The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 16, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Newbrook, Burlingame, Evans, Coutu and Preiss were present.  Commissioner Filippi recused herself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Jeffrey Johnson of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Preiss to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The Board hereby adopts its original findings in file numbers 030408 and 030408A as its initial findings of facts in this case.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has brought this facility into substantial compliance with the original decision.  However, the Board finds that the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s office does not have the necessary documentation from the sprinkler installer to determine whether the sprinkler heads in this facility meet the requirements of NFPA Standard 13.  During the hearing, the parties agreed that the sprinkler installer would provide the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s office with the appropriate requested documentation on the sprinkler system.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in which to provide the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s office with official certification that the sprinkler system in this facility is in compliance with the standards of NFPA 13.

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
	
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 Applicant’s 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:  Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-17).
	
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: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-18.)  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: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-19).  

Such changes in use or occupancy of this facility, or failure to continually comply with the Board’s 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: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	
The Applicant may appeal the Board’s 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.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].