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 Deputy State Fire Marshal Cynthia Dehler of the State Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Coutu and seconded by Commissioner 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 July 19, 2004 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 October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 19, 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.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 1 by repairing the cited exit light located in the kitchen of this facility.  
	2.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 2 by repairing the cited smoke detector in the bathroom of this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	3.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 3 by providing the fire alarm system of this facility with an approved drill switch to perform mandatory fire drills.
	4.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant was in the process of correcting deficiency 4, relating to sprinkler coverage, and would have this deficiency completely corrected by the end of the week.  Accordingly, the Board directs the Applicant to have corrected this deficiency, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals office.
	5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 5 by providing carbon monoxide detectors in the sleeping rooms of this facility.
	6.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought to reinstate an original variance allowing for a forty-seven (47) inch wide hallway servicing two (2) bedrooms at the end of the house.  This original variance was based on structural hardship and is hereby reinstated.
	7.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought to reinstate a variance covering the original allowed width of the basement stairway and to further allow the basement to be utilized for recreational use.  After review with the State Fire Marshal's office, the Board hereby reinstates the original variance to allow for the existing width of the basement stairway to remain on the basis of structural hardship and to further allow recreational use of the basement.  In granting this variance, the Board directs that there shall be no overnight occupancy of the basement of this facility.  
	8.  During the October 25, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board was also asked to reinstate an original variance allowing the Applicant to maintain the thirty-two (32) inch wide egress doors within this facility.  This variance is hereby reinstated based on structural hardship.

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)].