As indicated in the file, a hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on Tuesday, November 7, 2017 before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review [hereinafter the Board], pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws [RIGL] section 23-28.3-5.
	In attendance at the hearing were the following:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Jackson, Sylvester, Booth, Thornton and Davison.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Steven Hughes of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.
APPLICANT: Daniel Brennan.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq.

TRAVEL OF THE CASE

1.	This is an Application for Variance filed under RIGL 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 Daniel Brennan (authorized representative) of 50 Holt Road, Andover, MA dated October 11, 2017.
3.	The Application was received by the Board and File  170135 was opened on October 18, 2017.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on November 7, 2017 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 Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Booth 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  170135 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Variance Application  170135 dated October 11, 2017 and filed on October 18, 2017.
2.	East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office Plan Review Report dated September 28, 2017.
3.	Letter of authorization for Daniel Brennan from Deepa Krishnamurthy of Linear Retail East Greenwich  1, LLC dated October 12, 2017.

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the November 7, 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 numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of the September 28, 2017 plan review 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 November 7, 2017 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the September 28, 2017 plan review 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 1-story assembly occupancy consisting of approximately one thousand three hundred thirty-one (1,331) square feet (gross area) and originally built in 1960.
3.	The building is of Type III (211) construction, has a compliant fire alarm system and is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system.
4.	The maximum occupant load of the facility has been calculated at fifty-six (56) persons.
5.	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 RILSC Table A.7.6 by allowing the existing egress system to remain as configured.

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 RIGL 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 [FSC] 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: FSC 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 FSC or a revision of the above-cited classification.  (See: FSC 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 RIGL section 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:  FSC section 6-2-25).
4.	In accordance with RIGL section 23-28.3-5(e), any person who violates a final order of the Board may be subject to prosecution in the District Court with possible imprisonment for a term not exceeding one (1) year, or fined not more than one thousand dollars (1000) for each offense.
5.	In accordance with RIGL section42-35-12, 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: FSC section 6-2-18).  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [See: RIGL section 42-35-15(c)].