The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 25, 2001 at l:30 p.m.  At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Evans, Filippi, Wahlberg, O’Connell and Coutu were present.  The fire service was represented by, Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Jobin of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Coutu to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT
		
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of March 22, 2001 inspection report compiled by the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board the Applicant and the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office during the September 25, 2001 hearing on this matter.  The Board hereby incorporates the March 22, 2001 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s finds 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 defined in Section 23-28.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #1, by providing this facility with an approved local fire alarm system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal, in accordance with the provisions of Section 23-28.25-4(a).  Accordingly, as a condition of the variances granted herein, the above system shall be maintained as a required system by the Applicant.

2.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #2, by providing this facility with approved fire extinguishers, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal.

3.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #3, by providing this facility with approved exit signage.  It is the further understanding of the Board that the Applicant has also provided this facility with approved emergency lighting, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal.  Accordingly, as a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to maintain the above emergency lighting and exit signage as required systems for the purposes of maintenance.

4.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 23-28.17-4 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the cited non-rated steel doors within the existing door jambs of this facility.

5.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #5 by providing approved emergency lighting in the basement storage area, to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.

6.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #6 by repairing the cited rear exterior stairway from the second floor of this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.

7.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #7 by providing this facility with approved fire stopping, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.

8.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 23-28.l7-4 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing construction, dimension and rating of the cited interior stairway to the second floor of this facility.  In granting this variance on the basis of structural hardship, it is the understanding of the Board that the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office has no objection.

9.	The Board finds deficiency #9 to be informational in nature.

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 Applicant’s 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.

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.  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.  Such changes in use or occupancy of this facility, or failure to continually comply with the Board’s Decision, shall void all variances granted under the above-cited use or occupancy.  If such changes creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.l-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.

	The Applicant may appeal the Board’s 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.  [RIGL 42-35-l5(c)]