The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing by a subcommittee of the Board on April 5, 2006 at 9:00 A.M.  At that time, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioner Filippi were present.  Commissioners Blackburn and Burlingame recused themselves from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Thomas Karpovitz of the Middletown Fire Marshals Office.  The subcommittee recommendations were reviewed by the full Board on April 18, 2006 and approved pursuant to a motion by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson.  Accordingly, the subcommittee recommendations now have the status of a full Board decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the subject facility is an assisted living facility in an existing two-story structure that was originally constructed in 1998.  The Board further finds that the facility houses approximately fifty (50) residents.  The Board further finds that the facility has been classified by the State of Rhode Island Department of Health as an existing F2 occupancy.  The Board further finds that the subject facility is further classified as an existing large Board and Care facility.  The Board further finds that large Board and Care facilities are defined in the Life Safety Code as those with sleeping accommodations for more than sixteen (16) residents.  (See LSC 33.1.1.3(3)).
	The Board finds that the Applicants consultant has reviewed the evacuation times of the residents in this facility and has determined that this facility would be classified as slow with regard to evacuation procedures under the Life Safety Code.  The Board finds that the evacuation times in the facility during recent fire drills were approximately ten to twelve (10-12) minutes.  In order to address this situation, the Applicant has submitted a November 18, 2004 plan of action to provide areas of refuge for the residents of this facility.  The Board notes that the Life Safety Code requires that the areas of refuge be provided with two-way communication for communication between the area of refuge and a central point.  However, the Board notes that the subject stairwells to be utilized as areas of refuge do not currently provide the two-way communication.  However, the Applicants consulting engineers have requested that the Board approve the use of areas of refuge without the use of two-way communication as part of the facilitys total evacuation plan for the occupants.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby approves the Applicants November 18, 2004 plan of action for allowing the areas of refuge within this facility not to be equipped with two-way radio communication as part of the total evacuation plan for the occupants of this facility that are not able to evacuate the facility in a timely manner through the exit stairs.  In granting this relief, the Board notes that all of the other safeguards outlined in the November 18, 2004 plan of action shall be implemented in this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Middletown Fire Marshal's 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 subcommittees recommendation to the full Board, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date of this Decision, by requesting such review in writing in accordance with the provisions of RIGL 23-28.3-5(b)4.  Commencement of such an appeal does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].