OPPOSITION FILED to KIUC’s Motion

Aloha Everyone,

I filed my “OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS FORMAL COMPLAINT” on August 8, 2012.  It was received by the PUC on August 9, 2012. The full pdf can be read below.

 Opposition Motion Filed with PUC by Mark Naea

 

The complete filing is contained in the PDF, and I should receive the PUC stamped copies shortly.

Please share this with all your friends, as we are fighting both discrimination and privacy in our own homes.

mark

 

KIUC Files “Motion to Dismiss”

KIUC Motion to Dimiss my Formal Complaint

On August 1, 2012, KIUC filed a “Motion to Dismiss” my Formal Complaint with the Hawaii PUC.  I have posted the “motion” above in a PDF format for everyone to view. I will let the document speak for itself, as it is a real eye opener to the mindset that KIUC has towards its members/customers.

Aprit 25, 2012 Court Transcript of
 Adam Asquith vs. Kauai Island Utility Cooperative,
Civil Case No. CV 12-00134 HG-RLP

The “motion” also included the full court transcript of the “Adam Asquith vs. Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, Civil Case No. CV 12-00134 HG-RLP” hearing on April 25, 2012.  The testimony of Mr. Proudfoot speaks volumes and reveals to the reader just how far KIUC is willing to go.

I will post my “Opposition Motion” in the next post.

Please pass this to all who could benefit from this.

mark

July 12, 2012 – PUC Upholds Formal Complaint against KIUC

Important Press Release, please pass on

July 12, 2012

 

Formal Complaint upheld, KIUC ordered by PUC to answer

On June 18, 2012 Mark Naea filed a Formal Complaint with the Public Utilities Commission and the Division of Consumer Advocacy charging Kauai Island Utility Cooperative( KIUC ) with discrimination.

For the complete PUC Order documents, click here:  PUC Order No. 30519

Today the PUC has recognized the validity and standing of Mark’s Formal Complaint, finding that

“. . . the complaint appears to substantially comply with the requirements of HAR Title 6, Chapter 61, Subchapter 5 of the commission’s Rules of Practice.”

The PUC has therefore ordered KIUC to file an answer to the complaint.

In the Matter of

MARK NAEA, Complainant

vs.

KAUAI ISLAND UTILITY COOPERATIVE, Respondent

DOCKET NO. 2012 – 0159

ORDER NO. 30519

DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE AN ANSWER TO COMPLAINANT’S FORMAL COMPLAINT

By this Order, the commission directs Respondent KAUAI ISLAND UTILITY COOPERATIVE (“Respondent” or “KIUC”) to file an answer to the formal complaint filed by Complainant MARK NAEA ( “Complainant “), attached as Exhibit A, within 20 days after the date of service of this order.

The order is dated July 11, 2012. The PUC has ordered KIUC to file an answer to the complaint with them.

By recognizing the legitimacy and legal issues of discrimination brought forth within the complaint, the PUC has upheld the rights of Kauai’s citizens.

With this order in place, KIUC can no longer hide behind semantics or their so-called deferral form. The precedent that this case represents goes far beyond the shores of Kauai.

For the complete PUC Order documents, click here:  PUC Order No. 30519

New KIUC Flyer II with Health Risks

Aloha Everyone,

I have created a new KIUC Flyer that includes Shosanahs post on the health risks associated with smart meters.

You can view and print the new PDF from here or from the Importatnt Forms section in the sidebar on the left.

http://stopkiuc.com/wp-content/themes/atahualpa_1/pdf/KIUC%20Flyer%20II.pdf

Blessings and Light

mark

Smart Meter Health Complaints

Guest Post by Shosanah

As the smart meter roll out continues on Kauai, more and more people are experiencing symptoms from pulsed microwaves and dirty electricity.  The fortunate ones understand what is happening and can take steps to alleviate the situation.  Others have no idea why they suddenly have symptoms such as ringing in the ears, headaches, difficulty sleeping, heart arrhythmias, and more.  Below is a list of the symptoms of Radio Frequency Sickness, also called Electrical hyper sensitivity (EHS) or EMF sensitivity.

Please feel free to copy and share this information with attribution as a service to our ohana.

For those of you who have already begun to experience symptoms, please share your story  by commenting to this post so that others may be empowered to protect their health.

 

Smart Meter Health Complaints

Around the world where smart meters are being installed, people are reporting symptoms of microwave (RF) sickness.   It is estimated that 5% of people will be have immediate adverse health effects and another 10% will experience symptoms over time.  The remaining 85% are at greater risk for cancer, autoimmune disease, bone loss, Alzheimer’s, and a host of other chronic disease conditions.

Below is a list of symptoms of acute EMF exposure sometimes called RF (radio frequency) sickness or electrical hypersensitivity.   If you are experiencing any of these symptoms, you may wish to consider if you are living, working, or visiting in an area where smart meters have been installed.     You may also wish to pay attention to your exposure to WIFI, cell phones, and cordless phones.  The January 2012 Santa Cruz Department of Health report shows radiation exposure from Smart meters to be 50-450 time that of cell phones. Microwave radiation damage is cumulative.

RF sickness is better researched and understood in Europe and elsewhere than in the United States. You may find your doctor is unfamiliar with the condition. Women in particular may be referred for psychological care rather than properly diagnosed and guided.

Symptoms of Radio Wave Sickness

(excerpted from No Place To Hide, Vol. 3 #1, April 2001.)

  • Neurological: headaches, dizziness, nausea, difficulty concentrating, memory loss, irritability, depression, anxiety, insomnia, fatigue, weakness, tremors, muscle spasms, numbness, tingling, altered reflexes, muscle and joint paint, leg/foot pain, “Flu-like” symptoms, fever. More severe reactions can include seizures, paralysis, psychosis and stroke.
  • Cardiac: palpitations, arrhythmias, pain or pressure in the chest, low or high blood pressure, slow or fast heart rate, shortness of breath.
  • Respiratory: sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma.
  • Dermatological: skin rash, itching, burning, facial flushing.
  • Ophthalmologic: pain or burning in the eyes, pressure in/behind the eyes, deteriorating vision, floaters, cataracts.
  • Others: digestive problems; abdominal pain; enlarged thyroid, testicular/ovarian pain; dryness of lips, tongue, mouth, eyes; great thirst; dehydration; nosebleeds; internal bleeding; altered sugar metabolism; immune abnormalities; redistribution of metals within the body; hair loss; pain in the teeth; deteriorating fillings; impaired sense of smell; ringing in the ears.

Long term hazards of low level microwave radiation include: Bone loss, Cancer, Autoimmune Disease, DNA breaks.

Click here for more info:  http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?page_id=2292

There is NO safe level of low level pulsed microwave radiation for pregnant women and children!

Hawaii PUC Formal Complaint

On Monday June 18, 2012, I filed a formal complaint wth the PUC and the Consumer Advocate, charging Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (KIUC) with discrimination, disregarding PUC rules and regulations, creating unequal status and discrimination among Co-op members, as well as special terms and treatment with individual co-op members.

Here is the Formal Complaint that I filed with the PUC, the Consumer Advocate and KIUC.

The supporting documents I provided can be viewed here:

Supporting documents included:

 

  1. STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; AND ORDER” (Exhibit A)

 

  1. KIUC deferral form (Exhibit B)

 

  1. Formal Complaint and Notification to KIUC” letter (Exhibit C)

 

  1. Smart meters, AMI, AMR, and their respective definitions (Exhibit D)
Leo De Azambuja of the Garden Island emailed me to ask for the above docs, (which I sent him) and asked “what do you expect to achieve with the complaint?”
My expectations are that the rights of each co-op member to equality be upheld, that KIUC does not have the right to discriminate among co-op members by creating in essence a privileged class of haves and have-nots. This type of discrimination can not be allowed to go on, as KIUC’s current stance also exposes the Cooperative to multiple lawsuits, the cost of which will ultimately be borne by the co-op members.
KIUC is in clear violation of the discrimination laws of this state, and they know it.  It is time that our politicians and the PUC put a stop to this.

Blessings & Light

mark

 

Charges Brought Against KIUC

Press Release

June 18, 2012

Discrimination Charges Brought Against KIUC

Mark Naea filed a Formal Complaint on June 18, 2012 with the Public Utilities Commission and the Consumer Advocate charging Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (KIUC) with discrimination, disregarding PUC rules and regulations, creating unequal status and discrimination among Co-op members, as well as special terms and treatment with individual co-op members.

The case stems from the out of court settlement that KIUC reached with Adam Asquith in response to his Federal lawsuit. The settlement agreement was presented to the court for approval and signed by both parties on May 31, 2012. The “STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; AND ORDER”, was approved and so ordered by Federal Court Judge Helen Gillmor on June 1, 2012.

“Condition 1” of the settlement agreement stipulates:

“KIUC agrees that it will not seek to install (including but not limited to requesting from the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (“PUC”) permission or authorization to install a smart meter on premises where the electricity accounts are in Plaintiff’s name), and will not voluntarily install without court order or an order or determination of the PUC, any smart meters on premises where the electricity accounts are in Plaintiff’s name without Plaintiff’s permission.”

KIUC has stated on its website:

“The terms of the settlement apply only to Mr. Asquith.”

KIUC seems to believe that it has the authority to make rules and settlements with individual Co-op members, creating in essence a privileged class of haves and have-nots.

This is in direct opposition to the statements made by KIUC to Mr. Asquith. Adam Asquith is quoted to have said:

“KIUC admitted that they cannot offer me (Adam) a special deal and these new conditions must be offered to all members under their PUC regulations.”

KIUC has also stated on its website:

“The settlement provides to Mr. Asquith the same assurance KIUC gives to those who fill out a deferral form”

The KIUC deferral form contains no such terms or assurances as those stipulated within the “Settlement Agreement” with Adam.

The word “deferral” is defined as -the act of putting off to a future time or date. Though KIUC has verbally said it is an indefinite deferral, the term “indefinite” is not on the “Deferral Form” itself. In fact, the deferral form makes no mention on any binding agreements with the co-op member.

The “Settlement Agreement” between Adam Asquith and KIUC is a legally binding document, recorded in Federal Court and approved by a Federal Judge.

The deferral form is not a legally binding document. It is a one sided agreement by KIUC to KIUC, that grants co-op members “a wish to defer”, while implying through vague and official sounding language that KIUC can obtain cost recovery at some future date.

There is a clear difference between the “settlement agreement” with Adam Asquith and KIUCs deferral form. The “settlement agreement” grants legal rights to Adam, one of them being “no installation of a smart meter without his permission first”, with no mention of any cost recovery.

That last sentence forms the basis of several significant points of departure that sheds further light on the charges brought against KIUC.

KIUC filed a “motion to dismiss” Adam’s lawsuit in Federal Court, in an effort to derail his lawsuit on privacy. At the first hearing, KIUC was told that the “motion to dismiss” was to be denied, and KIUC withdrew the motion before it was ruled upon.

KIUC agreed that they did not want it to go to trial and agreed to meet Adam’s demand for an opt-out in writing. This was agreed upon at the first hearing on the injunction where the judge severely admonished KIUC.

The judge also made it clear that she found even the idea of having to pay a fee to retain privacy in your home reprehensible and she better not see it in her court if that action is made. And that is why no mention of any cost recovery fees are found in the “settlement agreement” between KIUC and Adam Asquith.

Not only are co-op members being discriminated against on their rights to equality, co-op members are also being stripped of their rights to legitimate and legal protection provided by Adam’s “settlement agreement”.

The action that Mark Naea has initiated has brought to light KIUC’s attempted discriminatory stance.  It has also revealed how KIUC has trampled upon the constitutional rights of authority and ownership of one’s home and property and the right to privacy in that home.

Adam’s “settlement agreement” with KIUC upholds our right to privacy in our own home, our right to choose without fear of corporate or governmental circumvention, and the individual rights of authority and ownership of one’s home and property.

Adam stood up for his rights in Federal court, and in so doing, stood up for all of us.  The “settlement agreement” that KIUC wrote and legally agreed to upholds those rights. Yet, KIUC would have us believe that we are without such protections.

It is discrimination to give special treatment to one co-op member and not others; it is discrimination to force co-op members to pay for such special treatment in the form of court fees and litigation; and finally, it is discrimination to give false assurance to one class of co-op member while another is protected by special dispensation.

KIUC has done all three, and continues to do so. In light of Adam Asquith’s settlement and Mark Naea’s PUC Formal Complaint, KIUC can no longer hide its agenda to curtail co-op members’ legal rights and protections.

Kilauea Community Outreach Informational Talk June 23, 2012

Aloha Everyone,

I will be presenting a community outreach informational talk on smart meters, an unbiased look into the real costs, dangers, and misleading statements by KIUC.

It will be held Saturday June 23, 2012 in Kilauea Nieghborhood Center, from 2:30 pm to 4:30 pm.  For directions, see the Community Calendar for details and a Google map.

If you have any questions as to the dangers that smart meters present, now is the time to take action. KIUC is already installing these dangerous and unwanted meters upon an unsuspecting public.

There will be copies of the KIUC deferral form as well as informational flyers.

I look forward to seeing you there.

Mark Naea

Landmark Case Settlement on Kauai

KIUC agrees to “By Permission Only Opt-In Agreement”

The landmark Federal Court case of “ADAM ASQUITH vs. KAUAI ISLAND UTILITY COOPERATIVE” for injunctive relief ended in an out of court settlement when KIUC’s motion to dismiss was voluntarily withdrawn on April 25, 2012.

The case was settled without going to trial. This was agreed upon at the first hearing on the injunction where the judge severely admonished KIUC. KIUC agreed that they did not want it to go to trial and agreed to settle with Adam on his complaint.

The settlement agreement was presented to the court for approval and signed by both parties on May 31, 2012. The “STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; AND ORDER”, was approved and so ordered by Federal Court Judge Helen Gillmor on June 1, 2012.

The agreement reached between Adam and KIUC as stipulated in this settlement has completely changed the landscape of KIUC’s planned roll out of smart meters here on Kauai. The settlement agreed to has two (2) conditions.

“Condition 1” of this agreement states:

“KIUC agrees that it will not seek to install (including but not limited to requesting from the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (“PUC”) permission or authorization to install a smart meter on premises where the electricity accounts are in Plaintiff’s name), and will not voluntarily install without court order or an order or determination of the PUC, any smart meters on premises where the electricity accounts are in Plaintiff’s name without Plaintiff’s permission.”

“Condition 2” of this agreement states in essence:

“. . . the dismissal with prejudice in this action will not prevent Plaintiff from challenging said decision . . .” if in the future the PUC authorizes or allows KIUC to install a smart meter without Plaintiff’s permission.

The complete settlement document in PDF format can be found here:

http://www.stopkiuc.com/wp-content/themes/atahualpa_1/pdf/kiuc_asquith.pdf

 

Settlement Changes Smart Meter Program to Opt-In ONLY!

The legal ramifications of “Condition 1” go far beyond this just being an “opt-out program”, as some see it. By legal definition, making such an agreement with one (1) member of the Cooperative, KIUC is required by state law and PUC regulations to have this settlement apply to all Cooperative members.

Under “General Order No. 7” of the Hawaii PUC “Standards for Electric Utility Service in the State of Hawaii”, section 1.2 “Application of Rules”, item “f” states:

f. Each electric utility may of its own accord establish uniform non-discriminatory rules more favorable to its customers than the rules herein established.

KIUC of its own accord established such a “rule” by signing and agreeing to the above settlement and its conditions. This new rule must be applicable as a “uniform non-discriminatory rule” to all cooperative members.

Adam Asquith states,

KIUC admitted that they cannot offer me a special deal and these new conditions must be offered to all members under their PUC regulations.

To clarify “Condition 1”, and establish this new KIUC rule as required by state law, the term “Plaintiff” now becomes “Co-op Member” as below:

“Condition 1” of this agreement creates this new rule:

“KIUC agrees that it will not seek to install (including but not limited to requesting from the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (“PUC”) permission or authorization to install a smart meter on premises where the electricity accounts are in Co-op Member’s name), and will not voluntarily install without court order or an order or determination of the PUC, any smart meters on premises where the electricity accounts are in Co-op Member’s name without Co-op Member’s permission.”

This new rule changes everything and has the following legal guidelines that KIUC has agreed to follow and implement:

1. KIUC must have Co-op Member’s permission before installation of any smart meter on premises where the electricity accounts are in Co-op Member’s name.

2. KIUC will not request permission or authorization to install any smart meters from the PUC where the electricity accounts are in Co-op Member’s name.

3. KIUC must have a court order or an order or determination of the PUC to install any smart meters without permission of Co-op Member.

The continued rollout of smart meters on Kauai by KIUC is in direct violation of PUC regulations and state law, as well as undermining the Federal court approved settlement with Adam Asquith.

KIUC is now required by their lawful and signed settlement with Adam to seek permission first before installation of any smart meter. KIUC is prohibited from installing any smart meters without consent of the account holder.

It’s an Opt-In Rule!!!

What we now have is an Opt-In rule, written and agreed to by KIUC, and enforced by PUC regulations and state law.

 

KIUC Breaks State Law, Deceives Public and PUC by Omission

All installations of smart meters on and after June 1, 2012, have been done illegally by KIUC, its contractors and interested parties.

It is imperative that KIUC stop all involuntary smart meter installations on Kauai and not expose the Cooperative to multiple lawsuits.

I now call on all of our duly elected officials and the PUC to enforce the laws that KIUC has agreed to in Federal court, and by definition, PUC regulations as they apply in this case.

I call on the Ohana of Kauai to make it known to KIUC to stop wasting our hard earned money and stop the smart meter rollout.

And lastly, I call on KIUC to show us its integrity, follow the law, and make good on its commitment to us all.

Pattern of deception at KIUC – Time for a moratorium on Smart Meters

Shosanah writes in answer to Pat Gegen’s emails . . .


Aloha Pat and members of the KIUC Board,   This letter is in response to Pat’s of 6/1 to Christopher Schaeffer.

Christopher wrote the board, asking KIUC to produce an expert of comparable credentials to Dr. David Carpenter to refute Dr. Carpenter’s testimony concerning the documented health hazards of WIFI.

Pat wrote:

“…we have seen this information and unfortunately it does not pertain as closely as many are stating.  The frequency used in the Portland school example is based on 2.4GHz while the frequency used by Landis and Gyr meters is the Gridstream RF which is in the neighborhood of 902-908 MHz.” and later, “I present no expert, just some differences between the study being used to make some assertions and the actual specifications of the Landis and Gyr Meters.”

You and everyone on the board will apparently be surprised to learn that the smart meters KIUC selected utilize both 900 MHz AND 2.4GHz

The Landis+Gyr literature you recently sent me clearly states

“comes with Zigbee® home area network radio for communicating with in-premise devices, such as energy monitors, thermostats and appliances.”

http://style.landisgyr.com/apps/products/data/pdf1/RFResidential_ProdSheet.pdf

Zigbee is a 2.4 GHz communication protocol – a fact which should long since have been known to all of you on the board and been made known to the people of Kauai…especially those interested in the in home display program which will immediately utilize Zigbee.

I request that KIUC amend its website, its publicity, and its literature to reflect this revelation.  I request that an email be sent to all coop members alerting them to this new information and reminding them that they may ask for a deferral or for removal of their smart meter at no additional cost.   

Since all of you have missed understanding or communicating this fundamental point (whether intentionally or otherwise I cannot say), you may perhaps appreciate why Chris and many others feel that the board’s due diligence and transparency on all issues regarding smart meters, is not to be trusted.

Having established the fact that KIUC smart meters are configured for 2.4GHz, it should be plain to you that Chris is correct:   Dr. Carpenter’s research is highly relevant and you all have a duty to answer his concerns. 

Unless KIUC can disprove Dr. Carpenter’s concerns, I respectfully request that you immediately institute a moratorium on further installations and remove all smart meters which have already been installed.   I further request an EIS and additional research on human and animal health issues.

Please also read the amended declaration of microwave specialist Barrie Trower.  (See link below)  This too details numerous studies of serious health problems resulting from exposure to pulsed microwaves carried on 2.4 GHz communication.

www.wirelesswatchblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2001/11/20-Amended-Declaration-of-Barry-Trower.pdf

At the Marriott courtyard meeting on 4/24 Jan TenBruggencate dismissed citizen concerns about the effect of smart meters on human health, saying that had read dozens of studies and was convinced Smart Meters are safe.   Which studies did Mr. TenBruggencate consider?   Did he ignore studies which did not specifically pertain to 900 MHz?   Did he understand the significance of the pulsed microwaves carried on 900 MHz?  (see next paragraph)

While it is always important that KIUC presents truthful information about smart meters, focusing primarily on carrier frequency may cause us to miss the most important issue of all.    Current research strongly suggests that  pulsed microwave radiation is the most damaging to our biology, regardless of whether it is carried on the 900 MHz or 2.4 GHz band.

See:

  1. Andrew Goldsworthy The Biological Effects of Weak Electromagnetic Fields March 2012, p. 4 http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Biol-Effects-EMFs-2012-NZ2.pdf
  2. The Amended Declaration of Barrie Trower  p. 17, #59 http://www.wirelesswatchblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2001/11/20-Amended-Declaration-of-Barry-Trower.pdf
  3. The Amended Declaration of Dr David Carpenter, p. 5, #17; p. 8, #25; and p. 22, #33  http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Amended-Declaration-of-Dr-David-Carpenter.pdf

Remember, smart meters communicate via pulsed microwaves.    I will cover the hazards of pulsed microwaves in greater detail in answer to the letter Pat sent me on 6/3 in which he asked if I could show you what he was missing in his understanding of the studies.   Pat and I had planned to meet in person to discuss this, but events at the 6/4 KIUC meeting make it essential for this communication to occur in public.

At the meeting Pat interrupted Ken Taylor’s request that Brad, your engineer, answer my technical questions about smart meters originally submitted to Jan TenBruggencate.   Pat claimed he had already answered my questions in writing and in full.   This is FALSE.    Was this a deliberate ploy by the board to prevent the truth from being revealed in an open public forum?

Finally, the recent measurements of an actual smart meter on Kauai call into question the remaining reasons you gave for the inapplicability of Dr. Carpenter’s statements.

You, (Pat Gegen), wrote:

“at the 99.9% a smart meter is on for about 14 minutes in a 24 hour period and the average is closer to 45 seconds.”

Based on actual measurements, analyzed frame by frame in video, Mr. Naea writes on http://stopkiuc.com/2012/06/actual-smart-meter-microwave-exposure-video-taped-kapaa-kauai/:

“As the graph shows, extrapolated over a 24 hour period that amounts to 3.2 hours of exposure to a pulsed modulated microwave frequency radiation at over 2 milliwatts per square meter (mW/m ).”

Revelations about the dangers of smart meters and the deceptions perpetrated on Kauai’s people are just beginning.   Please, let us invoke the precautionary principle and implement a moratorium now, before any further damage is done.

Sincerely,

Shosanah Chantara


From: Pat Gegen <psgegen@hotmail.com>
To: Christopher Schaefer
Sent: Friday, June 1, 2012 10:08 AM Subject:
Re: TESTIMONY OF DR. DAVID CARPENTER…

Aloha Mr. Schaefer,

Yes – we have seen this information and unfortunately it does not pertain as closely as many are stating.  The frequency used in the Portland school example is based on 2.4GHz while the frequency used by Landis and Gyr meters is the Gridstream RF which is in the neighborhood of 902-928 MHz.  I am sure with all of your research on radio frequencies Mr. Schaefer you understand that this is a significant difference.  I am not arguing one way or the other, just pointing out some facts that differences exist between this study and the realities of the Advanced Meters currently being installed on Kauai.

Also, if you use the California Court Document presented by Mark Naea and Ray Songtree that discusses the frequency and duration of Smart meter pulses you know that at the 99.9% a smart meter is on for about 14 minutes in a 24 hour period and the average is closer to 45 seconds.  I think the average WI-FI is on a significantly longer time and at a much smaller wavelength which does make a difference.  But don’t take my word for it – please read the studies and use the actual information when making your own decision.  The WHO report discussed earlier is a great resource to discern the differences between the frequencies.

I have attached the court document that was provided to me for your knowledge.  I present no expert, just some differences between the study being used to make some assertions and the actual specifications of the Landis and Gyr Meters.

regards,
psg

On Jun 1, 20 12, at 7:46 AM, Christopher Schaefer wrote:

Hello to all,

I believe most if not all of you got this one, but in case you did not, please read the article below, TESTIMONY OF DR. DAVID CARPENTER , including contents of the link below which leads to his amended declaration pdf:   Amended Declaration of Dr. David O. Carpenter, M.D.

I realize there are two sides to this issue so I would like to know if the KIUC Board knows of anyone with comparable credentials who refutes Dr. Carpenter’s findings and if so could they bring that expert and their data to light here for us just as Dr. Carpenter’s findings as been brought to light?

I realize the KIUC Board might need some time for this task and if that is the case, I ask the Board to please offer an approximate time they will answer this request with the other expert?

If the Board cannot find another expert with comparable credentials to Dr. Carpenter to refute Dr. Carpenter’s research with like research, I request the Board inform me and all interested parties here.

Thanks,

Chris

Testimony of Dr. David Carpenter

For those of you who still think smart meters are harmless, Dr. David Carpenter’s expert testimony on pulse-modulated (“PM”) microwave (“MW”) radiation leaves no doubt on this matter. The case involves the deployment of Wi-Fi in the Portland school system, in the same frequency range as smart meters.

>But in the case of smart meters, the levels of pulse-modulated (“PM”) microwave (“MW”) radiation are much higher.

Dr. David O. Carpenter serves as director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at University at Albany School of Public Health. He previously served as director of the Wadsworth Laboratory of the New York State Department of Health. Carpenter, who received his doctorate from Harvard Medical School, has 220 publications, 37 reviews and book chapters and 12 other publications to his credit.

Taken from his testimony:

1. I am a public health physician, educated at Harvard Medical School. My current title is Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and Professor of Environmental Health Sciences within the School of Public Health. Formerly, I was the Dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Albany and the Director of the Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research of the New York State Department of Health.

2. I served as the Executive Secretary to the New York State Powerlines Project in the 1980s, a program of research that showed children living in homes with elevated magnetic fields coming from powerlines suffered from an elevated risk of developing leukemia. After this I became the spokesperson on electromagnetic field (EMF) issues for the state during the time of my employment in the Department of Health. I have published several reviews on the subject and have edited two books.

3. I am a Co-Editor and a Contributing Author of the BioInitiative: A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF), www.bioinitative.org. It documents bioeffects, adverse health effects and public health conclusions about impacts of electromagnetic radiation (electromagnetic fields including extremely-low frequency ELF-EMF and radiofrequency /microwave or RF-EMF fields). The public health chapter from this report was subsequently published in a peer-reviewed journal.

4. Additionally, I am a Co-Author of Setting Prudent Public Health Policy for Electromagnetic Field Exposures, Reviews on Environmental Health, Volume 23, No 2, 2008, attached as Addendum A-2.

5. In addition, in 2009, I was invited to present to the President’s Cancer Panel on the subject of powerline and radiofrequency fields and cancer, and have testified on this issue before the Unite States House of Representatives.

6. In sum, I am a public health physician, professor and former public health school Dean with expertise in electrophysiology, low-frequency electromagnetic fields bioeffects, and radiofrequency (RF) and microwave (MW) radiation bioeffects.

And this . . . .

17. Like second-hand smoke, EMF and RF/MW radiation involve complex mixtures, where different frequencies, intensities, durations of exposure(s), modulation, waveform and other factors are known to produce variable effects, often more harmful with greater complexity. Decades of scientific study have produced substantial evidence that EMF and RF/MW radiation may be considered neurotoxic, carcinogenic and genotoxic. Sources of fields and radiation, but are not limited to: power lines, navigational radar, cell phones, cordless phones [or Digitally Encoded Cordless Transmission Devices (D.E.C.T.) phones], cell towers, ‘smart’ meters and their grids or infrastructure, “smart” boards, meters and grids, WiMax and wireless internet (WI-FI).

18. The RF/MW radiation and low-frequency EMF science that currently exists includes tens of thousands of studies dating back to the 1920s. On the basis of this vast body of literature, many public health experts believe, myself included, that it is likely society will face epidemics of neurotoxic effects and degeneration, cancers and genotoxicity in the future, resulting from the extreme and mostly involuntary exposure to RF/MW radiation and EMFs. WI-FI radiation in schools exceeds natural background levels of microwave radiation by trillions of times. Thus, it is important that all of us restrict our use of cell phones, and be as free as possible from exposure to unnatural, background sources of MW radiation, particularly WI-FI.

And here is the PDF of his expert testimony, with links to dozens of support materials, studies and research.


Thank you Chris and Shosanah for the tremendous effort you have put into this, Kauai appreciates your selfless efforts on our behalf.

Mark Naea