ORDERS:
ORDER
GRIEVANCE NO. McCI 0010-04
In the above-captioned matter, Appellant Samuel Temoney appeals of the decision of Respondent South Carolina Department of Corrections (Department) to deny his grievance concerning his vegetarian meals. 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 January 8, 2004, and February 6, 2004, respectively, and identified as grievance number McCI 0010-04, Appellant contends that on two occasions the Department failed to provide him with a non-meat, vegetarian meal while the McCormick Correctional Institution was on “lockdown” status. In response to Appellant’s grievance, the Department determined that, while the preparation of Appellant’s meals may have been affected by the lockdown of the prison, he was still provided with a nutritionally balanced meal that complied by the Department’s food service operation policy. Therefore, by a final agency decision dated September 21, 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 supported by sufficient evidence in the record. 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
|
