HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4148
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4148

**Personal Statement: Wireless Smart Meter, RF Exposure Concerns and Forced Enforcement in My Home**

**Submitted by:** Snöfrid
**Country:** Sweden
**Docket:** HHS-OASH-2026-0397

I am a private individual in Sweden submitting my personal experience concerning a dispute with Vattenfall, my electricity network operator, over the installation of an electricity meter with wireless radiofrequency (RF) communications.

**I did not refuse electricity metering or the replacement of my meter.** I reported my electricity consumption, submitted meter readings and paid for the electricity I used. My objection concerned the active wireless communications transmitter proposed for installation inside my home. I requested a wired alternative that would allow accurate measurement without this wireless transmitter.

I have a hearing impairment and need written communication. On 21 January 2025, I informed a Vattenfall technician by text message that I have hearing loss and communicate through text. I wanted to discuss the technical solution, but my need for accessible written communication and my objection to wireless transmission were treated as part of a refusal to cooperate.

On 7 October 2026, an enforcement operation took place at my home. According to my home surveillance recordings, representatives of the Swedish Enforcement Authority (Kronofogden), Vattenfall personnel, a locksmith and uniformed police officers were present. The recordings show activity between approximately 9:35 a.m. and 10:48 a.m. The rear balcony door lock cylinder was drilled out and replaced.

On 3 October 2026, I had contacted the police in writing to raise concerns about the planned operation and explain that I was not refusing a meter replacement as such, but objecting to the wireless communications solution. The police replied on 5 October 2026, treating the matter as a contractual issue concerning access.

I am concerned that my written warning, hearing impairment and request for a wired alternative were not adequately considered before this serious intervention in my home. I understand that the legality of the enforcement operation must be assessed by the competent Swedish authorities. I submit this account as my personal experience, not as a legal determination by HHS.

**RF exposure and consumer choice**

The proposed meter was described to me as having a wireless communications module using a mobile network. I was concerned about having an active RF transmitter inside my home and about repeated or ongoing wireless transmissions.

This statement does not claim to prove that RF exposure caused a particular medical condition in my case. It documents my concern about exposure and my wish to avoid unnecessary wireless transmission in my home.

I respectfully ask HHS to consider:

1. The actual transmission characteristics and exposure patterns of wireless smart meters, including those using mobile networks.
2. Clear public information about frequencies, transmission patterns and relevant exposure measurements.
3. Independent research into long-term and cumulative RF exposure, distinguishing established scientific findings from reported experiences and unresolved questions.
4. The feasibility of wired or non-transmitting alternatives for consumers who request them.
5. Accessible written communication and fair procedures for consumers with hearing impairments.
6. The consequences for residential privacy and personal dignity when disputes over wireless technology result in forced entry into a home.

**Conclusion**

My position is straightforward: I did not seek to avoid electricity metering. I reported and paid for my electricity consumption and requested a wired solution instead of an active wireless communications transmitter inside my home.

I ask HHS to consider my experience in its review of RF exposure, wireless smart meters, consumer choice and practical ways to reduce unnecessary exposure.

I support careful, independent scientific investigation and transparent discussion of both established evidence and questions that remain unresolved.

Submitted in good faith as a personal account.

**Snöfrid**
Private individual, Sweden