Canary In The Coal Mine

Thursday, October 13, 2016

New Public Utility Rules - My Comments

Below (in black) is the comment I submitted to the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) regarding the proposed new public utility rules. The proposed new rules can be viewed here. And comments submitted should be posted for the public to view at their e-Dockets site here.

Someone had discovered that the MPSC was allegedly redacting comments that had to do with health and medical treatment, and suggested the verbiage in the first two paragraphs of my comment.

October 10, 2016

Executive Secretary

Michigan Public Service Commission

P.O. Box 30221

Lansing, Michigan 48909

Re: MPSC Case No. U-18120

Dear Sirs and Madams:

Please Note: I want the information below and any attachments published in full in the public comments section of the edocket for U-18120. Under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, I, as a private person, have every right to disclose and disseminate, in whatever form I choose, any information about myself, including information about my health and health reports from medical professionals. There is nothing in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) that precludes me from doing so.

The Commission does not fall under HIPAA rules and may not use the language of HIPAA to circumscribe the commentary I wish to make of my own free will on the public record in this or any other proceeding in regard to my health or in providing documents from an entity covered by HIPAA. The Commission is not a health plan, health care clearinghouse, or health care provider, nor does it perform functions or services on behalf of a an entity covered under HIPAA. HIPAA applies only to "health plans, health care clearinghouses, and to any health care provider who transmits health information in electronic form in connection with transactions for which the Secretary of HHS has adopted standards under HIPAA." See HHS.gov at https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/. The only other type of entity that might be governed by HIPAA "is a person or organization, other than a member of a covered entity's workforce, that performs certain functions or activities on behalf of, or provides certain services to, a covered entity that involve the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information. Business associate functions or activities on behalf of a covered entity include claims processing, data analysis, utilization review, and billing.” Id.

In reviewing the proposed new rules, I have found areas of concern I will describe, along with my questions:

R 460.102 Definitions; A to F. (b) talks about customer account information and data. The words "extraordinary effort" are used. This is vague. One person's extraordinary effort is effortless for another, such as a hacker.

With smart metering technology, cyber security is a real threat. Did you know that Lansing's Board of Water & Light got hacked into this past April? Or that hackers have already taken down the power grid in the

Ukraine

? What is being done to address these real threats to our *safety? (*See end note)

Please see the following links about smart meters and hacking:

R 460.111 General deposit conditions for residential customers. (8) This is the first place in the proposed new rules where utility companies want to REDUCE the amount they pay to customers in interest by 2%. Why would you allow this? Are utility companies loosing money? Is this *reasonable?

R 460.111a General deposit conditions for nonresidential customers. (5) Another mention of reducing interest utility companies pay to customers on deposits, from 7% to 5%. While utility rates and tariffs continue to rise, utility companies charge customers more, but PAY customers less when they hold customer money. I do not consider this *reasonable. Do you?

R 460.116 Meter relocation. Rule 16. (1) (b) This rule addresses if a customer threatens harm to a utility worker. What about utility meters that harm customers? Are you not a "Public Service Commission"? I thought you were supposed to help protect public utility customers by promoting *safe service. If that it not your job (among other things) to help protect public utility customers, then what IS your job?

R 460.126a Billing error. Rule 26a. (1) This rule proposes another reduction in the interest utility companies pay customers, from 7% to 5% on overcharges. Again, is this *reasonable? Or is this benefiting the utility companies at the EXPENSE of the customers?

This rule also states: "A utility is not required to adjust, refund, or credit an overcharge plus 5% (which should remain at 7%) APR interest for more than the 3 years immediately preceding discovery of the billing error..." This is unacceptable! New NON-ANALOG public utility meters have a history of overcharging. This proposed rule would relieve public utility companies of some of their responsibility for choosing to install faulty, inferior equipment and/or for installing equipment incorrectly.

To relieve utility companies of some of their financial responsibility to customers is *unreasonable. Again, it is protecting utility companies at the EXPENSE of the customers.

Utility companies must be held accountable for billing errors for no less than 7 (seven) years from the time the error is discovered and pay a minimum of 7% interest on the amount overcharged.

Please see the following links about smart meters and over-charging:

Did you know that "smart" and digital "opt-out" electric meters TAKE electricity to run? ANALOG meters do not. Who is paying for this extra electricity usage to run new electric meters? The customer is. Is this additional financial burden to customers *reasonable?

R 460.137 Shutoff or denial of service permitted. (1) Why is the word "hazardous" used here but NOT defined under R 460.102 Definitions? This word and this statement are both too vague for a document of this magnitude. This is definitely NOT a *reasonable rule.

R 460.137 (1) would allow utility companies to shut-off service to customers who refuse the installation of a new, NON-ANALOG, utility meter. Some customers already know they are sensitive to new metering technology and want to keep ANALOG meters.

If our natural gas provider had told us their new AMR ERT NON-ANALOG meters send signals over 450,000 times per month, we would have refused installation. That could happen to a customer in the middle of the winter. It could be just a matter of hours before water pipes begin to freeze and burst, creating possible catastrophic property loss for utility customers. Is it *reasonable to expect customers to accept new metering technology when they are already aware of a sensitivity to it? Is it *reasonable to expect customers to be OKAY with natural gas (or electric) shut-off in the middle of the winter with NO NOTICE?

By not defining "hazardous," you give utility companies the power to create their own rules regarding shutoffs as they go along. This is definitely NOT *reasonable, and makes the Michigan Public Service Commission of NO VALUE to utility customers.

"Hazardous" must be clearly defined, please. THAT is only *reasonable!

Furthermore, the following rules must be added:

(1) Utility companies must provide full disclosure of what exactly they are installing on customers homes. Utility companies must provide complete and accurate information about equipment before installing new equipment.

I was already avoiding cell phones because of a known sensitivity to radio frequency radiation, prior to new AMR ERT gas meters being installed.

The gas company told us their new meters only transmit once per month, for the meter read. What they didn't say was that they send signals over 450,000 times per month. Had they told us the whole truth about their new meters, we would have refused installation. But we didn't, and within three months, I started having symptoms of electromagnetic hypersensitivity. I didn't know it, at the time. I had no idea the new AMR ERT gas meters were going to eventually make me extremely unwell.

About a week after I requested information on their new AMR ERT gas meters, Dave Williams, the Regional Operations Manager at SEMCO Energy, emailed me with the data about what exactly the new AMR ERT gas meters do. I'm not sure he even knew the details about their new AMR ERT meters before I inquired.

Mr. Williams also told us they have no opt-out, so the only thing we could do if we wanted the new AMR ERT gas meters that made me extremely unwell removed, is disconnect natural gas service. Is THAT *reasonable?

(2) Utility companies must offer an ANALOG utility meter choice.

There's a growing number of people in Michigan discovering they are electro-sensitive, thanks to smart meters, as you may already know, given the number of complaints you have and are receiving. This is a growing health crisis. Please do your job to help protect us. We must be accounted for.

Harm done by wireless technology and electromagnetic fields has been known about since the 1980's. Perhaps even before that. You must do your job and protect the people in Michigan who are electro-sensitive.

Also, new NON-ANALOG electric meters now have a growing history of explosions and/or starting fires. Utility customers who wish to AVOID the increased risk of fire from a public utility meter must be given an ANALOG utility meter choice.

(3) Utility customers must be given the choice to either:

a. read their ANALOG meter themselves at NO additional charge if they submit their reading electronically, or

b. read their ANALOG meter themselves at NO additional charge save postage if they submit their reading via the

United States

Postal Service, or

c. have the utility company come out and read their meter for a minimal charge.

(4) Utility companies must be prohibited from charging customers for utility bills that are printed and mailed via the

United States

Postal Service.

This is *reasonable given the fact that not all utility customers own a home computer. It's *unreasonable to expect customers to leave their homes in order to view their utility bills.

I've been told to be respectful to the Michigan Public Service Commission, however I find it difficult to be respectful to people who have been defending and protecting those who've taken away my Rights as a Human Being to *Safety, Security, and Privacy in my own home.

Please, do your job and earn the respect the Michigan Public Service Commission deserves. Otherwise, you are a useless organization to the People of Michigan.

Most Sincerely,

Jeanine S. Deal

*R 460.101 Applicability; purpose. (2) These rules are intended to promote safe and adequate service to the public and to provide standards for uniform and reasonable practices by electric and natural gas utilities in dealing with residential and non residential customers. (My highlights added)

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Unnecessary Microwave Radiation

Image from Smart Meter Education Network

On Tuesday, October 4, 2016, I spoke again to the City Commissioners of Battle Creek during the three minute General Public Comment time:

Every 14 seconds the new, so-called "smart" water meters the City of Battle Creek Water Department has been installing, send pulses of radio frequency radiation, per Perry Hart from the Water Department. That's over 6,000 pulses of electromagnetic energy per day from "smart" water meters alone.

Add the over 15,000 pulses per day from new SEMCO Energy AMR ERT gas meters, and we're being zapped over 21,000 times per day from gas and water public utility meters alone.

New Consumers Energy "smart" meters, also known as "advanced" meters (they keep changing the name), will zap us even more.

The citizens of Battle Creek are being involuntarily and chronically exposed to unnecessary electromagnetic energy emitted by the "smart" meters you are in approval of.

Since you have not been able to provide proof these new meters are safe for humans, let alone the birds and the bees, have you looked into your liability for approving this unsafe technology?

Andrew A. Marino, Ph.D., ~~wrote the book~~ (co-authored the study), “Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: Evidence for a Novel Neurological Syndrome.”

Dr. Marino also submitted an expert report in a recent smart meter lawsuit here in the United States that probably no one has heard about because smart meter lawsuits are not reported in mainstream media news.

Dr. Marino testified:

“... [there] is a reasonable basis in established science for the Complainants’ concern regarding risks to human health caused by man-made electromagnetic energy in the environment, including the type of electromagnetic energy emitted by smart meters. These health risks are heightened in the very young, the very old, and in those with preexisting diseases or disorders."

"... electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a documented neurological condition in which the affected person experiences musculoskeletal, immunological, and/or neurological symptoms that noticeably flare or intensify upon exposure to man-made electromagnetic energy in the environment."

Public utility meters never bathed us in radio frequency radiation. Until now, that is. Until smart meters, advanced meters, AMR ERT meters.

This is unnecessary radio frequency radiation, in the microwave range.

So I ask you again: If the City of Battle Creek is to error in regards to Public Health, is it not best you error on the side of caution?

Thank you for listening. May you all be blessed!

Source Information:

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Michigan's New Public Utility Rules Hearing

Below is a close approximation of what I said at the Michigan Public Service Commission hearing on September 22, 2016, regarding the new rules for Michigan natural gas and electric utility customers.

About 35 people spoke. A lot of those who spoke have been harmed by new public utility meters (digital, "smart", AMI, AMR ERT), and a few severely disabled by them.

Time will tell if our comments will fall on deaf ears. Is corporatocracy alive and well in Michigan? We will see...

This is regarding Case No. U-18120

It is my view that "Full disclosure by public utility companies to customers regarding equipment" must be added to the "Consumer Standards and Billing Practices for Electric and Natural Gas Service" Rules.

If a public utility customer asks any questions about metering technology, the public utility company must be obliged to give all the information possible on the equipment, to the customer.

I argue that public utility customers have a right to know exactly what public utility companies propose to install on homes and businesses.

This is my view because: Instead of telling us that their new AMR ERT natural gas meters transmitted over 450,000 times per month, our natural gas provider told us that they transmit only once per month. That's a huge discrepancy, in my opinion. Had they been obliged to give us full disclosure, we would have refused installation.

I was already avoiding cell phone use because of a sensitivity I had developed to radiofrequency radiation, so had our natural gas provider told us their new AMR ERT meters pulsed radiofrequency radiation over 450,000 times per month, we would have refused installation.

According to the proposed new Rules, our natural gas provider could have then turned our natural gas service off, right then and there, without notice.

It is my opinion that here in Michigan, that rule could prove to be catastrophic for public utility customers. In the winter with below freezing temperatures, if gas or electricity is shut-off, it could be just a matter of hours before pipes begin freezing and bursting, leading to loss of property.

It is my view a minimum of a 21-day notice must be given to public utility customers prior to any shut-off, for any reason.

It is also my view that an "Analog Meter Choice" be added to the new Rules. As evidenced by the Oversight Committee Hearing in December of 2014, and perhaps about half of the people here today, there is a growing number of people in Michigan unable to tolerate new metering technology. I can not tolerate new AMR ERT meters, but our natural gas providers have no analog choice.

I argue that it is our right to choose what radiofrequency radiation and electromagnetic field emitting devices are in, and/or on, our homes.

Thank you.

(End of my comment.)

The Commission will continue to take written and electronic comments through 5:00 p.m., October 13, 2016.

Send written comments to:

Executive Secretary

Michigan Public Service Commission

P.O. Box 30221

Lansing, Michigan 48909

Electronic comments can be e-mailed to mpscedockets@michigan.gov. If you require assistance, contact Commission staff at (517) 284-8090 or by e-mail at mpscedockets@michigan.gov.

All information submitted to the Commission in this matter will become public information available on the Commission’s website and subject to disclosure. All comments should reference Case No. U-18120. Please do not include information you wish to remain private.

The new proposed rules for gas and electric public utility companies can be found here: http://efile.mpsc.state.mi.us/efile/docs/18120/0001.pdf

For more information, please see "Large Turnout for Michigan Utility Rules Hearing."

And here's the stories of two Michigan women who also testified at this hearing:

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Inadvertent Activists

This is what I said to the City Commissioners of Battle Creek at the City Commission meeting on Tuesday, September 20, 2016:

New, non-analog public utility meters are sometimes called smart meters, digital meters, AMR ERT, advanced meters, or upgraded meters. These new meters have inadvertently created a growing number of activists speaking out against them. The issues include privacy, cyber security, explosions and fires, safety, inaccuracy, over-charges, and health complaints.

New non-analog/smart metering technology has never been subject to human safety testing.

On the website wearetheevidence.org, you will see testimonies from all kinds of people, from medical doctors, attorneys, teachers, musicians, all who have one thing in common: They developed electromagnetic hyper sensitivity caused by electromagnetic fields.

New public utility meters all generate electromagnetic fields in the radiofrequency radiation range, and thereby increase everyone's chances of developing this potentially fatal condition.

Old analog public utility meters do NOT create electromagnetic fields.

The BioInitiative Report, with 29 authors, mostly medical doctors and PhD's, states:

"Bioeffects are clearly established and occur at very low levels of exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation."

Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by SEMCO Energy's new gas meters, Consumers Energy's new electric meters, and the City of Battle Creek's new water meters. Battle Creek's Perry Hart (the Director of Public Works) told us the new water meters pulse this radiation every 14 seconds. That's over 6,000 pulses per day of radiation from water meters alone!

Michigan is no stranger to health complaints from new non-analog public utility meters, as evidenced by the Michigan OversightCommittee hearing in 2014.

We are asking for something very simple: To keep the old, safe, time-tested analog public utility meters on our homes without penalty. Analog meters have been used for approximately 100 years without issue.

No one complained about analog meters, not even the utility companies. That is, until smart meters came along. That's when utility companies started to complain. They needed an excuse to "fix" what wasn't broken.

Thank you for listening. May you all be blessed.

(Comments are limited to three minutes, strictly enforced.)

Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Burden of Proof

To the City Commission of Battle Creek, on Tuesday, September 6, 2016, I quoted parts of this letter written to the North Carolina Utility Commission, and said:

The precautionary principle states that the introduction of a new product or process whose ultimate effects are disputed or unknown should be resisted. It is a form of risk management, with the intention of reducing risk. If an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action. Which would be all of you in regards to smart metering technology.

This is a letter, co-authored by a group of scientists and health professionals who together have co-authored many peer-reviewed studies on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation.

"The majority of scientific literature related to radiofrequency radiation stems from cell phone studies. There is strong evidence that people who use a cell phone held directly to their ear for more than 10 years are at significantly increased risk of developing gliomas of the brain and acoustic neuromas of the auditory nerve."

"Smart meters and cell phones occupy similar frequency bands of the electromagnetic spectrum, meaning that cell phone research can apply to smart meter radiofrequency radiation. Smart meter radiofrequency radiation consists of frequent very intense but very brief pulses throughout the day. Because smart meter exposure is over a 24 hour period, it can be very prolonged. Pulses can average 9,600 times a day... and because there is building evidence that the sharp high-intensity pulses are particularly harmful, the cell phone study findings are applicable when discussing adverse health impacts from smart meters."

"While the strongest evidence for hazards coming from radiofrequency radiation is for cancer, there is a growing body of evidence that some people develop a condition called electromagnetic hypersensitivity. "

I did, once smart meters were installed where I live.

"These individuals respond to being in the presence of radiofrequency radiation with a variety of symptoms including headaches...."

These professionals have said:

"There is absolutely no safe level of exposure established for radiofrequency radiation."

So, given this information from these educated professionals and their studies, the burden of proof of safety is now on all of you. So where is your proof that smart meters are indeed safe?

Thank you for listening. May you all truly be blessed.

(End of three minute "General Public Comment")

Speaking of "burden of proof," I've come across a couple of new websites with more scientific studies on radiofrequency radiation:

Thursday, September 1, 2016

Knowledge Is Useless Unless It's Used

I love how Richard Kimberley, in his blog post titled "What You MUST Know," compares becoming electro-sensitive with a glass slowly being filled with drops of water:

"Imagine a glass under a dripping tap. You are the glass and the drips are microwave radiation. As the glass fills up throughout your life, there’s no cause for alarm, no damage is perceived as being done. However, once that glass fills to the top, the trouble is about to start. The final drip overflows the glass and now we have a mess. You can move the glass away from the tap, but only a little of the contents will evaporate. One or two more drips, and we’re overflowing again."

Most people don't feel microwave radiation. That is, until they do. When their glass overflows.

Cell phones were no problem for me. Until they were. After several months of cell phone use, I started to feel pain and a burning sensation in my "phone ear." My glass was overflowing. So I stopped putting the cell phone to my ear, and the pain went away. My body began to heal, and perhaps some of the water in my glass began to evaporate.

Just a few months after new gas meters were installation, I felt the first symptom of my glass overflowing again. I didn't know microwave radiation emitting utility meters had been installed. New gas meters are not called "smart." But, I found out later, they do pulse microwave radiation over 600 times per hour, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, non-stop. That's the same frequency as cell phones, by the way.

And the gas company wont remove the new not-smart meters unless we want our natural gas turned-off. Permanently.

New symptoms of my glass overflowing were occurring, beyond just my phone ear hurting. I describe some of my experience here and here. Within a short period of time, I went from radiantly healthy, to achy all over, extremely exhausted, and more. I was rapidly declining.

Several months later, I identified the problem as being the not-smart gas meters, and began to remedy the microwave radiation problem.

It's been ten months now since we first blocked the radiation emitting from the not-smart gas meters. I've also been turning electric breakers off at night, to cut down on the dirty electricity. Though many of my symptoms have lessened considerably, not all symptoms are gone, and I still don't have the energy I had before not-smart gas meters were installed. Maybe I never will. But it is what it is.

Biological effects from microwaves and radiofrequency radiation have been known about for many years, and have even been researched by NASA. But our governments seem to be run by large corporations and powerful utility companies, and they seem to be calling many of the shots. At the expense of human health and safety.

"While human health and safety continue to be dismissed by many, growing scientific evidence is showing a dark side to cell phone, WiFi, smart meter and point-to-point technologies." ~ Dr. Albert Manville, Adjunct Professor, Johns Hopkins University

Is this the world you want to leave to your children's children's children? One that cares more about profit than human health and safety?

Knowledge is useless unless it's used.

Thank you for reading ~ May all beings be blessed!

Some information:

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

"We Are The Evidence"

Angel of Truth photograph by Nicholas Miller found here

Last night at the Battle Creek City Commission meeting I shared summaries of some of the public comments from the Michigan Oversight Committee Hearing on Smart Meters, December 2014. What I shared was from just a few of the many people who testified to adverse health effects from smart meters.

If I spelled someone's name incorrectly that you know of, please let me know.

This was my three-minute "General Public Comment" to the commissioners:

I recently sent you all a link to the video of the Michigan Oversight Committee Hearing on smart meters, December 2, 2014. I would like to read a summary of a few of the comments.

Lori Ebaugh, Milford, MI: Didn't know a smart meter had been installed, started to experience heart palpitations, heart arrhythmia, insomnia, high-pitched ringing in her ears.

Carol Garcia, Rochester Hills, MI: Was very healthy. Became "deadly sick" after 2 to 3 months of smart meter exposure. Symptoms: "Every day" bloody nose, headache, vertigo, nausea, chest palpitations, insomnia, fatigue. Three of her doctors want smart meters removed from her house immediately.

Melissa Cardon, Muskegon County, MI: Her husband started to experience more frequent epileptic seizures, inability to sleep and neuropathy in his legs. Both experienced elevated blood pressure. They are low income, so the opt-out fees are significant for them.

April Jones, Shelby Township, MI: Headaches, sharp pains in her head, dizziness, insomnia, extreme fatigue, depression, anxiety, agitation, nausea, joint and muscle pain, memory issues, palpitations, chest pains, arrhythmia, shortness of breath, became bedridden. Can not live in a facility with a smart meter.

Linda Kurtz from Michigan's Smart Meter Education Network submitted a comment about 60% of the people who've called her with smart meter health complaints didn't know a smart meter had been installed when they began to experience their symptoms.

"We are the evidence..."

This is only a small fraction of the people who testified on December 2, yet our utility companies continue to install smart meters. These people are the evidence something is gravely wrong.

This is not a matter of the science catching up with technology, because the science is available. I've shared numerous articles and quotes with you, and now "reliable diseasebiomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity" has been studied and identified.

This is a matter of mainstream acceptance of the truth of electrohypersensitivity and smart meters.

Smart meter opt-out fees are discriminatory. And it's troubling the only concern the City Attorney of Battle Creek expressed in regards to all the Michigan lawsuits involving smart meters, was whether or not any of them had been upheld.

If you are truly concerned about the safety of all the citizens in Battle Creek, which you had expressed (earlier in the meeting), Mayor Walters, please, help stop this and support House Bill 4916, Analog Utility Meter Choice legislation.

Thank you for listening. May you all truly be blessed.

For more information about electrohypersensitivity, please see:

We Are The Evidence - Wireless Injury Advocacy Group

If you live in Michigan and would like to support legislation that allows all utility customers the choice to keep analog public utility meters, please see:

If You Live In Michigan