A hearing involving the above-captioned property was conducted on Tuesday, June 4, 2024 before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review [hereinafter the Board], pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws [RIGL] sections 23-28.3-5, 42-35-9 and 42-46-3.

	In attendance at the hearing were the following:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Newbrook, Vice-Chairman Blackburn and Commissioners Thornton, ODonnell, Muto, Horan & Mancini.
AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION [AHJ]: Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal April Kuzdeba of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
APPELLANT: Gregory Riley.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: W. Keith Burlingame, Esq.
TRAVEL OF THE CASE

1.	This is an Application for Appeal submitted 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 submitted by Gregory Riley (authorized representative) of WB Engineers and Consultants, 374 Congress Street  3rd Floor, Boston, MA dated March 5, 2024.
3.	The Application was processed by the Board and Appeal  2024022 was filed on April 25, 2024.
4.	A hearing on the Application was conducted on June 4, 2024 at 1:00 PM before the Fire Safety Code Board of Appeal and Review.
5.	After consideration of the application, the testimony of the witnesses and of the entire record presented to the Board, and after carefully reviewing such information, a motion was made by Commissioner Thornton and seconded by Commissioner ODonnell to grant the Appellant the relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed on a 6 to 1 vote with Vice-Chairman Blackburn voting in opposition.

RECORD OF THE CASE

The following documents are part of the administrative record for Appeal  2024022 and are pertinent to the decision rendered:

1.	Appeal Application  FVA-24-22 submitted on March 5, 2024 and filed on April 25, 2024.
a.	Attached Plan of Action dated February 29, 2024.
b.	Site Specific RFI 17: Fire Plan and Building Department Comments [Project: 23-026] dated March 19, 2024.
c.	Drawings (12 pages) dated February 29, 2024.
d.	Letter of authorization from Cassandra Robinson of Paolino Properties dated February 26, 2024.
e.	Letter of authorization for WB Engineering from Carlos Montemor of Adler Pollock & Sheehan dated February 26, 2024.
2.	Providence Fire Marshals Office Plan Review Report  SSUP-24-41dated [undated].

EXHIBITS

The following documents were presented at the June 4, 2024 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 Findings of Fact:

1.	The determination below corresponds with the [undated] plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Appellant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the June 4, 2024 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the [undated] plan review report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings relating to this report, such as correction of a deficiency by the Appellant, shall be noted herein.
2.	The building is an existing 21-story above grade building with a parking garage and basement level, classified as a high-rise business occupancy, consisting of approximately four hundred twenty-nine thousand five hundred three (429,503) square feet (gross area) and originally built in 1985.
3.	The building is of non-combustible construction, has a compliant fire alarm system with emergency forces notification and is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system.
4.	The scope of the project that is the subject of this appeal request is limited to renovations of the sixteenth floor and more specifically, the two (2) individual rooms identified as the vault room and the IT server room.
5.	There is no objection by the Providence Fire Marshals Office to the granting of the relief outlined herein.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DETERMINATIONS ON VARIANCE REQUESTS

References to NFPA shall mean the National Fire Protection Association; references to the Rhode Island Fire Code [RIFC] shall mean NFPA 1, (2018 edition) as incorporated by reference and amended by 450-RICR-00-00-7; and, references to the Rhode Island Life Safety Code [RILSC] shall mean NFPA 101, (2018 edition) as incorporated by reference and amended by 450-RICR-00-00-8.

1.	EXTINGUISHMENT: The Board hereby grants the Appellant a variance from the provisions of RILSC sections 11.8.3.1 and 9.7 by approving the proposed omission of automatic sprinkler protection in the sixteenth-floor vault and IT server rooms.  In consideration of the relief granted herein, the Board adopts the Appellants plan of action to provide both of these rooms with individual Novec 1230 clean agent suppression systems installed in accordance with NFPA 2001, Standard on Clean Agent Extinguishing Systems, 2015 edition, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The Board further directs that these systems shall be deemed required systems and shall meet all of the requirements of NFPA 2001 Chapter 7, Inspection, Testing, Maintenance, and Training.

Any deficiency understood by the Board to have been corrected, which is not so corrected, shall be immediately corrected by the Appellant.  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 Appellants 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 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(W)].
2.	Failure of the Appellant to initially comply with the full Decision of the Board, within the stated time frame, shall void all variances granted herein.  [See: FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(Y)].  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 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(Z)].
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 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(AA)].
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 section 42-35-12, the Appellant 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: RIGL section 23-28.3-6 and FSC section 450-RICR-00-00-1.7.2(S)].  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [See: RIGL section 42-35-15(c)].