The above-captioned cases were originally scheduled for hearing on January 29, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Jackson, Jasparro, Walker, Filippi and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Joseph Michalczyk and Christopher Dillon of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined in the original Decision covering files 070376, 070377 and 070378.  The motion was unanimous.
	The original Decision, covering files 070376, 070377 and 070378, was issued shortly thereafter and forwarded to the parties.  By letter dated February 1, 2008, Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Joseph Michalczyk advised the Board that his superiors had ordered that he could not allow or agree to re-occupancy of the buildings.  However, the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals letter also stated that he would be content with the Decision of the Board.  The letter further advised that while the last fire was electrical in nature, previous fires had been due to the human factor (specifically from cooking) and that the fire-watch activity should continue in the occupied buildings until they were brought up to code.  Finally, the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal advised that the referenced fire walls were technically not true fire walls due to possible construction deficiencies and unaddressed penetrations. 
	The most recent concerns of the Providence Fire Marshals Office, outlined in the February 1, 2008 letter, were addressed by the Board during the next regular meeting held on February 5, 2008.  At that time, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Jackson, Richard, Walker, Filippi and Pearson were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this matter.  An initial motion to allow re-occupancy of these buildings was made by Commissioner Walker and seconded by Commissioner Jackson.  The motion was unanimous.  A second motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioners Walker, Filippi and Pearson to allow the fire-watch to be continued by the owners private 24-hour security team, as opposed to the university security, upon completion of the electrical work.  Accordingly, the owners security will continue the fire-watch until all of the deficiencies within this complex are fully corrected.  The second motion was also unanimous. 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the January 29, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that this is an apartment complex with three major stand-alone buildings. (73-101 Charles Street; 105-115 Charles Street; and 400456 North Main Street).  Each stand-alone building is further divided by fire barriers, maintaining an approximate two (2) hour fire rating, into smaller independent buildings each containing six (6) or eight (8) separate apartment units.  Any penetrations in these fire barriers will be corrected by the Applicant.  In total, there are nineteen (19) smaller independent apartment buildings between fire walls.  The Applicant has provided the Board with a rough sketch of the configuration of the main stand-alone buildings and smaller independent apartment buildings between the above fire barriers.  The Applicants sketch is located on the fourth page of the attached January 29, 2008 Hughes Associates plan of action for this complex. 
The Hughes Associates January 29, 2008 plan of action for this complex, along with the sketch, were reviewed by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the January 29, 2008 hearing on this matter.  Since nothing in the plan of action was contested, the Board hereby incorporates the attached January 29, 2008 plan of action as its additional findings of fact in this case.
The Board further finds that members of the Providence Fire Marshals Office believe that the most recent fire in this complex was electrical in nature.  The Providence Fire Marshals Office has also advised that prior fires were determined to involve a human factor such as cooking.  As outlined in the plan of action, the Board further finds that the Applicant has addressed the Providence Fire Marshals concern about the electrical system by commencing the process of replacing all of the electrical panels throughout the complex to provide arc-fault protection.  In addition, the Board finds that all existing electrical fancoil units, that were not previously replaced in the complex, are in the process of being replaced.  The Board further finds that while the electrical system is being upgraded, the Applicant is providing the complex with an approved fire-watch overseen by the security office of a major university having students residing within this complex.  This approved fire-watch is currently conducted during the evening and early morning hours.  Once the university fire-watch concludes after the electrical system is corrected, the Applicant shall continue the fire-watch, with his own 24 hour security, until all remaining deficiencies are corrected in this complex. 
The Board further finds that the Applicant has installed additional temporary battery-operated combination smoke alarm/CD detector units in all of the dwelling units.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has installed approved fire extinguishers throughout the common hallways and is in the process of installing approved fire extinguishers within each of the apartment units.  In addition, the Board finds that the Applicant is in the process of equipping each apartment door with approved spring loaded hinge(s) and that all of the apartment doors within this complex shall be so equipped within two and one half (2  ) weeks of the January 29, 2008 hearing date. 
In light of the above, the Applicant has requested to be allowed to continue to occupy this complex, with the above safeguards, pursuant to a plan of action to bring this facility into full compliance with the fire code on or before August 29, 2008as outlined on page three of the attached January 29, 2008 Hughes Engineering Report.  The Board notes the objection of the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal pursuant to the orders of his superiors.  The Board further notes that the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal is leaving this matter to the Board and would abide by the Boards Decision. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	With the exception of the automatic use of the fifteen point plan, as outlined in RILSC section 31.1.3, the Board hereby approves the Applicants attached plan of action including the proposed timelines for bringing this facility into full compliance with the State Fire Code.  As a condition of the continued occupancy of this complex during the above period, the Board directs the Applicant to maintain the current fire-watch, by university security, from 10PM through 7AM, until all of the electrical panels throughout the complex are provided with arc-fault protection and all existing electrical fancoil units replaced to the satisfaction of the electrical inspector.  Upon completion of the university security fire-watch, the Board directs the Applicant to continue the fire-watch with his own 24 hour security team until all remaining deficiencies are corrected.  The Board notes the formal objection of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
2.	The Board is currently in the process of limiting the application of the 15-point plan to apartment buildings that were originally one, two or three family buildings.  Accordingly, as a condition of the above relief, the Board is requesting that the Applicant make a diligent effort to correct the remaining deficiencies in this apartment complex by utilizing one of the other options listed for existing apartments in chapter 31 of the Rhode Island Life Safety Code.  However, since the original plan of correction may have been based upon the 15-point plan, the Board shall continue to leave this file open to address any major hardship the Applicant may encounter in attempting to fully comply with one of the other options found in Chapter 31. 

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
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)].