Monday, November 26, 2012
On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, the NV PUC will make their decision on how much they plan on financially extorting from Nevada residents and which so called 'non-communicating' meter they will release upon those who are rejecting the smart meters. By state law, they must have a public comments session prior to the 'discussion/decision', which, predicated on past actions, is just a formality they endure prior to publicly announcing their preconceived 'decision'.
The NV PUC, lead by Chairwoman Alaina Burtenshaw-Ochoa and with her usual lockstep other Commissioners, Rebecca Wagner and David Noble, are apparently placing Nevada on the "Why Nevada is to Be Avoided List" in the number 1 slot. If there ever was a clear contradiction in what I say and what I do, it's with the NV PUC's Chairwoman Alaina Burtenshaw-Ochoa.
Anyone with any modicum of concern for their health, the health of their children and future children, will be impacted by this regulatory agency. With Commissioners such as these, it's much more prudent to avoid moving to Nevada than have a future of health problems and higher utility bills.
The PUC is under the misguided opinion that EMF is benign and, therefore, not a health concern. Apparently, they are not aware that there is a U.S. Patent entitled "Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitors" "Hence, a TV monitor or computer monitor can be used to manipulate the nervous system of nearby people. This is unfortunate since it opens a way for mischievous application of the invention, whereby people are exposed unknowingly to manipulation of their nervous systems for someone else's purposes." [1]
What's to say that the smart meters are not reproducing these same effects? As the symptoms referenced in the patent are already mimicking those who are adversely affected by smart meters.
A woman in California who survived the Holocaust and Nazi torture is now bleeding for no apparent pathology. As she stated: 'my golden years are now my bloody years'. [2, 3]
The Commissioners are under the misguided delusion that these smart meters are not a violation of the 4th Amendment. When, in fact, not even the Congressional Research Service who researches and provides resources to the House of Representative members and committees can't state with conviction that they aren't violating the 4th Amendment. Their report dated February 3, 2012 confirms this. [4]
Every other state that has an opt out program has designated the analog meter as one of the options, but, the spineless, ignorant Commissioners are out to create known harm to a portion of the constituency of Nevada. In addition to having knowledge that these devices will harm the people of Nevada, information about other medical maladies are now coming forth regarding the developing fetus, seniors etc. And, shame on NV Energy for telling the PUC that smart meters are no more harmful than a cell phone. [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Why is there even a Commission, when the biased 'staff' of the PUC follows like lemmings to the ocean in lockstep with whatever NV Energy wants as clearly noted in their 'recommendations' to the Commission?
They allowed paid-for-hire 'testimony' back in December 2011 from NVE's experts Exponent, who just months later, after being paid by another utility company, PECO, determined that the Sensus meters were problematic and removed all of the installed meters and replaced them with another company's meters. So, if the price is right, you can get an expert to give two opposing answers to the same question.
Two of the Commissioners were present during an October 11, 2012 Consumer Session when they were notified of this contradiction of safety of Sensus Meters along with receiving and entering into their docket the relevant articles as read into the record. [10, 11]
The PUC's General Counsel, Jan Juanita Judkins Goslee Cohen, is suppressing this rebuttal evidence that was entered into Docket Number 12-07010, Docket ID Number 20549, showing the above verified contradictions.
According to the PUC, nothing in the public comments sessions are 'acted upon', which resulted in a highly detailed document being filed, that has now been relegated to the public comment file, aka 'virtual waste basket' of an open docket. According to the PUC's confirmatory email: "You have acknowledged that by filing documents in a Commission Docket you are placing yourself on a service list and both the documents you filed and the contact information you provided for yourself will be publicly available." [12]
In a Las Vegas Review Journal article, February 12, 2011, Burtenshaw started her 'acting' career in trying to come across as a 'concerned' Commissioner. [13]
"We find out things in consumer sessions that we will not find out anywhere else," Burtenshaw said in a Friday interview discussing her plans for the job, which Gov. Brian Sandoval appointed her to on Feb. 2. "The things they tell us can make a difference. I really appreciate it when someone says, 'I have a problem here, and I can't get it fixed.' A lot of times, it's the first time people hear about an issue."
"What's most important to me is that we're very transparent – that people understand what we're doing, and that we are as transparent as possible," she said. "I'm more of a process person. I want to make sure if folks have a problem, they have a chance to be heard."
Burtenshaw-Ochoa is 'presenting' her ever-increasing, Oscar award-winning speech/performance of "we want to help, we are concerned, we will listen." This is almost the same as saying we aren't really going to do anything to help you, we just want you to think we are.
Her idea of transparency is as clear as mud regarding hearings and other responsibilities of their job even though state regulations require them to be transparent. When, in fact, Burtenshaw-Ochoa, Wagner and Noble are nothing short of marionettes being manipulated by their handlers at NVE, while acting in public meetings as covert Delphi Masters.
Cohen's overprotective discrimination for her lemmings is not part of the 'transparency' that her Chairwoman envisioned during her statement in the article.
Burtenshaw-Ochoa, in her "rally for the public interest" propaganda interview, also stated "We certainly have an economy right now in Las Vegas, in particular, and in Reno, that we haven't seen for decades." So, what does she do? She and her fellow marionettes decide to increase the cost to the consumer under the 'guise' of offering them an alternative to smart meters.
This most likely is their surreptitious way to get people to accept the smart meters, knowing full well this state is severely financially strapped. By imposing a fee, they think people will acquiesce to NV Energy's smart meters installation.
When the state of Vermont has voted to allow the consumers to retain the analog meters "with out" incurring a charge. [14]
What the PUC is intentionally hiding from the public when they are making this 'consideration' is that for the last few years since the deployment of smart meters, NVE has been able to maintain readings and billing without all these 'required' modifications.
It takes approximately 3 (three) minutes for a NVE employee to read an analog meter. We have followed and timed meter readers, so we are confident of our analysis, not theirs.
Why do they now need to have a reader turn off the engine, push a button to open a window to wave a 'wand' and then push another button to 'send' the electronically collected data? When, for a mere 3 minutes, there would be no need for all these handheld devices, unnecessary meter alternative purchases, and unnecessary system upgrades?
If this so-called 'alternative' proposal to keep the analogs was so inconsistent with their 'activity', then everyone who has an analog would 'not' be having utility bills.
Likewise, other states, like California, Vermont, Maine etc., would not be allowing the retention of analog meters.
These facts are being ignored and the Commissioners are as usual going to grant their handlers' request while setting themselves up for possible nonfeasance and or malfeasance charges, which they certainly will deserve.
References
1.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6506148.PN.&OS=PN%2F6506148&RS=PN%2F6506148 2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmrG6aoe0uE 3.
http://www.pucwatchdogs.com/Declaration_XXX_3-3.pdf 4.
http://www.pucwatchdogs.com/congressreport.pdf 5.
http://aaemonline.org/emfpositionstatement.pdf 6.
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1107612 7.
http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00312/full/srep00312.html 8.
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15368370802608738 9.
http://www.kompetenzinitiative.net/assets/aschermann_electrosensitivity_final_2011.pdf 10.
http://www.pucwatchdogs.com/COnSessionexhibits.pdf 11.
http://www.pucwatchdogs.com/AD1stConSession.MPG 12.
http://www.pucwatchdogs.com/PUCreccombo.pdf 13.
http://www.lvrj.com/business/utilities-commission-gets-new-leader-116060739.html 14.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/14/vermont-smart-meters-opposition_n_1514544.html