# IC vs Non IC rated recessed lighting



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Just for clarification, where would non IC rated cans be allowed to be used in lieu of IC rated? 
Code reference?


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

Ummmm...anywhere where the can isn't in contact with insulation.

I guess I don't get your exact question.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

I just completed installing remodel cans in a kitchen ceiling, where there is attic space above, and insulation.
The GC supplied the (non IC rated)cans and I told him we might have an issue with the inspection.
Now I made sure I moved the insulation away from the cans, but still think my inspector will want me to put in IC rated.
When I supply the cans I always get IC rated.
I am just wondering if this install would be a code violation.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

Were they AT rated?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Were they AT rated?


That I do not know.


----------



## JHFWIC (Mar 22, 2012)

Why would you let somebody else supply the cans?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

JHFWIC said:


> Why would you let somebody else supply the cans?


This GC always supplies the cans. He gets the Lightolier brand.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> That I do not know.


You let someone else supply the cans, you installed them, and didn't check if they were rated for the application?

You can move the insulation away from the non IC rated cans, but they would have to be air tite if you are installing them in an attic.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Thus the reason I asked the question.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

aftershockews said:


> I just completed installing remodel cans in a kitchen ceiling, where there is attic space above, and insulation.
> The GC supplied the (non IC rated)cans and I told him we might have an issue with the inspection.
> Now I made sure I moved the insulation away from the cans, but still think my inspector will want me to put in IC rated.
> When I supply the cans I always get IC rated.
> I am just wondering if this install would be a code violation.


I'd be willing to bet it's a building code violation. It's without question a hack job and the homeowner should fire you and the GC and hire some competent contractors.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

You will probably need to fabricate boxes out of drywall or something else. If I was in inspector I would fail you unless you made it impossible for insulation to get near the cans.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

I figure that will be the case.
I was wondering if there is a code reference for future issues like this.


----------



## CopperSlave (Feb 9, 2012)

http://www.amazon.com/Tenmat-FF130E-Recessed-Light-Cover/dp/B002XVPUAO


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

The dreaded UL listing is your reference.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

You could start with 110.3, then find any appropriate local building codes.


----------



## SparkyDino (Sep 23, 2013)

JHFWIC said:


> Why would you let somebody else supply the cans?


I have had about 6 can jobs in last 3 mths where the customer already had the recessed cans.

Varying reasons from didn't have time to install themselves, saw them on sale so grabbed them to couldn't figure out how to remove existing ceiling boxes with numerous conduits/wire that were in the way for new cans.

The only thing I supplied was the AC whips & misc small material.

I am not going to pass up an easy T & M job to make a few hundred bucks cash because the owner had the cans already. :whistling2:

Only once did they not have the right cans, so I supplied them.


----------



## daveEM (Nov 18, 2012)

Sometimes you just can't do what people want you to do. Those cans should have been firmly stuffed up the GCs ... So he would learn you see.

You of course should never had wired then in.

Now if you don't change them and the inspector doesn't notice... cause why would he, you being an electrician an all and IC cans being available for many years now, well you're doing a disservice to the customer.

Change them out. Put the insulation back too. You can do it this afternoon.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

aftershockews said:


> I was wondering if there is a code reference for future issues like this.


*110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment.*
*(B) Installation and Use.* Listed or labeled equipment
shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.

*410.116 Clearance and Installation*.
*(A) Clearance.*
*(1) Non-Type IC.* A recessed luminaire that is not identified for contact with insulation shall have all recessed parts spaced not less than 13 mm (1⁄2 in.) from combustible materials. The points of support and the trim finishing off the openings in the ceiling, wall, or other finished surface shall be permitted to be in contact with combustible materials.
*(2) Type IC.* A recessed luminaire that is identified for contact with insulation, Type IC, shall be permitted to be in contact with combustible materials at recessed parts, points of support, and portions passing through or finishing off the opening in the building structure.
*(B) Installation.* Thermal insulation shall not be installed above a recessed luminaire or within 75 mm (3 in.) of the recessed luminaire’s enclosure, wiring compartment, ballast, transformer, LED driver, or power supply unless the luminaire is identified as Type IC for insulation contact.

Pete


----------



## CraigV (May 12, 2011)

See 410.16(B) in Pete m's post. You can't put _any_ insulation above the can. That means you can't meet the energy code requirements for attic insulation without creating additional structure (boxes) around and over each can. So whether you meet the electrical code isn't really as important as the building/energy code failure.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Pete m. said:


> *110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment.*
> *(B) Installation and Use.* Listed or labeled equipment
> shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.
> 
> ...


 Thanx Pete, that was what I was looking for.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

CraigV said:


> See 410.16(B) in Pete m's post. You can't put _any_ insulation above the can. That means you can't meet the energy code requirements for attic insulation without creating additional structure (boxes) around and over each can. So whether you meet the electrical code isn't really as important as the building/energy code failure.


Understood.
Inspector passed without question. I will inform the GC of the concerns stated here.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Understood.
> Inspector passed without question. I will inform the GC of the concerns stated here.


Concerns? Seems like more than concerns. You, currently, have code violations. Whether the inspector caught it or not, they are code violations. At minimum, you will have cold air falling thru the cans. At worst, the homeowner will reinsulate, cover the cans, and start a fire.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Concerns? Seems like more than concerns. You, currently, have code violations. Whether the inspector caught it or not, they are code violations. At minimum, you will have cold air falling thru the cans. At worst, the homeowner will reinsulate, cover the cans, and start a fire.


Thank you for the input. I will also bring this to the GC's attention


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Concerns? Seems like more than concerns. You, currently, have code violations. Whether the inspector caught it or not, they are code violations. At minimum, you will have cold air falling thru the cans. At worst, the homeowner will reinsulate, cover the cans, and start a fire.


 Please cite me the code violation.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

So you are telling me that it is legal to put a non AT can in a ceiling with open attic above?


----------



## Morris Scardigno (Oct 29, 2007)

Violation to energy code.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> So you are telling me that it is legal to put a non AT can in a ceiling with open attic above?


So, since in a previous post you tell me I violated code, but when I asked for the code violation, you change your answer?
Are you avoiding the question I cited?


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

I didn't change my answer. I asked you a question pertaining to the violation.


----------



## bobelectric (Feb 24, 2007)

Morris Scardigno said:


> Violation to energy code.


 Then D.O.E. gets involved.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> So you are telling me that it is legal to put a non AT can in a ceiling with open attic above?


 I am asking you to cite it the NEC Code I violated that makes it illegal.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> I didn't change my answer. I asked you a question pertaining to the violation.


And I asked you what the violation is. You have not answered that.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

I never said it was an electrical code, however, our EI's do enforce it.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

I believe someone has already told you but...


NEC Section 110.3(B) requires that “Listed or 
labeled equipment shall be installed and used 
in accordance with any instructions included in 
the listing or labeling.” 
Are you done now.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

sbrn33 said:


> I believe someone has already told you but...
> 
> 
> NEC Section 110.3(B) requires that “Listed or
> ...


 I take it you did not read the whole thread.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> I never said it was an electrical code, however, our EI's do enforce it.


 Oh. OK. So it is a violation according to YOUR EI's. And this is why you pushed as also applying to my install?


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

I'm sure it is a violation in your state as well.

http://www.ecmag.com/section/lighting/out-sight-out-mind

To ensure your customers get the most reliable recessed luminaries, there are other codes and standards in place past the NEC. The majority of building energy codes now require recessed cans installed in the building shell to be airtight. The International Building Code Section 711.4.2 states, “Where floor/ceiling assemblies are required to have a minimum 1-hour fire resistance rating, recessed fixtures shall be installed such that the required fire resistance of the ceiling will not be reduced.” - See more at: http://www.ecmag.com/section/lighting/out-sight-out-mind#sthash.XfiJwBmX.dpuf


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

aftershockews said:


> I take it you did not read the whole thread.


I did read the whole thread and I believe I answered your little troll type question.
I gave you a code section and a real world answer. what more would your little mnd want?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to push buttons. I stated that I did not like this install. I also stated that I removed insulation away from the cans.

I asked for a code reference that would prohibit this install. Pete was the only one to provide a code reference that did not prohibit this install.

There are some of you saying it is against code but can't provide anything but your opinion.

If what I installed is an NEC code violation, then point it out using a code article. Just as I asked from the start.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> I just completed installing remodel cans in a kitchen ceiling, where there is attic space above, and insulation.





aftershockews said:


> Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to push buttons. I stated that I did not like his install. I also stated that I removed insulation away from the cans.


Now you didn't install the cans?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

sbrn33 said:


> I did read the whole thread and I believe I answered your little troll type question.
> I gave you a code section and a real world answer. what more would your little mnd want?


 Apparently you did not.
I followed the MFG instructions as well as what Pete posted.
You think my install violated code?
And you think I am trolling just to get answers?


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

aftershockews said:


> Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to push buttons. I stated that I did not like his install. I also stated that I removed insulation away from the cans.
> 
> I asked for a code reference that would prohibit this install. Pete was the only one to provide a code reference that did not prohibit this install.
> 
> ...


Hire a professional and sub it out ya butcher. I'm embarrassed and I have nothing to do with the hack job you did.


----------



## daveEM (Nov 18, 2012)

Well there are good electricians and bad ones. We all know that. You proved to me you are not a good electrician.

Hopefully you will find another line of work.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Now you didn't install the cans?


 Typo due to auto correct on my phone. HIS should be THIS.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Typo due to auto correct on my phone. HIS should be THIS.


Understood...just making sure


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

daveEM said:


> Well there are good electricians and bad ones. We all know that. You proved to me you are not a good electrician.
> 
> Hopefully you will find another line of work.


 So nothing to add but an insult?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Understood...just making sure


 I corrected it.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

I wonder why they install insulation.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Damn Celtic, I really wish I could read your response, but you have proven to be just like those others on my ignore list, and I want true responses and adult debates. not name calling and piss contests.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

aftershockews said:


> Damn Celtic, I really wish I could read your response, but you have proven to be just like those others on my ignore list, and I want true responses and adult debates. not name calling and piss contests.


Are you a 14 year old girl? :laughing:


----------



## Mate (Sep 5, 2009)

aftershockews said:


> Damn Celtic, I really wish I could read your response, but you have proven to be just like those others on my ignore list, and I want true responses and adult debates. not name calling and piss contests.


I wonder why they install insulation.
that's what he said. Even my first year greenie would know it's wrong.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Mate said:


> I wonder why they install insulation.
> that's what he said. Even my first year greenie would know it's wrong.


Why would it be wrong to install insulation?


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Why would it be wrong to install insulation?


Because now there are non-IC rated cans up there.:whistling2:


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Nevermind, I did not see your location. Like FrunkSlammer and daveEM, your just another that has no experience here but yet likes to weigh in an opinion where you have no experience.


----------



## Rednecksparky (Aug 23, 2013)

I always thought us electricians where smart, what you did is grounds for being shot from where im from. Give your head a shake


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> Because now there are non-IC rated cans up there.:whistling2:


Funny there , real funny. Would you mind it if I responded with "Bite Me"?


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

aftershockews said:


> Nevermind, I did not see your location. Like FrunkSlammer and daveEM, your just another that has no experience here but yet likes to weigh in an opinion where you have no experience.


Seriously you don't know the difference between IC rated and non-IC rated cans and you're the pro on this website? lmfao :laughing:

I may be green, but at least I'm certified.

What kind of hack installs non-IC rated cans and then just "pushes" insulation away from them, and thinks it's okay? I hope nobody dies in that fire.. if it happens.


----------



## SparkyDino (Sep 23, 2013)

my dad used to say something or other like..........

"just because someone can write about turning a screwdriver on a piece of paper, doesn't mean he can turn a screwdriver"


----------



## Mate (Sep 5, 2009)

aftershockews said:


> Why would it be wrong to install insulation?


I don't think you're the sharpest pen in the drawer so let me explain. Insulation is there for a reason (to isolate). If you push the insulation away, what happend? No more insulation where it should be. BUT if you put insulation on non ic rated lights, it might caught on fire........Dilemma....I wonder if there is a product to solve this problem...??!!?


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

DH ELECTRIC said:


> my dad used to say something or other like..........
> 
> "just because someone can write about turning a screwdriver on a piece of paper, doesn't mean he can turn a screwdriver"


:blink:
I am not sure how to take that one.


----------



## Rednecksparky (Aug 23, 2013)

aftershockews said:


> :blink: I am not sure how to take that one.


Take it as your an idiot quit your job, go be a plumber


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Sorry Rednecksparky, I learned from FrunkSlammer that it is best to ignore you Canadians, since #1, you don't do what we do here, and #2, most of what you say that concerns us here is you opinion only and just dribble.
Therefore it is a waste of my time and forum bandwith for you to be posting in a thread that does not even concern you our the country you choose to live in.


----------



## Rednecksparky (Aug 23, 2013)

aftershockews said:


> Sorry Rednecksparky, I learned from FrunkSlammer that it is best to ignore you Canadians, since #1, you don't do what we do here, and #2, most of what you say that concerns us here is you opinion only and just dribble. Therefore it is a waste of my time and forum bandwith for you to be posting in a thread that does not even concern you our the country you choose to live in.


The issue is that not only canadians think your a moron. So do your own country men, and i dont do what you do but i do what the rest of the electricians do, i dont no if you new but ic and non ic pots are in canada with the same standard for install.


----------



## SparkyDino (Sep 23, 2013)

when y'all started talking about pot lights, at first I thought you meant grow lighting for weed. :no:


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

DH ELECTRIC said:


> when y'all started talking about pot lights, at first I thought you meant grow lighting for weed. :no:


Never once did I mention POT in my posts, you drugie minded lil bas......:laughing::thumbup:


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

Oh Canadians definitely know the difference between pot lights and lights for pot! :laughing:

That's second year side job knowledge!


----------



## Mate (Sep 5, 2009)

aftershockews said:


> Sorry Rednecksparky, I learned from FrunkSlammer that it is best to ignore you Canadians, since #1, you don't do what we do here, and #2, most of what you say that concerns us here is you opinion only and just dribble.
> Therefore it is a waste of my time and forum bandwith for you to be posting in a thread that does not even concern you our the country you choose to live in.


We might have some difference in our code vs yours but in general it's pretty much the same job with same equipment and same tools. Where does it says in your OP that this post was for american only?? That would be a shame because us canadians wanna make fun of you too!


----------



## CopperSlave (Feb 9, 2012)

Mate said:


> Dilemma....I wonder if there is a product to solve this problem...??!!?


There is, and I gave a link to it in post #13.:thumbsup:


----------



## Bobby_Sardells (Jul 11, 2012)

IC = Insulation Contact

It is pretty self explanatory. If insulation will touch the fixture, then you need an IC rated can. Will not pass inspection if a regular retrofit is used!


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

aftershockews said:


> Damn Celtic, I really wish I could read your response, but you have proven to be just like those others on my ignore list, and I want true responses and adult debates. not name calling and piss contests.


I don't usually go the route of name calling and pissing contests, but in your case - I'll make an exception.

:laughing:


I don't have to stoop to name calling and pissing contests - like I told you before: I am brutally honest.
Sometimes that honesty comes with a side of sarcasm.


You won't be the first to put me on an ignore list - and you won't be the last....it's not really an exclusive club :cool2:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

I'm not going to read the entire thread but the violation is non-compliance of the energy code which applies to recessed lighting in non-conditioned air spaces. It's also common sense to prevent conditioned air to escape to an unconditioned space, wouldn't you say?


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

It's awesome that now when people who aren't professional electricians google "ic vs non ic", this thread will come.

What an embarrassment to the trade. It really doesn't get any simpler than ic rated cans and non-ic rated cans. :no:


----------



## papaotis (Jun 8, 2013)

it has always amazed me that 'american' usually means from u.s. but america includes canada (as in north america). and then theres central AMERICA, and southAMERICA:001_huh:


----------



## Bobby_Sardells (Jul 11, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Sorry Rednecksparky, I learned from FrunkSlammer that it is best to ignore you Canadians, since #1, you don't do what we do here, and #2, most of what you say that concerns us here is you opinion only and just dribble.
> Therefore it is a waste of my time and forum bandwith for you to be posting in a thread that does not even concern you our the country you choose to live in.


Well this comment proves you are not educated (only morons make generalizations). YOU are the reason inspectors have to be thorough. This thread has done more than enough to lead you in the right direction. 

BTW I do thermal imaging so I will be happy to drive down and show you the importance of insulation. After that I will show you just how hot recessed cans get...cough using your face cough..


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Thanks to this international residential code that we got now, we have to add lots of spun glass wool into attics that never needed any , in order to protect us from freezing temperature inside houses, which never also happened. It also makes houses become hotter than they used to get. Brilliant! I blame the Canadians for this. 

I say we make Bumpy king of the islands and get rid of all mainland contact.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

And while we are at it, we really should have made Bu the Gov.


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Bobby_Sardells said:


> Well this comment proves you are not educated (only morons make generalizations). YOU are the reason inspectors have to be thorough. This thread has done more than enough to lead you in the right direction.
> 
> BTW I do thermal imaging so I will be happy to drive down and show you the importance of insulation. After that I will show you just how hot recessed cans get...cough using your face cough..


 I guess my post got under your skin considering your location. Sorry about that.
I ignore those who would rather insult, belittle, or otherwise put someone down for questioning something rather than just discuss.
If you read through this thread you will see that I intend to discuss this with the GC, more that likely have him build boxes to place around the cans like someone else suggested


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> Thanks to this international residential code that we got now, we have to add lots of spun glass wool into attics that never needed any , in order to protect us from freezing temperature inside houses, which never also happened. It also makes houses become hotter than they used to get. Brilliant! I blame the Canadians for this.


It's global warming.. the insulation will protect us from being cooked alive in our house. That's why IC/Non-IC cans are so important.. with global temperatures increasing, the likelihood of a fire increase every year. :jester:

Aftershockews: "I intend to discuss this with the GC" :laughing: :no:


----------



## Bobby_Sardells (Jul 11, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> I guess my post got under your skin considering your location. Sorry about that.
> I ignore those who would rather insult, belittle, or otherwise put someone down for questioning something rather than just discuss.
> If you read through this thread you will see that I intend to discuss this with the GC, more that likely have him build boxes to place around the cans like someone else suggested


No you didn't get under my skin I was simply doing my due diligence as a Canadian. I read through the thread more than once and the answer to the questions you repeatedly asked was given (3 times if i am not mistaken) 

You need to help us help you. You can't just sit there demanding easier to digest answers.


----------



## CraigV (May 12, 2011)

http://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/becu/2006_iecc.pdf

This is the energy code TN adopted in 2008. It applies to your installation. See page 23 for the three choices of installation for recessed cans. Only the third choice will be acceptable for non-IC cans. It is not enough to merely push insulation away.

&#56256;&#56510;Type IC rated and labeled
in a sealed or gasketed
enclosure​&#56256;&#56510;​​​​Type IC rated and labeled
as meeting ASTM E 283
with no more than 2.0 cfm
of air movement​
&#56256;&#56510;​​​​Located inside an airtight
box with clearances of at
least 0.5 inch from
combustible material and​
3 inches from insulation


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

CraigV said:


> http://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/becu/2006_iecc.pdf
> 
> This is the energy code TN adopted in 2008. It applies to your installation. See page 23 for the three choices of installation for recessed cans. Only the third choice will be acceptable for non-IC cans. It is not enough to merely push insulation away.
> 
> ...



I got that impression on page 1, bit thanx for the link.
​


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Bobby_Sardells said:


> No you didn't get under my skin I was simply doing my due diligence as a Canadian. I read through the thread more than once and the answer to the questions you repeatedly asked was given (3 times if i am not mistaken)
> 
> You need to help us help you. You can't just sit there demanding easier to digest answers.


I will try to make this straight forward. Your Canadian, you follow rules and regulations pertaining to your trade in which they are not the same as we do here in the USA? Similar? yes, the same, NO.

I don't stick my nose in discussions pertaining to Canadian issues, I ask that you keep your nose out of issues I post pertaining to mine.

Understand?


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

aftershockews said:


> I will try to make this straight forward. Your Canadian, you follow rules and regulations pertaining to your trade in which they are not the same as we do here in the USA? Similar? yes, the same, NO.
> 
> I don't stick my nose in discussions pertaining to Canadian issues, I ask that you keep your nose out of issues I post pertaining to mine.
> 
> Understand?


Are you 8??? :laughing: You post a ridiculous topic and get called on it and then get mad at everyone else. 

I know, you can't see this because I'm on your ignore list. :laughing:


----------



## Rochsolid (Aug 9, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Sorry Rednecksparky, I learned from FrunkSlammer that it is best to ignore you Canadians, since #1, you don't do what we do here, and #2, most of what you say that concerns us here is you opinion only and just dribble.
> Therefore it is a waste of my time and forum bandwith for you to be posting in a thread that does not even concern you our the country you choose to live in.


By the sounds of things, you don't know how to do things down there either. As everyone else has stated in this thread, you used the wrong cans, they make a specific type of can for the purpose that you need, yet you used cans that are not listed for insulation contact in and insulated attic?! It really doesn't get much more clears then that. Hopefully you do the right thing and go fix it, send in the bill to the GC for the wrong cans m. Best of luck


----------



## SparkyDino (Sep 23, 2013)

Rochsolid said:


> send in the bill to the GC for the wrong cans m.


The GC may say something like "You put them in"


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

Rochsolid said:


> By the sounds of things, you don't know how to do things down there either. As everyone else has stated in this thread, you used the wrong cans, they make a specific type of can for the purpose that you need, yet you used cans that are not listed for insulation contact in and insulated attic?! It really doesn't get much more clears then that. Hopefully you do the right thing and go fix it, send in the bill to the GC for the wrong cans m. Best of luck


Damn,, 
I guess it's just Canadians.
Anyways. The cans I used are not typical to use in the situation I described. If you read the post in this thread then you will know that using these cans is not an NEC violation if I follow the MFG's specs and the code artical Pete posted which stated I must keep insulation atleats 3" from the cans, which I stated I did. 
Therefore I did not violate NEC code. NOW, I was informed by 2 persons that I can rememberer that cited it would be a building code violation.
Now keep up with me here because it seems I am having issues with the Canadians on this. (This might be a reason to keep out of issues not pertaining to you) 
I acknowledged that I saw that being and issue and would get with the GC to correct. But NOOOOO, I still got my chops busted by, wait for it, the Canadians who seem to want to get involved in issues not related to their own country. Why is that?
Is it an epeen thing? Compensating for something? I am confused by this and it seems why I end up adding more Canadians to my ignore list.

No offense dude, but If I keep my nose out of your affairs since I am not familiar with it, why would you stick your nose in mine when it is the same for you?


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

aftershockews said:


> No offense dude, but If I keep my nose out of your affairs since I am not familiar with it, why would you stick your nose in mine when it is the same for you?


You should keep your nose out of your affairs, since you're obviously not familiar with them.

DAMN CANADIANS! Frig off, eh! YOU HOSERS!

Now that we got that out of the way. Just because you "pushed" the insulation away from the non-ic rated cans, doesn't mean someone else will "push" the insulation back onto them. Some dumbass crackhead laborer will do it.

GUARANTEED.

And when/if someone with the AHJ of whatever code (electrical, fire, building) comes and sees that.. guess who's going to be in shiiiiit and take the hit on the install. The dumbass electrician who installed Non-IC rated cans into a insulated ceiling.

Good luck Yankee Doodle.


----------



## SparkyDino (Sep 23, 2013)

Personally I like Canucks........they grow great stuff & Rush is just dah bomb.
A-1 OK in my book


----------



## aftershockews (Dec 22, 2012)

DH ELECTRIC said:


> Personally I like Canucks........they grow great stuff & Rush is just dah bomb.
> A-1 OK in my book


:laughing:
I question a stoner. I think you may just like anything.


----------



## Rochsolid (Aug 9, 2012)

aftershockews said:


> Damn,,
> I guess it's just Canadians.
> Anyways. The cans I used are not typical to use in the situation I described. If you read the post in this thread then you will know that using these cans is not an NEC violation if I follow the MFG's specs and the code artical Pete posted which stated I must keep insulation atleats 3" from the cans, which I stated I did.
> Therefore I did not violate NEC code. NOW, I was informed by 2 persons that I can rememberer that cited it would be a building code violation.
> ...


Your getting your chops busted by everyone because you did a hack job, get over it and fix it  maybe if you would have used the air tight poky boot, that keeps the insulation where it needs to e, but not on the can, but "pushing" it away from the can, in my mind is not a compliant installation, the next tradesman to wonder up there will definitely push insulation into those non ic rated lights, then what?


----------



## FrunkSlammer (Aug 31, 2013)

Rochsolid said:


> the next tradesman to wonder up there will definitely push insulation into those non ic rated lights, then what?


Then the trailer he was working in spontaneously combusts and aftershockews moves to a new state.


----------

