The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 17, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Dias, Filippi, Jasparro and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Christine Kent of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Vice Chairman 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 May 22, 2006 inspection 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 March 17, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the May 22, 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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.1.5.1.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited head room on the basis of structural hardship.
	2.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to allow the Applicant to provide the cited areas of this facility with approved smoke detection and carbon monoxide detection installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield and State Fire Marshal's offices.  The Board hereby authorizes the Smithfield and State Fire Marshal's offices to extend the above deadline, if necessary, for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.
	3.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in order to upgrade the fire alarm system of this facility by providing approved heat detection in those ceiling areas identified by the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices.  The Board further grants the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices the authority to extend the above deadline, if necessary, for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.
	4.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 4 by providing the fire alarm system with approved audible notification devices installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield and State Fire Marshal's offices within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision.  The Board further grants the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices the authority to extend the above deadline, if necessary, for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.
	5.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 5 by bringing this facility into compliance with the provisions of section 17.2.11.1 and its referenced standards, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices.  The Board further grants the Applicant thirty (30) days in which to develop and submit a plan to the State Fire Marshal's office for the above corrections and an additional 120 days for the Applicant to effect the above corrections at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices.  Finally, the Board notes that the State and Smithfield Fire Marshal's offices may extend the above deadlines, if necessary, for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 17.2.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the overhead door to the basement as an emergency means of egress in light of the fact that the basement shall be limited to storage only and shall not maintain other occupancies.

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)].