The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 19, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Richard, Jasparro, Pearson, Dias and Filippi were present.  Commissioner Walker recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Couture of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias 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 July 13, 2010 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 October 19, 2010 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 13, 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.  (10-1704-VN).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 1 by providing this facility with approved sprinkler coverage which the Applicant has advised the Board the State has already agreed to.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days in order to submit a plan of action for the installation of the above sprinkler coverage and an additional 120 days in order to implement that plan of action, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board notes that the State Fire Marshals Office may extend either or both of the above timelines for good faith being shown by the Applicant.
	2.  (10-1703-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by providing the cited heat detection within bedroom 1.
	3.  (10-1705-VN).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office to review the structural possibilities for correcting the headroom issue of item 3 and to consider the structural possibilities for increasing the headroom.  However, the Board notes that if upon review the State Fire Marshals Office is satisfied with the existing headroom arrangement, the arrangement shall be considered to have received a variance by the Board.  Finally, if the parties develop a plan of action for the increase of the headroom in this area, the Board directs the parties to implement that plan of action within the time frame outlined in item 1 above.
	4.  (10-1715-VN).  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited stairway width of this facility based upon structural hardship.
	5.  (10-1722-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 by repairing the cited emergency lighting unit.
	6.  (10-1702-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 6 by providing this facility with approved sprinkler coverage.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 1 above to complete this coverage, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals 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)].