The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 4, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Preiss, Newbrook, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Jasper of the Johnston Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Coutu to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The Board has been advised and finds that there are only minor fire code deficiencies in this facility upon its last inspection.  The Applicant has come before the Board in order to address the sprinkler requirements for this facility.  The Applicant is requesting the Boards consideration of relief from the sprinkler dates, occupancy adjustments and the calculated seating capacity of this facility.  The Board notes that threshold issue involves the seating capacity of this facility.  Accordingly, the Board has asked the Johnston fire Marshal’s Office to recalculate the occupancies of this facility and to work on a plan of action for the protection of this facility with the Applicant.  Accordingly, the Board voted to hold this file open while the Johnston Fire Marshal and the Applicant redo the seating capacity issues and develop their plan of action.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1. The Board hereby holds this file open while the Applicant and the Johnston Fire Marshal’s Office review the seating capacity of this facility and the joint plan of action for the installation of sprinkler coverage in this facility.  Accordingly, during this period of review, all additional requirements, such as the “occupancy adjustment”, shall be in abeyance.  The Board directs the Applicant and the Johnston Fire Marshal’s Office to notify it upon the conclusion of this review.

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)].