Enter service the Mountain Valley Pipeline Southgate project
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-assessed · human review in progress Found and assessed by AI from the cited sources. Shown with its evidence; it is not counted in any Kept Score until confirmed.
- Announced
- 24 Apr 2018
- Due
- 31 Dec 2020
- Checked
- 29 Sep 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“the project has a targeted in-service date of the fourth quarter of 2020, subject to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and other regulatory approvals.”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
The Mountain Valley Pipeline Southgate project did not enter service by the fourth quarter of 2020, as evidenced by ongoing impairment charges and regulatory challenges reported in subsequent filings.
-
A Nextera Energy Inc. 10-K filed 2021-02-12
“The change for 2020 primarily reflects an impairment charge related to the investment in Mountain Valley Pipeline of approximately $1.5 billion.” ✓ confirmed on the page
-
A Nextera Energy Inc. 10-K filed 2022-02-18
“Due to continued legal and regulatory challenges related to Mountain Valley Pipeline, NextEra Energy Resources also recorded an impairment charge in the first quarter of 2022” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved -4.3% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (11 Feb 2021 to 17 Feb 2021). What this measures
Checked 29 Sep 2026.
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Facility other
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Enter
- Deliverable
- Mountain Valley Pipeline Southgate project
- In the company’s control
- Medium
- Specificity
- High
- Conditional
- Yes: subject to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and other regulatory approvals
- Depends on
- Regulatory
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: agreesA different AI model, Claude (Anthropic), re-read the evidence without being told the outcome and reached the same answer.
- Third check on a negative finding: disagreesBecause a negative finding could harm a company if wrong, a stronger model re-read the evidence fully blind and read it as “no_evidence”, so a person decides.
Not yet confirmed. Shown on the record, but it will not count in any score until it is confirmed. How verification works
Are you Nextera Energy Inc.? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2018-NEEPS-001074 · Corrections policy