diff --git a/keps/prod-readiness/sig-cli/3515.yaml b/keps/prod-readiness/sig-cli/3515.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..b2bb14812b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/keps/prod-readiness/sig-cli/3515.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+kep-number: 3515
+alpha:
+  approver: "@johnbelamaric"
diff --git a/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/README.md b/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..63532363c3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,992 @@
+<!--
+**Note:** When your KEP is complete, all of these comment blocks should be removed.
+
+To get started with this template:
+
+- [ ] **Pick a hosting SIG.**
+  Make sure that the problem space is something the SIG is interested in taking
+  up. KEPs should not be checked in without a sponsoring SIG.
+- [ ] **Create an issue in kubernetes/enhancements**
+  When filing an enhancement tracking issue, please make sure to complete all
+  fields in that template. One of the fields asks for a link to the KEP. You
+  can leave that blank until this KEP is filed, and then go back to the
+  enhancement and add the link.
+- [ ] **Make a copy of this template directory.**
+  Copy this template into the owning SIG's directory and name it
+  `NNNN-short-descriptive-title`, where `NNNN` is the issue number (with no
+  leading-zero padding) assigned to your enhancement above.
+- [ ] **Fill out as much of the kep.yaml file as you can.**
+  At minimum, you should fill in the "Title", "Authors", "Owning-sig",
+  "Status", and date-related fields.
+- [ ] **Fill out this file as best you can.**
+  At minimum, you should fill in the "Summary" and "Motivation" sections.
+  These should be easy if you've preflighted the idea of the KEP with the
+  appropriate SIG(s).
+- [ ] **Create a PR for this KEP.**
+  Assign it to people in the SIG who are sponsoring this process.
+- [ ] **Merge early and iterate.**
+  Avoid getting hung up on specific details and instead aim to get the goals of
+  the KEP clarified and merged quickly. The best way to do this is to just
+  start with the high-level sections and fill out details incrementally in
+  subsequent PRs.
+
+Just because a KEP is merged does not mean it is complete or approved. Any KEP
+marked as `provisional` is a working document and subject to change. You can
+denote sections that are under active debate as follows:
+
+```
+<<[UNRESOLVED optional short context or usernames ]>>
+Stuff that is being argued.
+<<[/UNRESOLVED]>>
+```
+
+When editing KEPS, aim for tightly-scoped, single-topic PRs to keep discussions
+focused. If you disagree with what is already in a document, open a new PR
+with suggested changes.
+
+One KEP corresponds to one "feature" or "enhancement" for its whole lifecycle.
+You do not need a new KEP to move from beta to GA, for example. If
+new details emerge that belong in the KEP, edit the KEP. Once a feature has become
+"implemented", major changes should get new KEPs.
+
+The canonical place for the latest set of instructions (and the likely source
+of this file) is [here](/keps/NNNN-kep-template/README.md).
+
+**Note:** Any PRs to move a KEP to `implementable`, or significant changes once
+it is marked `implementable`, must be approved by each of the KEP approvers.
+If none of those approvers are still appropriate, then changes to that list
+should be approved by the remaining approvers and/or the owning SIG (or
+SIG Architecture for cross-cutting KEPs).
+-->
+# KEP-3515: OpenAPI v3 for kubectl explain
+
+<!--
+This is the title of your KEP. Keep it short, simple, and descriptive. A good
+title can help communicate what the KEP is and should be considered as part of
+any review.
+-->
+
+<!--
+A table of contents is helpful for quickly jumping to sections of a KEP and for
+highlighting any additional information provided beyond the standard KEP
+template.
+
+Ensure the TOC is wrapped with
+  <code>&lt;!-- toc --&rt;&lt;!-- /toc --&rt;</code>
+tags, and then generate with `hack/update-toc.sh`.
+-->
+
+<!-- toc -->
+- [Release Signoff Checklist](#release-signoff-checklist)
+- [Summary](#summary)
+- [Motivation](#motivation)
+  - [OpenAPI v3 is a richer API description than OpenAPI v2](#openapi-v3-is-a-richer-api-description-than-openapi-v2)
+  - [CRD schemas expressed as OpenAPI v2 are lossy](#crd-schemas-expressed-as-openapi-v2-are-lossy)
+  - [Goals](#goals)
+  - [Non-Goals](#non-goals)
+- [Proposal](#proposal)
+  - [Basic Usage](#basic-usage)
+  - [Built-in Template Options](#built-in-template-options)
+    - [Plaintext](#plaintext)
+    - [OpenAPIV3 (raw json)](#openapiv3-raw-json)
+    - [HTML](#html)
+    - [Markdown](#markdown)
+  - [Risks and Mitigations](#risks-and-mitigations)
+    - [OpenAPI V3 Not Available](#openapi-v3-not-available)
+      - [Risk](#risk)
+      - [Mitigation](#mitigation)
+    - [OpenAPI serialization time](#openapi-serialization-time)
+      - [Risk](#risk-1)
+      - [Mitigation](#mitigation-1)
+- [Design Details](#design-details)
+    - [Current High-level Approach](#current-high-level-approach)
+    - [Proposed High-level Approach](#proposed-high-level-approach)
+  - [Template rendering](#template-rendering)
+  - [Test Plan](#test-plan)
+      - [Prerequisite testing updates](#prerequisite-testing-updates)
+      - [Unit tests](#unit-tests)
+      - [Integration tests](#integration-tests)
+      - [e2e tests](#e2e-tests)
+  - [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria)
+    - [Alpha 1](#alpha-1)
+    - [Alpha 2](#alpha-2)
+    - [Beta](#beta)
+    - [GA](#ga)
+  - [Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy](#upgrade--downgrade-strategy)
+  - [Version Skew Strategy](#version-skew-strategy)
+- [Production Readiness Review Questionnaire](#production-readiness-review-questionnaire)
+  - [Feature Enablement and Rollback](#feature-enablement-and-rollback)
+  - [Rollout, Upgrade and Rollback Planning](#rollout-upgrade-and-rollback-planning)
+  - [Monitoring Requirements](#monitoring-requirements)
+  - [Dependencies](#dependencies)
+  - [Scalability](#scalability)
+  - [Troubleshooting](#troubleshooting)
+- [Implementation History](#implementation-history)
+- [Drawbacks](#drawbacks)
+- [Alternatives](#alternatives)
+  - [Implement proto.Models for OpenAPI V3 data](#implement-protomodels-for-openapi-v3-data)
+  - [Custom User Templates](#custom-user-templates)
+<!-- /toc -->
+
+## Release Signoff Checklist
+
+<!--
+**ACTION REQUIRED:** In order to merge code into a release, there must be an
+issue in [kubernetes/enhancements] referencing this KEP and targeting a release
+milestone **before the [Enhancement Freeze](https://git.k8s.io/sig-release/releases)
+of the targeted release**.
+
+For enhancements that make changes to code or processes/procedures in core
+Kubernetes—i.e., [kubernetes/kubernetes], we require the following Release
+Signoff checklist to be completed.
+
+Check these off as they are completed for the Release Team to track. These
+checklist items _must_ be updated for the enhancement to be released.
+-->
+
+Items marked with (R) are required *prior to targeting to a milestone / release*.
+
+- [ ] (R) Enhancement issue in release milestone, which links to KEP dir in [kubernetes/enhancements] (not the initial KEP PR)
+- [ ] (R) KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable`
+- [ ] (R) Design details are appropriately documented
+- [ ] (R) Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input (including test refactors)
+  - [ ] e2e Tests for all Beta API Operations (endpoints)
+  - [ ] (R) Ensure GA e2e tests meet requirements for [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) 
+  - [ ] (R) Minimum Two Week Window for GA e2e tests to prove flake free
+- [ ] (R) Graduation criteria is in place
+  - [ ] (R) [all GA Endpoints](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1806) must be hit by [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) 
+- [ ] (R) Production readiness review completed
+- [ ] (R) Production readiness review approved
+- [ ] "Implementation History" section is up-to-date for milestone
+- [ ] User-facing documentation has been created in [kubernetes/website], for publication to [kubernetes.io]
+- [ ] Supporting documentation—e.g., additional design documents, links to mailing list discussions/SIG meetings, relevant PRs/issues, release notes
+
+<!--
+**Note:** This checklist is iterative and should be reviewed and updated every time this enhancement is being considered for a milestone.
+-->
+
+[kubernetes.io]: https://kubernetes.io/
+[kubernetes/enhancements]: https://git.k8s.io/enhancements
+[kubernetes/kubernetes]: https://git.k8s.io/kubernetes
+[kubernetes/website]: https://git.k8s.io/website
+
+## Summary
+
+This KEP proposes an enhancement to kubectl explain:
+
+1. Switch data source from OpenAPI v2 to OpenAPI v3
+2. Replace the hand-written `kubectl explain` printer with a go/template implementation.
+
+## Motivation
+
+<!--
+This section is for explicitly listing the motivation, goals, and non-goals of
+this KEP.  Describe why the change is important and the benefits to users. The
+motivation section can optionally provide links to [experience reports] to
+demonstrate the interest in a KEP within the wider Kubernetes community.
+
+[experience reports]: https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/ExperienceReports
+-->
+
+### OpenAPI v3 is a richer API description than OpenAPI v2
+
+OpenAPI v3 support in Kubernetes is currently beta since version 1.24.
+OpenAPI V3 is a richer representation of the kubernetes API to our users, who have been asking for visibility
+into things like:
+
+1. nullable
+2. default
+3. validation fields like oneOf, anyOf, etc.
+
+To show each of these additional data points by themselves is a strong reason
+to switch to using OpenAPI v3.
+
+
+### CRD schemas expressed as OpenAPI v2 are lossy
+
+Today CRDs specify their schemas in OpenAPI v3 format. To serve the `/openapi/v2`
+document used today by kubectl, there is an expensive conversion from the v3 down
+to v2 format.
+
+This process is [very lossy](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/6e0de20fbb4c127d2e45c7a22347c08545fc7a86/staging/src/k8s.io/apiextensions-apiserver/pkg/controller/openapi/v2/conversion.go#L56-L66), so `kubectl explain` when used against CRDs
+making use of v3 features does not have a good experience with inaccurate information, or fields removed altogther.
+
+This transformation causes bugs, for example, when attempting to `explain` a field
+that is `nullable`, kubectl instead shows nothing, due to the lossy conversion
+wiping nullable fields.
+
+### Goals
+
+1. Provide the new richer type information specified by OpenAPI v3 within kubectl explain
+2. Have a more maintainable `text/template` based approach to printing
+3. Fallback to old `explain` implementation if cluster does not expose OpenAPI v3 data.
+4. Provide multiple new output formats for kubectl explain:
+    * human-readable plaintext
+    * markdown
+    * maybe others
+5. (Optional?) Allow users to specify their own templates for use with kubectl
+  explain (there may be interesting use cases for this)
+6. Improve discoverability of API Resources and endpoints, and provide a platform
+for richer information to be included in the future.
+
+### Non-Goals
+
+1. "Fix" openapi v3 to openapi v2 conversion
+  This is a non-goal for two reasons:
+    * These formats are not compatible, and there WILL be data loss and inaccuracy
+    * This negates the benefits of using OpenAPI v3 for the richer type information
+2. Provide general-purpose OpenAPI visualization.
+
+
+## Proposal
+
+
+### Basic Usage
+
+The following user experience should be possible with `kubectl explain`
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods.spec
+```
+
+Output should be familiar to users of today's `kubectl explain`, except new
+information from the OpenAPI v3 spec is now populated.
+
+Note: Feature during development will be gated by an experimental flag. The commands
+shown here elide the experimental flag for clarity.
+
+### Built-in Template Options
+#### Plaintext
+
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods
+```
+or
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --output plaintext
+```
+
+The plaintext output format is the default and should be crafted to be as close
+as the existing `explain` output in use before this KEP.
+
+#### OpenAPIV3 (raw json)
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --output openapiv3
+```
+
+To get raw OpenAPI v3 data for a certain resource today involves:
+1.) setting up kubectl proxy
+2.) fetching the correct path at `/openapi/v3/<group>/<version>`
+3.) filtering out unwanted results
+
+This command is useful not only for its convenience, but also other visualizations
+may be built upon the raw output if we opt not to support a first-class custom
+template solution in the future.
+
+#### HTML
+
+> PROVISIONAL SECTION
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --output html
+```
+
+Similarly to [godoc](https://pkg.go.dev), we suggest to provide a searchable,
+navigable, generated webpage for the kubernetes types of whatever cluster kubectl
+is talking to.
+
+Only the fields selected in the command line (and their subfields' types, etc) 
+will be included in the resultant page.
+
+Possible idea: If user types `kubectl explain --output html` with no specific target, 
+then all types in the cluster are included.
+
+#### Markdown
+> PROVISIONAL SECTION
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --output md
+```
+
+When using the `md` template, a markdown document is printed to stdout, so it
+might be saved and used for a documentation website, for example.
+
+Similarly to `html` output, only the fields selected in the command line 
+(and their subfields' types, etc) will be included in the resultant page.
+
+Possible idea: If user types `kubectl explain --output md` with no specific target,
+then all types in the cluster are included.
+
+### Risks and Mitigations
+
+#### OpenAPI V3 Not Available
+
+##### Risk
+
+OpenAPI v3 data is not available in the current cluster.
+
+##### Mitigation
+
+###### If the user does not provide an --output argument
+
+In alpha in particular, if `--output` is not specified, the old `explain` behavior
+using openapi v2 deta will be used.
+
+After beta, `--output plaintext` will be assumed and behave as below.
+
+###### If the user does provide an --output argument
+
+If a user specifies an `--output` argument and the server 404's attempting to
+fetch the correct openapi version for the template, a new error message should
+be thrown to the effect of: `server missing openapi data for version: %v.%v.%v`.
+
+Internal templates should strive to support the latest OpenAPI version enabled
+by default by versions of kubernetes within their skew. With that policy, templates
+will always render with the latest spec-version of the data, if it is available.
+
+Other network errors should be handled using normal kubectl error handling.
+
+
+#### OpenAPI serialization time
+##### Risk
+
+Today there is no interactive-speed way to deserialize protobuf or JSON openapi
+v3 data into the kube-openapi format.
+
+##### Mitigation
+
+There has been recent progress in this area. To unmarshal kube-OpenAPI v3 is now able
+to be done in a performant enough way to do it in the CLI. This KEP's beta release
+should be blocked on the merging of this optimization.
+
+## Design Details
+
+#### Current High-level Approach
+
+1. User types `kubectl explain pods`
+2. kubectl resolves 'pods' to GVR core v1 pods using cluster discovery information
+3. kubectl resolves GVR to its GVK using restmapper
+4. kubectl fetches `/openapi/v2` as protobuf
+5. kubectl parses the protobuf into `gnostic_v2.Document`
+6. kubectl converts `gnostic_v2.Document` into `proto.Models`
+7. kubectl searches the document's `Definitions` for a schema with the
+extension `x-kubernetes-group-version-kind` matching the interested GVK
+8. If a field path was used, kubectl traverses the definition's fields to the subschema
+specified by the user's path.
+9. kubectl renders the definition using its hardcoded printer
+10. If `--recursive` was used, repeat step 9 for the transitive closure of
+  object-typed fields of the top-level object. Concat the results together.
+
+#### Proposed High-level Approach
+
+1. User types `kubectl explain pods`
+2. kubectl resolves 'pods' to GVR core v1 pods using cluster discovery information
+3. kubectl fetches `/openapi/v3/<group>/<version>`
+4. kubectl parses the result as kube-openapi spec3
+5. kubectl locates the schema of the return type for the Path `/apis/<group>/<version>/<resource>` in kube-openapi
+6. If a field path was used, kubectl traverses the definition's fields to the subschema
+specified by the user's path.
+8. kubectl renders the type using its built-in template for human-readable plaintext
+9. If `--recursive` was used, repeat step 8 for the transitive closure of object-typed fields of the top-level object. Concat the results together.
+
+### Template rendering
+
+Go's text/template will be used due to its familiarity, stability, and virtue of being in stdlib.
+
+### Test Plan
+
+<!--
+**Note:** *Not required until targeted at a release.*
+The goal is to ensure that we don't accept enhancements with inadequate testing.
+
+All code is expected to have adequate tests (eventually with coverage
+expectations). Please adhere to the [Kubernetes testing guidelines][testing-guidelines]
+when drafting this test plan.
+
+[testing-guidelines]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-testing/testing.md
+-->
+
+[x] I/we understand the owners of the involved components may require updates to
+existing tests to make this code solid enough prior to committing the changes necessary
+to implement this enhancement.
+
+##### Prerequisite testing updates
+
+<!--
+Based on reviewers feedback describe what additional tests need to be added prior
+implementing this enhancement to ensure the enhancements have also solid foundations.
+-->
+
+##### Unit tests
+
+<!--
+In principle every added code should have complete unit test coverage, so providing
+the exact set of tests will not bring additional value.
+However, if complete unit test coverage is not possible, explain the reason of it
+together with explanation why this is acceptable.
+-->
+
+<!--
+Additionally, for Alpha try to enumerate the core package you will be touching
+to implement this enhancement and provide the current unit coverage for those
+in the form of:
+- <package>: <date> - <current test coverage>
+The data can be easily read from:
+https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-testing-canaries#ci-kubernetes-coverage-unit
+
+This can inform certain test coverage improvements that we want to do before
+extending the production code to implement this enhancement.
+-->
+
+- `k8s.io/kubectl/pkg/explain`: `09/29/2022`-`75.6`
+
+##### Integration tests
+
+<!--
+This question should be filled when targeting a release.
+For Alpha, describe what tests will be added to ensure proper quality of the enhancement.
+
+For Beta and GA, add links to added tests together with links to k8s-triage for those tests:
+https://storage.googleapis.com/k8s-triage/index.html
+-->
+
+- <test>: <link to test coverage>
+
+Tests should include
+
+- Expected Output tests
+- Show correct OpenAPI v3 endpoints are hit
+- Tests that show default/nullability information is being included in plaintext output
+- Tests that update the backing openapi in between calls to explain
+
+##### e2e tests
+
+<!--
+This question should be filled when targeting a release.
+For Alpha, describe what tests will be added to ensure proper quality of the enhancement.
+
+For Beta and GA, add links to added tests together with links to k8s-triage for those tests:
+https://storage.googleapis.com/k8s-triage/index.html
+
+We expect no non-infra related flakes in the last month as a GA graduation criteria.
+-->
+
+Existing e2e tests should be adapted for the new system.
+E2E test that shows every definition in OpenAPI document can be retrieved via explain
+
+
+- <test>: <link to test coverage>
+
+### Graduation Criteria
+
+Defined using feature gate
+
+#### Alpha 1
+
+- Feature implemented behind a command line flag `--output` and environment variable
+- Existing explain tests are working or adapted for new implementation
+- Plaintext output roughly matches explain output
+- OpenAPIV3 (raw json) output implemented
+
+#### Alpha 2
+
+If we decide to move ahead with the `md` and `html` outputs, an Alpha 2 may
+be required.
+
+- `md` output implemented (or dropped from design due to continued debate)
+  - Table of contents all GVKs grouped by Group then Version.
+  - Section for each individual GVK
+  - All types hyperlink to specific section
+-  basic `html` output  (or dropped from design due to continued debate)
+  - Table of contents all GVKs grouped by Group then Version.
+  - Page for each individual GVK.
+  - All types hyperlink to their specific page
+  - Searchable by name, description, field name.
+
+#### Beta
+
+- kube-openAPI v3 JSON deserialization is optimized to take less than 150ms on
+  most machines
+- OpenAPI V3 is enabled by default on at least one version within kubectl's support window.
+As of Kubernetes 1.24 OpenAPIV3 entered beta and become enabled by default, therefore meeting this requirement.
+- `--output plaintext` is on-by-default and environment variable is removed/on by default
+- `--output plaintext-openapiv2` added as a name for the old `explain` implementation, so the feature may be positively disabled.
+
+#### GA
+
+- OpenAPIV3 is GA and has been since at least the minimum supported apiserver version
+by kubectl.
+- All kube-apiserver releases within version skew of kubectl should have OpenAPIV3 on by default. This is true as of kubectl for Kubernetes 1.25
+- Old `kubectl explain` implementation is removed, as is support for OpenAPIV2-backed `kubectl explain`
+- `--output plaintext-openapiv2` has been deprecated for at least one release
+
+<!--
+**Note:** *Not required until targeted at a release.*
+
+Define graduation milestones.
+
+These may be defined in terms of API maturity, [feature gate] graduations, or as
+something else. The KEP should keep this high-level with a focus on what
+signals will be looked at to determine graduation.
+
+Consider the following in developing the graduation criteria for this enhancement:
+- [Maturity levels (`alpha`, `beta`, `stable`)][maturity-levels]
+- [Feature gate][feature gate] lifecycle
+- [Deprecation policy][deprecation-policy]
+
+Clearly define what graduation means by either linking to the [API doc
+definition](https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/kubernetes-api/#api-versioning)
+or by redefining what graduation means.
+
+In general we try to use the same stages (alpha, beta, GA), regardless of how the
+functionality is accessed.
+
+[feature gate]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/feature-gates.md
+[maturity-levels]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/api_changes.md#alpha-beta-and-stable-versions
+[deprecation-policy]: https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-policy/
+
+Below are some examples to consider, in addition to the aforementioned [maturity levels][maturity-levels].
+
+#### Alpha
+
+- Feature implemented behind a feature flag
+- Initial e2e tests completed and enabled
+
+#### Beta
+
+- Gather feedback from developers and surveys
+- Complete features A, B, C
+- Additional tests are in Testgrid and linked in KEP
+
+#### GA
+
+- N examples of real-world usage
+- N installs
+- More rigorous forms of testing—e.g., downgrade tests and scalability tests
+- Allowing time for feedback
+
+**Note:** Generally we also wait at least two releases between beta and
+GA/stable, because there's no opportunity for user feedback, or even bug reports,
+in back-to-back releases.
+
+**For non-optional features moving to GA, the graduation criteria must include
+[conformance tests].**
+
+[conformance tests]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md
+
+#### Deprecation
+
+- Announce deprecation and support policy of the existing flag
+- Two versions passed since introducing the functionality that deprecates the flag (to address version skew)
+- Address feedback on usage/changed behavior, provided on GitHub issues
+- Deprecate the flag
+-->
+
+### Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy
+
+<!--
+If applicable, how will the component be upgraded and downgraded? Make sure
+this is in the test plan.
+
+Consider the following in developing an upgrade/downgrade strategy for this
+enhancement:
+- What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing
+  cluster required to make on upgrade, in order to maintain previous behavior?
+- What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing
+  cluster required to make on upgrade, in order to make use of the enhancement?
+-->
+
+N/A
+
+### Version Skew Strategy
+
+<!--
+If applicable, how will the component handle version skew with other
+components? What are the guarantees? Make sure this is in the test plan.
+
+Consider the following in developing a version skew strategy for this
+enhancement:
+- Does this enhancement involve coordinating behavior in the control plane and
+  in the kubelet? How does an n-2 kubelet without this feature available behave
+  when this feature is used?
+- Will any other components on the node change? For example, changes to CSI,
+  CRI or CNI may require updating that component before the kubelet.
+-->
+
+This feature only requires the target cluster has enabled The OpenAPIV3 feature.
+
+OpenAPIV3 is Beta as of Kubernetes 1.24. This feature should not be on-by-default
+until it is GA.
+
+Users of the `--output` flag who attempt to use it against a cluster for which
+OpenAPI v3 is not enabled will be shown an error informing them of missing openapi
+version upon 404.
+
+Built-in templates supported by kubectl should aim to support at least one OpenAPI
+version which is GA for an apiserver version within the support window.
+`kubectl` will support trying to fetch each of these versions, so one is guaranteed
+to be able to render.
+
+## Production Readiness Review Questionnaire
+
+<!--
+
+Production readiness reviews are intended to ensure that features merging into
+Kubernetes are observable, scalable and supportable; can be safely operated in
+production environments, and can be disabled or rolled back in the event they
+cause increased failures in production. See more in the PRR KEP at
+https://git.k8s.io/enhancements/keps/sig-architecture/1194-prod-readiness.
+
+The production readiness review questionnaire must be completed and approved
+for the KEP to move to `implementable` status and be included in the release.
+
+In some cases, the questions below should also have answers in `kep.yaml`. This
+is to enable automation to verify the presence of the review, and to reduce review
+burden and latency.
+
+The KEP must have a approver from the
+[`prod-readiness-approvers`](http://git.k8s.io/enhancements/OWNERS_ALIASES)
+team. Please reach out on the
+[#prod-readiness](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CPNHUMN74) channel if
+you need any help or guidance.
+-->
+
+### Feature Enablement and Rollback
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting alpha to a release.
+-->
+
+###### How can this feature be enabled / disabled in a live cluster?
+
+<!--
+Pick one of these and delete the rest.
+
+Documentation is available on [feature gate lifecycle] and expectations, as
+well as the [existing list] of feature gates.
+
+[feature gate lifecycle]: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/feature-gates.md
+[existing list]: https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/
+-->
+
+- [ ] Feature gate (also fill in values in `kep.yaml`)
+  - Feature gate name:
+  - Components depending on the feature gate:
+- [x] Other
+  - Describe the mechanism: Environment variable `ENABLE_EXPLAIN_OPENAPIV3` which toggles validity of `--output` flag
+    (to be renamed to --output when feature is no longer experimental)
+  - Will enabling / disabling the feature require downtime of the control
+    plane? No
+  - Will enabling / disabling the feature require downtime or reprovisioning
+    of a node? (Do not assume `Dynamic Kubelet Config` feature is enabled). No
+
+###### Does enabling the feature change any default behavior?
+
+<!--
+Any change of default behavior may be surprising to users or break existing
+automations, so be extremely careful here.
+-->
+
+Enabling the feature changes the data source of `kubectl explain` to use openapiv3.
+The output optimally should be familiar to users, who may be delighted to see new
+information populated.
+
+###### Can the feature be disabled once it has been enabled (i.e. can we roll back the enablement)?
+
+Until the feature is stable it will only be enabled when the environment variable is used.
+It has no persistent effect on data that is viewewd.
+
+###### What happens if we reenable the feature if it was previously rolled back?
+
+There is no persistence to using the feature. It is only used for viewing data.
+
+###### Are there any tests for feature enablement/disablement?
+
+<!--
+The e2e framework does not currently support enabling or disabling feature
+gates. However, unit tests in each component dealing with managing data, created
+with and without the feature, are necessary. At the very least, think about
+conversion tests if API types are being modified.
+
+Additionally, for features that are introducing a new API field, unit tests that
+are exercising the `switch` of feature gate itself (what happens if I disable a
+feature gate after having objects written with the new field) are also critical.
+You can take a look at one potential example of such test in:
+https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/97058/files#diff-7826f7adbc1996a05ab52e3f5f02429e94b68ce6bce0dc534d1be636154fded3R246-R282
+-->
+
+### Rollout, Upgrade and Rollback Planning
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+-->
+
+###### How can a rollout or rollback fail? Can it impact already running workloads?
+
+<!--
+Try to be as paranoid as possible - e.g., what if some components will restart
+mid-rollout?
+
+Be sure to consider highly-available clusters, where, for example,
+feature flags will be enabled on some API servers and not others during the
+rollout. Similarly, consider large clusters and how enablement/disablement
+will rollout across nodes.
+-->
+
+###### What specific metrics should inform a rollback?
+
+<!--
+What signals should users be paying attention to when the feature is young
+that might indicate a serious problem?
+-->
+
+###### Were upgrade and rollback tested? Was the upgrade->downgrade->upgrade path tested?
+
+<!--
+Describe manual testing that was done and the outcomes.
+Longer term, we may want to require automated upgrade/rollback tests, but we
+are missing a bunch of machinery and tooling and can't do that now.
+-->
+
+###### Is the rollout accompanied by any deprecations and/or removals of features, APIs, fields of API types, flags, etc.?
+
+<!--
+Even if applying deprecation policies, they may still surprise some users.
+-->
+
+### Monitoring Requirements
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+-->
+
+###### How can an operator determine if the feature is in use by workloads?
+
+<!--
+Ideally, this should be a metric. Operations against the Kubernetes API (e.g.,
+checking if there are objects with field X set) may be a last resort. Avoid
+logs or events for this purpose.
+-->
+
+###### How can someone using this feature know that it is working for their instance?
+
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --output openapiv3
+```
+
+User should see OpenAPI v3 JSON Schema for `pods` type printed to console.
+
+###### What are the reasonable SLOs (Service Level Objectives) for the enhancement?
+
+<!--
+This is your opportunity to define what "normal" quality of service looks like
+for a feature.
+
+It's impossible to provide comprehensive guidance, but at the very
+high level (needs more precise definitions) those may be things like:
+  - per-day percentage of API calls finishing with 5XX errors <= 1%
+  - 99% percentile over day of absolute value from (job creation time minus expected
+    job creation time) for cron job <= 10%
+  - 99.9% of /health requests per day finish with 200 code
+
+These goals will help you determine what you need to measure (SLIs) in the next
+question.
+-->
+
+###### What are the SLIs (Service Level Indicators) an operator can use to determine the health of the service?
+
+<!--
+Pick one more of these and delete the rest.
+-->
+
+- [ ] Metrics
+  - Metric name:
+  - [Optional] Aggregation method:
+  - Components exposing the metric:
+- [ ] Other (treat as last resort)
+  - Details:
+
+###### Are there any missing metrics that would be useful to have to improve observability of this feature?
+
+<!--
+Describe the metrics themselves and the reasons why they weren't added (e.g., cost,
+implementation difficulties, etc.).
+-->
+
+### Dependencies
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+-->
+
+###### Does this feature depend on any specific services running in the cluster?
+
+<!--
+Think about both cluster-level services (e.g. metrics-server) as well
+as node-level agents (e.g. specific version of CRI). Focus on external or
+optional services that are needed. For example, if this feature depends on
+a cloud provider API, or upon an external software-defined storage or network
+control plane.
+
+For each of these, fill in the following—thinking about running existing user workloads
+and creating new ones, as well as about cluster-level services (e.g. DNS):
+  - [Dependency name]
+    - Usage description:
+      - Impact of its outage on the feature:
+      - Impact of its degraded performance or high-error rates on the feature:
+-->
+
+To reap the benefits of this feature, OpenAPI v3 is required, however OpenAPI v2
+data can be used as a fallback.
+
+### Scalability
+
+<!--
+For alpha, this section is encouraged: reviewers should consider these questions
+and attempt to answer them.
+
+For beta, this section is required: reviewers must answer these questions.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in any new API calls?
+
+Yes, up feature replaces a single GET of `/openapi/v2` which returns a large (megabytes)
+openapi document for all types with a more targeted call to `/openapi/v3/<group>/<version>`
+
+The `/openapi/v3/<group>/<version>` endpoint implements E-Tag caching so that if the document has
+not changed the server incurs a cheap, almost negligible cost to serving the request.
+
+The document returned by calls to `/openapi/v3/...` is expected to be far smaller
+than the megabytes-scale openapi v2 document, since it only includes information
+for a single group-version.
+
+<!--
+Describe them, providing:
+  - API call type (e.g. PATCH pods)
+  - estimated throughput
+  - originating component(s) (e.g. Kubelet, Feature-X-controller)
+Focusing mostly on:
+  - components listing and/or watching resources they didn't before
+  - API calls that may be triggered by changes of some Kubernetes resources
+    (e.g. update of object X triggers new updates of object Y)
+  - periodic API calls to reconcile state (e.g. periodic fetching state,
+    heartbeats, leader election, etc.)
+-->
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in introducing new API types?
+
+No.
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in any new calls to the cloud provider?
+
+No.
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in increasing size or count of the existing API objects?
+
+No.
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in increasing time taken by any operations covered by existing SLIs/SLOs?
+
+No.
+
+###### Will enabling / using this feature result in non-negligible increase of resource usage (CPU, RAM, disk, IO, ...) in any components?
+
+No, would expect generally same amount of resource usage for kubectl.
+
+### Troubleshooting
+
+<!--
+This section must be completed when targeting beta to a release.
+
+For GA, this section is required: approvers should be able to confirm the
+previous answers based on experience in the field.
+
+The Troubleshooting section currently serves the `Playbook` role. We may consider
+splitting it into a dedicated `Playbook` document (potentially with some monitoring
+details). For now, we leave it here.
+-->
+
+###### How does this feature react if the API server and/or etcd is unavailable?
+
+Using kubectl's normal error handling. There is no lasting effect to data or the
+user.
+
+###### What are other known failure modes?
+
+<!--
+For each of them, fill in the following information by copying the below template:
+  - [Failure mode brief description]
+    - Detection: How can it be detected via metrics? Stated another way:
+      how can an operator troubleshoot without logging into a master or worker node?
+    - Mitigations: What can be done to stop the bleeding, especially for already
+      running user workloads?
+    - Diagnostics: What are the useful log messages and their required logging
+      levels that could help debug the issue?
+      Not required until feature graduated to beta.
+    - Testing: Are there any tests for failure mode? If not, describe why.
+-->
+
+###### What steps should be taken if SLOs are not being met to determine the problem?
+
+N/A
+
+## Implementation History
+
+<!--
+Major milestones in the lifecycle of a KEP should be tracked in this section.
+Major milestones might include:
+- the `Summary` and `Motivation` sections being merged, signaling SIG acceptance
+- the `Proposal` section being merged, signaling agreement on a proposed design
+- the date implementation started
+- the first Kubernetes release where an initial version of the KEP was available
+- the version of Kubernetes where the KEP graduated to general availability
+- when the KEP was retired or superseded
+-->
+
+## Drawbacks
+
+<!--
+Why should this KEP _not_ be implemented?
+-->
+
+## Alternatives
+
+### Implement proto.Models for OpenAPI V3 data
+
+The current hard-coded printer is capable of printing any objects in `proto.Models` form.
+
+[We already have a way to express OpenAPI v3 data as `proto.Models`, so this can be
+seen as a path of least resistance for plugging OpenAPI v3 into `kubectl explain`.
+
+This approach is undesirable for a few different reasons:
+
+1.) We would like to update the explain printer to include new OpenAPI v3 information,
+the current design makes that time consuming and not maintainable.
+
+2.) API-Machinery has desire to deprecate `proto.Models`. We see`proto.Models`
+conversion as unnecessary and costly buraucracy, that contributes to high
+OpenAPI overhead. We are seeking to deprecate the type in favor of the
+kube-openapi types for future usage.
+
+### Custom User Templates
+Users might also like to be able to specify a path to a custom template file for
+the resource information to be written to:
+
+human-readable plaintext form:
+```shell
+kubectl explain pods --template /path/to/template.tmpl
+```
+
+Since the API surface for this sort of feature remains very unclear and will likely
+be very unstable, this sort of feature should be delayed until the internal
+templates have proven the API surface to be used. To do otherwise would risk
+breaking user's templates.
diff --git a/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/kep.yaml b/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/kep.yaml
new file mode 100755
index 00000000000..c6f3b5eba08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/keps/sig-cli/3515-kubectl-explain-openapiv3/kep.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+id: "3515"
+name: kubectl-explain-openapiv3
+title: Kubectl Explain OpenAPIv3
+kep-number: 3515
+authors: ['@alexzielenski']
+owning-sig: sig-cli
+participating-sigs: [sig-api-machinery, sig-cli]
+reviewers:
+  - "@KnVerey"
+  - "@seans3"
+  - "@apelisse"
+approvers:
+  - "@KnVerey"
+  - "@seans3"
+creation-date: "2022-09-14"
+last-updated: v1.26
+status: implementable
+stage: alpha
+latest-milestone: "1.26"
+milestone:
+    alpha: "1.26"
+    beta: "1.28"
+    stable: "1.29"
+feature-gates: []
+disable-supported: true
+metrics: []