The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on April 23, 2002 at l:00 p.m. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Pearson, Burlingame and Newbrook were present. The fire service was represented by the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous. 
 
FINDING OF FACT

The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an April l7, 2002 inspection report compiled by the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the State Fire Marshal’s Office during the April 23, 2002 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the April l7, 2002 inspection report as its initial findings of fact.  Any modification of the Board’s findings such as correction of a deficiency 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.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1.(a-c).  The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Section 30-2.2.2 and 30-2.2.2.l and 5-2.l.2.2 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing minimum width of the cited doors within this facility.  With regard to the exit access the double doors connecting the front daycare room with the adjacent room, the Board directs the Applicant to either remove the latching devices or remove the doors entirely at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal.

2. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of Sections 30-2.l, 30-2.l.l and 5-1.5 in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing height of the cited door opening and portable arches.

3. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #3 has been corrected by the Applicant to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.

4. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected the initial portion of deficiency #4 by providing the written information as to when the initial acceptance test for the new fire alarm was conducted and to further provide written information that there is a maintenance contract for the newly installed fire alarm system.  The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to relocate the fire alarm drill switch outside of the fire alarm panel of this facility.  The above switch shall be removed within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision.

5. During the April 23, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the furnace of this facility is open to the basement.  Accordingly, the Board hereby grants a variance to allow this existing condition provided the Applicant place a sprinkler head off the domestic water supply over the cited furnace, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision.

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)].

This decision was mailed on 6-12-02.