IECC C405.11

Location
Colorado
Occupation
Electrical Design
It seems as though our industry is still grappling with the new regulations concerning Automatic Receptacle Control in Offices and Conference rooms. The IECC Code states in part "... At least 50 percent of all 125V, 15- and 20-amp receptacles installed in enclosed offices, conference rooms, rooms used primarily for copy or print functions, breakrooms, classrooms and individual workstations, including those installed in modular partitions and module office workstation systems. ..." - IECC 2021 C405.11

My Question is: Is there options out there for controlling multiple circuits in the same room or work space with one control device? e.g. There is four workstations in one bull pin area in the front lobby of a small clinic, three or more circuits will be needed to supply power to all the workstations in the area. Under the IECC code listed we will need to control at least 50% of all receptacles in this area no matter what circuit they are associated with. My thought is that the simple solution is to install a 4th circuit with only controlled devices and install 50% of the devices in the area on the one circuit. The reality is that nothing important or permanent will be plugged into the controlled devices because they will turn off each time there is not someone in the area for more than 20 minutes. But is this the intent of this code? Probably not? What is the actual thought process behind this code requirement?
 
You sir are a genius.
VW is looking for new designers for EPA diesel emission compliance team.

Seriously though, while likely compliant, is it not a great waste of expensive resources?
Talk over with your client and get feedback before going forward.

My state exempted this from being required, or at least last time I checked. Have you checked to see if your state has done something similar?

Relay panels that control the area lighting can also be used for controlling the receptacle circuits.
Check in with the sales reps for these products and they will walk you through all of the sensor control types and wall controls/override options.
 
I’m not sure if the first comment was calculated to be insulting or what its purpose was but it was definitely unnecessary. Secondly yes, our state definitely requires it and that is my point in going to a public forum to seek “professional” advice on options and alternative ways to comply with codes (though the code may be completely insane and a complete waist of money time and effort. In my opinion it’s still a code that has been adopted)
My point in asking the question is to find simple solutions to issues created by code making panels that are ether not thought through or totally calculated to create markets for products that those on the code panels benefit from.
Whatever the case your response gave no substantive answers or suggestions to actually solving any of the questions asked. Thank you for your response!
 
I didn't read that comment to be insulting. I took it to mean that you found a "work around" to the code that is compliant, but it doesn't achieve the intent of the code. I think MyCleveland answered your original question and he did suggest checking in with reps and also to check with your customer to find the "best" solution.
 
Ephraim.Barlow

I apologize if you took this as an insult or a slight against your character. I can only state is was not my intent.

"You sir are a genius." You came up with a way to comply with the code...no matter how someone interrupts your intent.

"VW is looking for new designers for EPA diesel emission compliance team."
I was trying to say you could help the VW team learn something about compliance WITHIN the rules.

"My state exempted this from being required, or at least last time I checked. Have you checked to see if your state has done something similar?"
I was not implying laziness or ignorance....many posters simply are not aware of this and it was just a reminder for you to look into the issue.

"is it not a great waste of expensive resources?"
This one you have to answer for yourself.

"Talk over with your client and get feedback before going forward."
I meant exactly that...DO NOTHING without your customers full knowledge.
I have had customers that would be onboard with the idea, until they realized the added cost. Others were "GREEN" to the bone and are content with following the rules as these committees have laid out.

The balance was just simple advice on who is best at assisting you in laying out a compliant control package.
 
Ephraim.Barlow

I apologize if you took this as an insult or a slight against your character. I can only state is was not my intent.

"You sir are a genius." You came up with a way to comply with the code...no matter how someone interrupts your intent.

"VW is looking for new designers for EPA diesel emission compliance team."
I was trying to say you could help the VW team learn something about compliance WITHIN the rules.

"My state exempted this from being required, or at least last time I checked. Have you checked to see if your state has done something similar?"
I was not implying laziness or ignorance....many posters simply are not aware of this and it was just a reminder for you to look into the issue.

"is it not a great waste of expensive resources?"
This one you have to answer for yourself.

"Talk over with your client and get feedback before going forward."
I meant exactly that...DO NOTHING without your customers full knowledge.
I have had customers that would be onboard with the idea, until they realized the added cost. Others were "GREEN" to the bone and are content with following the rules as these committees have laid out.

The balance was just simple advice on who is best at assisting you in laying out a compliant control package.
Please accept my apologies for taking your comment wrong, this is some new stuff for our area and there is a lot of designers still completely missing the details on this requirement on the prints or specs. Colorado is right behind California when it comes to these wasteful "energy saving" requirements there is a small amount of logic to it if you are talking about a 80 story office building with 2 million sf of office space that has people working a daily shift of 9-5 but, the way it is written it gives no excuse for if it is a single office and breakroom in a mechanic shop or if its in a office building with half a million cubicles. We have found so far that the best option really is to offer a higher class lighting control system that can control these circuits, but a lot of customers do not want to spend that kind of money so for these situations I will be adding a separate circuit that covers only the switched receptacles and putting them in as quads so the customer has at least the normal amount of usable receptacles available.
 
We use the power pack with multiple contacts controlled via occupancy sensors for that area. That way the same lighting and 50% receptacles go on / off with the same occupancy sensor.
This is a great idea. Do you happen to have any product info on these particular modules?
 
I read in the article that a non-controlled receptacle has to be min 12" away from the controlled. That blows the "quad" idea out of the water.
 
I read in the article that a non-controlled receptacle has to be min 12" away from the controlled. That blows the "quad" idea out of the water.
Welcome to the forum.

I'm under the impression it's within 12", so distance is not an excuse to avoid using it.
 
Don't believe an article unless they have a code reference.

What is the code reference for this 12" away business?
IECC2021 Art C405.11 but i guess i read it wrong, it mentioned for modular workstation only. but this is the wording for other office space
"Either split controlled receptacles shall be provided with the top receptacle controlled, or a controlled receptacle shall be located within 12 inches (304.8 mm) of each uncontrolled receptacle."
 
  • Like
Reactions: ron
It seems as though our industry is still grappling with the new regulations concerning Automatic Receptacle Control in Offices and Conference rooms. The IECC Code states in part "... At least 50 percent of all 125V, 15- and 20-amp receptacles installed in enclosed offices, conference rooms, rooms used primarily for copy or print functions, breakrooms, classrooms and individual workstations, including those installed in modular partitions and module office workstation systems. ..." - IECC 2021 C405.11

My Question is: Is there options out there for controlling multiple circuits in the same room or work space with one control device? e.g. There is four workstations in one bull pin area in the front lobby of a small clinic, three or more circuits will be needed to supply power to all the workstations in the area. Under the IECC code listed we will need to control at least 50% of all receptacles in this area no matter what circuit they are associated with. My thought is that the simple solution is to install a 4th circuit with only controlled devices and install 50% of the devices in the area on the one circuit. The reality is that nothing important or permanent will be plugged into the controlled devices because they will turn off each time there is not someone in the area for more than 20 minutes. But is this the intent of this code? Probably not? What is the actual thought process behind this code requirement?
You could use occupancy sensors and power pack to control 50% of the receptacles in the area. That is what we used to do. Thankfully Florida has decided to abandon the idea of controlled receptacles.
 
Top