2017-09-23 IARC classifications re. RF are ignored by WorkSafeBC

[2B – ACC – Adrian Dix – APS Arizona Public Service Electric Company – BC Hydro – BCUC – Bill BennettChristopher R. RabeChristy ClarkClaire Trevena – CPUC – Doctor Annie Sasco – EMF – Health Canada Safety Code 6 – IARC – Itron – John HorganLen GarisMichelle MungallNumber of Transmissions per Day – Opt-out Fees – Rebecca Irwin, AMP – Recall – RF – Rich Coleman – Safety – Shielding – Smart Meter Fires Report Press Release & Letter to BC MLAs by Sharon Noble – Solar Analogs – Sonia Furstenau Warren Woodward – Wi-Fi – Wireless – WorkSafeBC Regulations | BC – Sedona, Arizona & Berkeley, Marin County, Santa Cruz County, California, USA] & (videos)

1)    Below is the letter I sent to every MLA along with the Press Release. Now it’s time to press them to do their jobs, and keep the pressure on them until there is a recall.


2)    Presentation by Dr. Annie Sasco regarding the IARC classifications.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_Z3Rbjfmcs  (11 minutes)

(click on photos to enlarge)

BC occupational regulations are very disturbing and most workers don’t know.     According to WorkSafeBC:

no employee should be exposed to a 2B carcinogen if an alternative exists, EXCEPT FOR DEVICES THAT USE OR EMIT NON IONIZING RADIATION (section 7.19).

Safety Code 6 is not protective, is one of the weakest guidelines in the world, and evidence shows that health effects are significant at fractions allowed, yet workers are not protected. This allows teachers, nurses, doctors, and office workers to be exposed every work day to strong Wi-Fi modems, even those who have cancer or weakened immune systems.  Within our own province, the regulations are not protective. This is outdated and we should be pressuring the Health Minister, Adrian.dix.mla@leg.bc.ca , to amend this regulation. SC 6 allows for provinces to establish their own limits – so there is no excuse.

5.57 Designated substances


(1) If a substance identified as any of the following is present in the workplace, the employer must replace it, if practicable, with a material which reduces the risk to workers:

(a) ACGIH A1 or A2, or IARC 1, 2A or 2B carcinogen;

Division 3 Radiation Exposure

7.19 Exposure limits


(4) The employer must ensure that a worker’s exposure to non-ionizing radiation does not exceed the exposure limits specified in

      (a) for radiofrequency:

(i)  Health Canada Safety Code 25, Short-Wave Diathermy Guidelines for Limiting Radiofrequency Exposure, 1983, as amended from time to time;

(ii) Health Canada Safety Code 26, Guidelines on Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields from Magnetic Resonance Clinical Systems, 1987, as amended from time to time;

(iii) Health Canada Safety Code 6, Limits of Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields in the Frequency Range from 3 kHz to 300 GHz, 1999, as amended from time to time,

3)    Many people are looking for ways to shield their homes from Wi-Fi. Of course, the best way is to remove anything wireless in your home, e.g. cordless or cell phones, cordless baby monitors, Wi-Fi modems and wireless laptops. Hard-wired devices are always the best choice. But when there is a need to protect from other radiation, there are cheap ways to reduce radiation.  An interesting YouTube.  I cannot speak to the expertise of the person doing these tests, so do your own research.

Comparing Shielding Performance of Space Blankets, Aluminum Mesh and Foil, Grounded and Ungrounded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXaFlqmphVk   (4:47 minutes)

4)    A member of a group fighting smeters in Arizona sent information about the Utility Commission delaying installation of smeters and allowing people with solar systems to keep their analogs. No reason is given, and if he finds out and lets me know, I will share with you. His email is below in Letters.  Please note he is appealing the program, including the extortive $5 opt-out fee. What we would give for a $5 fee[https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/metersgrid/smart-meter-opt-out-options-and-fees/]

5)    People in California continue to fight smeters, and the utilities continue to mislead. I believe the California Utilities Commission still allows people to keep their analogs for $10 a month.  BC Hydro needs to explain why this works in California but not in BC.  Is BC Hydro so much less capable of handling this program?  [https://smartmeterharm.org/2014/07/13/how-many-rf-pulses-per-day-from-a-smart-meter/]

“Three times a day is very different from 9,000-190,000 times a day. If the smart meters were only emitting 3 times a day, they would be a lot safer, but then there are still privacy, overcharging, and fire concerns. We need to enact a moratorium like 57 local governments (including Santa Cruz County, Marin County, and the city of Berkeley) have already done in California. To stop implementation of this new technology, and conduct further testing to make sure it is 100% safe before subjecting the public to it.”




Dear British Columbia’s MLAs,

More than 4 years ago I told the then premier Christy Clark, and her energy minsters, both Bill Bennett and Rich Coleman, as well as NPD leaders Adrian Dix and John Horgan about smart meters failing, overheating and burning, putting lives and property at risk.  I also sent reports of fires to BC Hydro and the BC Utilities Commission, but no one took this issue seriously. Everyone preferred to believe that the meters were safe, primarily because of the opinion of one person – Mr. Len Garis, former head of the BC Fire Chiefs’ Association.

I undertook to prove what electrical engineers have warned, that these cheaply made, plastic computers are fire hazards due to several flaws in their design. The result of my 3 years’ work is in the Fire Report and the Documentary Evidence announced in the following press release. Binders with the report were provided to Premier Horgan, Energy Minister Mungall, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Trevena, Green Party MLA Sonia Furstenau and the BC Utilities Commission early in September. To date I have received one acknowledgement, this from the BCUC advising it had been sent to BC Hydro for comments.

After allowing more than 2 weeks for a response, even that the report had been received, I have released the following to the BC media.  I would ask that you consider that your constituents are being put into jeopardy because of these faulty devices. If your toaster were defective and several homes had burned because of it, it would be recalled and all monies paid would be refunded. Why are these smart meters any different? ITRON sold us a defective product, knowing it was defective (any electrical engineer would refuse to certify). BC Hydro paid more than any other jurisdiction in North America for something that was never certified by any agency or electrical engineer to be safe.

It’s time for the citizens of British Columbia to be protected, and for our money to be refunded. We want our dependable, safe, long-lived, and inexpensive analogs returned just as they have been in other places.  And it’s time for you to do your job.

Sharon Noble

“A politician thinks of the next election. A leader thinks of the next generation.” – Bernie Sanders


Very Surprising News from APS
Information & Perspective by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ September 22, 2017

Just the other day I received news that APS will not be removing analog meters en masse come this October 1st. Also, APS will not be forcing “smart” meters on solar customers who have already refused “smart” meters.

While it would be inappropriate to reveal the sources for this news, I will say that it comes from the top at APS. The news was also verified by someone who spent time on the phone with APS and talked with three different departments there, each of which echoed this policy that APS has adopted regarding “smart” and analog meters.

That said, understand that there is a difference between APS’s policy and the Order signed by the commissioners at the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). APS does have the legal right to remove all analog meters, and APS does have the legal right to force “smart” meters on solar customers. But APS’s current policy (which is at APS’s discretion and subject to change) is to not remove analog meters until their service life is over, and to not force “smart” meters on solar customers who have already refused “smart” meters.

Don’t ask me why APS is doing this. I don’t know and can only speculate.

I will still be appealing the ACC’s Order for several reasons. One is that customers should not be at the mercy of APS since that mercy can disappear whenever APS wants. Another reason is that the $5 per month fee that APS will be charging customers who refuse “smart” meters is extortion. And of course there are other reasons as well.


Sharon Noble
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“A government has no conscience. Sometimes it has a policy, but nothing more.”
~ Albert Camus

Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation