The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 16, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Newbrook, Evans, Burlingame, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Chief of Inspection William Howe of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Burlingame to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
It is the understanding and finding of the Board that the Applicant is requesting to be allowed a partial certificate of occupancy for this facility.  Specifically, the Applicant is requesting that the sprinkler system be connected to an existing building in order to bring it on line and that all occupied areas shall be compliant at the time of occupancy with one exception.  The exception is that the stairway is not finished and that the fire alarm system shall be installed in MC cable on temporary basis.
	
The Applicant is making this request for partial certificate of occupancy in order to bring people in to this facility to set up equipment.  These people are not part of the construction team.  It is the understanding of that the Board that the Building Official has no objection.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1. The Board hereby grants the Applicant’s request for a temporary certificate of occupancy of this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  In granting this relief, it is the understanding of the Board that the fire alarm system shall be fully functional but temporarily  installed in MC cable from the existing building.  It is the further understanding of the Board that all smoke detector covers shall be remove in the occupied areas.  Finally, the Board hereby maintains this as an open file in the event that the Applicant wishes to return to the Board or the State Fire Marshal wishes to return to the Board.

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)].