The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 19, 2002 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Evans, Newbrook, Richard, Pearson, Coutu, Filippi, Preiss, Wahlberg and OConnell were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Waterman of the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner OConnell and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT

	The number of the Decision below correspond with those of an October 15, 2002 inspection report compiled by the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office. The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office during the November 19, 2002 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the    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 defined in Section 23-28.11-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 18-3.1.1 and 6-2.4 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain previously installed elevator doors and assemblies within this facility.  In granting this variance, it is understanding of the Board that this facility is currently protected with a supervised fire alarm system and automatic sprinkler system along with emergency lights, exit sign, and portable fire extinguishers.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant shall provide this facility with an approved Knox Box, installed at the direction and to the satisfaction the Smithfield Fire Marshals Office.
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.  
	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. 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.  
	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.  

	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)].