The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on September 12, 2000 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, a comprehensive plan of action was developed for the Applicant. The Applicant subsequently requested that the Board reopen this file. The re-hearing on this matter was scheduled for March 13, 2001 at 1:30 PM. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Newbrook, O'Connell, Richard, Evans and Burlingame were present.   The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal George Calise of the Providence 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
	
This matter was previously before the Board and a decision was issued in file no. 200174. Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact as its initial findings of fact in this case. During the March 13, 2001 hearing on this matter, the Board was advised that the Applicant requested three additional variances covering deficiencies that became apparent during the final inspection of this facility.  These deficiencies were he apparently not disclosed on the original plans.  Finally, it is the understanding of the Board that all other fire code deficiencies shall be corrected by the Applicant.
	
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 from the provisions of NFPA 96 section 1-3.2 in order to allow the Applicant to waive the minimum clearance and approved clearance reduction system for the installation of the kitchen exhaust code (grease vapor exhaust system).  This variance is granted pursuant to, and in accordance with, the Applicant’s representations as outlined in the February 20, 2001 “Attachment No. 1” to its application.  In granting this variance, the Board further relies on the Providence Fire Marshal's observations that the intensity of cooking in this facility would probably not reach that of a commercial cooking operation.

2. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 96 section 
4-8.3.1 covering a wall termination of the kitchen exhaust hood (grease vapor exhaust system). This variance would further allow the fresh air intakes to remain located within the allowable minimum distance. This variance is granted pursuant to, and in accordance with, the Applicant’s representations as outlined in the February 20, 2001 “Attachment No. 1” to its application.

3.A The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of NFPA 13 R 
section 2-1.3.2 and NFPA 13 section 8-1(c) in order to allow the Providence Fire Marshal to accept in manufacturer’s data for hydrostatic testing of the copper tubing in lieu of the field testing requirements of NFPA 13 section 8-1(c). This variance is also granted pursuant to, and in accordance with, the Applicant’s representations as outlined in the February 20, 2001 “Attachment No. 1” to its application.

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 4-02-01.