Wednesday, October 28, 2020

Did you know Montgomery County Council is going to recommend a WSSC Water rate increase of at least 5.9%? Yes, with all our financial struggles, from COVID they expect you to pay more for water!

There is a Council vote this Tuesday morning 10/27. They need to hear from us by 9:00 am Tuesday!

Here's a EMAIL IDEA -- it's as easy as copy, paste, send!

Subject line: I Oppose WSSC Water's rate increase for their FY22 Budget

Body: Montgomery County Council should keep our water and sewer rates steady during this time of economic crisis and job loss, especially among retail workers and low income jobs. Continuing to increase rates will not resolve WSSC’s long-time financial management problems, keep our water supply clean, or fix the aging infrastructure. Instead, WSSC's continued practice of luxurious spending combined with investments on poorly-managed projects will continue to be enabled by the Council's repeated approval of unnecessary annual rate increases.

Note: WSSC also just shared that the AMI smart meter proposal will be a whopping 200 million dollars!

Since these increases are at the expense of your constituents, I request:

1) No salary increase for upper Management. With the unprecedented amount of job losses throughout the county, ratepayers cannot afford to continue to fund the overly inflated salaries of WSSC. The General Manager already makes more than twice as much as most of our elected officials.

2) WSSC should defer funding at this time for planning work that has no direct bearing on the provision of clean, safe water by WSSC to the public. This includes the debt services charges -- in the tens of millions of dollars -- for projects in the Capital Improvement Plan. Such projects include: Laboratory Division Building Expansion, Energy Performance Program, Advanced Metering Infrastructure, and Piscataway Bioenergy.

3) Your awareness that the WSSC staff, by its own admission, provided an out of date, 9-year old financial estimate regarding the Advanced Metering Infrastructure project to the WSSC Commissioners and you. The practice of Montgomery County customers continually bailing out WSSC resulting from its financial mismanagement and lack of transparency should stop.

In the midst of a global pandemic and utilities becoming less affordable, you need to support your constituents and wise practices. Water is essential to survival. Increasing the price of water while households and businesses are suffering is unacceptable. Instead, make WSSC stop the mismanagement of their funds –– and do not approve any rate increases for WSSC’s FY22 budget.

Signed,

[your name]

[your county]

Send to: 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

Friday, October 23, 2020

Todd M. Turner Sends Outrageous Response on Radiation Meters!

Dear RESIDENTXXXX

Thank you for reaching out on the current proposal before the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC or Commission) for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) or “Smart Meter” project within the Sanitary District. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to this issue.

We understand the Commission is currently considering the implementation of the AMI project to modernize operations to better serve WSSC customers. As a result of the discussion before the Commission conducted two virtual public hearing to seek additional public input on this project in late September. In addition, we understand that WSSC also conducted a public survey of customers and a cost-benefit analysis for implementation of the AMI project. A full copy of the survey and cost-benefit analysis can be found at www.wsscwater.com/AMI.

At the Commission’s October 21^st meeting, we have been advised that the project team presented opt out options and made a recommendation for an opt out program which provides a customer with an inside meter the option to move the smart meter outside of the house to the property line and underground. This option is expected to reduce concerns related to human proximity to radio frequencies all while allowing WSSC to maintain one consistent, state-of-the-art meter reading system across the entire WSSC Water’s network. The Commissioners are expected to vote on this recommendation during the November 18th Commission meeting. Tentatively, the AMI contract will be presented to the Commission for approval in October 2021 with meter installation tentatively to begin in Winter 2022 with project completion expected in Summer 2026.

I thank you again for expressing your position and interest as a WSSC customer and resident of the 4^th Council District, Prince George’s County and/or the Sanitary District. We hope this responds to your inquiry. Be well and safe.

Sincerely,

Office of Council Chair

Hon. Todd M. Turner

Dear Hon Todd Turner,

Are you serious? Are you even considering this as an opt out?? Shame on the WSSC for thinking this is an opt out!

Councilman Todd Turner we expect more from you.

THIS IS NOT AN OPT OUT

"At the Commission’s October 21^st meeting, we have been advised that the project team presented opt out options and made a recommendation for an opt out program which provides a customer with an inside meter the option to move the smart meter outside of the house to the property line and underground. This option is expected to reduce concerns related to human proximity to radio frequencies all while allowing WSSC to maintain one consistent, state-of-the-art meter reading system across the entire WSSC Water’s network.

Thursday, October 22, 2020

Next Steps with the WSSC 200 Million SmartMeter AMI Fiasco

By Nov 1st - both County Councils provide direction to WSSC regarding a soft upper-limit to next year's rate increase.

November 18th - Commission scheduled to vote on smart meter opt-out policy

January 2021 - Montgomery County public hearing on CIP (including WSSC's CIP)

February 2021 - Montgomery County Council worksession on WSSC's CIP

March 2021 - Montgomery County Council worksession on WSSC's CIP

May 2021 - joint meeting of the Montgomery and Prince George's County Councils to approve WSSC's operating budget (rates) and CIP

June 2021 - WSSC commission final pro forma vote to approve budgets and rates for fiscal year beginning July 1, 2021

What can you do?

Contact WSSC, your elected officials and your friends and neighbors and tell the WSSC NO!

Let your voice be heard!

Details here

https://smallcellsinmontgomerycounty.blogspot.com/2020/08/10-reasons-wsscs-100-million-dollar-ami.html

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Conflicts of Interest? Money? Who is making money here

Adam Krantz testified in favor of AMI. He is CEO of the National Association of Clean Water agencies. He failed to disclose that WSSC paid them around $60,000 in both fiscal years 2019 and 2020 (possible an annual membership fee).This is according to the searchable vendor database. https://my.wsscwater.com/PSD/#/wsscvendors

Insanity! WSSC AMI Radiation Meter Project Has Ballooned from $100 Million to $208 Million

The project cost has doubled overnight to $208M! The AMI line item in the CIP presented to the County Councils less than 1 month ago was $103M.

At long last, WSSC has released an updated cost benefit analysis. They had been working off a 2011 study.

https://www.wsscwater.com/files/live/sites/wssc/files/ami/AMI%20Cost%20Benefit%20Analysis%20-2.pdf

The new analysis was done by Arcadis who has a $9M AMI consulting contract with WSSC.

WSSC Has Some Explaining to Do! Will They Provide Facts on How Many Times Meter Radiate or a Whitewash?

Dear WSSC,

Do not mislead the public. In the October 21, 2020 WSSC Commission meeting WSSC Deputy General Manager Joe Beach hopped on the zoom and said "The meters only transmit for milliseconds a day."

Where is the data to support this what we believe is misinformation?

This is not a correct characterization of the radiation that smart meters emit.

Utility companies have long played this game talking about how it is just seconds a day when we know as a fact it is NOT.

Question: How do we know?

Answer: Just read the manual.

The manual of the Neptune Smart Water meter says, "The E-CODER)R900i meets FCC Regulations Part 15.247 allowing higher output power and greater range. It uses frequency hopping spread spectrum technology to avoid RF interference and enhance security. The transmitted data is updated at 15 minute intervals and transmits a mobile message that includes the meter reading data and the unique ECODER)900iID every 14 to 20 seconds.

The E-CODER)R900i also transmits a high power fixed network message every seven and one half minutes …If connected to a LoRa network , the E-CODER)R900i can transmit a high power fixed network message every three hours on an interleaved basis."

The Itron water meter says transmissions are numerous times!

yup. in fact the manual also says that people should be 20 cm from the meter. 20 cm is about 8 inches.

Read it Here

"RF Exposure Information

This equipment complies with the FCC RF radiation requirements for uncontrolled environments. To maintain compliance with these requirements the antenna and any radiating elements should be installed to ensure that a minimum separation distance of 20 cm is maintained from the general population."

Monday, October 19, 2020

An immediate halt to the AMI "smart" meters until an environmental impact statement/review is completed.

Dear WSSC,

I am asking for an immediate halt to the AMI "smart" meters until an environmental impact statement/review is completed.

The AMI meters emit Radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and there are no laws in place to ensure protections for birds, bats, insects, bees or trees. You cannot just rollout a network that increases RFR into our neighborhoods when you have not investigated the effects on the environment.

In light if the fact that we are talking about thousands of radiating meters, you have a responsibility to ensure safety for our community and environment by evaluating effects before deployment.

The "health expert hired did not review impacts to trees or insects.

Thank you, Theodora Scarato

FCC and ICNIRP limits were not developed to protect our flora or fauna. Wireless radiation “safety” limits for trees, plants, birds and bees simply do not exist. No US agency nor international authority with expertise in science, biology or safety has ever acted to review research and set safety limits for birds, bees, trees and wildlife.
It is a major gap in accountability.
The FCC project that the 5G needs over 800,000 “small” cell tower sites in the US alone. These new “small” cell towers (taller street lights and utility poles) will substantially increase the ambient environmental levels of radiofrequency radiation. Birds do perch on cell antennas. Bats, bees and pollinators will be flying directly through the radiation plumes from these new cell antennas. Tree leaves and limbs will receive high exposures from near direct contact to cell antennas in neighborhoods with heavy foliage.
No agency has ever set limits to ensure safety for wildlife or trees. The FCC limits (outdated) we have are for humans.
Furthermore at this time there is no environmental agency with a funded mandate to ensure bees, trees birds and wildlife are protected in regards to cell tower networks.
It is not that the laws we have are inadequate… it is that we literally have no laws and no agency with oversight when it comes to impacts to our flora and fauna- the environment.
Several literature reviews warn that non-ionizing EMFs are an “emerging threat” to wildlife (Balmori 2015, Curachi 2013, Sivani 2012) and impacts to pollinators are documented in published studies (Favre 2011, Kumar et.al., 2011, Lazaro et al., 2016). Field research has found years of exposure to cell tower radiation damages trees (Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al. 2016, Helmut 2016, Haggerty 2010) and plants (Halgamuge 2017, Pall 2016, Halgamuge and Davis 2019). Radiofrequency radiation has been found to affect the magnetic sense of invertebrates (including insects) (Tomanová and Vácha, 2016; Vácha et al., 2009) birds (Engels et al., 2014) and mammals (Malkemper et al., 2015). Furthermore research shows bees and pollinators could suffer serious impacts from the higher frequencies to be used in 5G as the higher frequencies resonate with their bodies resulting in up to 370% higher absorbed power.
Currently there is no U.S. Government-funded research program into the non-thermal biological effects of RF emissions to the environment. The EPA, which formerly conducted such research, lost all of its research funding in 1996, and has done nothing since. In July 2020 the Director of the Radiation Protection Division of the EPA Lee Ann B. Veal wrote Theodora Scarato Executive Director of EHT that the EPA had no funded mandate to regarding wireless radiofrequency matters and that they are not aware of any developed safety limits or research reviews related to impacts of wireless on birds bees and the environment. Read the letter. The EPA stated their last research review was their 1984 Report. The FCC confirmed in a USTTI webinar October 15, 2020 that their limits were for humans only.
A Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit from September 8, 2000. It clarifies how decades ago, when FCC limits were set, the EPA was defunded from properly reviewing the science on harm from electromagnetic fields.
“The Court’s reliance on the EPA was technically correct but substantively naive. What the Court did not realize was that Congress terminated funding for radiation research by EPA in 1996, and no staff has been available at EPA to conduct such research for the past five years.”
“The Court’s reliance on the EPA was technically correct but substantively naive. What the Court did not realize was that Congress terminated funding for radiation research by EPA in 1996, and no staff has been available at EPA to conduct such research for the past five years.”
Thus when companies state that proposed antennas are FCC compliant, this has no applicability to protections for bees, trees or the environment. As the scientific literature amply demonstrates, findings demonstrate the pressing need for a heavily-funded federal environmental- oriented research program and compliance with NEPA that considers impacts to wildlife from the increased radiofrequency radiation.
SOME RESEARCH STUDIES TO KNOW
Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al. “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations.” Science of the Total Environment 572 (2016): 554-69.
Breunig, Helmut. “Tree Damage Caused By Mobile Phone Base Stations An Observation Guide.” (2017).
You can also download the Tree Observation Guide at: Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment and Democracy
S Sivani, D Sudarsanam, Impacts of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from cell phone towers and wireless devices on biosystem and ecosystem ? A review, Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages 202–216, 2012
Haggerty, Katie. “Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings.” International Journal of Forestry Research2010.836278 (2010).
Halgamuge, M.N. “Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants.” Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, vol. 36, no. 2, 2017, pp. 213-235.
Martin Pall. “Electromagnetic Fields Act Similarly in Plants as in Animals: Probable Activation of Calcium Channels via Their Voltage Sensor”Current Chemical Biology, Volume 10 , Issue 1 , 2016
Shikha Chandel, et al. “Exposure to 2100 MHz electromagnetic field radiations induces reactive oxygen species generation in Allium cepa roots.”Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure 5.4 (2017): 225-229.
Halgamuge MN, Skafidas E, Davis D. A meta-analysis of in vitro exposures to weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phones (1990–2015). Environ Res. 2020;184:109227. doi:10.1016/J.ENVRES.2020.109227
Halgamuge MN, Davis D. Lessons learned from the application of machine learning to studies on plant response to radio-frequency. Environ Res. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2019.108634
Gustavino, B., et al. “Exposure to 915 MHz radiation induces micronuclei in Vicia faba root tips.” Mutagenesis 31.2 (2016): 187-92.
Halgamuge, Malka N., See Kye Yak and Jacob L. Eberhardt. “Reduced growth of soybean seedlings after exposure to weak microwave radiation from GSM 900 mobile phone and base station.” Bioelectromagnetics 36.2 (2015): 87-95.
“Tree Damage from Chronic High Frequency Exposure Mobile Telecommunications, Wi-Fi, Radar, Radio Relay Systems, Terrestrial Radio, TV etc.” by Dr. Volker Schorpp Lecture (about 31 MB)
Shepherd et al., Increased aggression and reduced aversive learning in honey bees exposed to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields. PLoS One. 2019 Oct 10
Balmori, Alfonso. “Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation.” Science of The Total Environment 518–519 (2015): 58–60.
Balmori, A. “Electrosmog and species conservation.” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 496, 2014, pp. 314-6.
Cucurachi, C., et al. “A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF).” Environment International, vol. 51, 2013, pp. 116–40.
Kumar, Neelima R., Sonika Sangwan, and Pooja Badotra. “Exposure to cell phone radiations produces biochemical changes in worker honey bees.” Toxicol Int., 18, no. 1, 2011, pp. 70–2.
Favre, Daniel. “Mobile phone induced honeybee worker piping.” Apidologie, vol. 42, 2011, pp. 270-9.
“Briefing Paper on the Need for Research into the Cumulative Impacts of Communication Towers on Migratory Birds and Other Wildlife in the United States.” Division of Migratory Bird Management (DMBM), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 2009.
“The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment.” Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, resolution 1815, 2011.
Engels, S. et al. “Anthropogenic electromagnetic noise disrupts magnetic compass orientation in a migratory bird.” Nature, vol. 509, 2014, pp. 353–6.
Balmori A. “Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields from Phone Masts on a Population of White Stork (Ciconia ciconia).” Electromagn Biol Med, vol. 24, no. 2, 2005, pp. 109-19.
Balmori, A. “Mobile phone mast effects on common frog (Rana temporaria) tadpoles.” Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, vol. 29, no. 1-2, 2010, pp. 31-5.

Subject: Trouble with Water Meters in Baltimore

Subject: Trouble with water meters in Baltimore

According to a February 2018 staff report to WSSC commissioners, the City of Baltimore spent $180M to convert to AMI smart meters. The Baltimore Sun reported in October 2016 about Baltimore's resulting switch from quarterly to monthly billing. Fox 45 reported in 2015 that the winning bid was $100M higher than another bidder resulting in a 45% rate increase.

Baltimore City runs the water system that serves both Baltimore City and Baltimore County. It was revealed at last month's commission meeting that Baltimore County remains on quarterly billing and only 1/3 of the County's water meters were converted to AMI.

The Baltimore City water system has been plagued with issues since the conversion. It was reported that some customers, such as the Ritz Carlton luxury condo residences had never been billed for water since the conversion resulting in millions in missing revenue. Water billing was halfted for months in 2019 by a ransomware attack on the city. In Baltimore County, customers have not received water bills since the 2020 pandemic began.

Earlier this month it was reported that the Baltimore City Department of Public Works plans to outsource water meter reading, installation & maintenance to smart meter vendor Itron for $12.9M. 63 employees will be laid off.The union that represents the workers is pushing back,blaming faulty equipment and training.

Itron is one of the companies that bid for WSSC's AMI smart meter project.

Baltimore County news release dated 10/6/20

WBFF coverage dated 10/6/20

WBALTV coverage dated 10/7/20

Baltimore Sun coverage dated 10/7

WJZTV coverage dated 10/8

Baltimore Sun coverage dated 10/14

Baltimore Brew coverage dated 10/14

WMAR coverage dated 10/14

WBFF converage dated 10/16

WSSC Water To Host a World Renowned Expert Dr. David Carpenter to Testify on Smartmeter Radiation

WSSC Water To Host a World Renowned Expert in Smartmeter Radiation

At the Wednesday, October 21, Commission meeting

The Commissioners have also asked Dr. David O. Carpenter, Director of University at Albany’s Institute for Health and the Environment, to present on the adverse health effects from radiofrequency radiation with a focus on AMI Meters .

David O. Carpenter is a public health physician who serves as director of the Institute for Health and the Environment, a Collaborating Center of the World Health Organization, as well as a professor of environmental health sciences at UAlbany's School of Public Health.

He previously served as Director of the Wadsworth Center of the New York State Department of Health, and as Dean of the University at Albany School of Public Health. Carpenter, who received his medical degree from Harvard Medical School, has more than 435 peer-reviewed publications, 6 books and 50 reviews and book chapters to his credit.

Similar to previous meetings, there will be a call-in option to ensure interested stakeholders are able to provide input during the meeting. The public comment period is scheduled to start shortly after 10 a.m. Wednesday’s agenda and all the presentation materials are available to view/download here.

Public Viewing Details

Watch: Virtual meeting will be broadcast live for public viewing

Call-in number to provide comment: 1-240-800-7929 / Conference ID: 711 650 31#

Please note the following:

You will not see any video via the virtual meeting link until the meeting starts at 9:00 a.m. The meeting will then go into Closed Session until 10 a.m. when Open Session resumes.
If you only want to watch the meeting, you do not need the call-in number.
We anticipate the public comment period will start shortly after 10 a.m. If you want to comment on any Commission-related item, please watch the meeting via the link above to know when it’s time to call.
Please do not call in before the public comment period starts.
When calling in to speak, please turn down your computer sound to avoid audio issues. You will have three minutes to speak.
Stay on the line if you don’t get through to talk immediately as there may be several speakers waiting to provide comment.

Small Cells ZTA Montgomery County: Mini Cell Towers In Front of Our Homes

Take ACTION Now

Wednesday, October 28, 2020

Dr. David Carpenter Presents to WSSC on SmartMeter Health Effects

AMI Smartmeters for water is a FAILAcross the country ! WSSC should stop wasting our money!

Check out these news stories on high bills and disruptive defective meter messes!

Monday, October 26, 2020

Action Alert: Montgomery County Council to increase water rates by 5.9%