North Carolina: Experts support public objection to Duke Energy Smart Meters

From the News & Observer

Duke Energy proposes $150 opt-out fee to customers who don’t want a smart meter
August 3, 2016

A meter reader reads a customer’s electric meter and keys the information into a handheld computer. Duke Energy wants customers who don’t want a smart meter to pay a $150 one-time fee and $11.75 a month to cover the costs of manual meter reading. News & Observer file photo

Posted under Fair Use Rules

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on North Carolina: Experts support public objection to Duke Energy Smart Meters

Illinois: ComEd may seek extension to deadline requiring Smart Meters for all customers

Smart Meters are mandated in Illinois.

The cumulative time of transmissions which ComEd rep McMahan gives in the article below — 5 minutes over a 24 hour period — is much higher than many meters. These transmissions are very brief pulses. If each pulse is 2/1000 of a second, that would be about 150,000 pulses every day, throughout the day.

150,000 DNA-damaging, carcinogenic, blood-brain-barrier disrupter, hormone-altering RF pulses from each and every Smart Meter around you hitting your body and your children’s bodies during the day and at night while you sleep.

One of the many resources on this radiation’s effects is this review of literature by an expert panel in Oregon, led by physician Paul Dart. https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2013I1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/42624

Readings must be done by a qualified person with the appropriate RF measuring device. Some devices cannot pick up the very short Smart Meter pulses, making a false reading very possible.

Compare any readings to levels at which health or biological effects have been found. Here is one table.
http://www.electromagnetic-pollution.com/main/page_biological_effects_exposure_tables.html

Other emission comparisons for Itron and Landis & Gyr Smart Meters are here:
http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/ http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=429

And then there’s the fire risk…

From the Chicago Tribune

ComEd representative says smart meter deadline may be extended
August 2, 2016
Kevin Beese

Area homeowners not keen on having a Commonwealth Edison smart meter in their home due to health concerns or any other issue may get longer to keep the power company at bay.

As it is written, Illinois law requires that all homeowners in the ComEd coverage area must have a smart meter one year after the completion of the smart meter installation program, right now slated for .

A representative of ComEd says that deadline may now be extended.

Speaking at the Darien City Council meeting Monday Michael McMahan, ComEd’s vice president of automatic meter infrastructure implementation, said the company will be filing a petition later this month with the Illinois Commerce Commission, seeking to push back that deadline.

McMahan said smart meters were mandated by the state legislature because they make providing electric service more efficient by eliminating the need for meter readers and giving homeowners the opportunity to monitor their power use.

“This was a state initiative approved by a super majority,” McMahan said.

He noted that only 0.1 percent of the 2.4 million ComEd customers in areas where smart meters have already been installed have opted to delay the installation.

Burr Ridge resident James Holderman has spent 700 hours studying the radio frequency radiation emitted from smart meters. His research and concerns led the Burr Ridge Village Board in June to pass a resolution encouraging ComEd to provide a permanent opt-out option from the smart meter program.

Holderman has argued that since the smart meter legislation was passed in 2011, significant studies, analysis, papers, letters and articles have been published that support the evidence of the health risks posed by exposure to radio frequency radiation.

“Further, it is now clearer than ever that these risks extend well beyond cancer,” Holderman said. “The most troubling aspect of the risk profile coming into scientific focus is the significantly greater risk to the unborn, babies, and children from exposure to radio frequency radiation.”

McMahan countered that the power company’s smart meters are well below Federal Communications Commission guidelines for radio frequency. He said at most a smart meter is sending out five minutes of radio transmissions over an entire day.

“That is significantly less than other devices people use every day, such as cellphones, microwaves and WiFi,” McMahan said.

McMahan did not give any indication what kind of smart meter deadline extension ComEd will be proposing to the Illinois Commerce Commission. He said a lot can change in the 3 ½ years between now and December 2019.

Homeowners who opt to delay the smart meter installation when the meters are installed in their neighborhood must pay a monthly charge of $21.53.

That is to recoup some of the $2 billion in savings that ComEd would not receive and additional charges, such as having a person read that meter manually, according to the company representative.

McMahan said that 60 million smart meters have been installed across the country. He said he has heard the health concerns from people and noted that those concerns are the number 1 reason people delay the installation.

He said he has reviewed the studies, but sees nothing in any study showing the small amount of radio frequency transmitted by smart meters being a health hazard.

McMahan offered for the company to take radio frequency readings at any smart meter in Darien to show the low levels of radio frequency waves being transmitted, Third Ward Ald. Joseph Kenny said he would welcome readings being done at his residence.

Holderman feels too much scientific data about radio frequency waves is out there to force ComEd customers to install the smart meter in their homes.

“The possibility of cancer, tumors, lower birth weights in offspring and autism or ADHD in children from the radio frequency radiation emitted from smart meters should never be forced upon people by a monopoly or a state, and all the more, when ‘monitor’ and ‘control’ are stated goals,” he said.

“The very reasonable request of a permanent ‘opt out’ from smart meters is, in my mind, a litmus test for government-supported corporate tyranny.”

*Kevin Beese is a freelance reporter for Pioneer Press*.

Copyright © 2016, Chicago Tribune <http://www.chicagotribune.com/&gt;

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/burr-ridge/news/ct-dbr-darien-smart-meters-tl-0804-20160802-story.html

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Illinois: ComEd may seek extension to deadline requiring Smart Meters for all customers

San Jose Mercury: PG&E leniency demands explanation

PG&E had taken money from ratepayers for gas pipeline maintenance and instead used it for shareholder dividends and executive bonuses. These are facts.

San Jose Mercury News
August 2, 2016

The federal attorneys who so effectively prosecuted the criminal case against PG&E owe the public, particularly San Bruno residents, an explanation for suddenly recommending leniency if the utility is convicted.

The U.S. attorney’s office is declining to comment on why it decided to drop 99 percent of the possible fines the utility faced for its role in the September 2010 explosion. This would take the potential penalty down to $6 million. For a company the size of PG&E — which recorded an $888 million profit last year — that’s petty cash.

Eight people died in San Bruno. Thirty-eight homes were destroyed. PG&E had taken money from ratepayers for gas pipeline maintenance and instead used it for shareholder dividends and executive bonuses. These are facts.

The jury is now deliberating. If PG&E is convicted of the charges, it deserves the maximum fine of $562 million.

Speculation is that federal prosecutors want to cut short the penalty phase of the trial, which would follow a conviction. With $562 million at stake, it would eat up enormous amounts of their time and money as well as PG&E’s. Making the fine inconsequential would cut things short for sure.

But a slap on the wrist after all this time would not discourage utilities from taking shortcuts at the expense of public safety. Did we mention PG&E’s $888 million profit last year?

PG&E was charged with 12 felony violations of laws that required it to identify risks to its pipeline operations and keep accurate records on conditions of the lines. It also was charged with obstructing the federal investigation.

PG&E’s history of record-keeping is horrible. For example, a key point of contention at the trial was whether the utility had adopted a policy of allowing gas pipeline pressure to go 10 percent above the legal maximum. Federal law requires utilities to classify this as high-risk. PG&E originally produced a memo saying it had adopted the policy, then said that was a only a draft of a policy that had not been implemented. Who knows what’s true?

A supervising engineer in pipeline risk management for PG&E, Calvin Lui, testified that the utility was aware of wide-ranging threats to its pipelines but failed to tell state regulators about manufacturing defects.

He also said “the pipeline codes tended to conflict and confused us.” But the rules seem clear that pressure tests or inspections are required on any pipes in which the maximum pressure has been exceeded. That didn’t happen.

Prosecutors argued that PG&E committed felony violations of the law in one of the worst utility disasters in American history. Backing off on the penalty is confusing to survivors, the public and to utilities watching for signals of accountability.

The U.S. attorney’s office should restore the full penalty request. If it doesn’t, at least tell us why.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_30202946/mercury-news-editorial-pg-e-leniency-demands-explanation?source=pkg

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on San Jose Mercury: PG&E leniency demands explanation

Prosecutors ripped after slashing potential PG&E San Bruno fine by 99 percent

From CBS, Sacramento
August 3, 2016

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – A surprising decision by federal prosecutors in San Francisco to drop their pursuit of a potential $562 million fine against one of the nation’s largest utilities after a deadly pipeline blast marked the second time in recent months that the office has backed down in a high-profile criminal case against a major corporation.

The decision Tuesday involving Pacific Gas & Electric Co. came weeks after the U.S. attorney’s office abruptly abandoned drug trafficking allegations against shipping giant FedEx during a trial.

The apparent misfires have raised concerns among legislators and legal observers about the performance of the office.

“It is so unbelievable that the U.S. attorney doesn’t have either the confidence or the faith in their work to be able to defend the charges that they originally made,” State Sen. Jerry Hill said about the decision to pursue a lower penalty against PG&E. Hill’s district includes San Bruno, the scene of the pipeline blast.

The setbacks more broadly indicate “the office is not adequately planning and investigating its corporate cases before trial,” added Brandon Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who studies corporate crime.

Criminal prosecutions of corporations rarely go to trial and are more often settled through plea deals or agreements.

Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said corporate criminal prosecutions are high stakes and usually involve skilled defense attorneys, making them difficult to win.

Prosecutors sought a court order Tuesday allowing them to seek a lower fine against PG&E if the company is convicted of violating pipeline safety regulations and obstructing investigators.

The 2010 blast sent a giant plume of fire into the air, killing eight people and destroying 38 homes in suburban San Bruno.

Prosecutors did not explain their decision, which came after more than a month of testimony at trial and as jurors deliberated for a fourth day on 11 counts of safety violations and one count of obstruction.

The judge who later granted the request also provided no explanation. His ruling reduced the maximum fine PG&E could face to $6 million.

Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, whose district also includes San Bruno, said he was shocked to hear about the lower penalty and wants to hear more details about the decision.

“Until we know the rationale, the victims’ families, residents of San Bruno and current PG&E customers everywhere are likely to feel that their concerns are being ignored,” Mullin said.

The potential $562 million fine was double the amount of money prosecutors said PG&E saved by skirting pipeline safety requirements. The utility argued in a court filing that determining any savings would be complicated and unduly prolong a possible penalty phase of the trial if jurors return guilty verdicts.

Hill speculated that the U.S. Department of Justice may have seen PG&E’s filing and decided it didn’t want to spend more money by going to a second phase of the trial.

California regulators previously fined the utility $1.6 billion for the 2010 blast.

Prosecutors may have been concerned that jurors could get angry and side with PG&E because of the amount of damages sought and the time jurors would have to serve during a penalty phase, said Robert Weisberg, a criminal law professor at Stanford University.

“There were various things that the government could have rationally accomplished, and it seems like the government either hadn’t thought it through very well or its motivation shifted during the trial,” he said.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office said Wednesday it could not comment on the PG&E decision during ongoing jury deliberations. It declined immediate comment on its handling of corporate prosecutions.

U.S. Attorney Brian Stretch previously said his office will investigate the FedEx prosecution for any lessons that can be applied to future cases.

That case – nearly two-years in the making – accused FedEx of shipping prescription drugs that it knew were illegal to dealers and addicts, some of whom died. But days into the trial, prosecutors moved to drop the charges, again without explanation.

Copyright 2016 The Associated Press.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/08/03/prosecutors-ripped-after-slashing-potential-pge-san-bruno-fine-by-99-percent/

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Prosecutors ripped after slashing potential PG&E San Bruno fine by 99 percent

Arizona overbilling problems: ‘I couldn’t believe it…how could it be that high?’

Notice the utility company uses the term “concerns” which has no legal standing and downplays the real issues he is raising.

But importantly, the utility company admits overbilling is a widespread problem. “Many of our customers…have similar concerns.” Customers should contact the news channel as well as their local officials if they have higher than normal bills.

Will TEP refund the extra charges to this customer?

From News 4 Tucson, KVOA

N4T Investigators: Meter mess
August 2, 2016
Written By Matthew Schwartz

Tucson – “I couldn’t believe it, and it was like, how could it be that high?”

That was Brian Grundhoefer’s reaction upon seeing his June bill from Tucson Electric Power, for $276.42. The average bill for his small foothills home is about $75.  So he says he turned up the thermostat from 78 to 80 degrees. Then the July bill came, for $372.75, almost $100 higher than the previous month. Yes, both months were very hot, but Grundhoefer says he did not use nearly that much more electricity.

Grundhoefer said, “There’s no way I can be sure, not being an electrician. You know? But I didn’t change my lifestyle, whatsoever.”

Grundhoefer told TEP he thinks the meter malfunctioned and wanted them to come out and test it.  TEP’s usually policy is if they come out to test a meter and find it’s broken, there’s no charge. But if the meter’s working, the customer has to pay $186 for the test.

The News 4 Tucson Investigators met with TEP spokesman Joe Barrios. We said, ”So the customer is really just taking a gamble of paying that money depending on what your guys find, right?  They don’t know in advance if they’re going to find something wrong or not.”

Barrios said, “Well, certainly no, but that’s why it’s important for customers to talk to us about their energy usage.”

Grundhoefer, a 70 year-old widower living on a fixed income, declined to pay for the meter test, and paid his high bills for June and July.

We said to Barrios, “You have to admit that this is a huge disparity, right? From an average of 75 dollars a month to 375?” Barrios said, “Well, I would say that it’s certainly worth a look by our employees.”

Barrios says it’s unlikely that Grundhoefer’s digital meter malfunctioned. However, soon after we told him about the high bills, a new meter was installed for Grundhoefer’s house, free of charge.

Barrios said, “We will reach out to this customer to speak with him directly, as we do with many of our customers who have similar concerns. There’s always circumstances that we need to consider, and we’re happy to do that.”

TEP inspected Grundhoefer’s two year-old meter today after removing it and found  there were gaps in reporting data. However, TEP says that would not affect usage. The company says it will waive the meter test fee for Grundhoefer, which it occasionally does, on a case-by-case basis.

A TEP rep will visit Grundhoefer’s home on Wednesday to do an energy audit, to discuss specifics and why his last two bills were so high. The company says if you think your bill is too high, you should call them to discuss your usage.

If you have a story you’d like us to investigate, email us at investigators@kvoa.com or call our tip line at 520- 955-4444.

http://www.kvoa.com/story/32592843/n4t-investigators-meter-mess

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Arizona overbilling problems: ‘I couldn’t believe it…how could it be that high?’

“Unbelievable”: federal prosecutors abruptly drop fines 99% at PG&E trial

From the San Jose Mercury

PG&E trial: Prosecution unexpectedly drops maximum potential penalty to $6 million
By George Avalos, gavalos@bayareanewsgroup.com
August 3, 2016

See related stories below.

PG&E will no longer face more than $500 million in fines if it is convicted on all charges in the criminal case linked to the fatal San Bruno explosion after prosecutors Tuesday abruptly proposed dropping 99 percent of the fines the embattled utility faced.

The most PG&E could be fined if convicted on all charges would be $6 million — far less than the $562 million prosecutors had been seeking in connection with the September 2010 explosion that killed eight people. The fatal explosion was one of the worst utility disasters in American history.

Prosecutors from the U.S. attorney’s office declined to comment on the reason for the request. U.S. District Court Judge Thelton Henderson approved the request late Tuesday, after jurors finished their fourth day of deliberations.

The PG&E pipeline blast hole on Glenview Dr. is photographed days after the blast which occurred on Sept. 9, 2010. Photo was copied on Feb. 23, 2012. (Photo courtesy of the Hensel family) (Gary Reyes/ Staff) ( Gary Reyes )

“This is unbelievable,” said state Sen. Jerry Hill, whose San Mateo County district includes San Bruno. “There is no way to justify this move when weighed against the loss of eight lives.”

San Bruno Mayor James Ruane, who like Hill has attended the trial, said, “That is a surprise, but I’m sure the prosecutors had their reasons for doing what they did. “The big thing is for PG&E to be convicted of the crimes they committed. A conviction puts a very dark stain on the corporate seal.”

San Francisco-based PG&E faces 12 criminal counts, including 11 charges that it violated federal pipeline safety regulations and one charge that it obstructed an official National Transportation Safety Board probe into the fatal blast. The company has pleaded not guilty.

The request by the U.S. attorney’s office to reduce the potential fines was outlined in a brief filing with the court. The document said that PG&E would be fined no more than $500,000 for each conviction, a maximum of $6 million.

PG&E would face fines only if jurors find the company guilty on any of the 12 charges. At that point, the case would move to a second phase during which penalties would be determined.

In April 2015, the state Public Utilities Commission imposed a $1.6 billion penalty against PG&E for causing the San Bruno explosion, the largest regulatory penalty ever levied on a U.S. utility.

PG&E spokesman Gregory Snapper issued a statement Tuesday in response to the prosecution’s request. “Regardless of this action or the next legal steps, we want our customers and their families to know that we are committed to re-earning their trust by acting with integrity and working around the clock to provide them with energy that is safe, reliable, affordable and clean,” the statement said.

Initially, prosecutors sought a fine that would have been double what they allege the utility saved by evading pipeline safety rules. Under that calculation, prosecutors initially sought a $562 million penalty.

Although prosecutors declined to comment on their request to dramatically reduce the fines, a court filing from PG&E provided some insight into arguments that the defense team may have used with federal prosecutors.

Defense attorneys argued that if the company were to be convicted on any charges, PG&E would then be forced in the penalty phase of the trial to present an extensive and complex defense in a proceeding that might have been heard by another jury.

PG&E warned in documents filed July 30 that the penalty phase would become “unduly complicated.”

If PG&E were to be convicted of violating federal pipeline safety standards, jurors would be required under a specific federal fines act to determine the amount of financial gain PG&E received from cutting corners in pipeline safety.

“For regulated utilities, assessing gains or losses accurately is a complex, nonintuitive endeavor that takes legions of regulatory experts,” PG&E attorneys stated in the July 30 filing.

San Bruno officials said a conviction, in their view, should be the primary focus, rather than penalties.

“For PG&E, all these fines are the cost of doing business,” Mayor Ruane said. “But a conviction sends a message that the lives of the eight people who died should not just be the cost of doing business.”

Contact George Avalos at 408-859-5167. Follow him at Twitter.com/georgeavalos.

Related stories:

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30198188/pg-e-faces-sharply-reduced-penalties-san-Bruno

Posted under Fair Use Rules

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on “Unbelievable”: federal prosecutors abruptly drop fines 99% at PG&E trial

Federal labor board discusses Smart Meter fire problems

Electrical workers union official Bobby Reed was fired by Texas utility company Oncor after testifying about Smart Meter fire problems to the Texas Senate in 2012. The National Labor Relations Board has just released its Decision and Order on his case. http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4582177a1a

It contains extensive discussion on the overheating and fire problems of Smart Meters found by union workers at Oncor and CenterPoint, both Texas utilities. Two culprits mentioned are the thinner blades in Smart Meters, and Landis and Gyr Smart Meters being too big for the meter socket. The blades inside the meters provide contact with the jaws of the meter socket. If the blades are too thin or the meter isn’t the right size, this causes inadequate contact or gaps which causes arcing. This is a fire hazard and also results in pitting of the metal surface. The arcing also creates “dirty” electricity – a very serious health issue.

Oncor went to great lengths in its testimony and accusations against Reed to defend Smart Meters.

Bizarrely, the labor relations board and administrative law judge went to great lengths to exonerate the Smart Meters. The judge stated these overheating, arcing, and fire problems are a connection problem, not a meter problem.

In sum, the record reflects that the primary cause of heating that resulted in burned out smart meters and in fires was not from any defects in the meters but rather stemmed from their connections with the meter bases. (p. 26 Decision, p. 19-20 Board Decision and Order — see below)

If this wasn’t such an enormous safety issue, this would be laughable. Political pressure on the Board and judge is the only possible rationale for such an absurd and dangerous decision.

If a meter is not made to correct specs, if it is constructed with cheaper, flimsier materials that do not do the job, then it’s the meter that is to blame.

The NLRB board in their Decision and Order “decided to affirm the judge’s rulings, findings, and conclusions.” They discuss Smart Meter safety issues particularly on p. 4-5, and dodge and weave around the fire problems, obscuring the meter as the problem-causer.

It’s astounding that these high paid, high-falutin NLRB lawyers don’t seem to grasp that electrical meters are a conduit for electricity, which is itself highly dangerous and which must be handled with care. Anything that causes a potential problem with electricity is a big red flag.

  1. Negligence and errors in meter specifications,
  2. Cost cutting to increase profits,
  3. Suppressing information and lying to the public – Reed testified that utility employees were instructed by the company to tell the public “it’s not the meter; it’s your meter can” — and then
  4. Making the public pick up the tab for all the damages

That is reckless and potentially lethal criminal conduct – very high stakes gambling. With the knowledge they have — all these utility officials and meter manufacturers — this could be called cold-blooded and pre-meditated murder.

These meters are the source of the problem. The meter manufacturer and the utility companies that use them are the causers of that problem. And that problem is causing not just “disgruntled” customers, as the NLRB board calls them, but dead customers, dead pets, damaged homes, and burned- up property.

The Decision and Order is here:
http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4582177a1a

There are several sections on Smart Meters, including Reed’s Senate testimony on p. 14

This is the earlier Decision by the Administrative Law Judge (it is included in the Decision and Order): http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4581b1f209

Here is the full section where the ALJ asserts Smart Meters are not the problem:

From the ALJ decision, Nov. 4, 2014, p. 25-26
(included in Decision and Order, July 29, 2016, p. 19-20) 

Smart meters, smart meter bases, and fires

In key respects, the testimony of the General Counsel’s and
the Respondent’s witnesses were substantially consistent and
credible, and I find the following facts.

Initially, a distinction must be made between the smart meter
itself and its installation vis-à-vis the meter base in which it sits.

When the jaws in the lug in the meter base are too wide or
loose, either as the result of improper installation of the smart
meter and/or the thinner blades of the smart meter not fitting
well, this can cause the jaws to heat. Such heating can cause
the lug to break and the plastic block of the meter itself to heat
and burn, resulting in a flash or electric arc and in the meter
burning up. Broken or bent lugs can result from loose connections
between the jaws and the smart meter, improper installation,
constant putting meters in and out, tampering, improper
installation, or movement of the earth. The age of the meter
base is a contributing factor, as is its proper maintenance.

After smart meter deployment began, both Reed and Waugh
noticed more situations in which improper connection between
the smart meter and the lugs (the jaws in particular) had resulted
in heating and/or burning.

Managers Carpenter Moore, and Smith, and Supervisors Anderson
and Efflandt did not contradict their testimony. Thus,
following the start of deployment, troublemen told Anderson of
situations where the jaws were spread too wide apart and did
not make good connection with the smart meter, and they and
told him that the smart meters were heating up and the lugs
melting or burning. Anderson candidly testified that this occurred
“through the whole time” of deployment, not just in the
early part, and that he observed lugs that appeared to be heated
up and melted, along with damaged meters. Efflandt received
complaints from troublemen about smart meter installation
but not about the smart meters per se. He recalled incidents
in which, after the smart meter was installed, troublemen
would be dispatched because the customer was having flashing
problems due to changing of the meter. Carpenter and Moore
both testified about an increase in the number of burned lugs
during deployment, although Carpenter indicated that many
may have been preexisting. Moore testified that CATS tickets
in General Counsel’s Exhibit 26 reflect problems with smart
meter connections, not the meters themselves. Finally, when
Smith had discussions with troublemen in November, they
mentioned problems with installation of smart meters and with
components other than the meter itself (i.e., rings or jaws).

Consistent with the above, the reports that Local 66 representatives
Childers and Lucero received from members indicated
that that the major cause of burned up Itron smart meters in
Houston appeared to be due to loose connections, owing in part
to their thinner blades vis-à-vis the analog meters that they
replaced. This is what they told Reed in 2012. In line with
their testimony, Longeway, the Respondent’s expert witness,
was aware that Itron had produced models in which the blades
were too thin and did not seat with sufficient pressure in the
jaws of the meter base.

Similarly, when Reed and Assistant Fire Marshal Simmons
had discussions in 2012, the focus was on whether smart meter
installation caused fires, not on whether the meters themselves
did so.

Longeway testified about his controlled laboratory experiments
with L+G smart meters that led him to conclude that they
could not cause fires. Oncor had him examine four instances
where there were fires after smart meter installation to determine
if the smart meters were responsible. He concluded that
the smart meter had not caused any of them; rather, they were
caused by faults in the electrical system or by broken lugs.

Prior to Reed’s testimony before the senate committee, Greer
was aware that claims had been made that smart meters were
causing damage to customers’ property, and he had been informed
that in two incidents in Arlington, a problem with the
customer’s meter base had caused a fire.

In sum, the record reflects that the primary cause of heating
that resulted in burned out smart meters and in fires was not
from any defects in the meters but rather stemmed from their
connections with the meter bases.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Federal labor board discusses Smart Meter fire problems

New Mexico: Los Alamos County mandates Smart Meters

From the Los Alamos Monitor

No opt-out for Smart Meters
Advocating action > McLin advocates for class-action suit against DPU
By Arin McKenna
Sunday, July 31, 2016

At its July 20 meeting, the Los Alamos County Board of Public Utilities (BPU) voted 4-1 against an opt-out option for Smart Meters. Stephen McLin voted against the motion.

According to the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) staff report, distributed energy resources such as roof-top solar are changing the face of the industry, and new options such as micro-grids, distributed energy resource management technologies and demand response programs for managing peak electricity demand more efficiently and economically are on the horizon.

Rate structures are also changing to provide options such as demand/response, time-of-use metering and value of solar tariffs (which credits customers for home solar generation).

Smart Meters, which allow two-way communication between the utility and the customer, are central to implementing those changes.

DPU plans to replace all electric meters with Smart Meters in FY2018. Gas and water meters will also be replaced with remotely read meters.

“When we get to the full deployment of these radio reads in our system, our plan is to not have meter readers at all anymore,” DPU Manager Tim Glasco told the board. “So that begs the question of what do we do if someone has strong feelings about having a radio transmitter on their meters at their house?”

DPU staff estimates that approximately 100 out of 8,000 households would opt out, based on how many opted out of a Smart Meter study on Barranca and North mesas.

According to Glasco, the main concern for those opting out are possible health impacts from having RF transmissions near their home. Glasco noted that numerous studies have failed to demonstrate any adverse health effects.

The other major concern is that someone could access data from the customer’s meter. The staff report points out that Smart meters “have extremely advanced data encryption and security protocols” and that there is no evidence that anyone has hacked into a smart meter data transmission and used the information for nefarious purposes.

Vice Chair Andrew Fraser was concerned that current law identifies utility billing as public records that must be released upon request, and that someone could use that information to determine when a customer is home.

Staff estimates that maintaining a half-time meter reader who would have to travel to widely spaced households and manually enter data into the system would cost an average of $20 per month per opt-out customer. They recommended that those customers shoulder that cost if the board allowed an opt-out option.

Based on his initial calculations, Deputy Utilities Manager for Finance and Administration Robert Westervelt does not anticipate that eliminating meter readers would significantly reduce the customer service fees, since other services such as billing and recovering the initial cost for the meters are encompassed in those fees.

McLin demanded that the department provide a cost/benefit study.

Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on New Mexico: Los Alamos County mandates Smart Meters

Michigan: Consumers Energy lies to the public and begins installing Itron Smart Meters

Despite the known problems, Consumers Energy is forcing Smart Meters on the public.

Consumers Energy tells several lies in this cheerleading article:

Itron Smart Meters do not broadcast once a day. They broadcast 1250 – 26,000 times per day according to California Public Utilities Commission documents which the commission compelled the utility companies to disclose.

The United States National Toxicology Program links this radiation with cancer. The World Health Organization declared it a possible carcinogen back in 2011.

Power outage information is not getting to the company from the meters. Customers still have to phone in an outage.

Pre-paid programs are a terrible idea. They jeopardize the health and safety of low income residents, particularly during the winter or the summer. At least one man froze to death due to a pre-paid scheme. Even though he had the money, he didn’t pay the bill when his prepaid amount ran out because he had dementia.

And the fire risk from these meters is frightening. Itron is known for its thin blades which cause arcing and “dirty” electricity. The company has never taken responsibility for that.

All of this hype by Consumers Energy is false advertising and fraud . There are no benefits except for the utility companies. These meters and their program will cost consumers over and over again. There will never be any savings. The rising costs will take everything. Add the health impacts and fire danger, and this is assault and more.

By Taylor DesOrmeau | tdesorme at mlive.com]
July 29, 2016

JACKSON, MI – There are smart phones, smart watches, smart cars, smart TVs and smart boards.

Now, all Consumer’s Energy customers will have smart meters.

The meters are being installed in Parma and Concord in late August and throughout the rest of Jackson County starting in December.

Smart meters have a communication chip inside that sends a message every night to the company with the amount of energy used for the day. With the new gas and electric meters, customers can view online their hourly energy use.

The digital meter also tells Consumers Energy whenever there’s a power outage.

“It offers our customers the opportunity to go online and look at their hourly energy use,” said Kathryn Burkholder, outreach coordinator for smart energy at Consumer’s Energy. “It gives us an opportunity to offer programs for our customers like a pre-paid program where they can pay as they go.

There are lots of interesting programs available with the new meter technology.”

The new technology will also eliminate estimated bills for customers.

The power goes out for five to 10 minutes during the installation process, however residents are alerted via a postcard, letter and phone call ahead of time and a knock on the door before the installation.

The program costs $750 million, but will save $1.8 billion, Burkholder said.

About 0.5 percent of customers opt out of the service, which costs $69.39 up front and $9.72 a month.

“Some people believe that there are health issues associated with them,” Burkholder said. “They’ll go online and read about the meters causing cancer, which is absolutely untrue. Our meters emit about as much radio frequency as a baby monitor.”

http://www.mlive.com/news/jackson/index.ssf/2016/07/consumers_energy_to_install_fr.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Michigan: Consumers Energy lies to the public and begins installing Itron Smart Meters

(VIDEO) WXYZ Channel 7 — Analog Meter Choice: Michigan bill would let customers opt out of smart meters

From Smart Meter  Education Network
Posted May 23, 2016

2:16

WXYZ Channel 7 reports on the introduction of Michigan’s Analog Meter Choice Bill. DTE does not respect customer choice, health concerns, and privacy concerns. Learn more about the bill at SmartMeterEducationNetwork.com.

DTE cut off power to a very few customers in 2015, trying to make an example of them. Customers continue to lock their meters. Many have had locked meters for 4 years or more. DTE’s shut-offs were illegal, but no one has fought them.

To get the bill passed, you MUST WRITE TO YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATOR. Learn more at http://www.smartmetereducationnetwork.com/optout-legislation-michigan.php

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on (VIDEO) WXYZ Channel 7 — Analog Meter Choice: Michigan bill would let customers opt out of smart meters