ORDERS:
ORDER
BACKGROUND
In the above-captioned matter, Petitioners John and Carole Borden challenge the decision of Respondent South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, through its Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), to issue permit OCRM-05-301-M on March 23, 2006, to Respondents Burgess and Emma Heyward (Respondents) for the construction of a private recreational dock in Bohicket Creek at 2884 Jesse Qualls Drive on Johns Island in Charleston County, South Carolina. On June 26, 2006, OCRM, with the consent of the other parties, requested that this matter be remanded to OCRM so that it could reevaluate Respondents’ dock permit based upon an error in the survey of the proposed dock as it relates to the extended property lines between Petitioners’ and Respondents’ properties. By an Order of Remand dated July 10, 2006, this Court granted OCRM’s motion and this matter was remanded to OCRM, with leave granted to Petitioners to restore this matter to the active docket of the Court if they had an objection to the decision OCRM reached in its reevaluation of the permit.
On November 8, 2006, Petitioners filed a Motion to Reinstate this matter to the active docket of the Administrative Law Court. In their motion, Petitioners allege that, after the remand of this matter to OCRM, Respondents submitted a permit amendment request to OCRM and, prior to receiving a decision on their original permit or permit amendment request, constructed their dock pursuant to the original, March 23, 2006 permit. Petitioners further contend that, by a letter dated October 25, 2006, OCRM informed Respondents that their permit amendment request was denied and that enforcement action may be taken against Respondents for the construction of their dock. Further, Petitioners state that they have been informed that OCRM also intends to formally revoke the March 23, 2006 dock permit. Based upon these circumstances, Petitioners seek to reinstate this matter to the active docket of this Court in order to preserve their right to challenge the March 23, 2006 permit, should the permit not be revoked by OCRM or this matter not be otherwise satisfactorily addressed by OCRM. However, Petitioners further state that they are agreeable to holding this matter in abeyance until the final disposition of OCRM’s denial of the permit amendment request and OCRM’s action to revoke the original permit.
ORDER
This Court recognizes Petitioners’ interest in preserving their ability to challenge the dock permit issued to Respondents by OCRM in the event that the permit is not revoked or otherwise invalidated. However, as OCRM has yet to make a final agency determination regarding the permit, either by reissuing or by revoking the permit, it does not appear necessary to restore this matter to the active docket of the Court at this time, to, in turn, merely hold this matter in abeyance. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case will remain stricken from the active docket of the Administrative Law Court. However, Petitioners may restore this case to the active docket of the Court by filing a written motion to that effect with this Court within thirty (30) days of a final agency determination by OCRM either reissuing, revoking, or otherwise addressing the status of permit number OCRM-05-301-M.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
JOHN D. GEATHERS
Administrative Law Judge
1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 224
Columbia, South Carolina 29201-3731
December 1, 2006
Columbia, South Carolina |
