As a result of issues generated in the ordinary course of business, the Companies are involved in legal proceedings before various courts and are periodically subject to governmental examinations (including by regulatory authorities), inquiries and investigations. Certain legal proceedings and governmental examinations involve demands for unspecified amounts of damages, are in an initial procedural phase, involve uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals or motions or involve significant factual issues that need to be resolved, such that it is not possible for the Companies to estimate a range of possible loss. For such matters that the Companies cannot estimate, a statement to this effect is made in the description of the matter. Other matters

may have progressed sufficiently through the litigation or investigative processes such that the Companies are able to estimate a range of possible loss. For legal proceedings and governmental examinations that the Companies are able to reasonably estimate a range of possible losses, an estimated range of possible loss is provided, in excess of the accrued liability (if any) for such matters. The Companies maintain various insurance programs, including general liability insurance coverage which provides coverage for personal injury or wrongful death cases. Any accrued liability is recorded on a gross basis with a receivable also recorded for any probable insurance recoveries. Estimated ranges of loss are inclusive of legal fees and net of any anticipated insurance recoveries. Any estimated range is based on currently available information and involves elements of judgment and significant uncertainties. Any estimated range of possible loss may not represent the Companies’ maximum possible loss exposure. The circumstances of such legal proceedings and governmental examinations will change from time to time and actual results may vary significantly from the current estimate. For current proceedings not specifically reported below, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such proceedings would have a material effect on the Companies’ financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

The Companies are subject to costs resulting from a number of federal, state and local laws and regulations designed to protect human health and the environment. These laws and regulations affect future planning and existing operations. They can result in increased capital, operating and other costs as a result of compliance, remediation, containment and monitoring obligations.

The CAA, as amended, is a comprehensive program utilizing a broad range of regulatory tools to protect and preserve the nation’s air quality. At a minimum, states are required to establish regulatory programs to meet applicable requirements of the CAA. However, states may choose to develop regulatory programs that are more restrictive. Many of the Companies’ facilities are subject to the CAA’s permitting and other requirements.

The EPA published final non-attainment designations for the October 2015 ozone standards in June 2018 with states required to develop plans to address the new standard. Certain states in which the Companies operate have developed plans, and had such plans approved or partially approved by the EPA, which are not expected to have a material impact on the Companies’ results of operations or cash flows. In March 2023, the EPA issued a final rule specifying an interstate federal implementation plan to comply with certain aspects of planning for the 2015 ozone standards which was applicable in August 2023 for certain states, including Virginia. The interstate federal implementation plan imposes tighter NOX emissions limits during the ozone season and includes provisions for the use of allowances to cover such emissions. Unless and until implementation plans for the 2015 ozone standards are fully developed and approved and in effect for all states in which the Companies operate, the Companies are unable to predict whether or to what extent the new rules will ultimately require additional controls. The expenditures required to implement additional controls could have a material impact on the Companies’ results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows.

In August 2016, the EPA issued a draft rule proposing to reaffirm that a source’s obligation to obtain a PSD or Title V permit for GHGs is triggered only if such permitting requirements are first triggered by non-GHG, or conventional, pollutants that are regulated by the New Source Review program, and exceed a significant emissions rate of 75,000 tons per year of CO2 equivalent emissions. Until the EPA ultimately takes final action on this rulemaking, the Companies cannot predict the impact to their results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows.

The CWA, as amended, is a comprehensive program requiring a broad range of regulatory tools including a permit program to authorize and regulate discharges to surface waters with strong enforcement mechanisms. The Companies must comply with applicable aspects of the CWA programs at their operating facilities.

In October 2014, the final regulations under Section 316(b) of the CWA that govern existing facilities and new units at existing facilities that employ a cooling water intake structure and that have flow levels exceeding a minimum threshold became effective. The rule establishes a national standard for impingement based on seven compliance options, but forgoes the creation of a single technology standard for entrainment. Instead, the EPA has delegated entrainment technology decisions to state regulators. State regulators are to make case-by-case entrainment technology determinations after an examination of five mandatory facility-specific factors, including a social cost-benefit test, and six optional facility-specific factors. The rule governs all electric generating stations with water withdrawals above two MGD, with a heightened entrainment analysis for those facilities over 125 MGD. Dominion Energy and Virginia Power currently have 14 and eight facilities, respectively, that are subject to the final regulations. Dominion Energy is also working with the EPA and state regulatory agencies to assess the applicability of Section 316(b) to eight hydroelectric facilities, including three Virginia Power facilities. The Companies anticipate that they may have to install impingement control technologies at certain of these stations that have once-through cooling systems. The Companies are currently evaluating the need or potential for entrainment controls under the final rule as these decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis after a thorough review of detailed biological, technological and cost benefit studies. DESC is conducting studies and implementing plans as required by the rule to determine appropriate intake

structure modifications at certain facilities to ensure compliance with this rule. While the impacts of this rule could be material to the Companies’ results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows, the existing regulatory frameworks in South Carolina and Virginia provide rate recovery mechanisms that could substantially mitigate any such impacts for the regulated electric utilities.

In September 2015, the EPA released a final rule to revise the Effluent Limitations Guidelines for the Steam Electric Power Generating Category. The final rule established updated standards for wastewater discharges that apply primarily at coal and oil steam generating stations. Affected facilities are required to convert from wet to dry or closed cycle coal ash management, improve existing wastewater treatment systems and/or install new wastewater treatment technologies in order to meet the new discharge limits. In April 2017, the EPA granted two separate petitions for reconsideration of the Effluent Limitations Guidelines final rule and stayed future compliance dates in the rule. Also in April 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted the EPA’s request for a stay of the pending consolidated litigation challenging the rule while the EPA addresses the petitions for reconsideration. In September 2017, the EPA signed a rule to postpone the earliest compliance dates for certain waste streams regulations in the Effluent Limitations Guidelines final rule from November 2018 to November 2020; however, the latest date for compliance for these regulations was December 2023. In October 2020, the EPA released the final rule that extended the latest dates for compliance with individual facilities’ compliance dates that would vary based on circumstances and the determination by state regulators and may range from 2021 to 2028. In May 2024, the EPA released a final rule revising the 2015 and 2020 Effluent Limitations Guidelines, establishing more stringent standards for wastewater discharges for the Steam Electric Power Generating Category, which apply primarily to wastewater discharges at coal and oil steam generating stations. Individual facilities’ compliance dates will vary based on circumstances and the determination by state regulators and may range to 2029, except in certain circumstances when a facility will be retired by 2034. Dominion Energy expects to complete wastewater treatment technology retrofits and modifications at its Williams generating station, with a similar project at its Wateree generation station under evaluation, to meet the requirements with the existing regulatory framework in South Carolina providing rate recovery mechanisms for costs of the projects. As discussed in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Companies’ Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, the Companies recorded an increase to their AROs in 2024 in connection with the expected compliance costs associated with the EPA’s May 2024 final rule concerning CCR. The Companies expect that such AROs would satisfy any AROs that would have otherwise been necessary for compliance with the EPA’s May 2024 Effluent Limitations Guidelines. Dominion Energy is currently unable to estimate what costs, if any, may be required in addition to the project for the Williams generating station, a potential project at the Wateree generating station and the recorded AROs to meet the requirements to operate certain facilities past 2034. However, Dominion Energy expects that while such costs for facility improvements, if required, could be material to the Companies’ financial condition and/or cash flows, the existing regulatory frameworks in Virginia and South Carolina provide rate recovery mechanisms that could substantially mitigate any such impacts.

The operations of the Companies are subject to a variety of state and federal laws and regulations governing the management and disposal of solid and hazardous waste, and release of hazardous substances associated with current and/or historical operations. The CERCLA, as amended, and similar state laws, may impose joint, several and strict liability for cleanup on potentially responsible parties who owned, operated or arranged for disposal at facilities affected by a release of hazardous substances. In addition, many states have created programs to incentivize voluntary remediation of sites where historical releases of hazardous substances are identified and property owners or responsible parties decide to initiate cleanups.

From time to time, the Companies may be identified as a potentially responsible party in connection with the alleged release of hazardous substances or wastes at a site. Under applicable federal and state laws, the Companies could be responsible for costs associated with the investigation or remediation of impacted sites, or subject to contribution claims by other responsible parties for their costs incurred at such sites. The Companies also may identify, evaluate and remediate other potentially impacted sites under voluntary state programs. Remediation costs may be subject to reimbursement under the Companies’ insurance policies, rate recovery mechanisms, or both. Except as described below, the Companies do not believe these matters will have a material effect on results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows.

Dominion Energy has determined that it is associated with former manufactured gas plant sites, including certain sites associated with Virginia Power. At four sites associated with Dominion Energy, remediation work has been substantially completed under federal or state oversight. Where required, the sites are following state-approved groundwater monitoring programs. Dominion Energy has proposed remediation plans for one site at Virginia Power and expects to commence remediation activities in 2026 depending on receipt of final permits and approvals. At June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, Dominion Energy had $55 million and $56 million, respectively, of reserves recorded. At both June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, Virginia Power had $50 million of reserves recorded. Dominion Energy is associated with three additional sites, including two associated with Virginia Power, which are not under investigation by any state or federal environmental agency nor the subject of any current or proposed plans to perform remediation activities. Due to the uncertainty surrounding such sites, the Companies are unable

The Companies are defendants in a number of lawsuits and claims involving unrelated incidents of property damage and personal injury. Due to the uncertainty surrounding these matters, the Companies are unable to make an estimate of the potential financial statement impacts; however, they could have a material impact on results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows. In 2024, Dominion Energy resolved a claim associated with operations included in the East Ohio Transaction and at December 31, 2024, Dominion Energy’s Consolidated Balance Sheet includes a $30 million offsetting reserve and insurance receivable for this claim.

Dominion Energy enters into guarantee arrangements on behalf of its consolidated subsidiaries, primarily to facilitate their commercial transactions with third parties. If any of these subsidiaries fail to perform or pay under the contracts and the counterparties seek performance or payment, Dominion Energy would be obligated to satisfy such obligation. To the extent that a liability subject to a guarantee has been incurred by one of Dominion Energy’s consolidated subsidiaries, that liability is included in the Consolidated Financial Statements. Dominion Energy 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 Energy 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 June 30, 2025, Dominion Energy had issued the following subsidiary guarantees:


	Maximum Exposure
(millions)
Commodity transactions(1)	$	2,409
Nuclear obligations(2)		187
Solar(3)		85
Other(4)		793
Total(5)(6)	$	3,474

(1)

Guarantees related to commodity commitments of certain subsidiaries. These guarantees were provided to counterparties in order to facilitate physical and financial transaction related commodities and services.

(2)

Guarantees primarily related to certain DGI subsidiaries regarding all aspects of running a nuclear facility.

(3)

Includes guarantees to facilitate the development of solar projects.

(4)

Guarantees related to other miscellaneous contractual obligations such as leases, environmental obligations, construction projects and insurance programs. Due to the uncertainty of workers’ compensation claims, the parental guarantee has no stated limit.

(5)

Excludes Dominion Energy’s guarantee of an offshore wind installation vessel discussed in Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Companies’ Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024.

(6)

In July 2016, Dominion Energy signed an agreement with a lessor to construct and lease a new corporate office property in Richmond, Virginia and commenced an initial five-year lease term in August 2019, with certain options at the end of the term to extend the lease, purchase or sell the property. In July 2024, the agreement was amended to reflect Dominion Energy’s election to extend the lease term through July 2029. At the end of the lease term, Dominion Energy can (i) extend the term of the lease for at least one year, subject to the approval of the participants, at current market terms, (ii) purchase the property for an amount equal to the project costs or (iii) subject to certain terms and conditions, sell the property on behalf of the lessor to a third party using commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the highest cash purchase price for the property. If the project is sold and the proceeds from the sale are insufficient to repay the investors for the project costs, Dominion Energy may be required to make a payment to the lessor equal to the recorded lease balance.

In addition, Dominion Energy had issued an additional $20 million of guarantees at June 30, 2025, primarily to support third parties. No amounts related to these guarantees have been recorded.

Dominion Energy also had issued three guarantees as of June 30, 2025 related to Cove Point, previously an equity method investment, in support of terminal services and transportation. Two of the Cove Point guarantees have a cumulative maximum exposure of $1.9 billion while the other one guarantee has no maximum limit. No amounts related to these guarantees have been recorded.

Additionally, at June 30, 2025, Dominion Energy had purchased $389 million of surety bonds, including $316 million at Virginia Power, and authorized the issuance of letters of credit by financial institutions, as discussed in Note 16, to facilitate commercial transactions by its subsidiaries with third parties. Under the terms of surety bonds, the Companies are obligated to indemnify the respective surety bond company for any amounts paid.