Regulators should defend consumer protection measure for offshore wind project
September 21, 2022

Dominion’s unique ownership model causes increased risk for customers



Cassady Craighill, Clean Virginia Deputy Director

[email protected], 828-817-3328

September 21, 2022

Richmond — In a legal response filed yesterday with the State Corporation Commission (SCC), energy reform organization Clean Virginia defended the regulatory agency’s requirement of a performance standard, a consumer protection measure for Dominion Energy’s offshore wind project, which would be one of the largest energy projects in Virginia’s history. Dominion’s 100% utility-owned model places essentially all of the financial risk on customers, making the performance standard the “most significant consumer protection adopted by the Commission”, according to Clean Virginia’s filing. 

In its original testimony to the SCC earlier this year in support of the project, Clean Virginia recognized the wind project’s critical contribution to Virginia’s clean energy transition, and requested consumer protection and quality measures including an independent monitor, a cost cap, and an evaluation of alternative ownership models, which the regulatory agency did not adopt.

“Dominion Energy’s utility-owned model for offshore wind guarantees record profits at no risk for its shareholders. All other states developing offshore wind have adopted models that reduce risks to customers,” said Laura Gonzalez, Clean Virginia’s Energy Policy Manager. “It is the regulator’s job to balance monopoly profit motives by adopting common and reasonable standards that will protect Virginians.”

In a petition for reconsideration filed last month, Dominion, Virginia’s largest utility monopoly, requested that the SCC reconsider the performance standard, a common provision that requires the company and its shareholders to take on the financial obligation to provide credits to customers for replacement energy costs when the project does not meet the output levels that Dominion defended in its regulatory application. Dominion customers will cover 100% of the project’s development and operations costs, paying an estimated $21.5 billion over the project’s 30-year lifespan, which includes Dominion’s guaranteed rate of return, currently estimated to be $7.22 billion.

In its filed response to Dominion’s appeal, Clean Virginia argues that: 

  • The Commission’s Performance Standard is lawful, reasonable, and consistent with precedent. In fact, Dominion Energy itself has proposed similar standards for some of its solar facilities, and utility commissions in multiple states have adopted similar performance requirements for large-scale wind projects. 
  • The Company overstates the potential financial harm to shareholders if the performance standard is triggered in some future year. As the largest capital investment in Dominion’s history, the offshore wind project will also be one of the most profitable, rewarding shareholders with an estimated $7.22 billion in guaranteed profits. If ever triggered, the performance standard will likely have a limited financial impact on Dominion’s bottom line.  

Dominion has until September 29 to file a reply to the pleadings filed yesterday.  


Clean Virginia is a 501(c)4 independent advocacy organization with an associated Political Action Committee, Clean Virginia Fund. Clean Virginia works to fight corruption in Virginia politics in order to promote clean energy, a robust, competitive economy, and community control over our energy policy. We are motivated by the core belief that our democracy should serve everyday Virginians over special interests.

Clean Virginia joins with fellow advocacy organizations in support of energy efficiency
By Diana Williams | May 12, 2022

Dominion lags behind peer utilities in meeting energy efficiency goals for residential customers


Richmond — Energy reform organization Clean Virginia requested Wednesday in public testimony that the State Corporation Commission (SCC) require Dominion Energy to accelerate its energy efficiency outreach and education campaign, particularly in light of the company’s request to increase customer bills.

“Despite the value of energy efficiency to customers and the codified financial incentive for Dominion Energy included in the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA), the company’s long-term plan still fails to meet the law’s minimum targets and the vast majority of Dominion customers have no awareness of Dominion’s residential energy efficiency programs at all,” Cassady Craighill, Clean Virginia’s Deputy Director testified in remarks to the SCC.

Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility monopoly, has filed for approval of a set of Energy Efficiency programs necessary to comply with the energy savings targets established in the Virginia Clean Economy Act. Dominion is not yet on track to comply with these savings targets, according to an analysis ordered by the SCC.

Compared to peer utilities, the performance of Dominion’s residential energy efficiency programs is notably low. Only 19% of surveyed residential customers were familiar with Dominion Energy programs and only 13% participated in a program in the last three years,  according to a long-term plan report required by the SCC. The report included several areas of improvement and emphasized the need to raise public awareness and consolidate the different utility programs.

“It shouldn’t be a battle to get energy efficiency tools in place, but it is because it interferes with the entrenched power and profit of utility monopolies. Regardless, putting energy efficiency first will put Virginians, and not profits, first. And that’s what we need,” said Laura Gonzalez, Energy and Regulatory Policy Manager at Clean Virginia.


About The Author

Photo of Clean Virginia joins with fellow advocacy organizations in support of energy efficiency
Diana Williams (she/her)

Diana loves telling stories about the human experience. She’s the founder of Williams Multimedia, a production company specializing in audio storytelling. Her reporting has focused on histories of people of color, LGBTQ+ people and the intersections where those two communities meet. Diana holds an MA in journalism and public affairs from American University. Diana and her husband Clarence have lived with their two sons in the Shenandoah Valley since 1997. She is on the Board of Directors for the Community Foundation of the Central Blue Ridge and the Virginia School Boards Association. She is also Vice Chair of the Waynesboro School Board.

BREAKING: Consumer Coalition in House of Delegates Blocks Dominion Profit Grab
February 28, 2021


Diana Williams, Clean Virginia Communications Lead

[email protected], 540-836-8125 

February 28, 2021 

BREAKING: Consumer Coalition in House of Delegates Blocks Dominion Profit Grab

A bipartisan coalition determined that Virginia students deserved a better deal on electric school buses

Richmond — Late Saturday night the House of Delegates blocked SB 1380, a bill that would have approved a controversial plan by Dominion Energy to establish a substantial foothold in the electric transport sector through the development of electric school buses. The measure included inflated costs to ratepayers, sky-high profits for Dominion, and utility monopoly control over bus batteries – even if that use was not in the interests of students. The House of Delegates had already defeated the bill earlier in the day on a tie 46-46 House vote, but in a highly unusual move, Democratic House leadership resurrected the bill for another attempt at passage before it finally died 41-49 in the final vote of the 2021 legislative session. A total of 21 Democratic delegates joined 28 Republican colleagues in killing the measure. A similar bill was also defeated on a bipartisan basis in the House of Delegates in the 2020 General Assembly session.

“Dominion has a well-established history of manipulating the General Assembly to secure utility-friendly legislation, but those days are over,” Clean Virginia Executive Director Brennan Gilmore said. “A new generation of lawmakers have joined veteran consumer protection champions to restore necessary balance to the creation of energy policy in the Commonwealth, and putting the interests of consumers first.” 

The electric school bus expansion plan, announced by Dominion last year, came in the context of a “strategic repositioning” touted by Dominion Executive Chairman Tom Farrell as an opportunity to “allow us to increase our long-term earnings growth rate guidance by around 30 percent.” Dominion followed this repositioning with a record-breaking $1.3 million in contributions to Virginia lawmakers, including during last year’s special session and leading up to the 2021 General Assembly session.

“Virginia should entrust the duty of converting diesel school buses into clean, electric fleets to an appropriate entity that puts students first,” said Lizzie Hylton, Clean Virginia’s Political and Legislative Director. “The General Assembly should never give the keys of a massive transportation project to a monopoly whose profit model exclusively rests on building things as expensively and inefficiently as possible. Utilities should be taking direction from policymakers, not giving it.”

Had it passed, SB 1380 would have saddled Virginians with a needlessly expensive electric school bus transition program managed by the state’s largest utility monopoly. In addition the measure also:

  • Lacked cost safeguards that would prevent electricity rate increases for all Virginians and stop Dominion from earning an annual profit every year the buses were in circulation.
  • Would have cost ratepayers approximately $250 million for the buses alone – without factoring in the cost of the charging infrastructure or Dominion’s annual profit from both  – and would have cost school districts a further $100 million (approximately).
  • Enabled Dominion to use bus batteries — without providing compensation to schools in case of disrupting student transportation.
  • Utilized a regressive payment structure that would have most burdened low-income households, making them pay for buses through electricity bills despite already shouldering an unaffordable energy burden in a state with the sixth-highest energy bills in the nation.

The 2021 session also saw the defeat of measures to curb loose campaign finance laws by banning the personal use of campaign contributions and stopping lawmakers from accepting campaign contributions from Dominion and Appalachian Power, utilities they are elected to regulate.

Opponents of the bill included the Virginia Conservation Network, Southern Environmental Law Center, Piedmont Environmental Council, Appalachian Voices, Virginia Organizing, and others.


Power Play: Inside the Dominion lobbying blitz that’s going to raise your electric bills
October 13, 2020

This article was produced in partnership with the ProPublica Local Reporting Network. Sign up for ProPublica’s Big Story newsletter.

When Democrats campaigned for the Virginia legislature last year, they took aim at the state’s largest power broker: Dominion Energy.

The electric utility’s clout was legendary in the state Capitol, where it doled out millions in campaign contributions and employed an army of lobbyists who helped write energy policy for decades. The result was soaring electricity bills and an energy grid heavily reliant on fossil fuels.

Democrats vowed to change that. After winning total control at the state Capitol for the first time in a generation, lawmakers unveiled the Clean Economy Act. They said it would phase out carbon-based energy and lower consumers’ power bills.

In a stark display of role reversal, one of Dominion’s top lobbyists watched from the back of the room as Democratic lawmakers stood alongside environmentalists and clean energy backers to introduce the legislation at a press conference.

But over the next 11 weeks, Dominion fought back and ended up as a winner in a bill intended to diminish its influence. By doubling the size of its lobbying corps and tapping its long-standing relationships with legislative leaders and Gov. Ralph Northam, the utility secured in the Clean Economy Act the right to build its top priority: a massive offshore wind farm set to be the most expensive utility project in Virginia history.

State regulators estimate a typical residential customer will pay nearly $70 more per month for the same amount of electricity by the end of the decade. About 40% of that increase is tied to the new law.

At the behest of Dominion, records show, a senior Northam administration official made last-minute changes to the legislation that increased the wind project’s price tag by an estimated $2.5 billion. The tweaks meant more money for Dominion, because state law guarantees utilities roughly 10% profit on construction projects. Neither the environmental representatives who helped craft the bill nor the state senator who sponsored it said they were aware of the changes until after the legislature passed it.

What happened in those 11 weeks — detailed in emails, internal documents and dozens of interviews conducted by The Richmond Times-Dispatch and ProPublica — offers an inside look at how Dominion wields political influence in Richmond, even as growing ranks of lawmakers denounce its name and refuse its money.

Dominion defended its role in the process, saying that the legislation directly affected its business.

“If the lights go out, people call us. So the No. 1 thing we always bring in any discussion of energy bills is we’re very aware we’ve got responsibility for this — keeping the lights on,” said Bill Murray, Dominion’s head lobbyist. “And that informs sort of everything else that we do.”

He said the utility pressed for the changes to the legislation to lock in the cost of the wind project. That helps offset the risks of building offshore wind, which is more expensive than other forms of energy. The company says it can’t meet the state’s new renewable energy goals without using offshore wind.

Today, Northam and Democratic lawmakers champion the Clean Economy Act as landmark legislation that places Virginia, long among the worst states on clean energy, at the forefront of the fight against climate change. It will also promote construction of solar energy and mandate utilities generate electricity without fossil fuels by 2050.

Nevertheless, if wind costs escalate or the offshore project doesn’t produce the energy expected, Dominion’s customers will still be on the hook.

“There’s no reason that we have to make these policy decisions that say that this regulated monopoly must profit off of all of these other projects,” said Del. Sam Rasoul, a Democrat from the mountain city of Roanoke, who unsuccessfully sought to curb costs in the Clean Economy Act. “I feel as though Dominion is still solidly in control of the legislature.”

Monopoly Rule, Big Bills

Like most public utilities, Dominion has a monopoly on its territory, providing power to two-thirds of customers in Virginia and a small slice of North Carolina. In exchange, the company is required to convince a board of independent state regulators, the State Corporation Commission, that it isn’t overcharging customers. But over the years, Dominion has pushed for and won legislation that undercuts regulators’ authority.

In 2015, Dominion convinced Virginia lawmakers to pass a bill that blocked the SCC from reviewing base electricity rates for the next seven years. (The utility had cited the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, saying it needed “rate stability” from Virginia in the face of expensive federal mandates. The Trump administration has since killed the environmental rule.)

The strategy has resulted in massive profits for Dominion while ratepayers’ bills soar. By law, utilities are entitled to earn about 10% profit on their assets and investments. Anything over that amount is considered “over-earnings,” money that could go back to customers as refunds. According to the SCC, Dominion made more than $500 million in excess earnings between 2017 and 2019.

The preliminary figures, released in a report in August, will be evaluated in a formal review next year. Dominion spokesman Rayhan Daudani said the company expects to use excess earnings for clean energy investments and assistance for people with unpaid bills during the pandemic.

“The customer is getting benefit back from those dollars,” he said.

Years of excess earnings, however, have driven public anger. Today, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Virginia households pay some of the most expensive electricity bills in the nation. Daudani said Dominion believes electricity rates are a better metric for comparison. The company’s rates are below the national average, he said, but Virginians use more electricity.

The utility’s residential power bills have jumped nearly 29% since 2007, largely due to new construction projects, according to an SCC report released in August.

“We have maintained reliable service, bolstered by our efforts to modernize the electric grid, and we have made record investments in clean energy,” Daudani said. “We are very proud of this record.”

Typically, state regulators would evaluate those projects to determine whether they were necessary. That’s how neighboring states oversee investor-owned utilities, which still earn millions in profit, said Joel Eisen, an energy and environmental law professor at the University of Richmond who has studied public utility regulation in America for 20 years.

But in Virginia, Dominion has routinely pressed the General Assembly to declare its projects “in the public interest,” language designed to force regulatory approval.

In 2007, lawmakers urged the commission to approve the Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center, a $1.8 billion power plant in Southwest Virginia. They also awarded Dominion a bonus as an incentive to build the plant. Five years later when it started generating power, it was one of the last coal plants to open in the United States.

Today, it isn’t scheduled to operate more than 11% of the time. The plant, however, makes up the largest single generation charge on a customer bill: nearly $4 a month for the typical residential customer. A 2012 state attorney general’s office report showed customers are paying an extra $146 million to Dominion over the project’s lifetime for the bonus that lawmakers approved.

State regulators have questioned the need for some of Dominion’s most expensive projects. SCC officials said in a report in 2018 that the utility has regularly overstated electricity demand in Virginia. Daudani, the Dominion spokesman, said that as a result of that report the company changed the way it predicts demand.

Still, the utility has found ways to continue building and to keep its excess profits. In 2018, amid a brewing revolt over customer costs, Dominion supported a law to allow the company to invest much of the excess earnings in clean energy projects — instead of issuing refunds.

Eisen said he’s “unaware of any comparable provision elsewhere in the nation that allows a utility to take money that a commission would otherwise decide it has to give back to ratepayers and allow the utility to plow that into new projects.”

All of this led to a massive opposition effort.

Beginning in 2018, a wealthy hedge fund investor, Michael Bills, offered financial support to any politician who refused to take campaign donations from Dominion. The response was overwhelming, with Bills shelling out $3 million to candidates and his political action committee, Clean Virginia.

Today, a third of state lawmakers have pledged not to take money from Dominion, its executives or lobbyists. Bills has supplanted the utility and every other person and corporation in Virginia as the state’s top political donor.

He gave Northam $586,000 from 2013 to 2017, more than double Dominion’s contributions to the governor in the past decade.

Bills said in an interview that he has no investments that compete with Dominion. He wants the legislature to allow more competition for clean energy and empower state regulators to stop Dominion from keeping excess profits.

“You can have clean energy and all the advantages of non-carbon producing energy without busting the bank,” Bills said, “and more importantly, busting the poor ratepayers’ backs.”

Dominion’s Friends in the State Senate

Democrats saw the Clean Economy Act as an opportunity to remake Virginia’s energy landscape and help lower power bills. Utilities would have to meet tougher energy efficiency targets and accept more solar and other renewable energy generated by producers other than Dominion.

Among the legislation’s primary authors was Virginia Advanced Energy Economy, a trade association that represents wind and solar developers, energy efficiency companies, and corporate energy buyers like Amazon and Facebook that want to reduce their carbon footprint.

Democrats in the House embraced the bill.

But leaders in the Senate bristled.

The upper house was ruled by Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw, a longtime Dominion ally from Fairfax County. Elected to the legislature in 1975, the 80-year-old lawmaker drives a purple Jaguar with the license plate “1” because he is Virginia’s senior state senator. A popular conservative radio talk show host calls him “the godfather.”

Dominion is Saslaw’s biggest political supporter. The utility’s PAC has given him $435,508 since 1996, nearly two times more than his second-largest donor, the Virginia Bankers Association, according to the nonprofit Virginia Public Access Project, which tracks money in state politics. And Dominion executives have given Saslaw an additional $48,000.

The utility is also the largest corporate donor to the Senate Democratic Caucus, giving nearly $400,000 in the past 20 years.

In 2019, as the anti-Dominion wave crested, Yasmine Taeb, a lawyer from Northern Virginia, challenged Saslaw in a primary, pledging to get excess Dominion earnings back to customers. She criticized what she called “‘an old Virginia way’ that still runs Richmond” and blasted Saslaw, who she said had “done Dominion’s bidding.” Saslaw has defended his record, saying the utility’s donations don’t influence his decisions. “I haven’t done any more than anybody else has” to help Dominion, he said in an interview.

With talk of a potential upset, Dominion stepped in. Five days before the election, the utility sent a letter to shareholders in his Senate district in the Washington suburbs touting his efforts on company projects.

Saslaw squeaked past Taeb by less than 3 points, his closest race in four decades.

He spent about $1.4 million on the primary, seven times more than Taeb.

Saslaw told environmental leaders that to get any climate bill through the Senate, they’d need agreement from Dominion. In an interview for this story, he said that the state’s largest utility would be directly affected by the measure, so it needed to be a player in the discussions.

“Your best legislation is when everybody involved reaches a compromise,” Saslaw said. “That’s the way the legislature works.”

After getting little out of past legislation backed by Dominion, environmentalists remained enthusiastic.

“We were excited because for the first time we were working from our language,” said Harrison Wallace, then the Virginia director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and one of the bill negotiators. “This was our bill, which we are now coming together to defend, and that was exciting.”

In Virginia, where the General Assembly usually convenes for an alternating 45 or 60 days each year, lobbyists have taken on an outsized role in policymaking.

Lawmakers file so many bills during the frantic sessions, rushing from hearing room to hearing room, that they often leave special interests to hammer out the details.

So last January, at Saslaw’s direction, representatives of environmental groups and Dominion began a series of negotiation meetings. The lawmakers who sponsored the bill did not participate in the sessions.

A Conference Room With No View

At first, the environmental and clean energy negotiators tried to meet with Dominion representatives in the cramped state legislative building, even in the room designated for news conferences. But space was scarce.

Dominion offered a solution: The group could use one of the utility’s office towers just a few blocks from the Capitol. Environmentalists were reluctant; they wanted neutral ground and felt moving the talks would give their longtime foe an advantage. But, under pressure to reach an agreement, they relented.

Over the next five weeks, the group often decamped to a conference room that had one window looking out onto a brick wall. Negotiators would spend three- to five-hour chunks, sometimes all day, hashing out details of the legislation. Dominion occasionally bought meals from fast-casual restaurants like Chipotle for the group.

After years of Republican rule, the environmentalists were thrilled to be at the table. But now they faced the consummate political insider.

Bill Murray, Dominion’s top lobbyist and lead negotiator on the legislation, had 29 years of legislative experience, about half with Dominion. He had worked in the administrations of two former governors, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, both now U.S. senators. After joining Dominion, Murray was part of the transition teams for the office’s most recent occupants, Terry McAuliffe and Northam.

Many lawmakers, especially those of the older generation, know and trust Murray because they’ve worked with him for years. He has personally given campaign money to more than 30 current lawmakers — a fifth of the General Assembly.

Joining Murray at the table was Katharine Bond, a 21-year veteran of Dominion who was the lobbyist at the environmental groups’ press conference with lawmakers.

Murray gave advice to the environmentalists and told stories about how to get a bill passed in the legislature, said Wallace of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

But he and Bond had a consistent message for the other negotiators: The provisions of the Clean Economy Act as presented were too costly.

The talks dragged on, and environmentalists believed that Dominion was using delay tactics. For instance, the utility initially agreed to annual benchmarks on energy efficiency designed to save customers money but later pared down the program, environmental negotiators said. Daudani, the Dominion spokesman, didn’t directly address the negotiations but noted that state regulators will set new efficiency targets after the program ends.

The change prompted a lobbyist with the Natural Resources Defense Council to leave the negotiations on Jan. 30.

By February, the talks were shaky.

“Legislative negotiations are always complicated and miscommunication can happen, but this occurred too often to be pure coincidence and caused unwarranted delays,” said Harry Godfrey, the executive director of Virginia Advanced Energy Economy.

Murray responded in an interview that everything had to be checked “with the people who operate the grid.”

To some in the room, it was as if the legislature had not changed hands.

“In the Public Interest”

The original Clean Economy Act called for offshore wind as part of a mix of clean energy but didn’t include language mandating that Dominion own it. The utility wanted to change that.

After years of investment in coal, natural gas and nuclear power, it had recently expanded into renewable energy.

The utility won a federal lease for the area off the coast of Virginia Beach in 2013, as it considered building an offshore wind farm. Five years later, in 2018, it was pursuing a two-turbine test project. Just as it had done with its previous construction efforts, Dominion successfully pressed the legislature to declare the pilot project “in the public interest.”

Saying the law tied its hands, the SCC approved the project but raised concerns.

The turbines would cost customers $300 million and generate 12 megawatts of electricity, enough to power only 3,000 homes with sustained winds. The cost of the wind energy was 26 times greater than purchasing it from the market and nearly 14 times greater than solar, the commission wrote in its order.

Regulators said that customers would bear almost all of the risk if costs went up or the project flopped.

Now, in early 2020, with the test project still under construction, Dominion pushed to go bigger. It wanted to build a $7.8 billion expansion, which would make its offshore wind operation the largest in the nation. And it saw the Virginia legislature as the vehicle to make it happen.

Offshore wind is largely a new frontier in America. During the legislative session, there was only one offshore wind farm in the United States, made up of five turbines off the coast of Rhode Island. There are 18 projects in the planning stages in other states, according to the American Wind Energy Association. But Virginia Democrats, many of whom campaigned on promises to combat climate change and protect the environment, backed Dominion’s plan.

text highlights 2
Legislators wrote a law in 2018 saying Dominion Energy’s test wind project was “in the public interest,” and they did so again in 2020 for the utility’s much larger offshore wind farm. (Highlights added by ProPublica and The Times-Dispatch)

While environmentalists and Dominion negotiated in the utility’s office tower, the Democratic sponsors of the Clean Economy Act, Del. Rip Sullivan of Fairfax County, and Sen. Jennifer McClellan of Richmond, added language that declared the wind farm “in the public interest.”

Another addition to the bill went further. It said the SCC should find certain costs to be “reasonably and prudently incurred.”

The provision meant legislators were directing state regulators to approve a future request from Dominion to recover billions from customers for its offshore wind plan.

While the SCC still makes the final decisions, the “reasonable and prudent” language makes the commission’s hearing more of a formality. The Virginia attorney general’s office warned lawmakers early in the session that the wording takes away a key ratepayer protection.

Such language is not the norm elsewhere, said James Van Nostrand, a utility law professor and director of the Center for Energy and Sustainable Development at West Virginia University who spent 22 years representing investor-owned utilities. Typically, he said, a public utility commission would determine whether a proposed project should move forward. The regulated utility has the burden of proof to show regulators that its proposed costs are reasonable and prudent.

The Clean Economy Act removes that burden, he said, calling it “a big advantage for the utility to have this.”

“The more the legislature weighs in, the more you see what Dominion can do just by its influence over the legislature,” Van Nostrand said in a recent interview. Lawmakers are removing authority “from an agency that has the expertise and has the proceedings that invite the level of rigor and scrutiny that’s going to test that number.”

The lawmakers who sponsored the bill said they largely left the details to Dominion and the environmental groups.

“Other than just generally focusing on ‘What can we do to expand wind,’ I was not involved in the weeds of the language negotiations,” said McClellan, who sponsored the legislation with Sullivan. “Rip and I basically told all of the stakeholders: ‘Negotiate this bill. When you can’t reach agreement, come to us and we’ll be the tiebreaker.’”

Sullivan said in interviews that the language came from “the ongoing collaborative process between lots of stakeholders. And I think I’d be misdescribing the process if I told you that one particular person or one particular entity asked for that specific language. It became part of the ongoing discussions.”

But key environmental negotiators — including Wallace of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Will Cleveland of the Southern Environmental Law Center and Mike Town of the Virginia League of Conservation Voters — said they didn’t write the language or help write it.

Dominion’s Murray and Bond said they didn’t know who wrote it; asked if Dominion’s lawyer wrote it, Murray said the utility’s legal representatives were “involved in discussions about it,” but the company declined to provide more detail.

Sullivan said in interviews that the language came from “the ongoing collaborative process between lots of stakeholders. And I think I’d be misdescribing the process if I told you that one particular person or one particular entity asked for that specific language. It became part of the ongoing discussions.”

But key environmental negotiators — including Wallace of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Will Cleveland of the Southern Environmental Law Center and Mike Town of the Virginia League of Conservation Voters — said they didn’t write the language or help write it.

Dominion’s Murray and Bond said they didn’t know who wrote it; asked if Dominion’s lawyer wrote it, Murray said the utility’s legal representatives were “involved in discussions about it,” but the company declined to provide more detail.

“Is it not the case that the reason we have not had a rate review … is because of two bills that you all helped draft and asked for?” he asked during a House subcommittee hearing.

The bill easily passed the House.

Then, it went to the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee. At the helm: Saslaw, the state’s most-senior senator.

The sponsors made their case and a long line of supporters formed to speak.

“This is about protecting the consumer, protecting the ratepayer,” said Del. Jay Jones, D-Norfolk. “That money belongs in the pockets of the people of Virginia.”

But Dominion lobbyists told lawmakers the bill would undercut Dominion’s ability to do clean energy projects, a claim refuted by the SCC.

Browder, speaking softly and without naming Dominion, told senators, “I believe that there may be some attempt at confusion on the issues here.”

He reminded them of times Dominion made claims that didn’t pan out, like in 2014 when lawmakers passed a bill allowing Dominion to charge customers for research on a nuclear reactor. The utility had argued it needed the funds to keep the project moving. Dominion charged customers $320 million for the work but later paused development of the reactor.

Others on the panel defended the utility.

“There are 26 to 29 states with higher rates than Dominion, so are they ripping off their customers too?” Saslaw asked one speaker; two speakers then told him rates are only part of what Dominion customers see on their bills. Dominion’s base rates make up about 60% of the average residential power bill, with additional charges for construction projects and fuel costs making up the rest.

The Senate Republican leader, Tommy Norment, accused “environmental groups and lower-income groups” of having “done their absolute unequivocal best to bend Dominion over in every way imaginable.”

The rate bill died in the Senate committee, 8-7. Six Democrats, including Saslaw, were joined by two Republicans in killing the measure.

With a Little Help From the Governor’s Office

For much of the session, environmental groups and Dominion were at an impasse over the Clean Economy Act. And with time running short, the Northam administration stepped in to mediate.

The governor, who had called for ambitious clean energy goals, supported Dominion’s offshore wind plan. He also had deep ties to the utility. Dominion has contributed $291,000 to Northam’s political campaigns and committees throughout his career. Northam also had tapped some of the utility’s top lobbyists — including Murray — to help his transition team in 2017 and later hired Dominion’s director of strategic communications as his chief communications officer.

Angela Navarro, Northam’s deputy commerce secretary, led talks between Dominion and the environmental groups.

Before entering state government, she was a lawyer for the Southern Environmental Law Center. Both sides saw her as a credible broker. Emails obtained through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act show Navarro taking the lead in making changes to the Clean Economy Act based on the negotiations.

One of the sticking points was cost: The amount lawmakers would order regulators to approve for the offshore wind project was obscured in the bill by a complicated equation. One part called for multiplying the energy cost of a certain type of natural gas plant by 1.6. Negotiators agreed to reduce 1.6 to 1.4, thereby cutting the projected cost.

Another part of the equation specified that the average energy cost of that gas plant should be the cost most recently estimated by a federal agency.

On Jan. 29, the most recent federal estimates were published, showing a 25% drop from 2019. Under the bill’s language, that meant the amount the legislature was telling regulators to allow Dominion to charge its customers fell, to $7.3 billion.

But on March 4, the day before lawmakers would introduce a new version for a final debate, Navarro made a critical alteration to the legislation.

Records show she changed “most recently” to “2019,” a tweak backed by Dominion that immediately boosted the acceptable price tag of the offshore wind project. The increase was roughly $2.5 billion, an analysis by the SCC would later show.

text highlights
The change to “2019” added roughly $2.5 billion to the project’s acceptable cost. (Highlights added by ProPublica and The Times-Dispatch)

Navarro said in a July interview she had no records from anyone asking her to make that change. She said the group negotiated the language. “I think we discussed it amongst all of the stakeholders,” Navarro said.

But five of the main environmental and trade association members who participated in discussions told the Times-Dispatch and ProPublica they did not ask for the alteration and weren’t aware of it at the time.

“We definitely did not ask for that change,” said Town, of the League of Conservation Voters.

Documents obtained through a FOIA request show that the language change was, in fact, a priority for Dominion. And phone records reveal that Navarro spoke to the utility’s representatives on March 4 just before and after emailing negotiators the tweaked legislation. One of those representatives did not return phone calls seeking comment and the other said she did not remember the nature of the conversation.

The next morning, a lawyer for Dominion emailed Navarro requesting several changes to the bill, records show. A state bill drafter had added “2019” to the cost formula, as Navarro directed, but did not cut “most recently.” The Dominion lawyer told Navarro to strike “most recently” and listed that request among “policy choices/more than typos.”

Dominion’s legal team also wanted Navarro to insert language into the bill that would allow Dominion to charge its Virginia customers extra if North Carolina regulators wouldn’t let the utility pass the Clean Economy Act charges along to Dominion’s 123,000 customers there. That language had been removed inadvertently, so Navarro approved putting it back into the legislation.

Navarro declined to comment about her phone records, her emails and the statements from environmental negotiators that they had not been involved in the key change that benefited Dominion.

Clark Mercer, the governor’s chief of staff, said in a statement for this story that Navarro was not aware of any new federal data that would have changed the cost in the bill until after the bill passed, and he wrote that she believed the change was “consensus language” from stakeholders.

Navarro left her job in the governor’s office on Sept. 4. Northam’s press secretary said Navarro had been planning to leave for several months.

Clean Economy Act supporters note that Dominion will be required to take competitive bids for most of the work to build the offshore wind farm, which it said would lower costs.

But under the bill, Dominion can recover at least $9.8 billion in costs — more than $2 billion above its latest estimate, the SCC later said in an analysis.

A Historic Law, a Risky Bet

Lawmakers in the House debated the new version of the Clean Economy Act on March 5. No one brought up the change in the cost equation or the resulting dollar amount.

McClellan, the Senate sponsor, told the Times-Dispatch and ProPublica she was unaware of the alteration until the news organizations asked her about it, months after the bill passed. Sullivan, the House sponsor, said he was aware of the change but not the resulting dollar amount.

That day, Sullivan described the Clean Economy Act as “transformative and historic” and said it would help the coastal Virginia region become a national hub for offshore wind manufacturing. Other states “are vying to become that hub,” he said on the House floor, “and Virginia needs to act now.”

But a few Democrats spoke against the bill, casting it as a giveaway to Dominion.

Del. Lee Carter, a Democratic socialist from Manassas, told his colleagues that they had been manipulated.

“Dominion Energy’s addiction is to its monopoly power and to ratepayer money, and they have adapted to Democratic control over the General Assembly,” he said. “In previous years, they’ve gotten their ratepayer money through fossil fuel projects because that is what they could get through a Republican-held General Assembly. Now they have adapted and they’re doing their price gouging on renewable energy projects. They are, in my opinion, taking advantage of this new majority’s desire to do something for the environment and they are using that as a way to gouge the citizens of this commonwealth.”

Rasoul, the Dominion critic from Roanoke, introduced amendments to reduce the cost of offshore wind development, but Sullivan labeled them a “poison pill.” The majority killed them.

The Clean Economy Act passed the House, 51-45, on March 5, and passed the Senate, 22-17, the next day. One Republican in each chamber joined Democrats.

Northam signed the legislation in April.

The environmental negotiators say they are happy with the progressive policies in the new law.

Its mandate that utilities generate all electricity without fossil fuels by 2050 is the first of its kind in the South.

The law requires the SCC to consider the social costs of carbon emissions for new utility projects, which environmentalists say will help the state fight climate change.

“It will be very hard for Dominion to get approval to build any gas of any size,” said Cleveland,  who helped write the original Clean Economy Act.

The law also shrinks Dominion’s energy monopoly a bit, allowing private parties to own 35% of new large solar projects. Previous law capped that amount at 25%. Environmental negotiators wanted a 50-50 split.

Other environmentalists, however, said the bill moves too slowly toward a transition to renewable energy. On energy efficiency, the language in the law was watered down to the point that the utility can nearly meet the mandate through programs it already planned under a previous law, according to a company filing.

Will Reisinger, a former assistant attorney general who practices with Richmond clean energy firm ReisingerGooch, said the bill is good for Dominion because it allows the company to make a lot of money. And the legislature missed an opportunity to pair that with fair electricity rates, he said.

“We have to pay attention to costs,” he said. “If we do the clean energy transition in a really expensive, inefficient manner, it’s going to impose unreasonable, unbearable costs on consumers and businesses and I just don’t think it’s going to work.”

But from Wall Street, Virginia took away risk for investors, which is important, said Shar Pourreza, managing director for North American power and utilities at New York investment firm Guggenheim Partners.

In other states, the risk of developing offshore wind is on the utility, he said.

For Dominion, the law has taken on even more significance.

Four months after the session ended, on July 5, its parent company announced it was selling its gas assets and canceling plans to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, an $8 billion project to carry natural gas from West Virginia. Dominion said the federally regulated project collapsed, in part, because of legal challenges from environmentalists.

Dominion Executive Chair Tom Farrell said in a news release that the company would instead focus on something else: A clean energy profile in “its premier state-regulated, sustainability-focused utilities.”

Virginia’s Energy Kingpin Could Finally Face A Reckoning Over Race
July 23, 2020

Dominion CEO Thomas Farrell’s history of railroading Black communities and glorifying the Confederacy is under new scrutiny after the demise of his controversial pipeline.

By Alexander Kaufman

Summer 2014 was an exciting and nostalgic season for the most powerful unelected man in Virginia.

In May of that year, Dominion Energy CEO Thomas F. Farrell II made his cinematic debut with “Field of Lost Shoes,” a Civil War drama following the victorious Confederate cadets at the Battle of New Market. He had co-written, produced and financed the film. In addition to being a lawyer and the boss of a $62 billion Richmond, Virginia-based utility that serves 6.7 million people in eight states, Farrell is a history buff who said he pulled many of the movie’s lines straight from diaries and speeches of the time. Historians, however, say he added one glaring fiction to his film: depicting the young, white Rebel heroes as would-be abolitionists, who were either apathetic about or opposed to slavery.

Historical criticism aside, Farrell was still riding high on that premiere when, in September, he arrived in a blue suit at the historic state capitol building in Richmond to accept then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s support for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a natural gas project that Farrell hoped would define his legacy as one of his generation’s great industrialists.

“In the 19th century, we had railroads, the steam engine and the beginning of steel manufacturing. In the 20th century, we had the automobile assembly line, the internet and ― from my perspective, the most important of all ― the electric grid,” Farrell told reporters at the press conference, held on the hottest day in Richmond that year. “In the 21st century, the expansion of our natural gas pipeline network looks to be one of those key infrastructure developments.”

Six years later, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project has been torpedoed by a mix of changing economics, accusations of environmental racism and climate recklessness. The collapse of the pipeline coincides with a national movement against anti-Black racism that has had particular resonance in Virginia, once home to the capital of the Confederacy. Critics of the racial impact of Dominion’s actions under Farrell’s leadership hope that, together with the financial loss from the pipeline project, the current political ferment could finally end his 14-year reign.

Under Farrell, Dominion has become a national symbol of how political corruption and monopoly power can undercut efforts to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels. That was worked for Farrell so long as Dominion’s cash could buy it the acquiescence of state legislatures. But now Virginia and many other states are looking to transition to 100% carbon-free electricity, and Dominion’s shareholders are in revolt. In May, nearly 47% of those shareholders voted in favor of a proposal to require an independent board chair, which would have given Farrell ― who currently serves as both chairman and chief executive ― a boss. In early July, Dominion’s stock price plunged more than 11% after the company and its partner, North Carolina-based Duke Energy, announced the Atlantic Coast Pipeline’s cancellation. The stock price has yet to fully recover, even as the market rebounds.

Virginia progressives, who cheered the toppling of four Confederate monuments in Richmond in recent weeks, hope Farrell could be the next storied edifice to fall.

“Clearly there’s a need for new leadership and new direction,” said state Del. Sam Rasoul, a Democratic legislator from Roanoke. “Dominion has consistently operated counter to the interests of Virginians and … when you have a CEO who championed a film that essentially glorifies the Confederacy, with all that is going on, it’s clear that there’s a new mindset needed.”

Dominion declined to comment on the record, but internal messages show the company worried this story aimed to “tar” Farrell as part of a coordinated effort to damage the firm. In an on-background phone call, a spokesman pointed to the company’s recent commitments to donate $25 million to historically Black colleges and universities in Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina and South Carolina and to fund $10 million in scholarships for minority students. The spokesman also highlighted a corporate pledge in June to direct $5 million to “social justice” and “community rebuilding efforts.”

“At Dominion Energy, we have a saying that ‘Actions Speak Louder.’ We share the anger of our communities at the unjustified deaths of Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery and George Floyd,” Farrell said in a press release announcing the latter commitment. “Our communities are grieving. Words can evoke empathy, compassion and understanding, but actions truly speak louder. So, we are investing in recovery and reconciliation, and in the vital work of overcoming years of debilitating actions, attitudes and abuses of authority that have traumatized our country.”

The company denied a request to interview Farrell.

A Tale Of Two Compressor Stations

Opposition from environmental justice groups contributed to the demise of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The proposal would have sent the pipeline through Buckingham County, a rural, mountainous area roughly 90 minutes west of Richmond. Dominion also planned to erect a compressor station in Union Hill, a historically Black community in Northern Virginia that freed slaves founded in the 1800s before the Civil War.

Compressor stations, which use fuel from the pipeline to run a series of gas-compressing engines that keep fuel flowing through the pipeline, emit air pollutants that cause respiratory and cardiovascular problems. Dominion said the Union Hill permit that the Virginia Air Pollution Control Board had unanimously approved set limits on emissions four to 10 times lower than other recent permits granted in the state. But that still allowed for the release of a cocktail of pollutants, including nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide and particulate matter.

For years, Union Hill residents protested and organized groups against the project. The Virginia NAACP condemned Dominion’s plans and urged regulators to halt permitting. In an August 2018 letter, the 15-member state Advisory Council on Environmental Justice urged Gov. Ralph Northam (D) to suspend the permits already granted and conduct a review of potential “civil and human rights violations” and “ensure that predominantly poor, indigenous, brown and/or black communities do not bear an unequal burden of environmental pollutants and life-altering disruptions.”

“We strongly disagree with the Advisory Council’s recommendations,” the company told The Washington Post at the time.

The company then proposed pouring $5.1 million into the Union Hill community, vowing to build a community center and fund an expansion of emergency services. The money proved divisive, which some there said was exactly the point.

“Dominion is an expert at the divide-and-conquer tactic,” Rev. Paul Wilson, the preacher at one of Union Hill’s two historically Black churches and a leading opponent of the pipeline, told NBC News in 2018. “There’s a group of people who are even moving to get me out as pastor. Once you inject money into the conversation, it becomes a wedge.”

When former Vice President Al Gore and anti-poverty activist Rev. William Barber II denounced the compressor station as environmental racism in 2019, Dominion started running Facebook ads featuring video from a high school essay contest on civil rights that it had sponsored.

Meanwhile, the company plowed ahead with plans to build the compressor station ― until a federal court intervened in early 2020, overturning the permit because Dominion had failed to resolve questions about how emissions would affect Union Hill.

It had taken Union Hill activists five years to get redress from the courts.

But a similar fight in a largely white and affluent community played out much differently. Three hours north, in Charles County, Maryland, Dominion spent two years planning another compressor station for the Eastern Market Access project. Then the Mount Vernon Ladies Association intervened, noting that the project would sully the view from President George Washington’s plantation across the Potomac River in Virginia. Four months after the society group joined local environmentalists in opposing the compressor station, Dominion canceled its plans.

Building Over Black History

It’s difficult to say how Farrell’s personal views have factored into company positions. But critics argue that redevelopment schemes that Farrell supported as a real estate investor, independent of his work at Dominion, have shown a similar disregard for Black history and communities.

In 2017, Farrell led a group of developers pushing a $1.5 billion project to rebuild a 10-block swath of downtown Richmond into a new arena, hotel, offices and luxury apartments. He and his co-investors dubbed the planned development Navy Hill after a Black neighborhood that was razed in the 1960s to make way for highways. That clearance demolished landmarks and displaced more than 1,000 families. This time, Farrell lined up the support of Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney (D), who is Black and has recently expedited the removal of Confederate monuments in response to the new protests against racism. Stoney received $10,000 from Dominion during his first year in office and announced in 2018 that he planned to continue accepting donations from the powerful utility.

While the project’s wealthy backers promised some funding, the city planned to largely finance the redevelopment through bond market debt. The proposal swore off tax hikes. But the need to pay off that bond debt threatened to divert funding from city services for decades to come, risking more budget cuts at a moment when municipal deficits were already triggering increased austerity.

Many also feared the project would gentrify a historically Black area of the city and make the neighborhood unaffordable for its longtime residents.

A November 2019 editorial in the Richmond Free Press, a weekly newspaper serving the city’s Black community, savaged the project. The editorial board called the plan “a travesty” that risked “leaving the taxpayers … stuck with the bill for the rising costs of city services.” Any new municipal revenue from the project would end up going toward paying off the new arena, the newspaper concluded.

“With this latest scheme, our community once again winds up as losers,” the editorial stated. “Only Mr. Farrell and friends are benefiting from this project and the charade being perpetrated to pull it off.”

There was a lot of race-baiting from folks who want to maintain a certain kind of racial capitalism in the former capital of the Confederacy.Chelsea Wise, organizer and host of the Richmond radio show “Race Capitol”

Chelsea Wise, an organizer and host of the Richmond politics radio show “Race Capitol,” said she saw members of her family holding up picket signs supporting the project at a key city council hearing. When she confronted them, they said they’d been offered $25 to show support.

“I like to joke that, after that, Thanksgiving was very different,” Wise said.

But the project was no laughing matter, she said. Wise took to calling the Navy Hill proposal “the second wave of the Bartholomew project,” a reference to the displacement of Black families during the 1960s under city planner Harland Bartholomew.

Among Navy Hill supporters, “there was a lot of race-baiting from folks who want to maintain a certain kind of racial capitalism in the former capital of the Confederacy,” Wise said. “This project would hurt Black people.”

The Richmond Free Press suggested the paltry rate at which Farrell’s group compensated picketers was an insult unto itself. “Sadly, it shows how deep poverty and depression is within Richmond’s African-American community that $25 can get people to show up and hold signs at a City Council meeting,” the editorial read.

In February, the Richmond City Council voted for a resolution that effectively killed the project.

“While the council resolution didn’t name him, the development proposal process did not reflect civic needs so much as the interests of one man in particular: Navy Hill’s leader and Dominion Energy’s chief executive, Tom Farrell, who has been arguing for a new Richmond arena for almost a decade,” Richard Meagher, an associate professor of political science at Randolph-Macon College, wrote in a February op-ed in Style Weekly, Richmond’s alt-weekly newspaper.

The Rates Card

Electricity rates are another area where the public interest in Virginia has been increasingly at odds with Farrell’s. In 2007, a hastily passed law proposed and backed by lawmakers who received donations from Dominion restricted the State Corporation Commission’s ability to police the utility rates the company charges. Between 2009 and 2018, the company overcharged Virginians by an average of $234 million per year, according to analysis by the advocacy group Clean Virginia. In 2018 alone, state regulators found that the company overcharged ratepayers by nearly $300 million, which averaged out to an extra $113 per customer for the year.

Dominion also asked to raise the percentage of its revenues it could keep as profit ― a request that regulators rejected last November. Now the company wants to raise rates by as much as $50 a month to help cover the cost of complying with Virginia’s new renewable energy targets.

That would come on top of the financial tsunami ratepayers already face in the months ahead as unemployment in Virginia sits at roughly 10% and workers struggle to make rent amid the coronavirus pandemic. Virginia extended its moratorium on utility service shutoffs for nonpayment until the end of August. Dominion said it will maintain the policy until Oct. 15.

By then, when colder weather risks inflaming the coronavirus infection rate, thousands could lose access to electricity in the state with the seventh-highest average monthly residential electric bill in the country. (Not to mention the other states where Dominion operates. The company said it will apply the same Oct. 15 endpoint to all eight states it serves.)

The risk of losing electricity, advocates say, will fall disproportionately on communities of color. Median-income families in Richmond and Virginia Beach, for example, spent between 3% and 4% of household income on utilities, according to 2013 data from the progressive nonprofit New Virginia Majority. But Black households in the same two cities spent 8% and 10%, respectively. Latino households spent about 6%.

“If you look at what’s actually affordable, paying the current bill plus catching up on arrearage that may have been accumulated during COVID, that may be hard to accommodate,” said Dana Wiggins, director of the Center for Community Outreach and Affordable Clean Energy at the Virginia Poverty Law Center. “When you take into account that they have been overcharged over a long period of time, it makes it very difficult.”

Dominion, meanwhile, increased its dividend to shareholders in February and then paid them an equivalent sum in June.

Had the nearly $3 billion Dominion spent on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline gone instead toward solar and wind projects, it would have likely lowered the cost of Virginia’s effort to transition to 100% clean energy by 2045.

But Farrell has long maintained that fossil fuels are the past and the future. Until early July, Dominion owned an entire gas transmission and storage subsidiary separate from its utility business. “We’ve come a long way in a relatively short time with renewable energy, but we’re still in the age of fossil fuels, whether we like it or not,” Farrell said in a 2015 speech to regional business leaders. “Seventy-five to eighty percent of it is going to come from fossil fuels, as I said, for many decades to come.”

The election of President Donald Trump, a fossil fuel hardliner, only cemented those views. “We need to acknowledge we are an energy superpower and start acting like it,” Farrell said in a July 2017 lecture to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Energy Institute. “Instead of trying to keep it all in the ground.”

Thanks to that mindset, Virginia still produces about 63% of its electricity from fossil fuels, compared to 7% from renewables, according to federal figures. The new state rules require that 26% of electricity come from renewables by 2025. In a lone on-the-record statement to HuffPost, a Dominion spokesman said: “We intend to comply with that.”

But climate change’s mounting toll of more disastrous storms, heat waves and flooding show that just meeting that minimum standard is insufficient and “Dominion needs new leadership,” said Harrison Wallace, a community organizer and the Virginia director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network, a regional grassroots environmental group.

“The leadership of our utility monopoly should at least represent the changing tide in politics and how climate is affecting our planet,” he said.

Farrell’s Lost Cause Film

Farrell’s movie may offer the most damning indication that the executive is out of step with the current moment. The $6 million film ― which received $1 million in public funding via a state filmmaking tax credit ― was widely panned for its historical revisionism.

The script for “Field of Lost Shoes,” which Farrell co-wrote, depicts its Confederate heroes at the Virginia Military Institute as deeply conflicted over slavery.

Historian Jeffrey Evan Brooks complained in a review that a “black character named Old Judge, who runs the VMI bakery, is inserted into the story in order to give the cadets a slave with whom to sympathize when he runs into trouble.” In The Hollywood Reporter, critic Frank Scheck said that the movie “doesn’t exactly score points for objectivity.”

“Amazingly, none of the staunch Southerners seem to hold any negative feelings toward blacks,” Scheck wrote.

At one point, a main character suggests as a given that the newly independent Confederacy must abolish slavery after winning the war. Another insists: “This war is not about slavery. It’s about money. It always is.”

For a white person in the Civil War era to express skepticism about slavery, much less outright support for abolition, would “have been an untenable position in Virginia,” said historian Rev. Benjamin Campbell, author of “Richmond’s Unhealed History,” a book about the city’s failure to confront the oppressive racist policies that shaped its past.

“A white person would have been thrown out of the state,” Campbell said. “A newspaper editor who simply questioned slavery was challenged to a duel in 1848 and killed in Virginia.”

Politically acceptable opinions at the time, he said, ranged from full-throated support of slavery to “advocating the American Colonization Society,” which was an effort to deport freed Black people to Africa and establish a U.S. trading colony there.

Campbell said he knows Farrell, who is in his mid-60s, personally and the Dominion boss is “not a rigid racist.”

“He’s a Virginian of his generation, and he’s a person in moral and emotional transition like all the rest of us,” Campbell said. “But it may not be fast enough.”

An internal text message HuffPost obtained showed what appeared to be public relations employees worrying about a “total of three negative pieces brewing” that will “try to tar us,” including this story, an op-ed due out in a local newspaper criticizing a lawmaker for accepting Dominion contributions, and an investigation in another outlet examining the company’s political donations. The texting thread of five Richmond-area numbers, which appears to have accidentally included this reporter, suggested the publications were “brewing all in rough coordination,” though HuffPost had no prior knowledge of the other two pieces.

Farrell’s role should “certainly be questioned” in the wake of the pipeline project, said Barber, a towering figure of the current civil rights movement.

“A company that would attempt to do all this to communities and put its customers through this kind of fight should be challenged in so many ways,” he said. “Racism is not just about symbolism, it’s about substance.”

Dominion Energy’s costly new energy blueprint fails to meet challenge of Virginia’s clean energy transition
May 1, 2020


Cassady Craighill, Clean Virginia Communications Director
[email protected], 828-817-3328

Dominion Energy’s costly new energy blueprint fails to meet challenge of Virginia’s clean energy transition 

Clean Virginia: Plan approval should depend on full rate case review of Dominion’s spending

Richmond, VA — Dominion Energy released its latest Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) today, projecting significant rate increases and an increased reliance on short-term fracked gas, despite the monopoly’s recent public commitments to clean energy.

“After decades of delays and resistance, Dominion has been forced by recent law to move forward on clean energy. The new Integrated Resource Plan appears after an initial review to be a flawed and imperfect reflection of the clean energy directive from the Governor, General Assembly, and citizens of the Commonwealth,” said Clean Virginia Executive Director Brennan Gilmore.

The utility monopoly filed its latest IRP to account for the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA), which Governor Ralph Northam signed into law last month. Primary findings from the plan include:

  • Significant rate increases. Dominion estimates that the cost of its proposal will result in a rate increase of 37% over the next 10 years, with a typical residential customer’s monthly power bill rising by $45.92. Dominion customers already pay among the highest electric bills in the United States and the monopoly has consistently overcharged by hundreds of millions of dollars each year. In advance of any new rate increases, the General Assembly must empower regulators to hold a comprehensive rate case that would set a fair base rate for customers, review Dominion’s spending, and issue refunds for overcharges as appropriate.
  • Declining demand for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Dominion forecasts no new baseload natural gas generation in its IRP, illustrating the declining demand for natural gas to meet Virginia’s energy needs and undermining its justification for the $8 billion Atlantic Coast Pipeline. In its proposal, Dominion includes high-cost combustion turbines, or peaker plants, which would operate only during periods of high demand and do not justify continued investments in a multi-billion-dollar interstate gas pipeline.
  • Inadequate solar and storage resources. Dominion prioritizes the development of new high-cost gas peaking facilities at the expense of low-cost combined renewable and battery storage resources. As utilities across the country invest in plans to meet 100% clean energy goals, Dominion told the Richmond Times-Dispatch that “there is not a plan to do that. What we would need is new technology.” The company’s statement underscores the need to increase competition in Virginia’s energy market in order to spur innovation and meet the overwhelming mandate from Virginians to prioritize clean energy.
  • Abandonment of the $19 billion North Anna 3 nuclear plant. Dominion states in its IRP that it has “paused” development of a third nuclear reactor at its North Anna facility. This is further confirmation that  North Anna 3 was never a cost-effective generation project and will not be built, as the office of the Virginia Attorney General warned in 2015. Dominion has already spent over $300 million of customer’s money for North Anna 3, money that otherwise would have been refunded. Clean Virginia detailed the failed North Anna 3 project in the Dominion Scam report. 

“Dominion is proposing a substantial overhaul of the way electricity is generated, consumed, and stored, all of which will have a significant economic impact for Virginian families and businesses,” Gilmore said. “The new construction envisioned by its IRP will generate significant shareholder profit for Dominion, but major rate increases for customers. However, the utility monopoly has aggressively opposed any attempt at a transparent review of its rates, despite overcharging Virginians by $1.3 billion since 2015. Dominion’s continued unwarranted reliance on fossil fuels and evasion of a fair review of rates — particularly at a time of unprecedented hardship — is deeply irresponsible. The General Assembly should urgently mandate regulators to conduct a full, transparent review of Dominion’s current rate structure in light of its massive spending plans.”


Dominion: Significant new natural gas generation not viable
April 9, 2020

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Dominion Energy Virginia recently told state regulators “significant build-out” of natural gas-fired power plants is no longer viable because of renewable energy legislation lawmakers passed earlier this year.

The disclosure came in a filing with the State Corporation Commission several weeks before Dominion has to file its integrated resource plan, or IRP, a long-range planning document that describes how the utility will generate power to comply with regulations and meet customer needs.

The company’s critics called it the latest development to raise questions about why the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, the approximately $8 billion multistate natural gas pipeline the utility’s parent company is spearheading, is needed.

When Dominion proposed the pipeline in 2014, it was planning to build several thousand megawatts of additional natural gas generation in Virginia, said Will Cleveland, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

“Now, not only are they not planning to do it, they’re saying that that kind of a build-up isn’t even possible. Which just begs the question that we’ve been asking for years: What is that pipeline for?”

Dominion spokesman Jeremy Slayton said the pipeline is still “urgently needed for electricity, home heating and manufacturing in Virginia and North Carolina.”

“Dominion Energy Virginia is just one of several public utility customers of the ACP, with a large portion of the capacity going to North Carolina utilities,” Slayton said in a statement.

Dominion’s filing asked the commission to waive a requirement it had previously instituted that said all future IRPs must include a risk analysis of constructing significant new natural gas and nuclear power generation.

Dominion said doing that modeling would be time- and resource-intensive work on something that was “no longer relevant.”

“Significant build-out of natural gas generation facilities is not currently viable, with the passage by the General Assembly of the Virginia Clean Economy Act of 2020,” the filing said.

That bill, which is awaiting Gov. Ralph Northam’s signature, sets a goal of zero carbon emissions by 2045, paving the way for an enormous expansion of offshore wind generation, solar or onshore wind generation, and the use of battery storage technology.

The legislation also requires utilities to meet certain energy efficiency standards, establishes annual goals for the sale of renewable energy, and contains provisions advocates say remove barriers to rooftop and shared solar energy.

Dominion also cited the bill in a filing last week with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the reason it anticipates recording an abandonment charge in the first quarter of 2020 as a result of the probable early retirement of coal- and oil-fired units. The charge is expected to be between $500 million and $650 million after-tax, the filing said.

Slayton called the filing with the State Corporation Commission a “procedural step to remove some outdated reporting requirements.” He said natural gas remains an important part of Dominion’s reliability.

The company has not canceled natural gas plant projects in Chesterfield and Pittsylvania County that are currently in the permitting process, he said.

A move away from natural gas would mark a significant shift from Dominion’s last IRP in 2018, which called for at least eight new gas-fired plants.

The SCC granted Dominion’s request to skip the modeling. The IRP is due by May 1.

Virginia bill will put more pressure on Dominion Energy to justify cost recovery
April 6, 2020

By Elizabeth McGowan 

House Bill 528, now awaiting the governor’s signature, offers state regulators more authority over monopoly utilities.  

A scantly noticed bill curated by a freshman legislator from northern Virginia elicited giant cheers from Dominion Energy watchdogs when it passed both the Senate and the House of Delegates just seven days before the General Assembly adjourned on March 12.

Though overshadowed by the Virginia Clean Economy Act, supporters view the success of House Bill 528 as a momentous first effort to shift power from utility monopolies and toward regulators and ratepayers.

On its face, the measure deftly shepherded by Del. Suhas Subramanyam is simple. It restores the State Corporation Commission’s oversight of Dominion’s cost recovery timeline for early retirements of all types of power plants.

“This is part of a larger effort to even the playing field and make sure a monopoly plays by the same rules as any other company,” the Loudoun County Democrat said in an interview. “No one else can determine how to depreciate their own assets and I don’t think people understood the implications of that.”

Subramanyam’s measure reverses current law, passed in 2018 as part of the massive Grid Transformation and Security Act. That allowed Dominion to recover — as a one-time expense — the remaining balance on a retired power plant instead of refunding the extra earnings to customers.

“I was trying to reverse an accounting trick that would prevent ratepayers from getting refunds,” he said. “When I first started with this, I thought it was a long shot. Once people understood what it did, they saw it as a common-sense bill.”

Part of what spurred him to push his bill was the imminent passage of the overarching Virginia Clean Economy Act, which is designed to shift energy priorities and speed up the retirement of coal- and natural gas-fired plants. To decarbonize Virginia’s electricity grid by 2045, the act establishes aggressive energy efficiency standards, broadly expands incentives for rooftop solar, and kickstarts a massive offshore wind industry.

Brennan Gilmore, executive director of Clean Virginia, praised what he called a newly emergent bipartisan coalition of lawmakers for challenging Dominion with HB 528 and on several other fronts.

For instance, legislators blocked Senate Bill 1096, a Dominion-backed bill to expand an exclusive electric school bus contract. They also advanced pilot competition bills for energy services, signaling interest in overhauling the state’s vertically integrated monopoly structure.

And they came remarkably close to passing the bipartisan Fair Energy Bills Act, which would have empowered state regulators to examine Dominion’s earnings, decide how much is fair, then direct the utility to refund the surplus to customers.

Dominion has overcharged customers by more than $1.3 billion since 2015, according to State Corporation Commission figures.

Combined, those initiatives sent “a strong message that Dominion Energy will no longer be able to use the General Assembly as a rubber stamp for its profit-padding legislation,” Gilmore said. “New lawmakers have joined seasoned members of both chambers to build a firewall of support for consumer protection, good governance and distributed clean energy.”

Dominion Energy did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

HB 528 is a start

Will Cleveland, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said he was disappointed legislators who professed to care about ratepayers bucked the Fair Energy Bills Act.

It was a necessary complement to the Clean Economy Act because “as long as rates are where they are, we’re not doing a transition to zero carbon emissions in the power sector in the least-cost manner,” he said.

Subramanyam’s bill isn’t comprehensive enough to solve that problem.

“HB 528 is a good starting point, but it fixes only one of the many things wrong with Virginia’s regulatory structure,” Cleveland said. “The Fair Energy Bills Act would have removed all of the obstacles.”

That latter oversight measure would have applied to Dominion’s 2021 rate case, when utility regulators will be examining four years of records — from 2017 to 2020 — and setting Dominion’s next base rate and allowed profit level.

Five years ago — when the Obama administration’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was rolling out the Clean Power Plan — Virginia legislators voted to let Dominion keep excess profits in exchange for freezing base rates for seven years.

“The State Corporation Commission is not failing to do its job,” Cleveland said about the overcharging. “It’s not legally allowed to do so.”

He noted that passage of the Clean Economy Act is “the first time a major piece of energy legislation has passed that Dominion didn’t write,” adding that the bill educated lawmakers about shortcomings in their state. “I’m excited about the number of people committed to helping to fix this in the future.”

Dominion will be filing its next version of an Integrated Resource Plan on May 1. Regulators have asked the utility to include a model detailing the costs of executing the Clean Power Plan.

“It’s the first time that Dominion is having to put numbers to paper in front of a court rather than through a press release,” Cleveland said. “Nobody has done a good job of quantifying the costs and savings of the Clean Economy Act.”

A push for accountability

Some advocates intent on reining in Dominion emphasized that legislators found voting for the Clean Economy Act more palatable after Subramanyam’s bill passed, even though it wasn’t as comprehensive as the Fair Energy Bills Act.

An analysis by state regulators said the Clean Economy Act would lead to Dominion collecting $50.8 billion more from its ratepayers.

But J.R. Tolbert, the managing director for the Advanced Energy Economy, questioned the accuracy of the commission’s math. He said a Lakes Energy study commissioned by his organization was more spot-on. It predicted customers’ monthly bills would drop by about $4 a month between 2020 and 2030.

Tolbert attributed legislators’ attempts to constrain Dominion this session to years of frustration by lawmakers and clean energy advocates in the trenches. Strategic thinking and the first Democratic majority in both chambers in a generation allowed that pent-up anger to be released.

“We reached a full boil on how we handle and address Dominion’s rates and everything else,” said Tolbert, who has tracked the General Assembly since 2008, the year after Virginia electric utilities returned to a regulatory model. “This year there was an enormous push for more accountability.”

The coalition that crafted the Clean Economy Act chose to achieve 100% clean energy without breaking the bank, he said.

“We know there are flaws in the current regulatory regime,” he continued. “But we can’t fix and change that regulatory model and put Virginia on a path to clean energy in the same package.”

Some key breakthroughs Tolbert cited include:

  • Removing barriers to rooftop solar by raising the cap on power purchase agreements in Dominion service territory from 50 megawatts to 1,000 MW and increasing the size of those individual projects from 1 MW to 3 MW.
  • Expanding distributed solar by reducing the upfront capital required to invest in solar, establishing a 1% carveout for distributed solar in the renewable portfolio standard and increasing the net metering cap in investor-owned utility service territories from 1% to 6%.
  • Declaring up to 5,200 MW of offshore wind to be in the public interest by 2035 as part of the renewable portfolio standard.
  • Creating an accelerated buyer program for companies leading on clean energy and requiring those large energy users to procure up to 50 MW of offshore wind, thus lowering the overall cost for other ratepayers.
  • Ensuring that utility-scale renewable energy is built on a lowest-cost basis by requiring competitive procurement for all projects and that 35% of all solar and onshore wind projects be third-party owned.

“We tried to fight for things that achieve the goals but take into account the impact on ratepayers, families and businesses,” Tolbert said. “Are there places where it could have been better or stronger? Yes.”

For instance, his coalition wanted third parties to have a higher ownership stake in renewable energy projects. But that didn’t fly.

Still, “the clean energy folks were able to get out in front,” he said. “As a result, we were able to make sure the conversation was based off our sheet of paper instead of the utility sheet of paper.

“Both Dominion and Appalachian Power came to the table to work on the bill.”

Gathering bipartisan support

Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam is expected to sign Subramanyam’s ratepayer protection bill into law early this month. The Senate greenlighted it on a 35-5 vote, while the House passed it 50-43.

“It’s a really big deal,” Subramanyam said. “This bill would have never passed in previous years because of the opposition from regulated utilities.”

During back-and-forth negotiations, he agreed to a few amendments to advance his measure. For instance, one allows Dominion to present specific amortization cases involving plant shutdowns to regulators — but commissioners have the power to make the ultimate decision.

Subramanyam, elected in 2019, credits his mentors for helping him to navigate the intricacies of legislating. However, he knows the value of listening and give-and-take.

He might be a rookie in Richmond, but his background is on Capitol Hill and in President Barack Obama’s White House.

“I think it was a surprise to the investor-owned utilities that there were both Democrats and Republicans who stood up in support,” he said. “Sometimes this is about relationships.”

Virginia session sets up clean energy investment, Dominion regulations fall flat
March 24, 2020

Virginia lawmakers passed bills during the 2020 legislative session that unlock billions of dollars in potential clean energy investments and continue shifting off of fossil fuels, although proposals to challenge the power of the state’s largest electric utility gained little traction.

Bills that sought to open up the state to retail competition, curb contributions from Virginia’s investor-owned utilities and put stricter regulations on utility earnings were either weakened or passed over.

Dominion Energy Inc. still has a “very strong tool in the toolkit” in Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw and the “powerful” Senate Commerce and Labor Committee, Brennan Gilmore, executive director of Clean Virginia, said in a March 13 phone interview.

“They still have an ability to use the legislature through that tool, but the wall that that tool provided in the past has been breached and we were able to get around it in a couple places,” Gilmore said.

The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee on March 2 killed a bipartisan bill that would have given the Virginia State Corporation Commission the ability to lower Dominion Energy Virginia’s base rates and order customer refunds for excess earnings.

The SCC showed in a late August 2019 report that Dominion subsidiary Dominion Energy Virginia and American Electric Power Co. Inc. utility Appalachian Power Co. earned millions in excess revenues for the second year in a row following a reinstatement of rate reviews in 2018. Dominion is now held to a “maximum $50 million rate reduction” following the first review of excessive earnings.

The state Senate committee voted 8-7 to indefinitely table the Fair Energy Bills Act.

“I think that was a loss, but at the same time it exposed just how badly a clean rate case is needed and I think it helped fuel the appetite for more structural reform in the system,” Gilmore said.

Clean Virginia endorsed and contributed to the campaigns of dozens of candidates for the state legislature in the November 2019 general election, all of whom refused to accept money from Dominion.

Democrats then took full control of the Virginia General Assembly for the first time in more than 25 years in a legislative shift seen as paving the way for the state to embrace stricter clean energy mandates and join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI.

Customer and clean energy advocates said they are seeing signs of change even if direct challenges to power largely fell flat.

“For the past decade, [Dominion has] essentially had their way with the legislature and there wasn’t any point where … they were held to the fire in negotiations around a big energy bill over things like cost containment or competition,” Gilmore said. “They were able to get into the code a lot of incredibly utility-friendly ratemaking provisions. I think the dynamic that we saw during this session was that is just not the case anymore.”

Although Dominion Energy has previously expressed concerns about Virginia’s effort to join RGGI and efforts to deregulate the electricity market, the utility said it will work to slash emissions in line with the state’s new policies.

“We are committed to net-zero carbon and methane emissions company-wide by 2050, including meeting any emissions requirements signed by the Virginia governor as a result of the General Assembly session,” Dominion spokesman Rayhan Daudani said in a March 20 email.

Virginia Clean Economy Act

One significant piece of legislation passed by the Virginia General Assembly is Senate Bill 851, known as the Virginia Clean Economy Act.

The legislation essentially phases out coal-fired generation by the end of 2030 and requires Dominion Energy Virginia and Appalachian Power to “retire all other electric generating units located in the Commonwealth that emit carbon as a by-product of combusting fuel to generate electricity” by Dec. 31, 2045.

The legislation replaces the state’s voluntary renewable portfolio standard with mandatory annual benchmarks that would eventually require electricity suppliers to produce 100% of their electricity from renewable sources.

Appalachian Power must procure 100% of its electricity from renewable resources by 2050, while Dominion Energy Virginia must hit that benchmark by 2045.

It also requires Dominion Energy Virginia, known legally as Virginia Electric and Power Co., and Appalachian Power to “retire all generating units principally fueled by oil with a rated capacity in excess of 500 [MW] and all coal-fired electric generating units operating in the Commonwealth” by Dec. 31, 2024. The bill provides an exception for coal plants co-owned with a cooperative utility and for Dominion Energy Virginia’s 624-MW Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center, which must be shut down by the end of 2030.

The measure adopts a target for energy storage deployment of 3,100 MW by the end of 2035. A new energy efficiency standard also would apply to both utilities with a 5% energy savings target for Dominion and a 2% target for Appalachian Power by 2025, both from 2019 levels.

“From a Clean Virginia perspective, it was a bit of a mixed bag,” Gilmore said. “From a climate perspective, it’s a great bill.”

Under the legislation, “the construction or purchase” of offshore wind facilities up to 5,200 MW off the Virginia shoreline by Dec. 31, 2024, is in the public interest.

Dominion Energy Virginia in September 2019 announced plans to build the “largest offshore wind project” in the U.S. off the coast of Virginia Beach in three phases of 880 MW each. If approved, the first phase of the $8 billion project would be completed in 2024, with the final phases expected to come online in 2025 and 2026.

“I think there is a pretty big delta between a gold-plated, profit-padding offshore wind deployment and one that is deployed with particular attention to cost and cost overruns,” Gilmore said. “There is some good language in the [Virginia Clean Economy Act] about the SCC’s ability to monitor this process to ensure that there is competitive procurement in a way to keep costs down. We would’ve liked to see more of that language but I think it’s going to bear careful attention in the years to come.”

Virginia set to join RGGI

In February, the General Assembly passed legislation that would lay the groundwork for the state to join RGGI.

The legislation authorizes the director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to “establish, implement, and manage an auction program to sell allowances into a market-based trading program consistent with the RGGI program.”

The vote comes after the Virginia Air Pollution Control Board in April 2019 adopted a rule to move forward with linking the state to RGGI and effectively curb total power plant carbon emissions 30% by 2030.

States involved in RGGI use a market-based cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from regional power plants, selling nearly all emissions allowances through auctions and investing proceeds in energy efficiency projects.

Dominion Energy Virginia has previously claimed that linking to RGGI could lead to emissions increases outside the state, a phenomenon known as leakage.

The utility has also claimed that such a move “would raise rates considerably in Virginia” and threaten the company’s competitive retail electric rates.

Gov. Ralph Northam is expected to enact the legislation.

Va.’s 100% clean energy shift: Part of a ‘bigger wave’?
March 17, 2020

By David Iaconangelo

A landmark legislative session for energy came to an end in Virginia last week, after the Democratic-controlled General Assembly mounted a late push to pass numerous new regulations on fossil fuels and promote zero-carbon sources of electricity.

One of the measures, which Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam is expected to sign, would make Virginia a participant in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the East Coast’s cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide emissions.

The governor is also expected to sign the “Virginia Clean Economy Act,” which would make Virginia the first state in the South to move toward 100% carbon-free electricity. It would require the state to decarbonize its power by 2050 and establish new mandates for a renewable build-out.

Cale Jaffe, an associate professor of environmental law at the University of Virginia and a former attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, said he “never would have imagined something like the Virginia Clean Economy Act to be remotely possible” when he began lobbying the Legislature for renewable policies over a decade ago.

“This is an absolute sea change,” he said in an email.

Other bills that passed in February and March would ban hydraulic fracturing in much of the state along with offshore drilling for oil and gas, while a third — already signed by Northam — creates a 27-member environmental justice council to advise the governor.

The flood of legislation came after Democrats took control of both chambers in last November’s elections. The political shift was apparent in the state’s entry into RGGI: In 2017, Republicans successfully inserted provisions into the state budget that blocked regulators from implementing the cap-and-trade program.

Some clean energy and green groups that have positioned themselves as rivals of Dominion Energy, the state’s main investor-owned utility, say this year’s legislation is just the beginning of a larger shake-up. An appetite is growing on both sides of the aisle for a deregulated power sector that allows other electricity generators to compete with Dominion, they say.

In the recently ended session, “you did see some shifting of power from Dominion” to utility regulators and Virginia ratepayers, said Cassady Craighill, communications director for Clean Virginia.

Craighill pointed to the passage of H.B. 528, which would give regulators control over how Dominion charges ratepayers for the early retirement of fossil fuel plants. It cleared both chambers over the objections of the utility giant — a rare event for a Legislature where the company has cast a long shadow.

“I think next year, you’ll see a bigger wave of that change,” she said.

Other clean energy advocates were more skeptical.

Several measures that would have expanded consumers’ ability to enter contracts with other companies for renewable power — including one co-sponsored by a Republican state senator — never cleared the Legislature, said Bryn Baker, director of policy innovations at the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance.

Dominion spokesman Rayhan Daudani did not directly respond to queries about the company’s influence on lawmakers, saying that the company’s focus “has been and will continue to be on providing safe, reliable and sustainable energy to our customers.”

‘Undue and harmful influence’

If the next session does see additional attempts to decrease Dominion’s control over power generation and distribution in Virginia, however, it likely will have the backing of a new activist donor with deep coffers.

Clean Virginia, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, was created in 2018 by hedge fund manager Michael Bills in order to “offset the undue and harmful influence of Dominion Energy and other utility monopolies … over Virginian politics,” according to a founding statement. In 2019, it received $300,000 from Bills.

A former vice president of Goldman Sachs and current chief investment officer at Bluestem Asset Management, Bills sits on the nonprofit’s board and has emerged as one of the state’s largest donors to political campaigns, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.

In 2019, he gave $1.24 million to dozens of Democratic candidates for state office, all of whom swore off donations from Dominion, and $200,000 to the state’s Democratic Party. Eight of those candidates won seats formerly held by Republicans.

In emailed comments to E&E News, Bills said he believes Clean Virginia has been “a valuable resource” in electoral battles but that voters have given “a clear mandate … to tackle both corruption and climate in Virginia politics.”

“The General Assembly started an important conversation this year about reforming Virginia’s energy market into a competitive one,” he added.

“[F]or the sake of Virginia customers, they should thoughtfully return to that conversation next year,” he said.