Click here for Adobe Acrobat version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

   May 4, 2009

   Mr. John J. Flinnigan, Jr.

   Associate General Counsel

   Duke Energy

   PO Box 960

   Cincinnati, OH 45201-0960

   Re: EB-09-GB-0029

   Mr. Flinnigan:

   The Federal Communications Commission notified you by warning letter dated
   May 6, 2008, that it had continued to receive complaints of harmful radio
   interference possibly caused by power line equipment maintained by your
   company. The interference was reported by:

   (name withheld)

   (address withheld)

   Cincinnati, OH 45251-2645

   Phone: (withheld)

   Email: (withheld)

   In that letter, you were advised that this problem, if unresolved, could
   be a violation of Commission rules and could possibly result in a monetary
   forfeiture. For this reason, we encouraged the parties involved to
   voluntarily resolve the matter without Commission intervention. The letter
   further stated, however, that should it become necessary for the
   Commission to facilitate a resolution, the Commission might investigate
   possible rule violations and address appropriate remedies, including
   monetary forfeitures.

   By letter dated January 9, 2007, you had responded to the Commission's
   August 11, 2006, letter indicating that Duke was attempting to locate the
   sources of reported interference. You further stated that Duke would make
   concerted efforts to work with Mr. Swallow to find the possible sources of
   interference and would continue to do so going forward. The record further
   demonstrates that multiple contacts were made between 2006 and 2007
   between Mr. Swallow and representatives of Duke Energy in an ongoing
   effort to find and resolve the problems.

   During the latter part of 2007 and into 2008, the licensee continued to
   experience interference and continued to contact Duke Energy to correct
   the problems. The licensee worked closely with the line crews to locate
   the sources to try to resolve the matter. Mr. Swallow went so far as to go
   out and attempt to locate several instances of noise himself. He provided
   that information to Duke. I am providing you with his suspected sources of
   noise as a starting point. They are as follows:

   sB K19-32E

   sB K19-33E

   sB K19-83C

   sB K19-85C

   sB K19-86E

   sB K19-179C

   sB K19-252C

   sB K20-372E

   sB J19-148C

   Given the fact this case has been ongoing for quite some time without
   resolution and Duke has had ample time to make the necessary repairs, you
   are directed to respond to the undersigned within 30 days of receipt of
   this letter detailing what steps you have taken to resolve the specific
   instances of interference listed above that are reported as being caused
   by Duke equipment.

   Likewise, given the fact that these sources were discovered by the
   licensee, not the utility, and should not be considered comprehensive, you
   are further directed to provide to the undersigned within 60 days of
   receipt of this letter a written report as to what steps Duke Energy has
   undertaken to locate and identify additional sources of interference and
   what steps Duke Energy intends to take to correct Mr. Swallow's radio
   frequency interference. Should the remaining interference problems not be
   resolved within those 60 days, Duke Energy will be required to provide the
   undersigned with a status update every two (2) weeks going forward as to
   what progress, if any, has been made to resolve the matter.

   If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at
   717-338-2577.

   Sincerely,

   Laura L. Smith

   Special Counsel

   Cc: Detroit Field Office

   Northeast Regional Director

   The Commission had previously notified you on August 11, 2006, of a
   complaint regarding possible interference caused by equipment operated by
   your company. Copies of both letter are enclosed for your convenience.