September 2, 2011
"The electromagnetic field is the perfect secret agent: you cannot
see it, you cannot smell it, you cannot hear it, and its effects are
slow but relentless."
Volter Hertenstein, MP Bavarian Parliament
I ask NWVs to post this column on a Friday because it does require
many hours of reading to fully understand the issue.
this new column is two parts as I'm trying, as I did in my first
column, to put as much credible information all together in one
place to make it easier for everyone fighting this new silent
killer. We're all pressed for time.
Thank you to everyone who sent
in reference material in our efforts to share the truth and what we
can do to stop this madness.
There is a major war being waged in this country, although you'd
never know it by the silence from
the old, disgraced media (ABC,
CBS, NBC) and all the cable "news" networks.
This new assault on our
bodies and privacy is over another relatively new piece of
technology that allegedly will save energy; it will also cost tens
of thousands of jobs for meter readers.
When I say millions of
Americans are up in arms over this, I am not exaggerating.
If you are unfamiliar with this issue, please read my
below first column
first on this to get a full understanding of how dangerous those
(above images) are and why you don't want one on your home or
It contains not only my battle against having one
installed on my house (update in Part II far below), but the very best expert
opinions from individuals who have studied wireless RF (radio
frequency) for decades:
My fight against the 'smart meter'
Since that column was published, my email box has been overflowing
with questions, which I will address as best I can in this column.
Hundreds of emails describe how people's health has suffered serious
deleterious effects after the meters were installed - before the
individual even knew about possible dangers to their health. When I
say utility companies are forcing this installation of those meters,
I am not exaggerating.
I know of one instance here in Texas where a
utility company installation man forced his way onto the person's
property and physically pushed the lady of the house multiple times
(in other words, he assaulted her) in his attempt to install the
meter after she told him she did not want the meter installed and to
get off her property.
I have spoken with her on the phone, but due
to legal reasons, cannot be more specific right now.
Wisconsin Utilities Bullying Customers Over Smart Meters
"The nationwide roll-out of transmitting radio frequency utility
meters, known as smart meters, has intensified since the federal
push and funding for them came through the Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009.
Wisconsin utilities got $21.5 million of the $3.4
billion awarded for smart grid projects, including meter
But people who are sensitive to the effects of
microwave radiation and electrical fields cannot tolerate the new
source of emissions. And some Wisconsin utility companies have been
bullying their paying customers who have resisted the installation
of smart meters, or requested their removal for health reasons.
"In fact, the chronic bursts or pulsing of smart meters have not
been proven to be biologically safe for anyone. Current federal
standards are grossly out of date, not taking into account the
growing levels of microwave radiation exposure people now get 24/7
from various sources.
Furthermore, FDA/FCC standards are based
solely on the heating effect of microwave radiation on a large,
grown man, ignoring numerous studies that point to other effects,
melatonin depletion, which affects
abnormal mast cell proliferation, which affects the
immune system and inflammation levels"
Here are just two examples from California:
Santa Cruz County Sheriff Wowak Enabling Illegal "Smart" Meter
"Despite Public Outcry, Sheriff Refuses to Enforce County Law
Banning Wireless Network
Santa Cruz, CA
"This morning at
approximately 7:45am, Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Deputies responded
to a "smart" meter protest at the Wellington Energy yard at 38th and
Portola in the unincorporated Opal Cliffs area of Santa Cruz County
where PG&E contractors Wellington Energy are based.
been installing wireless "smart" meters throughout the county,
violating ordinances in Capitola, Watsonville, and the County
that prohibit installations due to urgent concerns about health
impacts from the meters' wireless pulses, which have been measured
100 times the strength of a cell phone, as well as privacy
violations, ongoing accuracy issues and a series of fires and
explosions caused by the new meters.
"Thousands of people have submitted written health complaints to the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and in May the
Health Organization made an earth shattering declaration, that
non-ionizing radiation from,
...has been linked with a number of cancers.
meter radiation is now categorized as a
class 2b carcinogen in the
same cancer causing category as lead, DDT, and engine exhaust.
Nevertheless, PG&E continues to maintain that their meters are
Two More Arrested at Santa Cruz County Smart Meter Protest
Covering Logo on Trucks to Sneak into Backyards as Illegal
Santa Cruz County, Calif.
"Two people were arrested Friday
afternoon by Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Dept. for peacefully
blocking smart meter installation trucks as they attempted to drive
out of a yard in the Pleasure Point neighborhood of Santa Cruz
PG&E has stated that they do not intend to respect laws in
Santa Cruz County, Capitola, and Watsonville that prohibit wireless
meter installation - laws that were passed to protect the public from
identified health and safety risks from the new meters.
protesters who are affiliated with
StopSmartMeters! were charged
with misdemeanor obstruction, and released with court date in
Why are utility companies pushing so hard to install one of those
dangerous meters on every house, apartment, retail and commercial
building in this country?
Because of something called the $2
trillion dollar 'Smart grid' and BIG money. Advocates for the 'smart
meters' (especially those who stand to make billions of dollars
destroying your body) claim they save energy.
One State Attorney
General doesn't see it that way:
State of Connecticut - Office of the Attorney General George Jepsen
Jepsen Urges State Regulators to Reject CL & Ps Plan to Replace
February 8, 2011
"To evaluate the technical capabilities and reliability of the
advanced metering system, state regulators previously approved a
limited study of 10,000 meters. Between June 1 and Aug. 31, 2009,
CL&P tested the meters on 1,251 residential and 1,186 small
commercial and industrial customers, who volunteered and were paid
for their participation in the study.
The company reported its
results to the DPUC on Feb. 25, 2010.
"The pilot results showed no
beneficial impact on total energy usage," Jepsen said."
In addition to to the serious health risks from 'smart meters', the
other major issue people have is privacy.
Spring 2011 - Industry Week - Leadership in Manufacturing
"The demand portion includes how to control energy inside the
consumer space: smart meters on buildings, smart thermostats and
smart appliances, to name a few."
How to control your energy use in
your own home.
"In the initial stages of smart-grid development,
companies, governments and consumers have focused on changing
attitudes on the demand side, Geschickter says."
those who will control how much power is "allowed" into your home,
apartment, business. 'Smart meters' are nothing but surveillance
without a warrant.
Billions of Taxpayer $$$ Wasted on Risky Technology
"This is federal coercion on a grand scale. President
pushing to expose most U.S. citizens to constant radiofrequency/electromagnetic
radiation (RF/EMR) everywhere.
Wireless broadband sends RF/EMR
throughout an area rather than directly through a shielded wire or
cable to the electronic device being used.
everyone inside and outside of their homes and workplaces in over
98% of the U.S. to unprecedented levels and frequencies of RF/EMR
with wireless signals is a dangerous, unsanctioned, mass experiment
done without consent that must not occur.
This initiative risks our
finances, our health, privacy, cyber security, the ability of people
with medical device implants to function and more.
"If this radiation were a drug, increasing the dose and type would
not be allowed without thorough evaluation of safety because like
drugs, it can cause changes in the biology of the body. This
radiation promotes degenerative diseases and premature aging even at
levels of RF/EMR below FCC limits.
Numerous other risks to human
health from radiofrequency/microwave (RF/MW) radiation exposure,
particularly to children and persons with disabilities, at levels
below the current FCC limits are summarized in the review articles
published in the March 2009 issue of Pathophysiology that are based
on The BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-based
Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields - ELF and RF
"Many people who have developed a hypersensitivity to this form of
radiation and struggle to shield themselves from increasing levels
of this energy throughout the United States wonder where they can go
to escape from the widespread wireless radiation of this proposal.
Smart meters send and receive wireless RF/MW signals throughout
homes and businesses.
These smart meter RF/MW levels are far higher
than those already reported to cause health risks. Compliance is not
safety, since the existing FCC safety limits are under challenge,
and have already been called 'insufficient to protect public health'
by some federal agencies.
Device Malfunction Risk from Electromagnetic Interference
Wireless broadband RF/MW radiation can cause medical devices to
malfunction. Medical implants such as those to control the shaking
of Parkinson's disease are turned off by the electromagnetic
interference (EMI) caused by the signal.
Spurious RF signals are
already reported in published studies to interfere with critical
care equipment, ventilators, pain pumps, wireless insulin pumps and
other medical devices."
"Dirty Electricity tells the story of Dr. Samuel Milham, the scientist who first alerted the world about the
frightening link between occupational exposure to electromagnetic
fields, electromagnetic pollution, and human disease.
readers through his early years and education, following the
twisting path that led to his discovery that most of the twentieth
century diseases of civilization, including cancer, cardiovascular
disease, diabetes, and suicide, are caused by electromagnetic field
Health Concerns Grow
Consumers Are Getting Sick From Wireless Smart Meters. Last year, one state says no to 'Smart Grid'... for now...
Smart grid technology rollout stalls in Hawaii
Hawaii regulators scuttle plan for expanded rollout of smart grid
"Hawaii regulators have rejected plans for a broad
expansion of smart grid electric technology that would have been
paid for by residents and businesses.
Hawaiian Electric Co., the
state's primary utility, had envisioned a $115 million smart grid
project reaching 451,000 locations on Oahu, Maui and the Big Island.
But the utility's proposal fell apart when the Hawaii Public
Utilities Commission on Monday denied a request for expanded testing
of the technology on Oahu. The "smart grid" concept relies on
installing new electric meters that can wirelessly communicate with
the utility, allowing it to better distribute power and handle
additional renewable energy."
Maryland PSC Denies BGE's Stimulus-Funded Smart Meter Request
"The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) on Monday issued an
order denying Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.'s (BGE's) application to
deploy smart meters to all its customers because ratepayers would be
saddled with financial and technological risks.
The move "deeply
disappointed, frustrated, and frankly surprised" the utility,
because the smart grid project had received a $200 million federal
stimulus grant from the Department of Energy last October-the
largest amount awarded to a utility."
Some progress has been made regarding protecting your privacy (you
have to read my first column to get the facts on the mining of data
from your home and selling it).
Same threats I have received from Reliant Energy & ONCOR
Texas - Smart Meter Data Belongs to the Customer
March 17, 2011
"In Texas, lawmakers actually did something good related to the
smart meter debacle they included in the law that the data about
your electricity usage belongs to you, the customer."
Can the data still be harvested from third parties tapping into the
wireless transmission? I am told yes and it is happening.
After the cow is out of the barn:
California Decides on Data Access and Privacy Standards for Smart
"Many young companies have sprung up based on being able to access
consumers' Smart Meter data and package it in some meaningful form."
Smart Meters and Security: Locking Up the Grid
"Public utility companies are really hot right now for smart grids
- electrical grids that use Internet technology and special meters
to make energy delivery more efficient.
However, they're getting
static from both lawmakers and security researchers who say they're
dragging their feet in making sure their systems are secure.
"Despite reports earlier this year about spies penetrating the
computers that help control America's electrical grid, utility
companies appear to be slow in clamping down on security, and that
perception has led to a tongue-lashing from a House of
"U.S. Rep. Yvette Clarke (D, N.Y.) as accused the utilities of
exploiting a loophole that allows them to avoid complying with
Federal cybersecurity requirements. Also, a security researcher's
revelations of flaws in the smart meters utilities are installing
throughout the country added fuel to the fire."
That report was back in August 2009 and California has just now
gotten around to issuing guidelines regarding data mining? Lovely.
As I mentioned in my first column, several individuals got together,
pooled their money and hired an energy attorney to represent them at
a hearing in front of the Maine PUC (Public Utility Commission).
They won; here is the press release:
Additional Research Resources
Smart Grid: How Secure Will You Be?
The General Government's big propaganda site
LADWP Received $60 million for Smart Grid Project
Smart Meter Consumers Anger Grows Over Higher Utility Bills
The Smart Grid/Smart Meter Scam
Smart meters: California PUC issues sweeping data access
PUC Admits SmartMeter Health Crisis; Opt-Out Plan Falls
The Netherlands - Smart energy meter will not be compulsory
At the end of Part I above, I posed these questions:
Can you opt out of having a 'smart meter' in your state?
What if I already have one installed? Should I file a lawsuit?
Is there a state or federal law requiring a 'smart meter' be
installed on your home or business?
This mess is a complicated issue with states around the country
doing one thing while another is doing nothing.
One thing I have learned over the past two
decades from brilliant constitutional attorneys who have become dear
friends - never, ever go into court poorly prepared because the end
result is bad case law on the books.
We when feel threatened or harmed, the first inclination is to file
a lawsuit. But, due to millions of laws on the books at both the
federal and state level, one becomes frustrated and driven to
insanity by tracing one statute to the next from one bureaucracy to
Here in Texas, a lawsuit over the 'smart meter' failed
because of jurisdiction.
On Aug. 13, 2010, Texas Civil District
Court judge Lorraine Raggio dismissed a class action lawsuit against
ONCOR. That case was about new smart meters overcharging customers
Judge Raggio ruled that the Public Utility Commission of
Texas (PUCT) was the entity that had to be approached for looking
into and ruling on the accuracy of the meters.
There was another unsuccessful lawsuit filed earlier this year,
Cynthia Johnson vs. ONCOR, which had a lot of good arguments, but,
again, wrong jurisdiction. There is a central theme regarding the
'smart meter' onslaught which appears in the filings in the Johnson
The first I read about it was in the letter from ONCOR to me:
ONCOR's response to Ms. Johnson, they, of course, make the claim
there are no health risks involved, but also bring forward the pesky
little jurisdictional issue - page 18.
ONCOR falls under the
jurisdiction of the Texas PUC. On page 20, the discussion begins
regarding something known as PURA. As you can see on page one of the
letter to me from ONCOR, they talk about PURPA.
All of this revolves
around whether or not there is a federal or state law which requires
anyone to have the specific 'smart meter'. Now, I spent a
considerable amount of time researching this, including the law
cited by ONCOR in their letter to me, H.B. 2129, which uses the word
"encourages" not mandatory.
I also was sent this very valuable piece of comprehensive research
on this important question:
Smart Meters - No Federal Mandate
How about here in Texas? In ONCOR's letter, they site the previously
mentioned bill, H.B. 2129.
Please note this part of that law:
SECTION 6. Chapter 31, Utilities Code, is amended by adding Section
31.005 to read as follows:
Sec. 31.005. CUSTOMER-OPTION PROGRAMS. (a) This section applies to:
(1) a municipally owned electric utility;
(2) an electric cooperative;
(3) an electric utility;
(4) a power marketer;
(5) a retail electric provider; and
(6) a transmission and distribution utility.
(5) a program that encourages the deployment of advanced electricity
Encourages does not mean mandatory.
On August 29, 2011, my state representative, Jim Landtroop,
forwarded me email from Gabriel Cardenas, Legislative Assistant,
Governmental Relations Division, Public Utility Commission of Texas,
who opened his email with this statement:
As you may know, in 2005, the federal government passed legislation
that required states to consider the adoption of advanced metering
infrastructure (Energy Policy Act of 2005). That same year, the
Texas Legislature adopted law that encouraged the deployment of new
advanced metering technology.
The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) then established
standards for the features and deployment of the smart meters (PUC
Substantive Rules 25.130.
Consider and encouraged does not mean mandatory.
Going to the URL provided by Mr. Cardenas, here, one sees this on
page one for 25.130:
(d) Deployment and use of advanced meters.
(1) Deployment and use of AMS by an electric utility is voluntary
unless otherwise ordered by the commission.
So far, I cannot find any such order by the Texas PUC.
There is one other source I need to cite and wish to thank
Medina (who ran for Governor here last year against Rick Perry; I
voted for her) for bringing it to my attention:
Texas Utilities Code
- Section 39.107.
Metering And Billing Services
Debra was told by JP Urban at the PUC that Sec. 39.107 of the
Utilities Code provides the authority for installation of the meters
and in fact,
"he said, was the directive to install the meters."
Debra disagrees with his statement and after reading it, so do I.
Now, let's go back to page two of ONCOR's letter to me (image
above). They provide fine print stating they have the right to enter
a retail customer's premises to do this that and the other. I am not
a retail premise nor is my personal residence.
So, where do we stand legally?
Citizens in dozens of states are
fighting with their utility companies. They are sending letters
telling the utility company to stay off their property. They are
putting locks on their old analog meters so a utility company's
installer can't remove their old meter. They are spending money to
purchase kits ($299.00) in an effort to keep the 'smart meter' from
functioning the way it is supposed to when installed.
However, in my
opinion, the utility companies are going to find out and come after
the homeowner for tampering with their equipment and then the
homeowner will have even more legal problems.
First thing you must do is research the rules and laws set by your
state's PUC (Public Utility Commission).
The aforementioned lawsuits were thrown out because the plaintiffs
did not take their case to the PUC first. I can't tell anyone what
to do, but based on those couple of court decisions already on the
books, I would not recommend filing a lawsuit until you exhaust your
right to petition your state PUC and see what they rule.
retain legal counsel and ask others in your state to become
petitioners (see below).
There are a lot of lawyer jokes out there,
but when you're dealing with state bureaucracies where billions of
dollars (and political cloud is purchased by lobbyists), you
absolutely need qualified legal counsel to represent you.
Many folks are printing out some of the expert opinions listed at
the bottom of my first column and presenting them at city council
meetings to let folks know how dangerous those meters are.
as has been the case over and over in California with almost two dozen counties banning the meters, I'm afraid it's largely symbolic
as it all goes back to the PUC.
Out there, PG & E continues to
install those meters regardless of what city councils have voted
because they know the California PUC has jurisdiction. It's good to
attend a city council meeting and hand out a nice flyer with facts,
but the real fight has to be with your state PUC first while you
petition your state representative.
I recommend you write a snail mail letter to your state
representative (regardless if they're out of session or not) if you
have or are experiencing new health issues that did not exist before
the 'smart meter' was attached to your home. List your new health
problems. Tell your state representative that your legislature must
step up now and pass a simple law that says no citizen, owner of an
apartment building or retail or commercial building can be forced to
have one of those 'smart meters' forcibly installed.
You can print
out (or simply dump all onto a CD) the expert opinions provided at
the bottom of my first column and include it with your letter.
Putting it onto a CD is more cost effective and your state rep can
just pop it into his/her computer.
Politely remind your state rep
next year is an election year and do they want one of those
dangerous things on their home?
You can notify your utility carrier that you refuse to have them
install the meter, but, they can and will shut off your power.
As I said in my first column, the only reason there isn't a 'smart
meter' now attached to my home is I have locks on my six foot fences
and ONCOR can't get into the back yard unless I unlock the gates. At
this point in time, they have lied about access to our home, but
that will be addressed at our hearing.
Here in Texas, the PUC has a
law on the books that utility companies cannot shut off the power to
a home that has a disabled person residing there. That is the only
thing that has kept ONCOR from flipping the switch and turning off
my power because my husband has a long list of serious health
ONCOR was notified of this prior to their July 20, 2011,
letter via certified mail.
Of course, that didn't stop ONCOR in their letter; image two at the
bottom of the page where they threaten to 'suspend' delivery of
power to my home knowing full well they would be in violation of PUC
law. My case can be the second landmark case in the country. Texas
is a huge state compared to Maine as far as getting a favorable
decision for the rest of the country.
PUC's watch what other ones
are doing throughout the country.
If you read my first column, you know I have retained legal counsel
to present our arguments to the Texas PUC. My husband and I are
petitioners. Hiring legal counsel costs a great deal of money and
like many, John and I live on a fixed income. A few people have
come forward who are able to contribute financially to my case and
are now petitioners.
They have sent their checks in various amounts.
We are pooling those funds so the financial burden gets shared, just
as the folks did in Maine. Tommy Cryer is our attorney representing
us as petitioners. He will be filing for a hearing in front of the
Texas PUC. I am still gathering some documentation for him and
checking a few more things with the Texas PUC, so this isn't going
to happen tomorrow. We only have one shot at this so we need to be
If you would like to become a petitioner in my case as a few others
have done, please contact me by email: firstname.lastname@example.org and I
will give you the specifics as well as what we can expect as far as
the financial burden.
In the end, John and I will be responsible if
not enough funds are available at the end of the case.
But, the more
petitioners we have who can contribute financially to the legal
defense fund, well, the easier it will be for all of us. I have been
doing all the research so far regarding health issues and the
information provided above regarding laws here in Texas to cut down
on billable hours, but Tommy will have to do the legal part.
To date, the utility companies here in Texas (and elsewhere) are
simply picking people off one by one. The more numbers we have as
petitioners in front of the PUC, the more clout we will have and not
If you decide to join my case here in Texas and become a petitioner,
you will not have to appear at the hearing as Tommy will be
representing all of us. No hearing date is set yet, but all
petitioners in my case will be kept up to date as we carefully
If you live in the State of Texas, this case is very important and
can have a tremendous impact in other states.
We will have two
issues before the PUC:
Can any utility company in Texas force you to allow them to
install a 'smart meter' on your home against your wishes even though
there is no federal or state law requiring installation?
With the amount of expert opinions warning 'smart meters' are a
"ticking time bomb against human beings," I believe we can win this
argument because as far as I can find from all my research, there is
no mandatory requirement for the specific 'smart meter'.
This is all
about massive amounts of money for the utility companies and that
Your utility company installed a 'smart meter' on your property
without your knowledge and without informing you of the very real
Can the Texas PUC legally force the utility company
to remove the 'smart meter' and reinstall the analog meters (which I
have on my house? Can the PUC force the cost of such replacement
onto the utility company or will the people in Texas get reamed like
they did in Maine as discussed above?
If you are unable, and I do understand, to become a petitioner in my
case, perhaps you can make a donation that's comfortable for your
As long time readers of my columns and old newsletter
dating back to the mid-1990s know, I am always up front in projects
I undertake and for the rare occasion when I ask for donations,
every penny goes only for that project.
If you would like to make a
donation, which will be greatly appreciated, please send your check
or MO to:
Attorney at Law
7330 Fern Ave., Suite 1102
Shreveport, LA 71105
In the memo section, please write: smart meter defense fund