Urgent Action: Testify AGAINST WSSC "Smart" AMI Meters September 30!

Take Action Now
Call in to Speak for 3 minutes on September 30! 
at the WSSC hearing on AMI Smart watermeters 

Wednesday Sept 30 at 630 PM

Call-in number to provide comment: 1-240-800-7929 / Conference ID: 783 785 467#

You call in at 6:30, stay on the phone and wait until your turn when they un-mute you. 

Now WSSC is about to spent 100 million  dollars to pull out our water meters and install "smart" radiating meters on our homes. Water meters radiate several times a minute!!!! 

WSSC has hearings this Wed, 

WSSC is making it seem like it will save money but it seems companies are who is making money from this deal AND WSSC provides no proof for all their claims. It costs 100 million !!!!!

We need as many voices as possible to testify this-- Wed night (pick one) to state you do NOT want WSSC to spend 100 million dollars of ratepayer money on Smart AMI meters. 

WSSC wants to swap water meters to radiation emitting meters that also remove our privacy. 

See below for detailed information on how to testify via conference call - by the phone- so easy- at virtual public hearings Wednesday evening at 6:30pm on WSSC's $100M AMI smart meter project. Each witness will be given 3 minutes to testify. Written testimony is also being accepted.

Public Viewing / Participation Details

Wednesday, September 30, 2020 – 6:30 p.m.

Watch: Virtual meeting will be broadcast live for public viewing

Call-in number to provide comment: 1-240-800-7929 / Conference ID: 783 785 467#

Here are Some Ideas on What YOU Can Say! 

Digital meters and environmental NIGHTMARE

 THEY WILL NEED TO BE CHANGED EVERY 8 YEARS OR LESS BECAUSE these meters do not last that long!!!!!!! 

 

• There is no consensus that AMI smart meters make economic sense. Fairfax Water has rejected AMI smart meters as too costly (as of December 2018). Their rates are half of WSSC's rates
• Deployment of AMI smart meters is a risky proposition. WSSC has a poor record of containing costs of IT projects. Smart meters will put WSSC into the business of collecting massive amounts of customer data. This is not WSSC's core competency.
• There is no evidence that implementation of AMI smart meters will reduce water rates. In fact the opposite is true, they will increase water rates.
• The Maryland Public Service Commission has established a statewide policy that customers may opt out of AMI smart meters. So it is outrageous that WSSC seems hell bent on REMOVING our right to OPT Out. 
• We depend on WSSC staff to provide unbiased information so commissioners can make fair decisions. Staff has instead provided misleading information about AMI smart meters. 
• The economics of WSSC's AMI smart meter proposal is based on a 2011 study that has not been updated. There is a risk that the cost will be much greater than the estimated $100M. Beware ratepayers cause we are PAYING and will PAY PAY PAY! 
• As proposed, WSSC's AMI smart meter deployment is bad for the environment. It will result in tens of thousands or working meters entering the waste stream. In addition, digital meters do not last as long as the mechanical ones that lasted decades. AMI is an E-WASTE nightmare. 
• WSSC's AMI smart meters will kill jobs. Meter reader positions will be eliminated. WSSC says they will be put into new positions BUT WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. 
• Why is staff presenting AMI smart meters as the only solution to improve WSSC's meter reading operations? There are alternatives available that are more cost effective and avoid the health and privacy concerns of AMI smart meters.

 A Lack of Transparency at the WSSC

In June 2018, WSSC voted to approve a $9M consulting AMI contract with Arcadis. It was on the agenda web page, but there was no mention of it in the press release about the upcoming commission meeting:

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2018/wssc-commissioners-to-select-new.html

It is notable that WSSC omitted mention of the AMI project from the staff presentation slides presented at the beginning of the September 2nd and 3rd CIP hearings.

 

This is not the first time we have noticed burying of information on AMI smart meters in WSSC's CIP materials.

 

Also no mention in the "highlights" of their press releases publicizing the hearings:

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2020/wssc-water-hosting-virtual-publi.html

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2020/wssc-water-hosting-virtual-pub-1.html

 

Also missing from 2019 CIP hearings press release

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2019/wssc-hosting-public-hearings-on.html

 

And from 2018 CIP hearings press release

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2018/wssc-invites-customers-to-public.html

 

And from 2017 CIP hearings press release

https://www.wsscwater.com/contents/news/2017/wssc-holds-public-hearings-on-2.html

Mark Your Calendar: WSSC AMI Smartmeters Must be Stopped

SAVE THE DATE: Let Your Voice Be Heard

Sign up to speak at these meetings. Please be sure to speak at the AMI public hearings! 

• WSSC AMI Public Hearing 6:30 PM September 29 LINK and September 30 LINK 

For those who are short on time, it'll take less than one minute to email your testimony. 

Please tell them you do NOT want the WSSC to Move forward with an AMI Smartmeter

Get 5 of your friends to do the same!

Please contact your elected officials and ask them to STOP this waste of money. 

 Write the WSSC and all your elected officials. 

Email your opposition to ALL of these people who are RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE to us- the people! 

budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, chris.lawson@wsscwater.com, eloise.foster@wsscwater.com, fausto.bayonet@wsscwater.com, howard.denis@wsscwater.com, keith.bell@wsscwater.com, sandra.thompson@wsscwater.com, marc.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov, countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us, BLLaster@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict1@co.pg.md.us, councildistrict5@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict6@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict7@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict8@co.pg.md.us, ouncilDistrict9@co.pg.md.us, District4@co.pg.md.us, DLTaveras@co.pg.md.us, dmglaros@co.pg.md.us>, GPKonohia@co.pg.md.us, news@wamu.org, newsdesk@wjla.com, newstips@cbs17.com, news4pr@nbcuni.com, desk@wusa9.com, jnorwood@dcw50.com, darcy.spencer@nbcuni.com, Erika.Gonzalez@nbcuni.com, klewis@sbgtv.com, kojo@wamu.org, news@wamu.org, iflatow@sciencefriday.com, newsroom@wtop.com, Maggie.Fox@nbcuni.com, tara.bahrampour@washpost.com, ariana.cha@washpost.com, Lena.Sun@washpost.com, budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, chris.lawson@wsscwater.com, eloise.foster@wsscwater.com, fausto.bayonet@wsscwater.com, howard.denis@wsscwater.com, keith.bell@wsscwater.com, sandra.thompson@wsscwater.com, marc.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov, countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us, Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov, anne.kaiser@house.state.md.us, eric.luedtke@house.state.md.us, pam.queen@house.state.md.us, kathleen.dumais@house.state.md.us, david.fraser.hidalgo@house.state.md.us, lily.qi@house.state.md.us, ariana.kelly@house.state.md.us, marc.korman@house.state.md.us, sara.love@house.state.md.us, kumar.barve@house.state.md.us, kumarbarve@gmail.com, jim.gilchrist@house.state.md.us, julie.palakovichcarr@house.state.md.us, alfred.carr@house.state.md.us, emily.shetty@house.state.md.us, jared.solomon@house.state.md.us, charlotte.crutchfield@house.state.md.us, bonnie.cullison@house.state.md.us, vaughn.stewart@house.state.md.us, lorig.charkoudian@house.state.md.us, david.moon@house.state.md.us, jheanelle.wilkins@house.state.md.us, budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, chris.lawson@wsscwater.com, eloise.foster@wsscwater.com, fausto.bayonet@wsscwater.com, howard.denis@wsscwater.com, keith.bell@wsscwater.com, sandra.thompson@wsscwater.com, marc.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov, countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us, BLLaster@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict1@co.pg.md.us, councildistrict5@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict6@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict7@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict8@co.pg.md.us, ouncilDistrict9@co.pg.md.us, District4@co.pg.md.us, DLTaveras@co.pg.md.us, dmglaros@co.pg.md.us, GPKonohia@co.pg.md.us, anne.healey@house.state.md.us. joseline.pena.melnyk@house.state.md.us, mary.lehman@house.state.md.us, ben.barnes@house.state.md.us, alonzo.washington@house.state.md.us, nicole.williams@house.state.md.us, geraldine.valentino@house.state.md.us, marvin.holmes@house.state.md.us, ron.watson@house.state.md.us, erek.barron@house.state.md.us, andreafletcher.harrison@house.state.md.us, jazz.lewis@house.state.md.us, darryl.barnes@house.state.md.us, nick.charles@house.state.md.us, dereck.davis@house.state.md.us, veronica.turner@house.state.md.us, kris.valderrama@house.state.md.us, jay.walker@house.state.md.us, susie.proctor@house.state.md.us, michael.jackson@house.state.md.us, 

ACTION ALERT: WSSC Water Meters: UpComing Hearings AND EMAIL LIST

Did you know WSSC is about to move forward with a proposal to spend more than 100 million dollars on new, cheap, radiating water meters? Yes, that's money we the ratepayers will pay!

Speak up at the next WSSC Meeting and send your testimony to WSSC and your county Council! 

SAVE THE DATE:  

October 21, 2020 Link to get more info. 

For those who are short on time, it'll take less than one minute to email your testimony. 

Please tell them you do NOT want the WSSC to Move forward with an AMI Smartmeter

 

Please contact your elected officials and ask them to STOP this waste of money. 

 Scroll Down: See Draft Text for An Email 

PG residents send to:  

budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, chris.lawson@wsscwater.com, eloise.foster@wsscwater.com, fausto.bayonet@wsscwater.com, howard.denis@wsscwater.com, keith.bell@wsscwater.com, sandra.thompson@wsscwater.com, marc.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov,  countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us, BLLaster@co.pg.md.us , CouncilDistrict1@co.pg.md.us, councildistrict5@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict6@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict7@co.pg.md.us, CouncilDistrict8@co.pg.md.us, ouncilDistrict9@co.pg.md.us, District4@co.pg.md.us, DLTaveras@co.pg.md.us, dmglaros@co.pg.md.us, GPKonohia@co.pg.md.us, anne.healey@house.state.md.us. joseline.pena.melnyk@house.state.md.us, mary.lehman@house.state.md.us, ben.barnes@house.state.md.us, alonzo.washington@house.state.md.us, nicole.williams@house.state.md.us, geraldine.valentino@house.state.md.us, marvin.holmes@house.state.md.us, ron.watson@house.state.md.us, erek.barron@house.state.md.us, andreafletcher.harrison@house.state.md.us, jazz.lewis@house.state.md.us, darryl.barnes@house.state.md.us, nick.charles@house.state.md.us, dereck.davis@house.state.md.us, veronica.turner@house.state.md.us, kris.valderrama@house.state.md.us, jay.walker@house.state.md.us, susie.proctor@house.state.md.us, michael.jackson@house.state.md.us

MoCo residents send to: 

budgetgroup@wsscwater.com, chris.lawson@wsscwater.com, eloise.foster@wsscwater.com, fausto.bayonet@wsscwater.com, howard.denis@wsscwater.com, keith.bell@wsscwater.com, sandra.thompson@wsscwater.com,marc.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov,  countyexecutive@co.pg.md.us, Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov, 
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov, anne.kaiser@house.state.md.us, eric.luedtke@house.state.md.us, pam.queen@house.state.md.us, kathleen.dumais@house.state.md.us, david.fraser.hidalgo@house.state.md.us, lily.qi@house.state.md.us, ariana.kelly@house.state.md.us, marc.korman@house.state.md.us, sara.love@house.state.md.us, kumar.barve@house.state.md.us, kumarbarve@gmail.com, jim.gilchrist@house.state.md.us, julie.palakovichcarr@house.state.md.us, alfred.carr@house.state.md.us, emily.shetty@house.state.md.us, jared.solomon@house.state.md.us, charlotte.crutchfield@house.state.md.us, bonnie.cullison@house.state.md.us, vaughn.stewart@house.state.md.us, lorig.charkoudian@house.state.md.us, david.moon@house.state.md.us, jheanelle.wilkins@house.state.md.us

Want Ideas on what to say in your email?

Subject line: I Oppose WSSC Water's AMI Smart Meter Project

Body (option #1): Remove the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) smart meter project from the CIP budget. There are other alternatives available that are more cost effective and won't impose huge rate increases on WSSC Water's customers. More than $100 million has been budgeted for AMI in fiscal year 2022. Since 2018, four states have rejected AMI proposals for exorbitant costs and lack of customer benefit. Specifically, Virginia's Fairfax Water also determined that it was more cost effective not to implement AMI. As a result, Fairfax Water has kept their customer rates low. Additionally, a 2015 research study concluded that the average life of AMR/AMI water meters is 8.2 years. WSSC Water presented in August 2020 that the average life of analog meters is 17.03 years - that's more than double of the proposed smart meter. I am opposed to having my rates increase to pay back an estimated $100 million, plus interest for a substandard infrastructure.

Signed, 

[your name]

[your address]

[your county]

Body (option #2, pick whichever points you like. Make sure to include at least 1 opening, financial & closing):

Opening

• Remove the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) smart meter project from the CIP budget.
  
• There are more cost effective alternatives available than AMI smart meters that won't impose huge rate increases on WSSC customers.
  

Financial

• The economics of WSSC's AMI smart meter proposal is based on a 2011 study that has not been updated. There is a risk that the cost will be greater than the estimated $100M.
  
• Implementation of AMI will grossly increase water rates, making it less affordable for many of WSSC Water's customers. 
  
• Since 2018, New Mexico, Massachusetts, Kentucky and Virginia have listed that their official reasons for rejecting smart meter proposals has been a) exorbitant costs; and b) lack of customer benefit.
  
• Virginia's Fairfax Water also determined in 2018 that it was more cost effective not to implement AMI.
  
• WSSC Water's current meters last more than twice as long, compared to the proposed AMI smart meters.
  

Environment

• RF radiation effects the health of all living things on our planet.
  
• As proposed, WSSC's AMI smart meter deployment is bad for the environment. It will result in tens of thousands of working meters entering the waste stream.
  
• AMI meters are powered by lithium batteries that when disposed of leach into the soil and make their way into our water supply.
  

Health

• RF radiation is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”
  
• It is stated on the American Cancer Society's website, "Because RF radiation is a possible carcinogen, and smart meters give off RF radiation, it is possible that smart meters could increase cancer risk."
  
• Many water meters are located inside our homes, exposing us to RF radiation several times a day, all day. 
  

Privacy

• Smart meters will put WSSC into the business of collecting massive amounts of customer data, thereby invading our privacy.
  
• Under the guise of "early leak detection"  WSSC Water will be able to deduce the routine habits of each household. 
  
• It's stated on WSSC's "History of Meter Reading" video that our data leaving the meter is not encrypted. Encryption occurs halfway through the data transmission process. 
  
• This proposal jeopardizes the rights of property owners to control which equipment is installed on or in their property.
  

Closing

• I am opposed to having my rates increase to pay back approximately $100 million plus interest for a substandard infrastructure.
  
• I am opposed to paying for AMI smart meters that harms people, pollutes the environment and invades customer's privacy.
  

Signed, 

[your name]

[your address]

[your county]

 

Delegate Al Carr Testimony to WSSC "Carefully Evaluate" the $100M AMI SmartMeter Project

 

September 3, 2020

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission Budget Division
14501 Sweitzer Lane
Laurel, MD 20707

via email to budgetgroup@wsscwater.comRe: CIP Testimony

Thank you for allowing me to submit comments on WSSC Water’s proposed six-year (Fiscal Years 2022-2027) Capital Improvements Program (CIP).

I ask commissioners to carefully evaluate the proposed $100M Advanced Metering Infrastructure project also known as smart meters. I am not referring to potential health, privacy or jobs impacts but specifically the financial impacts of smart meters.

Regarding the financial impacts of smart meters, there are unanswered questions that commissioners need to resolve:

1. 1)  Do the benefits of smart meters outweigh the costs?

2. 2)  Will implementation of smart meters result in higher or lower water bills?

3. 3)  What are the risks? Implementation of smart meters will put WSSC Water into

   the business of collecting massive amounts of customer data. Is this WSSC Water’s core competency? Is there a potential for IT cost overruns as occurred on the billing system replacement?

I also believe that commissioners need to seek out objective, unbiased information about smart meters.

Smart meters were first approved in the CIP in 2012 under a different General Manager. Their justification and cost estimate is based on a study that was performed in 2011 and has not been updated since other than adjusting for inflation.

I hope you will also consider the experiences of nearby utilities. When I reached out to the General Manager of Fairfax Water in December 2018, he told me that Fairfax Water had rejected AMI smart meters as too costly. For many customers, Fairfax Water’s rates are half of WSSC Water’s rates.

I also hope that commissioners will ask staff to present you with a range of options to improve meter reading. AMI is currently presented as an all-or-nothing, but there are other options. The City of Rockville was able to obtain many of the promised benefits of AMI smart meters but at a lower cost by using a system of drive by AMR meters. With AMR, Rockville was able to reduce labor costs and eliminate estimated readings but without the expense of a wireless data network and extensive IT infrastructure required by AMI. Another feature of Rockville’s AMR system is that an opt out policy is not applicable because drive-by AMR meters configured for “wake up” operation do not continuously capture and transmit detailed customer usage information and lack the consumer privacy and health concerns raised by AMI that drive some customers to seek opt outs. Rockville has addressed unbilled water concerns by focusing on replacing older and wrongly-sized large meters.

If you decide to move forward with AMI smart meters, please adopt an opt out policy. That is the policy of the State of Maryland as established by the Maryland Public Service Commission when they approved AMI smart meters for most of the investor- owned electric utilities.

Speaking of the PSC, there is testimony on their record about how some promised benefits of AMI smart meters did not materialize at electric utilities.

I appreciate your efforts to provide safe and reliable water, life’s most precious resource, and return clean water to our environment, all in an ethical, sustainable, and financially responsible manner.

Sincerely,

Delegate Al Carr

Maryland’s 18th Legislative District

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. to the WSSC Against AMI Smartmeters

 September 3, 2020

To:  Carla A. Reid

General Manager and CEO
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission
Laurel, Maryland
Email:  carla.reid@wsscwater.com

CC:    Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission Officials

WSSC Corporate Secretary, Sheila Finlayson, Esq.
WSSC Board of Commissioners  (copies sent separately)
WSSC Legal Counsel, Amanda Stakem Conn, Esq.
WSSC Board of Ethics, c/o Latonya Allen, Administrative Assistant to the Board
WSSC Office of the Inspector General, Arthur A. Elkins, Jr., J.D., CFE, CBA

Officials of Maryland counties served by WSSC

Montgomery County Executive, Marc Elrich
Montgomery County Council Members
Prince George's County Executive, Angela D. Alsobrooks
Prince George's County Council Members

From:  Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

Retired U.S. Government career scientist
(short biography appended) Subject:  WSSC's wireless smart meters will harm human health and must be stopped.

As a retired U.S. Government scientist, I urge you to stop WSSC from making its biggest mistake ever:  the conversion of its metering system to wireless smart meters.  They will increase the exposure of the public to harmful radiofrequency radiation every day and every night for the indefinite future.

In this era of COVID-19, we do not need another assault on the health of the public, especially in the two counties served by WSSC.  They have the highest cumulative numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths of any counties in Maryland.

My understanding of WSSC's Plan, in Brief

WSSC plans to provide wireless smart meters for all of its customer accounts, which number 475,000 in the two Maryland counties that WSSC serves:  Montgomery County and Prince George's County.  If I understand correctly, each of these smart meters will likely have a peak radiofrequency (RF) power output between 1 and 2 watts.  Thus, altogether, WSSC is planning to add 475,000 to 950,000 watts of peak RF power output capability, distributed throughout the two counties.  And WSSC apparently wants us to believe that this capability will have no adverse health effects on any county residents.

The Health Argument Against Wireless Smart Meters

To be judged "safe", those wireless smart meters must cause NO HARM TO ANYONE, even though these meters will be communicating with WSSC every day and every night, indefinitely.  However, to date, WSSC seems to be showing very limited interest in safety.  In fact, to those of us outside of WSSC, even that limited interest seems to have surfaced only AFTER WSSC Management had already decided to implement wireless smart meters.  That limited interest took the form of a presentation, and a related document, from a consultant hired by WSSC Management to speak to the WSSC Commission at its meeting on February 19, 2020.  That consultant made an earnest effort to make the case for safety, but had insufficient evidence to assure NO HARM TO ANYONE.  That is not surprising because evidence of the harm caused by radiofrequency radiation continues to accumulate and is overwhelming.  To date, thousands of peer-reviewed biomedical research publications have examined and highlighted the many adverse health effects of radiofrequency radiation.
 
For an overview of the harm caused by radiofrequency radiation, including the radiation emitted by wireless smart meters specifically, please see the first attached document, entitled "Wireless smart meters harm human health."  This document was first presented to WSSC Management on January 19, 2020 and has been just been updated.  To date, no response has been received from WSSC.  This document cites many references and is further supported by five additional attached documents.

For a quick look at what is covered in the first attached document, here are several of the section titles:

o  Personal stories of those harmed by radiofrequency radiation from wireless utility meters and other wireless devices continue to accumulate.

o  Three surveys link health problems to exposure from wireless utility meters.
o  Individuals harmed by exposure to radiofrequency radiation tell their stories in videos.

o  Scientific evidence of harm from radiofrequency radiation has been growing for decades and has become overwhelming.

o  The NIH National Toxicology Program finds "clear evidence" that radiofrequency radiation causes cancer.
o  The World Health Organization classifies radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B human carcinogen.
o  253 of the world's EMF scientists appeal to the UN and the WHO to protect the public from harm from radiofrequency radiation, including the radiation from smart meters.
o  Review papers document the scientific evidence of harm from radiofrequency radiation.
o  Books document the harm from radiofrequency radiation.

o  Public awareness of harm from radiofrequency radiation is growing and is finding expression at local, state, national, and international levels.

o  40,369 Maryland ratepayers have "opted out" of wireless smart meters for electricity.
o  297,823 individuals and organizations have signed the "International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space".
o  217,000 individuals have signed up for the "5G Summit".
o  Public Television programs raise public awareness about the risks of exposure to radiofrequency radiation.
o  Video documentaries bring discussions of the risks of radiofrequency radiation to the public.
o  U.S. Supreme Court upholds "Right to Know" ordinance about cellular radiation risk.
o  Children's Advisory Council to the Governor of Maryland recommends phasing Wi-Fi out of Maryland's schools.

Other Concerns that WSSC's Plan Raises

While this message focuses on health concerns, there are other important concerns that are stated below but that are not further elaborated in this message or in the attached documents:

o  Privacy concerns arise from the daily monitoring of customers' behavior through their water consumption (such as when their homes are occupied and when they are not, and when their children arrive home from school).

o  Security concerns arise from the need to keep secure an immense database of largely unnecessary information about WSSC's customers, since no organization, not even the Department of Defense, has succeeded in protecting its data from unwanted intrusion.

o  Economic concerns arise from the immense cost ($100 million, estimated by WSSC) for the conversion to wireless smart meters, at a time of extreme fiscal stringency.  Also of concern is the high uncertainty that these costs can ever be fully recovered without rate increases, as WSSC attempts to maintain technically complex wireless smart meters that will likely have shorter lifetimes than current metering technology.

o  While WSSC's representative claims that no meter readers will be fired when wireless smart meters are implemented, employment concerns still arise because the projected cost recovery motivates such firing, when unemployment is already dramatically high in this era of COVID-19.  And most of these staff do outdoor jobs that are much safer in this era than most indoor jobs.

o  The MANDATED installation of wireless smart meters, as currently contemplated by WSSC, would ignore the rights of property owners to control which equipment is installed on their property, especially in the absence of an unpaid opt-out option.  A paid opt-out option, though better than no option, would smack of extortion ("pay or we will irradiate you, forever").  And neither an unpaid, nor a paid, opt-out option would protect the public from the radiation from their neighbors' wireless smart meters.

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D., Applied Physics, Harvard University, 1975).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President of the United States, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  For those organizations, respectively, I addressed Federal research and development program evaluation, energy policy research, and measurement development in support of the electronics and electrical-equipment industries and the biomedical research community.  I currently interact with other scientists, with physicians, and with other informed individuals around the world about the impact of electromagnetic fields, including radiofrequency radiation, on human health.

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.

Thank you for your attention.

Regards,

 
Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. 
 

"Smart" Water Meter Case Agreement: FREE OPT OUT: Fair Housing Act Prohibits Discrimination!

Dear WSSC: US Resident Housing Case Regarding “Smart” Water Meters: FREE Mechanical Meter Provided For Resident PLUS for the Neighbors

Why? Because of the RADIATION.

Not only was a resident provided a mechanical meter after filing in court, but in addition the neighbors of three adjacent properties also were provided free opt outs for the switch to mechanical meters. 

That is correct- this switch AWAY from water meters was made with NO charges- NO FEES. The legal filing  says that the Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination based on disability. 

 Click here to see redacted HUD water meter  agreement. 

Click here to see full documentation of case which was a consilation agreement.