The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 14, 2011 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Burlingame, Sylvester and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Paul Manning of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Vice Chairperson Filippi to grant the Applicant the relief outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous. 

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an April 26, 2011 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Fire Marshals Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicants representative, the new owners representatives, and the State Fire Marshals Office during the June 14, 2011 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the April 26, 2011 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. 

	The Board was further advised and finds that the ownership of this facility was transferred to new owners who appeared at, and participated during, the June 14, 2011 hearing. The Board further finds that the new owners have developed a plan of action with the State Fire Marshals Office. The Board notes that the new owners reviewed this plan of action with the Board on June 14, 2011.  
	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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the state fire code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.  (11-939-VN) It is the understanding of the Board that the parties have corrected Deficiency 1.
2.  (11-937-VN)  It is the understanding of the Board that new owners shall correct Deficiency 2, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office, in accordance with their approved plan of action. 
3.  (11-935-VN) It is the understanding of the Board that the parties have corrected Deficiency 3.
4.  (11-932-VN) The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the new owners to maintain the existing cited headroom in the means of egress at the exit from the dining area. In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the State Fire Marshals Office has no objection on the basis of structural hardship. 
5.  (11-933-VN)  It is the understanding and direction of the Board that the new owners shall correct Deficiency 5, by removing and/or relocating the cited exit sign in accordance with their plan of action.  
6.  (11-969-VN)  During the June 14, 2011 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised by the State Fire Marshals Office that deficiency 6 is now moot and not a violation of the State Fire Code. 
7.  (11-931-VN) It is the understanding of the Board that the parties have corrected Deficiency 7.
  
STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
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)].