2.2.0.7 false Commitments and Contingencies 123 - Disclosure - Commitments and Contingencies true false false false 1 USD false false iso4217_USD Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217 USD iso4217 0 iso4217_USD_per_shares Divide http://www.xbrl.org/2003/iso4217 USD iso4217 http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance shares 0 pure Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance pure 0 shares Standard http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance shares 0 $ 5 Commitments and Contingencies 3 us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock us-gaap true na duration No definition available. false false false false false false false false false false false false 1 false false false false 0 0 <div> Note 15. Commitments and Contingencies Other than the following matters, there have been no significant developments regarding the commitments and contingencies disclosed in Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Dominion’s and Virginia Power’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, or Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Dominion’s and Virginia Power’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010, respectively, nor have any significant new matters arisen during the three months ended September 30, 2010. Guarantees Dominion At September 30, 2010, Dominion had issued $131 million of guarantees, primarily to support equity method investees. No significant amounts related to these guarantees have been recorded. As of September 30, 2010, Dominion’s exposure under these guarantees was $54 million, primarily related to certain reserve requirements associated with non-recourse financing. Dominion also enters into guarantee arrangements on behalf of its consolidated subsidiaries, primarily to facilitate their commercial transactions with third parties. To the extent that a liability subject to a guarantee has been incurred by one of Dominion’s consolidated subsidiaries, that liability is included in Dominion’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Dominion is not required to recognize liabilities for guarantees issued on behalf of its subsidiaries unless it becomes probable that it will have to perform under the guarantees. Terms of the guarantees typically end once obligations have been paid. Dominion currently believes it is unlikely that it would be required to perform or otherwise incur any losses associated with guarantees of its subsidiaries’ obligations.   At September 30, 2010, Dominion had issued the following subsidiary guarantees:   <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="76%" align="center"> <tr> <td width="78%"></td> <td valign="bottom" width="6%"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td valign="bottom" width="6%"></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom" colspan="2" align="center">Stated Limit</td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom" colspan="2" align="center">Value(1)</td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="bottom">(millions)</td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom" colspan="2"> </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom" colspan="2"> </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#CCEEFF"> <td valign="top"> Subsidiary debt(2) </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom">$</td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">126</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom">$</td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">126</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top"> Commodity transactions(3) </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">3,001</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">231</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#CCEEFF"> <td valign="top"> Lease obligation for power generation facility(4) </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">784</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">784</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top"> Nuclear obligations(5) </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">231</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">52</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#CCEEFF"> <td valign="top"> Other(6) </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">500</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom"> </td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">139</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr style="FONT-SIZE: 1px"> <td valign="bottom"></td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom">  </td> <td> </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 1px solid" valign="bottom">  </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top"> Total </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom">$</td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">4,642</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td valign="bottom">$</td> <td valign="bottom" align="right">1,332</td> <td valign="bottom" nowrap="nowrap">  </td> </tr> <tr style="FONT-SIZE: 1px"> <td valign="bottom"></td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 3px double" valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 3px double" valign="bottom">  </td> <td> </td> <td valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 3px double" valign="bottom">  </td> <td style="BORDER-TOP: #000000 3px double" valign="bottom">  </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table>   <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(1)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Represents the estimated portion of the guarantee’s stated limit that is utilized as of September 30, 2010 based upon prevailing economic conditions and fact patterns specific to each guarantee arrangement. For those guarantees related to obligations that are recorded as liabilities by Dominion’s subsidiaries, the value includes the recorded amount.</td> </tr> </table> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(2)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Guarantees of debt of certain DEI subsidiaries. In the event of default by the subsidiaries, Dominion would be obligated to repay such amounts.</td> </tr> </table> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(3)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Guarantees related to energy trading and marketing activities and other commodity commitments of certain subsidiaries. These guarantees were provided to counterparties in order to facilitate physical and financial transactions in gas, oil, electricity, pipeline capacity, transportation and other energy-related commodities and services. If any of these subsidiaries fail to perform or pay under the contracts and the counterparties seek performance or payment, Dominion would be obligated to satisfy such obligation. Dominion and its subsidiaries receive similar guarantees as collateral for credit extended to others. The value provided includes certain guarantees that do not have stated limit amounts.</td> </tr> </table> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(4)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Guarantee of a DEI subsidiary’s leasing obligation for Fairless.</td> </tr> </table> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(5)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Guarantees related to certain DEI subsidiaries’ potential retrospective premiums that could be assessed if there is a nuclear incident under Dominion’s nuclear insurance programs and guarantees for a DEI subsidiary’s and Virginia Power’s commitment to buy nuclear fuel. Excludes Dominion’s agreement to provide up to $150 million and $60 million to two DEI subsidiaries to pay the operating expenses of Millstone and Kewaunee, respectively, in the event of a prolonged outage, as part of satisfying certain NRC requirements concerned with ensuring adequate funding for the operations of nuclear power stations.</td> </tr> </table> <table style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td valign="top" width="4%" align="left">(6)</td> <td valign="top" align="left">Guarantees related to other miscellaneous contractual obligations such as leases, environmental obligations and construction projects. Also includes guarantees related to certain DEI subsidiaries’ obligations for equity capital contributions and energy generation associated with Fowler Ridge and NedPower.</td> </tr> </table> Virginia Power As of September 30, 2010, Virginia Power had issued $16 million of guarantees primarily to support tax-exempt debt issued through conduits. No significant amounts related to these guarantees have been recorded. Spent Nuclear Fuel In August 2010, Dominion and the federal government reached a settlement resolving Dominion’s claims for damages incurred at Kewaunee prior to December 31, 2008 in connection with the government’s failure to commence accepting spent nuclear fuel. The approximately $21 million settlement payment was received in September 2010 and was credited to the receivable from the government that Dominion recognized as of June 30, 2010 for spent nuclear fuel-related costs. Other lawsuits filed by Dominion and Virginia Power against the DOE requesting damages incurred for spent nuclear fuel-related costs at Millstone, Surry and North Anna remain pending. The Companies will continue to manage their spent nuclear fuel until it is accepted by the DOE. Surety Bonds and Letters of Credit As of September 30, 2010, Dominion had purchased $87 million of surety bonds, including $39 million at Virginia Power, and authorized the issuance of standby letters of credit by financial institutions of $166 million, including $94 million at Virginia Power, to facilitate commercial transactions by its subsidiaries with third parties. Under the terms of the surety bonds, the Companies are obligated to indemnify the respective surety bond company for any amounts paid. Environmental Matters The EPA has finalized rules establishing a new 1-hour NAAQS for NO2 (January 2010) and a new 1-hour NAAQS for SO2 (June 2010), which could require additional NOX and SO2 controls in certain areas where the Companies operate. Until the states have developed implementation plans for these standards, the impact on Dominion’s or Virginia Power’s facilities that emit NOX and SO2 is uncertain. However, based on a preliminary assessment, Dominion has determined that the new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS will likely require significant future capital expenditures at State Line, and has recorded an impairment charge on this facility as detailed in Note 9. In January 2010, the EPA proposed a new, more stringent NAAQS for ozone and in July 2010, the EPA announced a proposed new rule, called the “Transport Rule,” which will eventually replace the current “Clean Air Interstate Rule” and as proposed requires significant reductions in SO2 and NOX emissions. Until this rulemaking is complete and states have developed implementation plans for the new standards, it is not possible to determine the impact on Dominion’s or Virginia Power’s facilities that emit NOX and SO2. The Companies cannot currently predict whether or to what extent the new rule will ultimately require additional controls. Water In October 2007, the VSWCB issued a VPDES permit for North Anna. The BREDL, and other persons, appealed the VSWCB’s decision to the Richmond Circuit Court, challenging several permit provisions related to North Anna’s discharge of cooling water. In February 2009, the court ruled that the VSWCB was required to regulate the thermal discharge from North Anna into the waste heat treatment facility. Virginia Power filed a motion for reconsideration with the court in February 2009, which was denied. The final order was issued by the court in September 2009. The court’s order allows North Anna to continue to operate pursuant to the currently issued VPDES permit. In October 2009, Virginia Power filed a Notice of Appeal of the court’s Order with the Richmond Circuit Court, initiating the appeals process to the Virginia Court of Appeals. In June 2010, the Virginia Court of Appeals reversed the Richmond Circuit Court’s September 2009 order. The Virginia Court of Appeals held that the lower court had applied the wrong standard of review, and that the VSWCB’s determination not to regulate the station’s thermal discharge into the waste heat treatment facility was lawful. In July 2010, BREDL and the other original appellants filed a petition for appeal to the Supreme Court of Virginia requesting that it review the Court of Appeals’ decision. An administrative hearing with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection to renew the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for Millstone, which allows Millstone to return water used in the generating process to its source, was completed in February 2009. In September 2010, the permit was reissued under the Clean Water Act. The conditions of the permit require an evaluation of control technologies that could result in additional expenditures in the future, however Dominion cannot currently predict the outcome of this evaluation. In October 2010, the permit issuance was appealed to the state court by a private plaintiff. The permit is expected to remain in effect during the appeal. </div> Note 15. Commitments and Contingencies Other than the following matters, there have been no significant developments regarding the commitments and false false false us-types:textBlockItemType textblock Includes disclosure of commitments and contingencies. This element may be used as a single block of text to encapsulate the entire disclosure including data and tables. Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name FASB Interpretation (FIN) -Number 14 -Paragraph 3 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS) -Number 5 -Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12 false 1 1 false UnKnown UnKnown UnKnown false true