The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on September 19, 2000 at 1:30 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Coutu, O'Connell, Pearson, Richard, Burlingame and Filippi were present.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Alan T. Adams of the Portsmouth Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
During the September 19, 2000, hearing on this matter, the Board was advised and finds that this is a three story, Type V111 structure with approximately 26,000 square feet per floor.  There are 76 assisted care residences and 15 special care residences. The building is sprinkled in accordance with NFPA 13 R. The parties advised the Board that the patients in this facility shall all be ambulatory and capable of self preservation. The Applicant is seeking a variance in order to maintain a one hour separation between the F-1 wing and the remaining F-2 (Board and Care) portion of this building.
	
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 grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain a one hour separation between the F-1 and F-2 occupancies of this fully sprinkled building. In granting this variance, the Board directs the Applicant to limit occupancy of this complex to patients who are ambulatory and capable of self preservation. In light of the above condition, the Portsmouth Fire Marshal has no objection.

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)].

This decision was mailed on 10-26-00.