The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 28, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Jackson, Richard, Preiss, Blackburn and Jasparro were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Kevin Garcia of the Newport Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Jackson and Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an April 13, 2006 inspection report compiled by the Newport Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Newport Fire Marshals Office during the July 28, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the April 13, 2006 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards findings, such as correction of a deficiency by the Applicant, 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 understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in this Code, or as approved in particular by the State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  During the July 28, 2009 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised by the Newport Fire Marshal's office that their office determined deficiency 1 to be in compliance.  Accordingly, the Board accepts the Newport Fire Marshal's determination and shall consider deficiency 1 to be in compliance. 
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport Fire Marshal's office.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.1.5.3 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited headroom on the basis of structural hardship.  The Board further notes that this entire facility is sprinklered and that the top level of this stairway only serves two (2) rooms.
	4-5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 4 and 5.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited headroom as outlined in item 3 above.
	7-11.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.
	12.  During the July 28, 2009 hearing, the Board was advised that deficiency 12 is also the subject matter of deficiency 1 which the Board has determined to be in compliance.  Accordingly, deficiency 12 shall be determined to be in compliance with the code.
	13-21.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport Fire Marshal's office.
	22.  During the July 28, 2009 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the fire alarm panel of this facility was placed behind an antique picture.  The Board was further advised that all responding fire department personnel are aware of the location of the panel.  Finally, the Board was advised that the Applicants representative was developing a plan of action with the Newport Fire Marshal's office to make the panel more readily accessible in the event of fire alarm activation through the use of additional hinges, magnets and/or other devices acceptable to the Newport Fire Marshal's office.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 70 section 110.26 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the fire alarm panel in its current configuration and to allow it to be covered by the cited picture in accordance with the Applicants plan of action as approved by the Newport Fire Marshal's office.
	23-24.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 23 and 24 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport 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)].