The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 9, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Preiss, Filippi, Walker and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron of the State Fire Marshal's Office and Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Fournier and Brian Kreizinger of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Filippi and Vice Chairman Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a January 11, 2010 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant, the Providence Fire Marshal's Office and the State Fire Marshals Office during the February 9, 2010 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the January 11, 2010 inspection report 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 
	1-2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 1 and 2 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	3.  During the February 9, 2010 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that this facility maintains an older fire alarm system and that the Applicant shall work with the State Fire Marshal's office in the upgrade of this system.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the State Fire Marshal's office the authority to develop a time line for the upgrade of the fire alarm system of this facility with the Applicant.  Accordingly, the Applicant shall upgrade the fire alarm system of this facility at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State Fire Marshal's office. 
	4.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of 120 days from the date of this decision in which to either properly certify the flame spread rating of the vinyl mats in this facility or to replace them at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office with compliant products.
	5.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.6-21 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the occupancy of the gymnasium/basketball area at below three hundred (300) people at all times as determined by the State Fire Marshal's office.  In granting this variance, the Board notes that the gymnasium/basketball area would not be required to be sprinklered as long as the Applicant maintains the occupancy below three hundred (300) at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	6.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 6 by providing a key access box, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office, in accordance with the timelines established for the fire alarm system by the State Fire Marshal's office as outlined in item 3 above.

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)].