A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 23 of Title 56 a section numbered 56-596.7, relating to electrical generating facilities; capacity factor; report.
HB766 would add a new section to the Virginia Code requiring owners of electrical generating facilities in the Commonwealth with a nameplate capacity of at least one megawatt to file an annual report with the State Corporation Commission. The report would have to list, for each month of the prior year, the amount of electricity produced and the facility’s capacity factor, using Commission-prescribed forms. The bill defines both “capacity factor” and “nameplate capacity” for reporting purposes.
The bill also directs the Commission to compile the submitted data and publish an annual statewide report by May 1 each year, and it authorizes the Commission to adopt regulations needed to carry out the new requirements. In practical terms, the measure creates a new data-reporting and public-disclosure framework for medium and larger power generation facilities, likely including utility-scale renewable, fossil-fuel, nuclear, and other generating assets meeting the 1 MW threshold.
HB766 would add a new reporting mandate to Title 56 governing electrical generating facilities, expanding the regulatory responsibilities of facility owners and the State Corporation Commission. Owners of qualifying facilities would need to track monthly generation and capacity factor data and submit it annually, while the Commission would be required to aggregate and publish the information and promulgate implementing regulations. The bill does not directly change how electricity is generated or priced, but it would increase compliance obligations and create a public dataset on generation performance for facilities of at least one megawatt.
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded floor debate, so there is no documented public sentiment from legislative discussion. Procedurally, the bill was left in the Labor and Commerce Committee, which indicates it did not advance out of committee during the available legislative history. Based on the text alone, the measure appears informational and administrative rather than controversial on its face, but the lack of recorded action prevents a stronger assessment of support or opposition.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of concern, based on the bill’s structure, could include the reporting burden on power plant owners, the scope of facilities covered by the 1 MW threshold, and whether publication of facility-level performance data could raise confidentiality or competitive concerns. However, no witnesses, legislators, or votes are available here to attribute those concerns to any particular person or group.