The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on 1/28/2014 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook, Vice Chairperson Filippi and Commissioners Booth, Pearson, Thornton, Jackson, Richard Burlingame and Sylvester were present.  Also present was Department of Administration Deputy Legal Counsel Peter N. Dennehy.  The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections Scott Caron and Deputy State Fire Marshal Kaitlyn Iannone of the State Fire Marshals Office.  The Applicant was represented by Mr. Eric Camiel and Mr. Leonard Belliveau, Jr. of Hughes Associates and Mr. Paul DePace  URI Director of Capital Projects.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.  Commissioner Thornton recused herself and did not participate in the hearing or the vote.

FINDINGS OF FACT

	The Board noted that this Applicant last appeared before the Board on January 15, 2013 at which time a time variance for compliance was granted for all of the above listed facilities.  The Applicant has advised the Board that a Plan of Action for full compliance has been developed wherein additional time variance requests were discussed with the State Fire Marshals Office on or about October 25, 2013.  At this time, the Applicant has submitted a comprehensive Plan of Action dated December 23, 2013 for compliance regarding all of the subject facilities.  Accordingly, the December 23, 2013 Plan of Action was relied upon by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the January 28, 2014 hearing.  Any modification of the Boards findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, shall be noted herein.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

	1. The Board hereby grants the time relief as set forth in the Applicants December 23, 2013 Plan of Action which incorporates a timeline for compliance for all subject facilities.  The Board notes that there is no objection by the State Fire Marshals Office to this Plan of Action.
	2. The Board hereby denies the Applicants request to omit the required sprinkler head in Room 112 of Pastore Hall [ 110180A], noting an objection by the State Fire Marshals Office.  In the alternative, the Board additionally grants the Applicant the option of providing an alternate suppression system and/or containment system in this room subject to the approval of the State Fire Marshals Office in conjunction with the Kingston Fire District, at which time the required sprinkler protection may be omitted.  This relief has been delegated to the State Fire Marshals Office upon their approval and no further appearances before the Board are required regarding this issue.
	3. It is the understanding of the Board that there is a question regarding the occupancy classification previously cited by the Applicant regarding the Whispering Pines Lodge [110164B].  The Applicant has indicated that this facility is still in the design phase and that they will rectify the issue raised by the State Fire Marshal as part of the global Plan of Action referenced 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)].