The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 9, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Blackburn, Jackson, Jasparro, Pearson, Walker, Filippi and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Silva, Richard Vespia and Timothy Lutz, Sr. of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Walker and Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the December 9, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board reviewed correspondence between the parties and took testimony.  Accordingly, the Board finds that by letter dated October 24, 2008 the Applicant advised the Providence Fire Marshal's office that he was seeking approval to install a temporary fire alarm system in the subject facility.  The Board further finds that this is a six-story 178,000 square foot mill building which is classified as a Type 3B fire rating.  The Board further finds that the building is being renovated for office space and that improvements were being made to the shell of this building only and did not include mechanical, electrical or fire protection upgrades.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has an existing wet sprinkler system in the building and was seeking the Providence Fire Marshal's approval to drain the sprinkler system during the winter months.
	The Board further finds that in exchange for not having the sprinkler system in service, the Applicant was requesting permission to install a temporary fire alarm system.  The Board further finds that the proposed temporary system would include heat detection, pull stations and horn/light units on each floor but would not have smoke detection as part of the system, as the environment of the building would be too harsh without heat.  
	The Board finds that by letter dated November 25, 2008, the Providence Fire Marshal's office had advised the Applicant to seek Board approval of the deactivation of the sprinkler system within this facility.  The Board further finds that the Applicant is currently providing a twenty-four hour fire watch while the building is unprotected and the Applicant is in the process of providing a temporary fire alarm system.  The Board further finds that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has advised that the sprinkler system would be completely drained by removing the end caps and blowing out the system and that the Providence Fire Marshal's office would still need access to the FDC and that the applicant should lock key access caps.  The Board further finds that there would be no storage or other occupancy in this building and that the Applicant would have to comply with the guidelines for vacant buildings at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  Finally the Board finds that the deactivation of the sprinkler system would not preclude charging of the standpipe system if deemed necessary by the Providence Fire Marshal's office in an emergency situation.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until February 1, 2009 in order to deactivate the sprinkler system in this facility and to provide a compliant temporary fire alarm system within this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  Specifically, the Applicant may utilize temporary wiring methods including mc cable in installing heat detection throughout this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  However, the Applicant must maintain the system as being weather tight and maintain the panel for the system in an approved heated area with heat detection at intervals approved by the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  As a condition of this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to further provide the Providence Fire Marshal's office with access to the FDC and to maintain the standpipe system so that could be quickly charged by the Providence Fire Department in the event of fire emergency.  Finally, the Board directs that the Applicant shall continue to maintain this as a completely vacant facility without storage and/or other occupancy until the sprinkler system is reactivated and the Applicant upgrades to a permanent fire alarm system.  The Applicant, in the meantime, shall further comply with all of the guidelines for vacant building at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  The Providence Fire Marshal is hereby authorized to extend the above deadlines for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.

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 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: 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 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: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	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.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].