The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 2, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Dias, Sylvester, Burlingame, Blackburn and Richard were present.  Commissioner Pearson left the room and did not participate in this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Susan Hawksley of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Dias to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Burlingame.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a February 2, 2013 inspection report compiled by Exeter Fire Marshal Susan Hawksley and a corresponding plan of action submitted by the Warwick Sportsmans Association.  The above report and plan of action were utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Exeter Fire Marshals Office during the April 2, 2013 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the February 2, 2013 inspection report along with the Warwick Sportsmans Associations plan of action 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 Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 1 by providing this facility with approved emergency lighting, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by providing the cooking equipment with an approved suppression system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 by providing this facility with all required fire extinguishers, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.
	4.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 4 by providing this facility with approved interior finishes, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 by providing the cited boiler with an approved remote shut-off switch, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.
	6.  During the April 2, 2013 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought to permanently reduce the occupancy of this facility to 194 people total through approved seating plans or physical reduction of the space, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.  The Board was further advised that the facility itself is slab on grade, non-combustible brick construction, and that the interior is essentially two large open areas with line of sight access to all egress doors in each area.  Specifically, the parties agree that, should a fire occur while the facility is occupied, it would be immediately detected and the occupants would be able to promptly evacuate and call for assistance.  The Board was further advised that the nearest fire station is within five (5) miles of this facility and that the facility is located in a rural area with no residential or commercial structures within approximately half a mile radius.

 Therefore, the Applicant has advised that should a fire occur, it would present no threat to the adjacent property before suppression.  In light of these reasons, the Applicant is requesting a waiver from the requirements of a local unsupervised fire alarm system in the facility and the Exeter Fire Marshals Office had no objection to this request in light of the above special circumstances.  In light of the above, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the subject facility with the reduced occupancy load, as outlined above, without fire alarm coverage.  The Board notes that this variance is specifically limited to the above facts and dependent upon the Applicants maintaining non-public, non-residential occupancy of this facility.  
	7.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance in order to reduce the maximum occupancy of this facility to one hundred ninety four (194) persons for club functions exclusively.  The above reduction shall be in accordance with an approved seating arrangement or space reduction arrangement accepted by the Exeter Fire Marshals Office.  In light of the above reduced occupancy, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant not to sprinkler this non-combustible, non-public, non-residentially occupied facility.  The Board notes that the Exeter Fire Marshals Office has no objection to this relief, based upon the above special circumstances.  

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)].