This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

SMART METER Opt-out Update 4/27/12

This week: SDG&E filed an "Advice Letter" with the CPUC, explaining how its smart meter opt-out plan will work. Personal accounts of arranging for a smart meter opt-out.

     This week, following the opt-out ruling by CPUC, both customers and SDG&E are preparing for the new provisions that allow removal of the radiation-emitting, problem-ridden smart meters for those customers who request it. Some customers are planning to opt-out and have already called SDG&E. Others are thinking it over, clearly unhappy with the fees. SDG&E has taken a few steps to get ready for providing analog meters to customers by May 9th, upon orders from the CPUC judge. The three California opt-out proceedings have been combined into one consolidated proceeding, covering the three major utilities: SDG&E, Southern CA Edison (SCE), and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). A prehearing conference (PHC) has been set up for May 16th in San Francisco at the CPUC, for Parties who must attend in person or submit a document to the judge to remain as a Party. Center for Electrosmog Prevention (CEP), based in La Mesa, a nonprofit representing utility customers, a current Party to the SDG&E and SCE opt-out proceedings, will participate in the consolidated proceedings. Our attorney, M. Homec, will attend the PHC on behalf of CEP. If all these acronyms have your head spinning, I apologize!

Key Developments:

     On Tuesday, SDG&E filed the smart meter opt-out "Advice Letter" (AL) ordered by the CPUC in its opt-out ruling on April 19th. The AL describes how SDG&E will comply with the CPUC-ordered smart meter opt-out, with many specifics outlined. The AL appears in full, in the Media section of this article, at right, and includes:

Find out what's happening in La Mesa-Mount Helixwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

  • notice that all customers will be notified of opt-out in print bill inserts
  • Delay List customers, customers who have previously requested a smart meter, and those customers whose meters have not been accessible to install smart meters will be notified of opt-out availability by certified letter
  • opt-out enrollment can be done by phone [SDG&E has established a dedicated phone line (1-
    877-357-8525) available 24/7], online at sdge.com/smartmeter, during an in-person office visit or by form, mailed out to you upon request.
  • customers who elect to opt-out will be offered an analog meter for both gas & electric (if they have both services) for one fee and monthly charge
  • customers with analogs who do not elect to join the opt-out will be deemed to have opted out if they do not respond and/or their meter is inaccessible to install a smart meter
  • interim fees are described - $75 changeout; $10 a month for non-CARE customers and $10 changeout; $5 a month for CARE customers.
  • changeout fees may be paid over a three month period.
  • the customer must "affirmatively" elect to opt-out (and agree to pay the fees)

     I called SDG&E on April 19th, when the opt-out ruling came down from the CPUC, to request the gas and electric opt-outs for our account. I talked to SDG&E representatives again, about every couple of days, to verify their information, which was evolving. One of the people I spoke with was Ms. Tesa Howard, Director of the SDG&E Opt-out Program. She was very polite and today, explained that SDG&E is implementing the CPUC decision as ordered to do so, and wants the customers to have "a nice experience" with it. Earlier in the week I told Ms. Howard that many customers I had spoken with were unhappy with the way SDG&E "does business", that SDG&E should treat customers as they would want to be treated.

Ms. Howard scheduled me for a smart meter opt-out for both of the gas and electric meters on our property, to occur on May 7th, in the morning between 8 and 12, as I had requested. I wanted an appointment, so I can be present and inspect the analog meters to be used to be sure that they are not digital and are electromechanical, with no RF (radiofrequency) emissions. (I have a RF field meter to measure these with.)

Find out what's happening in La Mesa-Mount Helixwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

     Of note: Toward the end of the conversation, Ms. Howard asked me "if I agreed with the fees". I had given this a lot of thought, ahead of time. I told her no, I did not agree with the fees, that I thought they were illegal, but that if I had to pay them for the sake of being able to opt-out, for my health, I would do so, but "under duress". I further told her that being under duress, to me, meant that I was being forced to pay, for my health reasons. I said that our organization, Center for Electrosmog Prevention (along with many others) would be working on overturning these fees. She said, "I will notate your account that you don't necessarily agree with the fees but you will pay them." When I pay these fees, I plan to write a separate check and will note on the check "paid under duress".

     Ms. Howard told me the opt-out can occur once per calendar year (at the same residence). I replied that I certainly wouldn't be changing back and forth. She asked me to provide feedback about what went well and what didn't go well, after the opt-out is made, that I would be amongst the first in their territory scheduled to receive an opt-out. I agreed to do so.

     My request, made earlier in the week, to meet with the CEO at SDG&E to discuss the problems with the smart meters, was denied.

     CEP is preparing a Protest to the Advice Letter for the CPUC (as can anyone, even those who are not Parties) concerning areas that appear to be missing or are "gray", that might impact customers. These include items like the use of fees; exact timelines (what is the length of time from request to changeout); and fee reduction for people who currently have analog (old style) meters, wish to keep them, and who will not require a changeout.

     I encourage Readers to view the Advice Letter and write their own "protests" for areas they feel are lacking, mailing it to the CPUC judge, Amy Yip-Kikugawa (ayk@cpuc.ca.gov), SDG&E (info@sdge.com) and others named below (see Protest).

     One major area that is unknown is, what rate schedule will be used for those with analog meters? Will it remain the same as it is now, when those with smart meters are being devastated with time-of-use (TOU) rating, later this year, being billed higher rates for peak hours? And since these fees are interim, what will the next set of fees look like? Does SDG&E think we are giving them a blank check?

     When will these dangerous smart meters be banned? Opting out is not enough, it is a bandaid solution. Some scientists have described smart meters as a "ticking time bomb" for the potential development of cancer and other diseases. They never should have continued to be installed despite the numerous health complaints. In fact, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, a large, international physicians' association, has recently condemned smart meters for their RF radiation risks and asked for a moratorium on their installation. For now, because we have an unresponsive CPUC and a utility that claims it must use wireless smart meters, all we have is the opt-out - for those who know enough to get the meters off and those who can afford it. No help for those exposed to neighbors' meters. No help for banks of meters. The situation is simply not acceptable, because it is not a complete solution. Yes, I will be glad to get the two smart meters off my property. I expect it will be a great relief. But I want the mesh network of radiation removed from our neighborhoods and homes. In the latter part of 2012, SDG&E will turn on the second radio inside the smart meters, called a Zigbee. Who knows what havoc that second source of RF radiation will wreak, as it constantly communicates with the newer, wireless-equippped appliances in your homes? 

I have received the Certified Mail notice in my mailbox today, the opt-out letter has arrived. Will review it when picked up.

If you have a smart meter or opt-out-request experience or comment to share, write it below in Comments. If you like this article, click Recommend, above!

Susan Brinchman
Director, Center for Electrosmog Prevention
P.O. Box 655
La Mesa, CA
91944
director@electrosmogprevention.org

www.electrosmogprevention.org
Smart Meter Dangers http://www.smartmeterdangers.org/
Southern Californians Against Smart Meters
American Coalition Against Smart Meters www.causes.com/acasm www.Twitter.com/No2SmartMeters

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

PROTEST


Anyone may protest this advice letter to the Commission. The protest must state the grounds upon which it is based, including such items as financial and service impacts, and should be submitted expeditiously. The protest must be made in writing and received within 20 days of the date this advice letter was filed with the CPUC, or May 15, 2012. There is no restriction on who may file a protest. The address for mailing or delivering a protest to the Commission is:


CPUC Energy Division
Attention: Tariff Unit
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102


Copies of the protest should also be sent via e-mail to the attention of both Maria Salinas (mas@cpuc.ca.gov) and EDTariffUnit@cpuc.ca.gov of the Energy Division. A copy of the protest should also be sent via both e-mail and facsimile to the address shown below on the
same date it is mailed or delivered to the Commission.


Attn: Megan Caulson
Regulatory Tariff Manager
8330 Century Park Court, Room 32C
San Diego, CA 92123-1548
Facsimile No. (858) 654-1879
E-mail: mcaulson@semprautilities.com

 

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?