The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on March 26, 2002 at l:00 p.m. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Filippi, Wahlberg, Richard, Newbrook, and Evans were present. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Daniel Isles of the Providence 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 March 26, 2002 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant sought a sixty (60) day extension in which to comply with the provisions of a June 21, 2001 plan review report compiled by the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  The Board granted the Applicant’s request.
	
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 grants the Applicant a sixty (60) day extension in which to bring this facility into compliance with a June 2l, 2001 plan review report or to review specific requested items from that report.  The Board hereby directs the Applicant and the Providence Fire Marshal to advise us as to when, and if, the Applicant wishes to reappear.

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.