The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 27, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Jasparro, Preiss and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals John Horan and Gregory Unsworth of the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT

	During the April 27, 2010 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the subject facility had been classified by the North Providence Fire Marshals Office as an existing educational occupancy.  The Board was further advised and finds that the subject facility is two stories in height and appears to be of Type II (000) construction. The Board was further advised and finds that the facility contains a gymnasium, kitchen, and another attached portion currently utilized for religious education.  The Board finds that the building is protected by a municipally connected fire alarm system that the North Providence Fire Marshals Office believes to be inadequate for the listed occupancy and recommends an extension of the existing coverage. 
	The Board finds that the Applicant has not renewed its last lease for the general educational occupancy of this facility.  The Board further finds that certain events have been scheduled to be conducted within this facility.  The Board finds that the Applicant has not provided the North Providence Fire Marshals Office with notification of these events and that the North Providence Fire Marshals Office has requested to be so notified in the future. 
	The Board had no evidence or testimony before it as to whether such events were ever allowed in any of the other public and/or private schools in North Providence and/or what safeguards were required for such events to take place.  However, the Board finds that the fire marshals requested notification when the Gym and/or Kitchen are to be utilized, and the possible assignment of a fire fighter on duty to ensure rapid detection  and evacuation, were reasonable and consistent with the practices of other jurisdictions. Finally, after a lengthy discussion during the initial hearing, the Board finds that the parties would need additional time to determine whether this facility would remain an existing educational occupancy or be converted to a new separate classification.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants the parties a time variance in order to return to the Board on June 8, 2010 with a determination as to whether this facility shall continue to be utilized as an existing educational occupancy or be converted to a separate occupancy classification or classifications. The Board is further requesting that the parties meet prior to that date to develop an action plan addressing either the existing deficiencies, under an educational occupancy, or any new deficiencies, determined by the fire marshal, under any newly proposed occupancy or occupancies. 

The Board recognizes that determination of a new occupancy classification or classifications may lead to a complicated plan of action and an equally complicated plan review. Accordingly, if the Applicant and/or the North Providence Fire Marshals Office need additional time to develop and/or review the action plan, the Board may consider such a request. However, until such request(s) are granted or denied, the Board directs the parties to continue to work together on the action plan and any required plan review. 
	As a condition of the relief granted above, the Board further directs the Applicant to provide a K-type fire extinguisher in the kitchen area at the direction, and to the satisfaction, of the North Providence Fire Marshals Office. The Board further directs the Applicant to immediately notify the North Providence Fire Marshals Office any time the Applicant plans to use either the Gym or the Kitchen in this facility. In any such event, the North Providence Fire Marshals Office may assign a fire fighter detail to supplement the existing fire alarm system and thereby provide the occupants with additional protection.     


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)].