Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
CEP Smart Meters Brinchman Direct Testimony (10.5.12)

CEP Smart Meters Brinchman Direct Testimony (10.5.12)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 269|Likes:
This is the direct testimony of CEP Director Susan Brinchman, on behalf of CEP, providing commentary on questions posed by CPUC related to smart meter opt-out fees.
This is the direct testimony of CEP Director Susan Brinchman, on behalf of CEP, providing commentary on questions posed by CPUC related to smart meter opt-out fees.

More info:

Published by: Center for Electrosmog Prevention on Oct 06, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/13/2014

pdf

text

original

 
CEP Testimony 1
Application No: A.11-03-014, and Related MattersExhibit No.: CEP-1Witness: Susan BrinchmanApplication of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Approval of Modifications to its SmartMeterTM ProgramandIncreased Revenue Requirements to Recover the Costsof theModifications (U39M).Application 11-03-014(Filed March 24, 2011)And Related Matters.Application 11-03-015Application 11-07-020
PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF SUSAN BRINCHMAN ON BEHALF OFCENTER FOR ELECTROSMOG PREVENTIONBEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAOctober 5, 2012
 
CEP Testimony 2
I. QUALIFICATIONS........................................................................................................................................3II. PURPOSE...................................................................................................................................................4III. PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE.....................................................................................................................5IV. QUESTIONS POSED IN AMENDED SCOPING MEMO................................................................................8a) What are the utility costs associated with offering an analog meter opt-out option?........................8Cost of Meters.......................................................................................................................................9Back Office Costs...................................................................................................................................9CPUC OVERSIGHT................................................................................................................................12RELIABILITY..........................................................................................................................................13COST OF METER-READING..................................................................................................................14b) Should more than one opt-out option be offered to customers who do not wish to have a wirelesssmart meter (e.g., a digital, non-communicating meter)?.....................................................................14c) Should all costs associated with the opt-out option be paid by only those customers electing theoption, or should some portion of these costs be allocated to all ratepayers and/or to utilityshareholders?......................................................................................................................................14d) What fees should be assessed on customers who elect the opt-out optionand should the fees beassessed on a per meter or per location basis?..................................................................................15e) Should there be different fees based on whether the customer is selecting to opt-out of a singlecommodity or two commodities?.......................................................................................................15f) Should there be an “exit fee” imposed on customers who elect the opt-out option and return to awireless smart meter?........................................................................................................................16
 
CEP Testimony 3
PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF SUSAN BRINCHMAN ON BEHALF OFCENTER FOR ELECTROSMOG PREVENTION
I. QUALIFICATIONS
My name is Susan Brinchman. I am the Director for the Center for Electrosmog Prevention(CEP). My business address is P.O. Box 655, La Mesa, CA 91944. I received a Bachelor’sdegree in Special Educationfromthe University of Connecticut, and aMaster’s in EducationalTechnologyfrom NationalUniversity. I wasemployed by the San Diego City Schools for 25years as a Specialand GeneralEducation teacherand am now retired. I have 9 years combinedexperience as founder and environmental nonprofit director forthe501c3 nonprofit Center for School Mold Help(SMH)and (concurrent) charitable nonprofit Center for ElectrosmogPrevention(CEP).Thepurpose of both organizations is to improve the public health throughreducing or eliminating preventable toxic environmental exposures by providing prevention,solutions, and advocacy. In the course of teaching special education students, I have seen manythousands of students whose disabilities could be connected with preventable environmentalexposures in utero or during the early years of childhood, and who suffered from such medicalconditions as asthma, as well as teachers who became disabled or ill due to workplace exposures.It made sense to me to try to intervene to improve the conditions, on a national basis, that werecausing these problems. In the case of mold and health, which was previously not officiallyrecognized as a public health risk by federal health agencies, SMH was able to intervene and wasinstrumental in convincing the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to accept external independentinformation pertaining to the public health threat from mold. As a result, CDC changed its entire position on mold, viewing it as a highly undesirable public health risk and promoting morecareful handling of mold, which now is more in alignment with current independent science.SMH hasalso communicated regularly and participated in meetings with United States (US)Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), conferenced with US Department of Educationofficials and national teacher unionleaders, and corresponded with World Health officials tohelp bring attention to improvements in policies and public information that would reduce the problem of mold and indoor dampness in schools, and to recognize thisproblem, and address itmore proactively. In manycases, the suggestions helped lead to notable improvements. Thus, as

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->