The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on January 31, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Preiss, Burlingame, Filippi and Richard were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Jeffrey Lynch of the Portsmouth Fire Marshals Office and Deputy State Fire Marshal Vincent Quinterno of the State Fire Marshal's Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote of Commissioner Preiss.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a December 17, 2004 inspection report compiled by the State and Portsmouth Fire Marshals Offices.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant, the Portsmouth and the State Fire Marshals Offices during the January 31, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the December 17, 2004 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, 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 Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 17.2 and its referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing ceiling height of the header leading into the basement level of this facility, and to further allow the Applicant to utilize a single means of egress from the basement level with the lock removed.  The above variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship under that condition that the space be secured and only utilized by staff occasionally to do laundry.
	2.  During the January 31, 2006 hearing on this matter, it was noted that this facility is not sprinklered.  It was further noted that all of the MHRH facilities are in the process of applying for a time variance in order to provide sprinkler coverage for their facilities.  Accordingly, the State and Portsmouth Fire Marshal's offices had no objection to maintaining this file open for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of this decision in order to allow this facility to present a plan which coincides with the master plan for the MHRH facilities.

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)].