The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 30, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Jasparro, Sylvester, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Timothy Lutz and Richard Vespia of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner Sylvester 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 an April 25, 2013 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the April 30, 2013 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the April 25, 2013 plan review 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 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 shall correct deficiency 1 by providing door 209 with an approved closure, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 2 by providing stair A with the proper handrail extension, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 3 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
	4.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 4 by providing classrooms 102 and 103 with proper exit signage.
	5.  In view of the limited use of this facility and the Applicants current plan to initially provide sprinkler coverage on the second level of this facility before occupancy and to further sprinkler the remainder of this facility on or before the commencement of the academic year in September of 2016, the Board hereby grants a time variance allowing the Applicant to fully sprinkler the remainder of this facility, beyond the second floor area, on or before the commencement of the 2016-2017 academic year in September of 2016.  The Board notes that the Providence Fire Marshals Office may extend this deadline for good faith efforts being demonstrated by the Applicant.  Finally, in view of the above time variance, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant not to provide emergency escape windows throughout this facility and to further allow the Applicant to utilize sprinkler heads in lieu of heat detectors as part of the fire alarm system for this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 6 by initially protecting the second level of this facility with approved sprinkler coverage and provide a service for that sprinkler which will be sized to allow for future expansion to the remainder of this facility as outlined above.

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)].