The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing before a subcommittee of the Board on July 15, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Walker, Dias and Jackson were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Kaitlyn Foley of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Vice Chairman Newbrook recommended that the relief granted herein be submitted to the full Board for review.  In particular the Acting Chairman wished to have the Board consider the question of the " paneling.

The subcommittee recommendation was reviewed by the Board on July 20, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Jasparro, Preiss, Blackburn, Jackson and Dias were present.  The Board initially reviewed the question of the wood paneling throughout this facility.  Accordingly, Vice Chairman Newbrook made a motion to approve the existing paneling as outlined in item 3 below and this motion was seconded by Commissioner Blackburn.  The initial motion was approved over the opposition vote of Commissioner Jasparro.  A final vote, approving this and the other subcommittee cases heard on the fifteenth of July was made by Commissioner Jackson and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook.  That motion was unanimous.  Accordingly, the subcommittee recommendation as outlined below now has the status of a full Board decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 29, 2008 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the July 15, 2010 subcommittee hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 29, 2008 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.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.1.5.1.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited headroom from the finished floor to the bottom beam on the ceiling located in the conference room of this facility.  In granting this variance on the basis of structural hardship, the Board directs the Applicant to provide an approved warning strip on the cited beam, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 and that the cited door is no longer difficult to open or close.
	3.  Based on the fact that this facility has multiple exits and an active fire alarm system, the Board grants a variance from the provisions of sections 39.3.3.2.1 and 39.3.3.2.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing " rough wood paneling throughout this facility.  The Board notes that this relief is granted by majority vote on July 20, 2010 over the opposition vote of Commissioner Jasparro.
	4-7.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 4, 5, 6 and 7 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State 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 submitting a written appeal of the above subcommittee recommendations to the entire Fire Board for review, pursuant to Board Rule 6-2-9.  The Applicant shall thereupon be scheduled for hearing before the full Board of Appeal & Review.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this decision (RIGL 42-35-15(c)).