This matter was originally before the Board on April 25, 2006 and a written decision was subsequently issued in file 060150.  The written decision established a four-phase plan of action for the upgrade of the fire protection and fire alarm systems within this facility.  The Applicant has now returned to the Board with an alternative plan of action for the supervision of the sprinkler system valves on the exterior of the building, specifically, post indicator valves and gate valves located below the roadway.  
Accordingly, the above-captioned case was most recently scheduled for hearing on January 6, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Pearson, Walker, Jasparro and Preiss were present.  Chairman Coutu and Commissioner Blackburn recused themselves from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Gerald Dion and Keith Sullivan of the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact in file number 060150 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board notes that the Applicant has submitted an October 20, 2008 letter outlining his specific variance requests in this case.  The above letter was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office during the January 6, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 20, 2008 letter as its additional findings of fact in this case.  Finally, during the hearing on this matter, Commissioner Preiss suggested that one of the companys employees be appropriately trained to conduct a daily inspection of the post indicator and gate valves on the exterior of this building to ensure that they are not tampered with.  Additionally, Commissioner Dias indicated that any future upgrade of the post indicator and/or gate valves on the exterior of the building should include the appropriate fire alarm tie-in to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's Office.  It is the understanding of the Board that the above two (2) suggestions would be acceptable to the parties.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RI Uniform Fire Code section 13.8.10.5.6 in order to allow the Applicant to omit electrical supervision of sprinkler system valves exterior to the building, specifically post indicator valves and gate valves located below the roadway.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to continue to keep all valves chained and locked in the open position.  The Board further directs the Applicant to continue to functionally test each valve on a monthly basis and send written reports to the Central Falls Fire Marshal's Office.  The Board further directs the Applicant to train one of its personnel to conduct brief daily inspections of each of the above valves to ensure that they have not been tampered with.  Finally, in the event these valves are modified or replaced in the future, the Board directs the Applicant to provide the appropriate electrical supervision on such valves at that time, 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)].