The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on July 15, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Richard and Commissioners Pearson, Newbrook, Burlingame, Coutu and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Campopiano of the Warwick Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	During the July 15, 2003 hearing on this matter the Board was advised that the Applicant sought relief for the installation of a kitchen exhaust duct system.  Specifically, the Board was advised that the ductwork was installed without openings and that it was further installed with a two-inch dip.  The Board was further advised that the Applicant now has provided access panels to get at the two-inch dip point and that the Warwick Fire Marshals office has no objection to allow the system to remain as built provided the access panels are maintained and the Applicant cleans the system out every three months.  The Applicant has agreed to comply with the Warwick Fire Marshals request.
	

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 96 Section 4-1.4 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the ductwork for this cooking system, as installed in accordance with the following provisions.  As a condition of this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to maintain access panels at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Warwick Fire Marshal to allow complete access to the cited two-inch dip.  The Board further directs the Applicant to maintain a quarterly cleaning schedule of the cited ductwork in order to provide access and cleaning every three months.  In light of the above conditions, it is the understanding of the Board that the Warwick 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)].