The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 22, 2000 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Richard, Coutu, Pearson, O’Connell, Evans and Filippi were present were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Kevin Murphy of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Wahlberg 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 July 7, 2000 inspection report complied by the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshal’s Office during the  August 22, 2000 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 7, 2000 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s 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 defined in section 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 1 by providing approved detection in the proposed day-care room, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.

2. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by providing the cited balcony doors with approved signage indicating that they are not to be used as a means of egress.

3. The Board hereby directs the Applicant jambs correct deficiency3 by providing the cited door jambs with approved doors at the direction to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal before occupancy.

4. The Board hereby grants a temporary variance from the provisions of NFPA 30-3.3.2 in order to allow the Applicant to provide the above-cited interior ceiling on the second floor with an approved, painted on, Class A finish, installed at the direction to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal, before occupancy.  Upon completion of the above, the Applicant shall be allowed to occupy this area as a day-care during the next two years. In the event the Applicant plans to continue to occupy this area of the building as a day-care, after August of 2002, the Applicant shall then first replace the existing ceiling with materials installed in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 30-3.3.2, at the direction to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal.

5. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5, by providing the cited janitor closet with approved self closer, at the direction to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal.

6. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6 by properly separating the kitchen from the egress corridor, at the direction to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal.

7. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 7 by providing the cited kitchen door with an approved self closer device, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal.

8. The Board hereby grants the Applicant a temporary variance from the provisions of NFPA 101, section 30-2.4, in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing remoteness of the egress doors for a period of two years.  In the event the Applicant wishes to continue to occupy this facility as a day-care after August of 2002, the Applicant is first directed to install a division door, within egress corridor of this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal in order to address the remoteness issue.

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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].