Jump to the schools that are:

Fire Code Violations Order

As mentioned by this Court on previous occasions, this Court's Order of June 10, 1994, is the touchstone of all subsequent Orders issued by this Court which continue to require the active enforcement of the Fire Code. Since the issuance of the June 10, 1994 Order, this Court has issued over fifty (50) Orders reiterating the June 10, 1994 Order. The-Court's Order of June 10, 1994, sets forth the requirements of the District of Columbia Fire Prevention Code ["Fire Code"] and the responsibilities of the code enforcement officer, the Fire Chief.

Therefore, since June 10, 1994, a period of over three years, defendants have been under a continuing Order to abate any and all Fire Code violations in District of Columbia Public Schools. This Court's Order has remained the same -- Fire Code violations must be abated.

Consistent with previous practice, the Court has conducted a series of prehearing conferences. These pre-hearing conferences have provided an efficient forum for all parties to address Defendants' compliance with the Court's Order of June 10, 1994, and subsequent Orders. These conferences have permitted the Court, with the assistance of Plaintiffs' and Defendants' counsel, to review the progress of Fire Code abatement on a school by school basis, and to identify and narrow the remaining issues for resolution during the in-court hearing.

In this regard, the Court's review during the pre-hearing conference and incourt hearing is based on the following factors: the Fire Inspection Reports and Fire System Operations Reports; contractors' reports detailing and confirming corrective work performed; the certification of the Fire Chief that the schools are free of Fire Code violations and the certification of the Fire Marshal that all fire alarm systems and the back-up thereto are tested and found operational; that sprinklers are free of paint and functional; that all fire drill records are in proper order; and that all fire doors are operational and are not locked or blocked.

The Court held pre-hearing conferences on July 1, 1997, July 2, 1997, July 3, 1997, July 7, 1997, July 8, 1997 and July 9, 1997. (The Court in its Order of February 27, 1997 scheduled the in-court hearing for July 10, 1997.) As a result of the prehearing conferences and the in-court hearing on July 10, 1997, and based on Defendants' submissions and the report of the Fire Chief for the District of Columbia, the Court finds the following schools free of Fire Code violations and cleared for opening:

Elementary	Junior High	Middle	Senior High
Amidon	Eliot	Backus	Ballou
Bancroft	Evans	Garnet Patterson	Banneker
Bowen	Hamilton	Roper	Coolidge
Brent	Hart	Sousa	D.C. Street Academy
Brightwood	Hine	Lincoln	Duke Ellington
Brookland	Johnson		School w/o Walls
Burroughs	Kramer		Penn Center
Carver	Langley		Woodson H. D.
Clark	Paul		Eastern
Cooke H. D.	Douglass
Davis	Shaw
Draper	Taft
Drew	Terrell R. H.
Eaton	Rosario
Emery
Ferebee-Hope
Ft. Lincoln
Garrison
Gibbs
Golding
Giddings
Harris C. W.
Harris P. R.
Hearst
Hendley
Janney
Kenilworth
Ketchum
Key
Kimball
MLK, Jr.
Langdon
LaSalle
Leckie
Logan
McGogney
Malcolm X
Mann
Miner
Monegomery
Moten
Murch
Noyes
Oyster
Patterson
Payne
Peabody
Plummer
Powell
Raymond
Reed
River Terrace
Ross
Rudolph
Savoy
Seaton
Shepherd
Simon
Slowe
Smothers
Stanton
Steven
Stoddert
Takoma
Terrell M. C.
Thomas
Thomson
Tubman
Turner
Van Ness
Walker-Jones
Watkins
Weatherless
Webb
West
Wheatley
Whittier
Wilson J. O.
Wilkinson

The Following schools have been closed by the District of Columbia Public Schools and are therefore not a part of this review process:

Closed Schools
Armstrong Adult Education Center
Blow Elementary
Burdick Senior High
Chamberlain Senior High
Filmore Elementary Arts Center
Hardy Middle
Harrison Elementary
Keene Elementary
Lewis Elementary
McKinley
Miller Junior High
Petworth Elementary
Richardson Elementary
Woodbridge Elementary
Old Congress Heights Elementary
Lenox
Taft Junior High
Douglass Junior High

The Defendants have requested that Burdick, Taft and Douglass although closed, be considered in this review hearing because these schools will be used as "swing" facilities or alternative sites.

The Court notes that two schools have had new roofs replaced by the District of Columbia Public Schools. However, these schools have not yet had the required re-inspection by the Fire Department and reports have not been submitted to the Court. Therefore, these two schools are not cleared to open. These schools are:

Elementary
Houston
Meyer

During the pre-conference hearing on July 9, 1997 and the in-court hearing on July 10, 1997, General Williams of the District of Columbia Public Schools testified that a number of the schools are presently scheduled for complete or partial roof replacements. General Williams advised the Court that the roof replacement work would be completed at three different time periods. The completion dates are August 15, 1997, August 31, 1997, and September 20, 1997. It is noted that as soon as each new roof is installed, the Fire Department is required to inspect the school and submit fire inspection reports regarding its findings.

The following schools are scheduled to have roofs completely or partially replaced by August 15, 1997, after which an inspection must be conducted by the Fire Department:

Elementary
Shadd
Tyler
Merritt

* Sharpe Health, a special education school, has roof repairs scheduled for completion on August 15, 1997.

The following schools are scheduled to have their roofs completely or partially replaced by August 31, 1997, after which an inspection must be conducted by the Fire Department:

Elementary	Junior High	Middle	Senior High
Adams	Deal	Stuart-Hobson	Anacostia
Birney	Jefferson		Spingarn
Burrville	MacFarland		Roosevelt
Gage-Eckington			Washington
Garfield			Wilson, W.
Lafayette
Lee, Mamie D
Nalle
Maury
Monroe
Orr
Randle Highlands
Young
Benning

The following schools are scheduled to have their roofs completely or partially replaced by September 20, 1997, after which an inspection must be conducted by the Fire Department:

Elementary	Junior High	Senior High
Aiton	Browne	Bell Multicultural
Barnard	Francis	Cardozo
Beers		Dunbar
Bunker Hill		Phelps
Cleveland
Cook J. F.
Fletcher-Johnson
Green
Hyde
Ludlow-Taylor
Park View
Shadd
Truesdell
Winston

The Court expressed support for the installation of new roofs. The Court was surprised, however, to learn that some roof installations would not be complete until August 31, 1997, and others as late as September 20, 1997. The Court expressed dismay at this schedule for completion, which when taken into consideration with the fact that each school must be inspected by the Fire Department after the roof installations, places the date for occupancy by students and staff even later than that projected.

The Court was advised that as many as fourteen (14) contracting companies would be working on the installation of the roofs and that these contractors were prequalified for the job. Based thereon, the Court inquired why the work could not be completed before the opening of school. The Court expressed concern that the roof replacements and installations would not be complete in order for the schools to open on time. The Court was particularly concerned with those schools whose roofs are scheduled to be replaced by August 31, 1997 and September 20, 1997, considering that District of Columbia Public Schools are scheduled to reopen on September 2, 1997.

The Court noted that the roofing schedule was very tight. Such a schedule puts Defendants in the likely position of not having the schools ready for opening. Further, the Court reminded Defendants that last August was one of the rainiest ever. Inclement weather delayed many roof repairs in August 1996.

The Court also inquired of Defendants as to whether they had devised a plan to house students and staffs in the event that the schools are not ready on September 2, 1997. Defendants requested that the Court allow occupancy of the school buildings while the roofs are being replaced. The Court pointed out that it has never in the history of the case allowed any school building to be occupied while the roof was being repaired. The simple reason for this is that a breach in the roof constitutes a Fire Code violation. The Court notes that it has certainly been consistent in this regard with respect to Tyler Elementary, Noyes Elementary, Sharpe Health, Brightwood Elementary, Jefferson Junior High and Deal Junior High.

The Court also notes that more recently, the Fire Department exercised its legitimate authority in enforcing the Fire Code by closing Roosevelt Senior High, Bell Mutlicutural and Shaw Junior High. In April 1997, during the course of an inspection of Shaw Junior High, Inspector Timothy A. Cropps, properly exercising his enforcement authority, evacuated and closed Shaw Junior High School because of a breach in the roof. This school remained closed until the roof repair work and other repairs were completed, and the school was later re-inspected and cleared of Fire Code violations by the Fire Department. The same was true for Roosevelt Senior High and Bell Multicultural Center. These schools were evacuated and closed by the Fire Department due to a breach in the roof. Students and staff were not permitted to reenter the buildings until the breach in the roofs were repaired. It stands to reason therefore, that while the roofs are being replaced the Fire Department has every authority to close the schools if they are occupied by students and staff.

The Court is in no way suggesting how many roofs should be replaced and when the work is to be done. The Court is requiring, however, that if such work is undertaken it should be completed prior to the reopening of school. This is not an unreasonable expectation. Defendants knew, or should have known, which schools needed new roofs and how long it would take to replace these roofs given the September 2, 1997, date which Defendants set for the reopening of schools. Certainly Defendants could not expect to install new roofs while the school buildings are occupied by students and staff. This has never occurred under the mandate of this Court. It seems clear to the Court, therefore, that based on the September 2, 1997, school reopening date, the number of roofs repaired and the timing of such repairs after September 2, 1997, will depend on the ability of the school system to absorb students and staff that are displaced. This Court has never sanctioned the occurrence of any roof repairs while school buildings are occupied by students and staff.

Plaintiffs' position was not clear to the Court from the record in this hearing. The Court notes that Plaintiffs stated in Court on July 10, 1997 that: "We are not advocating that the schools be passed that are having new roof work." However, Plaintiffs requested that the Court make itself available to monitor the situation while the repairs are in progress. This Court has always made itself available throughout these proceedings to receive motions and schedule hearings. This review process will be no different from others that have taken place. The Court will schedule weekly hearings on Thursdays at 12:00 noon in Courtroom 215, unless otherwise advised by the Court, to review the progress Defendants are making in replacing and installing the new roofs. If lead counsel for Defendant or Plaintiff is unavailable on any of these scheduled hearings, the Court will accept substitute counsel.

The Court admonishes Defendants to begin devising plans for alternative sites for students and staff from those schools which will not be ready for September 2, 1997. These plans shall be filed with the Court and served on Plaintiffs by August 18, 1997.

Wherefore, it is this 11th date of July, 1997, hereby

ORDERED, that the Court will hold a scheduled hearing on the above-captioned matter every Thursday at 12:00 noon in Courtroom 215, unless otherwise advised by the Court; and it is further

ORDERED, that the first such hearing shall occur on July 17, 1997; and it is further

ORDERED, that any school with outstanding Fire Code violations will not be cleared for use; and it is further

ORDERED, that Defendants shall devise and file with this Court and serve on Plaintiffs by August 18, 1997, a plan setting out alternative reporting sites for those schools they anticipate will not be free of Fire Code violations by September 2, 1997; and it is further

ORDERED, that Defendants shall complete the abatement of all remaining Fire Code violations in any school not cleared for opening prior to submitting any petitions to this Court; and it is further

ORDERED, that any petition submitted must be supported by affidavits and detailed documents evidencing all corrective work completed on the schools not cleared for opening; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Court's Order of June 10, 1994, and subsequent Orders remain in full force and effect.

SO ORDERED.

KAYE CHRISTIAN
Kaye Christian
Associate Judge
(Signed in Chambers)

Copies to:

Barbara Kagan, Esq.
Andrea Evans, Esq.
Mary Levy, Esq.
STEPTOE & JOHNSON
1330 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Pastell Vann, Assistant Corporation Counsel
Brenda Walls, Assistant Corporation Counsel
OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL
441 4th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001