Structure Report: Smart meter conflict of interest and cover up

www.briannarelle.com

Emails between utility giant PG&E and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) expose conflict of interest and cover up of skyrocketing smart meter bills.  The consultant the CPUC hired in 2010 to investigate the complaints, Structure, had worked for PG&E for the previous five years, and was not “independent” (as claimed in CPUC and PG&E’s misrepresentations).  CPUC President Peevey knew the results of Structure’s investigation long before it was complete, and shared that information with PG&E.  CPUC’s Peevey was aware smart meters were overcharging through personal experience.

The coordinated propaganda campaign between the CPUC, PG&E and marketing firms that resulted in the smart meter deployment couldn’t tolerate news such as the fact that 500,000 smart meters were at risk for overcharging in hot weather.  Peevey’s own bill doubled when a smart meter was installed on his vacation home, causing  him to joke about making The Sea Ranch a smart meter free zone.

The CPUC and PG&E used the Structure report to cover up smart meter problems, and to defend the deployment at the customers’ expense.  These emails suggest that returning to the tried and true analog meters is a viable remedy to avoid future skyrocketing utility costs, and that observant meter readers are a cost-effective way to ensure public and environmental safety.

READ MORE:  http://emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/structure-report-smart-meter-conflict-of-interest-and-cover-up/

PG&E threatens to disconnect 84 yr. old woman’s power for refusing smart meter extortion fees

SMARTcutoff100Santa Cruz CA- Utility giant PG&E is threatening to turn off the power to Lois Robin, an 84 year old woman from Santa Cruz because she’s refusing to pay “opt-out” fees for keeping an analog meter.

Lois MayaPG&E sent Lois a 15 day shut off notice in February, stating she owed $115. On Friday she received a message they will cut off her power today if she doesn’t pay.

Lois writes, “I have always paid all my bills, except the opt-out fees. I insisted on keeping my old meter. They did not give me a new one. I have been on record all along as refusing a smart meter.  I am 84 years old, with rapidly deteriorating vision. I would not want them to disconnect me as I get along poorly without light. Yet, I would rather they turned me off than pay their extractive fees.”

PG&E claims they have legal authority granted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to collect the fees.  Emails between PG&E and the CPUC recently made public expose collusion, cover-up, multiple exparte violations and the broken regulatory process by which smart meter opt-out fees were concocted.  Smart meter opt-out fees were fabricated between the CPUC and PG&E long before the evidentiary hearings on costs began.

For example, PG&E’s Brian Cherry, Vice President of Regulatory Relations, emails Marzia Zafar, a CPUC Program and Project Supervisor, that PG&E wants to eliminate the initial smart meter opt out fee of $75. He writes, “They never received a SmartMeter and therefore, we can’t really charge them an upfront removal fee since we haven’t removed anything yet.”  Cherry goes on to explain that PG&E also did not feel people who were forced to have a smart meter should pay either, because of the delay list was created after the deployment. Emails show Zafar was the informant to the Commissioners. CPUC President Peevey had an intimate role in deciding the fees. The CPUC ignored PG&E’s request to eliminate the initial fee. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Eliminate-initial-smart-meter-fee.pdf 

In 2011, The County of Santa Cruz passed an ordinance banning smart meters, but PG&E deployed smart meters anyway. Lois Robin is one of many, who refuse to be coerced into paying the fees. Lois says, “This has been very stressful. PG&E doesn’t listen to you. Talking to PG&E is like talking to automatons.”

CPUC President Peevey “There really are people who feel pain related to EMF”

In April 2010 the EMF Safety Network filed a CPUC application on smart meters. We asked for a moratorium, an independent technical review, evidentiary hearings on health and safety, and the right to opt out.

In December 2010 CPUC President Michael Peevey approved PG&E’s motion to dismiss our application.  He stated “I believe that relying on the FCC in this case is reasonable, prudent and fully consistent with our responsibilities to provide safe and reliable electric service to ratepayers.” He concluded his statements by stating, “You should take these concerns to the FCC, it’s the proper body.”

Nearly five years later 65,000 emails between PG&E and the CPUC have been publicly released. Emails reveal the collusion between CPUC and PG&E. They discussed the smart meter problems privately, violating their own rules of procedure.

In September 2010 Peevey emailed PG&E’s Brian Cherry on smart meters.  He did not say he thought we should take the issue to the FCC.

Peevey believed people were suffering from smart meters.  He believed PG&E should do something about it. However, instead of regulating the utility to ensure public safety,  he deferred his lawful responsibility to PG&E.

Peevey
CPUC President Michael Peevey, “There really are people who feel pain, etc., related to EMF”

Michael Peevey wrote, “One thought for the company: If it were my decision I would let anyone who wants to keep their old meter keep it, if they claim they suffer from EMF and/or related electronic-related illnesses and they can produce a doctor’s letter saying so (or expressing concern about the likelihood of suffering same). I would institute such a policy quietly and solely on an individual basis. There really are people who feel pain, etc., related to EMF,etc., and rather than have them becoming hysterical, etc., I would quietly leave them alone. Kick it around. And, it sounds like the company may already have taken this step, based on a couple of the comments at yesterday’s public hearing.

He writes, “If it were my decision”.  As the Commissioner assigned to the proceeding- it was HIS decision. Yet, Peevey defers his lawful duty to PG&E.  And he delayed on this case for years.

Peevey wanted PG&E to keep it quiet– didn’t want other customers, or the rest of the world to know there’s a problem with smart meters causing customers pain, etc.

You can find this email/quote here: ftp://ftp2.cpuc.ca.gov/PG&E20150130ResponseToA1312012Ruling/2010/09/SB_GT&S_0000529.pdf

Stay tuned for more EMAIL exposé! Yet to come: emails showing CPUC and PGE discussing alternatives to smart meters, including a phone line option. Email showing the CPUC stopped PG&E from giving small businesses an analog meter option, AND MORE!

PG&E hands over even more emails

deathmeterEvidence of smart meter corruption

PG&E has handed over another batch of emails that expose days long meetings between PGE’s Brian Cherry and CPUC president Michael Peevey.   Peevey provides information, direction and advocacy on utility projects, instead of regulating PG&E to protect the public to ensure safe utility service.

The majority of the emails are about Oakley Power Plant, a windmill project called Manzana and San Bruno.  However one small section gives a peek into Michael Peevey’s intentions on smart meters.

On July 2, 2010 PGE’s Brian Cherry wrote to Tom Bottorff about having spent a “good few days with Peevey and Bohn” (former Commissioner).  Cherry’s description of what took place included smart meters.

“SmartMeters-Mike grumbled about the CCSF PFM* and the folks in Sebastopol who want to delay SmartMeter implementation. He implied that this wasn’t going to happen and that by the time the Commission got around to acting on it, we would have installed all of our meters.”

Exhibit 2 SmartMeter Upgrade Proceeding A.07-12-009 link to the emails:  PGE Letter to Mr. Sullivan Exhibits 1 – 17_ 12-22-14

Click to see the screen shot:

Screen shot 2014-12-28 at 10.35.39 AM

The “folks in Sebastopol” are the EMF Safety Network.  We had a formal proceeding before the Commission in 2010 asking for a moratorium on smart meters.  A.10-04-018. President Peevey dismissed that proceeding deferring authority to the FCC. * CCSF is the City and County of San Francisco who asked for a moratorium, and illustrated smart meter problems. http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/EFILE/PM/119424.PDF

The Structure Report was issued two months after Cherry wrote about this, and its conclusions were the same as Cherry reported, smart meters were claimed to be accurate, and PGE was faulted for how they handled smart meter problems.

Peevey has done exactly what Brian Cherry said he implied.  Peevey dismissed and ignored the substantive issues, created a pay to opt out program, and delayed… meanwhile PGE installed almost all their  smart meters.  The utilities forced smart meters onto property without consent and without honest disclosure of how the meters work.

Wasn’t that just our experience?

PG&E forcing smart meters on customers!

Tearing down signs, and installing ahead of schedule!

CPUC ignoring cities and counties requests for a moratorium and safety studies!

CPUC and PG&E ignoring local laws that banned smart meter installation!

CPUC ignoring the science!  ignoring doctors requests! ignoring disability rights!

Charging punitive fees to avoid smart meters!

Not allowing communities to decide! Not allowing businesses a choice!

Excluding health and safety from the smart meter opt out proceeding!

More from the email:

“He [Peevey] was concerned about the Structure SmartMeter Audit.  He said he could not go into details, but that we would like their conclusions on the viability of the technology and infrastructure that supports it. He did say the Structure Audit report would be very critical of the way we handled the problem and communicated with our customers. He was also highly critical of Helen and her handling of the Senate hearing in Sacramento.”

“Miscellaneous- Mike couldn’t hide his disdain for Mark Toney and TuRN. He was particularly incensed, along with Clanon, about TURN’s refusal to modify their website about opposition to Smart Meters.  I’m not too concerned about TURN and the GRC at this point. I don’t believe we need them as a settlement partner with Peevey as the assigned Commissioner….”

This is the stuff of crooks!

CPUC approves extortion smart meter fees

What really happened at Peevey’s last CPUC meeting

Screen shot 2014-12-22 at 12.23.22 PM
Peevey’s last meeting: Reading of names and smart meter victim complaints the CPUC is ignoring.

IMG_5384Before noon on Dec.18, a Bay City News reporter published  a rare media account of Peevey’s last meeting at the CPUC titled “San Bruno blast: PUC’s Peevey presides over final meeting, receiving scorn and praise”.  During untimed public comments 30 speakers droned on with accolades for his twelve years at the CPUC, one calling him the “greenest Commissioner”.  After a couple hours the scorn began.  21 speakers had signed up to speak, most on smart meters.  Robert Ernst read the names and smart meter complaints told to the CPUC judge at public hearings. (see video below)

Within hours the news article covering the scorn was censored, and almost all mention of smart meter opposition inside the CPUC meeting was removed. Here’s what was taken out:

“Armed police guarded the meeting, which at one point was interrupted by shouts when it appeared that Peevey intended to adjourn the meeting before all members of the public had a chance to speak.

“Be quiet,” Peevey told those who were shouting. Eventually, Peevey decided to continue the meeting through lunch and speakers continued to offer comments.

Numerous people offered opposition to the controversial PG&E smart meter program.

Robert Ernst of San Rafael offered Peevey “a dark rose for dark times” that he claimed smart meters pose for California. People held up signs that read “Listen to the Smart Meter injured.

“The PUC is clearly a captured  agency, working on behalf of, and in collusion with, the utility it is supposed to be regulating,” said Sandi Maurer.”

IMG_5344IMG_5352Prior to the meeting we met on the steps of the CPUC in protest. The grim reaper held a wireless kills sign, black roses were handed out and a smart meter victims coffin was raised.

 

IMG_5367_2_2

The alternate smart meter decision is APPROVED

After a lunch break, the CPUC approved Peevey’s alternate decision, which charges opt out fees of $75 initial fee and $10 a month ($10 and $5 for low income) for no more than three years. The decision excluded health and safety and disallowed community and business opt out. The Commissioners did not discuss it, only offered gratuities to those involved.

Thanks to everyone who coordinated the actions and participated, and to Steve Zeltzer for the following video:

PG&E denies smart meter fires

Despite evidence that smart meters cause fires and explosions, in the following Stop Smart Meters video, a PG&E spokesperson says, that of all the nine million smart meters deployed in California PG&E has no reports of smart meters causing fires.

KO says a smart meter exploded-with a pop-pop-pop, flames and a big KABOOM- on her house.  She has pictures showing the fire damage.

BurnedSMIn Bakersfield, media reports a smart-meter blows up at a business. The PG&E technician told the employee that he had replaced at least 15 meters around town due to the same problem.

Mr. Patrick Wrigley, a former PG&E meter reader told a Public Utilities Commission judge that he was fired because he was not wiling to be quiet about the smart meter problems he saw.  He said, “These meters catch fire. They know it, and they are covering it up.”

The Berkeley fire department reported finding a smart meter “… hot to touch and smoking, with a orange glow inside the meter housing”.

IMG_2199Ms. Moskow, a PG&E customer stated,  “I had terrible electric problems in my house once the smart meter was installed,  fire coming out one of the outlets, many outlets not working.”

Two California fire department captains contacted the EMF Safety Network to report fire hazards associated with smart meters.  We also know that PG&E settled out of court in a wrongful death suit where Larry Nikkel lost his life in a smart meter fire.

In January of 2010 PG&E admitted smart meters interfered with GFI’s and AFCI’s which are devices designed to protect from shock and fire. More smart meter fire stories here: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?page_id=1280

Fires related to smart meters are reported in California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Pennsylvania, Texas, Australia, and Canada.

Mass tort lawsuit filed over smart meter health injuries

gavel-judgementAttorneys David Kyle and Paul Overett have filed a mass tort lawsuit against two California utilities:  Southern California Edison (SCE) and Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for health damages from exposure to smart meters, and or smart grid.  Also named in the lawsuit are smart meter installer companies, Corix and Wellington and smart meter manufacturers, Itron and Landis and Gyr, with possibly more defendants to be added as the lawsuit progresses.

Attorney David Kyle has previously won a small claims lawsuit against SCE over smart meter installation, and  settled with PG&E in a wrongful death suit involving an alleged smart meter fire.

Sixteen plaintiffs, ten SCE customers and six PG&E customers allege they suffered health effects ranging from headaches, insomnia, chronic fatigue, ringing in the ears, dizziness, heart palpitations, to heart attacks and medical implant interference from exposure to smart meters.

The suit alleges the defendants withheld important safety information associated with the use of smart meters as well as multiple violations of CA laws, including California Civil Code section 1710 which defines deceit as an untrue assertion or suppression of a fact so as to mislead.

Plaintiffs allege negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud and deceit, and products liability.

Elizabeth Barris, organizer for the lawsuit invites customers from other California utilities, including municipally run utilities, whose health has been effected by smart meters or smart grid to join the lawsuit. Elizabeth can be contacted at 310-281-9639 or email: contact@thepeoplesinitiative.org

Copies of the filed complaints can be found at: http://www.citizensforaradiationfreecommunity.org

Video introduction to the lawsuit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vln-uuu_aI