The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 12, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Preiss and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Thomas Dettore of the Cranston Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Filippi and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	Pursuant to the documentation submitted and the testimony during the September 12, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board finds that this is an existing three-story building built approximately 1892.  The Board further finds that it is of ordinary wood frame construction with a gable/hip roof.  The Board further finds that the exterior walls are aluminum siding and that the roof has asphalt shingles.  The Board further finds that the building contains four (4) apartment units and two (2) business occupancies.
	The Board further finds that the basement is fully furnished and is occupied by one (1) business.  The Board further finds that the first floor has one (1) apartment unit and one (1) business unit.  The Board further finds that the second floor has two (2) apartment units and the third floor has one (1) apartment unit.  The Board further finds that the building has sufficient egress, is protected by a local fire alarm system, emergency lights and fire extinguishers.  The Board further finds that the apartments have hard-wired smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.
	Finally, the Board finds that this facility currently contains a furnace that is located within the means of egress.  The Board finds that the Applicant has agreed to install a new zero clearance 100,000 BTU furnace with the makeup air and exhaust being directly vented to the outside.  The Board further finds that the furnace will be recessed into a closet area and protected by one hour rated walls and ceiling and a ninety minute rated enclosure.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant will need a time variance in order to implement the above plan of action.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of 120 days from the date of this decision in which to provide this facility with the above described 100,000 BTU zero clearance furnace and enclosure.  Specifically, the above furnace shall be enclosed and protected by one-hour rated walls and ceiling and maintaining a ninety-minute rated door.  Finally, the Board directs that the makeup air and exhaust will be directly to the outside of this building.

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)].