Naperville Smart Meter Awareness

May 17, 2012:  Ashland, OR, City Council voted to provide a fee-free opt-out for all residents and halt further installation.  Following are excerpts from a local news article regarding the city-owned electric utility in a town of 20,000 people.

“The Ashland City Council has approved an opt-out option for residents who don’t want radio frequency wave-emitting utility meters at their homes — and they won’t be charged hefty fees for their decision.

“The council adopted the opt-out policy on Tuesday night and directed city staff not to charge proposed fees of $120 to opt out, plus $20 each month during the time a home doesn’t have a so-called “smart meter.”

“I believe prudence is a good idea and we are a health-conscious community,” [Councilor] Slattery said.”

“The city is no longer actively pursuing the installation of smart meters because of community concerns…”

“To choose money over health is insanity. The question of safety needs to be answered first,” [a resident] said.”

Full Story:  http://www.dailytid ings.com/ apps/pbcs. dll/article? AID=/20120517/ NEWS01/20517

Medical Doctors, part of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, addressed a letter to the City of Naperville dated April 12, 2012, opposing “the installation of wireless “Smart Meters” in homes and schools based on a scientific assessment of the current peer-reviewed scientific literature.”  Members of the Academy’s Executive Committee asked Naperville for:

• Immediate caution on “Smart Meter” installation due to potentially harmful RF exposure 
• Accommodation for health considerations regarding RF exposure, including exposure to wireless  “Smart Meter” technology including opt-out options for residents and communities 
• Immediate restoration of analog meters to residents requesting relief 
• Independent research to further assess safety of RF exposures 
• Use of safer technology for “Smart Meters” such as hard‐wiring, fiber optics or other non-harmful methods of data transmission [Note: NSMA does not condone non-wireless "Smart" meters without full disclosure and customer acceptance of the risks to privacy.]

The Committee included a 7 page document (including references) supporting this conclusion.

According to AAEM’s website, “The American Academy of Environmental Medicine was founded in 1965, and is an international association of physicians and other professionals interested in the clinical aspects of humans and their environment.  The Academy is interested in expanding the knowledge of interactions between human individuals and their environment, as these may be demonstrated to be reflected in their total health. The AAEM provides research and education in the recognition, treatment and prevention of illnesses induced by exposures to biological and chemical agents encountered in air, food and water.”

Oral arguments to be heard Thursday morning in Maine Supreme Court…

For Immediate Release 5/09/12

Maine High Court to Hear Oral Arguments in Smart Meter Case
Contact: Ed Friedman, Lead Plaintiff: 666-3372 edfomb@comcast.net

Bruce McGlauflin, Attorney for the Plaintiffs: 775-0200 bmcglauflin@pmhlegal.com

When: Thursday, May 10 at 9:50am. Time allotted by court: 30 minutes.

Where: Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Newbury St., Portland, ME

Web: Oral Arguments now also live on the court website. Click on appropriate links to hear live streaming of oral arguments: http://www.courts.state.me.us/maine_courts/supreme/stream.shtml

Oral arguments in Maine citizens’ smart meter appeal from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) decision will be heard Thursday in Portland by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. Arguments are scheduled to begin at 9:50am and may also be heard streamed live from the Court’s website. Appellants seek to overturn the smart meter program on constitutional grounds. If the court is unwilling to overturn, appellants ask the case be remanded to the PUC for evidentiary hearings with a stay on opt-out fees at least until a full investigation is completed.
As part of a rapidly rising international tide of smart meter opposition, Maine privacy and safety advocates appealed a PUC dismissal of their earlier complaint which raised concerns about safety, privacy, security, trespass and constitutional violations related to the meters.  In dismissing the complaint the PUC stated all of the issues had been adequately investigated and resolved in earlier proceedings, referred to as the Opt-Out Investigation.  The notice of appeal to Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court was filed October 31, 2011 by attorney Bruce McGlauflin of the Portland firm Petruccelli, Haddow & Martin, LLP representing the Appellants.
Questions raised on appeal include whether safety, privacy and other concerns raised in the complaint were fully and adequately addressed and decided correctly by the Commission in its previous Opt-Out Investigation and, whether the PUC satisfied its Legislative mandate to “ensure safe, reasonable and adequate service.”  In an Opt-Out Investigation Order dated January 7, 2011, the PUC stated:  “We make no determination on the merits of health, safety.or which federal or state agency has the jurisdiction to make these determinations.”  And in an Order dated June 22, 2011, the PUC reiterated it “is making no determination on the merits of the health, safety, privacy or security concerns with respect to wireless Smart Meters.” The complaint also raises constitutional issues of illegal search and seizure (the fourth amendment) and takings (the fifth amendment).
When operational, the smart meter system will work as a “mesh network” of individual meters wirelessly communicating with one another to relay customer power usage and personal data to Central Maine Power.  Privacy concerns are high on the list for many electricity consumers. The National Institute for Standards and Technology, Government Accountability Office and Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers are among the more established entities to recognize potential privacy concerns including detailed consumer profiling that could be obtained from smart meter data.
“More and more experts consider smart meter radiation to be a major toxics issue equivalent to second-hand smoke and asbestos but this time mandated upon ratepayers”, said Kathleen McGee, former director of the Maine Toxics Action Coalition. “Our issue with the PUC is quite simple, in order for them to meet their statutory obligation to ensure safe and reasonable service; they need to first make a determination on these issues of concern. In order to do this, they need to fully evaluate the science and hear from the public, both of which they have repeatedly refused to do.”
In one of its Opt-Out Investigation rulings, the PUC allowed electricity consumers to opt-out of the smart meter program and retain their old analog meter but it also required these consumers to pay Central Maine Power Company an initial fee of $40 (for a meter they already have) plus a $12 monthly fee for this option. All ratepayers are bearing the cost of the smart meter program so those who opt out are required to pay twice.
“Endangerment, immoral, illegal, unethical, irresponsible or just plain wrong; call it what you will, but when citizens are ordered by the PUC to pay-up in order to avoid real or perceived harms to health and privacy, this is the antithesis of good government. In fact, it’s good government gone very, very bad,” said Ed Friedman, lead Plaintiff in the case.
Shortly after the PUC issued their first Order in the Opt-Out Investigation, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO/IARC) issued a report identifying as a “possible carcinogen” the type of non-ionizing radiation emitted by smart meters, cell phones and other wireless devices. This puts smart meter radiation in the same category (2B) used by WHO/IARC for classifying other potential carcinogens, such as DDT, benzofuran, chlordane, chloroform, 4,4′-Diaminodiphenyl ether, diesel fuel, 2,6 Dinitrotoluene, gasoline, lead, Polybrominated biphenyls, styrene, Toluene diisocyanates, and 4-Vinylcyclohexene.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine is calling upon the California PUC to institute an immediate moratorium on smart meter installations pending further studies. Last week the Vermont legislature passed a bill allowing anyone requesting to keep their analog meter to do so without paying any opt-out fee. In California 56 local and county municipalities have demanded a halt to smart meters. Because 3-10% of the population have acute sensitivity to RF, even opt-outs do not prevent illness in this group if living in urban or suburban areas and exposed to neighboring smart meters. Across the country, thousands have been made homeless, are living in their cars or are stuck in their homes in constant pain from RF exposure.
“Concerns about the new technology are only increasing and Congressional hearings have been called for,” says Friedman, “It will be some time before this issue is settled. Meanwhile, we encourage ratepayers not to sanction this uncontrolled and PUC – mandated experiment on their health and constitutional rights, but instead to keep their existing (analog) meters and not pay the extra fee. Our request is simple: Don’t Pay! That sends a clear message to CMP and the PUC.”

“After signing up with the German smart-meter firm Discovergy, the researchers detected that the company’s devices transmitted unencrypted data from the home devices back to the company’s servers over an insecure link. The researchers, Dario Carluccio and Stephan Brinkhaus, intercepted the supposedly confidential and sensitive information, and, based on the fingerprint of power usage, were able to tell not only whether or not the homeowners were home, away or even sleeping, but also what movie they were watching on TV.

“The problem, the researchers explained, stems from Discovergy’s monitoring frequency; the devices log homeowners’ electricity usage in 2-second intervals [the default], a timeframe they deemed unnecessary and intrusive. The two-second reporting interval provides so much data that they were able to accurately chart power usage spikes and lulls indicative of times a homeowner would be home, asleep or away.”

NOTE:  At this time, Naperville says their “monitoring interval” will be every 15 minutes and their “link” is secure, meeting DOE/Federal requirements.

Full article dated January 10, 2012:  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45946984/ns/technology_and_science-security/