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, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame, Filippi, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by the Newport Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Vice Chairman Coutu 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 November 30, 2005 inspection report and a follow-up January 26, 2006 inspection report compiled by the Newport Fire Marshals Office. The above reports were utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Newport Fire Marshals Office during the February 28, 2006 hearing on this matter.  In addition, the Applicant submitted a December 29, 2005 plan of action addressing the November 30, 2005 inspection report and a February 15, 2006 plan of action addressing the January 26, 2006 follow-up inspection.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the above reports and responses 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.  
	The Board further finds that 85 Touro Street is a Type III-200 masonry structure that contains the Touro Synagogue.  The Board finds that this structure is two stories in height and approximately 5400 square feet in area.
	The Board further finds that the Touro Synagogue was designed by Peter Harrison, the preeminent architect of the colonial era.  The Board finds that Harrison emigrated from England in 1738 and established himself in Newport.  The Board finds that the Touro Synagogue was built between 1759 and 1763.  The Board further finds that the Touro Synagogue has received national acclaim for its architectural and historical distinction.  The Board further finds that in 1946, by Act of Congress, President Truman proclaimed Touro Synagogue a National Historic Site.  The Board recognizes the historical significance of this facility.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

I.  November 30, 2005 deficiency report
	1.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 1 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Newport Fire Marshal's office.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to alter the directed number of horns strobe devices in the sanctuary from four (4) to three (3), and relocate one of the three within the sanctuary space.  Specifically, the Board hereby approves the variance request outlined on page 1 of the December 29, 2005 response of the Applicant.
	2.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 2 by contacting the State Fire Marshal's office for training in approved crowd management techniques.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.2.2.1 and 7.2.1.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to retain the existing school wing door width and swing in accordance with the December 29, 2005 plan of action submitted by the Applicant as outlined on page 2 of that document.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.2.2.3 in order to allow the Applicant to not install panic hardware on the sanctuary and school wing exterior doors, but rather to reconfigure the existing lock sets on the sanctuary and school wing doors as to render them un-lockable and non-latchable from the inside as outlined on page 3 of the Applicants December 29, 2005 plan of action for this facility.
	5.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.2.1(b) in order to allow the Applicant to retain the cited seat lift in accordance with the provisions outlined on page 3 of the Applicants December 29, 2005 plan of action for this facility.
	6.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.4.2 in order to allow the Applicant to retain single points of egress from the sanctuary and the school wing respectively in accordance with the plan of action outlined on page 4 of the Applicants December 29, 2005 general plan of action for this facility.
	7.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.5.1.2 in order to allow the Applicant to retain the existing architectural configuration of the gallery and to continue to utilize the entire gallery in accordance with the plan of action for this deficiency as outlined page 4 of the December 29, 2005 general plan of action for this facility.
	8.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.5.5.2. in order to allow the Applicant to continue to utilize the existing seating configuration in the gallery of this facility as outlined on page 5 of the Applicants December 29, 2005 general plan of action for this facility.
	9.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 9 by properly illuminating the means of egress within this facility.
	10.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 10 by providing approved exit signage within this facility.  

Plan of action amendment I  (February 15, 2006)
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.4.5.2 in order to allow the Applicant to retain the existing historic school wing stair rail configuration as outlined on page 1 of the February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	2.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.1.5.10 in order to allow the Applicant to utilize automatic flush bolts on the double doors providing egress from the sanctuary in accordance with the plan of action outlined as page 2 of the February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.2.2.3 in order to allow the Applicant to utilize the automatic flush bolts on the sanctuary doors and to retain the non-functioning surface mounted hardware on the inactive leaf of the sanctuary doors and to retain the historic box lock configuration on both the sanctuary and school wing exterior doors, in which the box locks cannot be latched or locked from the inside.  The above variance is granted pursuant to the Applicants plan of action as outlined on pages 2 and 3 of the February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.1.8.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the non-compliant doors in the school wing in accordance with the plan outlined on page 3 of the Applicants February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	5.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.1.4.2 in order to allow the Applicant to retain the existing door swings at the school wing exterior door and the school wing basement door, in accordance with the plan of action as outlined on page 3 of the Applicants February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6 and that the second floor signage has been relocated to meet the requirements of section 7.10.1.5.1.
	7.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.2.4.1.2 in order to allow the Applicant to retain the existing railing configurations at the 1761 front portico exterior stair in accordance with the plan of action as outlined on page 4 of the February 15, 2006 amended plan of action.
	8.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 8 by extending the sprinkler coverage throughout this facility to include the concealed spaces.
	9.  During the February 28, 2006 hearing, the Board was advised that the Applicant was not able to properly conceal the sprinkler piping within the 1761 front portico.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Newport Fire Marshal's office the authority to allow the installation of sprinkler protection within the proximity of the front portico in a manner satisfactory to both the Newport Fire Marshal's office and the Applicant.  In the event the parties are unable to reach agreement, the Newport Fire Marshal's office is hereby authorized to waive sprinkler coverage in this area.  In the event the Newport Fire Marshal's office declines to waive coverage in this area, the parties may return to the Board for further review of this requirement.  Finally, the Board notes that the authorization of the Newport Fire Marshal's office to issue a temporary certificate of occupancy for this facility will still be valid, even in the absence of sprinkler protection of the historic 1761 front portico.
	10.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 13 section 7.2.6.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing compressed air supply to the dry system of this facility, and not to require the air compressor to have battery back up.  The Board notes that the installation of a back up of sufficient size to run the compressor would impose a financial hardship on the Applicant, and that the Applicant has agreed to fully accept the consequences of a sprinkler system failure due to the absence of a battery back up to the dry system compressor.  Finally, the Board notes that the above variance is in response to a cited deficiency by the Newport Fire Marshal and not a formal interpretation of the cited code provisions.
	11.  The Board hereby authorizes the Newport Fire Marshal's office to approve the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for part or all 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)].