The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 25, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Burlingame and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Waterman of the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson 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 an August 2, 2004 inspection report compiled by the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office during the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 2, 2004 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 Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1-21.  It is the understanding and direction of the Board that the Applicant has either corrected or will correct deficiencies 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield Fire Marshals office within a timetable established by that office.
	22.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.3.3.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the double 5/8 walls with wood wainscoting within the egress system of this facility pursuant to the Boards direction that this facility shall be provided with an approved sprinkler system on or before July 1, 2006.  (See item 26 below.)
	23.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.3.3.3 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing flame spread rating of the cited materials in conjunction with the sprinkler system to be installed in this facility on or before July 1, 2006.  (See item 26 below.)
	24.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that this facility is currently protected by an older fire alarm system operated at 110 Volts.  The Board was further advised that the above system needs to be upgraded and that the Applicant has requested time in which to effect the upgrading.  The Board was further advised that the Applicant and the Smithfield Fire Marshal's office have reduced the posted occupancy of the main hall of this facility from 672 people to 484 people due to the absence of the upgraded fire alarm coverage and approved sprinkler coverage.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance, until July 1, 2006, to upgrade the existing fire alarm system of this facility to meet current standards at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield Fire Marshals office.
	25.  In light of the above, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until July 1, 2006 in order to provide the basement of this facility with approved heat detection or sprinkler head coverage, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield Fire Marshals office.
	26.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until July 1, 2006 in order to provide this facility with an approved sprinkler system in accordance with the following schedule.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to complete plans for the sprinkler coverage within thirty (30) days of the date of this hearing.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to then submit those plans to the Smithfield Fire Marshal who shall approve the plans within thirty (30) days of the submittal.  The Board then directs the Applicant to secure bids for the sprinkler system within the next sixty (60) days and to complete the sprinkler project on or before July 1, 2006.  
	27.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that there was a question as to the interior finish of the walls and other materials.  The Board notes that the sprinkler system within this facility should address this issue.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing interior finish within this facility in conjunction with the approved sprinkler coverage installed on or before July 1, 2006.
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)].