Mono County

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, but only for UNINCORPORATED Mono County. The Town of Mammoth Lakes (the county's only incorporated town) is a separate AHJ. 95% · department page
• What does this authority permit itself, and what does it delegate? Both Building AND Electrical, self-performed in-house by the Community Development Department's Building Division (offices in Mammoth Lakes and Bridgeport). No plan-check/inspection firm found: every named contact across all documents reviewed (Building Official Tom Perry, commdev@mono.ca.gov, department staff) is on the @mono.ca.gov domain, and no staffing-firm name, contractor-branded portal, or fee-schedule staffing appendix was found anywhere. Fire is fragmented: no county fire department exists; the county's own Building Official — not a fire marshal — is the codified enforcer of WUI/defensible-space compliance (§15.04.150) prior to occupancy, while actual fire suppression across unincorporated Mono is split among roughly six separate community fire protection districts/departments (Antelope Valley FPD, Bridgeport FD, Lee Vining FPD, June Lake FPD, Mono City FPD, Long Valley FD) plus CAL FIRE/USFS on federal land. 85% · adopting regulation + department page
• Is a permit required for a residential rooftop PV system? Yes. MCC §15.04.220 (Small Residential Rooftop Solar Energy Permit Expediting Ordinance) governs permitting of small residential rooftop solar systems, and the county's own 'Expedited Permit Process for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems' document requires a completed building permit application for every PV installation. 95% · ordinance
• Is there a separate electrical permit, or is it combined? Combined — the Consolidated Fee Schedule prices 'Solar Energy Systems' as a single line item (not separate Building vs Electrical fee lines), and residential PV is submitted on the county's single 'Minor Building Permit Application' (the same form used for decks and other minor work), not as two separate permit applications. 68% · fee schedule
• Is a HOA or architectural approval required first? Yes, per the county's own (2014) Prescriptive Installation requirements: 'If the residence is located within the jurisdiction of a Homeowner's Association (HOA), written approval for the solar panel installation must be obtained. A copy of the written approval must be provided to the Building Division.' This is in direct tension with Civil Code §714 (Solar Rights Act), which bars conditioning solar-permit approval on HOA sign-off; the document predates and does not cite §714. Reported as written, not resolved. 75% · ordinance
• Is a wind or windstorm certification required? No TDI-style windstorm certification found, and no operative county wind-load design table/figure (e.g. a codified mph design-wind-speed number) was found anywhere in Title 15. MCC §15.04.020 (Express Findings) cites 'high winds' generically as one rationale for the chapter's local amendments, but no wind-load design criteria section follows anywhere in the codified chapter — unlike the adjacent county of Inyo, which codifies an explicit 85 mph sustained / 110 mph 3-second-gust county-wide wind criterion. 80% · ordinance
• Is a Specific Use Permit or Council approval ever required? Not for a standard residential rooftop PV retrofit. MCC §15.04.220's process is administrative/ministerial per Gov. Code §65850.5; a Conditional-Use-Permit-style process is only triggered if the Building Official makes a written finding, based on substantial evidence, that the specific installation would have a 'specific, adverse impact' on public health or safety with no feasible mitigation — a narrow, appealable exception rather than a routine requirement. No separate utility-scale/CUP-style renewable-energy ordinance comparable to neighboring Inyo County's Title 21 was found reaching ordinary residential PV in the materials reviewed. 70% · ordinance
• Is there a system-size cap on residential generation? Yes — the codified 'small residential rooftop solar energy system' definition caps eligibility for the ministerial/expedited process at 10 kW AC nameplate rating or 30 kW thermal, scoped to single- or duplex-family dwellings only. The county's separate Prescriptive Installation and Expedited Permit Process documents independently describe systems 'of 10kW or less' as the target of the standardized permit path. This is a cap on the EXPEDITED path's eligibility, not a hard ceiling on system size generally. 88% · ordinance

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? Electrical work itself must be performed by a licensed electrician (the county's own 2014 Prescriptive Installation requirements state plainly: 'Electrical installation shall be in conformance with the California Electrical Code (CEC). A licensed Electrician shall perform all electrical work.'). The overall building permit, however, may be pulled by a licensed contractor OR an owner-builder — the general Building Permit Application carries the standard California owner-builder declaration alongside the licensed-contractor declaration. 75% · ordinance
• Must the contractor be registered with this authority before applying? Not clearly mandated as a precondition of applying, but implied: the county's own Building Permit Application form has a distinct field for 'Mono County Business Lic. #' printed directly beside the state 'Contractor Lic. #' field, suggesting the county expects contractors to hold a county business license when applying. 55% · department page
• Is a homeowner permitted to self-install and self-permit? Yes. The county's own Building Permit Application contains a full Owner-Builder Declaration package (per Business & Professions Code §7044 and related disclosures), letting a homeowner self-install and pull their own permit. 85% · ordinance

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? A complete submittal = (1) general building permit application (the 'Minor Building Permit Application' for PV), (2) Local Utility Approval — interconnection approval from the servicing utility company, (3) Design Documents — either the county's pre-approved prescriptive design forms (roof-mount or pole/ground-mount) or an engineer-stamped structural design where prescriptive eligibility isn't met, and (4) the supporting plan set called for in the Solar PV Standard Plan toolkit (roof/site layout diagram, electrical one-line-style plan, structural criteria, and fire-safety pathway diagram). 85% · published checklist
• Is a site plan required, and what must it show? Yes. A site plan/roof-layout diagram is required showing the roof layout of all panels and modules, clear access pathways, and the approximate locations of electrical disconnecting means and roof access points. 85% · checklist
• Is a one-line / three-line diagram required? Yes — a 'Solar PV Plan and supporting documentation' is required (Electrical Requirements, item E of the eligibility checklist), and the county's Solar PV Standard Plan toolkits (central-string-inverter and microinverter/ACM versions) each include a dedicated Roof Layout Plan sheet as part of the standardized submittal. 80% · checklist
• Are string and conductor calculations required? Yes, for the standardized/simplified path — the county's own Central String Inverter and Microinverter/ACM toolkits each contain conductor-sizing tables (e.g. ampacity tables factoring CEC 690.8 and 210.19(A)(1)) that the applicant must complete as part of the standard plan submittal. 80% · checklist
• Is a structural PE stamp required, and at what threshold? No single fixed kW/psf threshold — a structural PE stamp is required whenever the county's Prescriptive Installation eligibility criteria are NOT met (e.g., ground/pole-mounted systems, roof height over 40 ft, ground snow load conditions above the prescriptive limits, non-wood-frame roofs, mounting standoff over 12 in, adjustable or tracking systems). Separately, MCC §15.04.080 authorizes the Building Official to require engineering plan-check review — by in-house or contract engineers, at the Building Official's case-by-case discretion — whenever a submittal exceeds conventional light-frame code provisions for seismic design, wind load, or ground snow load. 85% · ordinance / checklist

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? No online/electronic permitting portal was identified. Residential PV is submitted on the county's 'Minor Building Permit Application' fillable PDF, in person or by mail/email to the Building Division's Mammoth Lakes or Bridgeport offices. The site-wide CivicPlus 'Create a Website Account' login is a generic notification/account feature, not shown to be a permit-application or plan-review portal itself. 68% · portal landing page
• Can the whole application be completed online? No. No document or page shows an online path to complete the whole application; only downloadable fillable PDF forms plus in-person/mail submittal were found. 65% · portal
• What does a residential solar permit cost? $450 flat for a residential PV system up to 15 kW AC (or $450 flat for a residential thermal system up to 10 kWth), plus $15 per additional kW (or kWth) above that threshold with no upper cap — cited to Gov. Code §66015. NOTE A LIVE CONFLICT: the county's own 'Building Resources' page still actively links a 2014 Board of Supervisors Resolution (R14-10) advertised as a 'Waiver of Permit Fees for Alternative Energy Projects' for qualifying solar/ground-source projects up to $75,000 in valuation — but the resolution's actual operative text waives only the single then-standard $229 building-permit fee, not plan-check, SMIP, BSC, or any other fee, and it predates the current fee schedule by over a decade. Both documents are live and unreconciled. 78% · fee schedule
• How is the fee calculated? Tiered — a flat fee for the first capacity tier (15 kW AC for PV / 10 kWth for thermal), then an uncapped per-kW (or per-kWth) rate for capacity above that tier. 90% · fee schedule
• Is there a separate plan-check fee? No separate solar-specific plan-check fee line was found distinct from the flat/per-kW 'Solar Energy Systems' fee itself; the schedule's general 'Planning – Building Permit Plan Check' flat fees ($106 small / $265 large) exist for other permit types but were not shown tied to solar in any document reviewed. 55% · 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.

• How long is an issued permit valid before it expires? Plan-check applications become void 180 days after the date of application. Issued building permits become void 36 months (3 years) after issuance unless a written extension is approved. Work must commence within 12 months of issuance, or be suspended/abandoned for 12 months, or the permit expires (Nov 1 - Apr 1 winter months are excluded from that 12-month clock due to climatic constraints). One extension of up to an additional 180 days is available at the Building Official's discretion. 92% · ordinance
• Which utility handles interconnection here? Southern California Edison (SCE) for most of the county — three major SCE transmission lines and 13 substations run through Mono County per the county/Town's own 2026 Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, which also documents SCE's Public Safety Power Shutoff program operating countywide. BUT the same document states plainly that communities north of Walker Canyon on Hwy 395 — Walker, Coleville, and Topaz — 'received electrical service from Liberty Utilities (based out of Nevada)', a separate utility, not SCE. 92% · utility territory map + city source
• Where does the utility sit in the sequence? The utility touches the process at two separate points. BEFORE permit issuance: 'Local Utility Approval — Interconnection approval from servicing utility company' is listed as one of the four required items for a complete solar PV submittal. AFTER permit/at final: MCC §15.04.120 makes it unlawful for 'any person, including utility companies,' to make a PERMANENT electric connection to a structure requiring a permit until the county Building Division has approved final inspection — so permanent energization/PTO is legally gated on the county's own final inspection sign-off. 85% · ordinance

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? 2020 NEC, adopted as the 2022 California Electrical Code (Title 24, Part 3), codified at MCC §15.04.030(C) via Ord. 22-18 (12-20-2022). This is the currently codified/operative edition, and is one full code cycle behind the 2023 NEC-based 2025 CEC that took effect statewide 1 Jan 2026 — the codification (through Ord. 25-006, Dec 2025 supplement) shows no amending ordinance to §15.04.030 since Dec 2022. 88% · adopting ordinance
• Which building code edition is in force? 2022 California Building Code and 2022 California Residential Code (Title 24 Parts 2 and 2.5), codified at MCC §15.04.030(B)/(K) via Ord. 22-18 (12-20-2022) — the currently operative edition, one cycle behind the 2025 CBC/CRC cycle that took effect statewide 1 Jan 2026 (same lag as Q29). 90% · adopting ordinance
• Which fire code edition is in force? 2022 California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9), codified at MCC §15.04.030(H) via the same Ord. 22-18 — Mono County has no separate fire-code chapter or county fire department of its own; this Title 24 blanket adoption is the only county-level fire-code citation found. (The Town of Mammoth Lakes' own Fire Protection District separately adopted the 2022 California Fire Code by its own ordinance, consistent with the same cycle.) 85% · adopting ordinance
• Are there local amendments to any of the above? Yes. MCC §15.04.020 (Express Findings) states local amendments are 'reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions, including snow loads, freezing temperatures, high winds, and remote mountain terrain' — codified as the elevation-banded Mono County Snow Load Design Criteria (§15.04.140) and the defensible-space/WUI fire-hazard-reduction requirements (§15.04.150). As of 25 Feb 2026 the Building Official has additionally issued a formal policy authorizing continued use of the county's own snow-load criteria as an ASCE 7-22 'alternative method of construction' in lieu of the state-mandated Hazard Tool. 92% · ordinance
• What is the installation judged against? The 2022 Title 24 code suite (CBC/CRC/CEC/CFC — see Q29-31) PLUS Mono County's own local structural amendments: the codified elevation-banded Ground/Roof Snow Load Design Criteria table (MCC §15.04.140 — up to 285 psf ground / 220 psf roof snow load at the county's highest-elevation communities), and, as of 25 Feb 2026, the Building Official's own policy permitting continued use of that county table (rather than the state-mandated ASCE 7-22 Hazard Tool) as an 'alternative method of construction' under CBC §104.2.3, on the documented finding that the Hazard Tool overstates local ground snow loads by up to 135% for this terrain. 90% · ordinance

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.

• What ridge setback and access pathways are required? The standard, unamended 2022 CFC §605.11.1.2 / CRC R324.6 model rules apply, restated verbatim in the county's own PV Toolkit Inspection Guide: two minimum 36-inch-wide access pathways from eave to ridge on separate roof planes (at least one on the street/driveway side); a ridge setback of 18 inches where the array covers 33% or less of the roof plan area, or 36 inches where it covers more than 33% (reduced to 18%/66% thresholds where an NFPA 13D sprinkler system is installed). The county's own (2014) Prescriptive Installation document separately allows an alternate 12-inch ridge clearance for tile/metal-shingle roofing, or steep composition-shingle roofs, waivable to less with Fire Official approval where alternative smoke ventilation exists. No local amendment beyond these state-model figures was found. 85% · fire code + amendments

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 — rapid shutdown is required per CEC §690.12, cited repeatedly and by name across the county's own PV toolkit documents. Those documents describe the rapid-shutdown initiation device requirement using 2019 CEC (2017 NEC)-era array-boundary language ('within 10 feet of the array and uncontrolled PV system conductors are no greater than 5 feet of length within the building'). The county's currently codified electrical code, however, is the 2022 CEC (2020 NEC) — one cycle newer than the toolkit documents cite; this lag is reported as written, not resolved. 82% · NEC edition in force

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? Yes. A 'WARNING: PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SOURCE' placard is required at the main service disconnect, plus a full set of additional required labels at specific equipment/locations: a shock-hazard warning at the utility-interactive inverter/battery enclosure; an ungrounded-DC-circuit shock-hazard warning at each junction/combiner box and disconnect; 'PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM DISCONNECT' labels on the AC and DC disconnects; operating-current/voltage markings on the DC disconnect; rated-AC-output markings at the interconnection point; a 'PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM EQUIPPED WITH RAPID SHUTDOWN' label at the rapid-shutdown device; a service/inverter/rapid-shutdown-device location directory; a terminal shock-hazard warning on de-energized-in-open-position equipment; and a 'do not relocate' warning on the inverter-output overcurrent device. 90% · ordinance / utility spec
• Does the authority specify placard wording of its own? The county's own documents restate exact, verbatim required label wording for every required placard (see Q38) — but this is the state model-code (CEC §690/§705, CFC §605.11.1, CRC R331.2) wording, republished by the county, not wording the county itself originated. 80% · ordinance
• Does it specify letter height, colour or material? Yes for the main placard: minimum 3/8-inch (9.5 mm) white lettering on a red background, made of reflective, weather-resistant material, for the 'WARNING: PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SOURCE' sign (restating CFC 605.11.1.1/.2 & CRC R331.2.1-2). Separately, for general equipment nameplates/markings under the Solar PV Standard Plan toolkit, the county gives an informational note (citing ANSI Z535.4) that 'no type size is specified, but 20 point (3/8") should be considered the minimum,' suggesting a phenolic plaque with contrasting text/background colors. 85% · ordinance
• Is a site plan / facility map placard required, and what must it show? Yes — a site/roof-layout diagram is required showing the layout of all panels/modules, clear access pathways, and the approximate locations of electrical disconnecting means and roof access points. No separate freestanding 'facility map' placard (a physical sign posted at the meter showing system layout) beyond this drawn plan-set diagram was found. 78% · 705.10 + local
• Where must the labels be placed? Labels/markings must be placed: immediately adjacent to the main service disconnect, clearly visible from where the disconnect is operated; on all interior and exterior DC conduit, enclosures, raceways, cable assemblies, junction boxes, combiner boxes and disconnects, repeated at least every 10 feet and within 1 foot of all turns/bends and roof/wall/ceiling penetrations; at each junction box, combiner box, disconnect and device with exposed ungrounded or energized parts; at the rapid-shutdown initiation device or an AHJ-approved location; and as a directory at the electrical service, inverter, and rapid-shutdown device if they are not co-located. 88% · ordinance / utility spec

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.

• Are batteries permitted, and under what conditions? Batteries are not addressed by any dedicated county ordinance — Titles 15, 19 and 20 all return zero hits for 'battery', 'energy storage', or 'ESS' (controlled: positive control 'electrical' = 16 hits in Title 15 alone; fabricated control 'zzqqx' = 0). The county's OWN expedited/prescriptive PV path explicitly EXCLUDES systems with battery storage from the standardized plan set: the Expedited Permit Process eligibility checklist requires the system be 'utility interactive and without battery storage' (General Requirements, item D) to use the pre-approved simplified toolkit — a system with a battery isn't barred, but it must be reviewed as a full engineered submittal rather than the standardized path. 75% · fire code + amendments
• Is there a separate ESS permit or inspection? No separate ESS-specific permit or inspection type was found; a battery/ESS installation appears to fall to the standard (non-expedited, engineered-design) building-permit process rather than a distinct permit category, and the Consolidated Fee Schedule carries no distinct residential battery/ESS fee line. 65% · ordinance
• Is a ground mount treated as a structure? Effectively yes — ground/pole-mounted PV is excluded from the county's Prescriptive (pre-approved) Installation path and, per that same document, 'require[s] an engineered design,' i.e. full structural review as its own structure. The county separately still publishes a distinct 'Pole (Ground Mount) Prescriptive Requirements' document (generic 2013 boilerplate, 2010 CBC/CRC) suggesting a standardized structural treatment for pole footings does exist in practice despite the stated blanket exclusion. No dedicated zoning-code setback/height rule specific to ground-mounted SOLAR was located — Mono's actual Zoning Code is not codified on Municode (see Q25) and could not be searched directly; the only comparable zoning-level structure found is the Small Wind Energy Systems chapter (MCC Ch. 20.05), which is wind-specific, not solar. 65% · ordinance
• Is there a local rule on service upgrades or busbar sizing? No local busbar-sizing or service-upgrade amendment was found anywhere in Chapter 15.04 (controlled full-text search: 'busbar'/'bus bar'/'225 A' = 0 hits; positive control 'electrical' = 16 hits; fabricated control 'zzqqx' = 0 hits). The county's own Solar PV Standard Plan toolkits DO reference the standard nationwide 225A busbar ceiling used for the AB 2188-model simplified/expedited PV eligibility path ('PV system is interconnected to a single-phase AC service panel...with a bus bar rating of 225 A or less') — but that is the state-model eligibility gate for the standardized plan, not a Mono-specific local amendment. 78% · amendments
• Is a specific mounting system or attachment spacing required? No universal codified mounting-spacing table exists, but the county's own 2014 'Prescriptive Installation Requirements and Restrictions' document sets a prescriptive standard for the roof-mount-only path: a rack leg or stand-off bracket fastened directly to every roof rafter/truss covered by the panels, maximum allowable panel area per fastener per referenced Tables RS-1 through RS-4, panels no more than 12 inches above the roof surface, and fixed (non-adjustable, non-tracking) mounting only. NOTE A CONFLICT: that same document states 'pole or ground-mounted systems are not eligible for Prescriptive Installation and require an engineered design' — yet the county separately publishes a distinct 'Pole (Ground Mount) Prescriptive Requirements' document (a generic, badly dated 2013 structural boilerplate citing the 2010 CBC/CRC). Both documents are currently linked from the county's own solar toolkit table of contents; reported as written, not resolved. 75% · amendments

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? By phone, via the county's published Inspection Hotline: 760-924-1827 — printed on every Building Division page, form, and toolkit document reviewed. No online inspection-scheduling portal was found. 85% · department page

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 — self-performed in-house. No delegation evidence was found across the tells checked (staff directory/email domains all @mono.ca.gov, no staffing-firm name in the fee schedule, no contractor-branded permit portal, no warrant-register or budget line reviewed showing contracted plan-check/inspection). 75% · department page
• If delegated, to whom? N/A — not delegated (see Q52). 75% · department page

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? The county's own PV Toolkit 'Field Inspection Guide' (Document #7) is framed as a single consolidated final-inspection checklist for rooftop PV meeting the Standard Plan — covering mounting, electrical, grounding, disconnects, rapid shutdown, and labeling together — implying one field inspection rather than separate rough-in and final stages for a standard-plan PV system. The county's separate (2014) Prescriptive Installation document additionally requires an UNUSUAL extra step specific to Mono: a structural certification inspection of the roof BOTH at completion of installation AND again one year later, performed by the owner, a licensed contractor, or a PE, certifying no adverse roof/structural condition has developed. 70% · department page

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.

• Is there a published inspection checklist? Yes — the county's own 'PV Toolkit Document #7: Inspection Guide for PV Systems in One- and Two-Family Dwellings' (Field Inspection Guide + Comprehensive Reference), published and linked from the Building Division's solar toolkit. 92% · department page
• What must be on site at inspection? Not stated as a distinct itemized list, but implied throughout: nearly every Field Inspection Guide checklist item is phrased '...according to the approved plan', indicating the approved plan set (and, per the 2014 Prescriptive doc, the signed Owner's Certification) must be available on site for the inspector to check work against. No explicit 'bring these documents to inspection' list was found. 58% · department page
• Does the inspector verify labels and listings? Yes, explicitly. The Field Inspection Guide requires the inspector to verify 'Equipment installed, listed and labeled according to the approved plan (e.g., PV modules, DC/DC converters, combiners, inverters, disconnects, load centers and electrical service equipment)' and 'PV system markings, labels and signs according to the approved plan.' 92% · department page

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.

• How are corrections issued and cleared? For PLAN-REVIEW (not post-field-inspection) corrections: MCC §15.04.220(G)(3) states that if the Building Official determines a solar permit application is incomplete, 'they shall issue a written correction notice to the applicant, detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required.' No document was found describing how FIELD-inspection corrections specifically (as opposed to plan-review deficiencies) are issued or cleared. 68% · department page