The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 9, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Preiss, Newbrook, Filippi, Burlingame and Pearson were present.  Commissioner Coutu recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Lt. Garvey of the Central Falls  Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Commissioner Pearson 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 a September 26, 2003 inspection report compiled by the Central Falls Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Central Falls Fire Marshal’s Office during the March 9, 2004 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the September 26, 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 March 9, 2004 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the Applicant has a full approved sprinkler system along with an approved municipally connected fire alarm system.  Accordingly, the Applicant sought a variance from the rating requirements of the classroom doors in the main corridors of the old wing of this facility.  In light of the Applicant’s sprinkler and fire alarm coverage in this facility the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 15.3.3 and 15.3.6 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing classroom doors throughout the main corridors of the old wing of this facility.
	
2(a). The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #2 by repairing the cited holes in the sheet rock walls of this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal’s Office on or before the commencement of the 2004-2005 academic year.
	
2(b). It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #2(b) is now moot, due to measurements taken under the new Life Safety Code for existing school.
	
3. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #3 by removing all the cited storage within the stair towers in the old wing of this facility on or before the commencement of the 2004-2005 academic year.
	
4(a)(b)and(c). It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies #4(a)(b)and(c).
	
4(d). The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #4(d) at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Marshal’s Office on or before the commencement of the 2004-2005 school year.

5. The Board hereby grants a time variance until September 2004 in order to allow the Applicant to relocate the first grade classroom within this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal’s Office.  Specifically, all of the items that need attention above shall be concluded prior to re-occupancy of this facility at the end of the summer of 2004, being the commencement of the 2004-2005 school 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)].