The above-captioned case was previously before the Board and a decision was rendered in consolidated file #020267A and 020272A.  The case was most recently scheduled for hearing on October 28, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Preiss, Newbrook, Evans, Burlingame, Coutu and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Henry Latek of the Cranston Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Wahlberg and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed with Commissioner Burlingame abstaining.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact of file #020267A and 020272A. The Board further finds that with the exception of completing the fire alarm systems in these facilities, the applicant has brought the facilities into compliance with the above decisions.  The Applicant has returned to the Board requesting an additional six (6) month period in order to complete the fire alarm system for these facilities.  The Applicant has advised the Board and the Board finds that the Applicant has contracts for the installation for the fire alarm systems and has provided on site inspection.
	
CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1. The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time extension until April 30, 2004 in which to bring the above captioned facilities into full compliance with the fire alarm code at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Cranston Fire Marshal’s Office or designee.  As a condition of this time variance, the Board directs the Applicant to provide approved carbon monoxide detection throughout this facility at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Cranston Fire Marshal or designee within the above time period.

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 Applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 Board’s 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)].