The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on June 2, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Jackson, Preiss, Walker, Jasparro and Filippi were present.  Commissioners Blackburn and Dias recused themselves from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Bruce Rice and Christopher Hiener of the Union Fire District Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Jackson and Jasparro 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 February 19, 2009 inspection report compiled by the Union Fire District Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Union Fire District Fire Marshals Office during the June 2, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the February 19, 2009 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.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 1 by repairing the basement exit sign at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 2 by repairing the cited emergency lighting units, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 3 by installing a domestically supplied sprinkler head over the furnace and making the enclosure smoke-tight, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to utilize the approved acceptable separations as defined in RI Fire Safety Code section 10.5.1 in order to separate 483.18 square feet of unused space in the basement of this facility from the remainder of the facility in order to bring the buildings total square footage to approximately 2,491.97 square feet wherein a local fire alarm system would not be required in accordance with RI Life Safety Code section 39.3.4.1.1.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the basement is utilized for utilities only and that the building currently has a non-compliant fire alarm system and that the owner wishes to abandon approximately one half of the area of the basement at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office.  In light of the above, as long as the abandoned area has no access, the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office has no objection.  Accordingly, this relief is granted in order to allow the Applicant to provide the above separation at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the Union Fire District Fire Marshal's office.

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)].