The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on June 26, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Richard, Blackburn, Jasparro, Walker, Pearson and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Jonathan Smith of the Narragansett Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Vice Chairman Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the June 26, 2007 hearing on this matter, the Board was presented with correspondence of the same date from the Applicants project manager (Dimeo Construction Company) to the Applicant (Superintendent of Schools).  The Board hereby adopts the June 26, 2007 correspondence as its initial findings of fact as to the current status and needs of this project.  The Board further finds that the Applicant is requesting an additional thirty (30) day extension on the prior variances in order to complete this project within a timely manner.  Finally, the Applicant is requesting that the Narragansett Fire Marshal's office be allowed to provide additional time beyond the above thirty-day period in light of good faith efforts made by the Applicant and/or her project manager.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby extends the original deadlines in this case by thirty (30) days in order to allow the Applicant to complete this project.  The Board hereby grants the Narragansett Fire Marshal's office the authority to extend the above deadlines for good faith efforts being made by the Applicant.  Finally, the Board notes that all buildings that the Applicant has proposed to be sprinklered shall be sprinklered on or before September 2008.

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)].