The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on January 23, 2007 at 1:00 P.M. At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Pearson, Filippi and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal David Pastore of the West Warwick 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 four identical November 28, 2006 inspection reports, covering Buildings A, B, C & D located at 1700 Main Street in the Town of West Warwick.  The Board finds that each building is a three story, six apartment unit facility constructed on a concrete slab.  The Board further finds that the gross dimension of each building is approximately 5,871 square feet.  The Board finds that there are two apartment units on each of the three floors.  The Board further finds that each apartment unit is provided with two means of egress.
	The Board further finds that attached to each building is a five and one half foot by eight foot, nine inch boiler room containing the buildings heating system.  The Board further finds that the walls of the boiler room are plastered.  The Board further finds that the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office has been unable to establish a rating of the separation between the boiler room and the abutting apartment and the apartment above the boiler room. 
	The Board further finds that the buildings are heated with enclosed forced hot water systems with the water being provided by 250,000 BTU gas boilers.  The Board further finds that there is no door leading from the boiler room back into the apartment building.  The Board finds that the boiler room is accessed exclusively from the outside.  The Board further finds that the closed hot water heating system, in each building, does not allow atmospheric gases through its piping to be released into the apartments it services.  
	The Board finds that, in its Interpretation 04-05(1), it decided that apartment buildings, not maintaining fire places and/or fuel-burning appliances within the dwelling units, would generally not require CO detectors in the dwelling units.  The Board finds that it made the following limited exception to the above general rule and stated, However, if it were possible that CO could enter the unit through potentially defective stacks, flues or forced hot air shafts, the AHJ may require CO detection in the area in question.
	The Board finds that the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office was not alleging the possibility of CO entering through potentially defective stacks, flues or forced hot air shafts in this case.  The Board finds that in this case the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office was concerned with the method used by the Applicant in sealing off pipe, wire and other penetrations in the boiler room separation walls and ceiling.
	The Board further finds that in its Interpretation 04-01(10) it indicated that, In the absence of a fuel burning appliance, a fireplace, and attached garage, or other potential source of carbon monoxide, CO detectors will not be required by the AHJ. 
The Board further finds that it is the apparent position of the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office that since electric ovens may produce minute amounts of CO gases, if not properly cleaned, that they should be grouped with the above fuel burning appliances and the apartment units containing these electric units should be required to be further provided with CO detection.  The Board notes that this is an extremely strained reading of its Interpretations covering where CO detection may be required.  The Board further notes that it is unaware of any reported case where a CO-related death or poisoning was actually attributed to the minute amount CO that may be generated from the burning of spilled food in an electric oven or on an electric cook-top range.  The Board notes that the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office has not provided such documentation.   
The Board further finds that the buildings are protected by previously-approved fire alarm systems that the Applicant has agreed to upgrade based upon plans submitted to West Warwick on November 27, 2006.  The Board finds that the above fire alarm system upgrade plans had not been approved and returned to the Applicant as of the January 23, 2007 hearing.  The Board therefore finds that the Applicant shall need additional time to upgrade the fire alarm system in this complex.  Finally, the Board finds that this facility is also protected by an existing system of hard wired smoke detectors covering the residential units. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance, of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of this Decision, in order to allow the Applicant to correct Deficiency 1 by upgrading the existing fire alarm systems within this complex in accordance with the requirements of the fire alarm provisions of the State Fire Code. 
The Board notes that the only CO detection that may be required in the four buildings of this complex shall be those CO detection units specifically referenced in Item 2, option 3, below.  The Board further notes that the above limited number of CO units shall not be required if the Applicant either provides the attached boiler room with an approved one hour rated assembly as outlined below or proves, to the satisfaction of the West Warwick Fire Marshal, that the proposed boiler room assembly is the equivalent of, or superior to, a one hour assembly installed in accordance with the guidelines of a nationally recognized testing agency (such as UL or FM).
2.	During the January 23, 2007 hearing on this matter, the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office basically advised the Board that he was concerned that CO gases could pass through the wall and ceiling assemblies of the boiler room that were common to the adjoining apartments.  He further basically advised the Board of his position that all of the remaining apartment units should be protected with CO detection due to the minute amounts of CO gases that could be possibly generated by food residues on the heating elements of electric cooking appliances. 
	As outlined in the Boards findings above, electric ovens and cook tops do not pose a realistic risk of CO poisoning or death.  In residential occupancies, this hazard is primarily limited to improperly maintained open-flame devices, including but not limited to, defective fuel burning stoves, defective fuel burning water heaters and defective fuel burning heating systems.  In the complete absence of any national statistics on CO poisoning or death attributed to dirty electric stoves, the Board finds that electric ovens and stove top ranges alone do not generate CO gases in sufficient quantities to justify the installation of CO detection in the existing apartment units.
	With regard to the first question of protection of those apartments having common floor-ceiling assemblies and/or common wall assemblies with the boiler room, the issue is whether the floor-ceiling and/or wall assemblies are built to sufficiently prevent the passing of CO gases.  Since the West Warwick Fire Marshal is unsure of the integrity of the above assemblies, the parties have the following options to address this issue. 
	Initially, the Applicant may provide the West Warwick Fire Marshal with documentation that subject assemblies are one hour fire rated assemblies approved by a national testing facility.  As noted by Commissioner Preiss, an approved one hour assembly would provide sufficient protection and separation to prevent the travel of CO gases from the boiler room into the adjoining apartment units. 
	A second option would be for the Applicant to provide the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office with an engineers certification that the existing separation is the equivalent of, or superior to, the above one hour separation approved by a national testing facility.  The West Warwick Fire marshal would then be free to fully rely upon the above certification of the existing separation as proper separation in this case. 
	In the absence of establishing a proper separation as outlined in either options 1 or 2 above, the Board would direct the Applicant, as a third option, to provide the furnace room, the apartment next to it, and the apartment above it, each with an interconnected hardwired CO detector.  In conjunction with the above three (3) CO detectors, the Board further directs the Applicant to reasonably seal off the pipes, chases, and wires penetrating the wall and ceiling assemblies at the direction of the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office. 
The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of this Decision to exercise one of the above three options.  The Board further relies upon the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office to continue to work with the Applicant in a professional manner in coming to a reasonable solution to this in this case.  
3.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of this Decision to correct deficiency 3 by either providing the boiler room with a one hour separation as outlined in options one or two above, or to provide the boiler room with domestically supplied sprinkler head(s) pursuant to RILSC 31.1.1.3(13). 
4.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 4 by properly servicing the cited portable fire extinguishers and providing the same with approved inspection tags. 
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)].