The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 6, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Burlingame, Newbrook, Pearson, Blackburn and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief Deputy R. Michael DiMascolo of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook 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 a March 22, 2006 plan review report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the June 6, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the March 22 2006 plan review 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.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 1 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.  
2.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.7.2 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing exit configuration within this facility.  Specifically, this variance is based on structural hardship, noting that the egress system will discharge into a two-hour rated corridor with direct access to the exterior of the building.
	3-9.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	10.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.4 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing stairway handrails and guards on the basis of structural hardship.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the handrails are only one and one-half (1) inches off the wall and that the State Fire Marshal's office has no objection to the granting of this relief. 
	11-12.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 11 and 12 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	13.  During the June 6, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was requested to grant the State Fire Marshal's office the authority to approve the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the second, third and fourth floors of this facility.  The Board hereby grants the requested relief and notes that the second, third and fourth floors shall be fully sprinklered and fully alarmed.  
	14.  During the June 6, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was also requested by the State Fire Marshal to require the Applicant to maintain the smoke detectors within the atrium of this facility.  Accordingly, as a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to properly maintain the smoke detectors in the atrium area, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State 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)].