The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 15, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Pearson, Preiss, Richard and Jackson were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case.  A motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion unanimous.

INDINGS OF FACT
	The Board finds that the Moses Brown School has been in continuous operation at 250 Lloyd Avenue since 1819.  The Board further finds that this facility finds that this facility provides education for children from pre-school through the twelfth grade.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has been involved with many major renovations at its thirty three (33) acre site.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has engaged in substantial fire safety improvements at this complex.  The Board further finds that the Applicant has decided to fully sprinkler the Howe Waughtel Field House.  However, the Applicant has appeared before the Board in order to request time until September 1, 2008 in order to complete the above sprinkler project.  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 Code, or as approved in particular by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (the State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until September 1, 2008 in order to complete the full sprinkler coverage in the cited Howe Waughtel Field House.


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)].