The above-captioned cases were originally scheduled for Subcommittee review on August 24, 2011 and September 23, 2011. The Subcommittee members were Chairman Dana Newbrook, Commissioner David Dias and Executive Director Tom Coffey, Esq.  During the Subcommittee review, the Fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron, Chief of Plan Review Officer Wade Palazini, and Deputy State Fire Marshals Kate Foley and Chris Moore of the State Fire Marshals Office. The University was represented by its Director of Public Safety Dr. Robert Drapeau and its Engineer Timothy LaRose, P.E.
The above-listed Priority 1 and Priority 2 cases were thereupon rescheduled for a hearing and review of the Subcommittees recommendations before the Board on September 27, 2011 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Burlingame, Jackson, Jasparro, Sylvester, Walker and Dias were present. Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case. The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron, Chief Plan Review Officer Wade Palazini and Deputy State Fire Marshal Kate Foley of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Sylvester and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous. 
In order to grant the State Fire Marshals Office sufficient time to review the above-listed Priority 3 cases, these remaining cases were reassigned for further Subcommittee review and a Board hearing on November 8, 2011. The Subcommittee review was scheduled for the morning of November 8, 2011, and the Board hearing, reviewing the Subcommittee recommendations, was thereupon scheduled for 1:00 PM on November 8, 2011. At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Burlingame, Jackson, Walker and Dias were present. Commissioner Blackburn also recused himself from consideration of this case. The fire service was also represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron, Chief Plan Review Officer Wade Palazini and Deputy State Fire Marshal Kate Foley of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief with regard to the Priority 3 cases as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous. 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the September 27, 2011 and the November 8, 2011 hearings on this matter, the Board had before it a September 23, 2011 Plan of Action developed by Hughes Associates. This plan was refined by the parties after an initial intensive August 24, 2011 Subcommittee review wherein the Applicant, University Officials and members of the State Fire Marshals Office the parties agreed to make certain modifications to the Plan of Action and report back for further Subcommittee review on September 23, 2011. 
	The revised Hughes Associates Plan of Action document, dated September 23, 2011, was thereupon again reviewed and approved by the Subcommittee. The Board finds that this document effectively divided the proposed fire protection upgrades into three priority classifications. The Board finds that Priority 1 primarily covered the Dormitories and other residential occupancies. The Board finds that Priority 2 primarily covered the larger Assembly Occupancies. And, the Board finds that the Priority 3 cases were the remaining smaller buildings were generally classified as business and/or classrooms.
	The Board hereby adopts the September 23, 2011 Plan of Action as its initial findings of fact. Any modification of the Boards findings 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.	The Board hereby approves the Applicants September 23, 2011 Plan of Action as reviewed by and presented to it on September 27, 2011 and November 8, 2011. Accordingly, the Applicant is directed to implement the above plan of action, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office, in accordance with its terms. In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the State Fire Marshals 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 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)].