This case was previously before the Board on May 23, 2006 and a decision was issued on September 20, 2006.  The Applicant has returned to present a plan of action and to request additional relief.  The most recent hearing on this matter was scheduled for September 26, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Blackburn, Preiss, Pearson, Filippi and OConnell were present.  Commissioner Newbrook recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspections William Howe and Deputy State Fire Marshals Lally and Kent of the State Fire Marshal's Office and Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Jeffrey Johnson of the Pawtucket Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner  Blackburn and seconded by Commissioner Pearson 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 060640 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that the Applicant has discovered certain structural issues that it would like to have addressed along with a question regarding the carbon monoxide detection requirements of this facility.  During the September 26, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board further had before it an August 11, 2006 letter from the Pawtucket Fire Marshal along with a September 19, 2006 letter from the Applicants architectural firm.  The Board hereby adopts the information in those documents as its supplemental findings of fact.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant and the Pawtucket Fire Marshal's office shall work together in addressing any outstanding deficiencies within this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal's office.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  During the September 26, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought clarification and relief from the headroom requirements in a portion of the ready to be fit room that is six feet two inches and also in an area of the room not to be used other than a passage to a storage room beyond.  The Board hereby reaffirms the original variance granted on May 23, 2006 on the headroom issue.  As a condition of this variance, it is the understanding and direction of the Board that only YMCA personnel will be using the storage room.
	2.  During the September 26, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that a standpipe was added to an existing already narrow stair causing the landing to be restricted further.  The Board was further advised that the landing is three feet three inches wide and that with the standpipe and valve extending into the landing the passage way is restricted to two feet two inches clear.  The Board was further advised that this was the situation in stairway D.  The Board originally granted a variance covering this situation on the basis of structural hardship as item 8 of its original decision in file number 060640.  However, it appears that the parties planned to address this situation.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of sixty (60) days from the date of this hearing in order to correct this deficiency at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal's office.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the installation of the carbon monoxide detection in the child care rooms of this facility pursuant to its understanding that there is no sleeping in any of the child care rooms and that these rooms are completely isolated from all fuel burning appliances that could potentially generate carbon monoxide.  In granting this relief, the Board is considering this area to be a day care.  

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)].