| Printed Page 1680, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 1700, Feb. 10 |

In representing the South Carolina Electric Cooperative Association, there came to be an interest in equity called Capital Credit in which it's accrued over a number of years and because of their rotating cycles, at that time it was 12 to 15 years, you would find that some individuals had moved out of the area and couldn't be located.

There was some questions for the South Carolina Tax Commission dealing with, first of all, when that amount became payable because the time period ran. They also questioned about -- there was a question of whether or not an individual had the right by bylaw to donate that to the corporation rather than leave it a -- to the state, a similar process that was used.

We appeared before hearings before the Tax Commission as to, first of all the constitutionality of the act, where it was attached to the Appropriation Bill and we felt at that particular time that the law had been implemented in violation of the South Carolina Constitution as far as not being in the title correctly.

South Carolina Supreme Court ruled --
Q. I think you -- if you want, don't develop it on a case by case basis, but if you'd give some overview. I mean I know your serving as an interim -- as an ABC hearing officer --
A. I will be glad to do that.
Q. -- and how many have you -- hearing cases have you had, that sort of thing. Not a case by case basis. Thank you?
A. And I appreciate that because it's a long and arduous trip we were about to take.
THE CHAIRMAN: We don't want to take quite that long a trip.
A. I have represented individuals before the Residential Homebuilders Commission. I have represented the water companies in applying for environmental permits such as the 208 plan. I have worked with volunteer fire departments in, first of all, obtaining federal and state funding and also the permitting process and training process that deal with it and general counsel for the Electric Cooperative Association.

I was involved in developing that legal department which handled training for job safety and treatment -- safety instructors and worked with the Labor Department as far as safety rules and regulation and implementation to business.

I am a City attorney for the town of Ridgeway and have dealt with interchange at the police department in personnel, employment problems, ethical applications and from time to time have worked with members of

My responsibility was to develop the case and hire the law firm that would try the case and be -- participate with them in the development of the pleadings.

Since going into private practice in 1986, I have been working with -- or my particular law firm, again, in that area of a regulation and constitutional challenges. Generally, there are five to six attorneys dealing with the case.

My responsibility has been involved in interpreting the law, especially research, regarding the constitutional application and writing memorandum and briefs for -- in support of the trial counsel's presentation.
Q. Sitting as an ABC hearing officer, have you found that it would have been any different if you had had any more litigation experience or would it matter if you had any at all?
A. I think it's been very help to me sitting as an ABC hearing officer this year to get a feel for what the law judges are going to experience because you sit in both capacities. One, you're hearing as an initial fact finder for a license -- a beer and wine license in which you are trying to establish the record, so that the agency can appeal.

In the law enforcement area, you are actually I would consider it the tribunal looking for whether or not there is any rational basis in fact for the application of the citing and understanding that you are not actually making the initial decision, but supporting the application of the agency. So it gives you both sides of what I think the ALJ will be doing with all of the agencies which they have been assigned to.
Q. If you're elected as an ALJ, what do you understand to be your ethical considerations about extrajudicial activities?
A. Extrajudicial activities will -- it will be an interesting application because there are two codes of ethics that apply as I understand it. There will be the South Carolina Ethics Acts, which deals with the State employees and other departments, and since the ALJs will not be attached to the judiciary per se, but under the Governor's office that I think those

And as the judicial standards say that they encourage your participation so long as it's not in a legal capacity and so long as it does not discredit or draw attention to the judiciary in an improper way.
Q. Did the cases -- your most significant cases that you listed in answer to the Question 17 on the PDQ, do they say anything special to this committee about you? What criteria did you use to select your cases?
A. Well, I think that one of the criteria that I used in this was a case -- the cases which would indicate the bringing together of the legislative intent in an Act and in the application of that intent by the agency or body that was supposed to carry that out. The Legal Chambers Development Corporation, which appears as Lee County is one that I remember from my report, dealt with whether or not a municipality that had not adopted a procurement code had, in fact, acted in accordance with the Procurement Code standard which is only applied to municipal and county governments through a one provision section in that area.

I had to review that town's -- I had to review how they administer their procurement. I had to determine and review how the council had acted historically and I think it required the idea to be able to translate, apply regulations and then balance the equities of the situation. It's a very interesting case.

I lost that case on laches which is very surprising, but it's still out there and you have to -- you need to know and advise your clients about that at all times.
THE CHAIRMAN: That's the landfill case; is that right?
A. That is the landfill case.
Q. You mentioned legislative intent. As an ALJ, what would be your deference to the interpretation of a statute by an agency?
A. I think you have to give large -- in fact, the case law says that you give deference to the interpretation of the statute by the -- an agency when there is reasonable application. You apply that statute and the agency's interpretation.

It will not be the ALJ's position to make law. That will be for the judiciary and ultimately for the Supreme Court and the Legislature to change any principles and precedents. That's something I think an ALJ will have to resist sometimes to do something you really like to in your heart and understand that you are administering the regulations and that's the process that we're dealing with.

I believe that if you worked on that matter specifically or you have access to information through your previous contacts that would or even give the appearance that there would -- could be some information coming out other than through the hearing process, those things I would waive.

It is my belief that that is a decision that the hearing officer and the judge should make. This is the Circuit Court judge makes and that would be reviewed by other bodies if they felt that the process was improper.
Q. As a Chief Administrative Law judge, how are you going to handle the case load? What kind of priorities are you going to set for cases? What are your thoughts on that?
A. The time table for getting started is relatively short. I think one of the initial things that I would like to do is to call upon each of the agencies in which we have been assigned services and responsibilities to determine, and they should have the records of what their case loads were last year, what the number of hearings were, what their turnaround time was.

I know the Tax and Revenue Division is doing statistics on how many of these special hearings they've held during the interim period, but that item needs to be brought together. I think the judges and their staff need to go through that and really develop as a team the way we'll approach the work load and the processing and the expertise.

I think this is one time that while there is an initial person that is going to theoretically say here is the rules and here is hiring the staff and because of the uniqueness of what needs to be put together and the fact that all of us who are running for judge positions Seat 1, 2 and 3 are going to be coming on board fresh, we need to develop a hearing procedure as a team method, though, I would be responsible for what occurred.
Q. Well, along that line, if you're responsible -- all the ALJs are elected. You don't really have any authority to fire or select or anything of that nature as with regard to ALJs. How do you manage that situation when you are ultimately responsible for the success of the individual ALJs and the division to some extent rests on your shoulders?

I presume as a part of the division of the Governor's office that we might get some guidance in that area. It's public relations work and one on one both with people you work with, your staff, and the people that you listen to their cases about.
Q. Have you ever been held in contempt or sanctioned by a court for any reason?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Have you sought directly or indirectly the pledge of a legislator's vote for you as -- for Seat 1 of the ALJ Division?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Are you aware of any solicitation without your authorization or request for a legislator's vote for you?
A. I'm aware of none.
Q. You mentioned a correction to your campaign expenditure filing and did I hear you correctly to change that to one seventy-nine? There is a discrepancy between some of the reports.
A. I would say it was 58 cents when I first started because I mailed one letter. Since that time, I've sent correspondence to the members of the Legislature announcing my candidacy. I have sent letters to friends around the state advising them of my candidacy and asking them after this Committee reports to possibly help me and I have paid my office for any copies of such things and reports and things that I do here and all that will be -- being reported.

My understanding is it will be the first quarter in January during -- according the Act, five days before the election and two weeks after, I believe.
Q. That's all the questions I have.
THE CHAIRMAN: Questions from the Members? Senator McConnell.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR MCCONNELL:
Q. Have you sought any endorsement from the General Assembly or the caucus of the General Assembly?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Have you participated in any formalized interview process outside of this one and the Bar Association's process?
A. No, I have not.

If they offer to buy me a lunch, I believe that can be done, but it would be reported on my economic interest statement declared as something that I've received. There is question in my mind if the attorney happened to be a registered lobbyist how would I treat them because that's -- they have a very different procedure and they would not be able if I was a House Member or Senator to buy me lunch, but I think the Judiciary is exempt in that area and I'd have to double check it, so I'd apply the standards of the South Carolina Code and the rulings of the South Carolina Commission as I know them to those situations.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any other questions? Mr. Beatty.
EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE BEATTY:
Q. Just one question that Mr. Elliott asked the previous candidate. This is going to require a lot of managerial
-- no, I shouldn't say experience, but acumen if you will, do you have any experience in that area?
A. I have a little experience in that area. I established the Legal Department in South Carolina Electric Cooperative Association. I was its first attorney and handled its budget from 1974 to 1985. We represented 22 corporations, electric cooperatives around the state and I provided and budgeted for training of board members and attorneys and their managers, so all that budgetary responsibility was mine.

I went into private practice in 1985 --
Q. Excuse me, not to cut you off, but how many people did you manage in this process, the previous experience you're talking about?
A. I had four people in my department. I had a budget of a little over $400,000.

I think we need to look at the dollars and cents and how we will mesh with the rest of the Governor's department in utilizing services to see how that would come together.

And let me correct something for the Senator because I don't want to mislead or even leave the impression of misleading on that budget. That $400,000 budget was for the entire association which I was a member. My specific individual budget was about 115,000, but as a group that we developed our budget to take to the board every year and I worked as general counsel on every department's budget, so that was the area.
THE CHAIRMAN: Senator.
RE-EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE BEATTY:
Q. If you needed help in setting up this -- I'm sorry, were you --
THE CHAIRMAN: No, sir. Why don't you finish up, Don?
Q. If you needed assistance in setting up the ALJ system, where would you look first?
A. Where would I look first in -- I would look first in consultation with the Division of Governors since that's because they've handled and

While there is uniformity in the Administrative Procedures Act, in my working with agencies in South Carolina, each has different specific concerns and they have generally come up in special regulations as to how they deal with that, so we have to take those into consideration.
Q. Would you rule out dealing with Court Administration?
A. No, I have no problem with working with Court Administration at all.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any more questions?
SENATOR MOORE: I have --
THE CHAIRMAN: Senator Moore.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR MOORE:
Q. Mr. Fantry, in regards to the interview by the Bar, when were you contacted that they had planned to interview you?
A. I think I got a call the night before the -- two days before the interview on a Monday evening.
Q. When did the interview take place?
A. It took place on Wednesday morning at 8:00 o'clock.
Q. What day is that, do you remember?
A. It was a Wednesday. It was a Wednesday. Excuse me, I'm sorry.
Q. The date --
A. The particular day, I had a deposition that day. I believe it was the 7th of January. I'll go back and look.
Q. Where did it take place? And I don't mean -- was it at their office, your office?
A. It is was at the South Carolina Bar Association's office.
Q. How many participants or interviewers?
A. There were three.
Q. Do you know what part of the state they resided?
A. There was a lady from Rock Hill, South Carolina. There was a lady from Myrtle Beach. And a staff member didn't sit in on that. I'm sorry, there were only two during hearing.
Q. Two interviewers?
A. Two interviewers.
Q. Did you know the interviewers prior to the --
A. No, I did not.
Q. When were you notified of the results?
A. I received a letter in the mail Monday.

Our next candidate is Samuel L. Finklea, III. Mr. Finklea. If you would please, raise your right hand.
SAMUEL L. FINKLEA, III, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: Am I pronouncing your name right? It's Finklea?
MR. FINKLEA: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have you have had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire summary?
MR. FINKLEA: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is that -- is it accurate?
MR. FINKLEA: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any points that need to be clarified or amendments that need to be made at this time?
MR. FINKLEA: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any objection to us making it a part of the record at this time?
MR. FINKLEA: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right, that shall be done.

1. Samuel L. Finklea, III
Home Address: Business Address:
7823 Charles Towne Drive Office of General Counsel
Columbia, SC 29209 S. C. Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201

4. He was divorced February 11, 1980; Samuel L. Finklea, III (moving party); Family Court, Richland County, South Carolina; one year's continuous separation. He has no children.

5. Military Service: S. C. Air National Guard; August 16, 1968 - present; Lieutenant Colonel; Serial No. ***-**-**** (formerly AF25112468); active reserve

6. He attended Duke University, 1963-1967, B.S. in Physics; the University of South Carolina, 1967-1975, M.S. in Physics in 1969 and Ph.D. in Physics in 1975; the University of South Carolina, 1981-1984, J.D.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:

National Institute of Trial Advocacy (Southern Reg), 1988

Natural Resources Seminar, S. C. Bar Mid-Year, 1989

Hazardous Waste and Superfund, ALI-ABA, 1989

Criminal Enforcement of Environmental Law, S. C. Bar, 1990

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990; ABA; Charlotte, North Carolina; 1990

EPA Region IV State-Federal Environmental Attorneys Conference; Atlanta, Georgia; 1991 and 1993

HMCRI Federal Environmental Restoration Conference; Vienna, Virginia; April, 1992

Bankruptcy for Government Lawyers, NAAG, New Orleans, 1993

9. Taught or Lectured:

"Environmental Enforcement on Military Installations;" Attorney General - Military Lawyers' Conference; 1987, 1989, 1990, 1992

| Printed Page 1680, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 1700, Feb. 10 |