"Given British Columbia's current political and province-wide electric utility realities (referring to BC Hydro's all but completed smart meter roll-out), I cannot imagine a more difficult or awkward predicament for any utility commission to be in than that which BCUC now finds itself, as you prepare to make your decision on Fortis BC's application to roll out its AMI/wireless smart meter-based meshed-grid networks throughout its jurisdiction. For that reason, it is my earnest hope that BCUC does have the authority to render its own decision - independent of government interference - and that your members, collectively, have the integrity, personal strength and moral turpitude to make your ultimate decision based solely on independent, science-based evidence, not on the artful misinformation, disinformation and untruths which Fortis and Exponent have carefully crafted for you. . . .

" . . . In this paper I have provided BCUC with unassailable evidence dating back more than 50 years showing that the militaries have long known of the dangers of chronic exposures to low-level, non-thermal pulsed microwave radiation. I have also provided ample evidence to easily refute Dr. Bailey's disingenuous contention that there is no such thing as EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity). I have also provided numerous examples showing that for more than 30 years, various U.S. federal agencies have reported - or tried to report - that chronic, pulsed, low-level, non-thermal microwave radiation is very dangerous, some say extremely dangerous, only to have governments - up to and including President George W. Bush's White House - quash their findings to protect the U.S. military, the telecom, wireless and electric power industries' commercial interests. . . .

"Because it is your responsibility to ensure utilities provide customers with safe technology, BCUC have no choice but to deny Fortis' application. You are the absolute last bastion of defense for Fortis' customers; you simply must protect them . . .

BC Utilities Commission Sixth Floor, 900 Howe Street, Box 250 Vancouver, BC V6Z 2N3

Attention: Erica Hamilton, Commission Secretary

Dear Sirs / Mesdames:

Re:    FortisBC Inc. Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project ~ Project No.3698682

Please find enclosed the final submissions of the Citizens for Safe Technology Society in these proceedings, along with referenced appendices and authorities. We have not provided a copy of the Radiocommunication Act and Regulations but would be willing to do so upon request.

Yours truly,

DAVID M. AARON

CST NOTE:
Good talking point from Page 12 of David Aaron's Final Submissions:

8. Rights flowing from bio-effects


"There is consensus in the scientific community that RF emissions, such as those from theproposed AMI meter, have bio-effects. The outstanding debate is only about whether those bioeffectsare adverse or not.


"The CSTS submits that existence of bio-effects, in itself, gives rise to an opt-out right, regardlessof whether the harmful nature of those effects have been "established". An individual has a rightto be free from physical intrusion in his or own home and a right to insist that a utility refrainfrom touching his/her body; raising heart rate; affecting his brain chemistry; exposing him/her toan environmental agent that caused weight gain in rats; etc. It is one thing for individuals to besubject to environmental influences, but it is another thing to situate those influences on theirbedroom walls, in the home, within which privacy and autonomy are fundamental to the fabric ofour democratic society. . . .

" . . . Public opinion received by the BCUC on the issue of smart meters is overwhelmingly against their installation. The NCGPCA maintains that any decision by the BCUC that ignores public opinion with regard to AMI project 3698682 is therefore a decision that is not in the public interest and is instead a decision in the proponent's interest.

"BCUC decision-making must to be able to stand up to critical scrutiny, to be rational, to be moral, to be supported by evidence and to be in accordance with some principles that can be defended. A decision forcing FortisBC customers to accept smart meters against their express wishes is neither rational nor moral and cannot be defended.

 "The Canadian public has long suspected that decisions made by government regulatory agencies are biased in favour of project proponents from the outset and that these agencies merely act as rubber stamps in granting the proponent's wishes. The BCUC must be seen as listening to the voices of the people. . . .

"The Nelson Creston Green Party Constituency Association does not support FortisBC's application for a Certificate of Public Convenience for its Advanced Metering Project in its current form."

On Opt-out:
It is important to respond to the FBC position on an 'opt-out' provision. I would argue that given the significant change in technology proposed in this application and the inherent health risks to any customer as developed in evidence to date, that, for the likely thousands of opponents and concerned customers of record, fair consideration must be made available. FBC suggest eventual termination of service to 'punish' what would likely be deep and rooted personal health concerns for most of those customers. There must be consideration by the BCUC to not force compliance and cause hardship and personal discomfort for those who do not want RF exposure. In this, I believe and would argue that any costs associated with the refusal of an RF device or insisting on an RF disabled device, costs should be for account of the project, not the affected customer. In bringing forward new, risk-bearing technology, FBC must be prepared to absorb the costs of the transition where customer's lives are being affected over a 20 year period. I would suggest and argue in the public interest, the BCUC should pursue a non-discriminatory opt-out practice, with full and non-restrictive interpretation, as noted in Section 59 of the Utilities Commission Act where it is stated, "Discrimination in rates: 59 (1) A public utility must not make, demand or receive (a) an unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or unduly preferential rate for a service provided by it in British Columbia". While it is desireable not to unbalance rates to customers who do not opt-out, the scope and risks posed by the conversion to RF demand a better solution than eventual disconnection of a customer when that customer is in direct fear and under threat for their personal health and well-being. In that, the project costs should accommodate each complainant.

Conclusion:
"We are faced with a situation where in subscribing to our electrical utility company, and there is no alternative to FortisBC Inc. for our service, we will be compelled to put ourselves in harm's way in order to have electrical service. As a free citizen in Canada, I should have the right to obtain electrical service without potential health risks, no matter how small. There are proven alternatives available such as PLC data distribution that contain no risk, yet provide an AMI solution meeting any requirements of the Clean Energy Act in British Columbia. I should note that the unproven nature of an RF solution was just recently highlighted in the BCUC considerations and amendments of the CPCN application timetable April 22, 2013, to permit submissions regarding the just released International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 462 page monograph relating to its designation of RF radiation as a possible cancer agent.

"There is clearly much yet to be learned about RF impacts and I submit and argue that this is not the time for FortisBC to experiment with their customer base by proliferating risky RF devices, but rather it should be the time for FortisBC to take the lead in championing no-risk devices to their customer base and re-submitting their application with a non-RF solution. I would further encourage the BCUC to find similarly and not be a party to the proliferation of potentially harmful devices."

" . . . on page 218 of FortisBC's final submission of March 28, 2013, Mr. Loski is quoted:

"And, you know, with that, it's all - you know, always then have to determine the public interest as a whole. And there are instances certainly where the views of a minority of customers is, you know, in opposition to a project, which in the end is deemed to be in the public interest for the whole. And so, you know, in that - in those types of circumstances, the minority of individuals essentially then have to live with the results of that project or that decision because they're part of the larger whole."

"I believe that, far and above any other, the fundamental question deserving of the most weight in the Commission's decision to approve or reject the Fortis BC Application is how it could ever be in the "public interest as a whole" to permit the widespread deployment of a wireless technology whose RF EMF emissions are classified as a Group 2B possible carcinogen to humans by the World Health Organization. The commission must also concern itself with whether it can in any way be morally or legally justified in forcing any citizen to "live with the results" in the event it decides in favour of the Fortis BC Application. . . .

"The basis of Fortis BC arguments regarding health issues is that the levels of RF EMF that will be emitted by its proposed ITRON meters are so low they are unlikely to cause human harm. This might be a more relevant argument if RF EMFs fell under WHO's Group 4 category "Probably not carcinogenic to humans". Since that is not the case the basis of FBC arguments should not be given any weight at all by the Commission. As noted on page 14 of the Exponent Report, "The IARC report, however, does not comment on the level of exposure". The fact remains that any level of RF EMF in the 30 kHz to 300 GHz falls under the WHO's Group 2B category. As long as this is the case, any member of the public is justified in taking whatever steps they feel are necessary to limit their exposure to such an agent. No government agency should be able to take away their ability to do so.

"Given the existence of equally viable and more affordable alternatives to wireless smart meters that do not carry a negative association with the WHO's Group 2B category, the Commission must deny outright the Fortis BC application for a Certificate of Public Convenience for its Advanced Metering Project as not in the public interest."

"The world's leading health officials do not agree on whether Smart Meters are good or bad for your health.

"That was a dominant theme among interveners at a two week BC Utilities Commission hearing March 4-15 into Fortis BC's application to install 115,000 Smart Meters in their coverage area.

"Nine interveners, including RDCK Area D director Andy Shadrack, Southern Interior MP Alex Atameneko and Nelson lawyer David Aaron, representing Citizens for Safe Technology, appeared before the commission to present evidence on the health and safety of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) -- also known as Smart Meters. . . .

"My overall take is that Fortis has not made a case that there is uniform agreement among world leaders about the dangers of wireless technology," said Shadrack at the end of the hearings. . . .

"Opponents of Smart Meters say the cumulative effects of low-level radiation can increase damage to the nervous system, cause electro-sensitivity, and have adverse reproductive effects and a variety of other effects on different organ systems.

"The question then is, at what level of exposure to something that is known to have an adverse effect do we allow exposures?" Shadrack asked of Fortis expert witness Dr. William Bailey.

"Bailey disagreed that the radiation from Smart Meters was harmful: "The evidence -- it's not that there's no research or nothing -- there's no evidence at all; that the evidence does not persuade that there is a cause and effect relationship," replied Dr. Bailey, according to transcripts of the hearings.

"Bailey, who is a Ph. D neuropsychologist in the United States, was on one of two witness panels provided by FortisBC. Dr. Baily's CV lists numerous publications and research on electromagnetic radiation

"He is currently a principal scientist at Exponent Health Sciences in Maryland specializing in environmental and occupational health issues. . . .

"Final submissions to the BCUC are due from Fortis by March 28 and by the interveners by April 18, with Fortis' reply due by April 25. The BCUC has no timeline by which to deliver their decision that can be appealed."

Rally   March 2013

In opposition to FortisBC's Application to BCUC for the AMI   

PROTECTING OUR HEALTH

PROTECTING OUR SECURITY

PROTECTING OUR HOMES and FAMILIES

PROTECTING OUR DEOCRATIC RIGHTS

  

Citizens coming together to oppose

FortisBC's Advanced Metering Application to BCUC

 Kelowna, March 2013

Volume 11, March 15, 2013 

DAY 10 (TEN) VOLUME 11 March 15, 2013 

Records begin on page 13 of this transcript (page 2050) 

ALSO: 
DAY ONE VOLUME TWO (March 4) 
DAY TWO VOLUME THREE (March 5) 
DAY THREE VOLUME FOUR (March 6) 
DAY FOUR VOLUME FIVE (March 7) 
DAY FIVE VOLUME SIX (March 8) 
DAY SIX VOLUME SEVEN (March 11) 
DAY SEVEN VOLUME EIGHT (March 12)
DAY EIGHT VOLUME NINE (March 13)
DAY NINE VOLUME TEN (March 14)

BRITISH COLUMBIA UTILITIES COMMISSION 
IN THE MATTER OF THE UTILITIES COMMISSION ACT R.S.B.C. 1996, CHAPTER 473 
And 
Re: FortisBC Energy Inc. 
Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and 
Necessity for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project 

Kelowna, B.C. 
March 14, 2013 

PROCEEDINGS 

BEFORE: 
L. Kelsey, Commission Chair / Panel Chair 
N. MacMurchy, Panel Member 
D. Morton, Panel Member 

Fortis Panel 5 - Health and Environment 

Tom Loski: 
Mark Richard Warren: 
William Hayes Bailey: 
Yakov Shkolnikov: 

CITIZENS FOR SAFE TECHNOLOGY PANEL 5

DAVID ORVILLE CARPENTER, Affirmed: 

Examination in Chief by Mr. Aaron ................ 2051 
Cross-Examination by Mr. Andrews .............. 2070 
Cross-Examination by Mr. Weafer ................. 2082 
Cross-Examination by Mr. Macintosh ........... 2102 
Re-Examination by Mr. Aaron......................... 2151 

SUBMISSIONS RE. APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Submission by Mr. Bennett  ............................ 2180 
Submission by Mr. Weafer .............................. 2184
Submission by Mr. Macintosh ......................... 2186 
Reply by Mr. Bennett ........................................ 2189

Decision ............................................................. 2191 

Volume 10, March 14, 2013

DAY 9 (NINE) VOLUME 10 March 14, 2013 

Records begin on page 14 of this transcript (page 1906) 

ALSO: 
DAY ONE VOLUME TWO (March 4) 
DAY TWO VOLUME THREE (March 5) 
DAY THREE VOLUME FOUR (March 6) 
DAY FOUR VOLUME FIVE (March 7) 
DAY FIVE VOLUME SIX (March 8) 
DAY SIX VOLUME SEVEN (March 11) 
DAY SEVEN VOLUME EIGHT (March 12)
DAY EIGHT VOLUME NINE (March 13)


BRITISH COLUMBIA UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE UTILITIES COMMISSION ACT R.S.B.C. 1996, CHAPTER 473
And
Re: FortisBC Energy Inc. 
Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and 
Necessity for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project 

Kelowna, B.C.
March 14, 2013 

PROCEEDINGS 

BEFORE: 
L. Kelsey, Commission Chair / Panel Chair 
N. MacMurchy, Panel Member 
D. Morton, Panel Member 

Fortis Panel 2 - Health and Environment 

Tom Loski: 
Mark Richard Warren: 
William Hayes Bailey: 
Yakov Shkolnikov: 

CITIZENS FOR SAFE TECHNOLOGY PANEL 4

ISAAC ADAM JAMIESON, Affirmed:

Examination in Chief by Mr. Aaron ................1907
Cross-Examination by Ms. Braithwaite .......... 1919
Cross-Examination by Mr. Andrews .............. 1941
Cross-Examination by Mr. Weafer ................ 1976
Cross-Examination by Ms. Herbst ................. 2005
Re-Examination by Mr.Aaron......................... 2017

Decisions of Commission Panel .................... 2037

DAY 8 (EIGHT) VOLUME 9 March 13, 2013 

Records begin on page 12 of this transcript (page 1644) 

ALSO: 
DAY ONE VOLUME TWO (March 4) 
DAY TWO VOLUME THREE (March 5) 
DAY THREE VOLUME FOUR (March 6) 
DAY FOUR VOLUME FIVE (March 7) 
DAY FIVE VOLUME SIX (March 8) 
DAY SIX VOLUME SEVEN (March 11) 
DAY SEVEN VOLUME EIGHT (March 12)


BRITISH COLUMBIA UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE UTILITIES COMMISSION ACT
R.S.B.C. 1996,  CHAPTER 473

And

Re: FortisBC Energy Inc. 
Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and 
Necessity for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project 

Kelowna, B.C.
March 13, 2013 

PROCEEDINGS 

BEFORE: 
L. Kelsey, Commission Chair / Panel Chair 
N. MacMurchy, Panel Member 
D. Morton, Panel Member 

Fortis Panel 2 - Health and Environment 

Tom Loski: 
Mark Richard Warren: 
William Hayes Bailey: 
Yakov Shkolnikov: 

Volume 9, March 13, 2013 CITIZENS FOR SAFE TECHNOLOGY PANEL 3

MARTIN BLANK, Affirmed:

Examination in Chief by Mr. Aaron ...........1645
Cross-Examination by Ms. Braithwaite ........1665
Cross-Examination by Mr. Andrews ............1685
Cross-Examination by Mr. Weafer .............1708
Cross-Examination by Mr. Macintosh ..........1738
Re-Examination by Mr.Aaron ..................1772

INDEX OF WITNESSES

CITIZENS FOR SAFE TECHNOLOGY PANEL 2

MARGARET SEARS, Affirmed:

Examination in Chief by Mr. Aaron .... 1788

Cross-Examination by Ms. Braithwaite ...... 1805
Cross-Examination by Mr. Andrews .......... 1825
Cross-Examination by Mr. Weafer ........... 1846
Cross-Examination by Mr. Macintosh ........ 1866