Attorney General of Michigan letter
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: AttorneyGeneral of Michigan, Utilities and Immunity (Raunio)..
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 11:32:45 -0500
From: Roy Beavers <email@example.com>
Organization: EMF-L List
This has to be seen as quite an IMPORTANT letter from the Attorney General of Michigan to Darlene Raunio!
I want to quote just one of the many important sentences it proclaims: "The burden of establishing safety should be on the entity constructing and operating these lines - not on the people impacted by them."
Oh, how often we (MANY of us) on this list have called for SOMEBODY in a responsible position in our government to acknowledge that fact....!!!
I wonder ... is there any significance to the fact that when it is finally acknowledged -- it comes from a WOMAN Attorney General of a major (northern) industrial state.......????........
It would never come from a man, I believe. It would never come from the Republican South (not even Colorado or Missouri).... It would never come from an agricultural state. (Not even Iowa or Minnesota has been willing to acknowledge it)........
Yet, it is so obvious and so true that when we finally hear it ... we say: OF COURSE!!!!! .......guru.......
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Utilities and Immunity
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:45:47 -0500
From: Darlene Raunio <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
I thought that I would forward this on to you ... It is an e-mail I just received from the Attorney General of Michigan in response to my e-mail to her.
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:02:18 -0400
From: "Michigan Attorney General" <MIAG@state.mi.us>
Subject: April 23, 2001
April 23, 2001
Citizen Inquiry 2001003614A
Dear Ms. Raunio:
Thank you for your e-mail highlighting the Wisconsin State Budget Bill that attempts to grant electric utilities immunity from liability for the damage caused by their "stray voltage," as well as the article from the British Sunday Times regarding the link between high voltage power lines and childhood leukemia.
It is ironic that after claiming for years that they have no "stray voltage" problems, the Wisconsin electric utilities now seek immunity for this allegedly nonexistent problem. If there is no problem, then why do they need immunity? If it is a problem, then immunity is not a proper solution as it will do nothing but allow damage to continue. It is also ironic that the electric utilities tried to bury this "immunity" in a huge budget bill hoping no one would catch it. This merely serves to highlight the lengths utilities will go to deny and cover up real and dangerous problems.
The Sunday Times article discussing the recent scientific research of Sir Richard Doll, which links childhood leukemia to high voltage power lines, is both enlightening and disturbing. It is enlightening that this suspected source of cancer is finally being exposed. It is disturbing that electric utilities have long touted the safety of these high voltage lines without any supporting evidence or scientific research. The electric utilities have merely assumed that there is no hazard posed by high voltages and then place the burden on others to prove them unsafe. The people of this country deserve better. The burden of establishing safety should be on the entity constructing and operating these lines - not on the people impacted by them.
Again, I thank you for your email and the materials you submitted. This information will be useful in prosecuting the stray voltage case against Consumers Energy Company in Michigan.
JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM
Dear Attorney General Grandholm and Assistant Atty. General Moll:
Please take the time to peruse the following information that is of EXTREME IMPORTANCE to every state ... yours while being in the midst of the litigation with Consumers Energy and the "Stray Voltage" issue: ASSEMBLY BILL 144 Bill Proposed: You can't sue electric companies for harm from Stray Voltage without the okay from the Public Service Commission (P.S.C.)?
Current Wisconsin State Budget Bill
Section 3866 895.496;
Pages 1664 1665
"A public utility" (a private electric company or co-op?) "is immune from liability" (can't be sued?) "for any damage caused by or resulting from stray voltage contributed by the public utility" (coming from the private electric company or co-op?) "if that stray voltage is below the level of concern established by the Public Service Commission."
The "level of concern" established by the P.S.C. has been increased by the P.S.C. as the electric ground/earth currents or electrical pollution increases!
P.S.C. "level of concern" 1980 0.5 Volts 1.0 mA (milliamp)
P.S.C. Docket 05-EI-106
P.S.C. "level of concern" 1987 0.7 Volts 1.4 mA (milliamp)
P.S.C. Docket 05-EI-115
P.S.C. "level of concern" 1996 1.0 Volts 2.0 mA (milliamp)
P.S.C. Docket 05-EI-115
U.S. Government Standards 2001 0.5 Volts 1.0 mA (milliamp)
OSHA Directive CPL-2-1-18A
- "a hazard exists at" 0.5 Volts or 1.0 mA
Enforcement of the Electrical
Generation, Transmission and
Distribution Standard, 10/20/199
"* the Public Service Commission shall evaluate * as to whether the order of the Public Service Commission was followed in calculating the amount of stray voltage *"
The P.S.C. will determine if the person suffers from stray voltage? - The P.S.C. will determine if the stray voltage measurements were right?
What about the stray voltage/electric-ground-earth currents readings from the persons private electrician? They don't count? Only electric company or P.S.C. State electricians readings count?
Whose side has the P.S.C. been on the citizens of Wisconsin or the electric companies?
C.U.R.E. - Citizens United for Responsible Electricity
P.O. Box 43
Brantwood, WI 54513
715 - 564 - 3362 / 715 - 453 - 5575