 |
 |
Hello,
Last week Project Censored Radio invited Cindy Sage and I to talk about smart meters, RF health risks, surveillance, and the emails between PG&E and the CPUC. Also featured is Dr. Burrows from SFSU. It is a great show! You can hear it here: https://kpfa.org/episode/project-censored-april-17-2015/
I spent the last two months researching the 65K+ emails between PG&E and the CPUC, and writing an overview of the findings on smart meters. Thanks to many people who helped with the research and feedback. Here's a link to the overview, and the key points. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Overview-of-PGECPUC-emails-on-smart-meters.pdf
- The CPUC intentionally delayed the legal process so PG&E could complete their smart meter deployment.
- CPUC President Michael Peevey knew smart meters were harming people.
- The smart meter deployment was a coordinated propaganda campaign between the CPUC, PG&E and marketing companies.
- PG&E's strategized with President Peevey, and Commissioner Florio on how much to charge customers to avoid smart meters. Both Peevey and Florio suggested higher initial fees.
- PG&E discriminated against customers by restoring analog meters to some and not others.
- Key smart meter decisions were made in back room deals and private emails, not in the formal complaint process, in violation of exparte rules.
- PG&E wanted to eliminate the initial fee of $75 after customers started to remove their own meters. The CPUC rejected their request.
- PG&E wanted to let small businesses opt out. The CPUC said no.
What's needed next? We want the CPUC drop the coercive fees, and to refund the fees already paid. They also need to hold health and safety hearings on smart meters. The public deserves to know RF is environmental pollution, and smart meters are a fire hazard. The CPUC and PG&E are under criminal investigation by both state and federal authorities.
If they dismiss our Rehearing Requests we can sue the CPUC in appeals court. It will cost at least 20K. However we lost on appeal against the CPUC in 2012. What do you think?
See more news below.
Thank you!
Sandi Maurer
Sent from my wired computer
|
|
 |
| |
|
Thanks to Ronald Powell Ph,D for placing two reviews of smart meter health impacts side by side. He compares the EMF Safety Network Survey results (USA 2011 ) to an Australian peer reviewed study by Dr. Frederica Lamech (AUS 2014). The results are astoundingly similar, especially when you account for the different methods for gathering the raw data. Network's survey was distributed online with boxes of symptoms to check off, and Dr. Lamech's study tallied written responses. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Symptoms-after-Exposure-to-Smart-Meter-Radiation.pdf |
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
|
Emails between utility giant PG&E and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) expose conflict of interest and cover up of skyrocketing smart meter bills. The consultant the CPUC hired in 2010 to investigate the complaints, Structure, had worked for PG&E for the previous five years, and was not "independent" (as claimed in CPUC and PG&E's misrepresentations). CPUC President Peevey knew the results of Structure's investigation long before it was complete, and shared that information with PG&E. CPUC's Peevey was aware smart meters were overcharging through personal experience. READ MORE: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/smart-meters/structure-report-smart-meter-conflict-of-interest-and-cover-up/ |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
In January 2015 EMF Safety Network filed a Rehearing Request in the smart meter opt out proceeding A.11-03-014. The CPUC is supposed to rule on these filings in 90 days, which is just a couple days away. If they don't we can claim the filing is deemed denied and move forward with a lawsuit against them. If you can help fund a lawsuit (20K or more) we have lawyers who can file it. The last time we sued the CPUC (2012) we were dismissed by the appeals court, without comment.
Think about it and let me know what you think is going to be our best course of action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What do you think?
| |
|
In 2011, PG&E's Brian Cherry, VP of Regulatory Affairs, wrote to the CPUC's Executive Director, CPUC attorney and CPUC Director of Consumer Safety, that PG&E has technology to beam RF waves from space and they changed their receptor site to Sebastopol. Is this a threat, a display of contempt, a joke? What do you think? http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/RF-Beam-at-Sebastopol.pdf |
|
|
|
Smart Meter Basics
| |
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
