Toxic Exposures
State Ignored ‘Hundreds’ of Public Comments Alleging Smart Meters Harm Health, Group Says
New Mexico regulators should consider public comments before deciding whether to allow smart meters in the state, according to a legal brief filed by New Mexicans for Utility Safety.
New Mexico continues to be one of the few states without smart meters — and many are working hard to ensure that it stays that way.
New Mexicans for Utility Safety — a public advocacy group that “has successfully opposed smart meters in the state of New Mexico for health and environmental reasons since 2016” — filed a legal brief this month with the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission.
The group alleges that “hundreds” of public comments testifying to smart meters’ dangerous impacts on human health and wildlife went overlooked in a case before the state’s regulatory commission.
Smart meters — sometimes referred to as AMI (advanced metering infrastructure) — are digital devices that measure and record electricity, gas or water consumption in real time and relay the information to utility companies, according to IBM. In addition to potentially harming health, many say the meters present privacy and cybersecurity risks.
The news comes as Children’s Health Defense seeks plaintiffs for its new series of strategic lawsuits to protect people from the harmful wireless radiation emitted by smart meters. People disabled by radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted by their smart meters are invited to apply.
The smart meter case before New Mexico’s regulatory commission involves whether the commission will approve or deny a “grid modernization” plan — which includes a smart meter rollout — proposed by the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM).
New Mexicans for Utility Safety urged the commission to deny PNM’s application.
The group also alleged in its brief “the total and illegal exclusion of the huge public opposition to AMI when considering the costs of this technology.”
“To totally ignore the public comments in a case,” the group said, “is to make a mockery” of the commission’s own rule which says, “All interested persons are afforded the opportunity to have input into cases which affect them.”
On April 18, the commission held a public comment hearing about the case and the cost-benefit analysis the commission asked PNM to submit for its proposed smart meter plan.
The commission said in an April 10 press release that comments made during the hearing “will not be considered as evidence in this proceeding.”
New Mexicans for Utility Safety took issue with this. “Public comments should be considered in evaluating PNM’s Cost-Benefit Analysis,” the group said.
The group also argued that costs to human health and the environment should be included in the cost-benefit analysis.
PNM has ignored scientific studies and evidence of “severe health effects,” the group said. Additionally, the state’s hearing examiner ruled that evidence relating to health and the environment was “irrelevant” to the case, the group added.
The hearing examiner even scheduled another prehearing event for the case at the same date and time as the public comment hearing, “thus guaranteeing that neither he nor any of the parties would be able to hear those public comments.”
“This is contrary to law. … Input that is not even heard by the decision-maker is not input,” the group said.
Do you have a news tip? We want to hear from you!
Woman’s seizures stop when she is away from smart meters
Many of the comments submitted during the hearing came from people who had smart meters installed on their homes and then sought to live somewhere without a smart meter — like New Mexico — because they believed the RF radiation emitted by the device was affecting their health.
New Mexicans for Utility Safety’s legal brief included this comment from Elizabeth Foley Walsh:
“After a smart meter was installed in my home in NC [North Carolina], I began having severe headaches and dizziness the very next week, and absence episodes which later were diagnosed as temporal lobe seizures …
“I had to go on medical leave from my 18-year career in developmental epidemiology … In desperation, I decided to sign a short-term lease to move to a remote and rural community in NC where I could pay a fee to keep my analog meter.
“I was not terribly optimistic which is why I was stunned at the change in my health. It was truly shocking. I never had another seizure.”
Deirdre Novella believes she was severely affected by smart meters. “They were installed at my job as a hair stylist,” she said, “and within a few months I had massive radiation poisoning symptoms.”
“My hair was falling out and I was diagnosed with leukemia … New Mexico is a safe haven for me, so I think smart meters should be banned,” Novella added.
Other commentators noted how they no longer saw wildlife — including bees, birds and frogs — after a smart meter was installed on their home.
This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.
The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.
New Mexico is a ‘refuge’
In its choice to reject smart meters so far, New Mexico serves as “a refuge and an example to the world,” said Arthur Firstenberg, president of the nonprofit Cellular Phone Task Force and New Mexicans for Utility Safety, and author of “The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life.”
Many other states now have smart meter mandates, with varying opt-out options.
PNM has tried three times to get regulatory approval to put smart meters in the state, according to New Mexicans for Utility Safety.
After PNM on Oct. 3, 2022, filed its third application with the state’s regulatory commission, the commission asked PNM to provide a cost-benefit analysis for its proposed grid modernization investment.
It is currently unclear when the commission will decide on PNM’s application.
No comments:
Post a Comment