The above-captioned cases were scheduled for hearing on July 12, 2005 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell, Vice Chairman Coutu and Commissioners Richards, Newbrook, Preiss, Evans, Pearson, Filippi and OConnell were present.  Commissioners Blackburn and Burlingame recused themselves from consideration of these cases.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Martin of the Bristol Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Preiss to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
During the July 12, 2005 hearing on this matter, the Board reviewed a June 3, 2005 plan of action developed for the Applicant by Hughes Associates, Inc.  The above plan of action established a timetable for the upgrade of the fire alarm systems of the residentially occupied buildings on this campus.  The Board notes that several of the buildings were sprinklered but that the fire alarm systems previously installed would not comply with current fire alarm standards.  The Applicant has requested that the Board adopt its plan of action with the attendant time tables.  

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	1.  The Board hereby adopts the Applicants plan of action for the upgrade of the fire alarm systems covering the fifteen (15) residentially occupied buildings on campus as presented in the attached June 3, 2005 plan of action presented by Hughes Associates, Inc. to the University.  Accordingly, the outlined timetables in the attached plan of action shall be considered time variances granted by the Board.

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)].