As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on Tuesday, June 20, 2017 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 Filippi, Pearson, Jackson, Booth, Thornton and Davison.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Michael Dexter of the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Scott Caron and John Metcalf.
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 Scott Caron (authorized representative) of Bryant University dated [undated].
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  170048 was opened on April 7, 2017.
4.	The matter was previously before the Board on May 8, 2007 at which time Decision  070192 was issued dated September 18, 2007.
5.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on June 20, 2017 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
6.	After all evidence was presented at the hearing, a motion was made by Commissioner Thornton and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant the relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on a 7 to 0 vote.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  170048 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  170048 dated [undated] and filed on April 7, 2017.
2.	Smithfield Fire Marshals Office letter dated March 21, 2017.
3.	Board Decision  070192 dated September 18, 2007.
4.	Letter of authorization for John Metcalf and Scott Caron from Ronald Machtley dated February 28, 2017.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the June 20, 2017 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 matter was previously before the Board on May 8, 2007 at which time Decision  070192 was issued dated September 18, 2007.
2.	In Decision  070192 a time variance was granted with a compliance date of September 30, 2016 for the installation of automatic sprinkler protection.
3.	At this time, the project is moving forward but has not yet been completed and is at the 90 completion stage.
4.	There is no objection by the Smithfield 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 continuation of the original time variance until September 30, 2020 for the completion of this project.

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 constitutes a final order of the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review as set forth in R.I.G.L. section 42-35-12 and 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.	In accordance with R.I.G.L 42-35-12, 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)].