BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF FILED CALIFORNIA 08-01-11

04:59 PM

In the Matter of the Application of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902 E) for Adoption of its Smart Grid Deployment Plan In the Matter of the Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Adoption of its Smart Grid Deployment Plan U 39 E Application of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E) for Approval of its Smart Grid Deployment Plan

A.11-06-006 (Filed June 6, 2011) A.11-06-029 (Filed June 30, 2011) A. 11-07-001 (Filed July 1, 2011)

CENTER FOR ELECTROSMOG PREVENTION PROTEST OF THE APPLICATION OF SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902 E) FOR ADOPTION OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN, THE APPLICATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR ADOPTION OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN (U 39 E), AND APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR APPROVAL OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN Pursuant to Rule 2.6 of the California Public Utilities Commissions (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, Center for Electrosmog Prevention (CEP) hereby responds to the applications filed on June 6, 2011, in the above captioned proceeding. The comments are timely because they are filed before August 4, 2011, the date set by the assigned Administrative Law Judge by a ruling issued on July 25, 2011. CEP expands its Protest to A.11-06-006, filed on July 6, 2011, to include a Protest to SCEs and PG&Es Applications for Adoption of their Smart Grid Deployment Systems, in addition to SDG&Es Application for Adoption of its Smart Grid Deployment System, per consolidation of these Applications and Protests. CEP adds one correction to its original Protest
Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

of July 6, 2011, and expands said Protest with remedy suggestions, and three attachments: Attachment 1: letter to the CPUC from scientist, Dr. Olle Johansson, Attachment 2: the World Health Organization Press Release No 208, of 5/31/11, and Attachment 3: CEP Opt-Out Proposal, July 28, 2011. The Center for Electrosmog Prevention (CEP) is a California nonprofit corporation representing utility customers and is Group Member of CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc. (CARE) pursuant to CAREs Bylaws. CEPs purpose is to promote the health of the general population by providing comprehensive information, prevention, solutions, and education regarding electrosmog1, defined as electromagnetic pollution. For purposes of correspondence contact: Party: Susan Brinchman Center for Electrosmog Prevention P.O. Box 655 La Mesa, CA 91944-0655 director@electrosmogprevention.org Information Only: Michael E. Boyd President CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc. (CARE) michaelboyd@sbcglobal.net BACKGROUND FOR THE PROTEST In Rulemaking 0812009 (R.0812009), the Commission issued Decision 1006047 (D.1006047) outlining the requirements for Californias investorowned utilities Smart Grid Deployment Plans, to be filed by July 1, 2011. A suggested method for reviewing these plans was published in June 2011, Evaluation Framework for Smart Grid Deployment Plans, A Systematic Approach for Assessing Plans to Benefit Customers and the Environment.2 This
1 Also known as electromagnetic radiation. Electricity supply systems, electrical appliances and a wide range of transmitters for various wireless applications generate non-ionising [non-ionizing] radiation (commonly referred to as electrosmog) that can be harmful to our health, depending on its intensity. Electrosmog in the Environment, Swiss Agency for Environment, Forests, and the Landscape SAEFL (June, 2005) http://www.wirelessimpacts.org/pdfs/Electrosmog-Swiss-Agency-report-2006.pdf 2 http://www.edf.org/documents/11795_EDF_SG_Evaluation_Framework_June_2011.pdf

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

report explains on page 2 that: Smart grid deployments should seek to share costs between utilities and consumers, and deliver benefits to consumers commensurate with investments. Smart grid deployment plans should share the investment and technology risk between utilities and their customers, while making sure customers get the full value from the investment, including reduced wholesystem costs and improved reliability, environment quality and public health. CEP is addressing the public health impacts of these plans. D.10-06-047 in Ordering Paragraph No. 3 ordered that Each section should also discuss how the Smart Grid will benefit customers and help meet environmental laws and policies contained in the Public Utilities Code. California Public Utilities Code section 768 mandates that: The commission may, after a hearing, require every public utility to construct, maintain, and operate its line, plant, system, equipment, apparatus, tracks, and premises in a manner so as to promote and safeguard the health and safety of its employees, passengers, customers, and the public. ANALYSIS CEP protests the applications of San Diego Gas &Electric Company (U 902 E), Pacific Gas and Electric Company for adoption of its smart grid deployment plan (U 39 E), and application of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E) for approval of their unsafe smart grid deployment plans utilizing a vast and complete indoor and outdoor mesh network based on constant, pulsed-radiation-emitting wireless technologies from which there is no escape; a switching mechanism and alleged incompatibility with home wiring that may also yield harmful emissions, aka dirty electricity and fires, for which there is no opt-out or safe remedy, except for a return to analog meters. To cause our counties, states, and nation to be dependent for our power on such a dangerous network is to invite disaster. We therefore strongly object and request a complete remedy. Epidemiological evidence consisting of many thousands of complaints involving serious health effects have been received by the CPUC and activist groups demonstrating widespread harm to humans and animals following the installation of smart meters. There is a growing body of independent scientific evidence consistent with these health complaints related to risks and/or dangers to biological beings from wireless technologies emitting pulsed/radiofrequency (RF) radiation, including humans, household pets, animals, wildlife, plants, agriculture and the
Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

environment. There are increasing warnings from scientists, researchers, experts, and world governmental bodies on the grave health and biological impacts dangers resulting from even low level exposures to rf radiation, pulsed rf radiation, and wireless networks3. These risks include cancer, as rf radiation has been recently added (on May 31, 2011) to the World Health Organizations list of (2B) potential carcinogens4, after undergoing a rigorous process, taking into consideration the warnings and research of thousands of scientists. "The increasing number of known or suspected environmental carcinogens compels us to action, even though we may currently lack irrefutable proof of harm." - Dr. LaSalle D. Lefall, Jr., Chair of the President's Cancer Panel, May, 20105. At the time that the smart grid was planned, conclusions from this research were emerging and have not yet impacted standards. Never-the-less, it is clear that RF radiation is not harmless, nor should we blanket our state or nation with it, as devastating results can occur, according to independent experts. 1. ...the inauguration of smart meters with grudging and involuntary exposure of millions to billions of human beings to pulsed microwave radiation should immediately be prohibited... It should be noted that we are not the only species at jeopardy, practically all animals and plants may be at stakeabundant evidence [exists] that biological effects and adverse health effects are occurring at [EMR] exposure levels hundreds to thousands of times below existing public safety standards around the world. (Johansson, PhD, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute (Sweden) 6 2. Many smart meters are close to beds, kitchens, playrooms, and similar locations. These wireless systems are never off, and the exposure is not voluntary. The smart meters are being forced on citizens everywhere. Based on this, the inauguration of smart meters with grudging and involuntary exposure of millions to billions of human beings to pulsed
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) (5.27.11) IARC, WHO (5.31.11) (Attachment 2) 5 Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now, May, 2010. http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualReports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf 6 Commentary on CCST report by Olle Johansson, Jan. 17, 2011 http://sagereports.com/smart-meterrf/?p=308
3 4

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

microwave radiation should immediately be prohibited until the red flag can be hauled down once and for allThe recent determination of the World Health Organization (WHO) to include radiofrequent radiation on the 2B list of carcinogens also applies to devices such as smart meters. (Johansson, PhD, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute
(Sweden), Letter to the CPUC, July 9, 2011, Appendix 1)7.

3. [Smart Meters] use is unwise from a public health point of view, which is where my expertise lies... (David O. Carpenter, MD, Director of the
Institute for Health & the Environment, Albany, NY) 8

4.

Smart meters, which operate 24/7 and radiate modulated microwaves intermittently, can therefore be expected to be particularly harmful to DNA....There is already evidence that heavy cell phone users are more prone to brain cancers...The regular transmissions from wireless smart meters can be expected to have much the same effect, with younger people being more at risk. The greatest damage from microwaves is when the brain is first developing in the [fetus] and the very young child, when it can lead to autism....There are ways in which the modulation of the signal can be changed to avoid this, but in the meantime, the compulsory introduction of smart meters can only contribute further to autism on a grand scale. This will be a further burden on the economy and increase the National deficit. This will far outweigh any possible advantages from the use of these metersThere is also a risk of legal complications for the utility companies. If it can be shown that that the consumer has taken reasonable precautions to minimize their microwave exposure by eliminating WiFi, cordless phones and wireless baby monitors from their house, the utility company could be held legally responsible for any autistic children that they may haveIn the UK, the

Johansson, PhD, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute (Sweden) Letter to the CPUC, July 9, 2011 (Attachment 1) http://www.scribd.com/doc/59738917/Dr-Johansson-s-letter-re-SmartGrid-Smart-Meter-dangers-to-CPUC-7-9-2011 8 http://www.scribd.com/doc/46947223/Dr-Carpenter-s-Comments-on-CCST-Smart-Meter-Report
7

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

lifetime cost of caring for an autistic child is in the region of one million pounds. It would be reasonable to claim compensation for this amount. In the United States, it may also be possible to claim punitive damages if it can be shown that the utility company knew of this risk when they installed or refused to remove a smart meter when requested.9
(Goldsworthy, Andrew, PhD, biologist, Science Advisor to European Space Agency on the biological effects of non-ionizing and ionizing radiation)

The original federal plans for the updating of the electrical grid, including the Energy Act of 2007, made no mention of the establishment of a vast blanket of radiation to be laid down in our homes, towns and cities, counties, states, and nation, for that was not its intent. SB 17, signed into law on Oct. 11, 2009 by Governor Schwarzenegger states that it is the policy of California to modernize the states electrical transmission and distribution system to maintain safe, reliable,10 efficient, and secure electrical service. The unsafe use of a vast wireless network was only recently developed as a hastily developed, cost-saving mechanism and nothing more, with a state plan developed in hasty anticipation of ARRA funding. The proposed plan put forward fails to require a health risk assessment as part of any environmental review of the proposed project be11 conducted pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Public health and safety was not a strong consideration, as the warnings of scientists in recent years have gone unheeded. To proceed with such a radical plan to wantonly blanket our communities with dangerous radiation from which there is no escape and to make our electrical grid dependent upon this is to place our entire civilization at risk. CEP therefore protests this as a violation of SDG&Es customers civil rights under Federal Law as well as their rights under the state law. CEP asserts that the waiving of independent environmental impact and safety testing is a mistake. CEP asserts that there is more than adequate demonstration of the dangers to public

10

HOW SMART METERS MAY CAUSE AUTISM AND CANCER, Goldsworthy, Andrew, PhD (July, 2011) Chapter 327, Statutes of 2009.

11 "The only role for this court in reviewing an EIR is to ensure that the public and responsible officials are

adequately informed `"of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made."'" (Berkeley Keep Jets Over The Bay Com. v. Board of Port Cmrs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1356, 111 Cal. Rptr.2d 598 (Berkeley).)
Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

health following the initial implementation of the smart grid plan, including all its wireless infrastructure and AMR/AMI/aka smart meters/aka smartmeters as indicated by many thousands of health complaints statewide, including those from SDG&Es region. CEP asserts that adding to the amount of unnatural levels of radiofrequency radiation, particularly on such a pervasive, grand scale, and particularly involuntarily, without regard to environmental conditions, susceptibilities, and medical condition, is highly reckless and will cause serious harm. This is confirmed by the record and according to independent scientists, physicians, and experts. Children, the elderly, pregnant women, the mentally ill, people with implants and medical devices that can be interfered with by wireless, such as cardiac pacemaker, hearing aids, and12 insulin pumps, are also at higher risk. (National Research Council, 2008) Metal implants, dental work, and use of metal eyeglasses and jewelry such as earrings, metallic adornments and implanted medical devices for the human body. examples include metal rim glasses, earrings, and various prostheses (e.g., hearing aids, cochlear implants, cardiac pacemakers) may interact with the RF radiation, [causing greater exposures and painful tissues]13. (National Academies of Science, 2008, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB)) CEP asserts that to proceed with further implementation of the smart grid plan would be to engage in reckless conduct that will further place the public in additional danger. This is an unprecedented, poorly researched, dangerous, indoor and outdoor wireless network-based program yielding pulsed RF radiation that has been shown to cause harm to thousands of individuals who complained and who have not received resolution. CEP asserts that all known statements of safety are based on biased industry sources and/or obsolete standards that do not specifically cover the conditions surrounding the smart meter program and its infrastructure. U.S. regulation of environmental contaminants is rendered ineffective by five major problems: (1) inadequate funding and insufficient staffing (2) fragmented and overlapping authorities coupled with uneven and decentralized enforcement, (3) excessive regulatory complexity, (4) weak laws and regulations, and (5) undue industry influence. Too often, these
12 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12036
13

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12036&page=16

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

factors, either singly or in combination, result 14 in agency dysfunction and a lack of will to identify and remove hazards. (Presidents Panel on Cancer, 2008) Enough harm has been demonstrated to individuals and the public health, as well as household pets, wildlife (possibly even including bees), and the environment to warrant a halt to the program, followed by extensive unbiased independent investigation, with remedies. The public has not been adequately warned about the risks, dangers, or harm to the public health, to date, thus reducing the number of complaints, particularly in Southern California where the media has not covered this topic adequately nearly no independent articles have been produced. To proceed as if this risky project is not harmful is to further place the public at grave risk and to potentially cause more illness, deaths, and irrevocable environmental harm. CEP is aware that San Diego Gas & Electric has received US Dept of Energy Recovery Act grant money to develop portions of the smart grid program with deadlines to implement that may be driving the desire of SDG&E to proceed as if the plan was not producing problems for customers. We are aware that SDG&E has knowledge of the health problems reported but has not acted on these to resolve them. CEP knows that SDG&E has a responsibility to the public, as does CPUC, to deliver services in a safe manner, protecting the public health, and to act in good faith. CEP does not believe that artificial grant deadlines should replace the more important nature of SDG&Es (and CPUCs) responsibility to safeguard the public. CEP is aware, in addition that there are at least several other concerns with the wireless smart grid plan these include incompatibility with household wiring and use of a switching mechanism that is asserted by some experts to produce dirty electricity, yielding an unnatural level of high frequency electromagnetic fields within the home that can impact biological beings. CONCLUSIONS CEP asserts that proceeding with the smart grid program places the public a grave risk for serious and increasing health problems, as well as grave risk of biological harm to the environment, including all living creatures. This is borne out by thousands of studies and reports
14 Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now, May, 2010. (p. 53)

http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualReports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf
Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

of harm from exposure to RF radiation and especially, similar frequencies. CEP asserts that reckless disregard of these facts not continue and that the smart grid program be halted and required environmental review be conducted first; not after the fact when it is too late to turn back. CEP further requests that the public be immediately informed of all complaints and possible risks to wireless technologies in advance, per independent research and world health authorities and governance bodies. CEP requests that CPUC, without delay, as a humanitarian and public health and safety measure, order an immediate opt-out and removal of wireless plan, that includes the following components: 1) Opt-outs 2) Removal of all wireless components to the grid 3) Full public disclosure of all complaints and scientific warnings.15 CEP requests that the smart grid project be placed on hold until all these are resolved to the satisfaction of an independent advisory panel that is comprised of non-industry related, independent scientists, experts, and concerned members of the public, that are fully vetted by CEP and its associates. Respectfully submitted,

Susan Brinchman Center for Electrosmog Prevention P.O. Box 655 La Mesa, CA 91944-0655 Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. (Winston Churchill)

Martin Homec P. O. Box 4471 Davis, CA 95617 Tel.: (530) 867-1850

15

CEP Opt-Out Proposal, July 28, 2011 (Attachment 3)

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

E-mail: martinhomec@gmail.com Attorney for CEP July 30, 2011

Attachment 1: letter to the CPUC from scientist, Dr. Olle Johansson, Attachment 2: the World Health Organization Press Release No 208, of 5/31/11, and Attachment 3: CEP Opt-Out Proposal, July 28, 2011.

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

10

VERIFICATION
I, Susan Brinchman, am Director and Founder of the Center for Electrosmog Prevention and am authorized to make this verification on its behalf. The statements in the document CENTER FOR ELECTROSMOG PREVENTION PROTEST OF THE APPLICATION OF SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902 E) FOR ADOPTION OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN, THE APPLICATION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR ADOPTION OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN (U 39 E), AND APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR APPROVAL OF ITS SMART GRID DEPLOYMENT PLAN filed on July 30, 2011, are true based on my own knowledge, except for those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on July 30, 2011 at La Mesa, California.

Susan Brinchman Center for Electrosmog Prevention P.O. Box 655 La Mesa, CA 91944-0655 director@electrosmogprevention.org

Protest by CEP July 30, 2011 to A.11-06-006; A.11-06-029; A.11-07-001

11