The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 6, 2012 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Richard, Dias, Pearson, Jasparro, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Kaitlyn Foley of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition votes of Commissioners Blackburn and Burlingame.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond in sequence with those of a December 20, 2011 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 March 6, 2012 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the December 20, 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.  (11-2734-VN).  During the March 6, 2012 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the State Fire Marshals Office sought three-hour separation between the 576 square foot one-person reupholstering operation and the business occupancy of this facility.  During the hearing, the Fire Marshal advised the Board that she had determined the three-hour separation was necessary due to the storage of foam within the reupholstering area.  The State Fire Marshal further advised the Board that the Applicant and the business owner had not provided her with approved certification of the foam in this area.  In light of the above, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing separation between the single person reupholstering operation and the business occupancy of this facility with one of the following safeguards.  As a condition of this variance, the Applicant is directed to work with the owner of the reupholstering operation to secure certification that the foam cited by the State Fire Marshals Office in this facility is not flammable.  Alternatively, the Applicant is directed to work with the owner of the reupholstering operation and the State Fire Marshal to store any and all of the foam materials that are not currently required by the reupholstering projects taken on by the business owner, outside of the building to the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Accordingly, the above relief is granted upon the Applicant and the owner of the upholstery operation meeting one (1) of the above two requirements to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  (11-2735-VN). The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in which to develop and submit a plan of action for the installation of a municipal fire alarm system within this facility.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 150 days in order to implement the above plan of action by providing this facility with an approved municipally connected or third-party monitored fire alarm system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board hereby grants the State Fire Marshals Office the authority to extend either or both of the above timelines for good faith efforts being demonstrated by the Applicant.
	3.  (11-2736-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 3 by replacing the glass door within the concrete block wall separating the storage and business occupancy with an approved rated door installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	4-5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 4 and 5.
	6.  (11-2741-VN).  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to provide the cited exit doors from the business occupancy with push-paddle locking devices installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office within the time frame outlined in item 2 above.
	7-11.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant either has corrected or will correct deficiencies 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	12.  (11-2754-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 12 by providing this facility with permanent wiring and eliminating the extension cords cited by the State Fire Marshals Office.  In granting this relief, the Board has been advised that the Applicant is undergoing operational issues and once the permanent office space is established, the Applicant shall provide permanent wiring.
	13.  (11-2760-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 13 by either rating or otherwise bringing the furnace rooms into compliance with the Code.
	14.  (11-2761-VN).  During the March 6, 2012 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that if the hazard level of the cited 576 square foot industrial area was reduced as outlined in item 1 above, the single means of egress shall be sufficient.  Accordingly, once the Applicant complies with item 1 of this decision, item 14 will be rendered moot.
	15.  (11-2763-VN).  During the March 6, 2012 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant has maintained the subject facility as a single-family home and that he plans to do so in the future because the Town of Charlestown has advised him that current zoning will not allow him to maintain a multiple family home.  Accordingly, the Board finds this deficiency to be moot.
	16.  (11-2766-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 16.
	17.  (11-2767-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 17 by providing the cited handrails at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	18.  (11-2769-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 18 by providing the second floor storage area with a means of egress satisfactory to the State Fire Marshals Office.
	19.  (11-2795-VN).  Pursuant to the understanding of the Board as outlined in item 15 above, it is the understanding of the Board that item 19 is moot in that the subject area of this building shall be maintained as a single family home.
	20.  (11-2796-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 20 by either providing domestic sprinkler coverage over the furnaces of this facility or providing a double 5/8 sheetrock surface on the walls separating the two occupancies.  Whichever alternative the Applicant plans to utilize, the work involved shall be at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	21.  (11-2724-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to correct deficiency 21 by providing the proper separation between the industrial and residential occupancy.

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)].