RJ31X question

Closed Thread

  #1  
Old 04-12-09, 12:03 PM
nap's Avatar
nap
nap is offline
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: north
Posts: 4,162
Received 1 Vote on 1 Post
RJ31X question

You do a great job with the alarms forum. Very knowledgeable you are.

I just read your sticky on alarm FAQ's. Not trying to argue but you state that the FCC and telcos require something such as an RJ31X to disconnect the alarm panel from the phone system for testing.

Having installed a few commercial systems, I have never been asked to do this. The fact that the telco control stops at the NID, and I can see no reason what-so-ever the FCC would even consider this requirement, do you have any support for such requirement.

Very few telcos, if any, will even deal with interior wiring without a pay to repair situation. They simply check their lines at the NID and as long as incoming is good, that is it. What is left is the customers problem. The NID's allow an easy disconnect for them.

Like I said, not trying to argue, just learn.
 
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 04-12-09, 12:56 PM
M
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
Posts: 16,745
Received 101 Votes on 93 Posts
FCC part 68 section 500, as well as manufacturer's specifications of pretty much all alarm system.

Varying degrees of reference to it are in the "Regulatary agency statements" usually buried in the last pages of nearly all installation manuals.
 
  #3  
Old 04-12-09, 02:42 PM
nap's Avatar
nap
nap is offline
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: north
Posts: 4,162
Received 1 Vote on 1 Post
Umm, section 500 is akin to NEMA standards for receptacle configurations plus a standards of manufacture of the connectors.

and what the manufacturers specify has absolutely no bearing on what is legally required.

and again, not arguing, just trying to learn.

47 C.F.R. part 68 is a large document so it may be in there somewhere. Here is a link so that if you are inclined to continue to educate me, it may help you to find what we are looking for.

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineeri...99/47cfr68.pdf

I would think maybe in subpart B but I could not find it.
 
  #4  
Old 04-12-09, 06:52 PM
M
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
Posts: 16,745
Received 101 Votes on 93 Posts
Dude, I'm not gonna parse legalese for you. If you don't think it's a requirement, then don't install it that way.

That said: If you are installing as a professional, and do not follow the manufacturer's specs for a proper install, you open yourself up to giving your liability insurance carrier an out from covering you if something goes south.

It's your dime, spend it the way you want to.

Me, I'll do the professional install.
 
  #5  
Old 04-12-09, 07:03 PM
nap's Avatar
nap
nap is offline
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: north
Posts: 4,162
Received 1 Vote on 1 Post
Wasn't trying to parse legalese.

as to liability; we were speaking of FCC regs and Telco requirements. That has nothing to do with manufacturers requirements and liability due to that.

I sincerely sought an answer. Just because you are incorrect don't get pissed at me. I would think that if you are going to tell a person something is required, you could and would be able to support that with facts. Sorry if I gave you credit where no credit was due.

and no, the RJ31X has never been required by any manufacturer I have installed. Whether it was a suggestion or not is irrelevent.
 
  #6  
Old 04-12-09, 08:34 PM
S
Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
RJ31X Jack

I am not sure of the legal issues with the use of the RJ31X jack, but I do know from past service calls that RJ jack comes in handy as a troubleshooting tool. During lightening storms a panel may take a hit causing the customer to lose the phone line. I have had the customer unplug the jack and they are able to get the phone line back, thus a problem with the alarm panel.
I personally lost my home phone line on day, so I called my phone company (using my cell phone). They asked if I had an alarm panel, when I told them "yes", they told me that was the problem and to contact the alarm company. I told the phone company I unhooked the RJ31X jack from the alarm, unplugged my cordless phone, and computer, but still did not have dial tone at the D-mark and that I worked for an alarm company. The conversation took a pause and then I was told "Oh, I guess we have a problem with your phone and will need to send someone out."
I'm not trying to tell anyone they HAVE to install the RJ31X jack, I'm just giving some positive reasons to install one.
 
  #7  
Old 04-13-09, 05:54 AM
M
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
Posts: 16,745
Received 101 Votes on 93 Posts
Random pull from the manuals on my desk:

Vista 20p installation and setup guide K5305-1V5
Page 2-13

"Connect incoming phonel line and handset wiring to the main terminal block (via an RJ31X jack) as shown in the Summary of Connections diagram at the back of this manual.
Wire colors represent the oflors of the cable to the RJ31X jack."

Networx NX-8 installation manual, page 56: Local Telephone Company Interface Information:

"Telephone connection requirements

Except for telephone company provided ringers, all connections to the telephone network shall be made through standard plugs and standard telephone company provided jacks or equivalent in such a manner so as to allow for immediate disconnection of the terminal equipment. Standard jacks shall be so arranged that if the plug connected thereto is withdrawn, no interference to the operation of the equipment at the customers premises which remains connected to the telephone network, shall occur by reason of such withdrawal."

The wiring diagram in every case specifies the use of RJ31X for connection to telecom.

Look, your opinion is yours, and you may maintain that I am wrong. I'm going to stick with what I know from 20 years of field and design experience.
 
  #8  
Old 04-13-09, 03:00 PM
nap's Avatar
nap
nap is offline
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: north
Posts: 4,162
Received 1 Vote on 1 Post
Originally Posted by fast1 View Post
what is NID?
Network Interface Device.

It's the box the telco (telephone company) puts in where they run their wire to and the customer runs their wire to for connecting.


Ron, I never said it was a bad idea or an improper installation. I was simply looking for support for your statement as to the legality and when it was not where you stated, I asked for further clarification. As far as I have found, there is no legal requirement for such a connection.

That doesn't mean you do bad work or anything of the sort. It just means, as far as I can see, it is not required.

When I started this thread, the compliments were honest. You do show a great deal of knowledge in the field and that is why I directed this thread to you. We all have preferences in how we install our work. There are many times, there are legally required devices and such that have to be used. I simply was simply trying to determine which it was in this case.

So, be pissed at me if you want. Nothing I can do about that. I wasn't trying to out you as a fraud or a blowhard but you seemed to take it that way.
 
  #9  
Old 04-13-09, 05:28 PM
F
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NE Wis / Paris France{ In France for now }
Posts: 4,807
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Please keep it civil in this section otherwise I will be forced to lock this topic.

Merci,Marc
 
  #10  
Old 04-13-09, 06:13 PM
nap's Avatar
nap
nap is offline
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: north
Posts: 4,162
Received 1 Vote on 1 Post
I had a huge ol' post written that ripped MrRon apart but rather than post it, I will simply close with the following as a rebuttal of MrRons inferences that I install a less than legal alarm system ;

MrRon states that it is a legal requirement to install a device such as an RJ31X per the FCC and various telcos. I can prove it is not a requirement by the FCC, at least by the authority he claims the "Networx" manual quotes. Part of the quote is in the document but the last sentence is nowhere to be found in the FCC document.


I am not saying it is wrong, or even bad design, to install such a device. I was merely seeking the legal authority he states requires it as I do install such systems from time to time and desire to abide by all applicable laws.

As of yet, I have not found there is such legal requirement to utilize such a device as a RJ31X or other similar device.

There is a huge difference between legal requirements and suggested inclusions by a manufacturer.

I sought the legal requirements which Ron has apparently mistaken the manufacturers requirements or suggestions to be.
 
  #11  
Old 04-13-09, 06:37 PM
Shadeladie's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA - USA
Posts: 4,552
Received 125 Votes on 97 Posts
Time for a referee to close this thread!
 
Closed Thread
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
 
Ask a Question
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: