As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on August 19, 2014 before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, pursuant to RI General Laws Section 23-28.3-5.
	In attendance at the hearing were the following:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Newbrook, Vice-Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Booth, Jackson, Pearson, Sylvester, Thornton and Walker.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Timothy Lutz, Sr. of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Joseph Watson (Hughes Associates).
TRAVEL OF THE CASE

1.	This is an Application for Variance filed under Chapter 23-28.3, entitled the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, and the Administrative Regulations promulgated thereunder.
2.	The Application was filed by Stephen Maiorisi (VP for Facilities Management) of Brown University, 295 Lloyd Avenue - Box 1941, Providence, RI  02912 dated August 4, 2014.
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  140094 opened on August 12, 2014.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on August 19, 2014 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
5.	After all evidence was presented at the hearing, a motion was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Commissioner Booth to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on an 8 to 0 vote.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  140094 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  140094 dated August 4, 2014 and filed on August 12, 2014.
2.	Hughes Associates Plan of Action Report dated July 31, 2014.
3.	E-mail from ADSFM Timothy Lutz, Sr. of the Providence Fire Marshals Office dated August 13, 2014.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the August 19, 2014 hearing as exhibits:

1.	Letter of authorization from Stephen Maiorisi of Brown University for Hughes Associates dated August 15, 2014.

FINDINGS OF FACT

	Based on the testimony and evidence introduced at the hearing and a review of the administrative file, the Board makes the following Finding of Fact:

1.	The Decision below corresponds with the July 31, 2014 plan of action report compiled by Hughes Associates.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the August 19, 2014 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 31, 2014 plan of action report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, shall be noted herein.
2.	The building is an existing 4-story multiple / mixed use occupancy (business & assembly).
3.	The building is of Type II(222) construction and is provided with sprinkler protection and has a compliant fire alarm system.
4.	There is no objection by the Providence Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board grants the Applicant a variance from the provisions of NFPA 92 (2012 edition) section 6.4.5.4.7 allowing motor current transducers to provide confirmation of the operational status of smoke control system fans in lieu of the required airflow pressure sensing switches, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.

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 understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in this Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS

1.	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).
2.	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).
3.	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).
4.	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)].