The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 24, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Richard, Preiss, Jackson, Jasparro and Walker were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal David Cionfolo of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Jackson and seconded by Commissioner Richard 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 a July 12, 2007 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the July 24, 2007 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 12, 2007 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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1(a)(b)(c).  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 19.2.1 and 7.1.5.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimension of the cited patient room doors and the ceiling height in the new sleeping room located in the old building.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship in light of the existing conditions.
	2(a).  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.2.4.1 in order to allow the office area to maintain the existing egress.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the office is limited to one (1) occupant, the owner, and that the State Fire Marshal's Office has no objection.
	2(b).  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.2.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing egress within the south basement and the north basement of this facility.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the above basements are not normally occupied spaces and that they are fully sprinklered and finally, that the State Fire Marshal's Office has no objection.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.2.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing thirty-inch (30) doors in the new sleeping rooms located in the old section of the building.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship in the absence of an objection by the State Fire Marshal's Office.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing ceiling heights and door heights within the basements of this facility.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship due to existing conditions and the fact that the State Fire Marshal's Office has no objection.
	5.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimension of the stone stairwell leading to the south basement.  This variance is based upon structural hardship, along with the limited use of the basement.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 19.2.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain a single exit/entrance from the basement on the north side through a bulkhead.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that there is no interior entrance to the basement and that this bulkhead is only utilized by maintenance people.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that the State Fire Marshal's Office has no objection in light of the limited access and the full sprinkler coverage of the basements.

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)].