ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FB230077RO
                                 STATE OF NEW YORK 
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                                OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433


          ------------------------------------X
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: FB230077RO

                                                  DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
               BRIGHTON REALTY ASSOCIATES         NO.: EJ220068BO
                                                       (EA220411BR)
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

               The above-named owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 2954 Brighton 12th Street, various 
          apartments, Brooklyn, N.Y.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record 
          and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to 
          the issues raised by the petition.

               The issue before the Commissioner is whether the 
          Administrator's order was correct.

               The Administrator's order being appealed, EJ220068BO was 
          issued on January 18, 1991.  In that order, the Administrator 
          affirmed the finding of EA220419BR, issued September 27, 1990, that 
          the owner be denied eligibility for a 1990/91 Maximum Base Rent 
          (MBR) increase, due to the owner's failure to meet the violation 
          certification requirements necessary to the owner's being granted 
          an MBR increase specifically, that the owner had not repaired 80% 
          of the non rent impairing violations cited at the subject premises 
          by an inspector of the New York City Department of Housing 
          Preservation and Development (HPD).

               On appeal, the owner argues that 80% of the non rent impairing 
          violations have been repaired.  The owner submits on appeal in 
          support of this contention various repairmen's bills, an affidavit 
          from the building superintendent, and a copy of an HPD Violation 
          Status Report (VSR).

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should 
          be denied.














          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FB230077RO

               Section 2202.3(h) of the New York City Rent and Eviction 
          Regulations provides that, in order to gain eligibility to increase 
          MBRs at a particular premises the owner must certify to the DHCR 
          that 80% of the non rent impairing (and 100% of the rent impairing) 
          violations of record at that particular premises one year before 
          the effective date of the order of eligibility have been repaired 
          by six months before the effective date.  In the instant 
          proceeding, the owner had to certify that 80% of the non rent 
          impairing violations of record at the subject premises as of 
          January 1, 1989 had been repaired by July 1, 1989.

               An examination of the record reveals that a List of Pending 
          Violations (LPV) relied on by the Administrator in this proceeding 
          found that, as of January 1, 1989 there were one rent impairing and 
          18 non rent impairing violations outstanding against the subject 
          premises.  An HPD inspection of the subject premises, conducted on 
          August 14, 1989 (after the passing of the deadline for repairs) 
          found that the rent impairing violation had been repaired, as had 
          five of the non rent impairing violations.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that the evidence submitted 
          by the owner on appeal is insufficient to justify the 
          Commissioner's overturning of the Administrator's finding below.  
          The Commissioner concedes to the findings of the VSR submitted by 
          the owner.  The various repairmen's bills submitted by the owner 
          attest to repairs of defects already reflected in the August 14, 
          1989 HPD inspection report.  The repair of the various violations 
          allegedly asserted in the superintendent's affidavit are not 
          reflected in the various HPD documentation.  (The LPV and August 
          14, 1989 inspection report relied on by the Administrator and the 
          VSR submitted by the owner on appeal).  The Commissioner notes that 
          the superintendent's affidavit is dated February 6, 1991.  The 
          affidavit may thus be vouching to the performance of repairs after 
          August, 1989.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, it is 

               ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and 
          the same hereby is, denied, and that the order of the Rent 
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:


                                                                             
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA         
                                             Deputy Commissioner