The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on September 14, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, the matter was assigned to a subcommittee for an on-site review.  The sub-committee convened on-site at 9:30 A.M. on October 12, 2004 and reported back to the full Board that day at 1:00 P.M.  A final decision on this matter was issued to the Applicant on February 1, 2005.
By letter dated May 17, 2005, the Applicants representative advised the Board that he was seeking clarification with regard to the provisions of paragraphs two (2) and three (3) of the original decision.  After an initial review, the Chairman assigned this matter to staff for a follow-up review.  The matter returned to the attention of the Board as a review of old business on August 30, 2005.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richard, Blackburn, Preiss, Burlingame, Filippi and Newbrook were present.  A motion was made by Commissioner Burlingame and seconded by Vice Chairman Coutu to clarify the original decision by reaffirming that the Applicant would be allowed to maintain the existing first floor kitchen exhaust system and extinguishing system in the first floor kitchen hood.  The motion passed unanimously.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby reaffirms its original findings of faction in file number 030329 as outlined in the February 1, 2005 decision covering this facility.  The Board further finds that the first floor kitchen exhaust system and the first floor kitchen hood extinguishing system are currently operational.  Accordingly, the Board shall allow the Applicant to retain these working systems until such time as they fail.  Items 2 and 3 of the original decision in this case are so modified.
	
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)].