The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 25, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Richard, Preiss and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Gerald Dion of the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office.  Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Burlingame and Blackburn recused themselves from consideration of this case.  Accordingly, the case was heard in subcommittee.  The subcommittees recommendations were thereupon approved on May 2, 2006, pursuant to a motion made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner OConnell.  Those Commissioners voting to approve the subcommittees recommendation were Chairman Farrell, Commissioner Filippi, Commissioner Newbrook, Commissioner Preiss, Commissioner Pearson and Commissioner OConnell.  Accordingly, the subcommittee recommendation has the status of a full Board decision.  

FINDINGS OF FACT
	It is the finding of the Board that the subject facility is a manufacturing/storage facility located in the City of Central Falls.  It is the further finding of the Board that the facility is classified as a mixed use building consisting of storage and industrial occupancies.  The Board further finds that the building has an area of approximately 700,000 square feet.  The Board further finds that most of the building is one story above grade and one story below.  The Board further finds that portions of the building are four (4) stories in height and that some portions of the building are two (2) stories below grade.  The Board further finds that the building is equipped with a municipally connected fire alarm system, automatic sprinkler systems throughout, emergency lights and exit signs and portable fire extinguishers.  The Board further finds that there are multiple freight elevators.  However, there are no passenger elevators.  The Board further finds that none of the elevators are automatic.  The Board further finds that the owner of the facility is planning to replace the existing municipally connected fire alarm system with a new analog addressable, municipally connected fire alarm system in accordance with Chapter 13 of the RI Uniform Fire Code.  The Board further finds that due to the large size of this facility, the owner is requesting a time variance for installation of the new automatic fire alarm system.  It is proposed to install the fire alarm system in four (4) phases.  The Applicants time variance is for the installation in accordance with the proposed timetable.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance in order to upgrade the fire alarms system within this facility through a series of four (4) phases.
	Phase I
	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until October 31, 2006 in order to complete Phase I by purchasing all fire alarm equipment and storing this equipment in a secure place on site.
	Phase II
	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until September 30, 2007 in which to complete Phase II by installing the fire alarm system head-end and all devices and appliances in the main production areas.  The Board notes that during this phase there shall continue to be temporary monitoring of the existing fire alarm system.
	Phase III
	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until September 30, 2008 in which to extend the new fire alarm system into all other occupied spaces.  The Board notes that there would continue to be monitoring of the existing fire alarm system during this period.
	Phase IV
	The Board hereby grants the applicant a time variance until December 31, 2008 in which to extend the new fire alarm system into all the unoccupied spaces and to demolish all remaining existing fire alarm system components at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office.

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)].