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 Marshal Timothy Lutz of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Jasparro to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The number of the Decision below correspond with those of an March 25, 2009 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office along with a revised October 5, 2009 plan of action addressing the above report and compiled by Hughes Associates .  The above report and plan of action were utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshals Office during the October 6, 2009 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the March 25, 2009 plan review report along with the revised October 5, 2009 plan of action develop by Hughes Associates 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, shall be understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in the State Fire Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected or shall correct deficiency 1 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
2.	 It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency or will correct deficiency 2 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
3.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 7.1.3.2.1(c), 8.3.3.3 and NFPA 80 2-1.4.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the cited electrical equipment rooms within the exit enclosures of this facility.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship in the absence of an objection by the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
4.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected or will correct deficiency 4 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
5.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 29.2.4.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited exit configuration as outlined on the March 25, 2009 plan review report.  In granting this relief on the basis of structural hardship, the Board notes that the Providence Fire Marshals Office has no objection in light of the stated equivalencies.
6.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected or will correct deficiency 4 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the 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)].