The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing by a subcommittee of the Board on August 9, 2006 at 9:00 A.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Blackburn and Newbrook were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshal Wade Pallazini of the State Fire Marshal's office.  The subcommittee recommendations were reviewed by the full Board on August 22, 2006 and approved pursuant to a motion made by Commissioner Newbrook and a second by Commissioner Pearson.  Accordingly, the subcommittee recommendations now have the status of a full Board decision. 
 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 25, 2006 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshals Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshals Office during the August 9, 2006 subcommittee hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 25, 2006 inspection 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, is understood to mean in accordance with the specific provisions related to the particular subject as are contained in this Code, or as approved in particular by the State Fire Marshal or his or her designee.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of sections 40.2.1 and 7.1.5.1.1 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing dimensions of the door through the overhead which services one to two people exiting this facility on an emergency basis.  This variance is based on structural hardship.
	2.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by removing the cited obstructions to the exits.
	3.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to address deficiency 3 as part of its plan of action for this facility within sixty (60) days from the date of this decision.  Specifically, the Board directs the Applicant to re-swing the cited north door and east door, if determined to be possible by the State Fire Marshal's office.  The State Fire Marshal's office, if necessary, shall provide the Applicant with additional time to correct this facility.  
	4.  During the August 9, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the cited fenced-in area has a gate and that the Applicant shall leave it unlocked during all hours of occupancy.  The Board accepts this plan of action.
	5.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 5 by providing this facility with emergency lighting both inside and outside, at the direction and to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State Fire Marshal's office.  
	6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 6.
	7.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 7.
	8.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 8 by properly mounting the cited portable fire extinguisher near the south exit of this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction and within a timetable established by the State Fire Marshal's office.
	9.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 9 at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.
	10.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of 120 days from the date of this decision in order to have the Applicant provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office.  The Board notes that if there is a true fire wall separation with an approved ninety-minute door, that the applicant may not need to extend the fire alarm system to the smaller area of this facility.  However, the Board notes that the State Fire Marshal's office must pre-approve any such limitation of the fire alarm system within this facility.
	11.  During the August 9, 2006 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that there are a number of wood-burning stoves located throughout this facility.  The Board was further advised that there is no other heating system within this facility and that none of these stoves are located within the egress path.  The Board was further advised that the occupancy of this facility is limited to two (2) people and that the stoves have been in operation since 1979.  Accordingly, the Board shall allow the Applicant to maintain the cited heating appliances provided the Applicant installs an approved fixed suppression system at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal's office with any additional portable extinguishers deemed necessary by the State Fire Marshal's office.  The Board notes that the above fixed suppression system may simply be a large manually operated fixed fire extinguisher located over each appliance.  
	12-14.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of sixty (60) days from the date of this decision in order to develop and submit a plan of action to the State Fire Marshal for addressing the spray room deficiencies within this facility.  If the State Fire Marshal's office is satisfied with that plan of action, that office may provide additional time for the Applicant to implement the plan of action.

 
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 subcommittees recommendation to the full Board, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date of this Decision, by requesting such review in writing in accordance with the provisions of RIGL 23-28.3-5(b)4.  Commencement of such an appeal does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].