The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing by a subcommittee of the Board on March 8, 2006 at 9:00 A.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Filippi and Blackburn were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Garvey of the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office.  The subcommittee recommendations were reviewed by the full Board on March 14, 2006 and approved pursuant to a motion made by Commissioner Pearson and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook with Vice Chairman Coutu abstaining from the vote.  Accordingly, the subcommittee recommendation now has the status of a full Board decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an October 4, 2004 inspection report compiled by the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Central Falls Fire Marshals Office during the March 8, 2006 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the October 4, 2004 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 Authority Having Jurisdiction (State Fire Marshal, his or her designated Deputy State Fire Marshals and/or Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshals).

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 13.2.5.4.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing swing of the egress doors leading from the bar of this facility to the sidewalk.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that swinging these doors directly onto the sidewalk would impede pedestrian traffic and possibly cause injuries.  It is the further understanding of the Board that the bar room of this facility has an approximate maximum occupancy of fifty-three (53) people.
	1(b).  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 1(b) by providing approved solid core wood doors maintaining an approximate fire rating of twenty (20) minutes in the existing door jambs of the residential units within this facility.  The above solid core wood doors shall be installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	2.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct the apartment door deficiency cited in item 2 by providing the apartment door jamb with an approved solid core wood door maintaining an approximate fire rating of twenty (20) minutes.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.5.1.3 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing remoteness of the two (2) exits from the bar area.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that both doors are fully functional and that the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office has no objection.
	3.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 7.2.1.4.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing swing of the bar room doors of this facility for the reasons outlined in item 1 above.
	4.  The Board directs the Applicant to correct deficiency 4 by providing this facility with an approved key lock box installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	5.  During the March 8, 2006 subcommittee hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant needed to address four (4) additional deficiencies outlined herein as items 5, 6, 7 and 8.  The first of those deficiencies, item 5, to be addressed herein, noted that the Ansul System within the kitchen area of the bar was not operable.  In addressing this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to eliminate the fryolator and not to utilize the stove for the generation of grease-laden vapors or smoke but only for the warming of food.  In light of the above conditions, the Board would grant the Applicant relief from providing the cooking operation with an Ansul System.  As an alternative to this arrangement, the Applicant may correct this deficiency at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office by bringing the Ansul System into operation within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	6.  During the March 8, 2006 subcommittee hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant had several electrical violations.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct those violations at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office or designee within 120 days of the date of this decision.
	7.  During the March 8, 2006 subcommittee hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant needed to upgrade the fire alarm system of this facility by providing approved carbon monoxide detection within the apartments and providing additional emergency lighting.  The Applicant agreed to do this.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in which to upgrade the fire alarm system with the CO detection coverage in the apartments, and to further upgrade the emergency lighting in this facility, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office.
	8.  Finally, the Central Falls Fire Marshal's office advised the Board that the Applicant needed to provide an approved Class A finish on the wainscoting in this facility, remove the storage from the rear hallway of this facility and provide an approved solid core door on the basement door jamb of this facility.  Accordingly, the Board hereby directs the Applicant to remove the cited storage within seven (7) days of the date of this decision, and to provide the Class A finish on the wainscoting and the solid core wood door in the basement door jamb within 120 days of the date of this decision.  The above corrections shall be at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Central Falls Fire Marshals office.

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)].