Smart meter developments at the state level in California are constantly evolving. To keep updated on this front, we’ve provided a list of Proceedings at the Calif. Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) that are coming up with Rulings and Decisions regarding regulations relating to Smart Meters and the Smart Grid.
Many of the Rulings, Comments, Motions and Decisions in these Proceedings relate to Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs, that is, the major utility companies in our state — San Diego Gas & Electric or SDG&E, Pacific Gas & Electric or PG&E, Southern California Edison or SCE, and So Cal Gas), and not municipal utilities. However, what the CPUC requires of the IOUs may very well influence and impact what’s going on in our and your community (i.e., municipal utilities) regarding smart meter options. For example, Glendale Water & Power in Los Angeles County has stated publicly that it is looking to the CPUC decision on smart meter options in formulating its options for Glendale residents.
FYI — will the CPUC require private water companies to become parties to the Smart Meter Opt Out Proceedings? you should organize with local and neighboring residents to ask for or demand to your City and County officials what smart meter options you do or don’t want with your local water companies. That’s because these local water departments and companies have not been required by the CPUC to be parties to the Smart Meter Opt Out proceedings.
Notes on key developments: On November 22, 2011, CPUC President Michael Peevey issued a Proposed Decision on Smart Meter Options proposed by PG&E. His Decision has sparked criticisms and many comments in protest, and gives the public a glimpse of how he will rule on smart meter options for SDG&E, So Cal Gas and SCE. FYI: Mr. Peevey is the former president of Edison International and SCE; with such a conflict of interest, he should have recused himself. The CPUC President and other Commissioners are scheduled to vote on it January 12, 2012.
Most recently, PG&E requested to modify its Smart Meter options proposal to include allowing residents to choose keeping or restoring analog meters. This may alter what happens on January 12, 2012. Mr. Peevey may have to submit a revised Proposed Decision. ( To read the Agenda and watch the Jan. 12th CPUC Meeting, scroll down to the bottom of this page and click the “CPUC Meeting” link.)
Earlier, on October 18, 2011, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Amy Yip-Kikugawa issued a Ruling asking SDG&E, SCE, So Cal Gas, and PG&E submit RF information about their meters by November 1, 2011. Read their responses below. In many of them, the utilities finally admit the frequency of the micropulse bursts that the smart meter are constantly emitting as they communicate to each other, and the receptor/collector/repeater antennas typically installed on poles throughout the neighborhood (that comprise the wireless “mesh network”).
Near the end of this page, you will find information on how member of the public can sign-up to be notified of documents filed in these proceedings or become an active Party directly participating in these Proceedings. There are also some helpful links and resources.
Note: CPUC may update the webpage addresses of the following proceedings, so in case the links below don’t work, use the CPUC’s Proceeding search engine at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/documents/proceedings.htm. Once you are there, click the link that says “Open Proceeding.” That will take you to the “Proceeding Information Search” page — type in the Proceeding number in the “Proceeding Number Search” block, and click the “Search” button to pull up the multitude of documents related to that proceeding.
1. Proceeding A1103014 – PG&E Opt Out Proceeding
- CPUC Decision issued February 1, 2012, on PG&E Smart Meter Opt-Out program: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/159342.htm
- PG&E proposes modifying its Opt Out Proposal to include allowing residents to have an analog meters. Read related news stories:
3. San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/19/MNHS1MEGPQ.DTL
4. San Jose Mercury News: http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_19580461
- Read the various Comments, including criticisms, of the Proposed Opt-Out Decision for PG&E — submitted on December 12, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/published/proceedings/A1103014.htm
- Response to Nov. 22nd Proposed Decision by Attorney Jim Tobin on behalf of Consumer Power Alliance, Town of Fairfax, County of Marin, Santa Barbara Tea Party, Burbank Action and other groups: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/CM/155827.htm
- CPUC President Michael Peevey issues Proposed Decision on November 22, 2011, on PG&E’s Smart Meter Options proposal: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/PD/153864.htm
- PG&E submits RF information on November 1, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RESP/149398.htm
- ALJ Amy Yip Kikugawa Oct. 18 Ruling requiring PG&E to submit RF emissions data: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/145652.htm
- Read news stories responding to PGE’s response to provide RF info– PG&E now is FINALLY being forced to admit the truth about the true frequency of emissions from smart meters. Also read related news stories:
1. EMF Safety Network’s story: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=6030
2. San Francisco Chronicle’s story: http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2011/11/03/smartmeters-send-almost-10000-signals-a-day/
- PG&E’s proposed Opt Out Program and Fees, April 20, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/CF/134289.htm
2. Proceeding A1107020 – SCE Opt Out Proceeding
- CPUC issues Proposed Decision on SCE Opt Out program. March 15, 2012: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/PD/161688.htm
- SCE submits its Smart Meter Options proposal on November 28, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/MISC/154721.htm
- SCE submits RF info on November 1, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RESP/149284.htm
- CPUC President Michael Peevey issues Ruling on September 21, 2011, requiring SCE to have a call-in Delay List for customers who don’t have smart meters: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/143742.htm
- ALJ Amy Yip Kikugawa issues Ruling on Oct. 18, 2011, requiring PG&E to submit RF emissions data: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/145652.htm
- Parties participating in this proceeding: Consumers Power Alliance (contact firstname.lastname@example.org), Public Citizen (national consumer group, contact Tyson Slocum of PC’s Energy Program, email@example.com), and Burbank Action (contact Ms. Kiku Iwata at BurbankAction@aol.com). Attorney representing this group is Jim Tobin, an attorney specializing in utility law (contact Tobin Law Group at www.tobinlaw.us).
3. Proceeding A1103015 – SDG&E Opt Out Proceeding
- CPUC Proposed Decision for SDG&E Opt-Out program, issued March 15, 2012: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/PD/161677.htm
- SDG&E submits its Smart Meter Options proposal on November 28, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/CF/154492.htm
- SDG&E submits RF info on November 1, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RESP/149379.htm
- ALJ Kikugawa’s Proposed Decision on Oct. 12, 2011, grants UCAN’s application directing SDG&E to submit opt-out proposal: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/PD/145182.htm
- CPUC President Michael Peevey issues Ruling on September 21, 2011, requiring SDG&E to have a call-in Delay List for customers who don’t have smart meters: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/143742.htm
- ALJ Amy Yip Kikugawa issues Oct. 18, 2011 Ruling requiring SDG&E file RF emissions data by Nov. 1: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/145652.htm
- Parties Participating in this include: Center for Electrosmog Prevention (Contact Sue Brinchman in San Diego, www.electrosmogprevention.org), Southern Californians for Wired Solutions to Smart Meters (Contact Barbara Schnier), and consumer group UCAN (www.ucan.org) in San Diego.
4. So Cal Gas RF info
- So Cal Gas submits RF info on November 1, 2011: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RESP/149309.htm
- ALJ Amy Yip Kikugawa issues Oct. 18, 2011 Ruling requiring SDG&E file RF emissions data: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/145652.htm
5. CPUC Proceeding A1106006, A1106029, A2207001 – Smart Grid Deployment Plans for SDG&E, PG&E & SCE
In this proceeding you will find Protests filed against the Smart Grid Deployment Plans (i.e., smart meters and wireless infrastructure in our neighborhoods and throughout our communities) of the three major Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs):
6. CPUC Proceeding A1004018 – Health effects of Smart Meters
- This proceeding is ongoing and the key group that initiated this was the EMF Safety Coalition, based in northern California.
- Important: If the CPUC moves forward on this proceeding, it has the authority to regulate ALL utilities on matters of health and public safety, and thus, the Municipal utilities (that is, not just SCE, So Cal Gas, SDG&E and PG&E) would be obligated to comply with any CPUC regulations handed down in this Proceeding. This would impact ALL of California.
7. IMPORTANT – CPUC Proceeding A0506028, initiated June 16, 2005 – PG&E application seeks approval for its Advanced Metering Program. Many of the documents, including PG&E’s original Application (June 15, 2005) and Amended Application (Oct. 13, 2005), and dissenting Briefs, including those filed by The Utility Reform Network, are inaccessible on-line and many were made Confidential and sealed from the public, so it’s difficult for the public to know the full costs, rationale, and details of PG&E’s AMI proposal before the CPUC that was approved.
CPUC Decision 06-07-027 issued July 20, 2006 approving PG&E’s Advanced Metering program for its electrical and gas meters: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/58362.htm. The Decision above states how PG&E’s AMI system for its electrical meters would be done with a Power Line Carrier (PLC, not a wireless system).*
Read CPUC Press Release, issued July 20, 2006, “PUC Approves Smart Meters for PG&E Customers,” http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RELEASE/58233.htm
RELATED: SDG& Advanced Metering proposal, Proceeding A0503015: http://delaps1.cpuc.ca.gov/CPUCProceedingLookup/f?p=401:56:1173129115235901::NO:RP,57,RIR:P5_PROCEEDING_SELECT:A0503015 and Press Release: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/published/proceedings/A0503015_doc.htm
RELATED: SCEs’ Advanced Integrated Meter proposal, Proceeding A0503026: http://delaps1.cpuc.ca.gov/CPUCProceedingLookup/f?p=401:56:1173129115235901::NO:RP,57,RIR:P5_PROCEEDING_SELECT:A0503026
8. CPUC Proceeding A0712009, initiated Dec. 12, 2007 — PG&E Application seeking approval to spend more money to “upgrade” its Advanced (Smart) Meters to include compatibility with Home Area Network (HAN) devices. During this proceeding, San Francisco and other parties also questioned the “accuracy” of PG&E Smart Meters, which lead to Structure Report, which many parties also challenged. However, the CPUC on Dec. 17, 2010 issued a Decision in response denying the challenges.
Read Application for upgrade, dated Dec. 12, 2007: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/A/76479.htm
CPUC Decision Approving Upgrade, issued March 12, 2009: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/98486.htm
FYI: The Structure report has been highly criticized for its flaws. In addition, the Structure Group has strong ties to the energy industry, and is a consultant to the utility industry, so there is a conflict of interest. This report does also not test the accuracy of other utility smart meters.
9. CPUC Proceeding R0812009 — initiated Dec. 18, 2008 — Smart Meters and the Smart Grid, including Smart Grid Privacy and Customer Security, and Compliance with State Legislation, and Federal Smart Grid Legislation and Federal Funding Grants
Privacy and Security issues are still being worked out by the CPUC. Also found here are documents and decisions related to CPUC compliance with the Federal and State Smart Grid legislation encouraging state utility agencies to adopt and promote smart grid technologies.
- Read “Decisions” on Federal and State legislation, and privacy and security issues here: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/proceedings/R0812009.htm#decisions
- Read “Documents” (Comments, Motions, Rulemaking, Statements, Briefs, Proposed Decision, etc.) here: http://delaps1.cpuc.ca.gov/CPUCProceedingLookup/f?p=401:56:1173129115235901::NO:RP,57,RIR:P5_PROCEEDING_SELECT:R0812009
- A Cover Page that includes the Status of this Proceeding, and lists Documents (including abridged Documents page) can be found here: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/proceedings/R0812009.htm#decisions
10. CPUC Proceeding R0701041 – Proceeding that began Jan. 25, 2007, on Demand Response programs, activities, and methodologies.
11. CPUC Proceeding R0206001 – initiated June 6, 2002 — is described as a “policymaking forum to develop demand response as a resource to enhance electric system reliability, reduce power purchase and individual consumer costs, and protect the environment.” Many of the rulings encouraged the IOUs with their pilot programs in demand response to determine what worked and didn’t.
As a result of this Proceeding, PG&E submitted a proposal for its Advanced Metering System (which you can find in Proceeding A0506028, #9, above).
12. CPUC “Smart Meter” Page: Includes links to Decisions on Smart Meter programs of SDG&E, PG&E and SCE, and Info on Opting out
13. CPUC “Smart Grid” Page: Includes links to related Proceedings, documents, important upcoming workshop dates for January 2012
14. Related – California Energy Commission: Senate Bill 1389 (SB 1389, Bowen and Sher, Chapter 568, Statutes of 2002) requires the California Energy Commission to: “[C]onduct assessments and forecasts of all aspects of energy industry supply, production, transportation, delivery and distribution, demand, and prices. The Energy Commission shall use these assessments and forecasts to develop energy policies that conserve resources, protect the environment, ensure energy reliability, enhance the state’s economy, and protect public health and safety.” (Pub. Res. Code § 25301(a)).
The California Energy Commission adopts an Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) every two years and an update every other year. As a result, the 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report was adopted by the Energy Commission on December 5, 2007. The Commission held nearly 50 public workshops and hearings. It published 70 supporting reports, scores of presentations, and received hundreds of public comments. The final main reports can be downloaded below. Background materials and supporting documents can be found in the documents section (see link in left-hand navigation column). The Executive Report and its Summary can be found here: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007_energypolicy/index.html
Filed under Docket 08-DR-01: http://www.energy.ca.gov/load_management/.
Also check out Docket 02-DR-01: http://energyarchive.ca.gov/demandresponse/
And read: “California Demand Response: A Vision for the Future (2002-2007),” which is included in D.03-06-032 as Attachment A: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/26965.htm
How to Be Added to the Service List of a Proceeding
Members of the public who are not Parties to these proceedings can sign up and receive notices and filings (i.e., to be added to a “Service List” as the CPUC says). Fill out the top half of the form and submit as instructed: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/forms/service_list_addition_change.pdf
How to Become an Active Party to a Proceeding
If any organization, group and member of the public wishes to become a “Party” to a proceeding which would allow them to participate directly (instead of outside as an observer; being a Party would allow you to file documents, including responses and Comments toward this proceeding, participate in workshops, attend closed-session meetings, etc.) they must abide by the rules of the CPUC and file the appropriate paperwork. A word of advice: There is a very specific language and protocol for writing and submitting documents when you want to or become a Party to a Proceeding, and as a result, you may have to hire an attorney to help you, or you may be able to figure the protocol and wording of documents on your own, as some have done. Go here to read more: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Practitioner/custom.htm
And here is yet more info: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/practitioner
Other helpful info and links
To read news stories updating you on the CPUC smart meter options front, please bookmark or subscribe to the following websites. They are also supporting smart meter opposition efforts at the local, statewide and national level, so please support their efforts with a donation if possible:
You can also send donations to Consumer Power Alliance (CPA) and ask that it go toward the services of Attorney Jim Tobin, who prepares and files documents with the CPUC regarding smart meter options on behalf of CPA and several other parties, including municipalities, resident groups, and Burbank Action: E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org for more info.
Alameda County Residents Concerned About Smart Meters: Contact Steve Martinot – Martinot4@gmail.com
To watch a CPUC Meeting, go here: http://www.californiaadmin.com/cpuc.shtml
For Agendas, go here: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/puc/aboutus/commmtgs.htm
For 2012 Meeting Dates, go here: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/aboutus/2012meetings.htm
If you would like to speak at a CPUC Meeting, you have to before the meeting starts to sign-in; read this and other important Public Comment instructions here: https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/requesttocomment/ and more here: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/aboutus/Divisions/CSID/Public+Advisor/Public+Comment+Rules.htm
File a Smart Meter Complaint today: http://www.smartmeterhelp.com/
Mail a “No Consent” Letter to your Utility today (and cc your local officials), and tell them you want your analog meter restored or preserved at no-cost, no extra fees and no higher rates: https://sites.google.com/site/nocelltowerinourneighborhood/home/smart-meter-action-forms
Sign the Move-On Petitions advocating for Analog Meters today:
Call (between 9a to 5pm weekdays) and also Email the Commissioners today. Also cc the CPUC Public Advisor at email@example.com and CPUC Administrative Law Judge Amy Yip Kikugawa at amy.yip–firstname.lastname@example.org. Tell the Commissioners you want them to:
1- oppose the forced installation of smart meters and their wireless mesh network on California residents because it was done without their individual and community consent and approval, and the Federal government and federal legislation does not make them mandatory but optional
2 – oppose the November 22, 2011 Smart Meter Opt-Out Proposed Decision by CPUC President Peevey
3- recommend that President Peevey retract his Proposed Decision and recuse himself due to conflict of interest
4 – oppose PG&E’s proposed opt-out program because charging fees to opt out is extortion and criminal, as well as prohibitory, unreasonable, unfair, inequitable, and unacceptable for all Californians
5- recommend that ALJ Amy Yip-Kikugawa be allowed to continue the Proceeding to allow for due process so that all possible smart meter options will be properly explored and investigated by all the Parties in the Proceeding
6 – recommend no-cost electromechanical analog meters option for electric, gas AND water smart meters
7 – recommend that the California Department of Public Health investigate the public safety and health hazards of smart meters, and consult with truly independent public health and environmental health consultants, physicians, biologists, and researchers of non-ionizing RF radiation health effects (i.e., with no political or funding ties to the utility or energy or telecommunications industries)
8 – recommend the immediate restoration of electromechanical analog meters for those Californians who want and request them, until the Smart Meter Opt Out proceedings are finished
Commissioner/President Michael Peevey (above)
Tel: 415.703.2782 or 415.703.3703
E-mail: email@example.com *
Commissioner Timothy Alan Simon:
Commissioner Mike Florio:
Tel. 415-703-2440 or 415-703-1840
Additional E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Commissioner Catherine J.K. Sandoval:
Tel. 415-703-3700 or 415-703-2593
Additional E-mail: email@example.com
Commissioner Mark J. Ferron:
Tel. 415.703.2444 or 415.703.2782
Additional E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
* For those Commissioners with two e-mail addresses listed here, you may want to e-mail your correspondence to both of their e-mail addresses to ensure delivery. You can also find the CPUC Commissioner e-mail addresses and contact info on the website of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC): http://www.naruc.org/commissions2.cfm?s=10.
IN CASE YOU WOULD LIKE TO e-mail and call Administrative Law Judge Amy Yip-Kikugawa to communicate your recommendations on any of the opt-out proceedings or programs of SCE, SDG&E and PG&E, here is her contact info:
Administrative Law Judge Amy Yip-Kikugawa (“Your Honor”)
For those living outside of California: You can find the contact info for your state’s Utility Commission and Commissioners at the NARUC website website: http://www.naruc.org/commissions.cfm
* Notes about PG&E’s approved Advanced Metering project, in Proceeding for Application A05-06-028.
The CPUC’s Decision 06-07-027, dated July 20, 2006 (http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/58362.htm; click PDF in the top right corner to read the PDF version), stated:
PG&E selected Distribution Control Systems, Inc. (DCSI) to provide a Power Line Carrier technology for electric meters…
The Decision also stated that most meters will not be removed, see bottom of Page 2 and top of Page 3:
It is often overly-simplified to imply that only meters are involved. In fact, in most instances, PG&E will not replace residential meters with new meters – most of the existing inventory will be retrofitted with communications modules and redeployed.
The footnote to this states:
PG&E’s plan is to retrofit 54% of the existing electric meters and 96.1% of its existing gas meters.
Then, a CPUC Ruling issued on May 4, 2010, by Commissioner Michael Peevey shows how PG&E’s original project has changed– it now states how PG&E’s AMI project involves Smart Meters, and they are going to replace existing meters (http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/EFILE/RULINGS/117349.htm), see Page 1:
The project includes the removal of customer meters and the installation of new meters known as Smart Meters.
So how did this happen? Many of the documents in this Proceeding have been sealed as confidential and are not available on-line for public viewing, so it’s hard to determine when and where this occurred.
If we go to a related Proceeding A0712009, you can read PG&E’s Application, filed Dec. 7, 2007, seeking approval to “upgrade” its Smart Meter program: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/efile/A/76479.pdf.
Go to page 3 to read the specific upgrades that PG&E seeks:
1. Integrated Load Limiting Connect/Disconnect Switches: PG&E wants to install them now in all meters
2. Home Area Network (HAN) devices
3. Solid State Meter Technology: “New solid state meters now can be supplied with additional data storage and
processing capabilities that expand both their use and reliability. These new, high functioning meters are necessary to support both the HAN gateway devices and integrated load limiting switches discussed immediately above. Moreover, the solid state meters will facilitate future upgrades because of their remotely-programmable components.”
However, in this Application PG&E does not state that this upgrade will be a mandatory program and that people who do not want to participate can or must “opt out,” or be required to pay a fee to opt out.