A Pennsylvania woman won a temporary ruling allowing her to keep her mechanical meter and requiring her electric company to maintain her power while her lawsuit against the state’s smart meter mandate proceeds.

Madison Rose Lucey, a 23-year-old who has a physical disability aggravated by wireless radiation from smart meters, accused the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PAPUC) and FirstEnergy of discriminating against her by refusing her request to keep a mechanical meter as a disability accommodation.

According to her amended complaint, filed Nov. 3 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, PAPUC and FirstEnergy rejected her request despite a letter from her doctor stating that she needed to avoid exposure to wireless radiation. Lucey filed her original complaint in September.

Smart meters — or “advanced metering infrastructure installations” — are wireless devices that use recurring pulses of radiofrequency (RF) radiation to transmit information to utility companies about how much water, gas and electricity consumers use.

The lawsuit accuses PAPUC and FirstEnergy of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and maintains that Lucey has the legal right to a physical disability accommodation.

FirstEnergy repeatedly threatened to cut off Lucey’s electric, water, heat and air conditioning if she kept her mechanical meter, even though the meter was fully functioning.

After FirstEnergy notified Lucey that it would cut off her electricity on her birthday, Aug. 4, she told the company she would file a federal lawsuit seeking an injunction and a temporary restraining order.

The case has yet to go to trial. However, a District Court judge last month temporarily ruled in Lucey’s favor, ordering FirstEnergy to continue providing power through her mechanical meter while the case proceeds.

Lawyer: case could set precedent that helps others seeking smart meter opt-out

Lucey, who holds a master’s degree in data science and is in her second year at Widener University Commonwealth Law School, is representing herself in the lawsuit.

If the court rules in her favor, it could set a precedent that helps others in Pennsylvania seeking to opt out of a smart meter, said W. Scott McCollough, lead litigator of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless Program.

Pennsylvania doesn’t allow opt-outs, so residents who experience negative health effects from smart meters have little recourse, he said.

In 2021, CHD and the Building Biology Institute submitted an amicus brief in support of a Pennsylvania resident who objected to the state’s smart meter mandate. However, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ruled against the resident.

“We predicted what has now occurred — that the court’s reading of the relevant statute would make it impossible to secure any relief based on adverse health effects from the state utility commission,” McCollough said.

In other words, people can file a claim with the PAPUC for a smart meter opt-out, but the commission’s court system reviews only whether the PAPUC followed its own rules — not whether a person qualifies for a disability accommodation.

McCollough acknowledged that courts — not state utility commissions — enforce federal disability laws, but said many Pennsylvania residents spend years seeking accommodations through the state commission only to see their claims dismissed.

‘I had no idea that anyone could get so sick, so quickly’

One such resident is Donna Ott, president and founder of Pennsylvanians for Safe Technology. Ott said she had largely overcome her chronic health issues before smart meters were installed in her neighborhood.

“The day the meters were installed, this all changed,” Ott said. “I had no idea that anyone could get so sick, so quickly, so severely and especially not to the point that it would be disabling and put me at risk for sudden death.”

Ott immediately experienced a disabling headache, nausea, fatigue and sleeping problems. After a week, she developed heart issues that later became life-threatening.

The symptoms dissipated when she left the house. “The more time I spent in my house, the more symptoms I developed,” she said. Her symptoms were so severe, she moved out of her home for two months.

“It was a terrible feeling,” Ott said. “I was a mother with young children and was suddenly not able to access my own house. I did not understand why my utility would not accept the letters from my doctors asking for the meter to be removed for medical reasons.”

Ott had to stop working. She hired an engineer to help shield her house from smart meter radiation and filter its electrical system. She also found doctors who understood the effects of RF radiation and advised her on ways to optimize her health.

Still, she continues to struggle to keep her symptoms under control.

Ott knows she is not alone. “I have spent much of the past six years listening to people from around Pennsylvania, as well as others in other states,” she said.

Smart meters named as common trigger for electrosensitivity

More people point to smart meters as the cause of their sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) than any other trigger, Beatrice Alexandra Golomb, M.D, Ph.D., told The Defender in a recent interview.

In 2014, Golomb surveyed roughly 200 people who self-identified as electrosensitive. Sixty-nine percent said they were aware of a triggering event causing their electrosensitivity.

Of those, the “overwhelming majority” named smart meters as the trigger, Golomb said.

Golomb, who presented the findings in 2015, is a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego’s School of Medicine. She leads a research group that studies conditions related to oxidative stress and cell energy impairments, including electrosensitivity — renamed EMR Syndrome earlier this year.

People with EMR Syndrome experience symptoms when exposed to RF radiation emitted by many modern technologies, including cell towers, smart meters, Wi-Fi networks and cellphones.

Symptoms vary and can include cognitive impairments such as headaches, dizziness, fatigue, heart palpitations, tinnitus, sleep problems and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or ADHD.

Pulses play role in power of smart meters

It’s unclear why smart meters have such a marked effect on some people, but multiple factors may play a role, according to Golomb.

“First off, biology responds more strongly to radiation level modulation, including pulsed radiation, than to continuous wave radiation,” she said.

Also, current allowable levels of RF radiation, set by the Federal Communications Commission, are defined by averages over time, not the power of each peak.

For instance, smart meters may emit a high level of radiation for only a millisecond every 15 minutes. This would place the peak radiation at 900,000 times the average radiation, Golomb said.

“The analogy I give is that if you have a jackhammer that puts out just one very hard bang every couple of minutes, then the average power of that is negligible.” However, she said, “that does not reflect the damage that can be done.”

Calls grow for opt-out measures

Smart meter laws vary by state. The National Conference of State Legislatures reported in 2019 that over a dozen states lacked opt-out programs.

Residents in states that don’t have opt-out measures for smart meters are seeking to change that.

In June, Massachusetts lawmakers held a hearing on a bill that would allow residents to opt out of smart meters. The bill includes an “emergency law” preamble, allowing the measure to take effect immediately if passed.

“We don’t want legislation to pass and have to wait the traditional time frame for it to be enacted,” Massachusetts state Sen. Michael Moore told Cecelia Doucette, a technology safety educator and the director of Massachusetts for Safe Technology.

In April, Pennsylvania lawmakers introduced a bill allowing residents to opt out of a smart meter and use an analog meter instead. The bill has not advanced out of committee.

‘ADA should apply’ if there is a recognition that RF radiation can disable

In late 2023, CHD lawyers filed a related lawsuit seeking relief under the ADA for people experiencing negative health symptoms from wireless radiation. The lawsuit alleged a Verizon cell tower triggered life-threatening cardiac events for an Idaho man living next to it.

In May, a federal appeals court ruled that wireless companies don’t have to make accommodations or changes to their practices under the ADA — even when their towers make people sick in their homes.

McCollough noted that Lucey’s case differs from the Verizon cell tower case because it relies on different sections of federal law. For instance, Lucey’s case deals with the Rehabilitation Act. The case involving the Idaho man, Henry “Hank” Allen, dealt only with the ADA.

Legal disputes arising from smart meters and cell towers are different, since the former deals with having a device attached to your house to have utility service, and the latter deals with being near a cell tower, said Miriam Eckenfels, director of CHD’s EMR & Wireless Program.

“I don’t think it’s surprising courts have a harder time expanding ADA coverage to cell towers,” she said. “However, I do think that if there is a recognition that RF radiation, no matter the source, can disable, the ADA should apply. Period.”

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pennsylvania-woman-scores-temporary-win-smart-meter-mandate/