This case was originally heard by the Board on March 1, 2005 and a decision was rendered on March 31, 2005.  This matter was re-heard by the Board on May 10, 2005 and a decision was rendered on July 21, 2005.  The Applicant has returned for a third time and the most recent hearing was scheduled for July 18, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Blackburn, Newbrook and Preiss were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Arthur DeCosta and Chief of Inspections William Howe of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original findings of fact in file numbers 050097 and 050097A as its preliminary findings of fact in this case.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has requested an extension of the original July 21, 2006 deadline for the upgrade and expansions of this facilitys existing sprinkler system.  The Board further finds that engineered drawings have been submitted to the State Fire Marshal's office on May 19, 2006.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has contracted with a sprinkler contractor to complete the sprinkler system and has raised approximately 50,000 to complete the work.  The Applicant has advised the Board that the work cannot be commenced until the engineered plans are approved by the State Fire Marshal's office but the work could be concluded within ninety (90) days of the date of the approval.  The State Fire Marshal's office has advised the Board that the plans have been approved and that the ninety (90) days requested extension would be acceptable.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that there are no other fire code deficiencies remaining in this facility.
	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 State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby extends the deadline for sprinkler compliance in this case to ninety (90) days from the July 18, 2006 hearing.  Accordingly, the Board directs the Applicant to fully install the sprinkler upgrades within ninety (90) days of the July 18, 2006 hearing.

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)].