Where the Smart Meter Stands Now in PA

A special report for PA-CHD by Stephanie Micek

Updated Nov. 9th.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court reverses Commonwealth Court ruling that smart meter installation is optional.

Pennsylvania began smart meter deployment when the General Assembly passed Act 129 of 2008 for the “purpose of promoting an energy efficiency and conservation program in Pennsylvania”. Act 129 defines “smart meter technology” as bidirectional communication that records electricity usage on at least an hourly basis, including related electric distribution system upgrades.   Smart meters use the same radio-frequency (“RF”) waves that cell phones emit, but smart meters broadcast their wireless RF signals throughout the day to the utility company at a power density 100 to 160 times that of a cell phone.

Beginning in 2015, several Pennsylvania electric customers filed legal action against the Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) to prevent the installation of smart meters at their homes due to health problems caused by smart meters. Five years later, the PA Commonwealth Court found, in its decision on October 8, 2020, that the PUC erred in interpreting Act 129 as a mandate for smart meters.

The PUC and PECO Energy appealed that decision to the PA Supreme Court, which heard the appeal in December 2021. Eight months later, on August 16, 2022, the PA Supreme Court issued an opinion on the PUC and PECO’s appeal that reversed the Commonwealth Court’s ruling that Act 129 does not mandate the installation of smart meters.

Not only did the PA Supreme Court uphold a forced smart meter installation program, but they also mandated that customers suffering from microwave sickness (symptoms include insomnia, headaches, tinnitus, lethargy, and cognitive problems) attributed to smart meters demonstrate a “conclusive causal connection” for proving that smart meters constitute unsafe or unreasonable service.

One PA Supreme Court judge, Justice Dougherty, issued a dissenting opinion regarding the PA Supreme Court Majority ruling that a customer establish a “conclusive causal connection” between RF emissions from smart meters and adverse human health effects.

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Dougherty observes that “the Majority itself correctly notes ‘the burden of proof in PUC cases is preponderance of the evidence’ and cites Federal Circuit and District Court cases in which civil law is clear that the plaintiff bears the burden of proving his case with reasonable certainty (a preponderance of the evidence), and is not required to furnish conclusive proof.

“Conclusive” is defined as eliminating all doubt, question, or uncertainty.  Per Justice Dougherty, “In sum, because I view the Majority’s endorsement of a conclusive causal connection standard for proving adverse human health effects under Section 1501 to be both internally inconsistent with its recognition of the governing preponderance of the evidence standard and contrary to law, I respectfully cannot join this aspect of the Majority’s opinion.”

There are approximately 75 active complaints out of 225 outstanding formal complaints filed against the PUC that will subject the complainants to this unprecedented burden of proving a “conclusive causal connection” between their symptoms of microwave sickness and the smart meters. There are other harmful aspects of smart meters that were not covered in the PA Supreme Court case, which are detailed below.

One should recall the US Government recognizes the chronic and debilitating condition known as “Havana Syndrome” and has paid out significant damage claims for what is now understood to be excess exposure to microwave emissions.  Might we start seeing PA residents who are forced to live with unwanted emissions pressing for similar claims against their electricity provider.

PA Smart Meters in Violation of Act 129

While the PA Supreme Court invokes Act 129, during their appeal hearing PECO Energy and PUC stated that the smart meters are critical for the Internet of Things (“IoT”) and 5G infrastructure, effectively disavowing responsibility for compliance with Act 129’s asserted goal of promoting energy efficiency and conservation. In 2020, overall energy footprint of the global wireless ecosystem, including network infrastructure and end devices, topped 19.8 million tons oil equivalent (Mtoe) per year.

By 2030, global wireless energy consumption is expected to grow by a staggering 160% to 51.3 Mtoe. Connected devices will grow exponentially as enterprises begin wide-scale deployment of IoT and 5G-enabled devices.  When smart meters are installed, many utility customers experience an increase in utility bills. The top complaint filed by utility customers with PUC is for over-billing. Smart meters allow the utility to reap significant financial benefits by charging time-of-use rates (peak pricing), so you pay more for electricity when you most need it. It is the utility customer who pays for the energy the utility consumes in transmitting the power-dense and incessant RF signals from the smart meter to the utility company.

It is the children who are most vulnerable to this involuntary exposure to RF emissions, particularly when their bedrooms or school classrooms are in close proximity to the smart meter. Even when playing sports outside, children are in the crossfire of the electrosmog that is constantly being transmitted by the smart meters to the utility company.

As wireless emission continue to increase all around us cases of illness will undoubtably increase as well.  The clearly poor ruling in favor of industry, to roll out energy guzzling smart meters that force EMR into the homes of those sickened by it, now waits for an appeal to the US Supreme Court.

New Hampshire recently commissioned a study on the environmental and health effects of 5G and recommended that, due to strong evidence of children being more susceptible to the negative impacts of RF-radiation, schools and public libraries migrate from RF wireless connections to hard-wired or optimal connections.  Unlike Pennsylvania, many states allow customers to opt-out of the smart meter.  Nearby, this includes Maryland, New Hampshire and Vermont.  Some townships and municipalities have halted smart meter deployment as a result of citizen outreach. 

In July 2022, the UK’s Upper Tribunal court recently mandated that a UK school accommodate a teenager with adverse health symptoms when exposed to Wi-Fi or other kinds of electromagnetic fields.