The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 14, 2006 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame, Pearson and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals Christine Kent and David Cionfolo of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook 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 September 1, 2005 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 March 14, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the September 1, 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.  During the March 14, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board noted that the Applicant has agreed to maintain the occupancy of the interior portion of this facility at less than three hundred (300) people.  Accordingly, the Board finds that the Applicant may provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system.  However, as a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to provide an approved second exit from the deck of this facility installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	2.  The Board finds that deficiency 2 is moot with the above determination.
	3.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 3 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	4.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 4 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency 5 is moot and not a violation of the State Fire Code.
	6.  In light of the fact that the interior occupancy of this facility is below three hundred (300) people, the Board notes that the building is not required to have an automatic sprinkler system.  
	7.  The Board grants the Applicant a time variance in order to correct deficiencies 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	17.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2 and section 7.1.5 and their referenced standards in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited ceiling height of the second floor of this facility on the basis of structural hardship.
	18-19.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiencies 18 and 19 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
 
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)].