Ban Texas Smart Meters

I have been slow in posting this update, please forgive!  (I have a business to run, and it took a little time for the dust to settle after the Mar. 30 deadline for your letters + 16 copies!)

By the way, Don’t keep this website a secret – tell everyone you know – use our Facebook buttons for convenience, or email the link to your friends – the more people actively in the resistance, the better chance we have to get these ‘stupid’meters banned!  You can also link this website from any that you might own or be a part of, like a Tea Party or 9-12 etc. website.  Ok, enough about us…Well, just one more plug…you too can own a bumper sticker like this one…email me at Cindy@bantexassmartmeters.com.

Say NO to Privacy Invasion! NO to Smart Meters!

I will try to summarize briefly.

If you don’t know about the recent activity at the PUC concerning smart meters, read any of the previous entries here: (Devvy Kidd Formal Complaint, What’s the PUC got to do with it?, PUC-Open for Public Comments on Devvy Kidd ‘case’ til Mar. 30th )

Where are we NOW?

“Formal Complaint from John and Devvy Kidd, DISMISSED (on technicality)”

Copy of PUC Order to Deny (last paragraph gives their formal & FLIMSY ‘reasons’ why they deny)

Response by Atty Tommy Cryer – objecting since there was one day notice to deny, and no time given to make amendment to their complaint as should be afforded them.

The PUC seems to be playing ‘Hardball’.  There was some wording that was not quite procedurally correct.  So, instead of giving them (Devvy and her Atty) time to make the corrections, they decided to dismiss it altogether.  They justified this since they had opened a project  (Project No. 40190), to look in to the need for an Opt Out program, which they did prior to Mrs. Kidd filing her ‘Formal Complaint’, also referred to in short as a “Petition for Rulemaking”.  I believe they did this knowing that this action was forthcoming, in an effort to make it appear they already have a project underway regarding Smart Meter installations, so there’s no need to open or introduce another.  In fact, when they rejected her filings, they stated that almost exactly, (see last paragraph of above linked doc.)

Devvy Kidd to Re-file her Formal Complaint and gain a Public Hearing

Any day now, Devvy is heading to Austin to re-submit her ‘Formal Complaint’ to the PUC in hopes that with the corrections that were indicated in the Denial Order, they won’t have an excuse to deny her so easily this time around.  She still has with her the rest of the ‘complainant’s', which number 117, plenty to require the PUC to have to hold a hearing.   Here’s an excerpt from correspondence I received from Devvy showing the ‘rules’ regarding when the PUC is required to hold hearings, as in our case.

“We know the PUC does not want to give us our public hearings. 

Texas Administrative Code, Title 16, Part II, § 22.282

‘RULE §22.282 – Notice and Public Participation in Rulemaking Procedures

500. Public Hearing. The commission may schedule workshops or public hearings on the proposed rule. An opportunity for public hearing shall be granted if requested by at least 25 persons, by a governmental subdivision or agency, or by an association having at least 25 members.The request for public hearing must be made no later than 30 days after the date the proposed rule is published in the Texas Register, unless the commission establishes a different date for requesting a public hearing.’

The request was published in the Texas Register on March 9, 2012. We filed February 23, 2012, with 117 petitioners. That more than exceeds the required number under Title 16 above.”

Stand by to start the next “Letter Writing Tsunami”  (check our website often, or send me an email at Cindy@BanTexasSmartMeters.com so I can email you when time to act).

More links for your research on Devvy Kidd’s complaint.

• Read any and all of the comments etc. regarding Devvy Kidd’s filing- The PUC opened what they called Project 40199 for the “Petition for Rulemaking”.  You can even see where Centerpoint submitted their objections to the filing.  If you wrote a letter, you can go see your letter, too, as well as see who else sent in comments etc.   When you go to this PUC Projects link, put in the project no. 40199 into the Control No. box, (ignore all the other boxes and just hit “SEARCH”.  Also, if you want to see what is going on with the OPT OUT Project, put in the number 40190 into the same box.
• Centerpoint’s counter claims - (this is also under the above link, but putting it here for your convenience!)
• Mr. Sage’s Letter – he was disconnected for 56 days.  I am not sure of the details, but I think it may have been because he took the smart meter off, and re-installed an analog meter…may have been told he was tampering with their meter or something…again, I am not sure of the details.
• John and Devvy Kidd’s FULL  Formal Complaint – formally named “Petition for Initiation of Rulemaking Procedures Regarding Smart Meters”.  This is a long document, but worth reading if you want to see all the documentation they have built their case upon.
• Author of Tx HB 2129 Dennis Bonner sends letter (see it here) to the PUC to correct their oversight by making the meters mandatory, as this was not the intent nor language in the bill passed in the 79th Legislature. 

DOCUMENTATION on Issues Regarding the installation & use of Smart Meters

1.) Violates 4th Amendment Privacy

They collect data constantly, and by definition are a “Surveillance Device” for which they have No Warrant.  Detailed Data is Collected & Stored about Customer, and can be displayed in graph fashion showing the “Load Signatures” as depicted below. That data that belongs to you!  In Texas, the PUC and even Oncor spokespersons are quick to admit that “Here in Texas, your data belongs to YOU!”  My Question to them is- “If I have not been asked for that data, and given my permission, then why are you taking it from me?  When I was growing up, my parents told me that to take something from someone without their permission, is STEALING!”  Therefore, since it belongs to YOU, doesnt it make sense that in order for them to have it, they need your permission to TAKE it from you?

So you want PROOF?  I guess I did say this is the section with the DOCUMENTATION? Ok, here it is!

The most blatant smoking gun that shows that the PUC and Utility companies are aware the meters collect this granular data, even though you will never seen this disclosed in any of their glossy propaganda, or on their FAQ’s about Privacy on their websites. How about a document that was put together by the Colorado PUC (links and excerpts below).  You can look at the first page and see what I am talking about with regards to the detail of data collection by the smart meters. But reading farther on in to the article is mind-boggling that they know that they are invading our privacy, and VIOLATING OUR 4th AMENDMENT to our Right to Privacy, but they JUST DON’T CARE!

SMART METERING & PRIVACY: Existing Law and Competing Policies (link to document)

Excerpt Pg. v.

Sample of the Data the Smart Meters Collect - called Load Signatures

“Proper management of this new information pool could support energy efficiency efforts
and demand-side management (DSM) initiatives.3 However, insufficient oversight of this
information could also lead to unprecedented invasions of consumer privacy. Many intricate
details of household life can be gleaned from information obtained via advanced metering
infrastructure.”

Excerpt Pg. 1

“The information provided by smart meters and other smart grid technologies is

unique in both its depth and breadth. If its collection and dissemination goes

unchecked, such information has to potential to enable significant invasions into
consumer privacy. At the same time, smart grid information is useful for
facilitating demand response initiatives and the development of new business
models…an electric utility, the likely clearing
house for this information, could bundle consumer electricity usage data into data
streams in several ways, tuning their efforts to both protect consumer privacy and
supply a new revenue stream to help drive the transition to a model of electricity
management rather than electricity sale.”

Excerpt Pg. 2

“Though initially thought a daunting task to work backwards from an appliance’s demand to the identity
of the appliance itself, the load signatures of various appliance categories are surprisingly
unique, (4) and an impressive amount of detail concerning customer usage habits could be
discerned from NALM-generated information.”

Excerpt Pg. 5

Excerpt Pg. 9

“Data collection via NALMs (NALM – Non-intrusive appliance load monitor) has sparked privacy concerns before. In mid-2001, MIT’s
Technology Review ran a story on NALMs, reporting that, “[in] essence, non-intrusive load
monitoring is an information technology. And like any such technology, it could gather
information that customers would prefer to keep to themselves.”20

…However, the massive deployment of smart meters across the country and the trend
toward finer and finer interval data means that more and more information will be discernible
about more and more people. While the raw information about when an appliance event
occurred in a given home may not seem to be sensitive information, it could be used to construct
a detailed picture of residential life. Tracking appliance events means smart grid information
could tell you the answer to questions like
» How often does a given customer eat microwave dinners as opposed to cooking
three-pot meals?
» How many hours of TV does a resident watch? What kind of TV is it?
» When does a resident normally shower (and so cue an electricity draw from the
water heater)?”

Thirsty for more?  I’m sure if you are at all like me-your blood pressure is quite high by the time you finish reading all of that.

But, if you feel the need to proceed..

Washington Post article:

Experts: Smart grid poses privacy risks  (link to article below)-  http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/11/experts_smart_grid_poses_priva.html)

“Instead of measuring energy use at the end of each billing period, smart meters will provide this information at much shorter intervals,” the report notes. “Even if electricity use is not recorded minute by minute, or at the appliance level, information may be gleaned from ongoing monitoring of electricity consumption such as the approximate number of occupants, when they are present, as well as when they are awake or asleep. For many, this will resonate as a ‘sanctity of the home’ issue, where such intimate details of daily life should not be accessible.”

According to the study, examples of information that utilities and partner companies might be able to glean from more granular power consumption data include whether and how often exercise equipment is used; whether a house has an alarm system and how often it is activated; when occupants usually shower, and how often they wash their clothes.

Other privacy risks could result from the combination of information from two separate users of the smart grid: For example, roaming smart grid devices, such as electric vehicles recharging at a friend’s or acquaintance’s house, could create or reveal additional personal information.

At a recent smart grid conference in Madrid, FPF co-chair Jules Polonetsky showed how researchers have already mapped unique load patterns of different equipment, showing that for instance washing machines pull power in different ways than other devices (graphic below courtesy FPF).

2.) RF Radiation Linked to Illness-

Headaches, Memory Loss, Nausea, Sleeplessness, Tinnitus (ringing in ears), Heart Palpitations, etc.  Also, long-term possible links to Cancer, per ‘WHO’, i.e World Health Organization.  Article Quote: “Over 70 studies have found effects at frequencies with very low-power intensity, many with implications for human health. Fifteen studies report effects among people living 50-to-1500 feet from a cell tower — including cancers, immune system effects, fertility problems, heart arrhythmias, miscarriages, sleeplessness, dizziness, concentration difficulties, memory loss, headaches, skin rashes, lowered libido, fatigue, and malaise.

And many of these symptoms mirror what some people are reporting within days of Smart Meters installed at their homes.

In addition, several studies report increases in the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, which protects brain tissue from bacteria, viruses, and toxins. One study found increases in stress markers in human saliva near cell towers. Also reported are calcium ion changes in cells — with implications for the ability to metabolize. Other studies link exposures to Alzheimer’s, Lou Gehrig Disease, and Parkinson’s.

In fact, every system of the body appears to be sensitive to low-level electromagnetic fields — and why not? Living cells are electromagnetic systems.

Research by Magda Havas, Ph.D., of Trent University in Canada, and U.S. epidemiologist Samuel Milham, M.D., links something called “dirty electricity” with diabetes, malignant melanoma, and cancers of the breast, thyroid, uterus and lung. Dirty electricity is an industry term that describes a multi-frequency exposure when higher frequencies like RF couple with the lower frequencies running along power lines. BPL (Broadband-Over-Power-Lines) is 100% dirty electricity — that’s how it functions — and people barraged by it can now measure RF radiation emanating from their light sockets.

Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like deep-brain stimulators for Parkinson’s, some pacemakers, insulin pumps, and in-home hospital equipment. The radio-frequency interference (RFI) inherent to Smart Grids can cause such equipment to go haywire, or even to stop. And RFI from ambient exposures has caused wheelchairs to go off peers or into traffic; automatic ignition switches in cars refuse to start until cars are towed to RF-free blocks; and surgical beds have jumped during operations.” (end of quote from Article: http://energybulletin.net/stories/2011-03-23/problems-smart-grids

3.) Damage reported to customers electronic devices and equipment-

Appliances, A/C units, Surge Protectors, Computer circuit boards, Security Systems, Electrical Equipment, Pool Equipment, sometimes as a result of ‘Power Surges’, and you are left to fix at your expense! (One News Story of many:  http://www.khou.com/home/Viewers-share-more-smart-meter-installation-problem-stories-124527004.html )  You can find others just by doing a keyword search on your favorite search engine!

4.) INTERFERES with other Wireless devices-

Including Baby Monitors, Garage Door Openers & Medical Devices. (documentation coming, till then, just research on your favorite search engine!)

5.)  Smart Meters Not Secure – Have been Hacked in ‘Testing’.  They admit they are ‘working on it’, when it comes to Security.   InGuardian’s Joshua Wright (I believe this is a California firm), who’s firm was hired by three TDU’s (Transmission & Distribution Utility) to test the security of the meters, said his firm found “egregious errors, such as flaws in the meters and the technologies that utilities use to manage data from meters.  Even though these protocols were designed recently, they exhibit security failures we’ve known about for the past 10 years,” Wright said.   Also, the Washington Post Article:  (link here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/27/AR2009072702988.html)Yet security researchers have found that these devices often are the weakest link in the smart-grid chain. Smart meters give consumers direct access to information about their power usage and the ability to manage that usage over the Web, but that two-way communication also opens up the possibility that the grid could be attacked from the outside. Many such systems require little authentication to carry out key functions, such as disconnecting customers from the power grid.

Indeed, at this week’s Black Hat, the world’s largest cybersecurity conference held annually in Las Vegas, researchers from IOActive of Seattle are slated to demonstrate a computer worm that spreads by taking advantage of the software update feature built into a prevalent brand of smart meters (IOActive is not disclosing which). The worm could in theory give the attackers who launched it the ability to very quickly sever tens of thousands of homes from the smart grid.

• Smart Grid Insecure: Article: “But could such a banal technology in fact be fraught with danger? In July 2009 — five months before the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC But could such a banal technology in fact be fraught with danger? In July 2009 — five months before the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) announced the initiative — security firm IOActive demonstrated a worm that could rapidly spread through a smart-grid network, disabling meters as it went. The experiment proved what many cybersecurity experts already knew: hackers distributing the right malware could shut down the network. Britain would go dark.

‘Before, to destroy a meter, you had to take a sledgehammer to it,’ explains John Bumgarner, research director for security technology at think tank the US Cyber Consequences Unit. ‘That worm could destroy 300,000 [smart meters] in one go. The smart grid is going to be a major target for hackers.’  Marc Maiffret, a former hacker and now chief technology officer at computer-security consultancy eEye Digital Security, says: ‘If there was a war tomorrow between major powers, the first stages would include cyberattacks with the aim of completely disrupting critical infrastructure. If you have the right combination of factors — power running at full blast and interference that means you cannot redistribute it properly — sabotage can have very serious consequences.’ ” Link to article:  http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2011/03/start/the-new-front-line-in-cyberwar?page=all

6.) FIRE HAZARD

(2 fires in Arlington and 2 in Houston area among the reported fires in Texas.  Santa Rosa Mall in California – search online for “Smart Meter Fires”!)  Arlington Fire Department recommended cutting power to the home prior to Smart Meter being installed, but Oncor has NOT done so, and continues to install while power is on to the property.  Arlington Fire Report: http://www.bansmartmeters.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Arlington-Fire-Report.pdf

Story about the fires and the lack of caution that Oncor has displayed in ignoring fire officials recommendation. http://www.bantexassmartmeters.com/smart-meter-installation-fires/

7.)  Control over your Electricity Usage via financial incentives -

Once you have a Smart Meter (and corresponding receivers on appliances and thermostats, the Electric Co. will have the ability to CONTROL any appliances or Thermostat with the ‘Smart Technology’.  This is called Demand Response.  This article excerpt (below) explains, but note the first paragraph states in a round-about way that this program has been used in commercial applications by coercion, although, (for starters) in residential applications this will be voluntary, using price incentives.  I want to point out, that if they can coerce commercial to comply to involuntary power reduction (vial AC reduction, etc.), then, if the government decides it is in the best interest of reducing our ‘carbon footprint’ that individuals need to “do their fair share” to reduce peak usage, they could mandate such requirements through regulations.

Article excerpt follows: “Unlike some of the demand response programs for larger commercial and industrial customers, programs for residential users tend to be voluntary, which means that eligible customers sign up to participate in the program. The incentives for doing so are typically two-fold in that utilities provide some sort of financial reward for cooperating, and it helps ensure the reliability of the grid, serving the common interest.

Examples: 

Pacific Gas & Electric pays $25 to customers willing to participate in their Smart AC program, in which households with central air conditioning systems allow the utility to install a device that would allow the utility to turn down your cooling system in the event of an “energy supply emergency” in the summer, between May 1 and October 31.  Customers may opt-out for particular days if PG&E is given notice, though they will override your request in the event of an emergency.  Customers may cancel membership in the program at any time.

Similarly, ConEdison has a program by which households with central air systems can have a device installed that allows the utility to cycle the cooling system on and off, while a fan continues to move air in the home, during “system critical situations,” which the utility claims occur about twice a year. The program is voluntary and participants are offered $50 for their participation. It is possible to override the system, and turn the a/c back on, though participants who don’t override the system receive an extra $50 at the end of the summer.  Free programmable thermostats are also installed, which can be controlled via internet or mobile device.” (end of excerpt

8.) Numerous cases of Over-billing-

Two to 3X higher in Many Cases!  With No Recourse! Consumers are just given the tired out line from the electric provider, “It’s the weather”, or whatever it is, “You still need to pay the bill regardless, that is, if you want to keep your electricity on!”  In early 2010, enough complaints were received that the PUC requested Oncor to have the meters tested, which resulted in the ‘Navigant Report’.  The Navigant report stated that numerous meters had an event code of 2118, which the report said in most cases would result in higher bills.   Furthermore the Navigant report stated that Oncor should not have ignored the event codes that indicated the meters were not working properly.   Of utmost concern to me is that there has been no proof of Oncor having corrected the over-billing to the customers, although the report stated that the meters were removed from service.   As a result, I am calling for the PUC to determine whether these customers ever received remuneration for their over-billing.   Quote from the Navigant Report below, and a link to analysis of the report here: http://www.defranchiseoncor.org/SmartMeters/index.htm

News Story Examples of customers with extremely high bills: Texas examples: http://www.wfaa.com/home/Smart-Meter-moratorium-requested-by-Texas-senator-86298422.html

http://www.watchdognation.com/blog/smart-meters-become-urban-legends/

Another more recent Texas story, although it is not too specific:

http://6lawrence.com/news/local/smart-meter-customers-complain-of-higher-bills/

(Calif) http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_e013206e-e6c0-5059-b71b-64cc3e6b3a95.html

Rense Report gives additional likely reason for higher bills with the smart meters.   Link to article here:

http://www.rense.com/general94/meters.htm

Article Excerpt: “Heating elements in electric ranges, water heaters, clothes dryers and baseboard electric heaters all draw heavy current when first turned on. Heating elements are similar to electric motors. A heating element (and filament light bulbs) are almost a dead short when cold but as soon as power is applied these begin to heats up. As a heating element or incandescent lamp gets hotter it draws less current. After a period of time equilibrium is reached producing no further increase in temperature and power consumption is stabilized. Older electric meters respond fast enough to heating elements to add that in-rush current onto the electric bill.

To summarize, high starting current motors often draw very high currents only for a fraction of a second. Due to inertia, older mechanical disk electric meters cannot respond quick enough to register large motor starting current. But smart meters have no problem registering the brief, high power consumption from electric motors as these meters have no moving parts.”

Source: Ted Twietmeyer   tedtw@frontiernet.net

(end of excerpt from rense.com)

This is all I have for now, but this should be enough for you to get an idea of the details regarding each of the above issues.  If you contact the PUC on this, please post to this  websites comment section to let others know and be encouraged to do the same!

Any questions, or concerns, contact Cindy@bantexassmartmeters.com

Announcing!

HEADLINES:  The PUC has agreed to explore options for consumers with regards to the new Advanced Metering, aka Smart Meters.

What role does the PUC play in regards to the Smart Meter implementation?  To be honest, that is a big topic, of which I am not an expert.  But, for the purpose of this discussion, it should suffice the reader to know that the PUC of Texas is in existence in part to protect the Texas consumer.  I know many of you, as well as myself feel that if they had already been doing their job, Texans would not have had to clamor so loudly simply to protect their health and privacy.

[Please take time to read to the end, or at least scroll down to the bottom to get the recommended action points to take at this junction.]

Many of you may have heard the news- (Finally!) The PUC seems to be coming to the “table” concerning how to answer the public outcry resulting from the “mandatory installations” of smart meters in some areas in Texas.  Personally, I could hardly believe my ears!  I knew from the start this would be a tough battle to win…and I was reminded of that fact frequently by ‘naysayers’!  I know many of you, like myself, have felt the frustration of the ‘David and Goliath’ situation we have found ourselves in as a result of Oncor (or other TDU, depending on your location in Texas), having either slap a ‘Smart Meter’on our house without our informed consent, or knowing that iinstallation would be coming any day now, and there was very little that could be done to stop it [short of a stand-off in the front yard].  We do not know exactly what caused the PUC to finally acknowledge there may be some legitimacy to public concern.  But, one thing is for sure, prior to the filing of Devvy Kidd’s Formal Complaint n February 23, 2012, it was like talking to a wall to call either Oncor or the PUC!

Boo to Smart Meters Effects!

Here we are three years after the deployment of the first smart meters were installed in the DFW area in 2009, an approximately 3.5 million installed so far in the Oncor territory that reaches from DFW to the West Texas area. Finally, the PUC seems to be listening, after years of complaints, probably logging into the thousands.  No doubt, the Texas PUC has received a variety of consumer complaints, ranging from outrageously high bills to a variety of other concerns about ‘invasion of privacy’ to health concerns, or even actual symptoms that the customer began experiencing after the introduction of a ‘smart meter’ on their home.

The burning question you and I both want to know, “What is the PUC of Texas going to do about the situation we are currently in?”  Sources I have heard from, albeit a little on the vague side, say that an Opt-Out is under consideration, but very little details have surfaced to date.  Admittedly, I am pleased that the PUC is coming to the table. Let’s say they give us an “Opt-Out” option, but at what price?  What are the terms?  Is it acceptable that they give us a choice to Opt-Out, but follow suit with California and Maine, and implement a onetime charge followed by a monthly fee for the privilege of maintaining your health and privacy?  We as taxpayers are already paying for the entire cost  for the meters and deployment thereof, as the utility is always able to pass on any operation cost to the consumers.  Rather,  I agree with Devvy Kidd, who is the brave lady that on February 23, 2012 filed her Formal Complaint before the PUC of Texas.  In her complaint, she has asked that with any work out there be no financial penalty to ‘opt out’.  (Read about her complaint here.)

Should we still push for the Total Ban of these Smart Meters not simply accept the Option to “opt-out”?

Although I have been raised to be thankful whenever someone does something for me, and not to be ungrateful, I feel that in this situation that for the benefit of all Texans, we should stand strong for a complete ban of these meters.  Why?

Some may question, “Why should we push for a total ban?  I can be happy as long as it is not on MY house?”  Where would we be if the PUC were to make as a condition of giving us an Opt-Out, that there won’t be any future opportunity to create a total BAN for these smart meters?  Unfortunately, this is a very real possibility.  They might make this a condition for giving us an Opt Out, so they can continue their desired path, knowing that over time, as people move from one home to another, then, eventually every home will have the meters simply through attrition, and they have accomplished their mission.

Say "no", Protect your Health, Safety & Security!

On the contrary, now is the perfect time for us as consumers to require that the PUC finally take a very close look at all of the various issues that have been discovered to be problematic since the meters have been brought to market.  If the advanced meters (aka smart meters) have, or even potentially have as many negative issues as they are purported to have, then the public at large should be protected from them.  It would not be out of the realm of reasonableness for us to expect a moratorium on the smart meters while more testing and research is performed.  Whenever a product comes to market, such as the Advanced Meter, there typically are many thresholds of safety and testing the device will go through to protect the public in the area of health, safety and security.  However, as a result of additional ARRA (Stimulus) funding, there has been additional infusion of funds that has gone directly into implementing the smart meters according to the PUC Chairman Donna Nelson.  Therefore it should be no surprise that the advanced meters were ‘fast-tracked’ (a nice term for ‘rushed’) to market.  As a consequence, based on  all the research that I have done about the various flaws  of the smart meters, it seems to point to the probability that neither adequate research, testing, nor precaution was employed prior to their purchase and installation.  The PUC needs to ADMIT the truth, that these “Advanced Meters” were not ready for prime time, and that their deployment was indeed pre-mature, perhaps even reckless at worst.  This acknowledgement, in fact needs to include the DOE (Dept. of Energy), the Electricity Industry and all of its Institutions, along with the body that should be governing all the above regarding public safety.  Furthermore, I submit, all the Public Utility Commission’s (which go by various similar names, but have the same commission) of the participating states throughout the US should also be held responsible for the lack of readiness of the smart meters.  Will these ‘governing bodies’ police themselves?  Not without public pressure.  Therefore it is incumbent upon those of us who have uncovered the faults and dangers of these “so-called” Smart Meters to hold the PUC to accountability.

ACTION POINTS!

• Join your voice to ours – leave your comments below.
• We need to insist that the PUC stop further installations of the smart meters while further research as well as any negotiations are in progress.
• We also need to demand that further research be done that can show that the meters are safe in every regard before continuing on with their implementation.
• Write/call/fax the PUC (of your state, if not in Texas), with your findings, or concerns, as well as your State and Federal Legislators.
• There is additional help in doing this by looking at the “Take Action” tab at the top of this page, on the Menu.

‘WeTexans’ Wrote the Letter to Send to your Elected Officials-Now YOU Print and Mail!  Now how’s that for EASY…?

Ranting may make you feel better, (temporarily), but once your done, nothing will change.  However, take your rant to your State Representative, State Senators, and US Congressmen… then maybe, just  MAYBE it will make a difference!

WeTexans

Fortunately other Texans are hot on the “Smart Meter Trail”.  The group “WeTexans” headed up by Debra Medina have created a letter that they posted online for just that very purpose- for Texans to copy off, sign their name and if you want include their own letter and mail to your State Representatives, Senators, and heck, I’d even send some to your US Rep’s and Senators.  You could even send to such committee members that sit on state committees that consider or create such policy as even allowed these dumb ‘smart meters’ in the first place.  (I will try to locate some committee information and post it here soon!)

Here is the “WeTexans” LETTER that you can print out and send to all of the ‘below’ (PUC, All Reps and Senators).  Be sure if possible, to add a hand written note, or signature to this letter.  Feel free to add a full explanation of the main reasons you are against these, or just a simple note. Handwritten touches help make it count more than just copy and print alone.  Even hand address it too. (Note: this is not the original letter that many requested or sought, which was one that was a refusal of installation of the Smart Meter.  When you see this letter’s content, you will see it is different in nature.)

I almost forgot- DO send a copy to our beloved PUC of Tx. who is definitely looking out for the well being of the Texas electricity users…uh, that would be all of us!  If you doubt my word, here’s a quote from the PUC.gov website about their Mission:

Mission:
We protect customers, foster competition, and promote high quality infrastructure.

What We Do:
The Public Utility Commission of Texas regulates the state’s electric and telecommunication utilities, implements respective legislation, and offers customer assistance in resolving consumer complaints.

Now, since it is CLEAR that the PUC is here for assisting you in RESOLVING your complaints, I’m sure they want to hear from you today!*

For your convenience, I will even include the address to the PUC:

PUC – Customer Protection
P.O. Box 13326
Austin, TX 78711-3326
Fax: 1-512-936-7003
E-mail: customer@puc.state.tx.us

For writing your Texas Legislators you can find out who represents you here.  You will have one Representative, and one Senator here in Texas.

TIP!! When writing your US Rep or Senator, send your letter to their Texas Office.  Why? To avoid DELAY!  If a letter (not a postcard) goes to Washington, it is held up for examination because of the potential threat of ‘anthrax’. (Remember that scare? Well, they take no chances!)

For writing your US Representatives you can find out who represents you here.

For writing your US Senators you can find out who represents you here.  To get the physical State Office address be sure to click on the NAME link for your senator rather than the Web form or using the Washington address for reasons stated above!

We have made it as easy as we possibly can.

However, if you are really strapped for time, but still want to contact your elected officials- Send them a FAX…OR do both!  You can fax them in Washington, and it won’t be slowed down by security!

PLEASE SHARE THIS PAGE WITH YOUR FRIENDS…UNLESS YOU WANT TO GET OR KEEP THOSE ‘SMART METERS’! Thanks!

*Sadly, to date, I know many of you have dutifully emailed, called and written the PUC with the only response being…”We have forwarded your complaint to Oncor/Centerpoint or other TDU.”  I would imagine that was the last you heard.  One suggestion might try is to follow up with the PUC once 21 days have passed to see if they have heard back from the TDU (who is the entity that installs these), and then persist in telling them you are not satisfied with the solution.  Ask them why they are not protecting you from privacy invasion…or potential health risks, or for some of you, from the health effects you are now experiencing because of the meter having been installed.

These new meters haven’t gone to school, but they know their stuff!  They are outfitted with computer and radio frequency technology!

What does that mean to me?   

The wireless home -control smart devices remotely!

For one, they have two way communication – why? The utilities claim it is ALL for your BENEFIT, so that YOU can CONTROL your usage.  How?  They will give you the ability to operate any ‘smart enabled’ appliances or devices, from your computer or remotely from your smart phone.  If you can do it remotely, don’t you think they can too? (What about ‘Hackers’…? HUH? NOOOO! YES!)

The additional benefit for the utility, and their ultimate motivation…(Did you wonder why they are so excited to spend money on all this new technology?  You didn’t think it was just so you can play ‘God’ with your smart phone did you?)…it is so the utility can communicate with your ‘smart appliances’ of the near future (they are already in the market place), and have the ability to shut your AC compressors off, as well as turn down/up your smart thermostat (you know, the kind that TXU and Oncor are offering for FREE to some of the people who are ‘fortunate’? enough to have the ‘smart meters!), not to mention adjust your water heater temp, dryer, dishwasher etc.    [if you want proof, research the terms 'Zigbee' Oncor Smart Meters and chk out You Tube for very insightful videos explaining just that!]

Right now, the Utility Companies claim it is all “Voluntary”…[just like when they came and asked you if you want a smart meter, anyone remember that? Me neither!  Oh, and they aren't MANDATORY either, just ask Oncor or Centerpoint...] Oh, and there are [supposedly, of course], no future plans to make any of this mandatory. {LOL} But what keeps future legislation from being enacted that could easily be passed to require you to let them have control of your thermostat and other appliances/devices?

Currently, many Electric Service Providers, like TXU, Reliant and others are already offering to smart meter customers (in many areas) financial incentives in exchange for control of your power or higher peak rates!  For example, in some parts of the country, for one example, for a rebate, or lower Kwh rate, you allow them the ability to shut off your power at peak times during the year.  With TXU, they have a program that if you allow them to charge you more from about May – October during the peak times of the day, they give you a lower Kwh rate for the rest of the time.  Every Electricity provider is free (now) to offer whatever plan they want (so far), so plans will vary from company to company!

How is it that these meters are SO smart, and they didn’t even go to school?  Too bad the ‘camel’s nose is officially under the tent’ with the smart meter!  Anyone smell something rank?