The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on October 21, 2003.  The Applicant has returned to the Board requesting additional time to comply with the original Decision.  The above-captained case was most recently scheduled for hearing on July 31, 2004 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Preiss, Newbrook, Evans, Burlingame, Coutu Filippi, OConnell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Susan Hawksley of the East Greenwich   Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Preiss and seconded by Commissioner Coutu to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion passed over the opposition votes of Commissioners Filippi and Evans with Commissioner Pearson abstaining.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The matter was previously reviewed by the Board and a decisions was issued in file number 020246 on January 21, 2001.  Accordingly, the Board hereby adopts its original findings of fact as the finding of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that the fire alarm system in this facility has been installed and that some of the doors have been replaced.  The Board further finds that the Applicant needs to replace two (2) additional doors and to provide a domestically supplied sprinkler head over the boiler.  It is the further understanding of the Board that the Applicant needs to provide one (1) door in the hallway and an additional door in the boiler room at the direction and to the satisfaction of East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office.  The Board further finds that the Applicant was first notified of the deficiencies in this building over two (2) years ago by a July 15, 2002 inspection report.  The Board further finds that the Applicant came before it on October 21, 2003 at which time the Board provided the Applicant with a plan of action for the upgrading of this facility.  The Board finds that the Applicant has not completed its plan of action within a timely manner, and as such risked voiding the previously granted variances.  Finally, in light of the fact that the Applicant needs two (2) doors and a domestically supplied sprinkler head over the boiler, the Board finds that the above corrections could be completed within seven (7) days.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
1.	The Board hereby grants the Applicant a period of seven (7) days from the hearing date of July 13, 2004 to bring this facility into compliance with the original Decision in file number 020246.  In the event that the Applicant brings the facility into compliance to the satisfaction of the East Greenwich Fire Marshals Office, the variance previously granted in file number 020246 shall be deemed to be valid and not voided by the Applicants previous failure to comply.

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.  
	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)].