Smart Meter Nightmare #4: SoCal Landlord Says Meters Hurting Her Tenants

The following submission was received from Donna, a Southern Californian Realtor and landlord, who relates how the installation of smart meters has impacted the health of her tenants and her ability to rent her apartments.

She writes to the CPUC President, Michael J. Peevey (view The Secret Life of Michael Peevey), who has consistently not taken effective action on behalf of the many thousands of Californians pleaing for help with health concerns. Donna demands an anolog meter be restored and reflects on what is happening to our nation, that we can allow this harm to occur, without help for those suffering.

CEP: Smart meters are clearly unsafe and therefore in violation of SB17/Chapter 4.1 Public Utilities Code. We followup with this law, below.

-----------------------------------

September 6 2011

Complaint Concerning Smart Meter

Donna D.

Fullerton, California  County of  Orange

Public Utility Commissioner:

Please be advised:  I personally have witnessed the devastating effects of the Smart Meter and I, and others in my neighborhood, are demanding the immediate removal of the smart meter out of concern for our health and the health of others.

I am a real estate agent in San Bernardino County, as well as Orange County, and have tenants who have become ill after the installation of the smart meters. 

This has hurt me financially, because some of the tenants are threatening to move if the smart meter is not removed.

I can’t blame them.  However,  for those of us who own our homes, it is not that easy to pick up and move.  Instead of being forced to move,  we want the meter  removed. 

Some of my tenants are elderly.  I feel a duty to try and protect them.  They are innocent and have done nothing to warrant this kind of an assault.  One of my tenants is a Vietnam war veteran with a heart pump.  Are you going to laugh at them for reporting a ringing in their ears, a loss of hearing, dizziness?   

Heart palpatations and an increase in heart rate led one of the women to experience a stroke two weeks after the smart meter installation.  She cried when she found out the utility company would not remove this dangerous device to her home.  

She is able to link the increase in heart rate/ palpatations to the time of the smart meter installation.

Are you going to laugh this woman’s story off? Really? 

Doesn’t she have the right to live in a safe environment ? 

I have a dog with epilepsy who is sensitive to the constant microwave radiation transmissions that take place every seven seconds, and he has had an increase in the occurrence of seizures since the installation.

It is very painful for me to watch him suffer.  Prior to the smart meter installation, his seizures were controlled by medication.  Are you going to laugh at my suffering pet and enjoy hearing about his suffering?

I wonder how many people with sensitive medical issues are being harmed and don’t know the reason why, because the utility companies sneak into your yard without telling you, and installs this made in China device to your home.  Is that funny also?  Is that all a joke to you?

How many more times do we need to hear about China putting too much lead in our children’s toys, poison in our pet food, and now a dangerous microwave radiation device on each and every home that was made in China.  What is going on?

This calls for immediate removal of smart meters for people who want to take their lives back, control of their health, and take their country back.

Donna D.

--------------------------------

For more information on Research that shows the biological and health effects of rf radiation like that found in smart meters, visit:

Smart Meter Dangers www.smartmeterdangers.org

Center for Electrosmog Prevention (CEP) www.electrosmogprevention.org

By installing unsafe meters, CEP asserts that SDG&E is in violation of SB 17 (Chapter 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code), as customer safety is required:

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

(SB 17 signed into law)

  SECTION 1.  Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 8360) is added to

Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, to read:

      CHAPTER 4.  SMART GRID SYSTEMS

   8360.  It is the policy of the state to modernize the state's

electrical transmission and distribution system to maintain safe,

reliable, efficient, and secure electrical service,

 8363.  This chapter shall be implemented in a manner that does not

compromise customer or worker safety or the integrity or reliability

of the electrical transmission and distribution system in this

state.

  This bill would require the commission, by July 1, 2010, and in

consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and

Development Commission (Energy Commission), the Independent System

Operator (ISO), and other key stakeholders, to determine the

requirements for a smart grid deployment plan consistent with the

policies set forth in the bill and federal law.

The bill would authorize smart grid technologies to be deployed in an incremental manner to maximize the benefit to ratepayers and to achieve the benefits of smart grid technology, … and would require the commission, in consultation with the Energy

Commission, the ISO, and electrical corporations, at each step of deployment, to evaluate the impact of deployment on major initiatives and policies.

  The bill would require a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, to develop by July 1, 2011, a smart grid deployment plan consistent with the policies set forth in federal law.

  SECTION 1.  Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 8360) is added to

Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, to read:

      CHAPTER 4.  SMART GRID SYSTEMS

   8360.

   (i) Develop standards for communication and interoperability of

appliances and equipment connected to the electric grid, including

the infrastructure serving the grid.

   (j) Identification and lowering of unreasonable or unnecessary

barriers to adoption of smart grid technologies, practices, and

services.

 8362.  (a) By July 1, 2010, the commission, in consultation with

the Energy Commission, the ISO, and other key stakeholders shall

determine the requirements for a smart grid deployment plan

consistent with Section 8360 and federal law, including the

provisions of Title XIII (commencing with Section 1301) of the Energy

Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140).

   8363.  This chapter shall be implemented in a manner that does not

compromise customer or worker safety or the integrity or reliability

of the electrical transmission and distribution system in this

state.

8364.  (a) By July 1, 2011, each electrical corporation shall

develop and submit a smart grid deployment plan to the commission for

approval.

[CEP FINDS IT HARD TO IMAGINE HOW THE CPUC HAS ALLOWED SUCH RAMPANT DEPLOYMENT ON THE PART OF THE UTILTIES WITHOUT AN APPROVED PLAN AND WITH RAPID DEPLOYMENT, CERTAINLY NOT CONDUCTED IN AN INCREMENTAL MANNER, WITH  FLAGRANT VIOLATIONS OF STATE LAW.

 WE CALL FOR INTERVENTION, IF NECESSARY, BY THE GOVERNOR, TO ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC WELFARE, AS CPUC’S CURRENT LEADERSHIP IS SHOWING DERELICTION OF DUTIES, NOT SHOWING ITSELF TO BE FOLLOWING THE LAW IN THE AREA OF SAFETY, NOT PROTECTING THE PUBLIC, BUT IGNORING THE OCEANS OF EVIDENCE THAT THE WIRELESS COMPONENTS OF THE SMART GRID ARE DANGEROUS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH. ANY INCREASE IN THE USE OF WIRELESS, ANY RAMPING UP OF THE SYSTEM THAT EXPOSES THE PUBLIC TO MORE RF RADIATION IS TO BE CONSIDERED A THREAT TO THE ENTIRE GENERAL PUBLIC AND MUST BE CONDEMNED AND PREVENTED.

HIDING BEHIND FCC GUIDELINES NEVER DEVELOPED FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS MISGUIDED AND OBVIOUSLY NOT PROTECTING THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC.]

   8366.  Smart grid technology may be deployed in a manner to

maximize the benefit and minimize the cost to ratepayers and to

achieve the benefits of smart grid technology. The commission, in

consultation with the Energy Commission, the ISO, and electrical

corporations, shall evaluate the impact of deployment on major

initiatives and policies including:

   (a) Implementation of new advanced metering initiatives.

   (f) Meeting the future energy growth needs of the state with new

and innovative technologies and methods that utilize the existing

assets more efficiently, result in a less environmentally adverse net

impact on the state, meet stringent costs versus benefit

assessments, and provide the ratepayers with new options in meeting

their individual energy needs

 (g) Implementation of technology to improve worker safety,

protection, and productivity.

 ----------------------

CEP: Notice how many times the safety requirement is mentioned, and incremental deployment so evaluations may take place (during the EXPERIMENT). Neither has occurred. Thus, Donna and her tenants, and literally, millions of Californians are at risk and at the very least, thousands suffering and some, worse than that. What will you do about this? Is this acceptable in America? We say, "NO, it is unacceptable."

Visit www.electrosmogprevention.org to TAKE ACTION. Write us at info@electrosmogprevention.org.