Category: smart meters

Public Hearings on Smart Meters December 13- 20, 2012

CPUC Holds Public Hearings on Smart Meters

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) will hold a series of five “public participation hearings” from Dec 13-20, 2012 to gather public input on the Smart Meter opt out program. Currently customers who want to retain or restore the analog meters are charged  “interim fees” to not have Smart Meters.

The CPUC judge Amy Yip-Kikugawa will preside over the hearings. This is an opportunity for customers to comment on cost and cost allocation issues: costs include customer impact; fees; billing overcharges; health costs; environmental costs; interference; fires or burnt out appliances following installation; banks of Smart Meters; and the need for community Smart Meter free zones, etc.

In your comments be sure to address cost allocation: Do you think it’s unfair that individuals should have to pay to protect themselves from Smart Meter radiation? Should shareholders, everyone, or individuals pay?

  • Hearings are free and open to the pubic.
  • They are scheduled to be 2 hours long.
  • Encourage politicians to attend. They will be allowed to speak first.
  • The length of time to speak will depend on how many people show up: The more people, the less time, for example 1-2 minutes. If hundreds show up the ALJ may ask for one person to represent and speak on behalf of a group of customers…”I represent #’s of customers.”
  •  There will be a court reporter and the public comments will become a part of the record in the Smart Meter consolidated proceeding (A.11-03-014)

BAKERSFIELD December 13, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. Bakersfield City Hall Council Chambers 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301

SANTA BARBARA December 14, 2012 at 3:00 p.m. County Administration Building Board Hearing Room, 4th Floor 105 East Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101

LOS ANGELES December 17, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. Junipero Serra State Office Building Carmel Room – Auditorium, 1st Floor 320 West 4th Street Los Angeles, CA 90013

SAN CLEMENTE December 18, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. San Clemente Community Center –– Ole Hanson Fireside Room 100 N. Calle Seville San Clemente, CA 92672

SANTA ROSA December 20, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. Steel Lane Community Center –– Dohn Room 415 Steele Lane Santa Rosa, CA 95403

Willits Man Refuses to Pay Extortion Fees to Retain Analog Meter, PG&E Threatens Power Cut

Despite the fact that the fees for keeping analog utility meters are still under legal dispute at the CPUC, and serious smart meter safety problems remain unaddressed, PG&E is now threatening to terminate service to its customers who refuse both smart meters and the contested fees.

Tom DeMarchi, a 68 year old Willits resident, has been told by PG&E that he must pay over $100 to retain his analog meter, or else he will have his electricity terminated today. Tom lives in an all-electric house, and although it’s a physical and financial hardship to have the electricity cut off, Tom is willing to live without it rather than submit to PG&E’s extortion fees.

Tom would prefer not to fight with PG&E. He is an environmentalist who pays his bills on time and has reduced his electric usage. He’s willing to self-read his analog meter, still an accepted practice in some areas where meter access is restricted.  However Tom refuses to pay a fee for nothing. He says,

“This is like the Mafia, extortion by crime bosses- Give us money and nothing bad will happen to you. This is wrong, and I am refusing to pay.”

PG&E is forcing customers to pay $75 initially and $10 a month to keep the analog meters, even though the fees are arbitrary and not based on any evaluation of costs. The cost issue is currently under evaluation at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and should be resolved by the spring of 2013.

One key question being evaluated by the CPUC is whether the fees violate section 453(b) of the Public Utility Code, which states: “No public utility shall prejudice, disadvantage, or require different rates or deposit amounts from a person because of ancestry, medical condition, marital status or change in marital status, occupation, or any characteristic listed or defined in Section 11135 of the Government Code.” The CPUC is also evaluating whether the fees violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Sandi Maurer, Director of the EMF Safety Network says that customers should not be charged to have analog utility meters. EMF sensitivity is widely recognized by medical and scientific experts, and is both caused and exacerbated by EMF and wireless radiation. According to Maurer:

“The CPUC and PG&E are failing their statutory obligation to ensure safe and reliable utility service at reasonable rates. The punitive fees are a desperate attempt to intimidate customers into keeping smart meters.”

Joshua Hart, Director of Stop Smart Meters! says that PG&E is going too far, risking alienating the public by cutting off services to bill-paying customers, when any proposed fee has not even been finalized by regulators:

“Arbitrarily cutting off power to our senior citizens just as winter approaches should not be taken lightly. PG&E has jeopardized people’s safety before and they are doing it again.”

Smart meter fires and explosions have been widely reported including several within PG&E territory.  In August, a series of 26 smart meter fires in Pennsylvania forced PECO Energy to halt installations, sparking inquiries in Washington D.C., Maryland, and Illinois.  Yet the CPUC has simply not investigated these fires, nor the thousands of complaints of health problems reported to them by members of the public.

It is unclear upon what legal grounds PG&E is terminating service for those refusing to pay the punitive fees.  Last year PG&E backed down under public pressure after terminating utility service to women and families who had their smart meters removed and restored with analogs.

Stop Smart Meters! and the EMF Safety Network collaborated on this coverage.

CPUC smart meter opt out testimony

On Oct 5, 2012 testimony was served in the CPUC smart meter opt out proceeding. On behalf of the EMF Safety Network I served the Testimony of Sandi Maurer. Here’s the summary,

“All customers should be allowed to opt-out of Smart Meters at no cost. Smart Meter opt-out costs should be paid by utility shareholders and/or shifting of utility funds. There should be no initial fees, no monthly fees and no exit fees. I believe that charging fees to opt out of a health and safety hazard is unlawful, and defeats the purpose of the opt out program which was to give utility customers a choice. Punitive opt out fees must be eliminated because they are unjust, unreasonable and in my opinion unlawful based on the Public Utilities Code.

The customer did not create this problem. The Commission, in concert with the utilities forced Smart Meters onto customers. They failed to fully vet the technical specifications prior to approval. They dismissed formal public opposition and continued to deploy Smart Meters and scrap analog meters.

Customer choice should be extended to commercial customers. Customers who have paid opt out fees should have their money refunded. Future costs of Smart Meter problems should be considered. Millions of Smart Meters are not working properly, and tens of thousands are failing and being replaced annually. Investigations on Smart Meter fires are currently taking place in three other states. The long term public health risk is a serious cost and liability issue, and health experts are advising against Smart Meters. A free opt out is an important step toward resolving these and other Smart Meter complaints.”

Six other parties in the smart meter opt out proceeding also served testimony. The Center for Electrosmog Prevention and Jeromy Johnson took a similar position as I did, calling for no fee opt out. Aglet Consumer Alliance called for a health and safety review and free opt out for customers with medical conditions. CLECA, an industry group, did not want business customers to pay more for the opt out program.

The District Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), who are a division within the CPUC whose mission is: “Our statutory mission is to obtain the lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable and safe service levels. In fulfilling this goal, DRA also advocates for customer and environmental protections. ” DRA did not recommend how opt out fees should be allocated.

In a shocking turnabout, The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a leading California utility consumer advocacy group who has encouraged its members to refuse Smart Meters on their homes since 2009, is now advocating Smart Meter opt out customers pay even more than the current “interim opt out fees “of $75/10 and $10/5 for CARE- low income. TURN testimony  Although it’s not clear what TURN recommended for PG&E customers, they sided with SCE and SDG&E in recommending individual customers pay all opt out program costs.

TURN recommends SCE customers pay $56 initial fee and $19 every month, and for low income $45 initial fee and $15 a month!  That’s $89 more per year, and $155 more per year for low income customers than the current proposed “interim” fees, which are already punitive! This is a major contradiction. I called TURN to discuss this, but the lawyer who worked on the case was out of town and unavailable for comment.

Criminal Investigation of Smart Meter Opt-Out Fees Requested in Maine!

The Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters filed a complaint this week requesting Maine’s Attorney General, William Schneider, open a criminal investigation into smart meter opt out fees.

The complaint alleges in order to avoid health and privacy harms from the detailed information gathering and radiation emitting meters, citizens are forced to pay extortionate fees. They request the Attorney General target Central Maine Power and the Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) in the extortion investigation.

Ed Friedman stated, “If I must pay to avoid actual harm or even the threat of harm, to myself, my family or my property that is extortion. The federal Hobbs Act defines it as: “…the crime of obtaining property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence or fear, or under color of official right.”

Maine has a similar definition for theft by extortion. With smart meters, the harm and threat of harm come from:

  • The emission of RF radiation known to create adverse biological effects;
  • The invasion of privacy facilitating warrant-less search and seizure of individual data by an agent of the government (utility acting under specific orders of the PUC);
  • The compromising of personal cybersecurity, and;
  • A taking of real property without due process of law or just compensation.

“In order to avoid these and other harms, we are forced to pay a coercive fee which if not paid leads to disconnection of electrical service by the monopolistic utility as well as adversely impacting credit ratings.”

The photos are from the Maine Coalition Day of Action protest this week.

 

National Day of Action: Health and Safety Advocates Say ‘Smart Meters’ – Not So Smart

From Maine to Maui, a growing wave of health and safety advocates are questioning the rush to install so-called “smart meters.” The wireless devices to track electricity use down to each appliance have been associated with health problems and house fires.

Today, nearly three dozen demonstrations were held across the country – including Washington, D.C., and Detroit – all to coincide with Grid Week, a conference of industry and government proponents of the “smart” grid.

Organizer Joshua Hart, with the National Campaign to Stop Smart Meters!, goes further – saying the devices are defective and should be recalled.

“The utilities are demanding that people pay a fee to keep their safe, analog meters, and we call that extortion. That’s unacceptable, and people have a right to be safe and secure in their homes – and that’s what today’s protests are about.”

Hart says problems with internal wiring and shoddy installations have been identified as the potential culprits in hundreds of fires caused by smart meters.

Smart meters emit strong bursts of microwave RF radiation that the World Health Organization has labeled as a Class 2B carcinogen. At the University of California-Berkeley School of Public Health, Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., says studies have shown that the meters expose people to significantly higher radiation levels than cell phones and WiFi.

“So, it seems to be highly problematic from a public health standpoint that we’re just rolling out millions and millions of these wireless meters, without fully understanding what are the potential health risks and figuring out how to reduce any potential harm.”

Utilities worldwide are moving quickly to install the wireless monitoring devices, saying the new technology will allow energy savings. However opponents question whether the data privacy and security concerns, as well as potential health hazards, make the technology as beneficial as claimed.

Smart Meter Free Sebastopol!

In solidarity with Stop Smart Meter groups across the US, health and safety advocates from the EMF Safety Network and Refuse Smart Meters, held signs, passed out flyers and waved to passers by on the four corners of downtown Sebastopol today. People responded with honks, beeps, and even a couple thumbs up were given as encouragement!

More information on all the demonstrations at www.actiondaytostopsmartmeters.org

“Smart” Water Meter or NO water!

City of Baraboo Michagan denies a request by an 80 year old widow and great-grandmother Audrey to keep her analog water meter and forces her to choose between a “smart” water meter or no water service at all.

On September 24, 2012 Audrey went before the City’s Public Safety Commission and told them she did not want a “smart” water meter for health, safety and privacy reasons, including that she’s experienced health palpitations in her kitchen, which she believes is caused by an electric Smart Meter that was installed on her home previously without her knowledge or consent.

The committee chair contends, that the “Smart” water meter is not a hazard for Audrey and he makes a motion to deny her request for an analog meter. Another member agrees, stating “I don’t see anything that’s harmful”.  The three member committee unanimously deny her request and then they confirm the timing when her “Smart” meter will be installed (in two weeks). The alternative is her water service will be turned off if she does not accept the new meter.  See the video: http://youtu.be/VfDdSCfsoqY

You can support Audrey by writing to City of Baraboo officials:
Mayor Mike Palm – mpalm@cityofbaraboo.com
City Engineer Tom Pinion – tpinion@cityofbaraboo.com
Utilities Supt Wade Peterson – wpeterson@cityofbaraboo.com
Alder Phil Wedekind – pwedekind@cityofbaraboo.com
Alder Tom Kolb – tkolb@cityofbaraboo.com
Alder Michael Plautz – mplautz@cityofbaraboo.com

In stark contrast to this situation, in Fairfield Iowa, City officials were making plans to halt the wireless water meters, and refunding customers any opt out fees they’d paid. According to the Fairfield Ledger article the “smart” water meters were transmitting RF radiation every 14 seconds.

NEW CA Smart Meter FLYER

Here’s an opportunity to spread the word!  A flyer is the best way to educate people who are new to the information. You can print this flyer on 8.5 x14′ paper, or find details on how to order color flyers from stopsmartmeters.org.

California Coalition to Stop Smart Meters, a new group formed to educate utility customers about the risks of Smart Meters, and to ultimately eliminate these hazardous devices from homes and businesses throughout the state, has produced a new flyer: Smart Utility Meters- Are They Smart For You?  This flyer is also available in black and white. 

This new flyer details the basic Smart Meter hazards: privacy, security, health impacts, risk of fire and more.