The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 24, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Preiss, Jackson, Jasparro and Walker were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Silva of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Walker and Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the July 24, 2007 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant planned to upgrade the fire alarm system within this facility.  The Board was further advised that in order to fully comply with the new fire alarm requirements, the Applicant would have to provide an emergency command center with a minimum area of ninety-six (96) square feet and a minimum dimension of eight (8) feet.  The Board was further advised that the Applicants existing emergency command center was planned to be reused.  The Board was advised that the existing command center is approximately fifty-three (53) square feet.  The Providence Fire Marshal's office appeared and had no objection to the reuse of the existing command center.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 11.9.3 in order to allow the Applicant to re-utilize the fifty-three square foot existing command center within this facility.  In granting this relief, the Board notes that the Providence Fire Marshal's office had no objection.

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)].