As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on July 12, 2016 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-Chairman Blackburn and Commissioners Richard, Jackson, Sylvester, Booth, Thornton and Davison.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Deputy State Fire Marshal James Gumbley of the State Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Arie Pivko and Dr. Michael Sullo.
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 Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, and the Administrative Regulations promulgated thereunder.
2.	The Application was filed by Arie Pivko (authorized representative) of 22 Bayview Avenue, Stonington, CT dated [undated].
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  160072 opened on May 6, 2016.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on July 12, 2016 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
5.	The Westerly Fire Marshal [AHJ], having been given proper notice, failed to appear for the hearing.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Thornton to conduct with the hearing without the AHJ and to request that Chief Deputy Gumbley of the State Fire Marshal's Office participate in the hearing.  The motion passed on an 8 to 0 vote.
6.	After all evidence was presented at the hearing, a motion was made by Vice-Chairman Blackburn and seconded by Commissioner Sylvester to grant the Applicant the 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  160072 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  160072 dated [undated] and filed on May 6, 2016.
2.	Westerly Fire Marshals Office Violation Notice dated March 28, 2016.
3.	Letter to Arie Pivko from the Board dated March 14, 2016.
4.	Letter of authorization for Arie Pivko from Ernest Schemitsch of Dikeman St. Corp. dated April 6, 2016.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the July 12, 2016 hearing as exhibits:

1.	Applicants plan of action dated [undated].

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 numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of the March 28, 2016 Violation Notice compiled by the Westerly Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Westerly Fire Marshals Office during the July 12, 2016 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the March 28, 2016 Violation Notice 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.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance from the provisions of RILSC section 39.2.4.1 by allowing the basement level of the facility to remain in use with only one (1) approved means of egress.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to provide plans for the installation of limited area sprinkler protection for the egress from this level in accordance with RILSC section 9.7.1.2 within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision, with an additional one hundred fifty (150) days to implement this plan of action, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Westerly Fire Marshal's Office.  The Board further directs the Applicant to endure that all occupants of the lower level of this facility have unobstructed access, i.e. no locking devices on access corridor doors, to two (2) separate exits at all times.

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: Fire Safety Code, 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: Fire Safety Code, 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: Fire Safety Code, 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:  Fire Safety Code, 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: Fire Safety Code, 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)].