The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 2, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Joseph Barroso of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Vice Chairman Coutu to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the August 2, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant is planning to erect a storage facility for the storage of road salt.  The storage facility shall be an open barn consisting of a membrane structure approved by the State Fire Marshals office.  There should be no electricity and no heat within this facility.  
	The Applicant has come before the Board requesting a variance not to provide this facility with a local fire alarm system.  The State Fire Marshals office has advised the Board that it has no objection to the granting of this variance.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RI Uniform Fire Safety Code section 13.8.10.4.1 in order to grant the Applicant relief from having to install a local fire alarm system in the above described open salt storage barn.  This variance is granted in light of the structure of the facility, the fact that it has no electricity or heat, and the fact that it maintains low hazard storage.  Finally, the Board notes that the State Fire Marshals office has no objection to the granting of this relief.  

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)].