In keeping with their general attitude towards customers, Eversource chimed in with an objection to this week’s appeal to the PUC, which urges the commission to reconsider the definition of “good standing,” making the argument that no new facts are being found, and instead “it only states that the Commission should adopt what Mr. Fisher believes is the ‘common understanding’ of the term, precisely the same argument he raised before.”

Of course the crucial piece of the puzzle that Eversource seems to be missing is that the appeal does bring forward additional facts- one which is incredibly inconvenient to Eversource: the phrase “good standing” has a common definition, and it has been wholesale disregarded by the PUC and Eversource.

If Eversource had even an ounce of customer service, they’d have dropped the matter long ago, and perhaps put forward the good will to utilize words that have meanings to the common public. The dirty secret that Eversource’s objection highlights is that Eversource isn’t upset with my interpretation of “good standing,” they just really prefer to make up and use their own.

There is no question that the interpretation I am pushing for is the common understanding. The appeal leaves little room for alternate opinions. The question we will answer soon is this: Will the PUC enforce the common understanding, or will they break their own rules, fail to enforce their policies, and demonstrate their inability to govern the very utilities they were put in place to govern.

I don’t know about you, but when a government agency fails to do its job of overseeing a monopoly and protecting the citizens, seems to me it’s time for a serious change.

PDF: Objection to Fisher Motion for Reconsideration