The above captioned case was scheduled for hearing on November 20, 2001 at l:00 p.m.  At that time, Chairman Farrell and Commissioners Wahlberg, Pearson, Richard and Filippi were present.   The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal Robert Jobin of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.  A motion was made by Commissioner Richard and seconded by Commissioner Filippi to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDING OF FACT
		
The numbers of the Decision below correspond with those of a July 6, 2001 inspection report compiled by the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.   The above report was utilized by the Board, the Applicant and the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office during the November 20, 200l hearing on this matter.  Accordingly, the Board hereby incorporates the July 6, 2001 inspection report as its initial findings of fact. 

	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 from the provisions of Section 23-28.12-30 in order to allow the Applicant to reinstall the cited door that it removed from the Ruggles Building stairway.  As a condition of this variance, the Board hereby allows this door to swing opposite of the direction of egress travel and the Applicant shall be allowed to hold this door open by use of a magnetic hold-open device tied into the fire alarm system.  The above reinstallation of this door shall be accomplished within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal’s Office.

2.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #2 by tying the emergency lighting of this facility into an approved backup generator.

3.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #3, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal.

4.	It is the understanding of the Board that the Applicant has corrected deficiency #4, at the direction and to the satisfaction of the East Providence Fire Marshal.

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)]