ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
These matters are before me pursuant to Respondents' separate requests for contested case
hearings in response to Administrative Orders issued to them by the South Carolina Department
of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). Because the DHEC Administrative Orders
concern the identical factual situation and alleged violations of the Pollution Control Act, judicial
economy dictates that the matters be consolidated into one contested case pursuant to Rule 42(a)
of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
It is further ordered that the case caption be changed to reflect that DHEC is the Petitioner in this
matter. DHEC is designated as Petitioner and bears the burden of proof because this is a
contested case conducted as a de novo proceeding. DHEC, through its enforcement order, is
alleging that Respondents have violated the Pollution Control Act. The Respondents are simply
requesting a contested case hearing pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §1-23-320(a) (Supp. 1995),
which requires that all parties be afforded an opportunity for a hearing.
Basic administrative law principles establish that an agency bears the burden of proof in an
enforcement action. See Peabody Coal Co. v. Ralston, 578 N.E.2d 751 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991);
David E. Shipley, South Carolina Administrative Law 5-79, -80 (1989). Because DHEC is
seeking enforcement of its order charging a violation of the Pollution Control Act, this is an
enforcement action requiring that DHEC bear the burden of proof in establishing that
Respondents' committed the alleged violation.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
June____, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina. |
