The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 7, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Blackburn, Preiss, Burlingame, Pearson, Filippi, OConnell and Newbrook were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Troy Phillips of the Oakland/Mapleville Fire District Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner Preiss to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the objection of Commissioner Burlingame.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond in sequence with those items of a December 11, 2004 inspection report compiled by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Troy Phillips.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Oakland/Mapleville Fire Marshals Office during the February 7, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the December 11, 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.  During the February 7, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Applicant advised the Board that he wished to reduce the occupancy of this facility to a total of below three hundred (300).  Accordingly, the Board hereby authorizes the Applicant and the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal to develop a plan of action to allow for the overall calculated occupancy of this facility not to exceed two hundred ninety nine (299) people.  As part of the plan of action, the Board directs the Applicant to provide the Fire Marshal with an approved fixed seating plan for 169 people at less concentrated use and to further submit monthly banquet summary reports and contracts to the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal.  Finally, as a condition of this variance, the Board hereby directs the Applicant to comply with a municipal fire alarm system.  In light of the plan of action for the reduction of occupancy of this facility below three hundred, the Board notes that sprinklers would not be required.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct the remaining deficiencies at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal.

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)].