The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on July 17, 2012 and a decision dated December 5, 2012 was thereupon issued.  The Applicant has returned to the Board and the case was assigned for hearing on March 12, 2013 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Walker and Sylvester were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Paul Manning of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner Sylvester to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact in file number 120006 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that, with the exception of item 22 (11-2899-VN) and item 26 (11-2812-VN) the Applicant should be able to address any remaining deficiencies within the original time lines.
With regard to item 22, (11-2899-VN) the Board finds that the possible deficiencies in the sprinkler coverage of this facility may be attributable to a municipal water supply line that is scheduled to be addressed in the near future.  Accordingly, the Applicant wishes additional time in order to determine whether addressing this municipal line would in fact eliminate the deficiency.  Finally, the Board finds that the Applicant wishes to further address the two-hour separation issue as it relates to the three-inch thick wood plank flooring which is topped with concrete within this facility.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1-21.  The Board notes that the Applicant shall be allowed to correct deficiencies 1 through 21 within the original time frame granted it by the Board and that the State Fire Marshals Office may still extend this time frame for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.
	22.  (11-2899-VN).  In light of the external factors beyond the control of the Applicant, the Board hereby grants the Applicant an extension of time to correct deficiency 22 as follows.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant an additional sixty (60) days from the date of this decision in order to develop a plan of action for the correction of this deficiency and an additional ninety (90) days in order to allow the State Fire Marshals Office to review and approve this plan of action.  The Board further grants the Applicant an additional 150 days from the above timelines in order to implement the above plan of action and the Board reaffirms the State Fire Marshals authority to extend any of the above timelines.  The Board further grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing approximate  inch piping schedule within this facility as recommended by the Applicants engineer and approved by the State Fire Marshals Office.  This variance is conditioned upon the Applicants maintaining of the existing approved occupancy of this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board notes that any time the sprinkler system is shut down for repairs or replacement, the Applicant shall provide the appropriate fire watch pursuant to the NFPA 1 standards.  
	23-25.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiencies 23, 24 and 25 within the original timeframes.  The Board further notes that the State Fire Marshals Office shall still have the authority to extend any of the above time frames.
	26.  (11-2812-VN).  The Board hereby grants a variance to approve the existing two-hour separation throughout this facility including the separation walls and the three-inch thick wood plank floors which are topped with concrete as acceptable two-hour assemblies.  In light of the above, the Board finds that the separation of the parking garage to the business/assembly occupancy is appropriate and not a violation of the State Fire Code.  The Board further finds that the State Fire Marshals Office has no objection to this relief, based upon structural hardship.


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)].