The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 8, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Pearson, Filippi, OConnell, Richard Blackburn, Preiss, Jackson and Jasparro were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal James Moore of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Blackburn and seconded by Vice Chairman 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 February 10, 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 May 8, 2007 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the February 10, 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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 1 by providing this facility with approved carbon monoxide detection installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
2.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 2 by providing a key operated drill switch for the fire alarm of this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
3.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 by removing the snow from the sidewalks of this facility.
4.	The Board hereby reinstates the previous variance allowing the second floor office area to maintain a single means of egress and the basement of this facility to maintain a single means of egress.  In reaffirming this variance, it is the understanding and direction of the Board that the basement area and the seconded floor areas shall be restricted and not utilized for the day care occupancy.
5.	The Board hereby reaffirms the prior variance in order to allow the door from the seconded floor office area to maintain its existing swing.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship.  
6.	The Board hereby reaffirms the original variance covering the swing o the south side exit door of this facility.  This variance is also granted on the basis of structural hardship.
7.	The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 7 by making available the opening device for day care bathroom at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office.
8.	The Board hereby reaffirms the original variance covering the winding stairs from the second floor of this facility in order to allow the Applicant to maintain both the winding nature and the dimension of the cited winding stairs of the second floor of this facility.
9.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiency 9 by providing approved certification of the flame spread rating of the curtains of the windows of this facility to the State Fire Marshals 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)].