The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on October 6, 2009 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Pearson, Preiss, Jasparro and Dias were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals James Bellamy and Robert Powers of the East Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Dias and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro 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 10, 2007 inspection report compiled by the East Providence Fire Marshals Office and also a September 30, 2009 plan of action developed by Hughes Associates.  The above report and plan of action were utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Providence Fire Marshals Office during the October 6, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the September 10, 2007 inspection report and the September 30, 2009 plan of action as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Boards 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 this Code, or as approved in particular by the State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	During the October 6, 2009 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought relief from providing this entire facility with sprinkler coverage in accordance with a plan of action it was developing with the East Providence Fire Marshals Office.  Specifically, the Applicant has proposed to limit sprinkler coverage to the second level of the building classified as a special amusement occupancy (laser tag) and to further provide sprinkler protection on the first floor level under the second level in lieu of sprinkler coverage throughout the building.  The Applicant is further proposing to protect the main high ceiling area of this building with approved beam-type smoke detection connected to a full coverage municipally connected fire alarm system, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The East Providence Fire Marshals Office appeared and had no objection to this plan of action.  It was also noted that the current egress system of this facility would accommodate approximately 1.923 people whereas the actual occupancy load is an average of 142 people.  
The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of sixty (60) days from the date of this decision in which to develop and submit a plan of action to the East Providence Fire Marshals Office.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until May 31, 2010 in which to complete its plan of action for the installation of a partial sprinkler system within this facility in conjunction with beam-type smoke detection in the main high ceiling area of the building.  The Board notes that the East Providence Fire Marshals Office may extend either of the above time lines for good faith efforts being shown by the Applicant.  Accordingly, in light of the above, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant not to sprinkler the entire building pursuant to RILSC section 13.3.5.1.1.  As a condition of this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to implement its plan of action at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshals Office, as outline above.
2.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.4.7.2 in order to allow the Applicant not to provide sprinkler protection throughout this entire facility.  As a condition of this relief, the Board further directs the Applicant to comply with the above plan of action as outlined in item 1.  The Board further notes that the East Providence Fire Marshals Office has no objection to this variance.
3-7.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshals 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 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)].