MA RESIDENTS FILE DPU FRAUD COMPLAINT WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL

Contact: StopSmartMetersMASS@gmail.com

MA RESIDENTS FILE DPU FRAUD COMPLAINT WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL

Short Version

 Massachusetts residents have filed a fraud complaint with the Attorney General and the Legislature concerning the $7B MA Department of Public Utilities smart meter mandate.

 

Smart meters enable electric companies to implement time-of-use billing for electricity. The meters have resulted in rising consumer costs and reported adverse health effects nationally and internationally.

 

Tobacco scientist Peter Valberg provided testimony justifying smart meter safety for the MA Department of Public Utilities in Feb. of 2014, within weeks of his testifying for Phillip Morris light cigarettes.

 

Valberg also testified for National Grid before the Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals in May of 2014. Worcester is the site of the controversial $48M National Grid pilot, which was delayed due to citizen opposition. The pilot includes 15,000 smart meters and 180 WiMax microwave antennas.

 

The fraud complaint states that Peter Valberg misrepresented international exposure limits and health research to the Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals, and calls for an investigation of the Worcester pilot, which is behind schedule. The $250,00 unbudgeted expense for installation of an industrial-scale sound wall in the Tory Fort area was necessitated by noise violations and has been attributed to improper engineering by opponents, who question why the DPU has mandated smart meters without waiting for the results of the pilot program

 

The complaint to the MA Attorney General delineates how the DPU fraudulently represented FCC limits as inclusive of non-thermal impacts, by falsely referencing sources that did not correspond to the text of the order issued by DPU Chair Ann Berwick in June of 2014.

MA RESIDENTS FILE DPU FRAUD COMPLAINT WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL

Long Version

Massachusetts residents have filed a fraud complaint with the Attorney General and the Legislature concerning the $7B MA Department of Public Utilities smart meter mandate.

 

Smart meters enable electric companies to implement time-of-use billing for electricity. The meters have resulted in rising consumer costs and reported adverse health effects nationally and internationally.

 

Tobacco scientist Peter Valberg provided testimony justifying smart meter safety for the MA Department of Public Utilities in Feb. of 2014, within weeks of his testifying for Phillip Morris light cigarettes.

 

Valberg referenced Canada’s Safety Code 6 for the DPU as evidence of consensus for RF safety limits. On May 7, the Canadian Medical Association Journal published a scathing condemnation of Health Canada’s safety guidelines. International experts in radiation and cancer warn that the microwave levels allowed in Canadian classrooms, residences and workplaces are, “a disaster to public health.”

 

Valberg also testified for National Grid before the Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals in May of 2014. Worcester is the site of the controversial $48M National Grid pilot, which was delayed due to citizen opposition. The pilot includes 15,000 smart meters and 180 WiMax microwave antennas.

 

The fraud complaint states that Peter Valberg misrepresented international exposure limits and health research to the Worcester Zoning Board of Appeals, and calls for an investigation of the Worcester pilot, which is behind schedule. The $250,00 unbudgeted expense for installation of an industrial-scale sound wall in the Tory Fort was necessitated by noise violations and has been attributed to improper engineering by opponents, who question why the DPU has mandated smart meters without waiting for the results of the pilot program.

 

Radiofrequencies were classified a 2B possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer in May of 2011. The EMR Policy Network provided testimony to the MA DPU that the National Academies of Science identified extensive shortcomings of FCC limits in a 2012 report, including lack of relevancy for pregnant women, infants, children, and the medically vulnerable.  The Office of the Interior has cautioned that FCC limits are 30 years of date and that the impact on birds and other wildlife has not been adequately studied or monitored.

 

Canada and the U.S. are among the nations using the “thermal” or heating threshold as the safety recommendation for radio frequency exposure, while other nations protect against biological impacts at levels far below the thermal threshold.

 

On May 11, 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk. These exposures are a rapidly growing form of environmental pollution worldwide. The International EMF Appeal asks the Secretary General and UN affiliated bodies to encourage precautionary measures, to limit EMF exposures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly to children and pregnant women.

 

Joel Moskowitz, PhD, of University of California, Berkeley, says, “ICNIRP guidelines set exposure standards for high-intensity, short-term, tissue-heating thresholds. These do not protect us from the low-intensity, chronic exposures common today. Scientists signing the Appeal request that the UN and member nations protect the global human population and wildlife from EMF exposures.”

 

The complaint to the MA Attorney General delineates how the DPU fraudulently represented FCC limits as inclusive of non-thermal impacts, by falsely referencing sources that did not correspond to the text of the order issued by DPU Chair Ann Berwick in June of 2014.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to MA RESIDENTS FILE DPU FRAUD COMPLAINT WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL

  1. Pingback: MA RESIDENTS FILE DPU FRAUD COMPLAINT WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL | Smart Meter News

Leave a Reply