The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 22, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Jackson, Pearson, Richard, Preiss, Walker, Dias and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Timothy Lutz of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	Based on the documentation submitted for and the testimony taken on the June 22, 2010 hearing date, the Board makes the following findings of fact.  The Board finds that the scope of review of this project is tenant renovations on the first floor of a four-story building.  The Board further finds that the construction classification per NFPA 220 is Type II (222) non-combustible or limited non-combustible construction.  The Board finds that the work area is approximately 8,554 square feet in the southern part of the building.  The Board finds that the classification of this occupancy is business use and that the hazard classification is light hazard.  The Board further finds that the facility is protected by a municipally connected fire alarm system and that there are two (2) approved means of egress from this occupancy.
	During the June 22, 2010 hearing, the Board had before it a March 19, 2009 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  The above plan review report cited section 38.3.5.1.  However, during the June 22, 2010 hearing, the Providence Fire Marshal's office advised the Board that the proper cite would have been 39.3.5.1.  The question the Providence Fire Marshal's office had was the specific language of the above provisions.  Specifically, that the facility would be "constructed of better than a two-hour fire rating".  Upon review of this language, the Board determined that the verification would only require the Applicant to prove that the building was "at least two-hour construction".  It is the understanding of the Board that the applicant has demonstrated to the Providence Fire Marshal that the facility is "at least two-hour construction".

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  For the purposes of determining compliance with both sections 38.3.5.1 and 39.3.5.1, it is the determination of the Board that the Applicant would only be required to prove that the subject facility is "at least two-hour construction".  Accordingly, if the Applicant demonstrates that the subject facility is "at least two-hour construction", then the Applicant shall be considered to have complied with the above requirements.

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
	This Decision represents a comprehensive, integrated plan of fire safety for the above-captioned facility under the above-cited use or occupancy.  Accordingly, every variance granted is conditioned upon the Applicants timely and continued compliance with all of the directives of the Board. Every variance granted is further conditioned upon the continued use or occupancy of this facility under the above-cited classification reviewed by the Board.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-17).
	Failure of the Applicant to initially comply with the full Decision of the Board, within the stated time frame, shall void all variances granted herein.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-18.)  In the event of complete, timely and continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above cited variances shall be deemed to have vested in the above-captioned facility.  As long as this facility is in continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above-cited variances shall remain with this facility in the absence of any change in use or occupancy mandating review under a separate classification of the Fire Code or a revision of the above-cited classification.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-19).  
Such changes in use or occupancy of this facility, or failure to continually comply with the Boards Decision shall void all variances granted under the above-cited use or occupancy.  If such change creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.1-6, all variances granted under the original use or occupancy are void and this facility shall be reviewed under the newly created use or occupancy.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	The Applicant may appeal the Boards Decision, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date of this Decision, by commencing an action against the State Fire Marshal in the Sixth division of the District Court.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].