Click here for Adobe Acrobat version


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.



   May 22, 2009

   Mr. Ronald H. Rogers

   Vice President, Transmission Operations & Maintenance

   Tennessee Valley Authority

   1101 Market Street

   Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801

   Re: EB-09-GB-0038

   Mr. Rogers:

   The Federal Communications Commission notified you by warning letter dated
   August 20, 2006, 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)

   Clarksville, TN 37043

   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 September 13, 2006, you had responded to the Commission's
   August 20, 2006, letter indicating that the Tennessee Valley Authority
   (TVA) had repaired a lighting arrester on the local distributor's pole.
   After conferring with (name withheld), TVA concluded that the interference
   matter had been corrected and asked the Commission to close the file.

   During the latter part of 2007 and into 2008, however, the interference
   returned and the licensee continued to contact TVA requesting that they
   correct the problems. (Name withheld) went so far as to go out and attempt
   to locate several instances of noise himself. (Name withheld) currently
   believes the source of the noise is a splice in the TVA lines. I am
   providing you with his suspected source of the noise as a starting point.
   It is as follows:

   sB The splice is located between two poles. The first pole is located
   immediately south of Laurel Wood Trail

   Given the fact this case has been ongoing for quite some time without
   resolution and TVA 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 TVA 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 TVA has
   undertaken to locate and identify additional sources of interference and
   what steps TVA intends to take to correct (name withheld) ongoing radio
   frequency interference. Should the remaining interference problems not be
   resolved within those 60 days, TVA 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


   Laura L. Smith

   Special Counsel

   Cc: Atlanta Field Office

   South Central Regional Director

   The Commission had previously notified you on October 26, 2005, of a
   complaint regarding possible interference caused by equipment operated by
   your company. Copies of both letters are enclosed for your convenience.