The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing before a subcommittee of the Board on January 21, 2010 at 9:30 A.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Jasparro and Commissioners Walker and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal David Cionfolo of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to recommend to the full Board that the Applicant be granted the relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
The above recommendations were thereupon presented to the full Board on January 26, 2010 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Walker, Jasparro and Preiss were present.  A motion to approve the subcommittee recommendations was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Walker.  The motion was unanimous.  Accordingly, the subcommittee determination has the status of a full Board decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a January 6, 2010 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the January 21, 2010 subcommittee hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the January 6, 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.  During the January 21, 2010 subcommittee hearing on this matter, the State Fire Marshal's office advised the Board that the facility is built like a cross with two (2) wings and a center area.  The State Fire Marshal's office further advised the Board that each of the two (2) wings is currently separated from the center wing with smoke barriers, thereby providing this facility with a total of three (3) separate smoke compartments.  The Applicant has requested relief in order to maintain the actual patient bed capacity in each of these wings.  Specifically, the north wing currently houses thirty-eight (38) beds and the south wing currently houses thirty-four (34) beds.  While the code would limit the total amount of beds within a smoke compartment to thirty (30), it is the understanding of the Board that the State Fire Marshal's office has no objection to allowing the Applicant to maintain the existing patient bed capacity in light of the other safeguards within this facility.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.3.7.1 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the actual patient bed capacity as outlined above within the smoke compartments of this facility.  Specifically, the Applicant shall be allowed to maintain a total of 38 beds in the north wing of this facility and a total of 34 beds in the south wing of this facility.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the State Fire Marshal's office has 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 submitting a written appeal of the above subcommittee recommendations to the entire Fire Board for review, pursuant to Board Rule 6-2-9.  The Applicant shall thereupon be scheduled for hearing before the full Board of Appeal & Review.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this decision (RIGL 42-35-15(c)).