The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 17, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Blackburn, Richard, Walker, Jasparro, Dias and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Silva of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Blackburn and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioner Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the November 17, 2009 hearing on this matter, the Board had before it a plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office on October 28, 2009.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the November 17, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 28, 2009 plans 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. 

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 State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RIUFC section 20.1.4.1.3, RILSC section 9.2.3 and NFPA 96 section 7.8.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to install the rooftop exhaust fan as proposed by the Applicant and approved by the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  The Board notes that this would be limited to the existing configuration of this building and the surrounding property and that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has otherwise approved this plan of action.  Finally, the Board notes that if there is an adjustment to this occupancy or the surrounding (adjacent) property, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal's office may return and present an alternative plan of action in the future.

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)].