The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 19, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Preiss, Filippi, OConnell and Newbrook were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Timothy Hawthorne of the Cranston Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner OConnell and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed by majority vote with Vice Chairman Burlingame abstaining.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the subject facility is a small addition onto an existing barn.  The Board finds that this facility shall be utilized to store combustible feed and hay which will be separated from the animals.  The Board finds that there shall be no electricity and no heat in the building and that there shall be no children or any public occupancy of the barn.  The Applicant has requested a waiver of the fire alarm requirements due to the lack of electricity and heat and the size of the building.  The Applicant has agreed to provide this facility with a fire alarm system in the event electricity is provided in the future.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant not to provide the cited barn with an approved fire alarm system as long as the barn shall remain unheated and without electricity.  The Board directs the Applicant to provide this facility with an approved fire alarm system in the event the Applicant plans to electrify this facility or to heat it.  Specifically, the Applicant shall provide this facility with an approved fire alarm system prior to turning on the electricity to the 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)].