The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 11, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Booth, Thornton, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Mark Vincent of the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Jackson 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 a May 14, 2013 inspection report compiled by the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office during the June 11, 2013 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the May 14, 2013 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 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 portable fire extinguishers.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by removing all combustible materials from the exit stairways of this facility.
	3.  During the June 11, 2013 hearing on this matter, the Applicant advised the Board that he requested relief to maintain the existing floor of the repair garage which may or may not be liquid tight and is not sloped, and does not have floor drains.  The Applicant further advised the Board that he is in full compliance with all DEM regulations covering hazardous materials and maintains his operations in accordance with those regulations.  The Board notes that the installation of drains and the reconfiguration of the floors slope would be a significant hardship to this Applicant, especially in light of the fact that he is in full compliance with the DEM regulations.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 30.2.5.1 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing floor and his existing compliance with DEM regulations.  As a condition of this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to seal the floor with a sealant approved by the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office within the following time periods.  

The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to develop and submit a plan of action for the sealant of the floor.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 150 days in order to implement that plan of action by properly sealing the floor of this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office.  The Board notes that upon completion of this project, the Applicant shall not be required to return to the Board, because the approval of the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office shall be deemed the approval of the Board.
	4.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 4 by removing the cited extension cord.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 to the satisfaction of the Hopkins Hill Fire Marshals Office.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6 by providing the cited dwelling unit with approved smoke and carbon monoxide detection.
	7.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 7 by properly maintaining the exit signage within this facility.

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)].