The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 19, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Preiss, Evans, Newbrook, Pearson, Filippi, OConnell and Richard were present.  Commissioners Burlingame and Blackburn recused themselves from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Mark St. Pierre of the Harrisville Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers referenced in the Decision below correspond with those of a July 29, 2004 inspection report compiled by the Harrisville Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Harrisville Fire Marshals Office during the July 19, 2005 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 29, 2004 inspection report 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.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  During the July 19, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board reviewed a plan of action developed by the Applicants fire protection engineer.  The above plan of action was dated July 18, 2005 and addressed the deficiencies outlined on the July 29, 2004 inspection report.  Upon review of the plan of action, the Harrisville Fire Marshals office advised the Board that he had no objection.  Accordingly, the Board hereby adopts the Applicants July 18, 2005 plan of action as follows.
	For all of those deficiencies outlined in the July 29, 2004 original inspection report, along with those outlined in follow-up inspection reports, that are not specifically addressed below, the Board directs the Applicant to correct those deficiencies within sixty (60) days of the date of this decision.
	With regard to the deficiencies addressing the paint spray booth within the shop area, the Board hereby directs the Applicant to discontinue the spray paint operation within sixty (60) days of the date of this decision.  Accordingly, the Applicant shall address deficiencies 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 by eliminating the spray paint operation within this facility. 
	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirteen (13) months from the date of this decision in order to correct items 31, 32 and 73.  The Board notes that these items will have to be put out to bid, and the construction will be completed over the summer of 2006.
	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall correct deficiencies 13, 27, 41 and 59 with the installation of an automatic sprinkler system installed throughout the C wing as described in item 37.  Accordingly, the Board grants the Applicant a time variance of thirteen (13) months from the date of this decision in which to correct fire alarm issues 13, 27, 41 and 59 by providing the above automatic sprinkler coverage.
	With regard to the broken or missing self-closing devices on the doors of this facility, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of six (6) months from the date of this decision in order to correct deficiencies 9, 39, 51, 63, 65, 91 and 102.  
	With regard to the protection of exits from the weather, the Board directs the Applicant to correct deficiencies 66, 69, 70, 73, 75, 77, 85, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 95, 96 and 97 by working with the Harrisville Fire Marshals office in developing an approved plan of action for maintaining all of the exits continually free from ice and snow while the building is occupied.
	With regard to the issue of accessible means of egress, the Board notes that specific ADA requirements are not addressed under the fire code.  However, the code does address the issue of accessibility.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensions as outlined in items 67, 68, 80, 81, 82 and 83.  The Board further grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to utilize the existing ramp slope.  However, the Board notes that there may be additional accessibility requirements under the state building code or the federal ADA.
	Finally, the Board notes that the door referenced in item 98 is not an exit or a required exit.  Accordingly, the Board finds no violation.

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)].