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 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 Blackburn and seconded by Commissioner Booth to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed with Commissioner Sylvester abstaining from the vote.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 29, 2013 inspection report (13-1090-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 July 29, 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. 
	The Board further finds that the subject facility was originally protected by a full sprinkler system that is currently out of service.  The Board finds that the Applicant has decided to remove the sprinkler system at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office instead of repairing the sprinkler system.  The Board finds that sprinkler coverage was originally required for this 20,000 square foot building, but that the current code does not require sprinkler coverage, only fire alarm coverage.  Accordingly, the Board finds that the above sprinkler system may be removed by the Applicant.
	The Board finds that the Applicant has requested exemption from fire alarm coverage of this 20,000 square foot facility, based upon the current limited occupancy and current non-hazardous storage within this facility.  The Board finds that granting such a request could potentially endanger even the limited number of employees within this facility, especially in the absence of sprinkler coverage.  The Board finds, however, that other relief can be granted to the Applicant to reduce the overall cost of this project.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  (13-933-VN).  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 1 by removing the out-of-service sprinkler system, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	2.  (13-935-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to submit a plan of action to the State Fire Marshals Office for the installation of a fire alarm system, emergency lights and exit signs within this facility.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 150 days in order to implement the above plan of action, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board hereby grants the State Fire Marshals Office the authority to extend either or both of the above timelines for good faith efforts being demonstrated by the Applicant.  Accordingly, the Board directs that the Applicant shall maintain proper egress from this facility with approved exit signage at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office, within the above timeline.
	3.  (13-938-VN).  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to provide this facility with approved emergency lighting, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
	4.  (13-932-VN).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 4 by providing this facility with an approved fire alarm system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office, within the timeline outlined in item 2 above.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant the option of tying in the new fire alarm system into the existing master box located on this premises, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State and North Kingstown Fire Marshals offices
	5.  (New)  During the September 10, 2013 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that this facility needed a remote means of egress and the Applicant advised the Board that he would provide a new pass door, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office, in order to accomplish remote egress from this facility.  Accordingly, the Board grants the time variance outlined in item 2 above in order to allow the Applicant to provide the new remote egress door from this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.

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)].