1) BC Hydro must refund legacy fees when meters not read
BCUC told Hydro it must refund fees when meters are not read as often as required under the Tariff, and asked Hydro to prepare a proposal. The submission is at this link:
2) Anti-spam law
As of July 1 a new anti-spam law comes into effect. It is intended to prevent commercial emails selling something or soliciting donations. But it appears that it will prevent us from referring to our websites because on our sites we speak about our lawsuits which require contributions to support our legal efforts. The law may be changed, or this might be clarified to allow non-profit organizations to communicate to its members, but until then please remember that our websites are
3) Why are Smart Meters not CSA certified?
A member just advised that in BC Business magazine rankings of the top 100 companies in BC, Hydro comes in 5th, up from 8th last year. The major shareholder is Province of BC 100%. That is us, the taxpayers. I continue to be confused. How can we own Hydro, be responsible for its debts, but not own the $meters??
If we owned the meters they would have to be certified safe by CSA and would have to meet safety standards which Hydro’s equipment doesn’t have to meet.
4) What is THE HUM?
In February I sent an article around about “the hum” that some people have been reporting. A small percentage of people report hearing this rumble and cannot figure out the cause. When I asked for people to let me know if they heard it, 11 responded that they did, several mentioning it is worse at night, and most mentioning that it started very recently. This articles presents some theories.
“So what’s behind the Hum? After nearly four decades, Hum investigators may finally have some idea. The general consensus among sufferers is that the Hum is comprised of very low frequency (or ‘VLF’, in the range of 3 kHz to 30 kHz and wavelengths from 10 to 100 kilometers) or extremely low frequency (or ‘ELF’, in the range of 3 to 30 Hz, and corresponding wavelengths from 100,000 to 10,000 kilometers) radio waves, which can penetrate buildings and travel over tremendous distances.”
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: Spogliarich Reconsider G-59-14- Phase 1 – BCH Meter Choices Decision
Wednesday, June 25th
Dear Mr Andrews:
The Spogliarichs’ application questions the accuracy of the figures on which the B.C.U.C. decision was based. The Spogliarichs’ diligent and painstakingly researched work certainly seems to demonstrate that B.C. Hydro’s figures represent an outlier when compared to similar charges in other jurisdictions in North America. This suggests, as the Spogiarichs assert, that B.C. Hydro’s figures must be, in some way, inflated, which explains, in turn, the unconscionable opt-out charges approved by the B.C.U.C. The Spogliarich application thus cannot be characterised, as you have obliquely suggested, as an abuse of process.
An appeal is made to attempt to overturn a decision. Any appeal, by its very nature, might be characterised as “causing trouble” by anyone supporting that decision. You and the organisations you represent should be the last ones to admonish the Spogliarichs for what amounts to an expression of total frustration with these hearings. The Spogiarichs, along with the vast majority of the other intervenors in these proceedings, absolutely do not feel as if they have been heard, and if they have the fortitude to keep trying, they should be congratulated, not criticised. The implementation of smart meters by BC Hydro in British Columbia has made a complete mockery of the democratic process, and you and the organizations you represent have simply acquiesced to the farce that has unfolded.
Whether one agrees with the political views of the hundreds and thousands of customers of BC Hydro who are opposed to installation of smart meters or not, the fact remains that a substantial number were coerced into accepting installation of a smart meter on their property against their will. In fact I am still dealing with constituents and others in the Kootenay region who are absolutely terrified of having these devices installed on their property.
For you, as a lawyer, to admonish a fellow intervener when you personally refused to make any statement about the fact that by order-in-council the provincial government peremptorily refused to allow the majority of BC Hydro customers the right to choose whether they wanted to have a smart meter in the first place, is an outrage. Environmental organizations in British Columbia have had a long history of fighting for the right of all life forms to exist, which I guess in the case of BCSEA and the Sierra Club of BC does not extend to the rights of British Columbians who fear their health will be harmed by these devices.
You and I both know that the cost of participating in the BC Hydro opt-out program is wholly dependent on the number of customers who participate in the program, and yet you have remained absolutely silent on the fact that the vast majority of BC Hydro customers were never given the choice to opt out. What kind of a democracy and what kind of governmental processes do you and the organizations you represent believe in anyway?
The manner in which smart meters have been introduced into BC has in and of itself been an abuse of political process from start to finish. Why then do you choose to remain silent on that fact, but instead publicly admonish lay interveners, who are in fact the victims in this whole process, for making some indiscreet comment to other interveners. Or do you, like Niccolo Machiavelli, simply believe that coercion and fear are justifiable means to achieving appropriate political ends?
Director Area D
Regional District Central Kootenay