The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 17, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Newbrook, Preiss, Pearson, Filippi and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Frank Dunton of the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard 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 an August 22, 2006 plans review report compiled by the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Woonsocket Fire Marshals Office during the October 17, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 22, 2006 plans 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 by providing this facility with an approved fire alarm system.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by providing this facility with approved sprinkler coverage.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing tread width and riser height of stairway 1 which is constructed within a solid masonry enclosure.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding and direction of the Board that the Applicant shall provide this facility with a new stairway constructed in accordance with the provisions of section 7.2.2.2.1.  The Applicants proposal to construct this new stairway is outlined in his architects letter dated September 18, 2006.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 14.2.3.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing corridor width within the egress system of this facility.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the corridor is obstructed at one point by a structural steel column that runs throughout the entire building.  This variance is based on structural hardship.
	5.  During the October 17, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that there was no longer an industrial occupancy within this complex.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 6.1.14.2.2 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing separation of occupancies in conjunction with the full sprinkler system installed within this facility.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6 by providing proper separation between the egress stairway and the service elevator hoistway.  
	7.  During the October 17, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the sub-basement was vacant and that a new stairway would be constructed servicing this area next summer.  The Board was further advised that the Applicant was seeking relief in the interim.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain existing egress from the sub-basement of this facility, noting that the sub-basement was utilized for service of this building only, and not otherwise occupied.  Pursuant to the Boards understanding, the Applicant shall provide an additional means of egress from the sub-basement over the summer of 2007.
	8.  As outlined above, the Applicant plans to provide a new means of egress to correct this deficiency.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until the completion of the new means of egress during the summer of 2007.  
	9.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 9 has been corrected by the Applicant.
	10.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 10.
	11.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing floor finish in conjunction with the sprinkler system of this facility.  However, upon future replacement of the floor finish, the Board directs the Applicant to provide the Woonsocket Fire Marshal's office with approved certification.
	12.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 12 by providing this facility with approved emergency lighting.
	13.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 13 by providing this facility with approved exit signage.
	14.  The Board hereby reaffirms the prior variance issued in file number 050050 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing glass window assemblies in conjunction with the sprinkler coverage throughout this facility.
	15.  The Board hereby reaffirms its original decision in file number 050050 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing components of the egress system in conjunction with sprinkler coverage.
	16.  The Board hereby reaffirms its original decision in file number 050050 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing window assemblies, corridor walls, and other egress system assemblies in conjunction with the sprinkler coverage.
	17.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 17 by providing this facility with approved portable fire extinguishers.
	18.  As outlined above, the Applicant plans to provide this facility with an approved new stairway during the summer of 2007.  Accordingly, all of the time relief granted above pursuant to the installation of this new stairway shall be contingent upon the new stairway being completed and approved prior to the commencement of the 2007-2008 academic year in September of 2007.

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)].