The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on May 6, 2003 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Acting Chairman Burlingame and Commissioners Preiss, Newbrook, Coutu, O’Connell and Pearson were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Richard Silva of the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Coutu and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a December 27, 2002 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office during the May 6, 2003 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the December 27, 2002 plan review report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s 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 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS
	
1.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #1 by relocating the remote shut-off switch outside of the furnace room at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal’s office prior to occupancy.
	
2.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #2 is moot in that none of the cited heating units are in excess of 160,000 BTU input.
	
3.  It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #3 is moot because the basement apartment now has two approved means of egress.
	
4.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.16-5(a) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing double 5/8” sheetrock assembly throughout the egress system of this facility.
	
5.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #5 by re-swinging the cited exit doors in the direction of egress travel.
	
6.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #6 by providing the cited egress doors with approved hardware to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal’s office.
	
7.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #7 by providing this facility with approved exit signage, if deemed necessary by the Providence Fire Marshal’s office, before occupancy.
	
8.  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA Standard 10, 1988 edition, in order to allow the Applicant to provide approved fire extinguishing equipment in each of the apartment units within this complex before occupancy.
	
9.  It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #9 by providing this facility with an approved hardwired smoke detection system and approved fire alarm system installed at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Providence Fire Marshal’s office.

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)].