(A) An administrative law judge shall preside over all hearings of contested cases as defined in § 1-23-505 or Article I, Section 22, Constitution of the State of South Carolina, 1895, involving the departments of the executive branch of government as defined in § 1-30-10 in which a single hearing officer, or an administrative law judge, is authorized or permitted by law or regulation to hear and decide these cases, except those arising under the:

(1) Consolidated Procurement Code;

(2) Public Service Commission;

(3) Department of Employment and Workforce;

(4) Workers’ Compensation Commission, except as provided in § 42-15-90; or

(5) other cases or hearings which are prescribed for or mandated by federal law or regulation, unless otherwise by statute or regulation specifically assigned to the jurisdiction of the Administrative Law Court. Unless otherwise provided by statute, the standard of proof in a contested case is by a preponderance of the evidence. The South Carolina Rules of Evidence apply in all contested case proceedings before the Administrative Law Court.

(B) All requests for a hearing before the Administrative Law Court must be filed in accordance with the court’s rules of procedure. A party that files a request for a hearing with the Administrative Law Court must simultaneously serve a copy of the request on the affected agency. Upon the filing of the request, the chief judge shall assign an administrative law judge to the case. Notice of the contested case hearing must be issued in accordance with the rules of procedure of the Administrative Law Court.

(C) A full and complete record must be kept of all contested cases and regulation hearings before an administrative law judge. All testimony must be reported, but need not be transcribed unless a transcript is requested by a party. The party requesting a transcript is responsible for the costs involved. Proceedings before administrative law judges are open to the public unless confidentiality is allowed or required by law. The presiding administrative law judge shall render the decision in a written order. The decisions or orders of administrative law judges are not required to be published but are available for public inspection unless confidentiality is allowed or required by law.

(D) An administrative law judge also shall preside over all appeals from final decisions of contested cases pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, Article I, Section 22, Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, or another law, except that an appeal from a final order of the Public Service Commission and the State Ethics Commission is to the Supreme Court or the court of appeals as provided in the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules, an appeal from the Procurement Review Panel is to the court of appeals as provided in § 11-35-4410, and an appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Commission is to the court of appeals as provided in § 42-17-60. An administrative law judge shall not hear an appeal from an inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections involving the loss of the opportunity to earn sentence-related credits pursuant to § 24-13-210(A) or § 24-13-230(A) or an appeal involving the denial of parole to a potentially eligible inmate by the Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services.

(E) Review by an administrative law judge of a final decision in a contested case, heard in the appellate jurisdiction of the Administrative Law Court, must be in the same manner as prescribed in § 1-23-380 for judicial review of final agency decisions with the presiding administrative law judge exercising the same authority as the court of appeals, provided that a party aggrieved by a final decision of an administrative law judge is entitled to judicial review of the decision by the court of appeals pursuant to the provisions of § 1-23-610.

(F) Notwithstanding another provision of law, a state agency authorized by law to seek injunctive relief may apply to the Administrative Law Court for injunctive or equitable relief pursuant to § 1-23-630. The provisions of this section do not affect the authority of an agency to apply for injunctive relief as part of a civil action filed in the court of common pleas.

(G) Notwithstanding another provision of law, the Administrative Law Court has jurisdiction to review and enforce an administrative process issued by an agency or by a department of the executive branch of government, as defined in § 1-30-10, such as a subpoena, administrative search warrant, cease and desist order, or other similar administrative order or process. A department or agency of the executive branch of government authorized by law to seek an administrative process may apply to the Administrative Law Court to issue or enforce an administrative process. A party aggrieved by an administrative process issued by a department or agency of the executive branch of government may apply to the Administrative Law Court for relief from the process as provided in the Rules of the Administrative Law Court.

Text of (H)(1) effective until July 1, 2024.

(H)(1) This subsection applies to timely requests for a contested case hearing pursuant to this section of decisions by departments governed by a board or commission authorized to exercise the sovereignty of the State.

Text of (H)(1) effective July 1, 2024.

(H)(1) This subsection applies to timely filed requests for a contested case hearing of decisions by the Department of Environmental Services. Emergency actions taken by the Department of Environmental Services pursuant to an applicable statute or regulation are not subject to the provisions of this subsection.

(2) A request for a contested case hearing for an agency order stays the order. A request for a contested case hearing for an order to revoke or suspend a license stays the revocation or suspension. A request for a contested case hearing for a decision to renew a license for an ongoing activity stays the renewed license, the previous license remaining in effect pending completion of administrative review. A request for a contested case hearing for a decision to issue a new license stays all actions for which the license is a prerequisite; however, matters not affected by the request may not be stayed by the filing of the request. If the request is filed for a subsequent license related to issues substantially similar to those considered in a previously licensed matter, the license may not be automatically stayed by the filing of the request. If the requesting party asserts in the request that the issues are not substantially similar to those considered in a previously licensed matter, then the license must be stayed until further order of the Administrative Law Court. Requests for contested case hearings challenging only the amount of fines or penalties must be considered not to affect those portions of such orders imposing substantive requirements.

(3) The general rule of item (2) does not stay emergency actions taken by an agency pursuant to an applicable statute or regulation.

(4)(a) Ninety days after a contested case is initiated before the Administrative Law Court, a party may move before the presiding administrative law judge to lift the stay imposed pursuant to this subsection or for a determination of the applicability of the automatic stay. A hearing must be held within thirty days after any party files a motion with the court and serves the motion upon the parties. The court shall lift the stay unless the party that requested a contested case hearing proves: (i) the likelihood of irreparable harm if the stay is lifted, (ii) the substantial likelihood that the party requesting the contested case and stay will succeed on the merits of the case, (iii) the balance of equities weigh in favor of continuing the stay, and (iv) continuing the stay serves the public interest. The judge must issue an order no later than fifteen business days after the hearing is concluded. If the stay is lifted, action undertaken by the permittee or licensee does not moot and is not otherwise considered an adjudication of the issues raised by the request for a contested case hearing. Notwithstanding the provisions of this item, the process to lift a stay as provided in this item does not apply to a contested case concerning a permit or license involving hazardous waste as defined in § 44-56-20(6), and a stay in such a contested case must not be lifted until the contested case is concluded and the Administrative Law Court has filed its final order in the matter.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in a contested case arising under this subsection, the Administrative Law Court shall file a final decision on the merits of the case no later than twelve months after the contested case is filed with the Clerk of the Administrative Law Court, unless all parties to the contested case consent to an extension or the court finds substantial cause otherwise.

(5) A final decision issued by the Administrative Law Court in a contested case may not be stayed except by order of the Administrative Law Court or the Court of Appeals.

(6) Nothing contained in this subsection constitutes a limitation on the authority of the Administrative Law Court to impose a stay as otherwise provided by statute or by rule of court.

(I) If a final order of the Administrative Law Court is not appealed in accordance with the provisions of § 1-23-610, upon request of a party to the proceedings, the clerk of the Administrative Law Court shall file a certified copy of the final order with a clerk of the circuit court, as requested, or court of competent jurisdiction, as requested. After filing, the certified order has the same effect as a judgment of the court where filed and may be recorded, enforced, or satisfied in the same manner as a judgment of that court.

(J) If an attorney of record is called to appear in actions pending in other tribunals in this State, the action in the Administrative Law Court has priority as is appropriate. Courts and counsel have the obligation to adjust schedules to accord with the spirit of comity between the Administrative Law Court and other state courts.