The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on November 21, 2006 and a written decision, outlining a plan of action for that facility, was issued on April 10, 2007.  The case was most recently scheduled for hearing on July 31, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Preiss, Blackburn, Richard, Filippi, Pearson, Jasparro and Jackson were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals David Cionfolo and Vincent Quinterno of the State Fire Marshal's Office along with Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Wheeler of the North Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact in file number 050139 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that due to a personnel shift in the North Providence Fire Marshal's office, fire alarm plans for this facility were not addressed within the time frames of the original decision in this case.  The Board finds that the Applicant has requested additional time in order to complete the fire alarm upgrades in this facility including the fire alarm system.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of six (6) months from the date of this decision in order to complete the installation of the fire alarm system within this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State and North Providence Fire Marshal's office.  In the event the Applicant needs additional time after making good faith efforts, the State and North Providence Fire Marshals are authorized to extend the above deadline.  
	2.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct the remaining deficiencies in this facility, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State and North Providence 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)].