ORDERS:
		
  ORDER OF DISMISSAL
            The
    above-captioned matter is before this Court pursuant to the request of
    Petitioner Karen McAbee for a contested case hearing.  Petitioner seeks the
    hearing to challenge an October 18, 2005 determination by staff at Respondent
    South Carolina Budget and Control Board, South Carolina Retirement Systems
    (SCRS), that Petitioner was not eligible to retire under the TERI program on
    June 30, 2005.  On December 20, 2005, SCRS filed a motion to dismiss this case
    because Petitioner had failed to exhaust her agency remedies before SCRS prior
    to requesting contested case review by this Court.  For the reasons set forth
    below, I find that the motion to dismiss must be granted. 
              The
    South Carolina Retirement Systems Claims Procedures Act provides the exclusive
    remedy for a dispute or controversy between SCRS and a participant in the South
    Carolina Retirement System or a participant’s designated beneficiary.  S.C.
    Code Ann. § 9-21-30 (Supp. 2005).  Pursuant to the Act, a participant seeking
    to challenge an administrative decision by SCRS staff must exhaust his agency
    remedies with SCRS prior to requesting a contested case hearing before this
    Court.  S.C. Code Ann. § 9-21-60 (Supp. 2005).  A person exhausts his agency
    remedies with SCRS by (1) filing a written claim to the director of SCRS within
    one year of the SCRS staff decision, (2) participating in the agency claims
    procedure before the director, and (3) obtaining a final decision from SCRS.  See S.C. Code Ann. §§ 9-21-20(5) (Supp. 2005), 9-21-50 (Supp. 2005).  If a person
    requests a contested case before this Court without first exhausting his agency
    remedies with SCRS, the Act specifically requires the Court to dismiss the
    request without prejudice.  S.C. Code Ann. § 9-21-60. 
              In
    the case at hand, Petitioner did not exhaust her agency remedies with SCRS
    prior to filing her request for a contested case hearing before this Court. 
    Rather than filing a written claim with the director of SCRS to challenge the
    October 18, 2005 agency decision regarding the date of her TERI eligibility,
    Petitioner directly filed a request for a hearing on that decision with this
    Court on November 17, 2005.  By failing to first seek
    relief from the SCRS staff decision with the director of SCRS prior to
    requesting this contested case, Petitioner failed to exhaust her agency
    remedies with SCRS.  See S.C. Code Ann. § 9-21-20(5).  Therefore,
    pursuant to Section 9-21-60, this case must be dismissed without prejudice, so
    that Petitioner may pursue her agency remedies with SCRS. 
              For
    the reasons stated above, 
              IT
    IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED without
    prejudice pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 9-21-60. 
              AND
    IT IS SO ORDERED. 
  ______________________________ 
  JOHN D.
    GEATHERS 
  Administrative
    Law Judge 
  1205 Pendleton
    Street, Suite 224 
  Columbia, South
    Carolina 29201-3731 
  February 7, 2006 
  Columbia, South Carolina 
 
 
  
  |