The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 18, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Evans, Burlingame and OConnell were present.  The fire service was not represented during this hearing.  However, Chairman Farrell reviewed the position of the Providence Fire Marshals office with the Board members.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Evans to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds this facility to be a fully alarmed and sprinklered place of assembly.  The Board further finds that the Applicant is requesting that the duct detectors within this facility, upon activation, only show trouble on the panel as opposed to shutting down all of the air handling system.  The Board was advised the Providence Fire Marshals office has reviewed the request and had no objection.  Finally, the Board noted that there were alternative methods of shutting down the air handling system in the event of fire.  
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the duct detectors, within the Applicants air handling system, not to shut down the air handling function of this system when activated.  The Board directs that the duct detectors would simply show a trouble on the panel, and thereupon be reset.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the Providence Fire Marshals office has no objection.

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)].