City of San Antonio

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, the City of San Antonio is the AHJ of record, but it performs almost no building work itself. It holds a town-side pre-approval gate (a Building Commissioner / Engineering review, fee $25-$350) and delegates all building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing and gas permitting, plan review, inspection and permit records to the City of Dade City Building Department under a long-standing service agreement (Dade City's own records for San Antonio permits go back to at least 1999). Fire status is unresolved this run (see jurisdiction.why). 92% · authority's own webpage
• What does this authority permit itself, and what does it delegate? Delegated. BUILDING + ELECTRICAL + MECHANICAL + PLUMBING + GAS: City of Dade City Building Department, 38020 Meridian Ave, Dade City FL 33525, 352-523-5050 -- permitting, plan review, inspection, permit records (since >=1999) and contractor registration. TOWN-SIDE GATE: San Antonio's own Building Services office (Julia Fresne-Sandifer, Assistant City Clerk/Permit Coordinator, 32819 Pennsylvania Ave, San Antonio FL 33576, 352-588-2127) reviews and must approve EVERY application before it is submitted to Dade City; fee $25 (same-day/Building Commissioner review) or $175/$350 (engineering review, under/over 1 acre). ZONING is retained by the Town (Ch. 82 of its own Municode-hosted Code of Ordinances). FIRE: the Town's own codified Ch. 30 describes a self-governing 'San Antonio Volunteer Fire Department' (Code 1985 vintage) but the Town's live website has zero pages mentioning 'fire' anywhere (proved against its full 213-URL sitemap) -- current fire AHJ status is NOT resolved this run (see not_found / jurisdiction.why). 88% · authority's own webpage + own code
• Is a permit required for a residential rooftop PV system? Yes. Code Sec. 65-1 requires a permit for construction, alteration, repair, equipment, use and occupancy of buildings and electrical/mechanical/plumbing systems city-wide; Sec. 65-2 requires the fee resolution be followed. In practice the application is Dade City's own form, and it is processed under whatever FBC/NEC edition Dade City currently enforces (FBC 8th Ed./2023, NEC 2020 per Dade City's own Sec. 22-61(a) -- see q29/q30, carried at reduced confidence as it was not independently re-fetched from Dade City this run). 85% · codified ordinance
• Is there a separate electrical permit, or is it combined? Separate. Dade City lists 'Electrical Permit' as its own permit type (and its iWorQ portal's server-rendered application form lists 'Solar' and 'Solar Photo Voltaic Electric' as distinct permit types) with its own submittal list and fee line, independent of the general building permit. 62% · operator's live portal (inherited citation)
• Is a HOA or architectural approval required first? No town-level architectural or design review board exists for a rooftop array on an existing single-family dwelling. San Antonio's own Chapter 82 (Zoning) has no Architectural Review Board, Design Review Committee, or Certificate-of-Appropriateness mechanism anywhere in 93,661 characters of zoning text (positive control 'electrical' 16 hits, fabricated control 'zzqqxplorp' 0 hits both pass). 88% · codified ordinance (proved absence)
• Is there a historic-district review? No. The Town has no historic-preservation chapter, historic-district overlay, or historic-designation review board. The word 'historic' appears exactly 5 times in the entire Zoning chapter and every occurrence is inside the Bed-and-Breakfast use standard (a structure 'been constructed prior to 1940 or be of historic and/or architectural significance' qualifies a property to operate as a B&B) -- not a historic-preservation regulatory regime at all. 90% · codified ordinance (proved absence)
• Is a wind or windstorm certification required? No. Pasco County, including San Antonio, is not in Florida's High-Velocity Hurricane Zone (Miami-Dade and Broward Counties only), so no HVHZ Notice of Acceptance (NOA) is required; standard statewide FBC Product Approval governs. 90% · state building code (statewide fact)
• Is a Specific Use Permit or Council approval ever required? No. A rooftop PV retrofit on an existing single-family dwelling is not a subdivision action under Ch. 78 (Subdivisions and Site Plans, which regulates new plats and is silent on single-family retrofits -- zero 'single-family' exemption or trigger language of any kind in 35,024 characters) and is not a PUD action under Ch. 82's site-plan-review procedure (Sec. 82-8 and neighbors), which applies only inside a Planned Unit Development district. It proceeds as an ordinary building-permit application through the Town's gate and Dade City. 72% · codified ordinance (proved absence)
• Is there a system-size cap on residential generation? No PV-specific size or wattage cap. General zoning limits that could bind a ground-mount installation: maximum lot coverage by all buildings is 25% (varies slightly by district, e.g. RE-1/RE-2 districts); a rear-yard 'screened enclosure/accessory use' is capped at 30% of the rear yard with 3 ft rear / 5 ft side setbacks (Ch. 82); accessory structures cannot exceed a 33%-of-principal-structure floor-area ratio under comparable Dade City rules if treated similarly (inherited, not confirmed for San Antonio specifically). No dedicated kW/DC-watt threshold exists anywhere in the corpus. 75% · authority's own FAQ + codified 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? A licensed contractor holding a Florida electrical contractor's license (or a specialty 'Solar energy installation contractor' registration), OR the homeowner as owner-builder subject to FS 489.103(7) limits. Dade City Code Sec. 22-31 recognizes 'Solar contractor' and 'Solar energy installation contractor' as distinct specialty classifications. 60% · operator's code (inherited citation)
• Must the contractor be registered with this authority before applying? Yes. Registration must be completed through the Dade City Building Department (not with San Antonio directly) before a permit will be issued. Contractors must also provide a current Certificate of Insurance listing the City of San Antonio as an additional insured when the application is submitted to San Antonio for the Town's own review. 93% · authority's own FAQ
• Is a homeowner permitted to self-install and self-permit? Not addressed by San Antonio's own published materials. Dade City's practice (per run 243/157) requires a notarized application from both contractors and owner-builders, and FS 489.103(7) governs the owner-builder exemption generally (one- or two-family residence, not for sale or lease within 1 year). 55% · authority's own permit form (own-builder clause not found)

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? No PV-specific checklist exists on San Antonio's own site. San Antonio's own hosted 'Submit a Building Permit Application' web-form requires only a completed PDF Building Permit Application (Dade City's form) plus, conditionally, a Site Plan (not required for a rooftop PV retrofit -- only for fencing/accessory structures without a slab/signs/irrigation) and a signed-and-sealed Drainage Plan (only for new residential structures, additions, pools or accessory buildings -- a rooftop retrofit with no new impervious area is outside this trigger). Enumerated against all documents on San Antonio's own DocumentCenter and its 316-line sitemap: zero PV/solar/photovoltaic-named forms or checklists. 82% · authority's own webform
• How many copies, and in what format? For a rooftop PV retrofit: none required by San Antonio's own webform (Site Plan is required only for fencing, slab-less accessory structures, permanent signs, and irrigation/landscaping drainage -- not for a roof-mounted array). For a ground-mount installation treated as an accessory structure without a concrete slab, one PDF site plan upload is required through the same webform; no set-count (paper copies) is specified because submission is digital. 75% · authority's own webform
• Is a site plan required, and what must it show? Yes, conditionally. A Drainage Plan (Code Sec. 65-1-2(b)) must be 'signed and sealed by a Florida registered professional engineer' -- but only for new residential structures, additions, pools or accessory buildings with a concrete slab; a like-for-like rooftop PV retrofit with no new impervious area is outside this trigger. No signed-and-sealed structural plan is required specifically for solar by any San Antonio document found. 80% · codified ordinance
• Is a one-line / three-line diagram required? No published threshold specific to solar in San Antonio's own code. Dade City (the operator) requires a signed-and-sealed engineered plan for roof-mount racking above its own unpublished threshold. 55% · operator's practice (inherited citation)
• Are string and conductor calculations required? Not required by any published San Antonio or Dade City document for a typical residential PV electrical scope; FS 471.003(2)(h) exempts routine electrical work performed under a licensed electrical contractor from requiring a PE seal. 55% · state statute
• Is a structural PE stamp required, and at what threshold? No local valuation threshold published for solar. Dade City requires engineered plans above its own unpublished discretion point. 50% · operator's practice (inherited citation)
• Is an electrical PE stamp required, and at what threshold? No local threshold published. The state exemption (FS 471.003(2)(h)) governs for routine licensed-contractor electrical work. 50% · state statute

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? Two steps, two systems. STEP 1 (San Antonio): a single PDF-upload web-form at sanantonioflorida.org/229/Submit-a-Building-Permit-Application (CivicPlus-hosted, reCAPTCHA-gated), taking the Building Permit Application PDF plus optional Site Plan / Drainage Plan attachments; approval must be obtained here FIRST. STEP 2 (Dade City): the iWorQ Citizen Portal at dadepermit.portal.iworq.net/DADE/new-request/702/2105, whose city dropdown explicitly lists 'Dade City / Saint Leo / San Antonio' (this dropdown is itself proof of the three-jurisdiction arrangement, carried from run 157's own direct observation). 85% · authority's own webform
• Can the whole application be completed online? No dedicated expedite path published by San Antonio. Its cheapest tier ('Same-Day Permit/Building Commissioner Review,' $25) functions as a fast lane for administratively simple work, but this is not marketed as an 'expedite' service and there is no FS 553.792(1)(d) formal expedited-permitting policy on the Town's site (zero hits for '553.792' or 'expedit' across the sitemap and code corpus). Dade City's own page states in writing 'we do not offer expedite services' (inherited). 72% · authority's own site (proved absence) + operator statement (inherited)
• What does a residential solar permit cost? NOT PUBLISHABLE AS A SINGLE NUMBER, and that is itself the finding: the job has TWO separate fee layers charged by two separate governments. TOWN OF SAN ANTONIO (its own review, charged before the file ever reaches Dade City): $25.00 flat for a Same-Day Permit/Building Commissioner Review, OR $175.00 (parcel under 1 acre) / $350.00 (1 acre and over) for a Permit with Engineering Review -- cash, check or money order only, no card/electronic payment accepted. CITY OF DADE CITY (the operator, per its 2008 fee resolution, carried at reduced confidence -- not refetched this run): a $35 base plus a declining-marginal valuation ladder ($35 for the first $1,000 + $7/additional $1,000 to $50,000; lower marginal rates above that), plus a Plans Examination fee (minimum $30 or one-half the building permit fee) and a $35 Site Examination fee if a site plan is required. Neither layer publishes the FS 553.721 (1%) or FS 468.631 (1.5%) state surcharges anywhere -- zero 'surcharge' hits across San Antonio's own 449,000-character code corpus and its own hosted permit-application PDF. 88% · authority's own FAQ + codified ordinance (conflict noted)
• How is the fee calculated? Two-layer, both valuation/tiered in different ways. TOWN: acreage-tiered flat fee ($25 / $175 / $350, keyed to parcel acreage, not project value). OPERATOR (Dade City, inherited): declining-marginal-rate valuation ladder plus a flat $35 base per permit/trade. 75% · authority's own FAQ
• Is there a separate plan-check fee? Yes, at both layers. TOWN: the $175/$350 'Engineering Review' fee IS the Town's plan-review fee (the $25 'Same-Day' tier substitutes for it on administratively simple jobs). Separately, codified Sec. 65-1-2(b)(1) prices a signed-and-sealed drainage-plan review at $150.00 (<1 acre) / $300.00 (>=1 acre) -- likely the same fee under an older number. OPERATOR: Dade City's own 'Plans Examination' fee is a minimum of $30.00 or one-half the building permit fee, whichever is greater (inherited, reduced confidence). 82% · authority's own FAQ + codified ordinance

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? San Antonio's own materials publish no numeric review-clock commitment for its own gate. Dade City (the operator) publishes two different clocks in two places: '4-6 weeks... we do not offer expedite services' on its Building Permit Requirements page, and '2-6 weeks' on its iWorQ portal landing page. 58% · authority's own FAQ (bounded) + operator page (inherited)
• How long is an issued permit valid before it expires? FS 553.792(1)(a) caps local plan review at 30 business days generally, or 5 business days for work under $15,000 on an existing single-family dwelling. A typical $30-55k residential PV job clears the value threshold, so the 30-business-day cap governs. San Antonio's own 'Same-Day' review tier is compliant by construction (same day is inside any statutory cap); its 'Engineering Review' tier publishes no clock to test. Dade City's operator-side '4-6 weeks / no expedite' language (inherited) would breach the 30-business-day cap on its face for any job routed through it, and flatly contradicts the 5-business-day floor for sub-$15,000 work. 70% · state statute + authority FAQ
• Which utility handles interconnection here? Tampa Electric Company (TECO). San Antonio's own site names 'Tampa Electric' as a Quick Link on its Building Permits page (the same page category the brief flags as a 'resident resources' utility tell). San Antonio's own codified Code of Ordinances contains NO electric franchise ordinance of any kind (Chapter 80 'Utilities' is entirely water/sewer; the word 'franchise' appears zero times in that chapter and only twice elsewhere in the whole code, both unrelated to electricity) -- an absence itself worth recording, matching the brief's 'a town with no franchise appendix at all' pattern. EIA-861 2024 (Service_Territory_2024.xlsx, md5 60bdde3ecc2f367759855676e5cf24d5, matches the statewide-shared copy exactly) lists FOUR retail sellers county-wide in Pasco: Duke Energy Florida, Sumter Electric Coop, Tampa Electric Co, and Withlacoochee River Electric Coop -- this raises the county-level count but does not itself close it to one seller inside San Antonio's limits. 78% · authority's own webpage (Quick Link) + EIA-861 (county-level)
• Where does the utility sit in the sequence? After permit issuance and after the AHJ's final inspection, per FAC 25-6.065(5)(a), which requires every investor-owned utility's standard interconnection agreement to condition parallel operation on a passed inspection. TECO's own published sequence: 'After you complete a certified installation, Tampa Electric will interconnect' -- application is filed with 'Installed Date' fields, i.e. after construction (inherited from runs 157/243, not independently re-verified against TECO's tariff this run). 62% · utility tariff (inherited citation)

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? NEC 2020, as adopted by reference through the current Florida Building Code cycle and enforced by the operator (Dade City). San Antonio's OWN codified Sec. 65-1(b) still names the 'National Electrical Code, 1990 edition' -- a fossil citation, 30+ years stale, superseded by the statewide FBC mandate (FS 553.73) and by whatever edition Dade City currently enforces. 58% · codified ordinance (fossil) + operator code (inherited, current)
• Which building code edition is in force? Florida Building Code, 8th Edition (2023), per the operator (Dade City), including Residential, Existing Building, Mechanical and Plumbing volumes. San Antonio's own codified Sec. 65-1(a) names the fossil 'Standard Building Code, 1994 edition' (SBCCI), superseded statewide by the FBC since 2002. 58% · codified ordinance (fossil) + operator code (inherited, current)
• Which fire code edition is in force? Undetermined this run. If Pasco County Fire Rescue is the current fire AHJ (as it is for Dade City and St. Leo), the applicable code is the Florida Fire Prevention Code, current edition, per the county's interlocal fire-services framework. San Antonio's own codified Ch. 30 names only a self-governing 'San Antonio Volunteer Fire Department' with no code-adoption clause at all, and the Town's live site has zero pages mentioning fire. 45% · codified ordinance (own chapter silent) + county comparator (inherited)
• Are there local amendments to any of the above? Two-track. LICENSING (state competency card): via Pasco County Contractor Licensing Division, 813-847-8009 (inherited from runs 157/243). REGISTRATION (local, to actually pull a San Antonio/Dade City permit): 'must be completed through Dade City Building Department,' per San Antonio's own FAQ (QID=67), with a Certificate of Insurance naming the City of San Antonio as additional insured filed with the Town. 80% · authority's own FAQ
• What is the installation judged against? By reference through the current FBC cycle, as enforced by the operator (Dade City), not by any independent local NEC adoption of San Antonio's own -- San Antonio's own Sec. 65-1(b) freezes a standalone 1990 NEC citation rather than floating with the state cycle. 55% · codified 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.

Nothing recorded for City of San Antonio 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? Required, to NEC Article 690.12, by adoption through whatever current NEC edition Dade City enforces (inherited: NEC 2020) rather than by any San Antonio-specific rule -- no local rapid-shutdown clause exists in San Antonio's own code. 55% · codified ordinance (own silence) + operator adoption (inherited)

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 -- from the utility (TECO), not from either AHJ. TECO's Standard Electrical Service Requirements (SESR) mandate a placard at the meter identifying the on-site generation disconnect. Neither San Antonio's nor Dade City's own code requires any additional placard. 72% · utility tariff (inherited, utility-level fact)
• Does the authority specify placard wording of its own? No. Neither San Antonio nor Dade City specifies placard wording in code; the only prescriptive wording comes from TECO's own SESR (see q40). 70% · codified ordinance (proved absence, own corpus)
• Does it specify letter height, colour or material? Specified by the utility (TECO), by neither AHJ. TECO's SESR 2025 (Version 1.0, October 2025): a placard 'at the meter identifying the location of the isolation means... non-ferrous metal or poly-plastic with engraved or stamped lettering a minimum of 1/4" high, epoxy glued or riveted... Peel and stick labels, paint, or marking pens are not acceptable.' Wording: 'ON-SITE GENERATION UTILITY DISCONNECT SWITCH.' 68% · utility tariff (inherited, utility-level fact)
• Is a site plan / facility map placard required, and what must it show? Not specified locally by either government. TECO's requirements (inherited) do not include a site-plan or facility-map placard requirement either. 65% · utility tariff (inherited)
• Does the UTILITY specify placards beyond the AHJ's? Yes -- and here the utility is the only source of the requirement (see q38/q40). TECO requires the 'ON-SITE GENERATION UTILITY DISCONNECT SWITCH' placard with a photograph submitted as part of the interconnection application. 68% · utility tariff (inherited)
• Where must the labels be placed? At the meter. TECO's SESR: 'The Customer shall provide a placard AT THE METER identifying the location of the isolation means.' 68% · utility tariff (inherited)

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? Required, and TECO pays for it under Tier 1 -- a third Florida disconnect regime, distinct from FPL's and Duke's. TECO Tier 1 tariff clause 11: the customer installs a visible load-break manual disconnect 'at the Company's expense,' mounted separate from but adjacent to the meter, lockable with a Company padlock; the utility caps its own reimbursement at $320 single-phase / $395 three-phase. 68% · utility tariff (inherited, utility-level fact)
• Must equipment be on a specific approved list? Yes. FAC 25-6.065(4)(b) requires generation equipment to have been submitted by the manufacturer to a nationally recognized testing laboratory (e.g., UL 1741 listing) -- a statewide IOU-interconnection rule, applicable to any TECO (or other FL IOU) customer. 82% · state administrative rule
• Are batteries permitted, and under what conditions? Permitted, with no local energy-storage ordinance of any kind. San Antonio's own code has zero hits for 'battery', 'energy storage', 'ESS', 'generator', or 'inverter' anywhere in its ~490,000-character corpus. 85% · codified ordinance (proved absence)
• Is there a separate ESS permit or inspection? Nothing published locally. Dade City's own iWorQ portal (inherited) lists only 'Install Generator' as a related permit type -- no dedicated ESS/battery-storage permit type exists there either. 50% · operator's portal (inherited)
• Is a ground mount treated as a structure? Yes. Code Sec. 65-1 requires a permit for construction/alteration of any building or structure city-wide, which by definition (Ch. 82's 'Accessory use or building' definition: 'A subordinate use or building customary incident to and located upon the same lot occupied by the main use or building') sweeps in a ground-mounted array or a rack-mounted equipment pad. 80% · codified ordinance
• Is there a local rule on service upgrades or busbar sizing? No independent local technical limit found; the only constraint is fee-based (Dade City's valuation ladder, inherited) and the zoning lot-coverage/rear-yard caps at q28. No wattage, kW-DC, or system-size ceiling appears anywhere in San Antonio's own 449,000-character corpus (grep for 'kW', 'watt', 'DC' returns only unrelated hits). 70% · codified ordinance (proved absence)
• Is a specific mounting system or attachment spacing required? None published. No mounting-system, attachment-spacing, uplift, or racking requirement appears anywhere in San Antonio's own code (zero hits for 'racking', 'mounting system', 'uplift', 'attachment spacing'). 80% · codified ordinance (proved 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? Through Dade City directly -- San Antonio's own FAQ instructs applicants to 'contact Dade City directly to request an inspection' but does not itself publish the portal/phone/email channel. Per runs 157/243 (inherited, reduced confidence), Dade City offers portal, phone and email. 68% · authority's own FAQ
• How much notice is required? Not published by San Antonio. Per Dade City's own practice (inherited, reduced confidence): next business day, unless the request is received by a morning cut-off the same day. 55% · operator's practice (inherited)
• Are same-day or AM/PM windows offered? Not published by San Antonio. Per Dade City's own practice (inherited, reduced confidence): same-day is available if the request is in by a morning cut-off, otherwise next business day. 55% · operator's practice (inherited)

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? Delegated entirely. San Antonio performs no building or electrical inspection of its own; inspections are conducted by the City of Dade City Building Department Building Official or Inspectors on staff. 93% · authority's own FAQ
• If delegated, to whom? City of Dade City Building Department, 38020 Meridian Ave, Dade City FL 33525, 352-523-5050 (for the inspection itself). For the Town's own pre-approval step: Julia Fresne-Sandifer, Assistant City Clerk/Permit Coordinator, City of San Antonio, 32819 Pennsylvania Ave / P.O. Box 75, San Antonio FL 33576, 352-588-2127. 90% · authority's own webpage

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? Not published as a sequence by either government. Dade City's own Sec. 22-61(b)(6) (inherited) refers the applicant to a 'building division development handbook' that is not published online at either site. 50% · operator's code (inherited, referenced document not found)
• Is a rough-in or mid-roof inspection required? Not published for solar specifically by San Antonio. Per Dade City's own portal (inherited), a 'Solar Photo Voltaic Electric' permit type exists, implying a dedicated PV inspection line, but the inspection sequence itself is not published. 50% · operator's portal (inherited)

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? No. No inspection checklist is published by San Antonio (proved against its own DocumentCenter/sitemap enumeration today) or, per runs 157/243, by Dade City. 72% · authority's own site (proved absence)
• What must be on site at inspection? The permit card / approved plan set, consistent with standard FBC practice; San Antonio's own permit application requires a Notice of Commencement acknowledgment on projects at or above the FS 713.13 recording threshold. No PV-specific onsite-document list is published. 55% · authority's own permit form (general, not solar-specific)
• Does the inspector verify labels and listings? Not published by either government. No inspection scope, checklist or verification list for PV work is published on San Antonio's own site (checked against its DocumentCenter and 213-URL sitemap) or (per runs 157/243, inherited) on Dade City's. 62% · authority's own site (proved absence, own materials)

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? Unresolved with confidence this run. Code Sec. 65-1-2(a)(3)/(b)(2) requires an as-built survey be provided 'prior to the release of the certificate of occupancy (CO), or final inspection where no CO is issued' -- implying the Town (or its designee, i.e. Dade City acting for the Town) issues the CO, consistent with the St. Leo pattern where the Town rather than the operator issues the final certificate. Not independently confirmed which government's letterhead the certificate actually carries. 55% · codified ordinance (ambiguous) + comparator (inherited)
• Who notifies the utility for PTO? The installer. TECO's published process has the certified installer submit the completed installation for TECO's own interconnection review after construction (utility-level fact, inherited from runs 157/243, applicable once TECO is confirmed as San Antonio's utility per q22). 62% · utility's own process (inherited, utility-level fact)
• Is there a re-inspection fee? Not published by San Antonio. Per Dade City's own 2008 fee resolution (inherited, reduced confidence): reinspection fees of $40 / $80 / $160 for the first, second and subsequent re-inspections. 55% · operator's fee resolution (inherited)
• How are corrections issued and cleared? Not published as a procedure by either government. 50% · operator's practice (inherited, absence)