The above-captioned cases were originally scheduled for hearing on May 2, 2006 and a decision outlining a plan of action for this facility was issued on August 28, 2006.  The parties have returned to have the Board address a new plan of action.  The above captioned cases were most recently scheduled for hearing on March 4, 2008 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Pearson, Filippi, Walker, Jasparro, Preiss, and Richard were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Richard Silva and Richard Vespia of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original findings of fact in file numbers 050921, 050922 and 050923 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board notes that during the March 4, 2008 hearing on this matter, it had before it a January 31, 2008 report from the Applicants fire protection engineer.  The January 31, 2008 engineers report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the January 31, 2008 engineers report as its additional findings of fact.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  During the March 4, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought revised time extension variances for certain aspects of this facility.  In the first instance, the Applicant advised the Board he would accelerate the process for the installation of sprinkler coverage by installing the sprinkler systems at the same time as the fire alarm systems are installed in all three (3) Regency buildings.  Accordingly, the sprinkler and fire alarm systems will be complete on or before December 31, 2009.  The Board notes that it had originally granted the Applicant relief in order to extend the above sprinkler deadline.  However, it is the understanding of the Board that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection to the accelerated plan of action.
	2.  During the March 4, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought to omit radio repeaters from all three Regency buildings based on the results of a radio test performed by the Chief Radio Engineer for the City of Providence.  It appeared that radio signals were sent and received throughout the building without miscommunication and without the use of repeaters.  The Board notes that it was the Boards intent that if normal signals did not require the use of repeaters, they would not be mandated.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant relief from the repeater requirement as long as the parties are satisfied that normal fire department radio signals can be sent and received throughout this entire complex.  The Board notes that if there are any future problems, the parties may be allowed to return to present those issues to the Board.
	3.  During the March 4, 2008 hearing on this matter, the Board noted that the Applicant sought to omit a dedicated room for a fire command center in accordance with section 13.8.10.4.3.4 of the code.  The Applicant has proposed alternatively to locate each new fire alarm control unit and associated equipment in an approved location due to structural hardship.  The Board was further advised that the new proposed locations were discussed with, and approved by, the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  The Board was further advised that the three (3) buildings in question are probably the exception to the rule because there are no HVAC issues and there is not an issue of stair pressurization.  Accordingly, in this particular case, the Board notes that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection.  The variance is hereby granted.
	4.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time extension in order to properly enclose the emergency generators, at the direction, to the satisfaction and within a time frame established by the Providence Fire Marshal's office.  If either party needs to return to the Board to address any technical and/or time issues, this file shall remain open for them to return.
	5.  It is the understanding and direction of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 5 by providing the elevators with approved controls, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal's office.

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)].