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

   August 17, 2009

   Mr. Creeden W. Huber, CEO

   Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Coop., Inc

   (address withheld)

   Wilcox, AZ. 85643

   Re: EB-09-GB-0014

   Dear Mr. Creeden:

   On March 16, 2009, the Federal Communications Commission notified the
   Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Coop. (SSVEC) that it had received
   complaints from (name withheld) that equipment operated by your utility
   might be causing harmful radio interference to his amateur radio
   equipment. (Name withheld)'s contact information is as follows:

   (name withheld)

   (address withheld)

   Cochise, AZ 85606-8531

   Tel: (number withheld)

   The March 16, 2009, letter advised SSVEC that the interference, if
   unresolved, could be a violation of Commission rules. For this reason, we
   encouraged SSVEC to voluntarily resolve the matter without Commission
   intervention. The letter specifically stated, however, that if it became
   necessary for the Commission to facilitate a resolution, the Commission
   might investigate possible rule violations and address appropriate
   remedies, including monetary forfeitures.

   On April 23, 2009, SSVEC responded to the letter. In its response, SSVEC
   indicated that it was taking (name withheld)'s complaint seriously and
   would make a concerted effort to solve the issue. SSVEC further noted that
   it was having a consultant, a Mr. Bruin, visit (name withheld)'s residence
   to attempt to identify and correct the radio interference. In addition,
   SSVEC noted that should Mr. Bruin's visit not produce a solution, SSVEC
   had contacted Mike Martin of RFI Services about possibly retaining his
   services. SSVEC indicated that it hoped to have (name withheld)'s
   interference problem resolved by the end of May. Commission records
   indicate that SSVEC did not report back as to the status of the
   interference matter at the end of May. Moreover, (name withheld) reports
   that there has been no reduction in the radio frequency interference.

   In order to avoid enforcement action on this matter, you have thirty (30)
   days from the date of receipt of this letter to respond to this office at
   the following address: 1270 Fairfield Road, Gettysburg, PA 17325. The
   response must contain a statement of the specific action(s) taken to
   identify and eliminate the source(s) of (name withheld)'s radio
   interference. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact
   me at 717-338-2577.

   Sincerely,

   Laura L. Smith, Esq.

   Special Counsel

   Enforcement Bureau

   cc: Los Angeles Field Office

   Western Regional Director

   Fines normally range from $7,500 to $10,000.