The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 9, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Filippi, Blackburn, Richard, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame, Pearson and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals Cynthia Dehler and Wade Pallazini of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Blackburn to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Burlingame.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the May 9, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant had requested the temporary use of a hangar located at 596 Airport Road in Warwick to be the location of a surprise birthday party on Saturday, May 20, 2006.  The Board was further advised and finds that this is a cinderblock and unprotected steel building which would be classified as Type II (000) construction.  The Board further finds that this facility is equipped with a municipally connected fire alarm system, emergency lights, exit signage and fire extinguishers.  The Board finds that this hangar is approximately 7,973 square feet in total area, and maintains an office, client waiting area, two (2) bathrooms, a small kitchen and a spare room.  The State Fire Marshal's office appeared and provided the Board with a May 4, 2006 assessment including the safeguards deemed necessary by that office in order to allow for conducting the May 20, 2006 event.  Accordingly, the May 4, 2006 letter along with the enclosed safeguards are incorporated herein by reference.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the State Fire Marshal's office the authority to approve the temporary occupancy of this facility on Saturday, May 20, 2006 as a place of assembly on that particular date.  In granting this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to comply with all of the May 4, 2006 safeguards outlined in the State Fire Marshal's letter, as well as any additional safeguards deemed necessary by the State Fire Marshal.
&8195;
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)].