The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on February 17, 2004 and on June 8, 2004.  The Applicant has now returned requesting an extension of time to correct the cooking compliance deficiency cited under NFPA 96.  The Applicant further wishes the option to disconnect or otherwise disable the appliances rather than comply with the hood and suppression system required under NFPA 96.
	The above-captioned case was most recently scheduled for hearing on September 28, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Burlingame, Newbrook, Pearson, OConnell and Preiss were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Cynthia Dehler of the State 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 passed over the oppositions vote of Commissioner Preiss.

 
FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby adopts its original findings of fact in File numbers 030065 and 030065A as its initial findings of fact in this case.  The Board has been further advised and finds of fact in this case.  The Board has been further advised and finds that the Applicant wishes an extension of time to either comply with NFPA 96 of to eliminate the hazard by disconnecting the  gas-fired appliances within this facility.   The State Fire Marshals Office also had question as to  the Applicants practice of cooking in the back yard of this facility.  It is the understanding of the Board that all other deficiencies in this facility have been corrected by the Applicant. 
	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.	During the September 28, 2004 hearing on this matter the Applicant advised the Board that he wished to permanently disconnect the gas-fired appliances in this facility in order to avoid the requirement of providing a hood  and suppression system.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a variance in order to allow him to permanently disconnect and disable the gas-fire appliances in this facility in lieu of providing an approved suppression and hood system over these appliances.  As part of the relief, the Applicant is further directed to disconnect the gas valve at the source at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshals Office until such time as the kitchen is brought into full compliance with NFPA 96 standards.
2.	During the September 28, 2004 hearing on this matter, the State Fire Marshals Office sought the Boards opinion as to the Applicants cooking on a gas grill in the back yard of this facility.  The Board was further advised and finds that the back yard does not have independent egress but rather would have to egress back through the building.
Accordingly, as a condition of the variance granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant not to allow any public or private gathering in the back yard of this facility.
However, the Applicant would be allowed to occasionally cook food, for private functions, on a gas grill within the yard area.  However, only the owner of this facility would be authorized. In granting this relief, the Board motes that the back yard area would classified as an outdoor place of assembly with no approved means of egress.  As a condition of this relief and the relief granted herein, the Board directs the State Fire Marshals Office to provide an additional safeguards deemed necessary for the safe operation of 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)].