The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 31, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Newbrook, Burlingame, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Susan Hawksley of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals 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
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an August 16, 2004 inspection report compiled by the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.  The above report listed a plan of action for all of the schools within the district and specific points of compliance for individual schools such as the Cole Jr. High School.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office during the August 31, 2004 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 16, 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.
 
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	During the August 31, 2004 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the voters of the Town of East Greenwich will be granted an opportunity to vote on a referendum as to whether the Cole Jr. High School should be replaced with a new building.  Accordingly, the Applicant has requested time in order to determine whether this building will no longer be utilized as a school.  The East Greenwich Fire Marshal has indicated that the Cole Jr. High School needs approximately twenty-two (22) emergency escape windows or emergency escape doors to bring this facility into compliance.  In light of the fact that the building may be replaced, the Board hereby grants a time variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain this facility without emergency rescue windows and/or doors until the referendum takes place during either January or February of 2005.  If the referendum is passed, the Applicant is directed to comply with the East Greenwich Fire Marshals plan of action as outlined below.  If the referendum fails, the Board directs the Applicant to provide at least one approved egress rescue window and/or door from each of the cited twenty-two (22) rooms, within one (1) year of the date of this decision.  As outlined during the hearing, doors can be also utilized as means of escape from the various classrooms.  As a condition of the above variances, the Board directs the Applicant to remove all chocks and other illegal hold open devices from the egress system doors of this facility.  Upon re-inspection of this facility if the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office detects such devices, the Applicant is then directed to equip the cited door or doors with approved alarm activated magnetic hold open devices at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Greenwich Fire Marshal.  Additionally, the Board notes that the East Greenwich Fire Marshal is authorized to limit the art work in this facility in accordance with the code.  Finally, all fire doors must be free from obstruction and fully functional at all times.

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)].