The above captioned case was scheduled for a hearing on February l9, 2002 at l:00  p.m.  At that time, Vice Chairman Richard and Commissioners Wahlberg, Fang, Filippi, Newbrook, O’Connell and Burlingame were present. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Dennis LaRoque of the West Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office along with Deputy State Fire Marshal’s Kevin Murphy and Chief of Inspections William Howe of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT

During the February l9, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that the master box fire alarm system of this facility is in full working order.  The Applicant further advised the Board that he is providing a special fire escape window from the eighth apartment, which is similar to that of the seventh apartment unit.  The Applicant further advised the Board that he has provided the eighth apartment unit with an approved solid core wood door enclosure.  The Applicant sought a waiver of a Knox-box requirement for this facility.  The Applicant has further requested clarification of the smoke detector language of the original Decision and has advised the Board that he did not wish to have the tenants provided with access to the boiler shutoff switches located near the bulkhead of the basement of this facility. It is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies have been corrected.

	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.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.	The Board hereby directs the Applicant to either relocate the kill switches for the boilers of this facility from the bulkhead to a common use area accessible by the tenants or to provide the tenants with access to the basement in order to have direct access to the remote shutoff switches to the boilers within this facility.  During the hearing, the Board directed the Applicant to discuss with his electrician whether a single kill switch could be provided within the common use area rather than providing eight (8) additional remote shutoff switches to the common area.  If the eight (8) boilers can be provided with one (l) shutoff switch, that would be acceptable to the Board provided that the tenants have access to this switch.  If this is not possible, the Board directs the Applicant to allow tenant access into the bulkhead in order to allow the tenants to utilize the remote shutoff switches.  In any event, the Board directs the Applicant to provide direct tenant access to either the eight (8) remote shutoff switches located in the bulkhead of the basement of this facility or to a single or multiple group of shutoff switches located in the common use area of this facility, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision.  The above switches shall be installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the West Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office within thirty (30) days and prior to the occupancy of the eighth apartment unit of this facility.

2.	The Applicant is directed to provide this facility with approved smoke detectors installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the West Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office and in accordance with the provisions of Section 23-28.34 of the State Fire Code, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision.  The above smoke detectors shall also be installed before occupancy of the eighth unit.

3.	As a condition of the Applicant’s occupancy, the eighth apartment unit of this facility, the Board directs the Applicant to comply with items #l and #2 above, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the West Warwick Fire Marshal’s 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 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.

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 Board’s Decision, shall void all variances granted under the above-cited use or occupancy.  If such changes creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.l-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 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.  [RIGL 42-35-l5(c)]