The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 8, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame, Pearson and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Fournier of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Coutu and seconded by Commissioner Blackburn 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 items 9 through 17 of an August 4, 2005 inspection report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the  Providence Fire Marshals Office during the April 18, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the  August 4, 2005 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, 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 
	1-8.  The Board notes that deficiencies 1-8 were previously addressed in file number 060240.
	9-10.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 9 and 10 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	11.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 11 by providing this facility with an emergency plan and enrolling its employees in the crowd management program conducted by the State Fire Marshal's office on May 15, 2006.  
	12-13.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 12 and 13 to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	14.  During the April 18, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant has submitted plans to the Providence Fire Marshal's office for a municipally connected fire alarm system to cover all levels of this facility.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of 120 days from approval of the plans in which to provide this facility with an approved municipally connected fire alarm system installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  In addition, the location of the pull stations within this facility shall be left to the direction and satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.
	15.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 15 by providing the cited fire suppression test report.
	16.  The Board hereby reaffirms a prior variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the cited width of the exit discharge door into the outside stairway of this facility.  In granting this relief from current code provisions 13.2.2.2.1 and section 7.2.1.2.4, the Board notes that there is a fire escape in the area of the door and that the facility is fully sprinklered and will be provided with approved fire alarm coverage.  Finally, the Board notes that this variance is based upon structural hardship.
	17.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 17 by providing the cited emergency lighting on the outside stairway of this 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)].