The above-captioned case was most recently scheduled for hearing on January 13, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Preiss, Jasparro, Walker, Pearson and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Vespia of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  An initial motion, to grant the applicant relief,  was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook.  However, the initial motion failed and a discussion ensued.  A follow-up motion was then made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The follow-up motion passed over the opposition votes of Commissioners Jasparro and Pearson.  The Board notes the objection of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  

FINDINGS OF FACT

	The Board hereby adopts its original findings of fact in file numbers 050359, 060904 and 070304 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that the Applicant wishes to re-affirm the previously granted relief to utilize the provisions of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72, section 5.7.3.2.4.2(4) as it relates to smoke detector spacing in the corridors of this facility; and the previously granted relief from sections 5.12.6 and 5.12.7, to eliminate the required manual fire alarm box from the main entrance and to relocate it to the front desk area. 
Finally, the Board finds that the Providence Fire Marshals Office conducted its remaining fire alarm plan review under the provisions of the 2002 Edition of NFPA 72 and properly notified the Applicant of this fact.  However, the Board finds that the Applicant now wishes to utilize either the performance based options found in the 2002 annexes, or the guidelines outlined in the 2007 edition of NFPA 72, for the survivability of communications circuits.  The Providence Fire Marshals Office now objects to the Applicants recent request for relief. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby re-affirms the Applicants previously granted relief to utilize the provisions of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72, section 5.7.3.2.4.2(4) as it relates to smoke detector spacing in the corridors of this facility; and the previously granted relief from sections 5.12.6 and 5.12.7, to eliminate the required manual fire alarm box from the main entrance and to relocate it to the front desk area. 
2.	The Board hereby approves the Applicants use of the performance-based option it overviewed during the January 13, 2009 hearing as an alternative to strict compliance with the 2002 edition of NFPA 72.  Alternatively, the Applicant may utilize the 2007 edition of NFPA 72, sections 6.9.10.4.2 and 6.9.10.4.3, as they relate to the survivability of communications circuits in a sprinkled building.  The Board notes that this relief is limited to this particular building as presented by this Applicants engineer.  The granting of this relief shall not be considered to be a general precedent. And, any future comparable request(s) shall be reviewed on an individual basis.  In granting this relief, the Board notes the objection of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.   

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)].