This case was originally scheduled for hearing on September l8, 2001.  At that time, it was rescheduled for two (2) weeks in order to allow the Applicant, the State and Warwick Fire Marshal’s to develop a plan of action.  The matter was then heard on October 2, 2001 at l:30 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Burlingame, Richard, Coutu, Filippi, Newbrook, Evans and O’Connell.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals Kevin Murphy and Vincent Quintero of the State Fire Marshal’s Office along with John Campobianco of the Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Walberg and seconded by Commissioner Richard to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion past over the objection by Commissioner Burlingame.  

This matter was subsequently reheard on October 9, 2001 in order to address a final issue involving the fire alarm monitoring of a sprinkler control valve.  At that time, Vice Chairman Richard and Commissioners Newbrook, Filippi, Evans and O’Connell were present.  The fire service was represented by Deputy State Fire Marshals Anthony Marsella and Kevin Murphy of the State Fire Marshal’s Office along with George Potter of the Warwick Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion to approve the parties’ plan of action for monitoring the control valve was made by Commissioner Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Filippi.  The motion passed unanimously.

FINDING OF FACT

The numbers of the Decision below primarily correspond with those of a September l2, 2001 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 October 2, 2001 hearing on this matter and the follow-up on October 9, 2001 hearing.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the September l2, 2001 inspection 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.l-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of sixty (60) days from the date of this Decision in which to comply with deficiency #l, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.  The Board further grants a variance from the provisions of Section 38.2.4.2 in order to allow an additional 28 feet of travel distance from the second floor business occupancy of this facility.

2. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #2 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.

3. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #3 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.

4. The Board hereby grants a variance in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the fire rating and hardware of the cited doors to the attic space.  However, the Board directs the Applicant to comply with NFPA 80 regarding the operation of the attic side of the cited doors.

5. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #5 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.

6. The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision in order to provide the cited stairs with approved uniform handrails.

7. The Board hereby directs the Applicant to correct deficiency #7 by providing the cited sprinkler heads, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.

8. As reviewed on October 9, 2001 and approved by the Board at that time, the Applicant is directed to provide monitoring of the sprinkler shut off valve in the meter pit by either utilizing existing conduit or an overhead means of connection.  The Board hereby grants a time variance of ninety- (90) days from the date of this Decision in order to provide approved supervision of the shut off valve, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.

9. It is the understanding of the Board that deficiency #9 is moot and no longer a violation of the State Fire Code.

10. The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision in order to correct deficiency #l0, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the State 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)].

This decision was mailed on 11-21-01.