The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 26, 2002 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Vice Chairman Richard and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Evans and Filippi were present.  Chairman Farrell recused himself from voting on this matter. A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
During the March 26, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant sought the Board’s acceptance of his proposed fire-stopping installation method, and a variance relating to the dimension of a portion of a landing located within Egress Stairway 3. It is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies shall be corrected by the Applicant.  
	
Any deficiency understood by the Board to have been corrected, which is not so corrected, shall be immediately corrected by the Applicant.  The term “approved”, as used herein, is defined in section 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby accepts the Applicant’s proposed fire-stopping method as the equivalent of the Omega Point Lab’s method #CEJ 114P and system. In granting this variance and system acceptance, the Board recognizes that the Applicant’s use of 3M products in the proposed system would allow spandrel glass as an acceptable substitute for the exterior steel panel in the floor edge assembly. This system acceptance and variance is further based upon the testimony of the Applicant’s Fire Protection Engineer and the submitted supporting documentation. Accordingly, the Board’s acceptance of the proposed system would allow the Applicant to provide this facility with the above assembly in order to achieve compliance with the approved separation mandated by NFPA 1500, section 7-1.2; and NFPA 101, sections 4-1.12, 15-1.2.3 and 6-2.2.2.

2. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 101, LSC 2000, sections 7.2.2.3 and NFPA 101 section 5-2.2.3.2, in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing stairway landing dimensions of Egress Stairway 3. In granting this technical variance, the Board notes that the Applicant has provided a radius, covering the landing, of at least a clear forty-four inches from the interior angle of the landing toward the exterior wall.  The Board further notes that the narrowest portion of the landing is approximately forty inches (40”) but approximately half of the landing meets or exceeds the forty-four inch (44”) requirement. Finally, the Board finds that the landing, as constructed, does not constitute a risk to the life safety of the occupants of this facility.  

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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].