City of Kerman

A city address is usually permitted by the city, not the county — but not always, and some authorities keep building and hand electrical to someone else. Getting this wrong costs the whole submittal, because every requirement below belongs to whoever actually holds jurisdiction. Check the overlays in the same pass: an HOA, a historic district, a windstorm certification or a system-size cap can reshape the design, and all of them are cheaper to find now than after the array is laid out.

• Is this authority the AHJ for residential solar at this address? Yes 95% · department page + codified ordinance + permit records
• What does this authority permit itself, and what does it delegate? Both 90% · department page + special district ordinance
• Is a permit required for a residential rooftop PV system? Yes 98% · codified ordinance (KMC ch. 15.24) + permit application form
• Is there a separate electrical permit, or is it combined? Combined 85% · permit application form + fee schedule + permit records
• Is a HOA or architectural approval required first? No 75% · codified ordinance (KMC §15.24) + zoning code (control-checked absence)
• Is there a historic-district review? No 90% · codified zoning ordinance (Chapter 17.32, control-checked as empty)
• Is a wind or windstorm certification required? No wind/windstorm-certification requirement found 60% · codified ordinance (absence)
• Is a Specific Use Permit or Council approval ever required? Only conditionally for ordinary residential rooftop PV: KMC §15.24.060(A) lets the Building Official require a site plan review permit under Title 17 procedures only where there is 'substantial evidence' the system 'could have a specific, adverse impact on the public health and safety' — the default path is nondiscretionary/administrative. Separately, utility-scale ground-mounted PV is routed through the zoning code's use tables as a 'Solar Energy Generation Facility' — classified 'Major' (>2,000 sq ft, Conditional Use Permit required) or 'Minor' (≤2,000 sq ft, Administrative Use Permit) — but that classification is for commercial/utility-scale generation facilities, not an ordinary residential rooftop or accessory system. 85% · codified ordinance + zoning use tables
• Is there a system-size cap on residential generation? 10 kW AC nameplate rating or 30 kW thermal is the codified eligibility threshold for the expedited/ministerial small-residential-rooftop-solar pathway (KMC §15.24.020(B)), scoped to single- or two-family dwellings and capped at the district's max legal building height. This functions as an ELIGIBILITY GATE for the streamlined process rather than a hard generation cap: the city's own real issued permits include systems well above that figure processed as ordinary 'Solar Panel Permit Residential' jobs via SolarAPP+ (e.g. a 22.62 kW roof-mounted system, permit 25-RES-0174), so larger systems are still permitted, just outside the guaranteed same-day/1-3-day review track. 85% · codified ordinance + permit records (real system exceeding the threshold)

Several authorities require the electrical permit to be pulled by a licensed electrician, or require the contractor to be registered with them BEFORE applying. Registration is not same-day. This is second on the list rather than fourth because it is the step most likely to stop the job before the drawings matter.

• Who is allowed to pull the electrical permit? Either 82% · permit application form (general rule) + Reroof Policy (reroof-specific exception)
• Must the contractor be registered with this authority before applying? Yes 85% · department page + permit application form
• Is a homeowner permitted to self-install and self-permit? Yes 80% · permit application form

Almost everywhere wants a site plan, a one-line or three-line electrical diagram, equipment cut sheets with listings, and a structural attachment detail. Build it against the published checklist rather than the last jurisdiction you worked in — the checklist is what the reviewer marks against.

• What documents make up a complete submittal? Application for Building Permit (project/site/owner/contractor/PV modules-kW info) plus a Standard Plot Plan (required for any residential addition/alteration involving a site change, including PV); supportive documents such as equipment cut sheets are referenced informally via real permit descriptions (module count, kW, ESS, MPU). NOTE: KMC §15.24.050(C) requires the Building Division to 'adopt a standard plan and checklist of all requirements' for expedited solar review, and no such standalone published solar checklist was found linked anywhere on the Building Division page — a codified mandate with no discoverable published document, distinct from the general forms above. 60% · department page (forms list; codified mandate cross-checked)
• How many copies, and in what format? Digital only for the general path — the Building Permit Application and supporting documents are submitted as a PDF to buildingonline@cityofkerman.gov; no stated copy count. For SolarAPP+-eligible residential PV, the entire submittal (including PV Modules/kW data) goes through the SolarAPP+ national online portal instead of email, confirmed from real issued permits carrying a 'SolarAPP+ ID' (e.g. SA20260501-13280-14-7-A). 75% · department page + permit records
• Is a site plan required, and what must it show? Yes — a Standard Plot Plan is required 'for any residential addition or alteration involving a change to the site,' which includes rooftop and ground-mount PV. Required content (18 items on the city's own Plot Plan Example): owner name, property address, date, project description, type of construction, existing/proposed sq ft, total sq ft, lot size, lot coverage, lot dimensions, location of all buildings/structures, yards/space between buildings, walls/fences/landscaping, setbacks (front/rear/sides), legal description (APN/lot/tract), plus whatever else Planning requires. 85% · published form/checklist
• Is a one-line / three-line diagram required? Not specified by the city in any Kerman document (Building Permit Application, Plot Plan, Reroof Policy, and the full codified KMC ch. 15.24 were all checked — none use the words 'one-line', 'single-line' or 'three-line'). The requirement exists at utility level instead: PG&E's own Greenbook (Doc 060559) requires the AC/interconnection disconnect to be 'clearly marked on the submitted single-line diagram indicating the manufacturer, model type, voltage rating, current rating, and location,' and SolarAPP+'s own national compliance engine independently requires one for any system routed through it. 65% · utility DG manual (PG&E Greenbook 060559)

Most authorities now take the whole application through a portal, and several states cap or constrain what a residential solar permit may cost. Check whether plan check is billed separately before you quote the job.

• Which permit portal does this authority use? SolarAPP+ (https://solarapp.nrel.gov/) for residential solar specifically — confirmed from real issued permits carrying a 'SolarAPP+ ID' under jurisdiction code 13280 (e.g. SA20260417-13280-12-4592-A, SA20251209-13280-16-10160-A). General (non-solar, or non-SolarAPP+-eligible) building permits are submitted by PDF email to buildingonline@cityofkerman.gov; a site-wide search found no evidence of a general online citizen portal (eTRAKiT, Accela, CityView, OpenGov, Citizenserve all returned zero results). 90% · permit records + site-wide search (absence of a general portal)
• Can the whole application be completed online? Yes for SolarAPP+-eligible residential solar (the entire submittal, review and approval happens on the SolarAPP+ platform). No/partial for the general (non-SolarAPP+) path — application and supporting documents are emailed as a PDF packet rather than submitted through an online portal. 82% · department page + permit records
• What does a residential solar permit cost? $305 flat for systems ≤15kW AC (initial deposit/minimum fee, effective 1 Jul 2025); for systems above 15kW: $450 base fee plus $15 per kW above 15kW. A separate 'Ground-Mount Solar - Residential' line exists at $450 (≤15kW) / $450 + $15/kW above 15kW. Footnote [a] on both lines: 'Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 66015(a)(1).' A 'Battery Backup Storage - Residential' fee of $174 applies to standalone battery installs. Additional permit-processing and other-department fees may apply on top per the section note. 92% · published fee schedule (current, effective 1 Jul 2025)
• How is the fee calculated? Tiered/per-kW-above-threshold — flat fee up to 15kW AC, then a base fee plus a fixed $/kW rate for capacity above 15kW. 90% · published fee schedule
• Is there a separate plan-check fee? No — for the named Solar Permit fee line specifically, the fee schedule states that fees in that section (Section A, which includes the Solar Permit lines) 'include all applicable inspection, and plan review fees,' so plan review is bundled into the flat/tiered solar permit fee rather than charged as a separate line. (A general 'Building Plan Check Fees' section D exists in the same schedule — 75% of the building permit fee — but that applies to projects priced under Sections B-C, not to the Section A Solar Permit line.) 82% · published fee schedule

Interconnection is a separate process from the permit and usually the longer pole. Where the utility does not depend on the permit being issued, running both at once is the single biggest saving available on a residential job.

• What is the stated plan-review turnaround? Same day for over-the-counter applications; one to three business days for electronic applications. 95% · codified ordinance (KMC §15.24.060)
• How long is an issued permit valid before it expires? Not locally amended — no provision in Title 15 (chs. 15.04, 15.06, 15.08, 15.12, 15.24, all read in full) modifies the standard (unamended) 2025 CBC/CRC §105.5 permit-expiration rule (work must commence within 180 days, and 180 days between required inspections, extendable). The fee schedule's own 'Permit Reactivation Fee' section (up to one year expired vs. more than one year expired) presupposes but does not itself restate that default validity period. 60% · fee schedule (inference) + codified ordinance (absence)
• Which utility handles interconnection here? Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 92% · city permit records (own document, names utility explicitly)
• Where does the utility sit in the sequence? After permit / Parallel — PG&E's Rule 21 (§D.13.b, statewide tariff, not independently re-downloaded this run) gates Permission To Operate on 'evidence of Applicant's final electric inspection clearance from the Governmental Authority having jurisdiction,' i.e. downstream of the city's final ('green tag') inspection. Kerman's own permit records use exactly that sequencing language: an electrical-service-panel job needing a 'green tag release for PGE reconnect,' and another needing 'Meter release needed for green tag for PG&E' — both confirming the city's final sign-off precedes PG&E's own meter action. 75% · permit records (city-side sequencing) + utility tariff (general rule, not re-verified)

The NEC edition a jurisdiction enforces is often a cycle behind the newest one published, and local amendments sit on top of it. Rapid shutdown, conductor sizing and labelling all change between editions, so the edition in force is the first thing to establish, not the last.

• Which NEC edition is in force? 2023 NEC, as incorporated into the 2025 California Electrical Code (CCR Title 24, Part 3), adopted by the city effective with the 2025 code-cycle omnibus adoption (Ord. 25-03, 2025). 95% · adopting ordinance (KMC §15.04.010)
• Which building code edition is in force? 2025 California Building Code and 2025 California Residential Code (CCR Title 24, Parts 2 and 2.5), adopted via the same omnibus ordinance. 95% · adopting ordinance (KMC §15.04.010)
• Which fire code edition is in force? Split between the city's nominal adoption and the actual enforcing agency's operative ordinance. The City's own Title 15.04.010(J) formally adopts the '2025 California Fire Code — CCR Title 24, Part 9' as part of its Title-24 omnibus (Ord. 25-03, 2025) — but the City has no fire department of its own; the agency that actually enforces the fire code, North Central Fire Protection District (NCFPD), has its OWN separately-enacted fire code ordinance (Ord. 2022-01, adopted January 2023) still on the 2022 California Fire Code / 2021 International Fire Code. That is a genuine two-cycle gap between the city's own code text and the operative fire-code ordinance of the agency that actually enforces fire provisions in the city. 80% · codified ordinance (city) + special district ordinance (fire, OCR'd)
• Are there local amendments to any of the above? Yes. On the city side: minor legacy amendments survive in Title 15 — e.g. §15.04.075 (Fire Suppression Sprinklers, adopted 1989, still citing the outdated 'Uniform Fire Code' and 'Uniform Building Code Section 3804' terminology, never updated since) and the general fee/appeals/investigation sections. On the fire side, NCFPD's Ord. 2022-01 amends dozens of California Fire Code sections (administration, appointment of the fire code official, right-of-entry, sprinkler/alarm/tank/standpipe requirements, flammable-liquids storage, compressed gases, etc.) — but a full OCR read of all 37 pages found NONE of those amendments touch PV/ESS-relevant sections (605, 1204-1207) at all. 85% · codified ordinance + special district ordinance
• What is the installation judged against? The 2025 California Building/Residential/Electrical/Mechanical/Plumbing/Energy/Green Building Codes as adopted by the city (KMC §15.04.010, Ord. 25-03), plus KMC §15.24.040's own solar-specific cross-references (CEC, IEEE, UL/accredited testing laboratories, and CPUC safety/reliability rules), and — for the fire-code component specifically — NCFPD's own locally-amended 2022 California Fire Code (Ord. 2022-01), which is one cycle behind the city's nominal 2025 CFC adoption. 85% · codified ordinance (composite)

Ridge setbacks and roof access pathways are fire-service requirements and they constrain the array layout. They are the most common cause of a redesign after the fire department comments on a plan set.

Nothing recorded for City of Kerman on this step yet — 1 question checked and found unpublished. The guidance above is general.

Which rapid-shutdown rule applies follows directly from the NEC edition in force, and the initiation device has to be at a location the fire service can reach and identify. This is inspected, and it is labelled.

• Is rapid shutdown required, and to which NEC edition? Yes, per NEC 690.12 as incorporated into the 2025 California Electrical Code (2023 NEC base) — no local amendment to CEC Article 690 was found anywhere in Title 15. Confirmed in practice: the city's own monthly permit reports describe real installed jobs with explicit rapid-shutdown device counts, e.g. '(17) Solar Panels... (2) ESS... 225/175A main panel upgrade' jobs and others listing '11-RSD' devices. 85% · adopting ordinance + permit records

The NEC sets a baseline for permanent markings at the service equipment and the disconnecting means. On top of that, an authority may specify its own wording, and the utility may specify more again. Where any of them writes its own text, a generic off-the-shelf label set will not pass — this is the detail most often fixed on a return visit.

• Which placards does this authority require at the service equipment? No PV-specific placard is required by either the city or North Central Fire Protection District. A full-text, control-checked search of Title 15 (positive control 'electrical'=44, fabricated 'zzqqx'=0) and of NCFPD's own 37-page fire-code ordinance (OCR'd in full) found no 'placard,' 'label' or 'marking' requirement tied to solar/PV/ESS anywhere in either document. The only markings/labels found in Title 15 relate to EV-charging-station receptacles, not PV. 75% · codified ordinance + special district ordinance (control-checked absence)
• Does the authority specify placard wording of its own? No 75% · codified ordinance (control-checked absence)
• Does it specify letter height, colour or material? Not specified by the city or the fire district. The applicable specification instead comes from PG&E's own Greenbook (utility level, statewide): 'Labels shall be permanent and suitable for the environment and shall be engraved phenolic or comply with ANSI Z535.4. Lettering shall be a minimum 3/8" high and in all capitals.' 85% · utility DG manual (PG&E Greenbook 060559)
• Does the UTILITY specify placards beyond the AHJ's? Yes — PG&E is the binding placard authority since neither the city nor NCFPD specifies one of its own. Greenbook 060559 requires: permanently attached signage on the front of the AC disconnect (example wording 'UTILITY AC DISCONNECT SWITCH'); open/closed position marking on the switch; a device label with ratings/UL certification; engraved-phenolic-or-ANSI-Z535.4-compliant, minimum 3/8" all-capital lettering; a location map where the disconnect is not grouped with the meter panel; and the same treatment for a Net Generation Output Meter if installed. 90% · utility DG manual
• Where must the labels be placed? On the front of the AC disconnect switch enclosure (PG&E: 'Permanently attached signage on the front'), with open/closed marking on the switch itself; where the disconnect is not grouped with or adjacent to the meter, add a location map and signage at the meter. Neither the city nor NCFPD adds a placement rule of its own. 85% · utility DG manual

Where the AC disconnect must sit relative to the meter is usually the utility's rule, not the building department's. Battery storage frequently carries its own permit, its own inspection and its own fire conditions.

• Where must the AC disconnect be, relative to the meter? PG&E: the AC/interconnection disconnect must be located 10 feet or less, in line of sight, from PG&E's electric meter at the point of common coupling, easily seen from the meter panel; if wall-mounted or pad-mounted, installed between 48 inches (min) and 75 inches (max) above grade; NOT allowed on any floor/level above grade, on a roof, or in a room that is not an approved electric meter room. An exemption exists for certain inverter-based systems on self-contained, form-'S', ≤320A, single-phase 120/240V meter panels, as determined by PG&E. Neither the city nor NCFPD specifies an AC-disconnect location rule of its own. 90% · utility DG manual
• Must equipment be on a specific approved list? No separate city-maintained approved-equipment list; equipment must instead meet CEC-listing/UL/accredited-testing-laboratory and CPUC safety/reliability standards under KMC §15.24.040(C). 80% · codified ordinance
• Are batteries permitted, and under what conditions? Yes, and extensively used in practice — most residential PV permits sampled in the city's own monthly reports bundle one or more battery/ESS units (Tesla Powerwalls, Enphase batteries) into the same job. No dedicated local ESS ordinance was found (a full OCR read of NCFPD's fire-code ordinance found no CFC §1206/1207 amendment); batteries are governed by the unamended 2025 California Residential/Fire Code ESS provisions. The city's fee schedule separately prices a standalone 'Battery Backup Storage - Residential' line at $174, distinct from the Solar Permit fee line. 85% · permit records + fee schedule + special district ordinance (absence)
• Is there a separate ESS permit or inspection? Split by scenario. A standalone battery installation (no accompanying PV) draws its own 'Battery Backup Storage - Residential' fee line ($174) on the current fee schedule, distinct from the PV permit fee. A battery installed alongside PV, however, is typically added as an 'ESS addendum' to the existing solar permit (using the city's general 'Application for an Addendum to Current Building Permit or Plan Review' form) rather than as a wholly separate permit, per multiple real examples in the monthly permit reports (e.g. '25-RES-0174... Addendum 1 Correction...', jobs listing '(1) ESS addendum'). 82% · fee schedule + permit records + department form
• Is a ground mount treated as a structure? Yes (by inference) — the fee schedule prices 'Ground-Mount Solar - Residential' as its own distinct line ($450 ≤15kW / $450+$15/kW above), separate from the rooftop 'Residential Solar Photovoltaic System' line, implying the city treats a ground-mounted array differently in practice. No PV-specific ground-mount provision exists in the Zoning Code (Title 17 was searched in full for 'solar' — every hit concerns the utility-scale 'Solar Energy Generation Facility' use-table classification, not a residential accessory standard), so a residential ground-mount PV array most likely falls to the zoning code's general 'Residential accessory structure standards' (Chapter 17.22): maximum height 12 feet unless otherwise regulated, with setback rules that vary by structure size (≤120 sq ft: 5 ft rear/side setback; larger: full zone setback) and a minimum 10 ft space between structures. 75% · fee schedule + zoning code (inference)
• Is there a local rule on service upgrades or busbar sizing? No local busbar-sizing or service-upgrade-specific rule found 78% · codified ordinance (control-checked absence)

Booking is a portal, a phone call or an email depending on the authority, and the notice required is rarely zero. Book before the work is finished rather than after — the lead time, not the work, is usually what sets the date.

• How is an inspection booked? Phone — the Building Inspections page states inspections are 'scheduled by contacting the Building Division,' with no online booking option described for general building inspections (contrast with a few comparable Fresno County cities that have since moved to a mandatory online portal). 90% · department page
• How much notice is required? Effectively one business day — inspection must be called in by 4pm one day prior to the requested inspection date; Monday inspections must be called in by 4pm the preceding Friday. 92% · department page
• Are same-day or AM/PM windows offered? No AM/PM windows are stated for general inspections. Inspections are available only Monday, Wednesday and Friday (per Building Inspections page); the Reroof Policy separately states re-roof inspections specifically run '8 – NOON' on those same three days — the two documents together suggest a morning-only inspection window, though the general Building Inspections page does not itself state a time range for all trades. 75% · department page + Reroof Policy handout

Some authorities inspect their own solar work; some delegate it, and a few do not inspect the PV equipment itself at all. Who is coming determines what they will look at.

• Does this AHJ perform its own final solar inspection? Yes 92% · codified ordinance
• If delegated, to whom? N/A — not delegated for the ministerial single-inspection path defined by KMC §15.24.060(G)-(I); the Building Division performs the (single, consolidated) final inspection itself. There is a documented tension worth flagging: North Central Fire Protection District's own current City-of-Kerman-specific Plan Review Application (DFP-001k, Rev 7/23/2025) carries a 'Solar: Residential/Commercial' checkbox, and that document states plans need a City 'Reviewed for Code Compliance' stamp before NCFPD will accept them, with NCFPD's own fire permit/letter then required 'prior to the issuance of a City building permit' — meaning NCFPD functions as a parallel PLAN-REVIEW gate for at least some solar submittals, even though it is not the inspecting party and has no PV/ESS fee line of its own. 75% · codified ordinance + special district form (tension reported, not resolved)

A rough-in or mid-roof inspection, where one is required, has to happen before the work it covers is closed up. Missing a stage means opening something back up, and it is the most expensive kind of correction.

• Which inspections are required, and in what order? For a qualifying small-residential system: (1) submittal to City Building Division (email PDF or SolarAPP+); (2) if routed to fire, NCFPD plan review — which itself requires a City 'Reviewed for Code Compliance' stamp or a letter that no city review is required BEFORE NCFPD will accept the plans, and NCFPD's resulting fire permit/letter is then 'considered proof to fulfill the requirement of a fire review prior to the issuance of a City building permit'; (3) City issues the building permit; (4) a single, consolidated final inspection by the Building Division (KMC §15.24.060(G)-(I)); (5) on pass, a 'green tag'/Finaled status enabling PG&E meter reconnection/PTO. 75% · codified ordinance + special district form + permit records (composite)
• Is a rough-in or mid-roof inspection required? No 88% · codified ordinance

The approved plan set, the permit, and the equipment listings should be on site and reachable. Inspectors routinely verify that installed equipment matches what was approved, and that the labels are the ones the plan set promised.

• What must be on site at inspection? Permit and job card must be on the job site; the city-approved plans must be on site; any previous correction notices must be available; a ladder must be provided if needed for a roof inspection. 88% · department page
• Does the inspector verify labels and listings? Yes (inferred) — the adopted 2025 CEC and KMC §15.24.040(C)'s own CEC/UL/IEEE-listing requirement would necessarily be checked at the single final inspection, though no city or NCFPD document explicitly states in those words that the inspector verifies labels and listings. 60% · inference from codified requirement

Passing gives you a final or an equivalent sign-off. That is not the same as permission to operate: PTO comes from the utility, and who tells the utility the inspection passed varies. A system left switched off for weeks is usually waiting on this handover.

• What is issued on pass? Final / 'Green tag' — the city's own permit-tracking status field uses 'Finaled' for a passed/closed-out permit, and its own permit records use the colloquial term 'green tag' for the passed-inspection status that PG&E requires before reconnecting/energizing service (e.g. 'Meter release needed for green tag for PG&E'; 'Need green tag release for PGE reconnect'). No separate Certificate of Occupancy is issued for a rooftop PV/ESS retrofit. 82% · permit records
• Who notifies the utility for PTO? Installer — PG&E's customer-facing solar process states the contractor submits the Interconnection Application, single-line diagram, and a copy of the final building permit to PG&E, which then issues Permission to Operate; nothing in Kerman's own code or department pages describes the city notifying the utility. Kerman's own permit records use exactly this installer-driven framing ('Meter release needed for green tag for PG&E' appearing on an electrical-service-panel job, i.e. the installer/electrician requesting the city's sign-off in order to get PG&E's meter action). 80% · utility process page + permit records
• Is there a re-inspection fee? $87.00 per re-inspection, applied after the first re-inspection (as determined by the City Building Official). 90% · published fee schedule
• How are corrections issued and cleared? At the application-intake stage, if an application is incomplete the Building Official issues a written correction notice (a standard building-permit-process mechanism; not called out separately for solar). No dedicated city document describes how FIELD-inspection corrections specifically (post-inspection, as opposed to at intake) are issued or cleared, beyond the Building Inspections page noting that 'previous correction notices' should be available on site at the next inspection. 55% · department page (partial)