Central Maine Power Co. is rejecting calls to allow some customers to opt out of its “smart meter” installation program.
The suggested alternatives to wireless smart meters — letting customers keep their mechanical meters or installing smart meters with dedicated phone lines — would cost too much money, CMP says. They also would fail to meet state policy objectives and may threaten $96 million in federal funds for the two-year project, the company says.
Additional Photos
The only workable option is to install smart meters away from areas of concern in a home or business, according to CMP. And that idea is acceptable only if individual customers pay for it, not all ratepayers.
CMP’s strong stance is detailed in a new filing with the Maine Public Utilities Commission. It will be a focal point next week in a key meeting of the PUC, the company and intervenors to help lay out the next steps in what has become a landmark utility case.
The three-member commission voted early this month to open a formal investigation of whether CMP’s policy of denying customers a choice to opt out of the program is unreasonable or discriminatory. The probe is narrow by design, and won’t address whether smart meters present health or security risks, as some opponents claim. Those claims are at the root of opposition to smart meters in other states and countries.
The investigation stems from two of five formal complaints filed with the PUC by residents who oppose smart meters for various reasons.
A lead intervenor expressed disappointment and anger Wednesday that CMP is refusing to seek creative solutions to the concerns of many customers.
Elisa Boxer-Cook said that “this fits perfectly into CMP’s pattern of trying to prove why customers don’t deserve a choice, why our concerns don’t matter and why we should be forced to buy a product that we believe violates our right to health, safety, security and privacy in our own homes.”
Boxer-Cook said she hopes the PUC will reject CMP’s assumptions and order the utility to work with its customers.
CMP’s unyielding position also was criticized by the senior counsel in the Public Advocate’s Office.
“I am disappointed,” said Eric Bryant. “CMP has lost an opportunity to work with customers and meet them halfway.”
Bryant said he shares CMP’s concerns about distributing opt-out costs among all ratepayers, but he still is reviewing CMP’s calculations to determine how big the impact might be.
After getting approval from the PUC last year, CMP began replacing its 620,000 mechanical meters with the new generation of digital devices. It has switched out roughly 100,000 so far.
Two-way communication between the meters and CMP will enable the utility to respond more quickly to outages and manage energy demand. The meters also will let customers track their hourly power use and, eventually, run appliances at a time of day when prices are lowest.
Beginning this spring, customers who have smart meters will be able to visit CMP’s website and monitor their energy use through a pilot program.
Some residents worry about health effects and other impacts from the radio frequency waves emitted by the meters. Their concerns prompted the PUC to look into whether alternative meters are technically and economically feasible.
In its latest filing, CMP firmly says they are not.
CMP says it knows of no other utility in the country that has established a formal opt-out program for smart meters. It says that letting some customers use alternative devices could limit the benefits of smart meters for everyone else.
“We don’t want to see anything that would diminish the effectiveness of the overall program,” said John Carroll, a CMP spokesman.
Based on the number of requests for alternatives so far, the company assumes that 1.5 percent of customers — 9,000 — eventually may want to opt out. CMP examined three primary alternatives in the filing:
• Keeping mechanical meters: The old meters can’t do any of the newly required functions, such as monitoring voltage and remotely checking outages. Also, it would be expensive to keep and maintain the existing system, although CMP hasn’t calculated the cost.
• Hard-wired meters: It’s technically possible to hook smart meters to phone lines, but the cost could reach $53.1 million over 20 years, CMP calculates. That’s because more equipment would be needed in rural areas, as well as software and computers to handle the data.
• Relocating smart meters: A meter, and the electrical line that feeds it, can be moved to another part of a house, or set up in a distant location on a property. The price would vary considerably, from roughly $750 to $5,000. The $18 million total cost over 20 years is the least expensive alternative.
Any relocation and opt-out costs should be borne by the customer, not all ratepayers, Carroll said. CMP has estimated that it will save $17.5 million over 20 years by installing smart meters. Ratepayers could lose out on those savings, Carroll said, if they have to pay all or part of the opt-out expenses.
In the filing, CMP’s lawyers say more people will likely opt out if they don’t have to pay. CMP is temporarily honoring requests for opt-outs, and the filing notes that media coverage of the issue led to 158 requests in a three-day period in early January — a 6.7 percent rate.
The lawyers wrote: “With no criteria to determine eligibility for an opt-out, and absent any costs allocated to customers for making this election, it is nearly impossible to predict how high the opt-out or relocation rate might be.”
CMP also says opt-out options would make it harder to manage outage responses, which would make its overall distribution system less reliable. It also expresses concern that the federal government could pull funding that’s paying for half of the project. The company is awaiting feedback from the U.S. Department of Energy.
Staff Writer Tux Turkel can be contacted at 791-6462 or at:
tturkel@pressherald.com
Send questions/comments to the editors.
