Maine: Oral Arguments Smart Meter Case – Live 5/10/12 6:50 AM EST

For Immediate Release 5/09/12
Maine High Court to Hear Oral Arguments
in Smart Meter Case [Contesting Fees for Analog Choice]

Listen Live
Contact: Ed Friedman, Lead Plaintiff: 666-3372 edfomb@comcast.net
Bruce McGlauflin, Attorney for the Plaintiffs: 775-0200 bmcglauflin@pmhlegal.com
When: Thursday, May 10 at 9:50am. Time allotted by court: 30 minutes.
Where: Maine Supreme Judicial Court, Newbury St., Portland, ME
Web: Oral Arguments now also live on the court website. Click on appropriate links to hear live streaming of oral arguments: http://www.courts.state.me.us/maine_courts/supreme/stream.shtml
Oral arguments in Maine citizens’ smart meter appeal from the Public Utilities Commission
(PUC) decision will be heard Thursday in Portland by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.
Arguments are scheduled to begin at 9:50am and may also be heard streamed live from the
Court’s website. Appellants seek to overturn the smart meter program on constitutional
grounds. If the court is unwilling to overturn, appellants ask the case be remanded to the PUC
for evidentiary hearings with a stay on opt-out fees at least until a full investigation is
completed.
As part of a rapidly rising international tide of smart meter opposition, Maine privacy and
safety advocates appealed a PUC dismissal of their earlier complaint which raised concerns
about safety, privacy, security, trespass and constitutional violations related to the meters. In
dismissing the complaint the PUC stated all of the issues had been adequately investigated and resolved in earlier proceedings, referred to as the Opt-Out Investigation. The notice of appeal to Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court was filed October 31, 2011 by attorney Bruce McGlauflin of the Portland firm Petruccelli, Haddow & Martin, LLP representing the Appellants.
Questions raised on appeal include whether safety, privacy and other concerns raised in
the complaint were fully and adequately addressed and decided correctly by the
Commission in its previous Opt-Out Investigation and, whether the PUC satisfied its
Legislative mandate to “ensure safe, reasonable and adequate service.” In an Opt-Out
Investigation Order dated January 7, 2011, the PUC stated: “We make no
determination on the merits of health, safety…or which federal or state agency has the
jurisdiction to make these determinations.” And in an Order dated June 22, 2011, the
PUC reiterated it “is making no determination on the merits of the health, safety,
privacy or security concerns with respect to wireless Smart Meters.” The complaint also
raises constitutional issues of illegal search and seizure (the fourth amendment) and
takings (the fifth amendment).
When operational, the smart meter system will work as a “mesh network” of individual meters
wirelessly communicating with one another to relay customer power usage and personal data to Central Maine Power. Privacy concerns are high on the list for many electricity consumers.
The National Institute for Standards and Technology, Government Accountability Office and
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers are among the more established entities to
recognize potential privacy concerns including detailed consumer profiling that could be
obtained from smart meter data.
“More and more experts consider smart meter radiation to be a major toxics issue equivalent to
second-hand smoke and asbestos but this time mandated upon ratepayers”, said Kathleen
McGee, former director of the Maine Toxics Action Coalition. “Our issue with the PUC is
quite simple, in order for them to meet their statutory obligation to ensure safe and reasonable service; they need to first make a determination on these issues of concern. In order to do this, they need to fully evaluate the science and hear from the public, both of which they have repeatedly refused to do.”
In one of its Opt-Out Investigation rulings, the PUC allowed electricity consumers to opt-out of the smart meter program and retain their old analog meter but it also required these consumers to pay Central Maine Power Company an initial fee of $40 (for a meter they already have) plus a $12 monthly fee for this option. All ratepayers are bearing the cost of the smart meter program so those who opt out are required to pay twice.
“Endangerment, immoral, illegal, unethical, irresponsible or just plain wrong; call it what you
will, but when citizens are ordered by the PUC to pay-up in order to avoid real or perceived
harms to health and privacy, this is the antithesis of good government. In fact, it’s good
government gone very, very bad,” said Ed Friedman, lead Plaintiff in the case.
Shortly after the PUC issued their first Order in the Opt-Out Investigation, the World Health
Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO/IARC) issued a report
identifying as a “possible carcinogen” the type of non-ionizing radiation emitted by smart
meters, cell phones and other wireless devices. This puts smart meter radiation in the same
category (2B) used by WHO/IARC for classifying other potential carcinogens, such as DDT,
benzofuran, chlordane, chloroform, 4,4′-Diaminodiphenyl ether, diesel fuel, 2,6 Dinitrotoluene, gasoline, lead, Polybrominated biphenyls, styrene, Toluene diisocyanates, and 4- Vinylcyclohexene.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine is calling upon the California PUC to
institute an immediate moratorium on smart meter installations pending further studies. Last
week the Vermont legislature passed a bill allowing anyone requesting to keep their analog
meter to do so without paying any opt-out fee. In California 56 local and county municipalities
have demanded a halt to smart meters. Because 3-10% of the population have acute sensitivity
to RF, even opt-outs do not prevent illness in this group if living in urban or suburban areas
and exposed to neighboring smart meters. Across the country, thousands have been made
homeless, are living in their cars or are stuck in their homes in constant pain from RF exposure.
“Concerns about the new technology are only increasing and Congressional hearings have been called for,” says Friedman, “It will be some time before this issue is settled. Meanwhile, we encourage ratepayers not to sanction this uncontrolled and PUC – mandated experiment on their health and constitutional rights, but instead to keep their existing (analog) meters and not pay the extra fee. Our request is simple: Don’t Pay! That sends a clear message to CMP and the PUC.”
# # #

[CEP Note: the above is a Press Release from one of the Maine activists and may necessarily reflect the opinion of CEP, w/ regards to non-payment of the extra fee. CEP recommends, that the customer consider writing “paying under duress” on the check for extra fees, and continuing to contest them. For instance, the VT state legislature just ruled that no-fees may be charged for utility customers who choose not to have smart meters for any reason.]