Here is a summary (obviously incomplete) of serious concerns being raised by the forced implementation of the SmartMeter device on US citizens.

· Privacy Concerns – Am I being forced to accept or purchase devices I do not want that are a gateway into my home and personal life? Is this legal, or even constitutional? See California Constitution Article l, sections 7 & 8, and US Constitution 4th amendment

·      Device has the potential to track your usage by appliance, and even moderate or shut off power to them. Does PGE have the right to turn down or turn off services as they will?

§  To facilitate this, you may be required to purchase “Smart Appliances” giving access to the utility to monitor and control

· S. 3059, the National Energy Efficiency Enhancement Act of 2010

· ??

·      Data collected on your personal activity may be used for what?

§  Punitive billing

§  Marketing

§  Made public

§  Sold


· Security – Is my personal data in jeopardy? Is the Grid in jeopardy?

·      Personal

§  Any wireless device is susceptible to hacking and the planting of malicious software. Your personal network, devices and data may be vulnerable to being controlled, or having data stolen

·      The Grid

§  A Smart Grid is vulnerable to malicious attacks that can damage or even shut down service on a large scale

· Cost to consumers will most likely rise

·      More granular usage monitoring gives the utility the ability to use billing cost structures to incent or punish specific types of energy use

·      Current SmartMeter recording technology appears to capture 10-15% more usage than traditional analog meters. This may amount to an unapproved billing increase

·      Home and business owner appliance damages have been documented during SmartMeter installations. PG&E has been reticent to cover costs.

·      Will more expensive Smart Device appliance purchase be required?


· Choice is being restricted or eliminated (violate US Constitution 9th and/or 10th amendment?)

·      Can an individual be forced by government to accept a device they do not want in exchange for services, do you have the right to opt-in or opt-out?


· Liability to property owners is increased

·      Should a tenant or occupant of a building claim personal harm from the SmartMeter and sue the owner, what liability is incurred by the owner? Will PGE or the CPUC defend their device in court on behalf of the defendant? Their current response is “no”

·      Are potential liability claims insurable? Initial inquiries were told “no”


· Safety – Are certain individuals at risk to increased disease? Are certain devices prone to interference or damage?

·      Medical               

§  EMP sensitivity

§  Disease

·      Your personal devices

§  critical care and medical implant devices

§  wireless routers, wireless laptops, cell phones, PDAs, DECT or other active-base cordless phone systems, home security systems, baby  monitors

§  ground fault interrupters and arc fault circuit interrupters




This is a list of some possible actions being discussed. Those in blue are endorsed by NBP .  Those in green may trigger unintended consequences and need to be carefully considered by each individual.

To better understand where these programs come from, here’s the current order of authority:

· Order of legal/legislative authority

1.            Federal Law

2.            State Law

3.            CPUC

4.            PGE

5.            Local Government (Supervisors, Councils)

6.            The People



· Action options

1.            Legislative

§  State

· Enact State Law directing changes or cessation (i.e. through Huffman, Leno, etc.)

      1. Lobby for appropriate bill

§  City Councils, County Board of Supervisors

· Currently they must enforce state law and CPUC regulations. They may be in violation of the National Telcom act if they choose to impede the Utility.

· That being said, we still should lobby them and ask minimally for a strong request to PG&E and the CPUC to listen to the will of the people and structure their regulations accordingly

2.            Judicial

§  Challenge existing regulations at CPUC

· ??

§  Challenge existing law in court

· ??

§  Small claims court – Caution: may be ruled as nuisance suits. May trigger counter suit

·  Not yet installed

·  Threatening power shut down

·   Already installed

3.            Individual actions

§  Lobby state legislators

§  Lobby Supervisors

§  Lobby Councils

§  Talk to neighbors to encourage them to be involved

§  Write letters to editors, blogs, newsletters, etc

§  Hold town halls, forums, etc

§  Refuse installation

· Signs on meters

· Yard signs

· Field signs

§  File small claims action