ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FF430218RO

                                 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.: FF430218RO

               MICHAEL ROBERTSON C/O              DISTRICT RENT
               BUCHBINDER & WARREN                ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: EK420024BO
                                                       (DJ420725BR)
                                   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 350 East 54th Street, various apartments, 
          New York, 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, EK420024BO was 
          issued on May 31, 1991.  In that order, the Administrator affirmed 
          the finding of DJ420725BR, issued October 25, 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.  The Administrator specifically found that the 
          owner had failed to clear one rent-impairing and at least three non 
          rent-impairing violations, as reported in the List of Pending 
          Violations (LPV), from the subject premises.

               On appeal, the owner argues that it has cleared a sufficient 
          number of violations.  As alleged proof of this contention, the 
          owner submits on appeal a copy of a New York City Department of 
          Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) report of an HPD 
          inspection made of the subject premises on November 28 and December 
          5, 1990, said report specifying that one rent-impairing and two non 
          rent-impairing violations had been cleared.  The owner 














          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FF430218RO

          also submits on appeal an affidavit from a Licensed Professional 
          Engineer, in which the engineer testifies that of all the 
          violations reported on the LPV, only one non rent-impairing 
          violation remains outstanding.  The affidavit is dated February 11, 
          1991.

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

               Section 2202.3(h) of the New York City Rent and Eviction 
          Regulations states that, in order to gain eligibility to raise MBRs 
          at a given premises for a given cycle, the owner must certify to 
          the Administrator that 100% of the rent-impairing and 80% of the 
          non rent-impairing violations which were of record against the 
          premises as of one year before the effective date of the order of 
          eligibility were cleared by six months before the effective date.

               In the instant case, the LPV reported that as of January 1, 
          1989 (one year before the effective date) there were one rent- 
          impairing and four non rent-impairing violations of record against 
          the subject premises.  Therefore, in order to gain eligibility  to 
          raise MBRs, the owner had to certify to the Administrator that the 
          one rent-impairing and at least three (4 X 80% = 3.2) non rent- 
          impairing violations had been cleared by July 1, 1989.  MBR 
          inspections conducted on August 18 and 25, 1989 revealed that the 
          owner had failed to clear the requisite number of violations by 
          those dates.  The Administrator thus denied the owner eligibility 
          in an order issued under docket # DJ420725BR.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that the evidence presented 
          by the owner on appeal is persuasive only that the violations were 
          cleared in an untimely manner (i.e., by November, 1990 at the 
          earliest).  The Commissioner notes that in the Violation 
          Certificate, filed by the owner, on June 16, 1989, the owner 
          certified that, as of that date it had cleared a requisite number 
          of violations from the subject premises.  As the owner contends on 
          appeal, such violations were cleared, but the evidence it submits 
          on appeal does not convince the Commissioner that the violations 
          were cleared before November, 1990-approximately 1 1/2 years after 
          the owner certified that the violations had already been cleared.

               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 






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FF430218RO

          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                                            
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             Deputy Commissioner