The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 10, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Booth, Pearson, Thornton, Jackson, Sylvester, Burlingame, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Cynthia Dehler of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioners Booth and Thornton 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 August 19, 2013 inspection report (13-1007-IS) 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 September 10, 2013 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 19, 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.  (13-860-VN).  During the September 10, 2013 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the subject facility was constructed in approximately 1956 of cinderblock, and maintains no ceiling.  The Board was further advised that this is a seasonally occupied building with no heating system.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing exposed wood construction of the roof assembly of this facility with additional smoke detection installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  (13-861-VN).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 2 by providing this facility with approved smoke detection, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	3.  (13-862-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has correct deficiency 3 by providing a twenty-four hour emergency number of the owner or the owners representative for the fire department to call in the event of an alarm or trouble condition. 
	4.  (13-1030-VN).  During the September 10, 2013 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that a maximum occupancy of 148 people would be acceptable to the applicant for this facility.  The Board was further advised that several members of the association are also volunteer firefighters and have two-way radio communication.  Accordingly, in light of the new maximum occupancy of 148 people, the Board finds that emergency forces notification would not be required for this facility.  The Board further notes that this facility shall be provided with additional smoke protection and that the Applicant shall maintain a fire watch, acceptable to the State Fire Marshal, during all events.  
By way of clarification, the requirement of a fire watch is not the equivalent of a firefighter detail.  The Board notes that it is not requiring a firefighter detail for the occupancy of this facility of 148 people.  However, the Board notes that the local fire chief has the authority to determine whether or not a firefighter detail is necessary on a case by case basis, in accordance with Rhode Island General Laws.
	5.  (13-859-VN).  In light of the reduction of the maximum occupancy of this facility to 148 people, the Board has determined that a sprinkler system would not be required.  In addition, the Board finds that this is a seasonally occupied facility which potentially falls within the exceptions established in 23-28.6-21(b)(1).

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)].