The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 23, 2011 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Blackburn, Burlingame, Pearson, Jasparro, Dias and Jackson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Kevin Garcia of the Newport Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Jackson and seconded by Commissioner Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond in sequence with those of an August 16, 2011 inspection report compiled by the Newport Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Newport Fire Marshals Office during the August 23, 2011 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 16, 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. 

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.  (20)  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 13.2.2.3.1 and 7.2.2 and their referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing open interior stairs with the additional fire safety measures being installed within this facility.  In granting this variance, the Board notes that the Applicant maintains an existing sixteen-inch (16) draft curtain within the above open stairwells.  The Board further notes that the facility is fully alarmed with a master box communicating directly to the Newport Fire Station and that the building will be fully sprinklered and have additional sprinklers in specified areas.
	2.  (33).  During the August 23, 2011 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the maximum occupancy for this facility is listed at four hundred forty-four (444) patrons during the summer.  The Board was further advised that in addition to the cited egress, the Applicant shall provide two (2) eight by eight openings throughout the summer.  The Board was further advised that the winter occupancy of this facility has been reduced to approximately three hundred to three hundred twenty (300-320) patrons and that it therefore meets code during this period in which the above eight by eight windows will not be open.  In light of the above, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing main entrance of this facility in conjunction with the additional eight by eight openings at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport Fire Marshals Office during the summer months.  The Board notes that the occupancy of this facility shall be reduced at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport Fire Marshals Office as outlined above, during the off-season.
	3.  (New deficiency 1).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct this deficiency by repairing the cited emergency lighting at the main entrance to the basement nightclub of this facility, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Newport Fire Marshals Office.
	4.  (New deficiency 2).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct this deficiency by repairing the cited emergency lighting at the second level north of this facility, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Newport Fire Marshals Office.
	5.  (New deficiency 3).  During the August 23, 2011 hearing on this matter, the Board, with the agreement of the Applicant and the Newport Fire Marshals Office, directed the Applicant to remove the cited floor-to-ceiling mirror on the landing of the egress stairs of the basement nightclub of this facility within forty-eight (48) hours of the August 23, 2011 hearing.  

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)].