The above-captioned case was most recently scheduled for hearing on June 19, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Blackburn, Jasparro, Preiss, Jackson, Filippi and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Wade Palazini of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner Jackson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the June 19, 2007 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Department of Corrections was requesting a variance from the requirement for placing heat detection in spaces over 24 above a suspended ceiling.  The Board was further advised and finds that the relief is requested for corridors where the space above the ceiling is of non-combustible construction.  The Board further finds that the overhead deck is concrete planking, and that the walls are CMU block.  The Board further finds that the floors are either concrete slab or concrete planking.  The Board further finds that the suspended ceiling is a high-security metal ceiling that is not easily accessible without rendering the non-removable metal security ceiling tiles unusable.  The Board further finds that the space above the ceiling contains steam lines, sprinkler piping, water piping, ductwork and electrical conduit.
	The Board further finds that on September 12, 2006, ADSFM Timothy Hawthorne of the Cranston Fire Marshal's office inspected this location and determined that it was non-combustible space and that heat detection would not be necessary.  The Board further finds that on or about May 30, 2007 DSFM Wade Palazini conducted a follow-up inspection of this facility and determined that heat detection may be necessary.  The Board further finds that the parties agreed to have the Board address this question pursuant to an expedited hearing.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  While the Board understands the concerns of the State Fire Marshal's office, and agrees that technically detection could be required in the space, it appears that providing heat detection in such a space with non-removable metal security ceiling tiles would impose a substantial hardship upon the Applicant and provide only minimal additional fire safety.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant not to provide heat detection within the above described space of this facility.
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)].