The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 21, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Newbrook, Pearson, Filippi, Burlingame and Preiss were present.  The fire service was represented by the Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Coutu and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that this complex was previously before the Board and that the Applicant received approval to occupy this facility in accordance with the limitations of a low hazard use group.  The Board further finds that low hazard use in the arena area is a sustained steady fire with a heat release rate of less than 15,000 kW during an exhibition event when seating is not occupied.  The Board further finds that, within the main concourse, low hazard is defined as a sustained steady state of fire with a heat release rate of less than 5,000 kW controlled by the automatic sprinkler protection.  The Board further finds that future operational increases may be permitted by the State Fire Marshal pending approval and installation of complete sprinkler coverage of the bowl and arena floor.  The Board also finds that the above restrictions have been placed upon this occupancy due to the fact that there is no sprinkler protection of the bowl area of this facility.  While sports events, in the bowl area, do not present a significant fire load, events covering the bowl area, with flammable and combustible material, are of concern.
	The Board further finds that the Applicant plans to schedule the 2nd Annual South County Boat Show to take place on Saturday, February 12, 2005 and Sunday, February 13, 2005, at the subject facility.  The Board further finds that the Boat Show would exceed the limitations placed upon this occupancy as outlined above.
	The Board finds that the Applicant has worked with the State and Kingston Fire Marshals Office in developing an alternative plan of action for the fire safety of this facility during the proposed event.  Finally, the Board finds that the Applicant has agreed with the State and Kingston Fire Marshals to implement all of the proposed safeguards, and other conditions, outlined in both the December 21, 2004 plan of action, in support of the variance request, submitted by the Applicant and the December 20, 2004 position letter, to the Board, from the Kingston Fire Marshals Office.  The December 20th position letter and the December 21st plan of action are hereby specifically incorporated into this Decision by reference.
 
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants a limited two (2) day variance in order to allow the Applicant to conduct the proposed Second Annual Boat Show at this facility during the weekend of February 12th and 13th, 2005.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to fully comply with the requests of the Kingston Fire Marshal, as outlined in his December 20, 2004 letter, along with all of the additional safeguards outlined in the December 21, 2004 plan of action.  As an additional condition of this variance, the State Fire Marshal and the Kingston Fire Department shall be allowed to have fire inspector representatives, in addition to the firefighter detail assigned to operate the proposed hose lines.  The Applicant shall not place more than thirty (30) boats in this facility.  The Applicant shall further provide the State and Kingston Fire Marshal Offices with the floor plan of the proposed boat show within thirty (30) days of the above hearing date.  Finally, the Board directs the Applicant to provide this facility with all additional safeguards deemed necessary by the State Fire Marshals Office upon consultation with the Kingston Fire Department.

STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
		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)].