The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 28, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Newbrook, Blackburn, Preiss, Burlingame, Filippi, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Daniel Bradley of the Warwick Fire Marshals Office.  The Warwick Fire Marshal's office advised the Board that four (4) of the five (5) deficiencies listed on the inspection report covering this facility had been corrected by the Applicant.  The Board was further advised that the fifth deficiency involved sprinkler coverage for this facility.  The Board was further advised that the Applicant would consider reconfiguration of the space within this facility to determine whether or not a sprinkler system would be required.  Accordingly, rather than taking a vote on this matter at this time, the Board shall allow the Applicant and the Warwick Fire Marshal's office to review the possibility of reconfiguring this space to determine whether sprinkler coverage would be a moot issue.  Accordingly, the Board hereby leaves this file open in order to allow the parties to explore the possibility of reconfiguring the space of the subject facility.

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)].