The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 10, 2012 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Pearson, Walker, Jasparro, Jackson and Burlingame were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief Deputy James Gumbley, Chief of Inspections Scott Caron and Deputy State Fire Marshal Paul Manning of the State Fire Marshals Office along with Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Brian Ballou of the Union Fire District Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Burlingame.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a June 29, 2012 inspection report (12-1005-IS) compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant the Union Fire District Fire Marshals Office and the State Fire Marshals Office during the July 10, 2012 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates inspection report 12-1005-IS dated June 29, 2012 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 State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in which to submit a plan of action to the State Fire Marshals Office for the correction of any outstanding item on the inspection report entitled 12-1005-IS.  As part of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to address the wire pull and the new master box location and to determine whether it shall address the wiring method either above or below ground.  The Board further directs the Applicant to have an engineer review the HVAC system to determine whether it should be connected to the fire alarm system.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant an additional 120 days to implement the above plan of action at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.  Finally, the Board notes that the State Fire Marshals Office may extend either or both of the above timelines for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.

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)].