The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 8, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Jackson, Richard, Pearson, Preiss, Filippi, Dias and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Gregory Unsworth and John Horan of the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a January 14, 2010 inspection report compiled by the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the North Providence Fire Marshals Office during the June 8, 2010 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the January 14, 2010 inspection 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.  During the June 8, 2010 hearing on this matter, the Applicant advised the Board that the existing fire alarm system of this facility was in compliance with the code as of March 15, 1985 as outlined in a North Providence Fire Marshal's report as of that date.  The Board notes that this is entirely possible.  However, the Board further notes that with the adoption of the latest fire code in 2003, the fire alarm requirements were substantially modified and that a twenty-five year old system would not be in compliance with the current code.  However, the Board recognizes the hardship to the Applicant and will therefore grant the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to submit a plan for the upgrade of the fire alarm system of this facility.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 120 days in order to implement the above plan of action.  Finally, the Board notes that the North Providence Fire Marshal's office shall be granted the authority to extend either or both of the above deadlines for good faith efforts being demonstrated by the Applicant.  In light of the above, it is the understanding of the Board that the North Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by installing the required key box within this facility.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 by clearing the path of travel from the secondary exits in Kam's Furniture to the satisfaction of the North Providence Fire Marshal's office.

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)].