The above-captioned case was originally heard by the Board on April 25, 2000. A decision, outlining a plan of action for this facility, was mailed on June 22, 2000.  The Applicant, his engineer and the Providence Fire Marshal subsequently requested clarification of item 11 of the above decision. 

Accordingly, a new hearing was scheduled for Octobers 17, 2000 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Fang, Evans, Filippi and Coutu were present. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Arthur Laurenson of the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Board hereby incorporates by reference its original findings of fact in file no. 200095. During the October 17, 2000 clarification hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant's engineer questioned whether the required five hits in the stairway this facility could be maintained in accordance with the outlined standards.  Specifically, assuming no other use of the water supply in this facility, the sprinkler head on the fourth floor would be approximately four pounds below the optimal flow.  The engineer further advised the Board that the other water use within the facility, if unchecked, could bring the required heads below the required static pressure.  After further discussion, it was determined that the incorporation of an anti-backflow device would allow a maximum flow and pressure to the domestic heads. It was further decided that the system, as described, would adequately protect this facility.	

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 defined in section 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby approves the Applicant's system as presented and designed. The Board notes that this system allows for 5 domestically supplied sprinkler heads in the stairway of this facility.  The Board specifically directs the Applicant to equip the above system with an anti-backflow device in order to allow maximum flow to the domestically supplied sprinkler heads.

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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].