The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 29, 2011 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Jasparro, Walker, Dias and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Frank Dunton of the Woonsocket 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
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a November 22, 2006 inspection report compiled by the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office during the March 29, 2011 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the November 22, 2006 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 the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to submit a plan of action for the upgrade of the fire alarm system within this facility for approval by the Woonsocket Fire Marshal.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 120 days in order to implement that plan at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 1 above in order to correct deficiency 2 by providing this facility with approved hardwired carbon monoxide detection.  
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 by properly maintaining emergency lighting in this facility.
	4.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 4 by properly maintaining the exit signage within this facility.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 by properly maintaining the egress system of this facility.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that item 6 is not deficient.
	7.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 7.
	8-9.  It is the understanding of the Board that items 8 and 9 are not deficient.
	10.  It is the understanding of the Board that item 10 has been corrected.
	11.  It is the understanding of the Board that item 11 is not deficient.
	12.  It is the understanding of the Board that item 12 has been corrected.
	13.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 13 by providing the cited heating system with an approved domestically supplied sprinkler head.
	14.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 14 by providing this facility with approved portable fire extinguishers.
	15.  It is the understanding of the Board that item 15 is not deficient.
	16.  With regard to additional requirements, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has provided this facility with an approved evacuation diagram.


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)].