The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on August 28, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Preiss, Jackson, Walker, Filippi and Jasparro were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals Lisa Krapf, Christopher Dillon and Richard Vespia of the Providence Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner Walker to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact in file number 060173 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that the Applicant has installed a modified sprinkler system in this facility and is intending to tie in the flow and tamper switches from this new sprinkler system.  The Board further finds that the existing fire alarm control panel cannot be expanded to accept the additional devices.  Accordingly, the Applicant has requested a period of time in order to upgrade the existing non-addressable fire alarm system with an addressable system.  Accordingly, the Applicant has requested a time variance until June of 2008 in order to return to the Board with a proposed schedule and plan of action for the upgrading of the fire alarm system within this facility.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Providence Fire Marshal's office has no objection and will be working closely with the Applicant to develop this plan. 

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance until June of 2008 in which to return to the Board with a schedule and plan of action for the upgrade of the fire alarm system within this facility.

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)].