The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 4, 2002 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners O’Connell, Newbrook, Preiss, Evans, Pearson, Richard, Filippi, Burlingame  and Coutu were present. Commissioner Wahlberg was unable to attend this hearing but advised the Board, by memo, of his support for the requested variances. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Jobin of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard  to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an April 19, 2002  plan review report compiled by the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office during the June 4, 2002 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, with the following clarification, the Board hereby incorporates the April 19, 2002 plan review report as its initial findings of fact. As a point of clarification, the Board was advised and finds that the cited deficiencies relate to the existing portion of this complex and not the recently constructed addition. The Board was further advised and finds, pursuant to an inquiry by the State fire Marshal’s Office, that the sprinkler system in this complex was installed as a required system under the Building Code and not installed as a required system under the Fire Code. 

The Board further finds that the void between the concrete deck and the underside of the non-combustible floor panel is just over six and one half (6 1/2”) inches and the approximate distance between the concrete deck and the top of the non-combustible floor panel is eight (8”) inches. The Board further finds that all of the 110 volt wiring is in metal clad cable and that the remaining wiring is low voltage computer and telephone wire. Further, the Board finds that the Applicant is planning to provide addressable smoke detectors in this space that would allow for the pin pointing any source of smoke. 

Further, the Board finds that the Applicant has agreed to separate the subject floor void in the new addition into two (2) six thousand (6,000 sq. ft) square foot compartments and a single four thousand (4,000 sq. ft.) square foot compartment. Finally, the Applicant has agreed to provide fire stopping, in the floor voids between the existing building and the new addition. 

Any modification of the Board’s above findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, shall be noted herein. 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 grants a variance from the provisions of section 4-13.1 of NFPA 13, 1996 edition, and its subsections, in order to allow the Applicant to have this complex considered fully sprinkled without sprinkling the limited space under the flooring system. 

In light of the remote possibility of an ignition source and the limited combustible material in this space, the Board believes that the Applicant’s proposal, to provide addressable smoke detectors and separation, as outlined below, will constitute sufficient fire protection.  

Accordingly, the Board further grants a variance from the applicable dead end corridor restrictions covering this complex in light of the current sprinkler coverage. Specifically, the Applicant may maintain the existing dead end corridor conditions in this complex. 

As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to provide addressable smoke detectors in the floor void of the new addition in order to allow for the pin pointing any source of smoke. Further, the Board directs the Applicant to separate the subject void in the new addition into two (2) six thousand (6,000 sq. ft) square foot compartments and a single four thousand (4,000 sq. ft.) square foot compartment. Finally, the Board directs the Applicant to provide fire stopping, in the floor voids between the existing building and the new addition. 
 
2. In light of the existing sprinkler coverage, the Board hereby grants a variance from the applicable common path of travel distance restrictions covering this complex. Specifically, the Applicant may maintain the existing common path of travel conditions in this complex. This variance is also subject to the Applicant’s compliance with the additional fire safeguards outlined in item 1 above. 

3. In light of the existing sprinkler coverage, the Board hereby grants a variance from the applicable travel distance to exits restrictions covering this complex. Specifically, the Applicant may maintain the existing travel distance to exit conditions in this complex. This variance is also subject to the Applicant’s compliance with the additional fire safeguards outlined in item 1 above.

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)].