The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on February 27, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Newbrook, Preiss, Filippi, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was not represented, however, Chief Charles Hall advised the Board by telephone that Chief Pastore would not be in attendance and the Chief Hall objected to the Applicants relief.  At the conclusion of the hearing a motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner OConnell to grant the Applicant relief, as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition vote made by Commissioner Burlingame.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the subject facilities are apartment houses.  One site is an existing building the other site a proposed apartment building.  The Board further finds that upon inspection of the 58 Tiogue Avenue site the West Warwick Fire Department has notified the Applicant that they must install carbon monoxide detection in all apartments to get a variance.  The Board further finds that both buildings are one-bedroom apartments with no fuel burning appliances.  The Board further finds that they have electric stoves and there is hot water baseboard heat.  The Board further finds that the boiler room is separated with flues to the exterior.  The Board further finds that the flues are built pursuant to the building code requirements.  During the hearing it was the understanding of the Board that the Applicant could provide a one hour separation between the boiler room and the residential units.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that all other deficiencies within these facilities have been or shall be corrected at the direction and to the satisfaction of the West Warwick Fire Marshals Office.
	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, shall be 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, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby affirms its decision in blanket variance 04-05(1) to allow this facility to not provide approved carbon monoxide detection on condition that the Applicant separate the boiler of this facility with an approved one hour separation in accordance with section 8.3 of the Life Safety Code.  Specifically, upon the Applicants proof that it is in compliance with the provisions of section 8.3 of the Life Safety Code with regard to separation of the boiler room, then the applicant shall not be required to provide CO detection within these facilities.

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)].