $2 billion.”

In reality, AT&T acquired FiberTower for $207 million — a fraction of the amount of the estimated value of the spectrum Eshoo used in her estimate.

“The Bureau’s decisions also further concentrated critical input resources in the hands of the two dominant wireless incumbents,” Eshoo continued. “The purchasers of the public assets that Straight Path and FiberTower once held, Verizon and AT&T, already control a disproportionate amount of other critical spectrum available for immediate deployment. Up until recently, the industry had an imbalance in favor of these companies in low-band spectrum that lasted for decades. The FCC now risks going down the same wrong path with high-band spectrum should the Commission continue down this course. Allowing Straight Path and FiberTower to ‘flip’ public assets for private gain does nothing for taxpayers, but does much to further entrench the dominant incumbents’ longstanding spectrum advantage over their rivals.”

95+ GHz

The FCC has not regulated frequencies above 95 GHz, but as technology advances, there is growing interest in utilizing spectrum that many believed would be essentially unusable for communications services. Right now, most frequencies in this range are used by environmental satellites and radio astronomy. At these frequencies, signals would be absorbed by the skin and attenuated significantly by things like high humidity’s haze or fog. Still, there are proposals under consideration to open up a small portion of spectrum for unlicensed home users for things like indoor wireless routers.

The key policy priority here will be to protect existing users from any hint of interference. But with vast amounts of unused frequencies in this range, it shouldn’t be difficult to keep competing users apart.

PBS TV stations in smaller communities and secondary PBS affiliates and public stations in large ones are ending their free, over-the-air television broadcasts after decades of service because of politics, budget cuts and repacking the TV dial to give up more spectrum for wireless providers.

The most significant trigger for the impending closedown of several stations, especially those run from universities, is the FCC’s spectrum auction and reallocation plan, repacking UHF stations into a much smaller number of available channels, requiring stations to buy new transmitting equipment many cannot afford.

The original plan to repack television stations reassured affected broadcasters that the auction proceeds from the wireless industry auctions would cover the costs of the necessary new equipment.

Then Central Texas College, which owns and operates PBS affiliate KNCT in Belton, Tex., learned Republicans in Congress might appropriate only enough funding to cover 60% of the transition costs. The trustees that oversee KNCT, which serves central Texas, realized they would have to find roughly half of the $4.5 million needed to change their channel from 46 to 17 as part of the “station repack” and hope Congress would change its mind and reimburse the station.

That was money the trustees ultimately decided could not be found, especially as annual deficits at the station now average $500,000 — costs covered by the college.

KNCT general manager Max Rudolph, who has been in charge of KNCT for most of its 38 year history, said the station will now have to leave the airwaves.

“The board had to make a tough decision, but repacking was only the tip of the iceberg,” Rudolph said. “It’s economics — dollars and cents.”

KNCT operates with a staff of 15 — including five part-time employees, that take care of both the PBS TV station and KNCT-FM, which will continue on the air. The annual budget for the TV station was about $1 million, half spent on PBS membership and programming. Donors also provided around $160,000 a year.

KNCT-TV serves the Belton/Killeen/Temple/Waco, Tex. market, although KNCT’s signal struggles to reach into the northeastern part of its service area near Waco, where public TV station KAMU-TV in more distant College Station strangely provides a better signal.

The station hopes to continue operations through online streaming and on-demand shows kept on its website, but both require a subscription to internet service. For parts of central Texas, it represents the end of free PBS over-the-air programming.

Last year, Central Michigan University decided to accept a $14 million offer for satellite PBS station WCMZ-TV in Flint to vacate its current UHF channel and close down for good April 23, 2018. WCMZ-TV’s signal reaches as far away as Port Huron, Detroit and Lansing. But its intended market was Flint, which lacked local PBS service when the station signed on more than 30 years ago. Today, Central Michigan University still operates its primary station WCMU in Mount Pleasant, along with WCMV, which serves Cadillac and Traverse City, WCML, serving Alpena, Petoskey, Cheboygan and the Straits of Mackinac, and WCMW, which broadcasts to the Lake Michigan communities of Manistee, Ludington and Pentwater.

CMU officials are pulling the plug on WCMZ because, they claim, 99 percent of viewers live in areas that are now served by other public broadcasting stations. While cord cutters may miss WCMZ, cable and other pay television customers likely won’t because the service is expected to continue uninterrupted on cable and possibly satellite.

KMTP, San Francisco’s youngest multicultural public television station, is looking for a new home after selling its spectrum for $87.8 million in last year’s FCC auction. KMTP is licensed to Minority Television Project, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation, and serves the San Francisco Bay Area with non-commercial public television. KMTP broadcasts international programming in multiple languages including English and is not affiliated with PBS.

Its best chance to survive is dependent on an acquisition or arrangement with Poquito Mas Communications LLC, the licensee of low-power KCNZ in San Francisco, which is best known for carrying Creation TV, a Chinese language religious network. KMTP can either occupy several of KCNZ’s subchannels, or potentially buy the station outright. As a low power outlet, KMTP can hope to keep carriage on cable television, giving it perfect reception in areas where KCNZ’s low-power UHF transmitter cannot reach. But that means cord-cutters may have no access to the channel unless they live near the transmitter.

WUSF-TV, on the air in Tampa for 51 years, signed off late last year after the University of South Florida decided to liquidate the station for $18.8 million in auction proceeds from the FCC’s spectrum auction. The area’s larger PBS station, WEDU, has absorbed most of the programming that used to appear on WUSF, which now appears as a virtual subchannel on WEDU — unofficially called WEDQ.

Today, WEDU carries six different signals on its over the air digital channel: WEDU/PBS HD, PBS World, PBS Kids, WEDU+, Florida Channel, and Create TV. Many of these services are also available on cable television. But the original competing voice from WUSF is now gone.

WYCC in Chicago was the city’s second PBS affiliate, behind the larger and better known WTTW. Licensed by City Colleges of Chicago, the trustees decided to liquidate WYCC last year for cash as part of the FCC’s spectrum auction.

WYCC began its operations in 1983 with a message from President Ronald Reagan, congratulating the station for producing adult learning programming lacking on commercial television. WYCC first ended its PBS affiliation in 2017 and had one sole program provider, MHz Networks’ WorldView, when it ceased broadcasting on Nov. 27, 2017.

WTTW has sought to claim WYCC’s remaining assets and intends to place WorldView on one of its subchannels in the future. It already grabbed two Australian shows WYCC used to air:  “Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries” and “The Doctor Blake Mysteries.” All that will remain of WYCC are its “call letters,” which could possibly reappear when WTTW launches WorldView.

Dear Chairman Pai:

We write this letter to express our serious concerns that the map released by the Federal Communications Commission last week showing presumptive eligible areas for Mobility Fund Phase II (MF II) support may not be an accurate depiction of areas in need of universal service support.  We understand that the map was developed based on a preliminary assessment from a one-time data collection effort that will be verified through a challenge process. However, we are concerned that the map misrepresents the existence of 4G LTE services in many areas.  As a result, the Commission’s proposed challenge process may not be robust enough to adequately address the shortcomings in the Commission’s assessment of geographic areas in need of support for this proceeding.

MF II is intended to provide $4.53 billion in support over 10 years to preserve and expand mobile coverage to rural areas. These resources will be made available to provide 4G LTE service where it is not economically viable today to deploy services through private sector means alone.  Having consistently traveled throughout rural areas in our states, it appears that there are significant gaps in mobile coverage beyond what is represented by the map’s initial presentation of “eligible areas.” To accurately target support to communities truly in need of broadband service, it is critical we collect standardized and accurate data.

For too long, millions of rural Americans have been living without consistent and reliable mobile broadband service.  Identifying rural areas as not eligible for support will exacerbate the digital divide, denying fundamental economic opportunities to these rural communities.  We strongly urge the Commission to accurately and consistently identify areas that do not have unsubsidized 4G LTE service and provide Congress with an update on final eligible areas before auctioning $4.53 billion of MF II support.

In addition to Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the letter was signed by Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Angus King (I-Maine), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.).

The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee held a hearing on broadband infrastructure needs. The FCC’s wireless broadband coverage map was a main issue in contention. (Note, the hearing begins at the 30:00 mark.) (2:05:00)

CTIA, America’s largest wireless industry trade group and lobbyist, commissioned a research consultant to produce a six-page analysis that unsurprisingly concludes stripping some oversight responsibilities regarding cell tower placement would reduce the cost to deploy 5G wireless small cells by as much as $1.6 billion over the next nine years.

The Federal Communications Commission is currently considering industry-friendly proposals that would “streamline” and “modernize” the historic and environmental regulatory requirements for wireless deployments, exclude small cells from certain federal regulatory reviews, and put a strict limit on completing environmental impact reviews on new tower and antenna installations or else they will be automatically approved.

The Accenture analysis, produced at the request of CTIA, claims that it will cost an average of $9,730 for each 5G small cell regulatory review. But the report also states only 28-29% of installations will face this type of review. The CTIA implies it is much worse than that in its new 30-second ad complaining about regulatory burdens. That ad suggests 5G small cell “approval can take a couple of years.”

As the FCC ponders further deregulation of cell tower and antenna placement, wireless industry players are sharing their horror stories with the FCC to strengthen the agency’s likely  view that installation rules and oversight should be relaxed.

In January, Sprint complained it faced a demand to pay a $90,000 “tribal review fee” for six tower upgrades in the Chicago area. The company claims the towers were located in historic preservation areas, but not in areas of tribal significance. Sprint added in its letter to the FCC it only planned to install additional antenna equipment at those tower sites to increase capacity, not erect new towers.

The wireless industry is also lobbying to get cut-rate access to public infrastructure like street lights, on which it eventually plans to place 5G network equipment.

In states like California, AT&T has pushed hard for new legislation that would mandate cities and counties to give the company open access to public infrastructure in public rights-of-way or utility easements. In a 2017 bill before the California Senate, companies like AT&T would face a fee limit of $100-850 per small cell per year, indexed for inflation,

With multiple wireless companies prepared to enter the 5G marketplace, utility poles could get crowded.

Cities and counties may also find their right to object to what eventually ends up on their poles curtailed as a result of the deregulation effort.

CTIA’s new 30-second advertisement claims 5G small cells can be installed in about 90 minutes, but only after waiting years for a sluggish review process. (30 seconds)

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is under investigation by the Inspector General of the Federal Communications Commission after being alleged of improperly taking actions to benefit Sinclair Broadcast Group, while one of his colleagues, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, is the subject of an ethics complaint after allegedly violating the Hatch Act by openly advocating for the re-election of President Donald Trump.

Pai’s actions as head of the FCC under the Trump Administration have been under scrutiny by some members of Congress since last fall. Ranking Member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) signed a joint letter addressed to FCC Inspector General James Hunt last November requesting an investigation after they claimed Chairman Pai “has repeatedly refused to adequately respond to Congressional inquiries” on the matter.

Pallone and Cummings noted press reports that Pai specifically timed certain FCC regulatory actions to directly benefit Sinclair, seen as politically friendly to the Trump Administration and Republicans. As evidence, they included multiple examples of suspiciously timed regulatory changes that seemed to coincide with Sinclair’s business deals and the company’s lobbying efforts in Washington:

Sinclair-Bonten License Transfer Application

Chairman Pai rescinded a guidance in February (2017), effectively loosening the scrutiny the FCC’s staff applied to deals that could skirt local TV ownership restrictions by using a sharing agreement (effectively allowing Sinclair to control stations owned by another company). The FCC approved a deal three months later where Sinclair used several of these sharing agreements, potentially to circumvent the rules.

Reinstatement of the UHF Discount Rule

Press reports indicated in March, 2017, Sinclair was in talks with Tribune Media Company about a potential merger, but analysts remarked the deal would likely require the FCC to reinstate an outdated rule called the “UHF discount.” This rule, left over from the days of analog television and finally rescinded in 2016, did not count UHF television stations above Channel 13 the same as VHF stations (Chs. 2-13) when defining how many TV stations a single company can own. The theory behind the discount was that analog UHF reception was more difficult and, as a result, such stations were less valuable than their lower channel counterparts. But digital television largely erased that distinction because UHF reception has improved, TV stations can be “mapped” by digital tuners to any channel number, and, in some areas, digital VHF stations suffer more reception problems than UHF stations do.

Chairman Pai suddenly announced his plan to reinstate the outdated UHF discount rule the same month Sinclair began talks with Tribune. Sinclair announced its proposed acquisition of Tribune’s TV stations just two weeks after the FCC reinstated the UHF discount. If approved, the transaction would solidify Sinclair as the country’s largest TV group owner with a potential to reach 70% of the country, which is far in excess of the current 39% limit.

Next Gen TV (ATSC 3.0)

Sinclair has been one of the main proponents of the ATSC 3,0 (also known as “Next Gen TV”) transition, and its subsidiary holds patents that reports indicate could provide billions of dollars in licensing fees to Sinclair. Chairman Pai announced during his first full month in office a proposal to allow the TV industry to accelerate a transition to the new standard.

Since that time, the FCC has pushed ATSC 3.0 forward and the new technology has begun to be tested in the United States. Some consumer groups worry the new technology will be costly if consumers cannot afford or find converter boxes for existing televisions, although ATSC 3.0 proponents promise stations will continue to broadcast a Standard Definition version of existing TV stations for at least five years after the transition begins.

New televisions supporting the standard have already gone on sale in South Korea at prices ranging from around $900-$1,500US. The government is subsidizing TV station owners a minimum of $1.75 billion as part of a TV station repack that will precede the introduction of ATSC 3.0. But no subsidies will be given to consumers. Those buying ATSC 3.0 tuners or televisions will do so out of their own pocket if they wish to continue watching over-the-air stations. Sinclair will also get a royalty payment for each new television or tuner sold.

Main Studio Rule

The FCC voted last October to eliminate rules requiring a local broadcast station to maintain a physical presence in the market in which it operates. This means a station could deliver programming to a station’s transmitter from another city, with no local programming or personnel. This move would make Sinclair’s potential merger even more profitable by eliminating many of the costs of maintaining local stations, particularly labor and news-gathering costs.

Broadcast Ownership Rules

Chairman Pai plans to significantly change the existing broadcast media ownership limits. This would clear away virtually all remaining obstacles to Sinclair increasing its reach beyond the Tribune merger proposal and acquire still more television stations. Sinclair has carefully prepared for this eventuality by contractually obligating the new owner(s) of stations Sinclair is required to sell to remain under whatever ownership cap still exists to sell those stations back to Sinclair if and when Sinclair requests it.

According to the two Democrats, “all of these actions — when taken in context with reported meetings between the Trump Administration, Sinclair, and Chairman Pai’s office — have raised serious concerns about whether Pai’s actions comply with the FCC’s mandate to be independent.”

Pai’s critics are also concerned about the increased partisanship of the chairman and another Republican FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly. Both turned up at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Maryland last week.

The NRA’s “Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award” for Ajit Pai’s Assassination of Net Neutrality Includes a Kentucky Long Gun

When Pai arrived on stage to deliver a short speech, Dan Schneider, executive director of the American Conservative Union, which sponsors CPAC, took the microphone to introduce the FCC chairman.

“Ajit Pai is the most courageous, heroic person that I know,” Schneider said. “He has received countless death threats. His property has been invaded by the George Soros crowd. He has a family, and his family has been abused in different ways. Chairman Pai, thank you for everything you’ve done.”

He then turned the podium over to Carolyn Meadows, second vice president of the National Rifle Association, who surprised Pai with the NRA’s “Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award,” a rare honor given only to firebrand conservatives willing to push through their political agenda regardless of criticism or voter backlash. Pai was being recognized for ignoring the comments of tens of millions of supporters of net neutrality and pushing through a complete repeal of the open internet rules, regardless of the possible political consequences.

Previous award winners include controversial former Milwaukee Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr., Undersecretary John Bolton, who once threw a tape dispenser at a female government contractor and chased her down a Moscow hotel hallway, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, and Vice President Mike Pence.

The honor included a “Kentucky hand-made long gun,” said Meadows, who promised to store the gun for Pai at an NRA museum. That prompted a Tweet from the former director of the Office of Government Ethics, Walter Shaub, claiming Pai’s gun award likely violated federal ethics rules.

Anyone care to explain to me why the FCC thinks that the ethics rules allow Ajit Pai to accept the gift of an expensive handmade gun from the NRA, an entity whose interests he can affect (and has affected) by the performance of his official duties? Am I missing something? https://t.co/S6ocyWIV7H

— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 24, 2018

As criticism of the FCC chairman grew, Pai’s office sent letters on Thursday to both the NRA and the American Conservative Union declining the handmade weapon. Pai indirectly blamed the NRA, claiming his staff has asked at the event that the gun not be given to him. But the NRA came up with its own compromise, storing the gun until Pai left office.

“As you know, once my staff became aware of what was happening, they asked backstage that the musket not be presented to me to ensure that this could be first discussed with and vetted by career ethics attorneys in the FCC’s Office of General Counsel,” Pai wrote, an FCC source told Politico. “Therefore, upon their counsel, I must respectfully decline the award. I have also been advised by the FCC’s career ethics attorneys that I would not be able to accept the award upon my departure from government service.”

FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly Calls for the Re-Election of President Trump and Violates the Hatch Act

At the same CPAC event, FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly also managed to find himself the subject of controversy in response to a question.

Q. What can the FCC do to stop the constant “ping pong” of issues, like net neutrality, every time the party in power changes in the nation’s capital?
A. “I think what we can do is make sure as conservatives that we elect good people to both the House, Senate and make sure that President Trump gets re-elected,” O’Rielly answered.

Experts claim O’Rielly violated the Hatch Act, a law that prohibits employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president, vice-president, and certain designated high-level officials from engaging in certain forms of political activity. Telling the public to re-elect President Trump counts as a violation.

The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) already warned government officials so steer clear of President Trump’s already announced 2020 re-election campaign. In short, the Hatch Act “prohibits federal employees, while on duty or in the workplace, from expressly advocating for or against his reelection in 2020,” the OSC wrote in a guidance memo distributed to all federal agencies.

American Oversight, a group that monitors ethics issues in Washington, filed a formal complaint with the OSC against O’Rielly on Feb. 23:

“American Oversight respectfully requests that the Office of Special Counsel (“OSC”) immediately open an investigation into whether Michael O’Rielly, Commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), violated the Hatch Act during an appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference today, February 23, 2018. We do not believe this presents a hard question.

“Appearing in his capacity as a commissioner of the FCC, Commissioner O’Rielly improperly engaged in partisan political activity by expressly advocating for the re-election of Donald Trump
and exhorting the crowd to “elect good people to the House [and] the Senate.” Specifically, during the panel discussion, Commissioner O’Reilly delivered the following remarks:

“‘I think what we can do is make sure as conservatives that we elect good people to both the House, the Senate, and make sure that President Trump gets re-elected. But there’s another thing you can do. We’re going to have a fight over the Obama internet rules in the next couple months in the U.S. Senate. And that’s going to matter and that vote matters, and so making sure people take the right course on that, really does affect what policies we’re able to keep in place moving forward. So we can certainly use everyone’s help along those lines.’

“These remarks, made in Commissioner O’Rielly’s capacity as a commissioner at the FCC, constitute prohibited partisan political activity under the Hatch Act. As you know, the Hatch Act generally prohibits federal officials from engaging in partisan political activity while on duty. Advocating for the election of a candidate in a partisan election is the classic example of such prohibited activity.”

“The FCC controls our airwaves, the internet, and so many of the things we interact with every single day,” said Austin Evers, the executive director of American Oversight. “It should be independent, it should not be partisan, and bottom line, it should obey the law.”

Another group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is also reviewing the event.

“This certainly raises Hatch Act issues,” spokesman Jordan Libowitz told the Chicago Tribune. “[O’Rielly] is prohibited from taking part in partisan political activity using his official title or position.”

“The Young Turks” explain Ajit Pai’s attack on net neutrality and the award the NRA gave him for killing it. (7:16)