South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
Gary Grooms #283860 vs. SCDOR

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Corrections

PARTIES:
Appellant:
Gary Grooms #283860

Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Corrections
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
04-ALJ-04-00471-AP

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

ORDER
GRIEVANCE NO. LIEBER 0756-03

In the above-captioned matter, Appellant Gary Grooms appeals of the decision of Respondent South Carolina Department of Corrections (Department) to deny his grievance concerning deductions from his prison wages. Based upon the record presented in this appeal, I find that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance must be affirmed.

BACKGROUND

In Step 1 and Step 2 Inmate Grievance Forms, submitted on November 26, 2003, and March 16, 2004, respectively, and identified as grievance number LIEBER 0756-03, Appellant contends that the Department cannot deduct certain fees from his wages earned in prison industries, because he is serving a Florida sentence, not a South Carolina sentence, in South Carolina under the Interstate Corrections Compact. In response to Appellant’s grievance, the Department determined that it was entitled to deduct the fees in question from Appellant’s wages. In particular, the Department found that, under the agreement Appellant signed as a voluntary participant in the Prison Industries Service Program, Appellant acknowledged that he understood that a 20% deduction for the Victims’ Compensation Fund and a 10% deduction for room and board would be taken from his wages from Prison Industries. Therefore, by a final agency decision dated August 26, 2004, the Department denied Appellant’s grievance. Appellant now appeals that denial before this Court.

DISCUSSION

This appeal is before this Court pursuant to Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (2000), Sullivan v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 355 S.C. 437, 586 S.E.2d 124 (2003), and Slezak v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 361 S.C. 327, 605 S.E.2d 506 (2004). Having fully considered the documents filed by Appellant and the Department and having closely reviewed the record in this matter, I find that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance was the result of a routine and good-faith exercise of the Department’s administrative responsibilities that is fully supported by the evidence in the record. Specifically, it appears that Appellant voluntarily signed an agreement that explicitly authorizes the Department to deduct the fees he now complains of, and it does not appear that such an agreement is precluded by or conflicts with the Interstate Corrections Compact. Further, there is nothing in the record to suggest that the Department’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, or the result of personal bias or prejudice. Accordingly, the Department’s decision in this matter should be affirmed.

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Department’s decision to deny Appellant’s grievance is AFFIRMED.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

______________________________

JOHN D. GEATHERS

Administrative Law Judge

1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 224

Columbia, South Carolina 29201-3731

 

August 11, 2005

Columbia, South Carolina


Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court