Behind the Bill: How Virginia Turned a Constituent Idea Into a Plug-In Solar Law

By PlugInSolarUS Editorial Team · Published 2026-08-26 · Updated August 26, 2026 · 22 min read

Del. Paul Krizek and Virginia climate advocate Jamie Bacon show how one constituent email about Utah’s balcony-solar law helped spark a coalition, companion bills, and a new pathway for renters and homeowners.

Editor’s Note: This article is based primarily on an August 21, 2026 interview with Virginia resident and climate advocate Jamie Bacon; written comments from Del. Paul Krizek; Bacon’s contemporaneous timeline and correspondence; and official Virginia legislative materials for H.B. 395, S.B. 250, and Chapter 1052. Direct interview quotations have been lightly edited for readability without changing their intended meaning. Assertions about stakeholder positions based on Bacon’s recollection are identified as her account unless independently documented in legislative records. The discussion reflects the law and implementation process as of August 2026.

It started with an article about Utah

Virginia’s plug-in solar story did not begin with a utility filing, an industry lobbying campaign, or even a bill draft.

It began with a constituent reading an article.

On August 17, 2025, Alexandria resident Jamie Bacon saw a Boston Globe story in the Climate Action Now app about Utah’s new plug-in solar law. Utah had created a legal pathway for small solar systems designed to connect through an electrical outlet, reducing some of the interconnection and installation barriers associated with traditional rooftop solar.

Bacon immediately saw the appeal.

A retired biologist who had spent 33 years working in Bermuda, including years studying the effects of pollution on wildlife, Bacon had become increasingly involved in climate advocacy after moving to Virginia. She serves as a volunteer climate lobby captain in her Northern Virginia district, teaches about climate change, and lives in a large condominium community where traditional rooftop solar is not an easy individual option.

She also had a personal reference point: her daughter lives in Germany, where balcony solar had already become commonplace.

The next day, Bacon emailed her delegate, Paul Krizek. She sent information about the Utah legislation and plug-in solar products and asked him to help Virginia pass something similar.

That email would ultimately become the first step in Virginia’s plug-in solar law.

From one email to a statewide conversation

The idea did not become legislation overnight.

About a month later, Bacon saw Krizek at a community ice cream social and asked him about balcony solar again. He asked her to resend the information. She did.

Then Bacon widened the circle.

After reading an article by Virginia clean-energy advocate Ivy Main about solar policy, Bacon contacted Main and shared the same material. Main circulated the idea among Sierra Club advocates. Bacon brought representatives from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, or CCAN, into the conversation. Other clean-energy advocates began discussing the concept.

By early October, the idea had reached Virginia’s Commission on Electric Utility Regulation and several legislators. Main told the group that Del. Rip Sullivan was interested. Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell was interested as well.

Bacon then emailed Krizek’s office to let him know that other lawmakers were considering legislation. The response surprised her: Krizek’s chief of staff told Bacon that his office had already submitted a bill-drafting request based on the idea she had sent them and would coordinate with the other legislators.

For Bacon, October 9 became the moment when a constituent suggestion suddenly looked like a real legislative campaign. CCAN agreed to help lead advocacy. Sierra Club representatives offered to work alongside them. The idea had moved from Bacon’s inbox into Virginia’s clean-energy coalition.

One fellow advocate texted Bacon afterward asking, in effect, whether she had just helped move the entire state forward on balcony solar.

“I think I did.” — Jamie Bacon

The more complete answer is that Virginia’s law emerged from a network: Bacon brought the idea forward; Krizek’s office acted on it; Surovell and other lawmakers became legislative champions; Sierra Club and CCAN advocates helped build support; and stakeholders worked through the technical and political details.

But Bacon had unquestionably gotten the ball rolling.

A rare first-year legislative win

That grassroots origin is especially notable because the proposal moved unusually quickly.

Virginia ultimately advanced two companion measures: H.B. 395, with Del. Paul Krizek as chief patron, and S.B. 250, with Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell as chief patron. Both addressed what Virginia law calls a “small portable solar generation device.”

The legislation moved through committees, underwent revisions and stakeholder negotiations, passed the General Assembly, received recommendations from the Governor, and was ultimately approved on April 22, 2026.

For Bacon, the speed was surprising. She later learned that many new proposals spend their first legislative session simply being “socialized”—introduced so lawmakers and stakeholders can understand the concept before another attempt in a later year.

Virginia’s plug-in solar proposal did not need that second attempt.

“The fact that it did pass in its first year was pretty amazing.” — Jamie Bacon

Part of the reason may be the intuitive nature of the idea. Plug-in solar is easier to visualize than many energy policies. Instead of asking a resident to understand utility rate structures, transmission planning, interconnection queues, or wholesale electricity markets, the proposition is straightforward: put a small solar panel somewhere sunny, connect a properly certified system to your home, and use some of the electricity yourself.

That simplicity helped turn a relatively unfamiliar technology into a policy lawmakers and residents could quickly understand.

Krizek: solar that belongs to the person, not the property

Krizek did not sit for a full interview for this article, but he provided a written explanation of why he believes Virginia’s law matters.

His framing gets to the heart of the policy.

“The plug-in solar isn’t tied to the house but to the people.” — Del. Paul Krizek

Traditional rooftop solar is fundamentally tied to real estate. A homeowner invests in a system attached to a particular roof. If the homeowner moves, the solar typically stays behind.

Plug-in solar changes that relationship.

“You move to a new unit and you bring your energy maker with you.” — Del. Paul Krizek

For him, that portability is particularly important for renters. People who do not own their homes typically cannot decide to put a conventional solar array on the roof. They may support clean energy and want lower electricity bills, but the property decision belongs to someone else.

A portable solar device starts to separate access to distributed energy from ownership of real estate. Krizek described that as part of a broader evolution in consumer technology—from desktop computers to smartphones, and now, potentially, from fixed power generation toward personal energy equipment.

“Isn’t the best kilowatt of energy the one you actually make?” — Del. Paul Krizek

That philosophy gives Virginia’s law a distinctive consumer-access framing. Plug-in solar is not supposed to replace utility-scale renewable energy or rooftop solar. It creates another option for people who previously had few options at all.

What Virginia’s law actually does

Virginia’s enacted framework defines a small portable solar generation device as a movable photovoltaic system with a maximum output of 1,200 watts per customer, or per residential building unit in multifamily housing.

The device must:

• Connect to a building’s electrical system through an electrical outlet.
• Be located on the customer’s side of the electric meter.
• Primarily offset the customer’s own electricity consumption.
• Meet applicable National Electrical Code requirements.
• Be certified by a nationally recognized testing laboratory.
• Include a feature preventing the device from exporting power to the grid or affecting the building’s electrical system during a power outage.

Virginia also created an important distinction at 391 watts. A qualifying device with no more than 391 watts of maximum output to the receptacle is exempt from product-listing provisions that would otherwise require alterations to the building’s premises, wiring, or electrical panels.

In practical terms, Virginia has a broader pathway reaching up to 1,200 watts, while creating a simpler path for smaller systems that can operate without triggering certain building electrical alterations. The statutory framework becomes effective January 1, 2027.

Notification—but not utility permission

One of the most important parts of Virginia’s law is what utilities cannot require.

A qualifying customer does not have to go through traditional interconnection requirements or participate in net metering simply to operate a small portable solar device. Utilities may not require prior utility approval, an interconnection fee or other device-related charge, or additional controls or equipment beyond what is integrated into the qualifying device, subject to limited statutory circumstances.

Virginia did, however, preserve a notification process. Before installation, a customer must submit a simple form developed by the State Corporation Commission. The utility then has 15 days to review that form for accuracy and completeness. If the utility does not respond within that period, the customer is deemed to have satisfied the notification requirement and may proceed.

That distinction matters.

Notification is not permission.

A traditional rooftop solar project can involve an interconnection application, engineering review, utility approval, inspections, permitting, and significant soft costs. Virginia is trying to keep a small consumer device from automatically becoming that kind of project, while still giving utilities basic information needed for system awareness and safety.

Chapter 1052 directed the SCC to develop and publish a standardized online and printable notification form on or before September 1, 2026. Consumers should confirm the current form and utility process before installation.

Renters were not an afterthought

Virginia went further than simply changing utility rules. The legislation also amended landlord-tenant law.

For landlords above a specified ownership threshold, the law generally prevents them from simply prohibiting a tenant from installing a qualifying plug-in solar device on the exterior of the tenant’s premises. A landlord may still impose reasonable restrictions regarding the size, location, and manner of placement.

Tenants must also provide at least seven days’ notice and documentation showing that the proposed device meets the statutory requirements.

That renter language goes directly to the problem Bacon saw from the beginning. Renters may pay electricity bills every month, but they generally cannot order their building owner to install rooftop solar. Plug-in solar provides a potential piece of energy agency that moves with the resident.

“I think this is one way that renters…have some agency.” — Jamie Bacon

That word—agency—comes up repeatedly in Virginia’s story. It is not simply a question of how many kilowatt-hours one panel produces. It is about whether a consumer can make an individual energy decision at all.

The irony of the multifamily gap

Yet the law’s strongest access feature also contains one of its most important unresolved limitations.

Virginia excludes rental dwelling units operating under a ratio utility billing system, commonly known as RUBS. In those arrangements, the landlord or property may receive a master electricity bill and then allocate costs among tenants rather than each tenant having a direct utility account. Those tenants may not install a qualifying plug-in solar device under the new framework.

For Bacon, this issue is personal. She lives at River Towers, a large condominium community in Alexandria with pooled electricity. She is a condo owner rather than a renter, which creates a different legal question, but the building’s metering structure has left her seeking clarification about exactly how the law will apply to residents like her.

There is a certain irony in that. The person who helped introduce Virginia lawmakers to balcony solar may live in one of the housing configurations where implementation is most complicated.

Bacon said several residents in her community would like to install balcony solar even if the savings do not accrue directly to their individual bills.

“We don’t care that we’re not going to get the benefit. We want the whole building to benefit.” — Jamie Bacon

She is now pushing for greater clarity—and potentially future changes—to make sure multifamily residents are not unnecessarily excluded.

“Make sure you address multifamily units.” — Jamie Bacon

That may be one of Virginia’s most valuable lessons nationally. It is easy to say plug-in solar expands access for renters and apartment residents. It is harder to write legislation that accounts for every combination of renter, condo owner, landlord, HOA, common element, master meter, submeter, and ratio billing system.

Virginia made significant progress on renter access. Its implementation will now help reveal where the next round of policy refinement is needed.

Safety became part of the compromise

The bill was popular, but it was not frictionless.

Bacon said she learned from Krizek that utilities raised concerns during the legislative process and that fire-safety questions also entered the discussion. She was not directly involved in those negotiations and does not claim to know every detail of how they were resolved.

What the final law shows, however, is a substantial safety framework. Devices must comply with the applicable National Electrical Code and receive certification from a nationally recognized testing laboratory. They must include anti-islanding functionality so they do not energize the building or grid during an outage.

Virginia also created a formal stakeholder workgroup to examine the remaining safety questions. The Secretary of Commerce and Trade was directed to convene representatives from state agencies, utilities, electric cooperatives, clean-energy businesses, environmental advocates, the Department of Fire Programs, real-estate interests, and other stakeholders.

Among the issues the group must evaluate are national electrical standards, nationally recognized testing-laboratory certifications, the National Electrical Safety Code, and whether additional disconnect equipment provides safety benefits beyond existing standards.

The group’s recommendations are due November 15, 2026. That timing helps explain the implementation runway before the statutory framework takes effect January 1, 2027.

For deeper technical context, read our guides to anti-islanding and the UL 3700 testing framework.

The 391-watt pathway could matter most at first

Virginia’s 1,200-watt ceiling gets attention because it establishes the outer boundary of the new category. But the 391-watt provision may be equally important for early consumer adoption.

The distinction recognizes that a smaller device capable of operating without changes to the building’s premises, wiring, or electrical panel is fundamentally different from a larger system that may require additional electrical work.

Bacon sees that lower threshold as a potential way to get relatively simple systems into consumers’ hands. But she also emphasized that product availability remains a major unknown.

Consumers will need systems that clearly meet Virginia’s requirements. Retailers will need to know which products qualify. Manufacturers will need clarity on certification. Electricians, utilities, building managers, landlords, and consumers all need understandable guidance.

“The ones that are meeting the requirements for Virginia need to be available.” — Jamie Bacon

For plug-in solar to become an appliance-like category, consumers eventually need to be able to recognize a compliant product without becoming experts in electrical code. That market does not fully exist yet.

A small amount of electricity—and a larger sense of agency

Bacon is realistic about what balcony solar can accomplish. A few hundred watts on one apartment balcony will not solve Virginia’s electricity-supply challenges. It will not replace utility-scale solar, grid storage, transmission, energy efficiency, or conventional rooftop solar. And it will not, by itself, offset the growth in power demand associated with Virginia’s rapidly expanding data-center sector.

But Bacon argues that this misses part of the point.

“At least it may give people a sense of agency over their electrical bill.” — Jamie Bacon

That can matter politically as well as economically. Distributed solar is visible. A resident can see the panel, understand when the sun is producing power, and know that at least a portion of the electricity being consumed is being generated locally.

Bacon believes that visibility can be contagious. One rooftop solar installation can lead neighbors to consider solar. Balcony solar could have a similar effect in apartments and condominiums, particularly if future systems increasingly combine solar with small batteries.

“Is it going to solve everything? No. Can it help? Yes.” — Jamie Bacon

That may be the most realistic way to understand Virginia’s law. The kilowatt-hours matter. But so does participation.

A changing electricity landscape gives the idea urgency

Virginia’s plug-in solar law is arriving while the state faces a much larger debate about electricity demand. Data-center growth, new generation, transmission construction, utility costs, renewable-energy siting, and energy affordability have all become major political issues.

Bacon is deeply concerned about that trajectory. She does not present balcony solar as the solution to those structural problems. Instead, she sees it as one piece of a broader strategy that should include large-scale solar, storage, energy efficiency, agrivoltaics, and other clean-energy resources.

Plug-in solar does something those larger policies cannot do as directly: it lets an ordinary resident participate.

For a renter who cannot control a roof, that distinction is significant. For a condo resident who wants to contribute to clean-energy generation, it can be psychologically important even when the financial impact is modest. And for policymakers trying to build public support for a changing electricity system, millions of small consumer decisions may matter alongside gigawatts of utility-scale infrastructure.

What still needs to happen before January 1

Passing the law was one phase. Implementation is the next.

Several pieces still need to come together.

1. Clear safety guidance. The stakeholder workgroup is evaluating relevant standards and must report by November 15, 2026.
2. A simple notification process. The SCC was directed to publish a standardized form, and utilities need processes that preserve the law’s basic principle: notification, not discretionary approval.
3. Compliant products. Consumers need an easy way to determine whether a system satisfies Virginia’s certification, anti-islanding, output, and code requirements.
4. Consumer education. Residents need to understand placement, outlets and circuits, property rules, realistic savings, and when electrical work is required.
5. Multifamily clarity. The RUBS exclusion is explicit for tenants, while condo and common-meter situations may require additional interpretation depending on who the utility customer is and what private condominium documents allow.

For Bacon, these are not arguments against the law. They are what comes after success.

Lessons for other states

1. A constituent can start the process

Bacon was not a solar manufacturer or professional lobbyist. She encountered an idea, thought it made sense for her state, contacted a legislator, followed up, contacted advocates, and kept connecting people.

Virginia’s law is a reminder that policy diffusion does not always happen institution to institution. Sometimes it happens person to person.

2. Use another state as a starting point, not necessarily an endpoint

Utah gave Virginia a model. But Virginia added substantial provisions around renters, notification, multifamily housing, utilities, safety, and implementation. The states are building on one another.

3. Solve the utility question without recreating rooftop-solar interconnection

Virginia preserved utility notification while explicitly removing utility approval, interconnection fees, and conventional interconnection requirements for qualifying systems. That is an important distinction if the product category is supposed to remain consumer-accessible.

4. Address renters explicitly

Virginia recognized that simply legalizing a device does not guarantee renters can use it. Its landlord provisions create meaningful protections. At the same time, the pooled-billing exclusion shows why multifamily policy requires even more careful attention.

5. Make safety rules understandable at the point of purchase

If ordinary consumers need to interpret competing electrical standards themselves, plug-in solar will struggle to become mainstream. The long-term goal should be straightforward: compliant products should be clearly identifiable, properly certified, and installed according to clear rules.

6. Do not measure the category only by megawatts

A small system will not transform a state grid by itself. But it can broaden clean-energy ownership, create consumer familiarity with distributed resources, and bring renters and multifamily residents into a market that has historically centered homeowners.

That participation has value of its own.

A message to Virginia residents

When asked what she would tell a Virginia resident who becomes interested in plug-in solar once the law takes effect, Bacon did not hesitate.

“Get it!” — Jamie Bacon

Her enthusiasm comes with an important qualifier: wait for Virginia’s implementation process to be completed and use products that actually meet the state’s safety and certification requirements.

But the underlying message is clear. Bacon believes residents should be able to produce some of their own clean electricity—even if they do not own a detached house, even if they cannot afford a rooftop installation, and even if the amount of electricity produced is relatively small.

Krizek reaches the same conclusion from a policymaker’s perspective. For him, the significance is that the energy resource can belong to the resident rather than the building.

A renter can move. The solar can move too.

That is a subtle but important shift in how Americans have traditionally thought about distributed energy.

Why Virginia matters nationally

Virginia became one of the first states in the country to enact an explicit plug-in solar framework. But its larger contribution may be the way it combined several ideas in one law:

• A 1,200-watt portable-solar category.
• A simpler pathway at 391 watts.
• Exemption from traditional interconnection and net-metering requirements.
• Notification instead of utility permission.
• Explicit renter protections.
• Limits on local prohibitions.
• Nationally recognized product certification and anti-islanding protections.
• A formal state process to continue resolving safety and implementation questions.

Just as importantly, Virginia shows how quickly plug-in solar has moved from a European curiosity into American statehouses.

In August 2025, Jamie Bacon read about what Utah had done. The next day, she emailed her delegate. Eight months later, Virginia had a law.

That timeline captures what is happening with plug-in solar nationally. States are watching one another. Constituents are asking questions. Advocates are sharing language. Legislators are adapting earlier bills. Manufacturers and standards organizations are responding.

And a category that barely existed in U.S. energy policy a few years ago is beginning to develop its own legal architecture.

Virginia’s story suggests that the most consequential part of that architecture may not be the wattage limit. It may be the idea behind it:

You should not necessarily have to own a roof to make some of your own electricity.

Virginia plug-in solar quick facts

Source Notes: Primary sources include an August 21, 2026 interview with Jamie Bacon; Bacon’s written “Balcony Solar Story” timeline and contemporaneous correspondence documenting her outreach beginning in August 2025; written comments from Del. Paul Krizek; and official Virginia General Assembly materials for H.B. 395, S.B. 250, and Chapter 1052. Direct interview quotations have been lightly edited for readability without changing their intended meaning. Assertions about stakeholder positions based on Bacon’s recollection should be understood as her account unless independently documented in legislative records.

Safety, Legal, and Product Disclaimer: PluginSolarUS.com provides general educational information only. This article is not legal, electrical, engineering, product-safety, installation, or financial advice. Virginia’s first-enactment provisions become effective January 1, 2027, and implementation guidance, eligible products, utility processes, and interpretations involving renters, condominiums, HOAs, pooled billing, electrical work, and other property arrangements may continue to evolve. Before purchasing or installing equipment, confirm current requirements with Virginia law, the State Corporation Commission, local authorities, the electric service provider, the landlord or property association where applicable, and a qualified electrician if needed. A product marketed as “balcony solar,” “plug-in solar,” or “portable solar” does not automatically qualify under Virginia law.

Sources

• Virginia LIS: HB 395 — 2026 Regular Session
• Virginia LIS: Chapter 1052 — Enacted Text
• Virginia LIS: SB 250 — 2026 Regular Session
• Virginia House of Delegates: Del. Paul E. Krizek