The above-captioned case was scheduled for hearing on December 5, 2000 at 1:30 P.M. At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Newbrook, Pearson, Filippi, Burlingame, Evans, O'Connell and Coutu were present.  This meeting was conducted by Commissioner Burlingame as acting chairman. The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Waterman of the Smithfield Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Farrell and seconded by Commissioner Newbrook the to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of an August 9, 2000 inspection report complied by the Smithfield Fire Marshal’s Office.  The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the Smithfield Fire Marshal’s Office during the December 5, 2000 hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the August 9, 2000 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 23-28.1-4(3) of the Rhode Island General Laws.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS

1. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.17-2(b) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the egress system of this facility as modified herein.  This variance is contingent upon the Applicant's agreement to provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system as outlined in item six below.

2. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency 2 by providing the cited egress door, from the basement stairway to the first floor, with an approved self-closing device.

3. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.17-5(e) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the existing cited height of the door located on the first floor north from industrial area, and the door located in the east area of the basement. This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship and in light of the limited occupancy of this facility.  This variance is further contingent upon the Applicant's providing this facility with an approved fire alarm system as outlined in item six below.

4. The Board hereby grants a variance from the provisions of section 23-28.17-5(f) in order to allow the Applicant to maintain the first floor north egress door, from industrial area, without approved panic hardware.  This variance is granted on the basis of structural hardship pursuant to the Smithfield Fire Marshal’s observation that the cited door could not be properly retrofitted to accept panic hardware.

5. It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiencies 5(a), (b) and (c), at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield Fire Marshal.

6. As a condition of the variances granted herein, the Board directs the Applicant to provide this facility with an approved local fire alarm system, installed in accordance with the provisions of section 23-28.25-4(a), at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Smithfield Fire Marshal, within 120 days of the date of this decision.

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)].