As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on August 2, 2016 before a subcommittee of the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review, pursuant to RI General Laws Section 23-28.3-5.
	In attendance at the subcommittee hearing were the following:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Filippi and Booth.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Deputy  State Fire Marshal Octavio Vieira of the State Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Mary Beth Young and Shane McGrath.
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 Mary Beth Young (authorized representative) of 45 Industrial Road, Cumberland, RI dated May 26, 2016.
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  160086 opened on June 1, 2016.
4.	This property has previously appeared before the Board on a number of occasions:
a.	August 1, 2006	 030013B
b.	January 27, 2004	 030013-B
c.	May 13, 2003	 030013A
d.	January 21, 2003	 030013
5.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on August 2, 2016 at 1:00 PM before a subcommittee of the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
6.	After all evidence was presented at the subcommittee hearing, a motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Booth to grant the Applicant relief.  The motion passed on a 4 to 0 vote.
7.	The subcommittee recommendation was subsequently presented to the Board for acceptance on August 2, 2016 at which time Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Filippi, Booth and Davison were in attendance.  At that time a motion was made by Commissioner Davison and seconded by Commissioners Booth and Filippi to accept the subcommittee recommendation and 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  160086 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  160086 dated May 26, 2016 and filed on June 1, 2016.
2.	State Fire Marshals Office Inspection Report dated May 16, 2016.
3.	State Fire Marshals Office Building Description  401-1 dated March 27, 2015.
4.	Letter of authorization for Mary Beth Young from David MacDonald dated June 1, 2016.
5.	Decision  030013B dated December 7, 2006.
6.	Decision  030013-B dated May 10, 2004.
7.	Decision  030013A dated March 8, 2004.
8.	Decision  030013 dated May 12, 2003.


EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the August 2, 2016 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 numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of the May 16, 2016 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the August 2, 2016 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the May 16, 2016 inspection 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 with basement day care occupancy consisting of approximately twenty-nine thousand nineteen (29,019) square feet and originally built in 1975.
3.	The building is of Type II (000) construction and does not have a compliant fire alarm system and is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system.
4.	Hard-wired carbon monoxide (CO) alarms are provided in the buildings classrooms.
5.	The maximum licensed occupant load of the facility has been calculated at two hundred fifty-three (253) children.
6.	There is no objection by the State Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	[16-849-VN]  The Board grants the Applicant a variance from complying with the provisions of RILSC section 17.3.4.5 by allowing the spaces above the suspended ceiling assemblies throughout the facility to remain without fire alarm detection.

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)].