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 Dias 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 April 24, 2009 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshals Office along with a revised  October 5, 2009 plan of action developed by Hughes Associates, Inc..  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 April 24, 2009 plan review report along with revised October 5, 2009 plan review 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, 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 will correct deficiency 1 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
2.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 29.2.2.2.1 and 7.2.1.4.3(1) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing swing of the door from corridors 113, 114 and 115.  The Board notes that re-swinging the doors could impede egress travel and that the Providence Fire Marshals Office has no objection on the basis of structural hardship.
3.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected or will correct deficiency 3 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
4.	During the October 6, 2009 hearing on this matter, the Applicants engineer outlined the deficiencies with regard to the existing fire escapes in this facility as specifically outlined in its revised October 5, 2009 plan of action.  In light of the fact that the Providence Fire Marshals Office had no objection to these deficiencies, the Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 29.2.2.9, 7.2.8.1.1 and 7.2.8.4.1 (a) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing fire escape system within this facility.
5.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 29.2.2.9, 7.2.8.1.1 and 7.2.8.4.1(a) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing lead to ground of the fir escape ladders of this facility.  This variance is based upon a security hardship.
6.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RIUFC 14.9.1.1(1) along with sections 29.2.4.2 and 7.1.3.2.2 in order to allow the Applicant to utilize the cited fire escape as part of the egress system within this facility.
7.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 29.2.5.1, 7.5.1.1 and 7.5.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain fire escape access through the restroom of this facility, conditioned upon the Applicant removing all locks and locking devices from the restroom doors at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
8.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of RIUFC section 14.11.1 along with sections 29.2.7.31, 7.7.1 and 8.7.7.1 of the RI Life Safety Code in order to allow three exit stair enclosures to maintain their existing termination points. 
9-12.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected or will correct deficiencies 9, 10, 11 and 12 at direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.
13. The Board hereby a variance from the provisions of sections 29.2.2.2.1, 7.1 and 7.2.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing headroom of the cited which appears not to be part of the egress system.  Again, the Providence Fire Marshals Office has no objection.

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)].