The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 10, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Newbrook, Burlingame, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Howe of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Filippi 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 October 27, 2003 inspection  report compiled by the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Pawtucket Fire Marshal’s Office during the February 10, 2004 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 27, 2003 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s 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 the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the authority having jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal or his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshal or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal)”.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1. During the February 10, 2004 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that several of the deficiencies in this facility had received variances in 1994.  Accordingly, the Applicant has returned to the Board requesting that the prior variances be upheld in accordance with a new plan of action for the fire safety of this facility.  Specifically, the Applicant has indicated that he would provide sprinkler coverage in the egress of this facility, corridors and stairways, with an additional head located inside each classroom door from the sprinklered egress system.  The Applicant further advised the Board that this system would be installed prior to re-occupancy of the school for the 2004-2005 academic year.  Finally, the Applicant has requested relief to maintain the existing rugs within the corridors on the first and second floor of this facility.  In the event that these rugs are replaced in the future, they shall be replaced with certified materials at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal.  In light of the above plan of action, the Board hereby reaffirms the originally variances granted in 1994 and directs the Applicant to correct any remaining deficiencies, not covered herein, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal on or before the commencement of the 2004-2005 academic year.  The above variance is based upon the Applicant’s agreement to provide the egress system of this facility with approved sprinkler coverage with an additional sprinkler head located just inside the door of each classroom.  The above system shall be installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Pawtucket Fire Marshal or designee, on or before the commencement of the 2004-2005 academic year.

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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].