As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on October 20, 2015 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 and Commissioners Booth, Filippi, Pearson and Thornton.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Steven Hughes of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Paul Zinno.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq.

TRAVEL OF THE CASE

1.	This is an Application for Variance filed under R.I.G.L. 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 Paul Zinno (authorized representative) of 119 Vistas Court, East Greenwich, RI dated September 14, 2015.
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  150102 opened on September 29, 2015.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on October 20, 2015 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 Thornton and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on a 5 to 0 vote.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  150102 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  150102 dated September 14, 2015 and filed on September 29, 2015.
2.	East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office Building Description and History [undated].
3.	Letter of authorization for Paul Zinno from Lorraine Wheetman of RIPAC dated September 24, 2015.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the October 20, 2015 hearing as exhibits:

1.	None.

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 those of the undated building description and history report compiled by the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office during the October 20, 2015 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the above 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 3-story apartment occupancy.
3.	The building is of Type V (111) construction and is provided with approved sprinkler protection and has a compliant fire alarm system.
4.	There is no objection by the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance from the provisions of RIFC section 63.2.11.1 by allowing the omission of the required precautionary signage on the exterior doors of the dwelling units in this facility.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to provide a door-frame oxygen warning sign for any dwelling unit in which oxygen is being produced, stored, used or handled, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Greenwich Fire Marshal's 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 6-2-22).
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 6-2-23.)  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 6-2-24).
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 6-2-25).
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.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-18).  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].