The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 30, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Booth, Pearson, Thornton, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Michael Macaruso of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Booth to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the subject facility is an airport hangar with separated business and storage occupancies.  The Board further finds, pursuant to a July 17, 2013 letter from the State Fire Marshals Office, that the subject facility is proposed to be utilized as a temporary place of assembly for approximately two hundred (200) persons with tables and chairs on August 15, 2013.  The Board further finds that the subject facility is fully sprinklered and maintains a foam suppression system.  The Board further finds that the subject facility shall maintain its main door open at all times during the assembly occupancy and that the subject facility has additional exit doors approved by the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board finds that the State Fire Marshals Office has no objection to the Applicants plan for the one-day conversion of this facility to a temporary assembly occupancy.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance in order to convert this facility to a temporary assembly occupancy with a maximum occupancy of two hundred (200) persons with tables and chairs on August 15, 2013.  In granting this variance, the Board notes that this facility is fully sprinklered and maintains a foam suppression system, and that the main doors of this facility shall remain open throughout this function.  The Board further directs the Applicant to provide any additional safeguards deemed necessary by the State Fire Marshals Office for this one-day event.  Finally, the Board finds that the State Fire Marshals Office has no objection.

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)].