Analysis: Income Graduated Fixed Charge Bill Impact

Ava conducted an analysis to understand how Ava customers would fare under different Income Graduated Fixed Charge (IGFC) proposals by examining the CPUC’s Decision, select party proposals from the CPUC Demand Flexibility proceeding, and AB-1999 (Irwin) to determine:

• Are there more customers who are better off (lower bills) or worse off (higher bills)?
• By how much are those customers better or worse off?
• How do low-income customers and rooftop solar customers fare relative to others?

Conclusions:

• A majority of customers in Ava’s current service territory are worse off under all examined IGFC designs
• Stockton customers fare better due to comparatively higher usage and lower income
• In Ava’s current service territory, a majority of CARE/FERA customers benefit only under the TURN/NRDC and CalAdvocates proposals
• In Stockton, a majority of CARE/FERA customers benefit under all examined IGFC designs
• A high differential in fixed charges for low- and high-income customers can reduce bills for low-income customers by shifting costs to higher-income and rooftop solar customers.
• Lower fixed charges result in a smaller magnitude of bill impacts, but don’t necessarily increase the number of low-usage customers that save money under IGFC
• IGFC benefits customers with high usage. Usage may increase over time with electrification, improving customer outcomes.
• Ava customers may also be disadvantaged due to higher incomes compared to state average. The IGFC income brackets, defined by CARE and FERA enrollment status, may not be appropriate for Bay Area cost of living