The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 27, 2001 at l:00 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Evans, Coutu, Richard and O’Connell were present.   The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Dan Isles of the Providence Marshal’s Office.  Commissioner Newbrook recused himself from considering this matter.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Wahlberg to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT
		
This matter was previously before the Board and a Decision was rendered in File No.:  0l0235 on November 7, 2001.  The Applicant has reappeared before the Board and is requesting permission to utilize the 2000 edition of NFPA l0l, Life Safety Code.  In light of the Applicant’s high teacher to student ratio, and the fact that this facility is fully sprinkled and fire alarmed, the Board granted this request.  It is the understanding of the Board that all other deficiencies have been 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.l-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 utilize the 2000 edition of the NFPA Life Safety Code l0l.  In granting this variance, it is the understanding of the Board that the Providence Fire Marshal’s Office has no objection in light of the safety features as outlined above.

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 within 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)]