As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on September 13, 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 and Commissioners Richard, Filippi, Jackson, Booth and Davison.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Deputy  State Fire Marshal David Cionfolo of the State Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: David Benevides, David Cook and Enno Fritsch.
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 David Benevides (authorized representative) of RI College, 600 Mt. Pleasant Avenue, Providence, RI dated [undated].
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  160121 opened on August 31, 2016.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on September 13, 2016 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 Filippi and seconded by Commissioner Jackson to grant the Applicant the relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on a 6 to 0 vote.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  160121 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  160121 dated [undated] and filed on August 31, 2016.
2.	State Fire Marshals Office Inspection Report dated August 22, 2016.
3.	Letter of authorization for David Benevides from Kevin Fitta dated August 26, 2016

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the September 13, 2016 hearing as exhibits:

1.	Applicants drawing F1.01 dated September 13, 2016.

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 August 22, 2016 plan review 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 September 13, 2016 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 22, 2016 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.	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.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance from the provisions of RILSC section 8.6.5(2) by allowing the existing HVAC shaft to remain as constructed.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to provide the supplemental automatic sprinkler protection as set forth on their plan of action drawing F1.01 and this be deemed required protection.

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)].