The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 25, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Pearson, Jackson, Preiss, Jasparro, Walker and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals Wade Palazini and Cynthia Dehler of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioners Dias and Walker 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 October 24, 2008 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 November 25, 2008 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 24, 2008 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 has corrected deficiency 1 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 2 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 39.2.7 and 7.7.2 and their referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the current exiting arrangements whereby the two enclosed exit stair towers discharge through the first floor of this facility.  This variance is based upon structural hardship.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6(a) at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance in order to correct deficiencies 6(b) and 6(c) at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State Fire Marshal's office.
	7.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 7 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.
	8-13.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	14.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to immediately correct deficiencies 14(a) and 14(b) at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	15-20.  The Board notes that deficiency 16 appears to be corrected.  The Board hereby grants a time variance in order to allow the Applicant to correct the remaining deficiencies, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 20 at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State 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)].