Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The Senate assembled at 12:00 Noon, the hour to which it stood adjourned and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.
A quorum being present the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows:

Beloved, in Psalm 19 King David witnesses to God's glory in creation and the law. Hear verses 7 and 10:
"The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
The decrees of the Lord are sure,
making wise the simple;...
More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;..."
Let us pray.
Most gracious God and Father, You are our counselor and our companion on the way. We pause to renew and reaffirm our trust that You can help us in these days.
Arouse in our hearts the will to seek to know the mind of God as revealed in the life of Jesus in all our problems.
Through what is said and done here in these waning days of the session help us to enter into Your redemptive purposes for our people.
Kindle our imagination that we may see South Carolina as the State-she-ought-to-be in the sight of God, and the subdivisions as fruitful gardens of our God!
Amen.

At 12:03 P.M., on motion of Senator LEVENTIS, the Senate receded from business subject to a quorum being present.
At 12:15 P.M., a quorum being present, the Senate resumed.

The PRESIDENT called for Petitions, Memorials, Presentments of Grand Juries and such like papers.

May 28, 1997
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
Due to the nominee moving from the State, I respectfully request withdrawal from your consideration the appointment below.

Respectfully,
David M. Beasley

Initial Appointment, Advisory Board to the Head and Spinal Cord Injury Division of the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs, with term to commence June 30, 1995, and to expire June 30, 1999:
6th Congressional District:
Mr. Michael L. DeVinney, 200 Bentree Lane, Apartment H-1, Florence, S.C. 29501

The Senate acceded to the Governor's request and the Clerk was directed to return the appointment to the Governor.

On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, with unanimous consent, the Senate agreed to go into Executive Session prior to adjournment.

TO:       MEMBERS OF THE SENATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FROM:   THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
RE:       OPINION 1997-2
DATE:   JUNE 3, 1997

The Committee on Ethics has received the following question
which we feel should be answered through this Opinion:
Can a Member of the Senate use campaign funds to make donations to monument commissions created for the purpose of placing a monument on the Capitol Complex?
We will begin by quoting the following Section of The Ethics, Government Accountability, and Campaign Reform Act of 1991 with Amendments Effective January 12, 1995:
Section 8-13-1348(A). No candidate, committee, public official, or political party may use campaign funds to defray personal expenses which are unrelated to the campaign or the office if the candidate is an officeholder nor may these funds be converted to personal use. The prohibition of this subsection does not extend to the incidental personal use of campaign materials or equipment nor to an expenditure used to defray any ordinary expenses incurred in connection with an individuals's duties as a holder of elective office.[emphasis added]
This Committee has addressed many similar questions since the enactment of The Ethics, Government Accountability, and Campaign Reform Act of 1991. Most notably are Opinions 1993-4 and 1993-7.
Opinion 1993-4, says in part:
The Committee believes that the phrase "ordinary expenses incurred in connection with an individual's duties" as an officeholder is intentionally broad and that the determination whether a particular expense is permissible is by design left largely to the discretion of the Member.
In determining whether a particular expenditure is permissible, a Member should ask: (A) Is the expenditure "ordinary", that is, is the expense something "commonly encountered" or "usual" for a holder of public office in the Member's position?; (B) is the expense incurred in connection with the Member's duties as an office holder, that is, would the Member make the expenditure if he or she were not a holder of public office?; and will the Member realize no personal gain, aside from any benefit received by the public at large, from making the expenditure?
As we can see from these quoted sections of Opinion 1993-4, Members are allowed to expend campaign funds on those expenses that would not be incurred were it not for their office. Many examples are given in the entire text of 1993-4 as well as other Opinions of the Committee.
This question is very timely in that there are several monument commissions currently meeting to design and erect monuments that the General Assembly has approved. It has been stated that the donation of funds for these monuments will be sought from sources other than public moneys. It is a relatively safe assumption that Members of the Senate of South Carolina will be among the first who are formally solicited by these various monument commissions for donations.
Opinion 1993-7 states in part:
Other related provisions within the same act can often provide meaning or insight when interpreting a vague provision. Section 8-13-70 expressly authorizes an expenditure of campaign funds for charitable and other purposes upon final disbursement. One could reason that the presence of such specific language in Section 8-13-70 and its omission from Section 8-13-1348 means that a contribution to a charitable organization prior to final disbursement is not appropriate. This reasoning, however, ignores the fact that Section 8-13-1370 expressly restricts disbursement to several specified items, while Section 8-13-1348 is devoid of such restrictions. Logic dictates that those acts that are not prohibited should be considered appropriate.[emphasis added]
This is clearly an example of donations being sought because of the position held; i.e., that of State Senator. Participating in fundraising activities for organizations, churches, schools, colleges, universities, communities, families in dire situations, political parties, protecting historical landmarks such as buildings and their surrounding property, as well as adding to them, and a whole range of charitable giving and charitable good works is a longstanding function of elected officials, especially Members of the Senate of South Carolina. The Public of this state expect, and in many cases demands, that Members participate in various functions that benefit the aforementioned groups. The Ethics Act does not prohibit these actions by Members.

On motion of Senator LEATHERMAN, with unanimous consent, ordered printed in the Journal.

TO:       The Clerk of the Senate
The Clerk of the House
FROM:   Glenn F. McConnell, Chairman
Judicial Merit Selection Commission
DATE:   June 3, 1997

In compliance with the provisions of Act No. 119, 1975 S.C. Acts 122, it is respectfully requested that the following information be printed in the Journals of the Senate and the House.

Respectfully submitted,
Senator Glenn F. McConnell, Chairman
Representative F.G. Delleney, Jr., Vice-Chairman
Senator Edward E. Saleeby
Senator Thomas L. Moore
Representative Wm. Douglas Smith
Representative Ralph W. Canty
Harry M. Lightsey, Jr.
Judge Curtis G. Shaw
Richard S. Fisher

Date Draft Report Issued:   Wednesday, May 28, 1997
Date and Time Final Report Issued:   Tuesday, June 3, 1997,

at 10:00 a.m.

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is charged by law to consider the qualifications of candidates for the judiciary. The Commission has carefully investigated the candidates currently set for screening and found ten candidates qualified for judicial office. This report details the reasons for the Commission's findings and each candidate's qualifications as they relate to the Commission's evaluative criteria. Due to the large number of candidates in one of the races this round, it has been suggested that the Commission limit the number of candidates submitted to the General Assembly for consideration. The Commission would note that until July 1, 1997, it is without any statutory authority to limit the number of candidates forwarded to the Legislature for election. The Commission is cognizant of the need for members to be able to differentiate between candidates and, therefore, has attempted to provide as detailed a report as possible.
The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is composed of ten members and four of those members are non-legislators. The Commission has continued the more in-depth screening format started previously. The Commission has asked candidates offering for the Family Court their views on issues peculiar to service on that court. These questions were asked in an effort to provide the members of the General Assembly more information about candidates and their thought processes on issues relevant to their candidacies. The Commission has also engaged in a more probing inquiry into the depth of a candidate's experience in areas of practice that are germane to the office they are seeking. Candidates were asked to provide additional cases in domestic law that represent the breadth and scope of their family court practices. Candidates were also asked to provide an insight into their practices in the following areas: divorce and equitable division of property, child custody, abuse and neglect, adoption, and juvenile justice. The Commission feels that candidates should have familiarity with the subject matter of the courts for which they offer and feel that their responses should indicate their familiarity with most major areas of domestic law. Their written responses were incorporated into the transcript of each candidate's public hearing and can be referenced therein. In assessing each candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions, the Commission has placed candidates in either the "failed to meet expectations" or the "met expectations" category. The Commission feels that these categories should accurately impart the candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions.
The Commission has also created the Citizens Committees on Judicial Qualifications as an adjunct of the Commission. The Commission was concerned that since the decisions of our judiciary play such an important role in people's personal and professional lives that all South Carolinians should have a voice in the selection of those judges. It was this desire for broad-based grassroots participation that led the Commission to create the Citizens Committees on Judicial Qualifications. These committees composed of people from across the societal spectrum (doctors, lawyers, teachers, businessmen, and advocates; members of these committees are also diverse in their racial and gender backgrounds) were asked to advise the Commission on the judicial candidates in their regions. Each regional committee interviewed the candidates from its area and then others in that region who were familiar with the candidate either personally or professionally. Based on those interviews and its own investigation, each committee provided the Commission with a report on their candidates based on the Commission's evaluative criteria. The Commission then used these reports from the committees as a tool for further investigation of the candidate if the committee's report so warranted.
The Commission conducts a thorough investigation of each candidate's professional, personal, and financial affairs, and holds public hearings during which it questions each candidate on a wide variety of issues. The Commission's investigation focuses on its evaluative criteria. These evaluative criteria include the following: constitutional qualifications; ethical fitness; professional and academic ability; character; reputation; physical health; mental health; and judicial temperament. The Commission's investigation includes the following:
(1)   survey of the bench and bar;
(2)   SLED and FBI investigation;
(3)   credit investigation;
(4)   grievance investigation;
(5)   study of application materials;
(6)   verification of ethics compliance;
(7)   search of newspaper articles;
(8)   conflict of interest investigation;
(9)   court schedule study;
(10)   study of appellate record;
(11)   court observation; and
(12)   investigation of complaints.
While the law provides that the Commission is to make findings as to qualifications, the Commission views its role as also including an obligation to consider candidates in the context of the judiciary on which, if elected, they will serve and, to some degree, govern. To that end, the Commission inquires as to the quality of justice delivered in the courtrooms of South Carolina and seeks to impart, through its questioning, the view of the public it represents as to matters of legal knowledge and ability, judicial temperament, and the absoluteness of the Judicial Canons as to recusal for conflict of interest, prohibition of ex parte communication, and the disallowance of the acceptance of gifts.
The Commission expects each candidate to possess a basic level of legal knowledge and ability, to have experience that would be applicable to the office sought, and to exhibit a strong adherence to codes of ethical behavior. These expectations are all important and excellence in one category does not make up for deficiencies in another.
This report is the culmination of weeks of investigatory work and public hearings. The Commission takes its responsibilities very seriously as it believes that the quality of justice delivered in South Carolina's courtrooms is directly affected by the thoroughness of its screening process. Please carefully consider the contents of this report as we believe it will help you make a more informed decision. If you would like to review portions of the screening transcript or other public information about a candidate before it is printed in the Journal, please contact John Hazzard at 212-6610 or Beth Atwater at 734-3125.
This report conveys the Commission's findings as to the qualifications of all candidates currently offering for election to the Circuit Court and Family Court.

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional Provisions:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Armstrong meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Mr. Armstrong was born on August 12, 1956. He is 40 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Mr. Armstrong also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1982.

(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Mr. Armstrong.
Mr. Armstrong demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Armstrong reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association
(c)   Jasper County Bar Association
(d)   Beaufort County Bar Association
(e)   Children's Justice Act Task Force
Mr. Armstrong provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   University of South Carolina Alumni Association
(b)   Beaufort YMCA
Mr. Armstrong testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Armstrong testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Armstrong testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Mr. Armstrong to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Armstrong attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
1990 - 1995   Focused primarily on CLE courses in evidence and criminal law.
1995 - Present   Focused primarily on CLE courses in general civil law.
Mr. Armstrong provided that he has taught or given lectures on the following:
(a)   Presentation to "at risk" teens on the court system at Santee, South Carolina in March 1996.
(b)   Lectured and been a panel member for Leadership Beaufort and Senior Leadership Beaufort.
(c)   Presentation to the S.C. Association of Legal Investigators on becoming a more effective witness.
(d)   Appeared on several television shows in the Beaufort and Hilton Head area regarding criminal law.
(e)   Given presentations at Guardian Ad Litem training programs in Hampton and Jasper counties.
Mr. Armstrong provided that he has authored an article entitled, "Up From the Lowcountry, Who is this New Kid on the Block?", in the Fall 1993 issue of the South Carolina Trial Lawyer Bulletin.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Armstrong did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Armstrong did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Armstrong has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Armstrong was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Armstrong is divorced and has two children, ages 17 and 15.
Mr. Armstrong reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)   Physical Health:
Mr. Armstrong appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental Stability:
Mr. Armstrong appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Armstrong was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1982. Upon graduating from law school, he clerked for the Honorable William T. Howell. From 1983 to 1985, Mr. Armstrong was the Public Defender for Allendale, Hampton, and Jasper counties. From 1985 to 1990, he was an Assistant Solicitor for the 14th Judicial Circuit, and from 1990 to 1995, Mr. Armstrong was Deputy Solicitor for the 14th Judicial Circuit. Since July of 1995, Mr. Armstrong has been a sole practitioner with a general law practice.
Mr. Armstrong described his practice since becoming a sole practitioner as 40% criminal, 35% domestic, and 25% civil. He said that 75% of his court appearances over the past five years have been in state court, and that 75% of his cases over the last five years went to a jury. He said that he served as sole counsel in all of his cases except for ten death penalty cases where he served as co-counsel.
At the Commission's request, Mr. Armstrong provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in family law. His letter describes cases in the areas of Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Adoption, Abuse and Neglect, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Armstrong's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.
Mr. Armstrong provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:
(a)   Hughes v. Hughes, 95-DR-18-1522, 95-DR-18-1526. Mr. Armstrong represented the wife in a divorce action in Dorchester County. The issues involved adultery, physical cruelty, and custody.
(b)   Broxton v. Broxton, 95-DR-25-333. Mr. Armstrong represented the wife in a divorce action in Hampton County. She was granted a divorce on the ground of adultery.
(c)   Rivers v. Boyd, et al., 96-CP-27-95. This was an action brought on behalf of the heirs of Mattie Rivers to quiet title to land in Jasper County.
(d)   State v. Elkins, 436 S.E.2d 178 (S.C. 1993). This was the first death penalty case in which Mr. Armstrong gave a closing argument during the sentencing phase. The jury returned the death penalty.
(e)   State v. McConnell, 449 S.E.2d 778 (Ct. App. 1994). Mr. Armstrong was appointed to be the special prosecutor in Dorchester County. The defendant was convicted of Reckless Homicide.
Mr. Armstrong personally handled one domestic appeal, as attorney for the respondent. Jasper County Department of Social Services v. William Bostic and Jackie Bostic. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court in Memorandum Opinion, Number 92-MO-181, filed July 6, 1992.
The Commission determined that Mr. Armstrong had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Armstrong's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Beach meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Mr. Beach was born on May 15, 1947. He is 49 years old and a resident of Colleton County. Mr. Beach provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1972.

(2)   Ethical fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Beach.
Mr. Beach demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Beach is engaged in the operation of a title insurance company known as Tidewater Title. The business is a sole-proprietorship begun by Mr. Beach in 1980 and continued to the present. There are no employees of the business.
Mr. Beach reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   Member, Commission on Lawyer Conduct (1997 to 2000)
(b)   Member, Board of Commissioners on Grievance and Discipline, South Carolina Supreme Court (1993 to 1996)
(c)   Member, South Carolina Bar Practice and Procedure Committee, Default Judgment subcommittee
(d)   Member, South Carolina Bar Criminal Law subcommittee
(e)   Member, South Carolina Bar Family Law Section
(f)   Member, American Bar Association Family Law Section, Divorce Laws and Procedure Committee, Trial Techniques Committee; Alimony, Maintenance, and Child Support Committee
(g)   Member, South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association
(h)   Member, Association of Trial Lawyers of America
(I)   Member, South Carolina Trial Lawyers, Family Law Section
(j)   House of Delegates, South Carolina Bar Association (1995 to 1997)
Mr. Beach provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Board Member, Habitat for Humanity
(b)   Board Member, Colleton County Rice Festival Committee
(c)   Local Federal Emergencies Management Advisory Group
(d)   Chairman, Colleton County Old Jail Restoration Commission
(e)   Chairman, Colleton Jail Commission
Mr. Beach testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Beach testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Beach testified that he had campaign expenditures of approximately $127.50.

(3)   Professional and academic ability:
The Commission found Mr. Beach to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Beach provided that during the previous five years he has attended many CLE courses through the law school and the South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association. Mr. Beach has taken about twice the required continuing legal education courses.
Mr. Beach reported that he had lectured on domestic law for a paralegal course sponsored by the Technical College of the Lowcountry. The subject of the lecture was the substantive law of divorce in South Carolina.
Mr. Beach reported the following articles that he has written and that have been published:
(a)   "Releasing Names of Biologic Parents, Justice or an Accident of Birth", South Carolina Lawyer, May-June 1996.
(b)   "Recanted Testimony, the Red-Headed Stepchild", South Carolina Lawyer, May-June 1996.
(c)   Mr. Beach has also for the last two years written a column on law and politics for the Press and Standard, a local newspaper.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Beach did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Beach did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Beach has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Beach was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Beach is married and has one child, age 23.
Mr. Beach was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army in 1969. Mr. Beach reported that he served on TDY and inactive reserve status until his honorable discharge in 1977 as a captain.
Mr. Beach served on the Colleton County Council as a member from 1978 to 1994. Mr. Beach served the first 14 years as vice-chairman. Mr. Beach also served as an appointed member of the Low Country Council of Governments from 1980 to 1994, serving one term as chairman of the board.
Mr. Beach was an unsuccessful family court candidate in 1994. Mr. Beach was also defeated in two elections for the South Carolina House of Representatives (1980 and 1990) and in a bid for reelection to the Colleton County Council in 1994.
Mr. Beach reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)   Physical health:
Mr. Beach appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental stability:
Mr. Beach appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Beach was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1972.
Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Beach has practiced as an associate with the firm of Ackerman, Butler and Boensch from 1972 to 1973. Mr. Beach provided that he handled commercial law almost exclusively although he did some domestic cases. Since 1973, Mr. Beach has practiced with the firm of McLeod, Unger and Frasier doing general civil litigation, domestic, criminal, and plaintiff's personal injury cases. Since 1975, Mr. Beach reported that he has handled Social Security cases and has been general counsel for a savings and loan association.
Mr. Beach described his practice over the last 5 years as 20% civil, 20% criminal, and 60% domestic. He said that he appears in federal court 10% of the time and in state court the other 90%. Mr. Beach indicated that over the last 5 years 25% of his practice has involved jury matters and 75% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.
Mr. Beach listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)   State v. Carlos Elliott, 88-GS-15-135, 136, and 138. Capital murder case tried to its conclusion. The case involved sensitive issues as to mitigation. The defendant received a life sentence.
(b)   Alewine v. Alewine, 89-MO-023 (1989). A complex divorce and child custody case arising out of a long-term marriage. Mr. Beach provided that it was the most emotional case in which he had ever been involved.
(c)   S.C. D.S.S. v. Rick Herndon, 96-DR-08-222. This was a child custody and termination of parental rights case. Before Mr. Beach became involved with the case and brought it to a conclusion, the matter had been litigated for almost eight years.
(d)   State v. Anthony Sherrill, 97-UP-219 (1997). A criminal case involving the "chop shop" statute which Mr. Beach has appealed on the issue of recanted testimony.
(e)   Christopher Allen Walker v. Tonya Amanda Taylor, 95-DR-15-753. Case involving the adoption of minor children by a single male uncle living with another male at the time. The adoption by the male uncle was granted.
Mr. Beach provided that he does not handle many appeals and refers most of those cases to appellate attorneys. The only domestic appeal that Mr. Beach reported as being involved with was Alewine v. Alewine, 89-MO-023 (1989). Although, Mr. Beach tried the case and assisted with the appeal, he did not write the brief nor did he argue the case before the court. Mr. Beach has appealed both civil and criminal cases.
At the Commission's request, Mr. Beach supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Beach's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.
The Commission determined that Mr. Beach had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Beach's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional Provisions:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Clark meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Judge Clark was born on October 13, 1953. He is 43 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Judge Clark also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Judge Clark.
Judge Clark demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Clark and his wife own, and his wife operates, Advertising Products/Southern Trophy & Awards.
Judge Clark reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   Greenwood County Bar Association -- Secretary/Treasurer 1984-86
(c)   National College of Probate Judges
(d)   South Carolina Association of Probate Judges
President, 1988-89
Assn. Representative to Assn. of Counties Board of Directors, 1989-90
Mental Health Committee Chairperson, 1987-88 and 1989-90
Probate Code Committee Chairperson, 1991-Present (6 yearly appointments)
Judge Clark provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Ninety Six Elementary School PTO -- Secretary, 1991-92
(b)   Ninety Six Elementary School Improvement Council -- Member, 1992-1993; Chairperson, 1993-94
(c)   Edgewood Middle School PTO and Athletic Booster Club
Judge Clark testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Clark testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Judge Clark testified that he has campaign expenditures over $100, and that he has reported those expenditures to the House and Senate Ethics Committees as required by law.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Clark to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Clark attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
(a)   Attended all yearly Probate Judges JCLE's.
(b)   1993-95 -- Attended annual week-long sessions at National College of Probate Judges
(c)   Attended all South Carolina Bar-sponsored Probate and Estate CLE's and other training seminars on Estate Planning and Trust.
(d)   In the area of domestic law, attended "Hot Tips from the Experts" in July 1995.
(e)   1996 -- "Child Custody and Visitation" and "Family Law in South Carolina."
Judge Clark provided that he taught/lectured on the following law-related courses in the last five years:
(a)   1997 -- S.C. Probate Judges Association Meeting
Prepared materials and presented "The Omnibus Adult Protection Act"
(b)   1996 -- S.C. Probate Court Judges Association Meeting
Prepared materials and presented "The Elective Share under the Uniform Probate Code"
(c)   1995 -- Probate Court JCLE
Co-planner and co-moderator of the Third Annual Bench/Bar JCLE
(d)   1995 -- Court Administration
Training Lecturer for new and existing Probate Court Judges on "Laws Other than Probate and Commitment Laws that Affect the Probate Court"
(e)   1993 -- Court Administration
Lecturer to new Probate Court Judges and some court staff on Guardianships and Health Care Proceedings.
(f)   1993 -- Probate Judges Bench/Bar CLE
Discussion leader and panel member
(g)   1992 -- Court Administration
Led training sessions on Guardianships and Health Care Proceedings for Associate Probate Judges and Probate Court personnel.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Judge Clark did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Clark did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Clark has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Judge Clark was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Judge Clark is married and has four children, ages 14, 12, 8, and 3.

(6)   Physical Health:
Judge Clark appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental Stability:
Judge Clark appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Judge Clark was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. In January 1978, Judge Clark opened a sole practitioner office in Ninety Six, S.C., in the general practice of law. In January 1984, he joined with another attorney and moved his practice to Greenwood, S.C. He also became Probate Court Associate Judge. In January 1987, Judge Clark was elected as Greenwood County Probate Judge and has served in that position since that time.
Judge Clark stated that during the last five years, 10% of his hearings have been as special referee for the circuit court, and 90% have been as Probate Judge. Over the last five years, 100% of his cases have been civil, non-jury.
At the Commission's request, Judge Clark provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in family law prior to his election as Probate Judge. He handled cases in the areas of Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Adoptions, and Abuse and Neglect.
Judge Clark also noted that there are similarities between presiding over a Probate Court and a Family Court: the judge is the sole determiner of fact and law; the cases generally involve family disputes that often are emotional.
Judge Clark's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.
Judge Clark provided the following as his 5 most significant orders or opinions:
(a)   Kristine S. C. by her duly-appointed Guardian ad Litem, Sarah Frances Childs v. Pauline Williams Norman as Personal Representative of the Estate of Odell Norman, Sr., Estate File No. 93ES240008. This case involved a claim by an illegitimate child for an "omitted child's" statutory share of an estate. Judge Clark's ruling was upheld on appeal by the Circuit Court, Judgment Roll No. 49971.
(b)   Estate of Donald T. Redick, deceased, Kym I. Redick, Personal Representative, Estate Case No. 89ES2400256. This estate involved problems in connection with misappropriation of estate funds by the Personal Representative. The issues included proof and determination of a claim, removal of a personal representative, tracing of estate funds and seizing items purchased, and appointment of a special administrator to replace the personal representative.
(c)   In the Matter of Gertrude Murphy, Beth Harris and Charles Murphy, Co-Guardians, Guardianship Case No. 97GC2400017. This was an action brought by the Family Court Guardian, appointed pursuant to the Omnibus Adult Protection Act, to be appointed Guardian in Probate Court proceedings.
(d)   Emerson E. Westwood, III v. Thomas H. Westwood, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ruth H. Westwood, Case No. 92ES3600171. This was a classic will contest that Judge Clark heard as Special Probate Judge for Newberry County. It is significant for the depth of testimony and comprehensive review of case law on the topic.
(e)   In the Matter of Estate of Frank Jones, Jr., deceased In Re: Claim of Leatherwood, Walker, Todd and Mann, P.C., attorneys, Estate File - Drawer 548, Package 56. This case involved a claim for attorney's fees against an estate. The ruling dealt with whether a contract existed between the law firm and the estate representative and standards of entitlement for attorney fees. This case is currently on Petition to the South Carolina Supreme Court.
Judge Clark handled one domestic appeal as an attorney: Clayton B. Allen, Petitioner - Appellant v. William Carlos Allen, Respondent. The case was dismissed several weeks before scheduled arguments due to an opinion issued by the Supreme Court in the case of White v. White. Judge Clark and the opposing counsel agreed that the Supreme Court case was controlling on their issue.
The Commission determined that Judge Clark has engaged in an active trial practice, and that he had an active trial practice in the Family Courts prior to becoming Probate Judge, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Judge Clark's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional Provisions:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Ms. DeWitt meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Ms. DeWitt was born on August 25, 1955. She is 41 years old. She has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Ms. DeWitt also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1983.

(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Ms. DeWitt.
Ms. DeWitt demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Ms. DeWitt reported that she is President of the Beaufort County Public Defender Corporation. She is also Secretary of the Beaufort County Family Bar Association.
Ms. DeWitt reported that she was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   Beaufort County Bar Association
(c)   Beaufort County Family Court Bar Association, Secretary
(d)   American Bar Association
Ms. DeWitt provided that she was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Hendersonville Baptist Church, Walterboro, South Carolina
(b)   Shell Point Elementary School PTO, Burton, South Carolina
(c)   Battery Creek High School PTO & Booster, Burton, South Carolina
Ms. DeWitt testified that she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Ms. DeWitt testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Ms. DeWitt testified that she has campaign expenditures over $100, and that she has reported those expenditures to the House and Senate Ethics Committees as required by law.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Ms. DeWitt to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Ms. DeWitt attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
3/21/97   Hidden Issues in Cases Involving Children
12/6/96   1996 Family Court Bench/Bar Update
11/8/96   Auto Insurance Update
4/12/96   Understanding the New SC Criminal Rules
1/12/96   Worker's Compensation Practice in SC
11/17/95   Marital Litigation Update
8/24/95   The Proposed New SC Rules of Evidence
1/7/95     Civility in the Profession
3/18/94   DUI Defense
11/19/93   Workers' Compensation Practice in SC
10/2/92   SC Public Defender Association Annual Meeting
9/18/92   Criminal Practice in SC
5/26/92   Ethical Issues in Criminal Defense
Ms. DeWitt provided that she taught/lectured on the following law-related courses in the past five years:
(a)   Legal and Ethical Issues in Management, Webster University, Beaufort, SC campus, MA/MBA program.
(b)   Business Law, Webster University, Beaufort, SC campus, MA/MBA program.
(c)   Criminal Evidence, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Beaufort, SC.
(d)   Family Law, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(e)   Interviewing and Counseling, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(f)   Criminal Law, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Walterboro, SC.
(g)   History of Beaufort Public Defender's Office, Port Royal Club, Beaufort, SC.
(h)   The Importance of Education for Women, Battery Creek High School, Beaufort, SC.
(I)   Careers in the Legal Profession, Technical College of the Lowcountry, Beaufort, SC.
(j)   Best Budget Proposals, SC Public Defender Association Conference. Myrtle Beach, SC.
(k)   Insanity Defense, U.S. Law, WHHI-TV, Hilton Head, SC.
(l)   Women and the Law, Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, SC.
(m)   Criminal Justice System, Panel Member, Leadership Beaufort, Beaufort, SC.
(n)   Pre-Trial Motions Practice, Public Defender Training Conference, Columbia, SC.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Ms. DeWitt did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against her. The Commission's investigation of Ms. DeWitt did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Ms. DeWitt has handled her financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Ms. DeWitt was punctual and attentive in her dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with her diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Ms. DeWitt is married and has five children, ages 24, 22, 21, 17 and 8.
Ms. DeWitt was the recipient of the Equal Employment Opportunity Certificate of Appreciation for significant contributions to the Federal Women's Program, MCAS/Beaufort, SC in 1993, and she also received the South Carolina Bar Certificate of Appreciation, for service as Mock Trial Competition Coach in 1985.
(6)   Physical Health:
Ms. DeWitt appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.

(7)   Mental Stability:
Ms. DeWitt appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Ms. DeWitt was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1983. Upon graduating from law school, Ms. DeWitt worked for the Neighborhood Legal Assistance Program in Walterboro, SC, and served as managing attorney from 1984-1988. She served as Chief Public Defender in the Beaufort County Public Defender Office from July 1988 until April 1993. Since April of 1993, Ms. DeWitt has been in private practice as a sole practitioner, with 60% of her cases in the area of domestic law.
Ms. DeWitt has had one civil jury trial and one criminal trial in federal courts over the past five years. Since 1993, she has had 10-20 appearances per month in Family Court; Magistrate Court bench or jury trials six to seven times per month; General Sessions Court an average of four times per month for pleas or motions, eight completed trials; Master-in-Equity motions average six per year, one trial in four years; Common Pleas motions six times per year, one completed trial in four years, roster meetings and pre-trial conferences six times per year.
At the Commission's request, Ms. DeWitt provided a letter to the Commission that detailed her experience in domestic law. She has handled cases in the areas of Custody/Visitation, Divorce/Equitable Division, Divorce/Physical Cruelty, Divorce/Drug Use, Divorce/Adultery, Common-Law Marriage, Annulment, Divorce/One-Year Separation, Child Support, Paternity and Support, Adoption, Abuse and Neglect, and Juvenile Justice. Ms. DeWitt's letter was incorporated into the transcript of her public hearing.
Ms. DeWitt provided the following as her 5 most significant litigated matters:
(a)   State v. Christopher Lee Franklin, 425 S.E.2d 758 (S.C. App. 1992), Reh. Den., Cert. Denied. In this case, Ms. DeWitt represented the 15-year-old defendant charged with the murder of his father and stepmother. This case is significant because of the rarity of the crime, the brutality of the stepmother's killing, and the public's desire for an excuse or explanation. The legal issues at trial involved request for venue change, voluntariness of a child's confession, and sufficiency of evidence to give a manslaughter or self-defense instructions.
(b)   Case No. 83-DR-15-450. In this case a 23-year-old alcoholic had a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old. They married due to pregnancy, but there was physical abuse and drunkenness by the husband during marriage. At age 15, the wife vacated the home with the nine-month-old child. The husband burglarized the new residence and snatched the baby after a physical altercation with the wife. Ms. DeWitt represented the wife. The paternal grandparents and paternal aunt and uncle were allowed to intervene. The significant issues that arose in litigation were: Is age, lack of education and inability to support a child without public assistance sufficient for a finding of unfitness? Is a finding of mother's unfitness required to award custody to a third party or does the child's best interests control? Should the father or his family be awarded custody when the child is the result of the father committing criminal sexual conduct with a minor? Should a court temporarily maintain the status quo when possession of the child was obtained by the commission of a crime?
(c)   Case No. 95-DR-07-27. In this case Ms. DeWitt represented the husband in an action for equitable division of property, alimony and attorney's fees. The premarital net worth of the husband was $264,000, and the net worth when the litigation commenced was $4,200,000. With the assistance of accountants, Ms. DeWitt identified and traced premarital assets and appreciation due to market conditions. She identified and valued marital assets, calculated marital portion of debt on assets and tax consequences of various settlement alternatives. Negotiated settlement agreement whereby Wife and Husband were both satisfied and adequately provided for.
(d)   State v. Barbara Prince. In this case, the decedent's body was found in a young mother's mobile home while she was incarcerated on unrelated charges. There was a pre-trial motion to suppress the testimony of the four-year-old son on grounds that he was not competent to testify. This case was significant because competency of child witnesses often arises in Family Court and General Sessions Court.
(e)   Case No. 94-DR-07-1522. In this case, Ms. DeWitt served as Guardian ad Litem for six- and eight-year olds whose divorced mother died unexpectedly. The father appeared at the funeral to take them to Kentucky. The children had not seen the father in four years and there was a large child support arrearage. The grandparents who had significant connection with the children were awarded temporary custody at an emergency hearing and Ms. DeWitt was appointed. This case is significant because it demonstrates the importance of a Guardian's responsibility to thoroughly investigate and verify the facts relayed by the parties.
Ms DeWitt has handled one domestic appeal: Hess v. Hess. Court of Appeals, Unpublished Opinion No. 96-UP-468, submitted December 3, 1996, filed December 16, 1996. Ms. DeWitt represented the Respondent/Mother. Father appealed award of custody to Mother and property division. Custody award affirmed. Equitable distribution award to Mother vacated and remanded.
The Commission determined that Ms. DeWitt had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Ms. DeWitt's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Dukes meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Mr. Dukes was born on November 25, 1961. He is 35 years old and a resident of Beaufort County. Mr. Dukes provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1987.

(2)   Ethical fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Dukes.
Mr. Dukes demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Dukes reported that he is a fifty-percent owner in a corporation known as Frogmore Aerospace, Inc. Frogmore Aerospace owns a single aircraft which is leased out for use.
Mr. Dukes reported that he was sued by the client of another attorney regarding an agreement that he and the other attorney reached concerning the disbursement of some insurance proceeds in 1993. The other attorney was uninsured. Mr. Dukes reported that his insurance company settled the lawsuit. Based on its questioning of the candidate concerning this matter, the Commission is satisfied that Mr. Duke's actions in this incident should not disqualify him from judicial service. Mr. Dukes reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   American Bar Association
Mr. Dukes provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Rotary Club
(b)   Beaufort Yacht Club
(c)   Boys and Girls Club
(d)   Leadership Beaufort
Mr. Dukes testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Dukes testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Dukes testified that he had campaign expenditures of approximately $65.00.

(3)   Professional and academic ability:
The Commission found Mr. Dukes to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Dukes provided that during the previous five years he has attended the following CLE courses: Legal Ethics; Estate Planning and Probate in South Carolina (1992); Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts (1993); Family Mediation Training (1994); Ten things you need to know before the end of the year (1995); The Masters in Trial (1996); Family Court Bench/Bar Update (1996); Ethics for Family Law Practitioners (1996).
Mr. Dukes reported that he had lectured numerous times on Family Law matters at the Technical College of the Lowcountry Paralegal Program.
Mr. Dukes reported that he has written and published numerous articles for the Beaufort Gazette on a wide variety of domestic law topics.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Dukes did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Dukes did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Dukes has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Dukes was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Dukes is married with no children.
Mr. Dukes has served as a member of the Beaufort County Planning Board since 1992. Currently, he serves as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Board. He serves as Chairman of the Port Royal Island subcommittee and is a past member of the Lady Island's/St. Helena Island subcommittee.
Mr. Dukes reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "CV".

(6)   Physical health:
Mr. Dukes appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental stability:
Mr. Dukes appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Dukes was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1987.
Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Dukes has practiced law with the firm of Dukes, Williams, Infinger & Meeks, P.A. Mr. Dukes stated that his practice has consisted of Domestic Law, General Practice, Personal Injury, and Criminal Litigation. He provides that he has practiced primarily in the Family Court for the last five years.
Mr. Dukes described his practice over the last 5 years as 25% civil, 10% criminal, and 65% domestic. He said that he appears in federal court 2% of the time and in state court the other 98%. Mr. Dukes indicated that over the last 5 years 15% of his practice has involved jury matters and 85% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.
Mr. Dukes listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)   Ben Tillman Woods v. Lesa Brown Woods, 92-DR-07-933 and 94-DR-07-193. Case was for divorce, equitable division, and custody. The second case was an attempt by the mother to modify the original custody order based on a change in circumstances. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant because in the first case the tender years presumption had not yet been abolished increasing the difficulty in winning custody of the 8-year-old girl for the father.
(b)   Rick McElroy v. Cynthia Sharon McElroy, 96-DR-07-433. A custody, division, and child support case in which Mr. Dukes represented the father. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant in that it involved disturbing allegations of alcohol and drug abuse, child abuse, adultery, and allegations of "brain washing" the children. Also, the Final Order was novel because it allowed for a reconsideration without causing a change in circumstances.
(c)   Michael D. Boffeli v. Angelique T. Boffeli Moran, 95-DR-07-764. Mr. Dukes represented the mother in this modification of custody case. Mr. Dukes believes that the case is significant because it involved unusual UCCJA questions and Moore vs. Moore (third-party custody) questions.
(d)   Warner Advertising, Inc. v. The Cabral Company, Inc., 92-CP-07-1520, 94-UP-271. An accord and satisfaction case in which Warner sued Cabral for funds owed for advertising work. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant for the economic duress defense employed during the case.
(e)   Amerlink v. Julia Frazier, Rebecca Hall and Joe Frazier, Inc., 89-CP-07-0430. The case involved a mechanic's lien claim and a counterclaim for lost endorsement and entertainment fees. Mr. Dukes believes the case is significant because it was his first complex litigation involving an appeal and also because Joe Frazier (former world heavyweight boxing champion) appeared for the trial.
Mr. Dukes provided the following domestic appeal he has personally handled:
(a)   William C. Miller v. Marianne M. Mikell, 96-UP-21 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed Jan. 9, 1996).
At the Commission's request, Mr. Dukes supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Dukes' response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.
The Commission determined that Mr. Dukes had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Dukes' temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Fuge meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Mr. Fuge was born on October 4, 1947. He is 49 years old and a resident of Beaufort County. Mr. Fuge provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1974.

(2)   Ethical fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Fuge.
Mr. Fuge demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Fuge provided that he was sued by a former client, Susan Crowley. She alleged legal malpractice. Mr. Fuge was granted summary judgment. That order was appealed and reversed. A motion to reconsider the reversal was filed and granted. Currently, that motion is under advisement by the South Carolina Supreme Court. Based on its questioning of the candidate concerning this matter, the Commission's is satisfied that Mr. Fuge's actions in this incident should not disqualify him from judicial service.
Mr. Fuge reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   South Carolina Bar House of Delegates (1995)
(c)   Lawyers Caring About Lawyers Committee (1990 to present)
(d)   Family Law Section of the South Carolina Bar; Secretary (1994), Vice-Chairman (1995), and Chairman (1996)
(e)   South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association (1979 to present)
(f)   Chairman, South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association Family Law Section (1986 to 1987)
(g)   Beaufort County Bar Association (1974 to present)
(h)   Association of Trial Lawyers of America (1979 to 1995).
Mr. Fuge testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Fuge testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Fuge testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)   Professional and academic ability:
The Commission found Mr. Fuge to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Fuge provided that he has continuously exceeded the minimum continuing legal education requirements. Mr. Fuge has also been very active in continuing legal education.
Mr. Fuge was appointed commissioner on the South Carolina Supreme Court Commission on Continuing Legal Education and Specialization from 1990 to 1996. Mr. Fuge served as Secretary from 1994 to 1995 and as Chairman from 1995 to 1996.
Mr. Fuge has served on the Family Law Section Council of the South Carolina Bar from 1988 to the present. He has served as Secretary, Vice-Chairman, and as Chairman from 1996 to 1997.
Mr. Fuge served as chairman of the Family Law Section of the South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association from 1986 to 1987.
Mr. Fuge is currently Chairman of the Supreme Court Family Law Specialization Advisory Board.
Mr. Fuge reported that he served as city prosecutor for the City of Beaufort from 1979 to 1981.
Mr. Fuge listed the following CLE's at which he has been a speaker or moderator as follows:
(a)   South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association 28th Annual Convention - "Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act" (1985).
(b)   South Carolina Trial Lawyer's Association 29th Annual Convention - "Alimony" (1986).
(c)   South Carolina Bar 1988 Annual Meeting - "Trends: Retirement & Pensions" (1988).
(d)   Timely Topics in Family Court - "Getting and Keeping Military Benefits" (1989).
(e)   Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts - "Third Party Litigation - Establishing a Client's Interest in Property Owned by a Third Party" (1991).
(f)   Family Law Issues - "The 1990 Alimony Statute and other Alimony issues" (1990).
(g)   Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts - "Returning Military Dependents to the United States: The Survivor's Benefits Plan in Marital Dissolution Actions" (1990).
(h)   Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts Rides Again - "Other Alimony - What is it; and Sequestration to Preserve Assets" (1992).
(i)   Mid-Year Meeting of the South Carolina Bar - "Moderator - Family Law Section" (1997).
Mr. Fuge has also presented over the last four or five years, the Law School for Non-Lawyers for Beaufort County on behalf of the Young Lawyer's Division of the South Carolina Bar.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Fuge did not reveal any evidence of complaints or grievances made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Fuge did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Fuge has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
Mr. Fuge provided in his application that while he was in undergraduate school at the University of South Carolina in 1967 and 1968, he was involved in two fraternity party incidents in which a number of people were rounded up for being too loud that resulted in his being charged with disorderly conduct or some other minor infraction. On both occasions, Mr. Fuge reported that he was found not guilty.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Fuge was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Fuge is married with three children, ages 25, 21, and 21. One child is a housewife and two are university students.
Mr. Fuge reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)   Physical health:
Mr. Fuge appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental stability:
Mr. Fuge appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Fuge was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1974.
Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Fuge has practiced law in the firm of Dowling, Dowling, Sanders & Dukes, P.A., from 1974 to 1976, as a sole practitioner from 1976 to 1977, in the firm of Fuge & Denton, P.A., from 1977 to 1980, in the firm of Harvey & Battey, P.A., from 1980 to 1995, and since 1995 as a sole practitioner in Peter L. Fuge, P.A. Mr. Fuge provided that since the early 1980's, the general emphasis of his practice has been in domestic relations.
Mr. Fuge described his practice over the last 5 years as 10% civil, 5% criminal, and 85% domestic. He said that he has appeared in federal court approximately once or twice a year and in state court once or twice per week or more. Mr. Fuge indicated that over the last 5 years 3% of his practice has involved jury matters and 97% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.
Mr. Fuge listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)   State of South Carolina v. John Path., 277 S.C. 126, 284 S.E.2d 221 (19__). A death penalty case. Mr. Fuge was required to try, appeal, and re-try the case. He spent nearly 1000 hours working for free representing the defendant.
(b)   Rosemary Murphy v. James Lee Murphy, ___ S.C. ___, 461 S.E.2d 39 (19__). A divorce action in which Mr. Fuge represented the wife. The lower court decided, sua sponte, to appoint a sequestrator to accomplish the division of certain marital properties. Acting at times, pro se and at other times with counsel, Mr. Murphy, who is an attorney, has filed every conceivable motion and contested every order in one fashion or another. The appeal by Mr. Murphy was dismissed and he has contested the interest award on the judgment. Mr. Fuge is still representing Mrs. Murphy.
(c)   Hallie H. Hepner v. Lucy Hepner, 91-UP-175 (1991). Case involving an attempt by a father to win primary custody of his young daughter. This was the father's third or fourth marriage. Mr. Fuge was able to overcome the tender years doctrine by showing that his client possessed superior parenting skills and that it was in the best interests of the minor daughter that custody be awarded to the father.
(d)   Donald l. Parris v. Ruth H. Parris, ___ S.C. ___, 460 S.E.2d 571 (19__). Case in which the father was awarded custody of his son and the mother appealed claiming that the Court was guilty of gender bias against working women. Mr. Fuge believes that he presented an unbiased and factual case which demonstrated that the father exhibited a more active role in the day-to-day rearing of the child and that it was in the best interests of the child that custody be awarded to the father. The Supreme Court upheld the award of custody to the father.
(e)   Richard Keith McElveen v. Elaine Brennen McElveen, 277 S.C. 97, 283 S.E.2d 826 (19__). Mr. Fuge handled the appeal of this case. After the lower court changed custody from the mother to the father based on a substantial change of circumstances, Mr. Fuge was able to show on appeal that the trial judge improperly considered evidence which occurred prior to the date of the initial decree, thereby violating the doctrine of res judicata. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling and reinstated custody to the mother. Mr. Fuge provided that this case has been cited many times for the proposition that a lower court should not consider evidence that predates prior final orders when parties seek a change of custody.
Mr. Fuge provided the following domestic appeals that he has personally handled:
(a)   State of South Carolina v. John Path., 277 S.C. 126, 284 S.E.2d 221 (19__).
(b)   Rosemary Murphy v. James Lee Murphy, ___ S.C. ___, 461 S.E.2d 39 (19__).
(c)   Hallie H. Hepner v. Lucy Hepner, 91-UP-175 (1991).
(d)   Donald l. Parris v. Ruth H. Parris, ___ S.C. ___, 460 S.E.2d 571 (19__).
(e)   Richard Keith McElveen v. Elaine Brennen McElveen, 277 S.C. 97, 283 S.E.2d 826 (19__).
At the Commission's request, Mr. Fuge supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Fuge's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.
The Commission determined that Mr. Fuge had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Fuge's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional Provisions:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Laughlin meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Mr. Laughlin was born on February 28, 1952. He is 45 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Mr. Laughlin also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Mr. Laughlin.
Mr. Laughlin demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Laughlin reported that he is an officer of Daybreak Title Agency, Inc.
Mr. Laughlin reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   Beaufort County Bar Association (Secretary, 1982-84)
(c)   Hilton Head Island Bar Association (Secretary, 1978-79)
Mr. Laughlin provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Spanish Wells Golf Club
Mr. Laughlin testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Laughlin testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Laughlin testified that he had no campaign expenditures.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Mr. Laughlin to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Laughlin attended the following CLEs in the immediate past 5 years:
11/96   SC Bar, Masters in Trial
9/96   SC Bar, South Carolina Tort Law Update
11/95   Chicago Title Ins., Claims/Underwriting Seminar
10/95   SC Bar, Client Relations LEPR Series
7/95   SC Bar, The Continuing Saga of Hot Tips from the Experts
12/94   SC Bar, Nine Things You Absolutely, Positively Need to Know
12/94   SC Bar, What Goes on in the Jury Room
11/94   SC Bar, Professional Responsibility
1/93   SC Bar, Appellate Practice Under the SCRAP
11/92   SC Bar, Mastering Evidence and Proving Your Case
Mr. Laughlin provided that he has been a guest lecturer for Professor Stephen Spitz of the U.S.C. School of Law.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Laughlin did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Laughlin did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Laughlin has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Laughlin was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Laughlin is married and has three children, ages 20, 16, and 8.
Mr. Laughlin reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)   Physical Health:
Mr. Laughlin appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental Stability:
Mr. Laughlin appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Laughlin was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. Upon graduating from law school, Mr. Laughlin worked for the law firm of West, Bowen, Cooper, Beard, & Smoot in Hilton Head until 1980. From 1980-82, he worked for Bowen, Cooper, Beard, & Smoot in Hilton Head. From 1982-83, Mr. Laughlin worked for Davis & Turlington, Inc., in San Antonio, Texas. He returned to Hilton Head in 1983 and worked for Bowen, Smoot, & Laughlin in Hilton Head until 1986. From 1986-87, he worked for Qualey, Laughlin & Qualey, PA, in Hilton Head. He worked for the McNair Law Firm, PA, in Hilton Head from 1987-90. Since 1990, Mr. Laughlin has been a partner of Laughlin & Bowen in Hilton Head.
His practice has been primarily general civil litigation, including Family Courts; he also has some real estate practice and municipal law practice.
Mr. Laughlin also provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in domestic law. He handles the Family Court cases for his firm, which amounts to approximately 20% of his cases. He has handled issues in the areas of divorce, custody and visitation, equitable division of property, alimony, child support, division of marital property, and allegations of child and spousal abuse. Mr. Laughlin's letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.
Mr. Laughlin provided that the other 80% of his practice was civil, and that 60% of his cases were jury cases, approximately 5% tried to verdict. Thirty percent of his cases were non-jury, most tried to Court decision. He served as sole counsel in these matters. Over the last five years, he has had approximately one federal court appearance per year and fifty or more state court appearances per year.
Mr. Laughlin provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:
(a)   Barrington One Owners' Association, Inc., v. Greenwood Development Corp., Joe Harden Builder, Inc., and Eugene R. Smith & Associates, Inc.
Mr. Laughlin served as Co-Counsel representing condominium owners association and 111 individual owners in actions for recovery of damages for defective design and construction of condominium common elements and (in three related class actions) for recovery of damages for loss of use of condominium units. Settled cases for combined $11,050,000.

(b)   Brady Development, Inc. v. Town of Hilton Head Island, 312 S.C. 73, 439 S.E.2d 436. Mr. Laughlin represented Plaintiff in first of 55 actions against Town of Hilton Head Island seeking recovery of damages to purchaser of residential lot based on theory of negligent permitting of subdivision that lacked water or sewer service. Obtained judgment on jury verdict in the amount of $215,000, reversed on appeal based on application of public purpose doctrine.

(c)   Vacation Time of Hilton Head Island, Inc. v. Lighthouse Realty, Inc., 286 SC 261, 332 S.E.2d 781. Mr. Laughlin represented Plaintiff seller of real property in action against real estate broker for damages resulting from breach of fiduciary duty. Judgment on jury verdict in amount of $50,000 affirmed on appeal.
(d)   Hunter et al. v. Rose Hill Development Company. Mr. Laughlin successfully defended Defendant developer in suit brought by numerous Plaintiff property owners alleging fraud, breach of contract, violation of restrictive covenants, violation of development permitting, and violation of Interstate Land Sales Act. Summary Judgment obtained in United States District Court, District of South Carolina.
(e)   Keenan v. Keenan. Mr. Laughlin represented Defendant husband in divorce action involving marital estate valued in excess of $2,000,000. Case settled on day of trial.
Mr. Laughlin stated that none of his domestic cases had been appealed.
The Commission determined that Mr. Laughlin had engaged in an active trial practice, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.
(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Laughlin's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional Provisions:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Sanders meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service.
Judge Sanders was born on July 24, 1952. He is 44 years old. He has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years. Judge Sanders also has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1977.

(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical behavior by Judge Sanders.
Judge Sanders demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Sanders reported that he is Broker-in-Charge of Sanders Real Estate.
Judge Sanders reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   Allendale County Bar Association (Treasurer, Vice-President)
Judge Sanders provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   Fairfax Lions Club -- President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Lion of the Year
(b)   Allendale County Rural Health Program, Inc. (Board of Directors)
(c)   Allendale County Business Association
Judge Sanders testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Sanders testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Judge Sanders testified that his only campaign expenditure was postage to send letters announcing his candidacy.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Sanders to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Sanders has attended numerous CLEs and JCLEs in the immediate past 5 years and has met all attendance requirements mandated by the SC Bar.
Judge Sanders provided that he has been a part-time Associate Professor at the University of South Carolina - Salkehatchie Branch, teaching Business Law.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Judge Sanders did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Sanders did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Sanders has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Judge Sanders was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Judge Sanders is married and has two children, ages 14 and 10.

(6)   Physical Health:
Judge Sanders appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental Stability:
Judge Sanders appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Judge Sanders was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1977. Upon graduating from law school, Judge Sanders worked as an Associate with the Law Firm of Lawton, Myrick & Detrick in Allendale until July 1979. Since August 1979, Judge Sanders has been a sole practitioner at Walter H. Sanders, Jr., P.A.
Judge Sanders has a general law practice and he has also been the Municipal Judge of the Town of Fairfax since 1980, the Municipal Judge of the Town of Varnville since 1984, and the Municipal Judge of the Town of Brunson from 1988-89 and from 1996 to the present. He was also appointed as the interim Municipal Judge of the Town of Allendale in 1992 and has been the Master-in Equity for Allendale County since 1991.
Judge Sanders reported that 95% of his court appearances over the past five years have been in state court and five percent have been in federal court. Over the last five years, 25% of his cases have gone to a jury and 75% were non-jury. Judge Sanders reported that 50% of his practice was domestic, 45% civil, and 5% criminal. He has most often served as sole counsel or associate counsel.
At the request of the Commission, Judge Sanders provided a letter to the Commission that details his experience in domestic law. Approximately 50% of his cases are in the domestic law area, and he has handled issues in the following areas:
Divorce/Adultery; Divorce/Physical Cruelty; Divorce/Habitual Drunkenness; Divorce/One-Year Separation; Custody; Visitation; Child Support; Equitable Division of Marital Property; Restraining Orders; Alimony; Annulment; Paternity; Contempt of Court; Adoption from State; Private Adoption; Sexual Abuse of children; Termination of Parental Rights; Child Neglect; and Juvenile Crime.
Judge Sanders' letter was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing.
Judge Sanders provided the following as his 5 most significant litigated matters:
(a)   Virginia Ruth Allen v. William Dale Allen (Family Court). This case involved the granting of a father and husband custody of the minor children and support from the wife.
(b)   H.J. Kinard and Flossie Kinard v. Beth Morris, Paul W. Morris and Amy Paulette Morris (Family Court). This case involved the conflict between natural parents and grandparents and what is in the best interest of the minor child in regards to custody and visitation privileges.
(c)   Joe L. Smith, Jr., Barry H. Smith, and Barnie K. Smith v. Sandra Grubbs Smith, John H. Mole, and Mole Funeral Home (Circuit Court and Probate Court). This case involved the disinterment and reinterment of Joe Laurie Smith, Sr., and the conflict between the stepmother widow and the natural children concerning who has the primary right to the possession of the body and to control the burial thereof.
(d)   State of South Carolina v. George Campfield (Circuit Court). This was a murder case of the Defendant's wife and her unborn fetus.
(e)   State of South Carolina v. Edward Lester Rhein (Circuit Court). This was a murder case by two individuals who were only 16 and 17 years of age.
Judge Sanders has handled one domestic appeal: Beth Morris and Paul Morris, Petitioners-Respondents v. Flossie Kinard, Respondent Appellant, H.J. Kinard and Flossie Kinard, Petitioners-Appellants. This case was in the Supreme Court of South Carolina and the date of the decision was June 26, 1979.
Judge Sanders provided the following as his 5 most significant opinions or orders:
(a)   Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation v. Judith Diane Bowers, et al. (Foreclosure Action)
(b)   Julius Jackson v. Everliner J. Lawrence, et al. (Partition Action)
(c)   Josie Yvone Broomfield Ingram v. Ernestine Walker, et al. (Quiet Title Action)
(d)   Small Business Funding Corp. v. Metric Constructors, Inc. (Order for Summary Judgment)
(e)   Cecil Chavous, et al. v. John Sanders, Jr. d/b/a Sanders Logging and Trucking (Breach of Contract)
The Commission determined that Judge Sanders had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Judge Sanders's temperament would be excellent.
(10)   Miscellaneous:

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Short meets the qualifications prescribed by law for continued judicial service.
Judge Short was born on January 13, 1947. He is 50 years old. Judge Short provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1971.

(2)   Ethical fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Short.
Judge Short demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Short reported that he was a member of the following professional organizations:
(a)   SC Bar Association
(b)   American Bar Association
(c)   Chester County Bar Association
(d)   American Judicature Society
(e)   American Judges Association
(f)   SC Association of Circuit Judges (Legislative Reception Committee)
Judge Short listed the following organizations of which he is currently or has been a member:
(a)   Purity Presbyterian Church
(b)   Chester Sertoma Club
(c)   Chester Shrine Club
(d)   Chester Masonic Lodge
(e)   American Legion
(f)   Presbyterian College Board of Trustees

(3)   Professional and academic ability:
The Commission found Judge Short to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Short has attended a variety of CLE classes, including classes at the National Judicial College in Phoenix and in Reno and Circuit Court Bench/Bar Seminars.
Judge Short taught a seminar on Rules of Civil Procedure for the South Carolina Legal Secretaries Association in 1995. He also facilitated a General Jurisdiction Course for new judges at the National Judicial College in Nevada.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Judge Short did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Short did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Short has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
After becoming a Circuit Court Judge, Judge Short was sued by a prisoner acting Pro Se in Priest Gerald Garner v. Condon, et al. Judge Short was dismissed from the case.
The Commission also noted that Judge Short was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

(5)   Reputation:
Judge Short is married and has two children. One is a school teacher in Chester County. The other is a student. His wife, Linda Short, is a South Carolina State Senator.
Judge Short served as a 1st Lieutenant in the Army from 1968-1971. He served in the South Carolina National Guard from 1971-1973. He was honorably discharged as Captain. His present status is Inactive Reserve.
Judge Short reported that his last Martindale-Hubbell rating was "AV".

(6)   Physical health:
Judge Short appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.
(7)   Mental stability:
Judge Short appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Judge Short was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1971.
Since his graduation from law school, Judge Short practiced law in Chester, South Carolina with Fred Strickland and E.K. Hardin. In 1973, he began practicing with William Keels. He served in the SC House of Representatives from 1982-1981. He was appointed to the Chester County Airport Commission in 1978 and served until 1980. He was appointed Chester County Attorney in 1980 and served until 1982.
Judge Short was elected Circuit Court Judge, At-Large Seat 8, in February, 1991.
Judge Short listed his 5 most significant orders or opinions as follows:
(a)   Louis J. Truesdale v. Parker D. Evatt, and the SC Dept. Of Corrections, et al., The subject of this Order deals with the reimbursement of expenses incurred by expert witnesses called upon by Petitioner Truesdale in his death penalty case. The Appeal of his case is reported at 301 S.C. 546, 393 S.E.2d 168.
(b)   State of South Carolina v. Gary Allen Rimert, Op. No. 24093, 446 S.E.2d 400. The issue addressed in this Order is whether or not a jury in a criminal case is entitled to hear evidence regarding the sentence a defendant may receive if he is found guilty but mentally ill. I held that the jury's function was to determine guilt and that information about sentencing is irrelevant to such a determination. The Supreme Court affirmed.
(c)   Carol Ann Berkebile v. William C. Outen, 311 S.C. 50, 426 S.E.2d 760. This Order holds that losses from video poker playing are not recoverable pursuant to SC Code Section 32-1-10. Judge Short held that Section 32-1-10 removed the common law bar to the recovery of losses from engaging in illegal gambling. Therefore, if the loss resulted from legal gambling, this Code section would not apply and the Plaintiff cannot recover. The Supreme Court reversed.
(d)   City of Folly Beach v. Atlantic House Properties, Op. No. 24384. This order required Defendants in a condemnation action to pay the Plaintiffs reasonable attorney fees pursuant to SC Code Section 28-2-510. The SC Supreme Court reversed.
(e)   Betty Williams, et al. v. The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Rock Hill and New Hope Carolinas, Inc., This Order affirms the City of Rock Hill Zoning Commission's issuing of a permit to New Hope Carolinas allowing it to operate an institution to care for emotionally handicapped children.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Judge Short's temperament has been and would continue to be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:
The Bar found that Judge Short meets established criteria for the position of Circuit Court Judge. The Bar based its decision on the results of its end-of-year survey conducted in 1996, the collective knowledge of its Committee members, and its investigation of the candidate.

Commission's Finding: QUALIFIED

(1)   Constitutional qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Tunstall meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Mr. Tunstall was born on February 4, 1954. He is 43 years old and a resident of Greenwood County. Mr. Tunstall provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past 5 years, and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1980.

(2)   Ethical fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Tunstall.
Mr. Tunstall demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Tunstall reported that he was a member of the following bar associations and professional organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Bar Association
(b)   South Carolina Bar House of Delegates (1991 to present)
(c)   Resolution of Fee Disputes Board for the Eighth Circuit (1991 to present)
(d)   Family Law Section of the South Carolina Bar
(e)   South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association
(f)   Greenwood County Bar - past Treasurer
Mr. Tunstall provided that he was a member of the following civic, charitable, educational, social, or fraternal organizations:
(a)   South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Association - Sustaining member
(b)   Main Street United Methodist Church member (1959 to present)
(c)   Cambridge Academy Board Member
(d)   Governor's Community Youth Council Member - Eighth Circuit
Mr. Tunstall reported that he owns and leases four rental properties. Mr. Tunstall provided that he would not hear any cases involving a resident of any of his rental properties.
Mr. Tunstall testified that he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Tunstall testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
Mr. Tunstall testified that he had campaign expenditures of over $100 and that he was aware of the requirement of reporting that amount to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(3)   Professional and academic ability:
The Commission found Mr. Tunstall to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Tunstall provided that he has continuously exceeded the minimum continuing legal education requirements, with an emphasis on Domestic matters. Most recently, Mr. Tunstall attended the two-day Governor's Youth Conference on Youth Crime on March 6-7, 1997.
Mr. Tunstall reported that he had served as the Attorney Coach for the South Carolina High School Mock Trial Competition from 1987 to 1993. He taught Greenwood High School students how to prepare and try a case for mock court competition including teaching trial tactics, rules of evidence, and courtroom demeanor.

(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Tunstall did not reveal any evidence of complaints, grievances, or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Tunstall did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Tunstall has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Tunstall was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
One affiant testified in opposition to Mr. Tunstall's candidacy. The affiant alleged problems in Mr. Tunstall's handling of a divorce and criminal matter. After a review of pertinent material and questioning of the affiant and Mr. Tunstall, the Commission is satisfied that Mr. Tunstall's conduct in the representation of the affiant should not disqualify Mr. Tunstall from service as a Family Court judge.

(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Tunstall is married with two children, ages 13 and 8.
Mr. Tunstall was a member of the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission from 1985 to 1988.
Mr. Tunstall has served as a school board member for Cambridge Academy. The Board sets policy for the school.
Mr. Tunstall provided on his application that he served as a part-time City judge for Ware Shoals in 1983.
Mr. Tunstall reported that his current Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV".

(6)   Physical health:
Mr. Tunstall appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(7)   Mental stability:
Mr. Tunstall appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

(8)   Experience:
Mr. Tunstall was admitted to the South Carolina Bar in 1980.
Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Tunstall has practiced law as a sole practitioner from 1980 to 1981. During that time, Mr. Tunstall was also the Public Defender for the Greenwood and Abbeville Family courts. In 1981, he joined the Law Firm of C. Rauch Wise as an associate. He also accepted a part-time position as City Judge for Ware Shoals. Since 1982, Mr. Tunstall has been a partner in Wise and Tunstall, Attorneys. Mr. Tunstall described his practice as general in nature and is now about 80% domestic.
Mr. Tunstall described his practice over the last 5 years as 15% civil, 5% criminal, and 80% domestic. He said that he has appeared in federal court approximately 3 times and in state court 3 to 5 times per week. Mr. Tunstall indicated that over the last 5 years 10% of his practice has involved jury matters and 90% has been non-jury. He stated that he serves most often as sole counsel in these matters.
Mr. Tunstall listed his 5 most significant litigated matters as follows:
(a)   S.C. Newton, South Carolina Highway Patrol vs. Stacy Ray A., child under the age of 17 years, Case No. 89-GS-24-113 and 114. Mr. Tunstall represented the minor defendant in Family Court. The defendant was arrested and charged with reckless homicide and involuntary manslaughter. The case was reversed on appeal in favor of the defendant in The Interest of Stacy Ray A., 303 S.C. 291, 400 S.E.2d 141 (1991).
(b)   McCormick County Department of Social Services vs. Jane Doe, Case No. 93-DR-35-016. In this action, DSS brought an action against Mr. Tunstall's client seeking a finding of medical neglect of her children. The issue was whether the defendant was neglecting her child because she refused to allow her child to have a second corrective surgery attempt on her spine and whether the court should order the surgery. The court ruled that the DSS should not interfere in a parent's right to accept or reject medical advice unless the child was in imminent threat of harm. Mr Tunstall believes the case is significant because it demonstrates that judges must detach themselves from their personal feelings and follow statutes and case law.
(c)   Department of Social Services of Laurens County vs. John Smith and Jane Smith, Case No. 93-DR-30-600. An action in which DSS sought removal of children from the defendants' home. Mr. Tunstall was retained by a third party from Michigan seeking custody of the allegedly abused children. The court removed the children from the parents and placed custody with Mr. Tunstall's client in Michigan. Mr. Tunstall believes the case is significant because it involved the complexity of a multi-state case and required him to coordinate with various governmental agencies in different states.
(d)   John Anthony Rhodes vs. Tessa McNair Rhodes, Case No. 94-DR-24-531. Case involved an action for custody of a 4-year old, child support, and an equitable division of the property of the marriage. The court granted custody to the father, Mr. Tunstall's client.
(e)   Waretex Industries, Ltd. And Waretex Manufacturing, Inc. vs. Town & Country Real Estate, Inc., M. Calhoun Mayes, III, Herbert Anderson, Jr., George Risley, d/b/a Anderson-Risley, Carolina Coating Systems, Inc., and Defiance Metal Products of South Carolina, Inc., and Town and Country Real Estate, Inc. vs. Piedmont Fire Protection, Inc., Case No. 6-95-1042-3. This was a complicated civil case brought by Mr. Tunstall on behalf of his client, Carolina Coating Systems. The case was originally brought in state court but was later joined to a pending case in federal court. Mr. Tunstall's client received one of the largest settlements in a Greenwood County case. Mr. Tunstall believes the case is significant because it demonstrates his ability to handle exceedingly complex litigation.
Mr. Tunstall reported that because of the division of work in his firm that he has not personally handled any domestic appeals as sole counsel. He stated that his partner is in charge of appeals. He has, however, assisted in the research and preparation of numerous domestic appeals handled by his firm.
At the Commission's request, Mr. Tunstall supplied a number of additional cases which he felt were representative of his domestic practice and a summary of his practice in the following areas of domestic law: Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Abuse and Neglect, Adoption, and Juvenile Justice. Mr. Tunstall's response was incorporated into the transcript of his public hearing and can be referenced therein.
The Commission determined that Mr. Tunstall had engaged in an active trial practice in the Family Courts, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(9)   Judicial Temperament:
The Commission believes that Mr. Tunstall's temperament would be excellent.

(10)   Miscellaneous:

The following persons were unanimously found legally qualified:
Robert S. Armstrong   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Harris L. Beach, Jr.   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Curtis G. Clark   Eighth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Dianne P. Dewitt   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Marvin H. Dukes, III   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Peter L. Fuge   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Drew A. Laughlin   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Walter H. Sanders, Jr.   Fourteenth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3
Paul E. Short, Jr.   Sixth Judicial Circuit Court, Resident Judge
Billy A. Tunstall, Jr.   Eighth Judicial Circuit Family Court, Seat 3

Respectfully submitted,
/s/Senator Glenn F. McConnell   /s/Rep. F.G. Delleney, Jr.
Chairman     Vice Chairman
/s/Senator Edward E. Saleeby   /s/Senator Thomas L. Moore
/s/Rep. Wm. Douglas Smith   /s/Rep. Ralph W. Canty
/s/Harry M. Lightsey, Jr.   /s/Judge Curtis G. Shaw
/s/Richard S. Fisher

On motion of Senator McCONNELL, with unanimous consent, ordered printed in the Journal.

Senator THOMAS introduced Dr. Mark O'Rourke of Greenville, S.C., Doctor of the Day.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:
H. 3137 (Word version) -- Rep. J. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 40, CHAPTER 67, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPEECH PATHOLOGISTS AND AUDIOLOGISTS SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS FROM SIX TO FIVE, TO CLARIFY THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD, TO CLARIFY THE SCOPE OF PRACTICE, TO AUTHORIZE DISPENSING AND FITTING DEVICES TO PROMOTE COMMUNICATION, TO ADD LICENSURE FOR SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY ASSISTANTS, TO PROVIDE FOR BIENNIAL LICENSURE, TO INCREASE FEES, TO REQUIRE CONTINUING EDUCATION, TO CLARIFY EXEMPTIONS FROM THE CHAPTER, AND TO ESTABLISH CRIMINAL PENALTIES.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:

H. 3286 (Word version) -- Rep. Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 2 OF ACT 387 OF 1996 RELATING TO THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD WITHIN WHICH A PERMANENT WAIVER OF EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE GRANTED TO A MASSAGE/BODYWORK THERAPY APPLICANT FOR LICENSURE WHO MEETS CERTAIN OTHER REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED IN PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE AS A THERAPIST FROM FOUR YEARS TO ONE YEAR.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:
H. 3528 (Word version) -- Rep. H. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 2-7-71, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR A REVENUE IMPACT STATEMENT ON BILLS RELATING TO STATE TAXES REPORTED OUT OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS STATEMENT MUST BE CERTIFIED BY THE BOARD OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS OR ITS DESIGNEE RATHER THAN AN AGENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY REQUEST THE TECHNICAL ADVICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE WITH RESPECT TO THE PREPARATION OF THESE STATEMENTS.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it concurs in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:

H. 3650 (Word version) -- Reps. Felder, Harrison, Cotty, Young, Davenport and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-515 SO AS TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES ISSUING A NOTICE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO PERSONS OWING CHILD SUPPORT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3470, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE EMPLOYER TAX CREDIT FOR EMPLOYING PERSONS WHO RECEIVED AID TO FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN (AFDC), SO AS TO CHANGE AFDC TO FAMILY INDEPENDENCE, TO REVISE HEALTH INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN THE TAX CREDIT AND TO REVISE PROCEDURES FOR EMPLOYERS OBTAINING INFORMATION ON THE AVAILABILITY OF POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-941, RELATING TO LICENSE REVOCATION FOR NONPAYMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "LICENSE" WITH REGARD TO HUNTING, FISHING, OR TRAPPING; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-944, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LICENSING ENTITIES WHICH MUST PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM IN WHICH THIS INFORMATION MUST BE PROVIDED; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-9520, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SERVING A NOTICE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON PERSONS OWING CHILD SUPPORT DEBTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE NOTICE FOR A RESCHEDULED OR SUBSEQUENT HEARING; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-9530, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PROCEDURES FOR FAILING TO APPEAR FOR A NEGOTIATION CONFERENCE CONCERNING A CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE CONFERENCE TO BE RESCHEDULED IF THE PERSON DID NOT RECEIVE PROPER NOTICE; TO AMEND ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 43, RELATING TO PUBLIC AID AND ASSISTANCE, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONFORM PROVISIONS TO THE FAMILY INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 1995, TO REVISE PROVISIONS TO ASSIST IMPLEMENTING THAT ACT AND TO DELETE OBSOLETE PROVISIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-580, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS OF ABSENT PARENTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF AN APPLICANT FOR FAMILY INDEPENDENCE BENEFITS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1110, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA FAMILY INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 1995, SO AS TO CHANGE THE TERM "AFDC" TO "FAMILY INDEPENDENCE"; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1120, RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR FAMILY INDEPENDENCE APPLICANTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT REFERRING CERTAIN APPLICANTS TO A JOB CLUB IS OPTIONAL RATHER THAN MANDATORY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1135, RELATING TO STATE AGENCY GOALS TO EMPLOY WELFARE RECIPIENTS, SO AS TO CONFORM TERMS AND TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL GOALS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1150, RELATING TO THE JOB TRAINING AND PARTNERSHIP ACT (JTPA) INCENTIVE FUNDS, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A GOAL OF FORTY PERCENT OF FAMILY INDEPENDENCE RECIPIENTS PARTICIPATING IN JTPA PROGRAMS; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1185, RELATING TO FAMILY SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAMS, SO AS TO MAKE PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROGRAM BASED ON NEED RATHER THAN REQUIRED AS A CONDITION OF ELIGIBILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1190, RELATING TO AFDC ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO CONFORM TERM TO "FAMILY INDEPENDENCE" ELIGIBILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-1200, RELATING TO VEHICLE AND OTHER ASSET LIMITS FOR AFDC ELIGIBILITY, SO AS TO CONFORM TERMS AND EXEMPT ONE VEHICLE FROM THE ASSET LIMIT; TO REPEAL SECTION 43-1-130, RELATING TO THE FEDERAL WORK INCENTIVE PROGRAM; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 43-5-510, 43-5-520, 43-5-530, 43-5-540, 43-5-550, 43-5-560, 43-5-570, AND 43-5-640, ALL RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA EMPLOYABLES PROGRAM ACT.
and has ordered the Bill Enrolled for Ratification.

Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

S. 769 (Word version) -- Senator Moore: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO DESIGNATE AND NAME A SECTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 7 IN MCCORMICK COUNTY AS THE "DON R. SAGGUS, JR. MEMORIAL HIGHWAY" AND TO INSTALL APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS.

Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to recall the Resolution from the Committee on Transportation.
There was no objection.

On motion of Senator MOORE, with unanimous consent, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House of Representatives.

S. 719 (Word version) -- Senator Jackson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TO AUTHORIZE THE PLACEMENT OF A MARKER ON THE GROUNDS OF THE FORT MOULTRIE NATIONAL MONUMENT THAT RECOGNIZES THE ROLE OF SULLIVAN'S ISLAND AS THE "ELLIS ISLAND" FOR THE ENTRY OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS INTO THIS COUNTRY.

Senator WILSON asked unanimous consent to make a motion to recall the Resolution from the General Committee.
There was no objection.

On motion of Senator WILSON, with unanimous consent, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House of Representatives.

S. 29 (Word version) -- Senators Holland and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 24-13-450, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE, SO AS TO INCREASE THE POSSIBLE PENALTY TO A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY YEARS IMPRISONMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 16-1-60, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF VIOLENT CRIMES, SO AS TO DEFINE THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A VIOLENT CRIME; TO AMEND SECTION 16-1-90(A) AND (C) RELATING TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES, SO AS TO CLASSIFY THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A CLASS A FELONY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 17-25-45(C)(1), RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE, SO AS TO DEFINE THE CRIME OF TAKING OF A HOSTAGE BY AN INMATE AS A MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

Senator McCONNELL proposed the following amendment (29R003.GFM), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding at the end appropriately numbered new SECTIONS to read:
SECTION   .   Section 44-53-190 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"(g)   Any material, compound, mixture, or preparation containing flunitrazepam, or its derivative or metabolite, including its salts, isomers (whether position, geometric, or optical), and salts of such isomers whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible."
SECTION   .   Section 44-53-250(a) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(a) Depressants. Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of the following substances having a depressant effect on the central nervous system, including its salts, isomers (whether position, geometric, or optical), and salts of such isomers whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation:
(1)   Alprazolam
(2)   Barbital
(3)   Bromazepam
(4)   Camazepam
(5)   Chloral Betaine
(6)   Chloral Hydrate
(7)   Chlordiazepoxide
(8)   Clobazam
(9)   Clonazepam
(10)   Clorazepate
(11)   Clotiazepam
(12)   Cloxazolam
(13)   Delorazepam
(14)   Diazepam
(15)   Estazolam
(16)   Ethchlorvynol
(17)   Ethinamate
(18)   Ethyl Loflazepate
(19)   Fludiazepam
(20)   Flunitrazepam
(21) (20)   Flurazepam
(22) (21)   Halazepam
(23) (22)   Haloxazolam
(24) (23)   Ketazolam
(25) (24)   Loprazolam
(26) (25)   Lorazepam
(27) (26)   Lormetazepam
(28) (27)   Mebutamate
(29) (28)   Medazepam
(30) (29)   Meprobamate
(31) (30)   Methohexital
(32) (31)   Methylphenobarbital
(33) (32)   Nimetazepam
(34) (33)   Nitrazepam
(35) (34)   Nordiazepam
(36) (35)   Oxazepam
(37) (36)   Oxazolam
(38) (37)   Paraldehyde
(39) (38)   Petrichloral
(40) (39)   Phenobarbital
(41) (40)   Pinazepam
(42) (41)   Prazepam
(43) (42)   Temazepam
(44) (43)   Tetrazepam
(45) (44)   Triazolam."
SECTION . Section 44-53-370 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"(f)   It shall be unlawful for a person to administer, distribute, dispense, deliver, or aid, abet, attempt, or conspire to administer, distribute, dispense, or deliver a controlled substance to an individual with the intent to commit one of the following crimes against that individual:
(1)   kidnapping, Section 16-3-910;
(2)   criminal sexual conduct in the first, second, and third degree, Sections 16-3-652, 16-3-653, and 16-3-654;
(3)   criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the first and second degree, Section 16-3-655;
(4)   criminal sexual conduct where victim is legal spouse (separated), Section 16-3-658;
(5)   spousal sexual battery, Section 16-3-615;
(6)   engaging a child for a sexual performance, Section 16-3-810;
(7)   committing lewd act upon child under sixteen, Section 16-15-140;
(8)   petit larceny, Section 16-13-30 (A); or
(9)   grand larceny, Section 16-13-30 (B).
(g)   A person who violates subsection (f) with respect to:
(1)   a controlled substance classified in Schedule I (b) or (c) which is a narcotic drug or lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), or in Schedule II which is a narcotic drug is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be:
(a)   for a first offense, imprisoned not more than twenty years or fined not more than thirty thousand dollars, or both;
(b)   for a second offense, or if in the case of a first conviction of a violation of any provision of this subsection, the offender previously has been convicted of a violation of the laws of the United States or of any state, territory, or district relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant, stimulant, or hallucinogenic drugs, imprisoned not less than five years nor more than thirty years, or fined not more than fifty thousand dollars, or both;
(c)   for a third or subsequent offense, or if the offender previously has been convicted two or more times in the aggregate of a violation of the laws of the United States or of any state, territory, or district relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant, stimulant, or hallucinogenic drugs, imprisoned not less than fifteen years nor more than thirty years, or fined not more than fifty thousand dollars, or both.
Except in the case of conviction for a first offense, the sentence must not be suspended and probation must not be granted;
(2)   any other controlled substance is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be:
(a)   for a first offense, imprisoned not more than fifteen years or fined not more than twenty-five thousand dollars, or both;
(b)   for a second offense, or if in the case of a first conviction of a violation of any provision of this subsection, the offender previously has been convicted of a violation of the laws of the United States or of any state, territory, or district relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant, stimulant, or hallucinogenic drugs, imprisoned not more than twenty years or fined not more than thirty thousand dollars, or both;
(c)   for a third or subsequent offense, or if the offender previously has been convicted two or more times in the aggregate of a violation of the laws of the United States or of any state, territory, or district relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant, stimulant, or hallucinogenic drugs, imprisoned not less than five years nor more than twenty-five years, or fined not more than forty thousand dollars, or both.
Except in the case of conviction for a first offense, the sentence must not be suspended and probation must not be granted."
SECTION   .   Section 16-1-90(A), (B), (C), and (D) of the 1976 Code are amended to read:
"(A)   The following offenses are Class A felonies and the maximum terms established for a Class A felony, as set forth in Section 16-1-20(A), apply:
16-3-50   Manslaughter - voluntary
16-3-652   Criminal sexual conduct
First degree
16-3-655   Criminal sexual conduct with minors if victim under 11 years of age
First degree
16-3-656   Assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct
First degree
16-3-658   Criminal sexual conduct where victim is legal spouse
(separated)
First degree
16-3-910   Kidnapping
16-3-920   Conspiracy to commit
kidnapping
16-11-380   Entering bank, depository, or building and loan association with intent to steal
16-11-330(A)   Robbery while armed with a deadly weapon
16-11-390   Safecracking
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(b)(1)   (narcotic drugs in Schedules I(b) and (c), LSD, and Schedule II)
Second, third, or subsequent offenses
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(e)(2)(a)2   (trafficking in cocaine, 10 grams or more, but less than 28 grams)
Second offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts, penalties
(e)(2)(b)2   (trafficking in cocaine, 28 grams or more, but less than 100 grams)
Second offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts, penalties
(e)(5)(a)2   (trafficking in LSD, 100 dosage units or more, but less than 500 dosage units)
Second offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts, penalties
(e)(5)(b)2   (trafficking in LSD, 500 dosage units or more, but less than 1,000 dosage units)
Second offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties (g)(1)(b) and (c) (distribution of narcotic drugs in Schedules I(b) and (c), LSD, and Schedule II with intent to commit a crime)
Second, third, or subsequent offenses
44-53-375   Manufacture, distribution, etc.,
(B)(3)   ice, crank, or crack cocaine
Third or subsequent offense
44-53-375   Trafficking in ice, crank, or
(C)(1)(b)   crack cocaine (10 grams or more, but less than 28 grams)
Second offense
44-53-375   Trafficking in ice, crank, or
(C)(2)(b)   crack cocaine (28 grams or more, but less than 100 grams)
Second offense
55-1-30(3)   Unlawful removing or damaging of airport facility or equipment when death results
56-5-1030   Interference with traffic-control
(B)(3)   devices or railroad signs or signals prohibited when death results from violation
58-17-4090   Penalty for obstruction of railroad
(B)   The following offenses are Class B felonies and the maximum terms established for a Class B felony, as set forth in Section 16-1-20(A), apply:
16-3-1075   Carjacking (great bodily
(B)(2)   injury)
16-11-110(A)   Arson - first degree
16-11-370   Robbery of operators of vehicles for hire
16-11-540   Damaging or destroying building, vehicle, or other property by means of explosive or incendiary if personal injury results
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts, penalties
(e)(2)(b)1   (trafficking in cocaine, 28 grams or more, but less than 100 grams)
First offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(e)(3)(a)1   (trafficking in illegal drugs, 4 grams or more, but less than 14 grams)
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts, penalties
(e)(5)(b)1   (trafficking in LSD, 500 dosage units or more, but less than 1000 dosage units)
First offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties (g)(2)(c) (distribution of controlled substances with intent to commit a crime)
Third or subsequent offenses
44-53-375   Manufacture, distribution, etc.,
(B)(2)   ice, crank, or crack cocaine
Second offense
44-53-375   Trafficking in ice, crank, crack
(C)(2)(a)   cocaine (28 grams or more, but less than 100 grams)
First offense
44-53-475   Financial transactions involving
(A)(1)   property derived from unlawful drug activity
44-53-475   Transportation or attempt to
(A)(2)   transfer monetary instruments derived from unlawful drug activity
56-5-2945   Causing great bodily injury or death by operating vehicle while under influence of drugs or alcohol, death resulting
(C)   The following offenses are Class C felonies and the maximum terms established for a Class C felony, as set forth in Section 16-1-20(A), apply:
16-3-70   Administering or attempting to administer poison
16-3-75   Unlawful and malicious tampering with human drug product or food
16-3-220   Lynching in the second degree
16-3-620   Assault and battery with intent to kill
16-3-653   Criminal sexual conduct
Second degree
16-3-655(2)   Criminal sexual conduct with minor - victim 14 years of age or less, but who is at least 11 years of age
Second degree
16-3-655(3)   Criminal sexual conduct with minor - victim less than 16 years of age, but who is at least 14 years of age
Second degree
16-3-656   Assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct
Second degree
16-3-658   Criminal sexual conduct where victim is legal spouse (separated)
Second degree
16-3-810   Engaging child under 18 for sexual performance
16-11-110(B)   Arson - second degree
16-11-330(B)   Attempted armed robbery
16-11-350   Train robbery by stopping train
16-11-360   Robbery after entry upon train
16-11-540   Damaging or destroying building, vehicle, or other property by means of explosive or incendiary
24-13-450   Taking of hostages by any inmate
25-7-30   Giving information respecting national or state defense to foreign contacts (violation during peacetime)
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(b)(2)   (manufacture or possession of other substances in Schedule I, II, III, with intent to distribute)
Third or subsequent offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(e)(1)(a)2   (trafficking in marijuana, 10 pounds or more, but less than 100 pounds)
Second offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties (g)(1)(a) (distribution of narcotic drugs in Schedules I(b) and (c), LSD, and Schedule II with intent to commit a crime)
First offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties (g)(2)(b) (distribution of controlled substances with intent to commit a crime) Second offense
44-53-440   Distribution of controlled substance under Sections 44-53-370(a) and 44-53-375(B) to persons under 18
44-53-475   Concealment of property derived
(A)(3)   from unlawful drug activity
58-15-870   Injuring railroad or electric railway generally if act endangers life
(D)   The following offenses are Class D felonies and the maximum terms established for a Class D felony, as set forth in Section 16-1-20(A), apply:
16-3-1075   Carjacking
(B)(1)
16-11-312   Burglary - second degree
16-11-325   Common law robbery
16-11-550   Threatening to kill, injure, or intimidate individual or damage or destroy property by means of explosive or incendiary
Second and subsequent offense
16-15-140   Committing or attempting lewd act upon child under 14
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties
(B)(1)   (narcotic drugs in Schedule I (b) and (c), LSD, and Schedule II)
First offense
44-53-370   Prohibited Acts A, penalties (g)(2)(a) (distribution of controlled substances with intent to commit a crime)
First offense
44-53-375   Possession of less than 1 gram
(A)   of ice, crank, or crack cocaine
Third or subsequent offense
44-53-375   Manufacture, distribution, etc.,
(b)(1)   ice, crank, or crack cocaine
First offense
44-53-577   Unlawful to hire, solicit, direct, a person under 17 years of age to transport, conceal, or conduct financial transaction relating to unlawful drug activity
56-5-2945   Causing great bodily injury by
(A)(1)   operating vehicle while under influence of drugs or alcohol"
SECTION   .   If, at any time after the effective date of this act, flunitrazepam is found to have an accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, it automatically shall be rescheduled as a Schedule IV drug.
SECTION   .   Section 16-3-652 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 16-3-652.   (1)   A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:
(a)   The actor uses aggravated force to accomplish sexual battery.
(b)   The victim submits to sexual battery by the actor under circumstances where the victim is also the victim of forcible confinement, kidnapping, robbery, extortion, burglary, housebreaking, or any other similar offense or act.
(c)   The actor causes the victim, without the victim's consent, to become mentally incapacitated or physically helpless by administering, distributing, dispensing, delivering, or causing to be administered, distributed, dispensed, or delivered a controlled substance.
(2)   Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than thirty years, according to the discretion of the court."/
Amend title to conform.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was amended and ordered returned to the House with amendments.

S. 510 (Word version) -- Senator Leatherman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-1290, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF LICENSE PLATES FROM ONE MOTOR VEHICLE TO ANOTHER MOTOR VEHICLE OF THE SAME VEHICLE OWNER OR LESSEE, SO AS TO ALLOW THE TRANSFER OF THE PLATE ONLY WHEN THE OWNER OR LESSEE HAS ASSIGNED TO ANOTHER THE TITLE TO OR LEASE ON THE VEHICLE FROM WHICH THE PLATE IS TRANSFERRED.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

Senator LEATHERMAN proposed the following amendment (510R001.HKL), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 2 as contained in Section K, page 5, line 31, by striking / March 31, 1997 / and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
/   May 31, 1997   /
Amend title to conform.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was amended and ordered returned to the House with amendments.

The following were introduced:

S. 801 (Word version) -- Senator Williams: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND COMMEND MRS. EARNESTINE REED OF BERKELEY COUNTY FOR HER DISTINGUISHED THIRTY- TWO YEAR CAREER AS AN EDUCATOR UPON THE OCCASION OF HER RETIREMENT AND WISH HER WELL IN HER FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Senate Resolution was adopted.

S. 802 (Word version) -- Senators McConnell, Ford and Rose: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO URGE THE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO DETERMINE WHETHER CONTRACTS CONTEMPLATED BY THE UNIVERSITY AND COLUMBIA HCA AMOUNT TO A JOINT VENTURE, TO AUTHENTICATE THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF ASSETS AND REEVALUATE THE MORGAN STANLEY EVALUATION, TO NOTIFY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AS TO ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT, AND TO REEXAMINE WHETHER COLUMBIA HCA IS THE APPROPRIATE PARTNER FOR THE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Medical Affairs.

S. 803 (Word version) -- Senators Washington, Matthews, Rose and Williams: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 3 OF ACT 117 OF 1961, AS LAST AMENDED BY ACT 587 OF 1984, PERTAINING TO THE COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS OF THE COLLETON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EACH MEMBER SHALL RECEIVE AN ANNUAL SALARY OF TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS.
Read the first time and ordered placed on the local and uncontested Calendar without reference.

On motion of Senator WASHINGTON, with unanimous consent, S. 803 was ordered to receive a second and third reading on the next two consecutive legislative days.

S. 804 (Word version) -- Senator Ford: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE DR. ARTHUR A. FLETCHER FOR A LIFETIME OF ACHIEVEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House.

S. 805 (Word version) -- Senators Hutto and Washington: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO EXTEND SINCERE CONGRATULATIONS AND BEST WISHES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SENATE TO THE BELOVED MRS. SARAH MAE McCRADY LAWTON OF ALLENDALE COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF HER 100TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION.
The Senate Resolution was adopted.

H. 3424 (Word version) -- Reps. Breeland, Simrill, Felder, F. Smith, Spearman, Limehouse, Woodrum, Seithel, Sharpe, Cobb-Hunter, T. Brown, Young, Whipper, Law, Allison, Littlejohn, Webb, Altman, Howard, Bailey, Harrell, Scott, Mullen, Neal, Whatley, Lee, Gourdine, Byrd, Trotter, Mack, M. Hines, Kelley, Parks, McMahand, Stuart, Rodgers, Cave, Campsen, Phillips, Battle, Jordan, Lanford, Davenport, J. Brown, Cooper, Moody-Lawrence and Edge: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-39-160, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATING IN INTERSCHOLASTIC ACTIVITIES BY STUDENTS IN GRADES NINE THROUGH TWELVE, SO AS TO REQUIRE STUDENTS TO HAVE AN OVERALL "C" AVERAGE IN THE PRECEDING SEMESTER AND HAVE PASSED AT LEAST FOUR ACADEMIC COURSES INCLUDING EACH UNIT TAKEN WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR GRADUATION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT EACH SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL PROVIDE ACADEMIC ASSISTANCE FOR THOSE STUDENTS WHO DESIRE TO PARTICIPATE BUT WHO HAVE NOT MAINTAINED A "C" AVERAGE IN THE PRECEDING SEMESTER.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Education.

H. 4215 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, RELATING TO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS PERMIT, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2196, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

H. 4216 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, E-911 OPERATORS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2181, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

H. 4217 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2186, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

H. 4218 (Word version) -- Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION, MANUFACTURED HOUSING BOARD, RELATING TO MANUFACTURED HOMES, PRACTICES IN THE INDUSTRY, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2176, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Read the first time and referred to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.

H. 4254 (Word version) -- Rep. Wilkes: A BILL TO DEVOLVE THE POWERS, DUTIES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY RECREATION DISTRICT ON THE GOVERNING BODY OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, TO TRANSFER ALL ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF THE DISTRICT TO THE COUNTY, AND TO REPEAL ACT 1059 OF 1970 RELATING TO THE CREATION OF THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY RECREATION DISTRICT.
Read the first time and ordered placed on the local and uncontested Calendar without reference.

H. 4260 (Word version) -- Reps. Scott, Allison, Altman, Askins, Bailey, Barfield, Barrett, Battle, Bauer, Baxley, Beck, Boan, Bowers, Breeland, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Brown, Byrd, Campsen, Canty, Carnell, Cato, Cave, Chellis, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Cotty, Cromer, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Easterday, Edge, Felder, Fleming, Gamble, Gourdine, Govan, Hamilton, Harrell, A. Harris, Harrison, Harvin, Haskins, Hawkins, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hodges, Howard, Inabinett, Jennings, Jordan, Keegan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Knotts, Koon, Lanford, Law, Leach, Lee, Limbaugh, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Mack, Maddox, Martin, Mason, McCraw, McKay, McLeod, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Neilson, Parks, Phillips, Pinckney, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Riser, Robinson, Rodgers, Sandifer, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, Simrill, D. Smith, F. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stoddard, Stuart, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Walker, Webb, Whatley, Whipper, Wilder, Wilkes, Wilkins, Witherspoon, Woodrum, Young and Young-Brickell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE SOUTH CAROLINA CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BENCH AND BAR SPOUSES, INCORPORATED, ON SPONSORING ITS FOURTH ANNUAL SCHOLARSHIP GALA AND WISHING IT MUCH SUCCESS IN ITS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4261 (Word version) -- Reps. H. Brown and Hinson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE HANAHAN HIGH SCHOOL "HAWKS" SOCCER TEAM, COACHES, AND STAFF ON WINNING THE 1996-97 CLASS AA-A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4262 (Word version) -- Rep. Bailey: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT THE DEATH OF TERETHA LEMON-LINCOLN OF DORCHESTER COUNTY AND EXTENDING SYMPATHY TO HER FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4263 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JACOB SVENSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4264 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING RICARDO ALMEIDA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4265 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING CLAES PERSSON OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS ROLE IN ASSISTING LANDER WIN THE 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4266 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING FRANK POTTHOFF OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4267 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARTIN KAHM OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4268 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING LAIO TEIXEIRA OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4269 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MAURICE SZPYDOWSKI OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4270 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING JANNE VILHUNEN OF LANDER UNIVERSITY FOR HIS OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AS A MEMBER OF LANDER'S 1997 NCAA DIVISION II NATIONAL MENS TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4271 (Word version) -- Reps. Carnell, Klauber, Parks and Stille: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING COACH JOSEPH CABRI, LANDER UNIVERSITY MENS TENNIS COACH, FOR LEADING THE UNIVERSITY'S MENS TENNIS TEAM TO ITS NINTH NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP AND ON HIS SUCCESS AS AN OUTSTANDING FACULTY MEMBER.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

H. 4273 (Word version) -- Rep. McLeod: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MARYLAND STATE SENATOR GLORIA GARY LAWLAH, A NATIVE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF NEWBERRY, SOUTH CAROLINA, FOR HER DISTINGUISHED LEADERSHIP RECORD AND ACHIEVEMENTS.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered returned to the House.

Senator WILSON from the General Committee has polled out H. 3847 with no report:
H. 3847 (Word version) -- Reps. Meacham and Kirsh: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 39-55-215, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MINIMUM ACREAGE OF LAND REQUIRED FOR USE AS A CEMETERY, SO AS TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION.

Wilson                    Holland                   Moore
Thomas                    O'Dell                    Washington
Courtney                  Russell                   Martin
Mescher                   Ryberg                    Short
Courson                   Fair                      Gregory
Ravenel                   Williams

Alexander

Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

S. 271 (Word version) -- Senator J. Verne Smith: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 3, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF ARCHITECTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO CLARIFY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRM LICENSURE; TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION; TO EXPAND GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION; AND REVISE EXAMINATION PROCEDURES.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

On motion of Senator J. VERNE SMITH, the Senate nonconcurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly.

H. 3858 (Word version) -- Reps. Vaughn, Haskins, Cato, Leach and Hamilton: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 432 OF 1947, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, ITS CREATION, BOARD, POWERS, AND DUTIES, SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM SELLING, LEASING, MERGING, CONSOLIDATING, OR TRANSFERRING CERTAIN OF ITS ASSETS OR ENTERING INTO A JOINT VENTURE OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE GREENVILLE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION IF THE ACTION DISPOSES OF OR COMMITS TEN PERCENT OR MORE OF THE ASSETS; TO PROHIBIT THE BOARD FROM TRANSFERRING OR DELEGATING ITS RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY OVER THE HOSPITAL SYSTEM TO ANY OTHER PERSONS, BOARD, OR ENTITY, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION ONLY MAY CALL FOR A REFERENDUM IF CONSENT IS REQUESTED TO TAKE SUCH ACTION; TO INCREASE THE BOARD FROM SEVEN TO NINE MEMBERS AND TO PROVIDE NOMINATING PROCEDURES AND TO PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE COMPOSITION AND PROCEDURES CONTINGENT UPON A GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL STIPULATION BY ORDINANCE; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND LOCATE FACILITIES OUTSIDE OF GREENVILLE COUNTY IF SUCH WOULD ENHANCE SERVICES; TO ENTER INTO JOINT VENTURES OR OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR OBTAINING CONSENT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AUTHORIZE THE CHANGE OF NAME OF THE BOARD AND THE OPERATION OF THE BOARD UNDER A TRADE NAME; TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE OR MORE SUBSIDIARIES AND TO REQUIRE SUCH ENTITY TO COMPLY WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL HOSPITALS OR OTHER CLINICS; TO AUTHORIZE THE EXERCISE OF CERTAIN POWERS GENERALLY CONFERRED ON REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICE DISTRICTS; TO AMEND ACT 1285 OF 1966, RELATING TO THE NAME OF THE GREENVILLE HOSPITAL SYSTEM, SO AS TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE BOARD TO THE GREENVILLE HEALTH SYSTEM BOARD OF TRUSTEES; TO REQUIRE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR ANY DAMAGES THE COUNTY MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY THE CITY UNDER A CONTRACT ARISING OUT OF ACT 432 OF 1947; AND TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS CONTINGENT UPON STIPULATIONS OF GREENVILLE CITY COUNCIL.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

On motion of Senator THOMAS, the Senate nonconcurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly.

S. 641 (Word version) -- Senators Holland and Bryan: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-100, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PROBATE CODE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS IN AN ESTATE ARE DETERMINED BY THE LAW IN EFFECT AT THE DATE OF DEATH; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-201, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "MINOR", SO AS TO EXCLUDE THOSE PERSONS UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN WHO ARE EITHER MARRIED OR EMANCIPATED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-302, RELATING TO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE PROBATE COURT, SO AS TO GIVE THE PROBATE COURT EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER ACCOUNTS AND DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THE UNIFORM GIFTS TO MINORS ACT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-308, RELATING TO APPEALS, SO AS TO ADD A PROVISION ALLOWING PARTIES NOT IN DEFAULT TO APPEAL DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-403, RELATING TO THE REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY OF PARENTS, SO AS TO ADD "UNBORN CHILD"; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-109, RELATING TO THE MEANING OF "CHILD", SO AS TO CLARIFY WHEN AND HOW PATERNITY MAY BE ESTABLISHED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-302, RELATING TO PRETERMITTED CHILDREN, SO AS TO SUBSTITUTE "SPOUSE" FOR "PARENT OF THE OMITTED CHILD"; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-501, RELATING TO WHO MAY MAKE A WILL, SO AS TO PROHIBIT MINORS, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 62-1-201(24) FROM MAKING A WILL; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-802, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "SURVIVING SPOUSE", SO AS TO NOT INCLUDE A COMMON LAW SPOUSE UNLESS HE OR SHE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SUCH BY AN ADJUDICATION COMMENCED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD; TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-803, RELATING TO THE EFFECTS OF HOMICIDE ON INTESTATE SUCCESSION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A KILLER WHO DIES WITHIN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY HOURS OF THE DECEDENT IS DEEMED TO HAVE PREDECEASED THE DECEDENT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-203, RELATING TO THE PRIORITY AMONG PERSONS SEEKING APPOINTMENT AS A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO DELETE LANGUAGE CONVEYING THE PRIORITY OF A NOMINATOR TO THE NOMINEE FROM SUBSECTION (7), AND TO ADD THIS LANGUAGE TO SUBSECTION (8) WITH THE QUALIFICATION THAT PERSONS NOMINATED BY THE DECEDENT SHALL HAVE THE HIGHEST PRIORITY; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-603, RELATING TO BOND REQUIRED OF PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, SO AS TO CLARIFY WHEN BOND IS REQUIRED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-610, RELATING TO THE TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS FOR RESIGNATION OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-614, RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO ALLOW INFORMAL APPOINTMENT UPON THE APPLICATION OF A CREDITOR OF THE DECEDENT'S ESTATE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-719, RELATING TO THE COMPENSATION OF A PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT COMPENSATION IS BASED UPON THE VALUE OF THE PROBATE ESTATE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-914, RELATING TO THE DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED ASSETS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT UNCLAIMED DEVISES OF ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS OR LESS MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE TREASURER; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-1001, RELATING TO PETITION FOR SETTLEMENT, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT THE PROPOSAL FOR DISTRIBUTION PERTAINS ONLY TO ASSETS NOT YET DISTRIBUTED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-3-1101, RELATING TO THE EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS INVOLVING TRUSTS, INALIENABLE INTERESTS, OR INTERESTS OF THIRD PERSONS, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT SETTLEMENTS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION NEED NOT COMPLY WITH SECTION 62-5-433; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-103, RELATING TO PAYMENT OR DELIVERY TO A MINOR OR INCAPACITATED PERSON, SO AS TO CLARIFY FOR WHAT PURPOSES SUMS RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF THE MINOR OR INCAPACITATED PERSON MAY BE USED; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-104, RELATING TO THE DELEGATION OF A GUARDIAN'S POWERS, SO AS TO ALLOW THE POWERS TO BE DELEGATED TO ANOTHER PERSON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY DAYS; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-310, RELATING TO TEMPORARY GUARDIANS, SO AS TO REQUIRE A HEARING TO REVIEW THE APPOINTMENT OF A TEMPORARY GUARDIAN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THAT APPOINTMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-405, RELATING TO NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF A CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT THE PERSON TO BE PROTECTED BE PERSONALLY SERVED WITH NOTICE AT LEAST TWENTY DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-424, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CONSERVATOR MAY, WITH COURT APPROVAL, ENCUMBER ASSETS FOR PERIODS WITHIN OR BEYOND HIS TERM OF CONSERVATORSHIP; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-425, RELATING TO DISTRIBUTIVE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE CONSERVATOR, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT MARRIAGE DOES NOT END A CONSERVATORSHIP, BUT RATHER ONLY MAJORITY OR EMANCIPATION RESULTING FROM A PROCEEDING BEGUN PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE CONSERVATORSHIP; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-428, RELATING TO CLAIMS AGAINST PROTECTED PERSONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT ANY CLAIM DENIED BY THE CONSERVATOR REMAINS BARRED UNLESS THE CLAIMANT FILES A PETITION WITH THE COURT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF THE DISALLOWANCE; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-501, RELATING TO POWERS OF ATTORNEY NOT AFFECTED BY DISABILITY, SO AS TO REPEAL SUBSECTION (D); TO AMEND SECTION 62-7-705, RELATING TO THE RESIGNATION OF A TRUSTEE, SO AS TO ALLOW RESIGNATION ONLY UPON SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 20-1-550, RELATING TO SERVICE UPON A NONRESIDENT OR ABSENT DEFENDANT IN AN ACTION TO ANNUL A MARRIAGE, SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE DUTY OF THE PLAINTIFF TO FORWARD NOTICE TO THE PROBATE COURT; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-150, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS UNDER THE UNIFORM GIFTS TO MINORS ACT, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITIONS OF "COURT" AND "MINOR"; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 14-23-650, RELATING TO THE DESCRIPTION OF DEVISED LANDS.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

On motion of Senator McCONNELL, the Senate concurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly. Ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for Ratification.

H. 3461 (Word version) -- Reps. McMahand, F. Smith, Sheheen, Allison, Breeland, Spearman, Littlejohn, Lee, Stoddard and Davenport: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 59-67-545 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE PARENTS AND OTHER ADULT SCHOOL VOLUNTEERS TO RIDE SCHOOL BUSES ON A SPACE AVAILABLE BASIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THEIR VOLUNTEER SCHOOL ACTIVITIES UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

On motion of Senator SETZLER, the Senate concurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly. Ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for Ratification.

S. 315 (Word version) -- Senator Thomas: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 24-3-550, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO WITNESSES AT AN EXECUTION, SO AS TO REVISE THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WHO MAY WITNESS AN EXECUTION.
The House returned the Bill with amendments.

On motion of Senator THOMAS, the Senate concurred in the House amendments and a message was sent to the House accordingly. Ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for Ratification.

S. 800 (Word version) -- Senators Setzler, Lander, Ryberg and Wilson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO COMMEND MRS. BETTY BAIRD OF BATESBURG FOR HER MANY YEARS OF DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS LEXINGTON COUNTY EXTENSION AGENT WITH CLEMSON EXTENSION SERVICE UPON THE OCCASION OF HER RETIREMENT.
Returned with concurrence.
Received as information.

S. 799 (Word version) -- Senator Leventis: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING LEROY A. THOMPSON, JR., OF SUMTER ON BEING SELECTED TO RECEIVE THE "OUTSTANDING STATE EMPLOYEE AWARD" FOR 1997 AND COMMENDING HIM FOR HIS DEDICATION AS A STATE WORKER AND FOR HIS OUTSTANDING ABILITIES.
Returned with concurrence.
Received as information.

Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it refuses to concur in the amendments proposed by the Senate to:
S. 236 (Word version) -- Senators McConnell, Passailaigue and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 9, TITLE 6, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO BUILDING CODES, SO AS TO REVISE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE CODES AND THE MANNER IN WHICH COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES MUST ADOPT AND ENFORCE SUCH CODES, REVISE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE BUILDING CODES COUNCIL, REVISE PENALTIES, PROVIDE FOR DUTIES OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL AND DEPUTY FIRE MARSHALS IN REGARD TO THESE CODES, AND PROVIDE FOR LIMITED APPLICATION OF THE CHAPTER; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 8 TO TITLE 6 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR BUILDING CODES ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND FOR THEIR FUNCTIONS, DUTIES, AND REGISTRATION; BY ADDING SECTION 38-7-35 SO AS TO PROVIDE THE FIRST TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OF THE PREMIUM TAX LEVIED ON FIRE INSURERS MUST BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING THE TRAINING, CERTIFICATION, AND CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAM FOR BUILDING CODES ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House

On motion of Senator McCONNELL, the Senate insisted upon its amendments to S. 236 and asked for a Committee of Conference.

Whereupon, the PRESIDENT Pro Tempore appointed Senators McCONNELL, BRYAN and LANDER of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate and a message was sent to the House accordingly.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it insists upon the amendments proposed by the House to:
S. 271 (Word version) -- Senator J. Verne Smith: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 3, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF ARCHITECTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND, AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO CLARIFY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRM LICENSURE; TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION; TO EXPAND GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION; AND REVISE EXAMINATION PROCEDURES.
asks for a Committee of Conference, and has appointed Reps. Trotter, Phillips and Law of the committee on the part of the House.

Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House

Whereupon, the PRESIDENT Pro Tempore appointed Senators MOORE, O'DELL and ALEXANDER of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate and a message was sent to the House accordingly.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has appointed Reps. Chellis, Law and G. Brown of the Committee of Conference on the part of the House on:
S. 269 (Word version) -- Senators Setzler and Moore: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 7, TITLE 40, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REGULATION AND LICENSURE OF BARBERS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL BOARDS AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF BARBERS.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

Columbia, S.C., June 3, 1997

Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has appointed Reps. Young, Cotty and Govan of the Committee of Conference on the part of the House on:
H. 3744 (Word version) -- Rep. Wilkins: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A STUDY COMMITTEE TO FORMULATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO CONSIDER FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION CONCERNING DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS AND THE TREATMENT METHODS, COMMITMENT PROCEDURES, AND THE PROSECUTION OF MOTHERS OF DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS, AND ALL OTHER RELATED ISSUES CONCERNING DRUG IMPAIRED INFANTS AND THEIR MOTHERS.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.

THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO A CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED LOCAL AND STATEWIDE CALENDAR.

The following Bill and Joint Resolutions were read the third time and having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the titles be changed to that of Acts and enrolled for Ratification:

H. 3756 (Word version) -- Reps. Limehouse, Bailey, Battle, Bauer, Bowers, J. Brown, T. Brown, Campsen, Canty, Chellis, Dantzler, Delleney, Edge, Gamble, Gourdine, Harrell, Hinson, Hodges, Jordan, Kelley, Kennedy, Kinon, Kirsh, Klauber, Koon, Leach, Mason, McMahand, McMaster, Meacham, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, Mullen, Neal, Pinckney, Rhoad, Rice, Rodgers, Scott, Seithel, Sharpe, Sheheen, F. Smith, Spearman, Stille, Stuart, Tripp, Walker, Whatley, Whipper and Witherspoon: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-17-510, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RESTRICTIONS ON TAKING CERTAIN FISH, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT BLACK SEA BASS BE PROCESSED, MARKETED, AND SOLD WITH THE HEAD AND TAIL FINS INTACT.
On motion of Senator GIESE, with unanimous consent, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

Senator RAVENEL explained the Bill.

H. 4190 (Word version) -- Education and Public Works Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO DEFINED PROGRAM K-5, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2123, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

H. 4191 (Word version) -- Education and Public Works Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO DEFINED PROGRAM 6-8 (AMENDED TITLE), DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2126, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

H. 4192 (Word version) -- Education and Public Works Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO DEFINED PROGRAM 9-12, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2124, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

The following House Bills were read the third time and ordered returned to the House with amendments:

H. 3207 (Word version) -- Reps. Seithel and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 61-6-35 SO AS TO PROHIBIT DRINKING GAMES IN ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH SELL ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES, AND TO DEFINE "DRINKING GAMES" AND "ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS".
On motion of Senator RANKIN, with unanimous consent, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

H. 3607 (Word version) -- Rep. Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-96-60, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1991 AND THE STATE SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, INCREASE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COUNCIL, PROVIDE FOR VARIOUS TERMS OF OFFICE, AND DELETE THE PROVISION REGARDING EXPIRATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE COUNCIL; TO AMEND SECTION 44-96-100, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL UNDER THE SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT, SO AS TO ADD PROVISIONS WHICH PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH A REGULATION OR BRING A CIVIL ACTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OR REQUEST THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO BRING CIVIL OR CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY IMPOSE CERTAIN CIVIL PENALTIES, AND THAT WILFUL VIOLATION OF CERTAIN REGULATIONS IS A MISDEMEANOR; AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 44-96-400, 44-96-410, AND 44-96-420, RELATING TO THE SOLID WASTE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT AND PROVISIONS GOVERNING WASTE MANAGEMENT, SO AS TO DELETE REFERENCE TO "ARTICLE" AND SUBSTITUTE "CHAPTER" THEREFOR.
On motion of Senator MATTHEWS, with unanimous consent, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

H. 3419 (Word version) -- Reps. Cobb-Hunter, R. Smith, Harrell, Kennedy and Harvin: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 59-127-310, 59-127-320, 59-127-400, 59-127-440, AND 59-127-460, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPECIAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, SO AS TO DEFINE "NET ATHLETIC REVENUES" AND ADD THESE REVENUES TO THOSE REVENUE SERVICES PREVIOUSLY AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE ON THESE BONDS, TO REMOVE THE THREE MILLION DOLLAR OUTSTANDING DEBT LIMIT FOR THESE BONDS, TO AUTHORIZE BOND PROCEEDS TO BE USED FOR ACQUIRING, CONSTRUCTING, RECONSTRUCTING, RENOVATING, OR EQUIPPING ATHLETIC FACILITIES, AND TO REFUND PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BONDS, AND TO DELETE PROVISIONS RELATING TO ADVERTISING OF ISSUES.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment (3419R001.GFM) proposed by Senator McCONNELL and previously printed in the Journal of Tuesday, May 27, 1997.

On motion of Senator McCONNELL, with unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

H. 3626 (Word version) -- Rep. Harrell: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 21, TITLE 12, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES, BY ADDING ARTICLE 27 SO AS TO ENACT THE TOURISM INFRASTRUCTURE TAX ACT AND WHICH PROVIDES THAT A PORTION OF ADMISSIONS TAXES PAID TO CERTAIN TOURISM AND RECREATION FACILITIES MAY BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, PROVIDES FOR THE FUND INTO WHICH THESE REVENUES MUST BE DEPOSITED AND THE USES TO WHICH THEY MAY BE PUT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND DURATION OF THE PROGRAM, AND FOR THOSE FACILITIES ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 12-21-2423, RELATING TO A SIMILAR USE OF A PORTION OF ADMISSIONS TAX REVENUES.
On motion of Senator LEVENTIS, with unanimous consent, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senator LEVENTIS explained the Bill.

H. 3677 (Word version) -- Rep. Klauber: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 1, TITLE 35, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE UNIFORM SECURITIES ACT, SO AS TO REVISE THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHAPTER BY DELETING CERTAIN LANGUAGE AND PROVISIONS, ADDING NEW PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, FOR DEFINITIONS FOR THE TERMS "FEDERAL COVERED ADVISER" AND "FEDERAL COVERED SECURITY", THAT INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS AND COMPLAINTS FILED WITH THE SECURITIES COMMISSIONER ARE NOT CONSIDERED PUBLIC INFORMATION BUT ISSUED ORDERS, INCLUDING CERTAIN COMPLAINTS, ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC RECORDS, THAT CERTAIN BROKER-DEALERS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 35-1-410, THAT CERTAIN ACTIVITY IS UNLAWFUL, THAT EVERY INVESTMENT ADVISER REGISTRATION OR NOTICE FILING EXPIRES TWO YEARS FROM ITS EFFECTIVE DATE UNLESS RENEWED, THAT REGISTRATION OF AN INVESTMENT ADVISER AUTOMATICALLY CONSTITUTES REGISTRATION OF ANY INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVE WHO IS A PARTNER, OFFICER, OR DIRECTOR OR A PERSON OCCUPYING A SIMILAR STATUS OR PERFORMING SIMILAR FUNCTIONS, FOR CHANGES IN CERTAIN FEES, THAT THE SECURITIES COMMISSIONER MAY REQUIRE, WITH RESPECT TO INVESTMENT ADVISERS, THAT CERTAIN INFORMATION BE FURNISHED OR DISSEMINATED AS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR FOR THE PROTECTION OF INVESTORS AND ADVISORY CLIENTS, FOR NOTICE FILINGS FOR FEDERAL COVERED SECURITIES, THAT UNLESS PROHIBITED BY RULE OR ORDER OF THE SECURITIES COMMISSIONER, AN INVESTMENT ADVISER REGISTERED UNDER THE INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940 MAY TAKE OR RETAIN CUSTODY OF SECURITIES OR FUNDS OF A CLIENT, AND THAT THE SECURITIES COMMISSIONER MAY REFER AVAILABLE EVIDENCE CONCERNING VIOLATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER OR OF ANY RULE OR ORDER UNDER THIS CHAPTER TO THE APPROPRIATE DIVISION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE OR OTHER APPROPRIATE PROSECUTION, LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR LICENSING AUTHORITIES WHO MAY INSTITUTE THE APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER THIS CHAPTER.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senator SALEEBY proposed the following amendment (BBM\9501JM.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 1 and inserting:
/ SECTION   1.   Chapter 1, Title 35 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

Section 35-1-10.   This chapter may be cited as the Uniform Securities Act.
Section 35-1-20.   When used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1)   'Securities commissioner' means Attorney General, who shall be ex officio securities commissioner.
(2)   'Agent' means any individual, other than a broker-dealer, who represents a broker-dealer or issuer in effecting or attempting to effect purchases or sales of securities. 'Agent' does not include an individual who represents (a) an issuer in (a) (i) effecting transactions in a security exempted by item (1), (2), (3), (9) or (10) of Section 35-1-310, (b) (ii) effecting transactions exempted by Section 35-1-320 or (c) (iii) effecting transactions with existing employees, partners or directors of the issuer or any of its subsidiaries if no commission or other remuneration is paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting any person in this State. A partner, officer or director of a broker-dealer or issuer, or a person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, is an 'agent' only if he otherwise comes within this definition.
(3)   'Broker-dealer' means any person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the account of others or for his own account. 'Broker-dealer' does not include (a) an agent, (b) an issuer, (c) a bank, savings institution or trust company or (d) a person who has no place of business in this State if (i) he effects transactions in this State exclusively with or through (1) the issuers of the securities involved in the transactions, (2) other broker-dealers or (3) banks, savings institutions, trust companies, insurance companies, investment companies as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, pension or profit-sharing trusts or other financial institutions or institutional buyers, whether acting for themselves or as trustees or (ii) during any period of twelve consecutive months he does not direct more than fifteen offers to sell or buy into this State in any manner to persons other than those specified in clause (i), whether or not the offeror or any of the offerees is then present in this State.
(4)   'Federal covered adviser' means a person who is registered under Section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or who is excluded from the definition of 'investment adviser' under Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.
(5)   'Federal covered security' means any security that is a covered security under Section 18(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 or the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.
(6)   'Fraud,' 'deceit' and 'defraud' are not limited to common-law deceit.
(5)(7)   'Guaranteed' means guaranteed as to payment of principal, interest or dividends.
(6)(8)   'Investment adviser' means any person who, for compensation, engages in the business of advising others, either directly or through publications or writings, as to the value of securities or as to the advisability of investing in, purchasing, or selling securities or who, for compensation and as a part of a regular business, issues or promulgates analyses or reports concerning securities. 'Investment adviser' also includes financial planners and other persons who, as an integral component of other financially related services, provide the foregoing investment advisory services to others for compensation and as part of a business or who hold themselves out as providing the foregoing investment advisory services to others for compensation. 'Investment adviser' does not include (a) an employee of an investment adviser; (b) a bank, savings institution, or trust company; (b) (c) a lawyer, accountant, engineer, or teacher whose performance of these services is solely incidental to the practice of his profession; (c) (d) a broker-dealer whose performance of these services is solely incidental to the conduct of his business as a broker-dealer and who receives no special compensation for them; (d) (e) a publisher of any bona fide newspaper, news column, newsletter, news magazine, or business or financial publication of general, regular, and paid circulation or service, whether communicated in hard copy form, or by electronic means, or otherwise, that does not consist of the rendering of advice on the basis of the specific investment situation of each client; (e) a person whose advice, analyses, or reports relate only to securities exempted by item (1) of Section 35-1-310; (f) any person that is a federal covered adviser; a person who has no place of business in this State if (i) his only clients in this State are other investment advisers, broker-dealers, banks, savings institutions, trust companies, insurance companies, investment companies as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, pension or profit-sharing trusts, or other financial institutions or institutional buyers, whether acting for themselves or as trustees or (ii) during any period of twelve consecutive months he does not direct business communications into this State in any manner to more than five clients other than those specified in clause (i), whether or not he or any of the persons to whom the communications are directed is then present in this State; or (g) such other persons not within the intent of this item as the securities commissioner may by rule or order designate. Until October 10, 1999, the exclusions provided in Section 35-1-20(8)(f) shall not apply to a person who fails to pay the fees required under Section 35-1-480(B) of this chapter.
(6A)(9)   'Investment adviser representative' (a) with respect to any adviser registered or required to be registered under this chapter, means a any partner, officer, director, of or person individual occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, or other individual, except clerical or ministerial personnel, who is employed by or associated with an investment adviser and, except clerical personnel, who does any of the following:
(a)(i)   makes any recommendations or otherwise renders advice regarding securities directly to clients,
(b)(ii)   manages accounts or portfolios of clients,
(c)(iii)   determines which recommendations or advice regarding securities must should be given,
(d)(iv)   solicits, offers, or negotiates for the sale of or sells investment advisory services, or
(e)(v)   directly supervises employees who perform any of the foregoing; or investment adviser representatives, unless the investment adviser representatives are already required to register due to their role as supervisors.
The persons and entities excluded from the definition of 'investment adviser' under item (6) of this section are also excluded from the definition of 'investment adviser representative' under this item (6A).
(b)   with respect to any person that is registered or required to be registered under Section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or that is excluded from the definition of an 'investment adviser' under Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, means any person who is defined as an investment adviser representative' under SEC Rule 203a-3 (17 CFR 275.203a-3) and who has a place of business located in this State.
(7)(10)   'Issuer' means any person who issues or proposes to issue any security, except that (a) with respect to certificates of deposit, voting-trust certificates or collateral-trust certificates, or with respect to certificates of interest or shares in an unincorporated investment trust not having a board of directors or persons performing similar functions or of the fixed, restricted management or unit type, the term 'issuer' means the person or persons performing the acts and assuming the duties of depositor or manager pursuant to the provisions of the trust or other agreement or instrument under which the security is issued and (b) with respect to certificates of interest or participation in oil, gas or mining titles or leases or in payments out of production under such titles or leases, there is not considered to be any 'issuer'.
(8)(11)   'Nonissuer' means not directly or indirectly for the benefit of the issuer.
(9)(12)   'Person' means an individual, a corporation, a partnership, an association, a joint-stock company, a trust where the interests of the beneficiaries are evidenced by a security, an unincorporated organization, a government or a political subdivision of a government.
(10)(13)(a)   'Sale' or 'sell' includes every contract of sale of, contract to sell, or disposition of, a security or interest in a security for value.
(b)   'Offer' or 'offer to sell' includes every attempt or offer to dispose of, or solicitation of an offer to buy, a security or interest in a security for value.
(c)   Any security given or delivered with, or as a bonus on account of, any purchase of securities, or any other thing is considered to constitute part of the subject of the purchase and to have been offered and sold for value.
(d)   A purported gift of assessable stock is considered to involve an offer and sale.
(e)   Every sale or offer of a warrant or right to purchase or subscribe to another security of the same or another issuer, as well as every sale or offer of a security which gives the holder a present or future right or privilege to convert into another security of the same or another issuer, is considered to include an offer of the other security.
(f)   The terms defined in this item (10) (12) do not include (i) any bona fide pledge or loan, (ii) any stock dividend, whether the corporation distributing the dividend is the issuer of the stock or not, if nothing of value is given by stockholders for the dividend other than the surrender of a right to a cash or property dividend when each stockholder may elect to take the dividend in cash or property or in stock, (iii) any act incident to a class vote by stockholders, limited partners, or members of a limited liability company, pursuant to certificate of incorporation, partnership or limited liability company agreement, or the applicable corporation, limited liability company or partnership statute, on a merger, consolidation, reclassification of securities, or sale of corporate assets in consideration of the issuance of securities of another corporation entity, or (iv) any act incident to a judicially approved reorganization in which a security is issued in exchange for one or more outstanding securities, claims or property interests, or partly in such exchange and partly for cash or (v) a solicitation of interest the response to which does not legally obligate the responding person to purchase or pay for the securities and which conforms to such other requirements as the securities commissioner may adopt by rule, order, or statement of policy.
(11)(14)   'Securities Act of 1933,' 'Securities Exchange Act of 1934,' 'Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935' and 'Investment Company Act of 1940' mean the federal statutes of those names as amended before or after June 14, 1961.
(12)(15)   'Security' means any note, stock, treasury stock, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate of subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, certificate of interest or participation in an oil, gas or mining title or lease or in payments out of production under such a title or lease or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a 'security', or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing. 'Security' does not include any insurance or endowment policy or annuity contract under which an insurance company promises to pay money either in a lump sum or periodically for life or for some other specified period.
(13)(16)   'State' means a state, territory, or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
Section 35-1-30.   This chapter shall be administered by the Attorney General who shall be ex officio the securities commissioner and who may employ such additional assistants at such salaries as may be authorized by the General Assembly as he deems necessary. The securities commissioner may delegate any or all of his duties pursuant to this act to members of his staff, as he deems necessary or appropriate.
Section 35-1-40.   It is unlawful for the securities commissioner or any of his officers or employees to use for personal benefit any information which is filed with or obtained by the securities commissioner and which is not made public. No provision of this chapter authorizes the securities commissioner or any of his officers or employees to disclose any such information except among themselves or when necessary or appropriate in a proceeding or investigation under this chapter. No provision of this chapter either creates or derogates from any privilege which exists at common law or otherwise when documentary or other evidence is sought under a subpoena directed to the Securities Commissioner or any of his officers or employees.
Investigative records and complaints filed with the securities commissioner shall not be considered public information. Orders issued by the commissioner, including complaints of the commission, are to be considered public records.
Section 35-1-50.   The securities commissioner by rule or order may require the approval filing of any prospectus, pamphlet, circular, form letter, advertisement or other sales literature or advertising communication addressed or intended for distribution to prospective investors, including clients or prospective clients of an investment adviser, unless the security or transaction is exempted by Sections Section 35-1-310 and or 35-1-320, or the security is a federal covered security or the transaction is with respect to a federal covered security.
Section 35-1-60.   The securities commissioner may make, amend, and rescind those rules, forms, and orders, including cease and desist orders, as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including rules and forms governing registration statements, applications, and reports and defining any terms, whether or not used in this chapter, insofar as the definitions are not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter. For the purpose of rules and forms, the securities commissioner may classify securities, persons, and matters within his jurisdiction and prescribe different requirements for different classes.
No rule, form, or order may be made, amended, or rescinded unless the securities commissioner finds that the action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors and consistent with the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of this chapter. In prescribing rules and forms the securities commissioner may cooperate with the securities administrators of the other states and the Securities and Exchange Commission with a view to effectuating the policy of this chapter to achieve maximum uniformity in the form and content of registration statements, applications, and reports wherever practicable.
All rules and forms of the securities commissioner must be published.
Section 35-1-70.   The securities commissioner may by rule or order prescribe (a) the form and content of financial statements required under this chapter, (b) the circumstances under which consolidated financial statements shall be filed and (c) whether any required financial statements shall be certified by independent or certified public accountants. All financial statements shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices.
Section 35-1-80.   No provision of this chapter imposing any liability applies to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, form, or order or policy statement of the securities commissioner, notwithstanding that the rule, form, or order or policy statement may later be amended or rescinded or be determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason. The burden of proving good faith rests on the person claiming reliance.
Section 35-1-90.   Every hearing in an administrative proceeding shall be public unless the securities commissioner in his discretion grants a request joined in by all the respondents that the hearing be conducted privately.
Section 35-1-100.   A document is filed when it is received by the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-110.   The Securities Commissioner shall keep a register of all applications for registration and registration statements which are or have ever been effective under this chapter and all denial, suspension, or revocation orders which have been entered under this chapter. The register shall be open for public inspection.
Section 35-1-120.   The information contained in or filed with any registration statement, notice filing, application, or report may be made available to the public under such rules as the securities commissioner prescribes.
Section 35-1-130.   Upon request and at such reasonable charges as he prescribes, the securities commissioner shall furnish to any person photostatic or other copies, certified under his seal of office if requested, of any entry in the register or any document which is a matter of public record. In any proceeding or prosecution under this chapter, any copy so certified is prima facie evidence of the contents of the entry or document certified.
Section 35-1-140.   The securities commissioner in his discretion may honor requests from interested persons for interpretative opinions.
Section 35-1-150.   Fees for examinations, filings under Section 35-1-50, and other miscellaneous filings for which no fees are otherwise specified by law shall be set by the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-160.   It is unlawful for any person to make or cause to be made, in any document filed with the securities commissioner or in any proceeding under this chapter, any statement which is, at the time and in the light of the circumstances under which it is made, false or misleading in any material respect.
Section 35-1-170.   (1)   Neither (a) the fact that an application for registration under Article 5 of this chapter or a registration statement under Article 7 of this chapter or a notice filing under Article 8 of this chapter has been filed nor (b) the fact that a person or security is effectively registered or a notice of filing has been made constitutes a finding by the securities commissioner that any document filed under this chapter is true, complete, and not misleading. Neither any such fact nor the fact that an exemption or exception is available for a security or a transaction means that the securities commissioner has passed in any way upon the merits or qualifications of, or recommended or given approval to, any person, security, or transaction.
(2)   It is unlawful to make, or cause to be made, to any prospective purchaser, customer, or client any representation inconsistent with subsection (1) of this section.
Section 35-1-180.   (1)   Sections 35-1-170, 35-1-410, 35-1-810, 35-1-1210 and 35-1-1490 to 35-1-1560 apply to persons who sell or offer to sell when (a) an offer to sell is made in this State or (b) an offer to buy is made and accepted in this State.
(2)   Sections 35-1-170, 35-1-410 and 35-1-1210 apply to persons who buy or offer to buy when (a) an offer to buy is made in this State or (b) an offer to sell is made and accepted in this State.
(3)   For the purpose of this section, an offer to sell or to buy is made in this State, whether or not either party is then present in this State, when the offer (a) originates from this State or (b) is directed by the offeror to this State and received at the place to which it is directed, or at any post office in this State in the case of a mailed offer.
(4)   For the purpose of this section, an offer to buy or to sell is accepted in this State when acceptance (a) is communicated to the offeror in this State and (b) has not previously been communicated to the offeror, orally or in writing, outside this State, and acceptance is communicated to the offeror in this State, whether or not either party is then present in this State, when the offeree directs it to the offeror in this State reasonably believing the offeror to be in this State and it is received at the place to which it is directed, or at any post office in this State in the case of a mailed acceptance.
(5)   An offer to sell or to buy is not made in this State when (a) the publisher circulates or there is circulated on his behalf in this State any bona fide newspaper or other publication of general, regular, and paid circulation which is not published in this State, or which is published in this State but has had more than two-thirds of its circulation outside this State during the past twelve months or (b) a radio or television program originating outside this State is received in this State.
(6)   Sections 35-1-420 and 35-1-1220 to 35-1-1240, as well as Section 35-1-170 so far as investment advisers are concerned, apply when any act instrumental in effecting prohibited conduct is done in this State, whether or not either party is then present in this State.
Section 35-1-190.   Prior law exclusively governs all suits, actions, prosecutions or proceedings which are pending or may be initiated on the basis of facts or circumstances occurring before June 14, 1961, except that no civil suit or action may be maintained to enforce any liability under prior law unless brought within any period of limitation which applied when the cause of action accrued and in any event within two years after June 14, 1961.
Section 35-1-200.   All effective registrations under prior law, all administrative orders relating to such registrations, and all conditions imposed upon such registrations remain in effect so long as they would have remained in effect if this chapter had not become effective. They are considered to have been filed, entered, or imposed under this chapter, but are governed by prior law.
Section 35-1-210.Prior law applies in respect of any offer or sale made within one year after June 14, 1961 pursuant to an offering begun in good faith before June 14, 1961 on the basis of an exemption available under prior law.
Section 35-1-220.   (A)   Fee revenues collected pursuant to this chapter in excess of such revenues credited to the general fund of the State in Fiscal Year 1995-96 may be retained by the Attorney General and used for the operations of the Securities Division.
(B)   The Attorney General may retain the first two hundred fifty thousand dollars received by the Division of Securities in a fiscal year in settlement of litigation enforcement action and reimbursements of expenses arising from violations under this chapter to offset investigative, prosecutive, and administrative costs of enforcing this chapter.

Section 35-1-310.   The following securities are exempted from Sections 35-1-50, and 35-1-810, and 35-1-1100:
(1)   Domestic government securities. Any security, including a revenue obligation, issued or guaranteed by the United States, any state, any political subdivision of a state or any agency or corporate or other instrumentality of one or more of the foregoing, or any certificate of deposit for any of the foregoing;
(2)   Foreign government securities. Any security issued or guaranteed by Canada, any Canadian province, any political subdivision of any such province, any agency or corporate or other instrumentality of one or more of the foregoing or any other foreign government with which the United States currently maintains diplomatic relations, if the security is recognized as a valid obligation by the issuer or guarantor;
(3)   Securities of banks, etc. trusts and savings institutions. Any security issued by and representing an interest in or a debt of, or guaranteed by, any bank organized under the laws of the United States or any bank, savings institution, or trust company organized and supervised under the laws of any state;
(4)   Securities of federal savings and loan and similar associations. Any security issued by and representing an interest in or a debt of, or guaranteed by, any federal savings and loan association, or any building and loan or similar association, organized under the laws of any state and authorized to do business in this State;
(5)   Securities of federal or state credit unions. Any security issued or guaranteed by any federal credit union or any credit union, industrial loan association, or similar association organized and supervised under the laws of this State;
(6)   Securities of public service companies. Any security issued or guaranteed by any railroad, other common carrier, public utility or holding company which is (a) subject to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission, (b) a registered holding company under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 or a subsidiary of such a company within the meaning of that act, (c) regulated in respect of its rates and charges by a governmental authority of the United States or any state or (d) regulated in respect of the issuance or guarantee of the security by a governmental authority of the United States, any state, Canada or any Canadian province;
(7)   Securities listed on stock exchanges. Any security listed or approved for listing upon notice of issuance on the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange, the Midwest Stock Exchange, the NASDAQ/National Market System, or that other securities exchange as the securities commissioner by regulation may designate, any other security of the same issuer which is of senior or substantially equal rank, any security called for by subscription rights or warrants so listed or approved, or any warrant or right to purchase or subscribe to any of the foregoing;
(8)   Securities of religious, charitable, etc., and trade organizations. Any security issued by any person organized and operated not for private profit but exclusively for religious, educational, benevolent, charitable, fraternal, social, athletic, or reformatory purposes, or as a chamber of commerce or trade or professional association;
(9)   Short-term commercial paper. Any commercial paper which arises out of a current transaction or the proceeds of which have been or are to be used for current transactions and which evidences an obligation to pay cash within nine months of the date of issuance, exclusive of days of grace, or any renewal of such paper which is likewise limited, or any guarantee of such paper or of any such renewal;
(10)   Employees' investment plans. Any investment contract issued in connection with an employees' stock purchase, savings, pension, profit-sharing, or similar benefit plan if the securities commissioner is notified in writing thirty days before the inception of the plan or, with respect to plans which were in effect on June 14, 1961, within sixty days thereafter or within thirty days before they are reopened if they are closed on June 14, 1961; and
(11)   Securities of state cooperatives. Any security issued by a cooperative association organized under the laws of this State.
Section 35-1-320.   The following transactions are exempted from Sections 35-1-50, and 35-1-810, and 35-1-1100:
(1)   Isolated nonissuer transactions. Any isolated nonissuer transaction, whether effected through a broker-dealer or not;
(2)   Distributions of outstanding securities. Any nonissuer distribution of an outstanding security if (a) a recognized securities manual contains the names of the issuer's officers and directors, a balance sheet of the issuer as of a date within eighteen months and a profit and loss statement for either the fiscal year preceding that date or the most recent year of operations or (b) the security has a fixed maturity or a fixed interest or dividend provision and there has been no default during the current fiscal year or within the three preceding fiscal years, or during the existence of the issuer and any predecessors if less than three years, in the payment of principal, interest, or dividends on the security;
(3)   Nonissuer transactions with broker-dealers. Any nonissuer transaction effected by or through a registered broker-dealer pursuant to an unsolicited order or offer to buy; but the securities commissioner may by rule or otherwise require that the customer acknowledge upon a specified form that the sale was unsolicited and that a signed copy of each such form be preserved by the broker-dealer for a specified period;
(4)   Underwriting transactions. Any transaction between the issuer or other person on whose behalf the offering is made and an underwriter, or among underwriters;
(5)   Mortgage bonds sold as unit. Any transaction in a bond or other evidence of indebtedness secured by a real or chattel mortgage or deed of trust or by an agreement for the sale of real estate or chattels, if the entire mortgage, deed of trust or agreement, together with all the bonds or other evidences of indebtedness secured thereby, is offered and sold as a unit;
(6)   Transactions by fiduciaries, etc. Any transaction by an executor, administrator, sheriff, marshal, receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, guardian or conservator;
(7)   Transactions by pledgees. Any transaction executed by a bona fide pledgee without any purpose of evading this chapter;
(8)   Transactions with banks, and other financial institutions or institutional buyers, etc. Any offer or sale to a bank, savings institution, trust company, insurance company, investment company as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, pension or profit-sharing trust or other financial institution or institutional buyer or to a broker-dealer, whether the purchaser is acting for itself or in some fiduciary capacity;
(9)   Limited offerings. Any transaction pursuant to an offer directed by the offeror to not more than twenty-five persons, other than those designated in item (8) of this section, in this State during any period of twelve consecutive months, whether or not the offeror or any of the offerees is then present in this State, if (a) the seller reasonably believes that all the buyers in this State, other than those designated in item (8) of this section, are purchasing for investment and (b) no commission or other remuneration is paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting any prospective buyer in this State, other than those designated in item (8) of this section; but the securities commissioner may by rule or order, as to any security or transaction or any type of security or transaction, withdraw or further condition this exemption, increase or decrease the number of offerees permitted or waive the conditions in clauses (a) and (b) with or without the substitution of a limitation on remuneration and the securities commissioner, further, may require persons claiming this exemption to notify him in writing of the claim of exemption, the number of offers extended and to whom made at any point during the offering process;
(10)   Limited preorganization subscriptions. Any offer or sale of a preorganization certificate or subscription if (a) no commission or other remuneration is paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting any prospective subscriber, (b) the number of subscribers does not exceed twenty-five and (c) no payment is made by any subscriber prior to filing of the articles of incorporation, or limited partnership, limited liability partnership, or limited liability company agreement with the Secretary of State;
(11)   Conversions and exercise of warrants. Any transaction pursuant to an offer to existing security holders of the issuer, including persons who at the time of the transaction are holders of convertible securities, nontransferable warrants or transferable warrants exercisable within not more than ninety days of their issuance, if (a) no commission or other remuneration, other than a standby commission, is paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting any security holder in this State or (b) the issuer first files a notice specifying the terms of the offer and the securities commissioner does not by order disallow the exemption within the next five full business days;
(12)   Offers after registration statements filed. Any offer, but not a sale of a security for which registration statements have been filed under both this chapter and the Securities Act of 1933 if no stop order or refusal order is in effect and no public proceeding or examination looking toward such an order is pending under this chapter.
Section 35-1-330.   The securities commissioner may by order deny or revoke any exemption specified in item (8) or (10) of Section 35-1-310 or in Section 35-1-320 with respect to a specific security or transaction. No such order may be entered without appropriate prior notice to all interested parties, opportunity for hearing and written findings of fact and conclusions of law, except that the securities commissioner may by order summarily deny or revoke any of the specified exemptions pending final determination of any proceeding under this section. Upon the entry of a summary order, the securities commissioner shall promptly notify all interested parties that it has been entered and of the reasons therefor and that within fifteen days of the receipt of a written request the matter will be set down for hearing. If no hearing is requested and none is ordered by the securities commissioner, the order will remain in effect until it is modified or vacated by the securities commissioner. If a hearing is requested or ordered, the securities commissioner, after notice of an opportunity for hearing to all interested persons, may modify or vacate the order or extend it until final determination. No order under this section may operate retroactively. No person may be considered to have violated Section 35-1-50 or Section 35-1-810 by reason of any offer or sale effected after the entry of an order under this section if he sustains the burden of proof that he did not know, and in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known, of the order.
Section 35-1-340.   In any proceeding under this chapter the burden of proving an exemption or an exception from a definition is upon the person claiming it.

Section 35-1-410.   It is unlawful for any person to transact business in this State as a broker-dealer or agent unless he is registered under this chapter or exempt from licensing under this chapter. It is unlawful for any broker-dealer or issuer to employ an agent unless the agent is registered or exempt. The registration of an agent is not effective during any period when he is not associated with a particular broker-dealer registered under this chapter, or a particular issuer. When an agent begins or terminates a connection with a broker-dealer or issuer, or begins or terminates those activities which make him an agent, the agent as well as the broker-dealer or issuer shall promptly notify the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-415.   (1)   The following broker-dealers are exempt from the licensing requirements of Section 35-1-410:
(a)   a broker-dealer who either is registered or, except as provided in subsection (2), is not required to be registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and who has no place of business in this State if:
(i)   the transactions effected by the broker-dealer in this State are exclusively with the issuer of the securities involved in the transactions, other broker-dealers licensed or exempt under this section, and financial or institutional investors;
(ii)   the broker-dealer is licensed under the securities act of a state in which the broker-dealer maintains a place of business and the broker-dealer offers and sells in this State to a person who is an existing customer of the broker-dealer and whose principal place of residence is not in this State; or
(iii)   the broker-dealer is licensed under the securities law of a state in which the broker-dealer maintains a place of business and the broker-dealer during any twelve consecutive months does not effect transactions with more than five persons in this State in addition to transactions with the issuers of the securities involved in the transactions, financial or institutional investors, or broker-dealers, whether or not the offeror or an offeree is then present in this State; and
(b)   other broker-dealers the commissioner, by rule or order, exempts.
(2)   The exemption provided in subsection (1)(a)(i) is not available to a broker-dealer who deals solely in government securities and is not registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 unless the broker-dealer is subject to supervision as a dealer in government securities by the Federal Reserve Board.
(3)   The following agents are exempt from the licensing requirements of Section 35-1-410:
(a)   an agent acting for a broker-dealer exempt under subsection (1);
(b)   an agent acting for an issuer in effecting transactions in a security exempted by Section 35-1-310(1), (2), (3), (9), or (10);
(c)   an agent acting for an issuer effecting offers or sales of securities in transactions exempted by Section 35-1-320;
(d)   an agent acting for an issuer effecting offers or sales of securities that are covered securities under Section 18(b)(3) or Section 18(b)(4)(D) of the Securities Act of 1933, provided that no commission or other remuneration is paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting any person in this State;
(e)   an agent acting for an issuer effecting transactions with employees, partners, officers, or directors of the issuer, a parent or a wholly-owned subsidiary of the issuer, if no commission or other similar compensation is paid or given directly or indirectly to the sales representative for soliciting an employee, partner, officer, or director in this State:
(f)   an agent whose transactions in this State are limited to only those transactions set forth in Section 15(h)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(g)   other agents the securities commissioner, by rule or order, exempts.
Section 35-1-420.   (1)   It is unlawful for any person to transact business in this State as an investment adviser or investment adviser representative unless (a) he is so registered under this chapter or exempt from licensing under this chapter. The following investment advisers are exempt from the licensing requirements of Section 35-1-420:
(a)   an investment adviser if:
(i)   it has as its only clients in this State other investment advisers, federal covered advisers, broker-dealers or financial or institutional investors; or
(ii)   it has no place of business in this State and the investment adviser during the preceding twelve-month period has not had more than five clients, other than those specified in sub-subitem (i), who are residents of this State; and
(b)   other investment advisers the commissioner, by rule or order, exempts. , (b) he is registered as a broker-dealer without the imposition of a condition under item (5) of Section 35-1-530, or (c) his only clients in this State are investment companies as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940 or insurance companies.
(2)(a)   It is unlawful for any person required to be registered as an investment adviser under this chapter to employ an investment adviser representative unless the investment adviser representative is registered under this chapter. The registration of an investment adviser representative is not effective during any period when he is not employed by an investment adviser registered under this chapter or a federal covered adviser not required to be registered.
(b)   It is unlawful for an investment adviser representative of a federal covered adviser to transact business unless such investment adviser representative is registered under this chapter, or is exempt from registration.
(c)   When an investment adviser representative begins or terminates employment with an investment adviser or a federal covered adviser, the investment adviser, in the case of Section 35-1-420(2)(a) and the investment adviser representative in the case of Section 35-1-420(2)(b), shall promptly notify the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-430.   Every broker-dealer and broker-dealer agent registration expires two years from its effective date at midnight on the last day of the calendar year in which it became effective unless renewed. The securities commissioner by regulation or order may prepare an initial schedule for registration renewals so that subsequent renewals of registrations effective June 14, 1961, may be staggered by calendar months. For this purpose the Securities Commissioner by regulation may reduce the registration fee proportionately. Every investment adviser registration and federal covered adviser notice filing expires two years from its effective date unless renewed and, unless renewed prior to expiration, every investment adviser representative registration expires at the same time the registration or notice filing of the associated investment adviser or federal covered adviser would expire if not renewed.
Section 35-1-440.   A broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser, or investment adviser representative may obtain an initial or renewal registration by filing with the securities commissioner an application together with a consent to service of process pursuant to Section 35-1-1410. The application must contain whatever information the securities commissioner by regulation rule or order requires concerning these such matters as (a) the applicant's form and place of organization, (b) the applicant's proposed method of doing business, (c) the qualifications and business history of the applicant, (d) in the case of a broker-dealer or investment adviser, the qualifications and business history of any partner, officer or director, any person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions or any person directly or indirectly controlling the broker-dealer or investment adviser, (e) in the case of an investment adviser, the qualifications and business history of any employee, (f) any injunction or administrative order or conviction of a misdemeanor involving a security or any aspect of the securities business and any conviction of a felony, and (g) the applicant's financial condition and history and (h) information to be furnished or disseminated to any client or prospective client, if the applicant is an investment adviser.
For all applicants who are not members of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), a criminal record history must be obtained, at the rate set by law, from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division on an applicant's initial application for registration under this section. All convictions of misdemeanors involving a security or any aspect of the securities business and all felonies recorded within ten years of the date of the application must be noted on the registration.
Section 35-1-450.   The securities commissioner may by rule or order require an applicant for initial registration to publish an announcement of the application in one or more specified newspapers published in this State.
Section 35-1-460.   Registration becomes effective when the securities commissioner so orders.
Section 35-1-470.   Registration of a broker-dealer automatically constitutes registration of any agent who is a partner, officer or director, or a person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions. Registration of an investment adviser or a notice filing by a federal covered adviser automatically constitutes registration of any investment adviser representative who is a partner, officer, or director, or a person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions.
Section 35-1-480.   (A)   Every applicant for initial or renewal registration as a broker-dealer, broker-dealer agent, investment adviser or investment adviser representative shall pass one or more examinations, pay a registration fee, and meet other requirements as required by the securities commissioner.
(B)   Except with respect to federal covered advisers whose only clients are those described in Section 35-1-420(1)(a), a federal covered adviser shall file with the commissioner, prior to acting as a federal covered adviser in this State, such documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission or such other notice filing document, as the commissioner may by rule or otherwise require, together with such notice fee and consent to service of process as the commissioner, by rule or otherwise, may require. The notice filing provisions under this subsection shall expire as provided in Section 35-1-430.
(C)   The following filing fees shall remain in effect for all initial, renewal and notice filings described in subsections (A) and (B) of this section unless and until the securities commissioner promulgates a rule or order establishing different fees:
(1)   broker-dealer: four three hundred dollars:
(2)   agent: one hundred dollars;
(3)   investment adviser and federal covered adviser: four hundred dollars;
(4)   investment adviser representative: one hundred dollars;
(B)(D)   When the an application is denied or withdrawn the filing fee must not be refunded.
Section 35-1-485.   (A) Licenses required by Chapter 1 of Title 35 to be registered biennially must be assigned registration periods as provided in this section.
(1) Upon the first reregistration of the licenses by the South Carolina Secretary of State's Office after the effective date of the implementation of biennial licensure, a biennial registration period must be implemented as follows:
(a) Licensees whose license numbers end in:
(i) an even number and expire between July 1, 1992, and December 31, 1992, shall obtain a biennial registration;
(ii) an even number and expire between January 1, 1993, and June 30, 1993, shall reregister their license for one year. At the end of this time they shall reregister their license for two years and biennially after that time;
(iii) an odd number and expire between July 1, 1992, and December 31, 1992, shall register their licenses for one year. At the end of that time they shall register their license for two years and biennially after that time;
(iv) an odd number and expire between January 1, 1993, and June 30, 1993, shall obtain a biennial registration;
(v) "A" through "L" and expire between July 1, 1992, and June 30, 1993, shall obtain a biennial registration;
(vi) "M" through "Z" and expire between July 1, 1992, and June 30, 1993, shall obtain a one-year registration and a biennial registration after that time.
(b) Licenses issued in South Carolina for the first time between:
(i) July 1, 1992, and December 31, 1992, which end in an even number must be issued biennially;
(ii) July 1, 1992, and December 31, 1992, which end in an odd number must be issued for one year. At the end of this time the license must be renewed for two years and biennially after that time;
(iii) January 1, 1993, and June 30, 1993, which end in an even number must be issued for one year. At the end of that time the license must be renewed for two years and biennially after that time;
(iv) January 1, 1993, and June 30, 1993, which end in an odd number must be issued biennially;
(v) July 1, 1992, and June 30, 1993, and are issued license numbers which end in "A" through "L" shall obtain a biennial registration;
(vi) July 1, 1992, and June 30, 1993, and which end in "M" through "Z" must be issued for one year and renewed biennially after that time.
(2) Registrations are valid until the last day of the month in which the registration expires. The license fees charged during the conversion process must be prorated for the length of the license issued.
(B) After June 30, 1993, all licensees must be registered and licensed for twenty-four consecutive months, and registrations expire on the last day of the twenty-fourth month. The registration and licensing of every licensee must be renewed biennially upon application by the holder and by payment of fees required by law to take effect on the first day of the month following the expiration of the registration and licensing to be renewed. This section does not prevent the Secretary of State's Office from refusing to issue a license.
Section 35-1-490.   A registered broker-dealer or investment adviser may file an application for registration of a successor, and a federal covered adviser may file a notice filing for a successor, whether or not the successor is then in existence, for the unexpired portion of the year. There shall be no filing fee.
Section 35-1-500.   The securities commissioner, may by rule or order, may require a minimum capital for registered broker-dealers and investment advisers not to exceed ten thousand dollars the limitations of Section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and establish minimum financial requirements for investment advisers, subject to the limitations provided in Section 222 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, which may include different requirements for those investment advisers who maintain custody of clients' funds or securities or who have discretionary authority over clients' funds and those investment advisers who do not.
Section 35-1-510.   (A) Registered broker-dealers, agents, investment advisers, and investment adviser representatives shall post surety bonds in amounts of fifty thousand dollars for broker-dealers and investment advisers and ten thousand dollars for agents and investment adviser representatives, conditioned that the registrant will comply with the provisions of this chapter and those orders and regulations as the commissioner may from time to time prescribe. The securities commissioner, by rule or order, may require registered broker-dealers, agents, and investment advisers who have custody of or discretionary authority over client funds or securities, to post surety bonds in amounts as the securities commissioner may, by rule or otherwise, prescribe, and may determine their conditions, subject to the limitations of Section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for broker-dealers and Section 222 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 for investment advisers. The bond may be so drawn as to cover the original registration and any renewal of the registration. Any appropriate deposit of cash or securities must shall be accepted in lieu of the any bond so required. No bond may be required of any registrant whose net capital, or, in the case of an investment adviser, whose minimum financial requirements, which may be defined by rule, exceeds the amounts required by the securities commissioner. Every bond shall provide for suit thereon by any person who has a cause of action under Section 35-1-1210 and, if the securities commissioner by rule or order requires, by any person who has a cause of action not arising under this act. Every bond must provide that no suit may be maintained to enforce any liability on the bond unless brought within three years after the sale or other act upon which the suit is based and must also provide that the liability of the surety on each bond to all persons aggrieved may in no event exceed in the aggregate the penal sum of the bond.
(B) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (A), investment advisers and investment adviser representatives shall post surety bonds in the amount of ten thousand dollars for investment advisers and five thousand dollars for investment adviser representatives where such persons:
(1) are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission;
(2) do not have custody of or general power of attorney over their clients' funds and such lack of custody or power of attorney is specified by the client's agreement with the investment adviser or investment adviser representative. A limited power of attorney which does not allow custody over their client's funds does not require higher bonding requirements as provided in subsection (A); and
(3) file annually with the securities commissioner a current statement of financial condition.
No bond is required for broker-dealers or agents who are members of the National Association of Security Dealers, Inc., or the Securities Investor Corporation or for investment advisers or investment adviser representatives who, in addition to the requirements of this subsection, maintain professional liability insurance providing coverage for errors and omissions in the minimum amount of one hundred thousand dollars where such policy of insurance is approved by the commissioner.
Section 35-1-520.   (1)   The securities commissioner may by order deny, suspend, or revoke any registration if he finds (a) that the order is in the public interest and (b) that the applicant or registrant or, in the case of a broker-dealer or investment adviser, any partner, officer, or director, any person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, or any person directly or indirectly controlling the broker-dealer or investment adviser:
(i)   has filed an application for registration which as of its effective date, or as of any date after filing in the case of an order denying effectiveness, was incomplete in any material respect or contained any statement which was, in light of the circumstances under which it was made, false or misleading with respect to any material fact;
(ii)   has wilfully violated or wilfully failed to comply with any provision of this chapter or a predecessor law or any rule or order under this chapter or a predecessor law;
(iii)   has been convicted, within the past ten years, of any misdemeanor involving a security or any aspect of the securities business or any felony;
(iv)   is permanently or temporarily enjoined by any court of competent jurisdiction from engaging in or continuing any conduct or practice involving any aspect of the securities business;
(v)   is the subject of an order of the securities commissioner denying, suspending, or revoking registration as a broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser, or investment adviser representative;
(vi)   is the subject of an order entered within the past five years by the securities administrator of any other state or by the Securities and Exchange Commission denying or revoking registration as a broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser, or investment adviser representative or the substantial equivalent of those terms as defined in this chapter, is the subject of an order of the Securities and Exchange Commission suspending or expelling him from a national securities exchange or national securities association registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or is the subject of a United States post office fraud order; but (1) the securities commissioner may not institute a revocation or suspension proceeding under this item (vi) more than one year from the date of the order relied on and (2) he may not enter an order under this item (vi) on the basis of an order under another state act unless that order was based on facts which would currently constitute a ground for an order under this section;
(vii)   has engaged in dishonest or unethical practices in the securities business;
(viii)   is insolvent, either in the sense that his liabilities exceed his assets or in the sense that he cannot meet his obligations as they mature, but the securities commissioner may not enter an order against a broker-dealer or investment adviser under this item (viii) without a finding of insolvency as to the broker-dealer or investment adviser; or
(ix)   is not qualified on the basis of such factors as training, experience and knowledge of the securities business, except as otherwise provided in Section 35-1-530.
(2)   The securities commissioner may by order deny, suspend, or revoke any registration if he finds (a) that the order is in the public interest and (b) that the applicant or registrant has failed:
(i)   reasonably to supervise his agents if he is a broker-dealer or his employees if he is an investment adviser; or
(ii)   to pay the proper filing fee; but the securities commissioner may enter only a denial order under this item (ii), and he shall vacate any such order when the deficiency has been corrected.
Section 35-1-530.   The following provisions govern the application of item (ix) of subsection (1) of Section 35-1-520:
(1)   The securities commissioner may not enter an order against a broker-dealer on the basis of the lack of qualification of any person other than (a) the broker-dealer himself if he is an individual or (b) an agent of the broker-dealer.
(2)   The securities commissioner may not enter an order against an investment adviser on the basis of the lack of qualification of any person other than (a) the investment adviser himself if he is an individual or (b) any other person who represents the investment adviser in doing any of the acts which make him an investment adviser.
(3)   The securities commissioner may not enter an order solely on the basis of lack of experience if the applicant or registrant is qualified by training or knowledge or both.
(4)   The securities commissioner shall consider that an agent who will work under the supervision of a registered broker-dealer need not have the same qualifications as a broker-dealer.
(5)   The securities commissioner shall consider that an investment adviser is not necessarily qualified solely on the basis of experience as a broker-dealer or agent. When he finds that an applicant for initial or renewal registration as a broker-dealer is not qualified as an investment adviser, he may by order condition the applicant's registration as a broker-dealer upon his not transacting business in this State as an investment adviser.
(6)   The securities commissioner may by rule provide for an examination, which may be written or oral or both, to be taken by any class of or all applicants, as well as persons who represent or will represent an investment adviser in doing any of the acts which make him an investment adviser.
Section 35-1-540.   The securities commissioner may not institute a suspension or revocation proceeding on the basis of a fact or transaction actually known to him when registration became effective unless the proceeding is instituted within the next one hundred sixty days; provided that this time limitation is suspended during the time period of any investigation commenced by the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-550.   The securities commissioner may by order summarily postpone or suspend registration pending final determination of any proceeding under this section. Upon the entry of the order, the securities commissioner shall promptly notify the applicant or registrant, as well as the employer or prospective employer if the applicant or registrant is an agent or investment adviser representative, that it has been entered and of the reasons for the order and that within fifteen days after the receipt of a written request the matter will be set down for hearing. If no hearing is requested and none is ordered by the securities commissioner, the order remains in effect until it is modified or vacated by the securities commissioner. If a hearing is requested or ordered, the securities commissioner, after notice of and opportunity for hearing, may modify or vacate the order or extend it until final determination.
Section 35-1-560.   If the securities commissioner finds that any registrant or applicant for registration is no longer in existence or has ceased to do business as a broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser, or investment adviser representative, or is subject to an adjudication of mental incompetence or to the control of a committee, conservator, or guardian, or cannot be located after reasonable search, the securities commissioner may by order cancel the registration or application.
Section 35-1-570.   Withdrawal from registration as a broker-dealer, agent, investment adviser, or investment adviser representative becomes effective thirty days after receipt of an application to withdraw or within that shorter period of time as the securities commissioner may determine, unless a revocation or suspension proceeding is pending when the application is filed or a proceeding to revoke or suspend or to impose conditions upon the withdrawal is instituted within thirty days after the application is filed. If a proceeding is pending or instituted, withdrawal becomes effective at that time and upon those conditions as the securities commissioner by order determines. If no proceeding is pending or instituted and withdrawal automatically becomes effective, the securities commissioner may nevertheless institute a revocation or suspension proceeding under item (ii) of subsection (1) of Section 35-1-520 within one year after withdrawal became effective and enter a revocation or suspension order as of the last date on which registration was effective. Withdrawal of a notice filing by a federal covered adviser shall become effective upon receipt by the securities commission of notice of the intention to withdraw.
Section 35-1-580.   No order may be entered under any part of Sections 35-1-520 to 35-1-570 or Section 35-1-1475 except the first sentence of Section 35-1-550 without (a) appropriate prior notice to the applicant or registrant, as well as the employer or prospective employer if the applicant or registrant is an agent or investment adviser representative, (b) opportunity for hearing, and (c) written findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Section 35-1-590.   Every registered broker-dealer, shall comply with the recordkeeping requirements of the Securities Act of 1934. A licensed and investment adviser, subject to the limitations of Section 222 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, shall make and keep such accounts, correspondence, memoranda, papers, books, and other records as the securities commissioner by rule prescribes by rule or order. All records so required shall be preserved for three years, unless such period is modified by the securities commissioner by rule prescribes or order, and subject to the limitations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Section 222 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 for broker-dealers and investment advisers, respectively otherwise for particular types of records.
Section 35-1-595.   With respect to investment advisers, the securities commissioner may require that certain information be furnished or disseminated as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors and advisory clients. To the extent determined by the securities commissioner in his discretion, information furnished to clients or prospective clients of an investment adviser that would be in compliance with the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the rules thereunder may be used in whole or partial satisfaction of this requirement.
Section 35-1-600.   All the records referred to in Section 35-1-590 are subject at any time or from time to time to such reasonable periodic, special or other examinations by representatives of the securities commissioner, within or without this State, as the securities commissioner deems necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors. For the purpose of avoiding unnecessary duplication of examinations, the securities commissioner, in so far as he deems it practicable in administering this section, may cooperate with the securities administrators of other states, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and any national securities exchange or national securities association registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Section 35-1-610.   Every registered broker-dealer, not to exceed the limitations of Section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and investment adviser, not to exceed the limitations of Section 222 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, shall file such financial reports as the securities commissioner by rule prescribes by rule or order.
Section 35-1-620.   If the information contained in any document filed with the securities commissioner is or becomes inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect, the registrant shall promptly file a correcting amendment unless notification of the correction has been given under Section 35-1-410. A federal covered adviser shall file a corrected notice filing with the securities commissioner only if amended documents are required to be filed with the Securities Exchange Commission.

Section 35-1-810.   It is unlawful for any person to offer or sell any security in this State unless (a) it is registered under this chapter, or (b) the security or transaction is exempted under Section 35-1-310 or 35-1-320, or (c) it is a federal covered security.
Section 35-1-820.   The following securities may be registered by notification, whether or not they are also eligible for registration by coordination under Section 35-1-840:
(1)   Any security whose issuer and any predecessors have been in continuous operation for at least five years, if (a) there has been no default during the current fiscal year or within the three preceding fiscal years in the payment of principal, interest, or dividends on any security of the issuer, or any predecessors, with a fixed maturity or a fixed interest or dividend provisions and (b) the issuer and any predecessors during the past three fiscal years have had average net earnings, determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices, (i) which are applicable to all securities without a fixed maturity or a fixed interest or dividend provision outstanding at the date the registration statement is filed and equal at least five percent of the amount of such outstanding securities, as measured by the maximum offering price or the market price on a day, selected by the registrant, within thirty days before the date of filing the registration statement, whichever is higher, or book value on a day, selected by the registrant, within ninety days of the date of filing the registration statement to the extent that there is neither a readily determinable market price nor a cash offering price, or (ii) which, if the issuer and any predecessors have not had any security of the type specified in clause (i) outstanding for three full fiscal years, equal at least five percent of the amount, as measured in clause (i), of all securities which will be outstanding if all the securities being offered or proposed to be offered, whether or not they are proposed to be registered or offered in this State, are issued; and
(2)   Any security, other than a certificate of interest or participation in an oil, gas or mining title, or lease or in payments out of production under such a title or lease, registered for nonissuer distribution if (a) any security of the same class has ever been registered under this chapter or a predecessor law or (b) the security being registered was originally issued pursuant to an exemption under this chapter or a predecessor law.
Section 35-1-830.   A registration statement under Section 35-1-820 and this section shall contain the following information and be accompanied by the following documents in addition to the information specified in Section 35-1-910 and the consent to service of process required by Section 35-1-1410:
(1)   a statement demonstrating eligibility for registration by notification;
(2)   with respect to the issuer and any significant subsidiary;
(a)   its name, address, and form of organization,
(b)   the state, or foreign jurisdiction, and the date of its organization, and
(c)   the general character and location of its business;
(3)   with respect to any person on whose behalf any part of the offering is to be made in a nonissuer distribution;
(a)   his name and address,
(b)   the amount of securities of the issuer held by him as of the date of the filing of the registration statement; and
(c)   a statement of his reasons for making the offering;
(4)   a description of the security being registered;
(5)   the information and documents specified in items (8), (9), (10) and (12) of Section 35-1-880;
(6)   in the case of any registration under item (2) of Section 35-1-820 which does not also satisfy the conditions of item (1) of Section 35-1-820, a balance sheet of the issuer as of a date within four months prior to the filing of the registration statement and a summary of earnings for each of the two fiscal years preceding the date of the balance sheet and for any period between the close of the last fiscal year and the date of the balance sheet, or for the period of the issuer's and any predecessors' existence if less than two years; and
(7)   such additional information as the securities commissioner may by rule or order require.
A registration statement under Section 35-1-820 and this section becomes effective when the securities commissioner so orders.
Section 35-1-840.   Any security for which a registration statement has been filed under the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with the same offering may be registered by coordination.
Section 35-1-850.   A registration statement under Section 35-1-840 and this section shall contain the following information and be accompanied by the following documents in addition to the information specified in Section 35-1-910 and the consent to service of process required by Section 35-1-1410:
(1)   two copies of the latest form of prospectus filed under the Securities Act of 1933;
(2)   if the securities commissioner by rule or otherwise requires, a copy of the articles of incorporation and bylaws, or their substantial equivalents, currently in effect, a copy of any agreements with or among underwriters, a copy of any indenture or other instrument governing the issuance of the security to be registered and a specimen or copy of the security;
(3)   if the securities commissioner requests, any other information or copies of any other documents filed under the Securities Act of 1933; and
(4)   an undertaking to forward all future amendments to the federal prospectus, other than an amendment which merely delays the effective date of the registration statement, promptly and in any event not later than the first business day after the day they are forwarded to or filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, whichever first occurs.
Section 35-1-860.   A registration statement under Sections 35-1-840 and 35-1-850 automatically becomes effective at the moment the federal registration statement becomes effective if all the following conditions are satisfied:
(1)   no stop order is in effect and no proceeding is pending under Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1050;
(2)   the registration statement has been on file with the securities commissioner for at least ten days; and
(3)   a statement of the maximum and minimum proposed offering prices and the maximum underwriting discounts and commissions has been on file for two full business days or such shorter period as the securities commissioner permits by rule or otherwise and the offering is made within these limitations.
The registrant shall promptly notify the securities commissioner by telephone or telegram of the date and time when the federal registration statement became effective and the content of the price amendment, if any, and shall promptly file a post-effective amendment containing the information and documents in the price amendment. 'Price amendment' means the final federal amendment which includes a statement of the offering price, underwriting, and selling discounts or commissions, amount of proceeds, conversion rates, call prices, and other matters dependent upon the offering price. Upon failure to receive the required notification and post-effective amendment with respect to the price amendment, the securities commissioner may enter a stop order, without notice or hearing, retroactively denying effectiveness to the registration statement or suspending its effectiveness until compliance with this section, if he promptly notifies the registrant by telephone or telegram, and promptly confirms by letter or telegram when he notifies by telephone, of the issuance of the order. If the registrant proves compliance with the requirements of this section as to notice and post-effective amendment, the stop order is void as of the time of its entry. The securities commissioner may by rule or otherwise waive either or both of the conditions specified in items (2) and (3) of this section. If the federal registration statement becomes effective before all the conditions in this section are satisfied and they are not waived, the registration statement automatically becomes effective as soon as all the conditions are satisfied. If the registrant advises the securities commissioner of the date when the federal registration statement is expected to become effective, the securities commissioner shall promptly advise the registrant by telephone or telegram, at the registrant's expense, whether all the conditions are satisfied and whether he then contemplates the institution of a proceeding under Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1050. But this advice by the securities commissioner does not preclude the institution of such a proceeding at any time.
Section 35-1-870.   Any security may be registered by qualification.
Section 35-1-880.   A registration statement under Filings pursuant to Section 35-1-870 and this section shall contain, within the registration statement, prospectus, offering circular, or other offering documents, the following information and be accompanied by the following documents in addition to the information specified in Section 35-1-910 and the consent to service of process required by Section 35-1-1410:
(1)   with respect to the issuer and any significant subsidiary
(a)   its name, address and form of organization,
(b)   the state or foreign jurisdiction and date of its organization,
(c)   the general character and location of its business,
(d)   a description of its physical properties and equipment and
(e)   a statement of the general competitive conditions in the industry or business in which it is or will be engaged;
(2)   with respect to every director and officer of the issuer, or person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions
(a)   his name, address, and principal occupation for the past five years,
(b)   the amount of securities of the issuer held by him as of a specified date within thirty days of the filing of the registration statement,
(c)   the amount of the securities covered by the registration statement to which he has indicated his intention to subscribe and
(d)   a description of any material interest in any material transaction with the issuer or any significant subsidiary effected within the past three years or proposed to be effected;
(3)   with respect to persons covered by item (2) of this section, the remuneration paid during the past twelve months and estimated to be paid during the next twelve months, directly or indirectly, by the issuer, together with all predecessors, parents, subsidiaries, and affiliates, to all those persons in the aggregate;
(4)   with respect to any person owning of record, or beneficially if known, ten percent or more of the outstanding shares of any class of equity security of the issuer, the information specified in item (2) of this section other than his occupation;
(5)   with respect to every promoter if the issuer was organized within the past three years, the information specified in item (2) of this section, the amount paid to him within that period or intended to be paid to him and the consideration for any such payment;
(6)   with respect to any person on whose behalf any part of the offering is to be made in a nonissuer distribution
(a)   his name and address,
(b)   the amount of securities of the issuer held by him as of the date of the filing of the registration statement,
(c)   a description of any material interest in any material transaction with the issuer or any significant subsidiary effected within the past three years or proposed to be effected and
(d)   a statement of his reasons for making the offering;
(7)   the capitalization and long-term debt, on both a current and a pro forma basis, of the issuer and any significant subsidiary, including a description of each security outstanding or being registered or otherwise offered, and a statement of the amount and kind of consideration, whether in the form of cash, physical assets, services, patents, good will, or anything else, for which the issuer or any subsidiary has issued any of its securities within the past two years or is obligated to issue any of its securities;
(8)   the kind and amount of securities to be offered; the proposed offering price or the method by which it is to be computed; any variation therefrom at which any proportion of the offering is to be made to any person or class of persons other than the underwriters, with a specification of any such person or class; the basis upon which the offering is to be made if otherwise than for cash; the estimated aggregate underwriting and selling discounts or commissions and finders' fees, including separately cash, securities, contracts or anything else of value to accrue to the underwriters or finders in connection with the offering, or, if the selling discounts or commissions are variable, the basis of determining them and their maximum and minimum amounts; the estimated amounts of other selling expenses, including legal, engineering, and accounting charges; the name and address of every underwriter and every recipient of a finder's fee; a copy of any underwriting or selling-group agreement pursuant to which the distribution is to be made, or the proposed form of any such agreement whose terms have not yet been determined; and a description of the plan of distribution of any securities which are to be offered otherwise than through an underwriter;
(9)   the estimated cash proceeds to be received by the issuer from the offering; the purposes for which the proceeds are to be used by the issuer; the amount to be used for each purpose; the order or priority in which the proceeds will be used for the purposes stated; the amounts of any funds to be raised from other sources to achieve the purposes stated; the sources of any such funds; and, if any part of the proceeds is to be used to acquire any property, including good will, otherwise than in the ordinary course of business, the names and addresses of the vendors, the purchase price, the names of any persons who have received commissions in connection with the acquisition and the amounts of any such commissions and any other expense in connection with the acquisition, including the cost of borrowing money to finance the acquisition;
(10)   a description of any stock options or other security options outstanding or to be created in connection with the offering, together with the amount of any such options held or to be held by every person required to be named in item (2), (4), (5), (6), or (8) of this section and by any person who holds or will hold ten percent or more in the aggregate of any such options;
(11)   the dates of, parties to and general effect concisely stated of every management or other material contract made or to be made otherwise than in the ordinary course of business if it is to be performed in whole or in part at or after the filing of the registration statement or was made within the past two years, together with a copy of every such contract;
(12)   a description of any pending litigation or proceeding to which the issuer is a party and which materially affects its business or assets, including any such litigation or proceeding known to be contemplated by governmental authorities;
(13)   two copies of any prospectus, pamphlet, circular, form letter, advertisement or other sales literature intended as of the effective date to be used in connection with the offering;
(14)   a specimen or copy of the security being registered; a copy of the issuer's articles of incorporation and bylaws, or their substantial equivalents, as currently in effect; and a copy of any indenture or other instrument covering the security to be registered;
(15)   a signed or conformed copy of an opinion of counsel as to the legality of the security being registered, with an English translation if it is in a foreign language, which shall state whether the security when sold will be legally issued, fully paid and nonassessable and, if a debt security, a binding obligation of the issuer;
(16)   the written consent of any accountant, engineer, appraiser, or other person whose profession gives authority to a statement made by him, if any such person is named as having prepared or certified a report or valuation, other than a public and official document or statement, which is used in connection with the registration statement;
(17)   a balance sheet of the issuer as of a date within four months prior to the filing of the registration statement; a profit and loss statement and analysis of surplus for each of the three fiscal years preceding the date of the balance sheet and for any period between the close of the last fiscal year and the date of the balance sheet, or for the period of the issuer's and any predecessor's existence if less than three years; and, if any part of the proceeds of the offering is to be applied to the purchase of any business, the same financial statements which would be required if that business were the registrant; and
(18)   such additional information as the securities commissioner requires by rule or order.
A registration statement under Section 35-1-870 and this section becomes effective when the securities commissioner so orders.
Section 35-1-890.   A registration statement may be filed by the issuer, any other person on whose behalf the offering is to be made or a registered broker-dealer.
Section 35-1-900.   Every person filing a registration statement shall pay a filing fee as required by the securities commissioner. A filing fee of five hundred dollars shall remain in effect unless and until the securities commissioner promulgates a rule or order establishing a different fee. No registration statement may be renewed or reregistered unless another filing fee of five hundred dollars or other appropriate amount as may be specified by the commissioner is paid. When a registration statement is withdrawn before the effective date or a preeffective stop order is entered under Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1050, the securities commissioner shall retain the entire filing fee.
Section 35-1-910.   Every registration statement shall specify (a) the amount of securities to be offered in this State, (b) the states in which a registration statement or similar document in connection with the offering has been or is to be filed and (c) any adverse order, judgment or decree entered in connection with the offering by the regulatory authorities in each state or by any court or the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Section 35-1-920.   Any document filed under this chapter or a predecessor law, within five years preceding the filing of a registration statement, may be incorporated by reference in the registration statement to the extent that the document is currently accurate.
Section 35-1-930.   The securities commissioner may by rule or otherwise permit the omission of any item of information or document from any registration statement.
Section 35-1-940.   In the case of a nonissuer distribution, information may not be required under Section 35-1-880 or Section 35-1-970 unless it is known to the person filing the registration statement or to the persons on whose behalf the distribution is to be made or can be furnished by them without unreasonable effort or expense.
Section 35-1-950.   The securities commissioner may by rule or order require as a condition of registration by qualification or coordination (a) that any security issued within the past three years or to be issued to a promoter for a consideration substantially different from the public offering price, or to any person for a consideration other than cash, be deposited in escrow and (b) that the proceeds from the sale of the registered security in this State be impounded until the issuer receives a specified amount from the sale of the security either in this State or elsewhere.
The securities commissioner may by rule or order require as a condition of registration that any security registered by qualification or coordination be sold only on a specified form of subscription or sale contract and that a signed or conformed copy of each contract be filed with the securities commissioner or preserved for any period up to three years specified in the rule or order.
Section 35-1-960.   Every registration statement is effective for one year from its effective date or any longer period during which the security is being offered or distributed in a nonexempted transaction by or for the account of the issuer or other person on whose behalf the offering is being made or by any underwriter or broker-dealer who is still offering part of an unsold allotment or subscription taken by him as a participant in the distribution, except during the time a stop order is in effect under Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1050. All outstanding securities of the same class as a registered security are considered to be registered for the purpose of any nonissuer transaction (a) so long as the registration statement is effective and (b) between the thirtieth day after the entry of any no stop order suspending or revoking the effectiveness of the registration statement has been entered under Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1050 if the registration statement did not relate in whole or in part to a nonissuer distribution, and one year from the effective date of the registration statement. A registration statement may not be withdrawn for one year from its effective date if any securities of the same class are outstanding. A registration statement may be withdrawn otherwise only in the discretion of the securities commissioner.
Section 35-1-970.   So long as a registration statement is effective, the securities commissioner may by rule or order require the person who filed the registration statement to file reports, not more often than quarterly, to keep reasonably current the information contained in the registration statement and to disclose the progress of the offering.
Section 35-1-980.   A registration statement relating to a security issued by a face-amount certificate company or a redeemable security issued by an open-end management company or unit investment trust, as those terms are defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, may be amended after its effective date so as to increase the securities specified as proposed to be offered. The amendment becomes effective when the securities commissioner orders.
Section 35-1-990.   As a condition of registration a prospectus approved by the securities commissioner shall be sent or given to each person to whom an offer is made before or concurrently with (a) the first written offer made to him, otherwise than by means of a public advertisement, by or for the account of the issuer or any other person on whose behalf the offering is being made or by any underwriter or broker-dealer who is offering part of an unsold allotment or subscription taken by him as a participant in the distribution, (b) the confirmation of any sale made by or for the account of any such person, (c) payment pursuant to any such sale or (d) delivery of the security pursuant to any such sale, whichever first occurs.
Section 35-1-1000.   Securities registered pursuant to Sections 35-1-820 to 35-1-880, become eligible for trading in the secondary market at current market prices upon completion of the original offering when such securities are outstanding and in the hands of the public.
Section 35-1-1010.   The securities commissioner may issue a stop order denying effectiveness to, or suspending or revoking the effectiveness of, any registration statement if he finds (a) that the order is in the public interest and (b) that:
(i)   the registration statement as of its effective date or as of any earlier date in the case of an order denying effectiveness, any amendment under Section 35-1-980 as of its effective date or any report under Section 35-1-970, is incomplete in any material respect or contains any statement which was, in the light of the circumstances under which it was made, false or misleading with respect to any material fact;
(ii)   any provision of this chapter or any rule, order or condition lawfully imposed under this chapter has been wilfully violated, in connection with the offering by (1) the person filing the registration statement, (2) the issuer, any partner, officer or director of the issuer, any person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, or any person directly or indirectly controlling or controlled by the issuer, but only if the person filing the registration statement is directly or indirectly controlled by or acting for the issuer or (3) any underwriter;
(iii)   the security registered or sought to be registered is the subject of an administrative stop order or similar order or a permanent or temporary injunction of any court of competent jurisdiction entered under any other federal or state act applicable to the offering but (1) the securities commissioner may not institute a proceeding against an effective registration statement under this item (iii) more than one year from the date of the order or injunction relied on and (2) he may not enter an order under this item (iii) on the basis of an order or injunction entered under any other state act unless that order or injunction was based on facts which would currently constitute a ground for a stop order under this section;
(iv)   the issuer's enterprise or method of business includes or would include activities which are illegal where performed;
(v)   the offering has worked or tended to work a fraud upon purchasers or would so operate;
(vi)   the offering has been or would be made with unreasonable amounts of underwriters' and sellers' discounts, commissions or other compensation, promoters' profits or participation or unreasonable amounts or kinds of options;
(vii)   when a security is sought to be registered by notification, it is not eligible for such registration;
(viii)   when a security is sought to be registered by coordination, there has been a failure to comply with the undertaking required by item (4) of Section 35-1-850; or
(ix)   the applicant or registrant has failed to pay the proper filing fee; but the securities commissioner may enter only a denial order under this item (ix), and he shall vacate any such order when the deficiency has been corrected.
Section 35-1-1020.   The securities commissioner may not institute a stop-order proceeding against an effective registration statement on the basis of a fact or transaction known to him when the registration statement became effective unless the proceeding is instituted within the next thirty days.
Section 35-1-1030.   The securities commissioner may by order summarily postpone or suspend the effectiveness of the registration statement pending final determination of any proceeding under this section. Upon the entry of the order, the securities commissioner shall promptly notify each person specified in Section 35-1-1040 that it has been entered and of the reasons therefor and that within fifteen days after the receipt of a written request the matter will be set down for hearing. If no hearing is requested and none is ordered by the securities commissioner, the order will remain in effect until it is modified or vacated by the securities commissioner. If a hearing is requested or ordered, the securities commissioner, after notice of and opportunity for hearing to each person specified in Section 35-1-1040, may modify or vacate the order or extend it until final determination.
Section 35-1-1040.   No stop order may be entered under any part of Sections 35-1-1010 to 35-1-1030 except the first sentence of Section 35-1-1030 without (a) appropriate prior notice to the applicant or registrant, the issuer and the person on whose behalf the securities are to be or have been offered, (b) opportunity for hearing and (c) written findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Section 35-1-1050.   The securities commissioner may vacate or modify a stop order if he finds that the conditions which prompted entry have changed or that it is otherwise in the public interest to do so.

Section 35-1-1100.   (a)   The securities commissioner, by rule or order, may require the filing of any or all of the following documents with respect to a federal covered security under Section 18(b)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933:
(1)   Prior to the initial offer of such federal covered security in this State, all documents that are part of a current federal registration statement filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933 or a notice form adopted by the commissioner in lieu thereof, together with a consent to service of process signed by the issuer and a notice filing fee of five hundred dollars.
(2)   After the initial offer of such federal covered security in this State, all documents that are part of an amendment to a current federal registration statement filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, or a ntoice form adopted by the commissioner in lieu thereof which shall be filed concurrently with the securities commissioner.
(3)   All notice filings for federal covered securities are effective upon receipt by the commission, unless another date is requested by the issuer. These filings are effective for twelve months. If securities are to be offered beyond this twelve-month period, the issuer must file an annual notice filing consisting of any documents that the securities commissioner, by rule or otherwise, may require and a fee of five hundred dollars. The renewal notice filing shall be effective upon the expiration of the prior filing period.
(4)   Amendments to a notice filing are effective upon receipt by the securities commissioner. Termination of a notice filing is effective upon receipt by the securities commissioner of notice of the termination.
(b)   With respect to any security that is a federal covered security under Section 18(b)(4)(D) of the Securities Act of 1933, the securities commissioner, by rule or order, may require the issuer to file a notice on SEC Form D and a consent to service of process signed by the issuer no later than fifteen (15) days after the first sale of such federal covered security in this State, together with a fee of three hundred dollars.
(c)   The securities commissioner, by rule or order, may require the filing of any document filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933 with respect to a federal covered security under Section 18(b)(3) or (4) of the Securities Act of 1933, together with a filing fee of twenty-five dollars.
(d)   The securities commissioner may issue a stop order suspending the offer and sale of a federal covered security, except a federal covered security under Section 18(b)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, if he finds that (1) the order is in the public interest and (2) there is a failure to comply with any condition established under this section.
(e)   The securities commissioner, by rule or order, may modify, change, or waive any or all of the provisions of this section.

Section 35-1-1210.   It is unlawful for any person, in connection with the offer, sale, or purchase of any security, directly or indirectly, to:
(1)   employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud;
(2)   make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading; or
(3)   engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.
Section 35-1-1220.   It is unlawful for any person who receives any consideration from another person primarily for advising the other person as to the value of securities or their purchase or sale, whether through the issuance of analyses or reports or otherwise;
(1)   to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud the other person;
(2)   to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the other person;
(3)   acting as principal for his own account, knowingly to sell any security to or purchase any security from a client, or acting as broker for a person other than such client, knowingly to effect any sale or purchase of any security for the account of such client, without disclosing to such client in writing before the completion of such transaction the capacity in which he is acting and obtaining the consent of the client to such transaction. The prohibitions of this subparagraph shall not apply to any transaction with a customer of a broker-dealer if such broker-dealer is not acting as an investment adviser in relation to such transaction;
(4)   to engage in dishonest or unethical practices as the commissioner may define by rule.
(5)   The provisions of items (3) and (4) of this section do not apply to federal covered advisers.
The commissioner may by rule or order adopt exemptions from item (3) of this section where such exemptions are consistent with the public interest and within the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of this chapter.
Section 35-1-1230.   Except as may be permitted by rule or order of the securities commissioner, it is unlawful for any investment adviser to enter into, extend, or renew any investment advisory contract unless it provides in writing that:
(1)   the investment adviser shall not be compensated on the basis of a share of capital gains upon or capital appreciation of the funds or any portion of the funds of the client;
(2)   no assignment of the contract may be made by the investment adviser without the consent of the other party to the contract; and
(3)   the investment adviser, if a partnership, shall notify the other party to the contract of any change in the membership of the partnership within a reasonable time after the change.
Item (1) does not prohibit an investment advisory contract which provides for compensation based upon the total value of a fund averaged over a definite period, or as of definite dates, or taken as of a definite time. 'Assignment', as used in item (2), includes any direct or indirect transfer or hypothecation of an investment advisory contract by the assignor or of a controlling block of the assignor's outstanding voting securities by a security holder of the assignor; but, if the investment adviser is a partnership, no assignment of an investment advisory contract is considered to result from the death or withdrawal of a minority of the members of the investment adviser having only a minority interest in the business of the investment adviser, or from the admission to the investment adviser of one or more members who, after admission, will be only a minority of the members and will have only a minority interest in the business.
The commissioner may by rule or order adopt exemptions from the provisions of this section where such exemptions are consistent with the public interest and within the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of this chapter.
Section 35-1-1240.   It is unlawful for any investment adviser to take or have custody of any securities or funds of any client if:
(1) The securities commissioner by rule prohibits custody; or
(2) In the absence of rule, the investment adviser fails to notify the securities commissioner that he has or may have custody.
To the extent permitted by rule or order of the securities commissioner, an investment adviser licensed under this chapter may take or retain custody of securities or funds of a client.

Section 35-1-1310.   Any person aggrieved by a final order of the securities commissioner may obtain a review of the order in the court of common pleas for Richland County or in the county wherein the person resides by filing in court, within thirty days after the entry of the order, a written petition praying that the order be modified or set aside in whole or in part. The filing of a written petition for review, accompanied by the posting of any bond set by the court in which a petition is filed, shall stay the effectiveness of the commissioner's final order until such time as the court has reviewed the order. A copy of the petition must be served upon the securities commissioner, and the securities commissioner shall certify and file in court a copy of the filing and evidence upon which the order was entered. When these have been filed, the court has exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, modify, enforce or set aside the order, in whole or in part. The findings of the securities commissioner as to the facts, if supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence, are conclusive.
Section 35-1-1320.   If either party applies to the court for leave to adduce additional material evidence, and shows to the satisfaction of the court that there were reasonable grounds for failure to adduce the evidence in the hearing before the securities commissioner, the court may order the additional evidence to be taken before the securities commissioner and to be adduced upon the hearing in such manner and upon such conditions as the court considers proper. The securities commissioner may modify his findings and order by reason of the additional evidence and shall file in court the additional evidence together with any modified or new findings or order.
Section 35-1-1330.   The commencement of proceedings under Section 35-1-1310 does not, unless specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the securities commissioner's order.

Section 35-1-1410.   Every applicant for registration under this chapter, federal covered adviser, and every issuer which proposes to offer a security in this State through any person acting on any agency basis in the common-law sense shall file with the securities commissioner, in such form as he by rule prescribes, an irrevocable consent appointing the securities commissioner or his successor in office to be his attorney to receive service of any lawful process in any noncriminal suit, action, or proceeding against him or his successor, executor, or administrator which arises under this chapter or any rule or order hereunder after the consent has been filed, with the same force and validity as if served personally on the person filing the consent. A person who has filed such a consent in connection with a previous registration need not file another. Service may be made by leaving a copy of the process in the office of the securities commissioner, but it is not effective unless (a) the plaintiff, who may be the securities commissioner in a suit, action, or proceeding instituted by him, forthwith sends notice of the service and a copy of the process by registered mail to the defendant or respondent at his last address on file with the securities commissioner and (b) the plaintiff's affidavit of compliance with this section is filed in the case on or before the return day of the process, if any, or within such further time as the court allows.
Section 35-1-1420.   When any person, including any nonresident of this State, engages in conduct prohibited or made actionable by this chapter or any rule or order hereunder, he has not filed a consent to service of process under Section 35-1-1410 and personal jurisdiction over him cannot otherwise be obtained in this State, that conduct shall be considered equivalent to his appointment of the securities commissioner or his successor in office to be his attorney to receive service of any lawful process in any noncriminal suit, action, or proceeding against him or his successor, executor, or administrator which grows out of that conduct and which is brought under this chapter or any rule or order hereunder, with the same force and validity as if served on him personally. Service may be made by leaving a copy of the process in the office of the securities commissioner, and it is not effective unless (a) the plaintiff, who may be the securities commissioner in a suit, action, or proceeding instituted by him, forthwith sends notice of the service and a copy of the process by registered mail to the defendant or respondent at his last-known address or takes other steps which are reasonably calculated to give actual notice and (b) the plaintiff's affidavit of compliance with this section is filed in the case on or before the return day of the process, if any, or within such further time as the court allows.
Section 35-1-1430.   When process is served under Section 35-1-1410 or Section 35-1-1420, the court or the securities commissioner in a proceeding before him shall order such continuance as may be necessary to afford the defendant or respondent reasonable opportunity to defend.
Section 35-1-1440.   The securities commissioner in his discretion (a) may make such public or private investigations within or outside of this State as he deems necessary to determine whether any person has violated or is about to violate any provision of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder or to aid in the enforcement of this chapter or in the prescribing of rules and forms hereunder, (b) may require or permit any person to file a statement in writing, under oath or otherwise as the securities commissioner determines, as to all the facts and circumstances concerning the matter to be investigated and (c) may publish information concerning any violation of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder.
Section 35-1-1450.   For the purpose of any investigation or proceeding under this chapter, the securities commissioner or any officer designated by him may administer oaths and affirmations, subpoena witnesses, compel their attendance, take evidence and require the production of any books, papers, correspondence, memoranda, agreements, or other documents or records which the securities commissioner deems relevant or material to the inquiry.
Section 35-1-1460.   In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey a subpoena issued to, any person, the court of common pleas, upon application by the securities commissioner, may issue to the person an order requiring him to appear before the securities commissioner or the officer designated by him, to produce documentary evidence, if so ordered, or to give evidence touching the matter under investigation or in question. The court may fine the person not exceeding three thousand dollars if it finds that the person's failure to respond fully to the subpoena was not in good faith or was for purposes of delay. In any case the court may award the securities commissioner fees and costs incurred in appearing before the court. Failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt of court in addition to the other penalties authorized by this section.
Section 35-1-1470.   No person is excused from attending and testifying or from producing any document or record before the securities commissioner or in obedience to the subpoena of the securities commissioner or any officer designated by him or in any proceeding instituted by the securities commissioner, on the ground that the testimony or evidence, documentary or otherwise, required of him may tend to incriminate him or subject him to a penalty or forfeiture. But no individual may be prosecuted or subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any transaction, matter or thing concerning which he is compelled, after claiming his privilege against self-incrimination, to testify or produce evidence documentary or otherwise, except that the individual testifying is not exempt from prosecution and punishment for perjury or contempt committed in testifying.
Section 35-1-1475.   The securities commissioner may impose and collect an administrative fine against any person found to have violated any provision of this chapter, any rule or order promulgated by the commissioner, or any written agreement entered into with the commissioner in an amount not exceeding five thousand dollars for each violation.
Section 35-1-1480.   Whenever it appears to the securities commissioner that any person has engaged or is about to engage in any act or practice constituting a violation of any provision of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder, he may in his discretion bring an action in the court of common pleas for Richland County or in the county wherein such person resides to enjoin the acts or practices and to enforce compliance with this chapter or any rule or order hereunder. Upon a proper showing a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order or writ of mandamus shall be granted and a receiver or conservator may be appointed for the defendant or the defendant's assets. The court may not require the securities commissioner to post a bond.
Section 35-1-1490.   Any person who:
(1)   offers or sells a security in violation of subsection (2) of Section 35-1-170 or Section 35-1-410 or Section 35-1-810, or of any rule or order under Section 35-1-50 which requires the affirmative approval of sales literature before it is used or of any condition imposed under Section 35-1-950 or Section 35-1-990; or
(2)   Offers or sells a security by means of any untrue statement of a material fact or any omission to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading, the buyer not knowing of the untruth or omission, and who does not sustain the burden of proof that he did not know, and in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known, of the untruth or omission;
Is liable to the person buying the security from him, who may sue either at law or in equity to recover the consideration paid for the security, together with interest at six percent per year from the date of payment, costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees, less the amount of any income received on the security, upon the tender of the security, or for damages if he no longer owns the security. Damages are the amount that would be recoverable upon a tender less the value of the security when the buyer disposed of it and interest at six percent per year from the date of disposition.
Section 35-1-1500.   Every person who directly or indirectly controls a seller liable under Section 35-1-1490, every partner, officer or director of such a seller, every person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, every employee of such a seller who materially aids in the sale, and every broker-dealer or agent who materially aids in the sale are also liable jointly and severally with and to the same extent as the seller, unless the nonseller who is so liable sustains the burden of proof that he did not know, and in exercise of reasonable care could not have known, of the existence of the facts by reason of which the liability is alleged to exist. There is contribution as in cases of contract among the several persons so liable.
Section 35-1-1510.   Any tender specified in Section 35-1-1490 may be made at any time before entry of judgment.
Section 35-1-1520.   Every cause of action under this chapter survives the death of any person who might have been a plaintiff or defendant.
Section 35-1-1530.   No person may sue under Sections 35-1-1490 and 35-1-1500 more than three years after the contract of sale. No person may sue under either section (a) if the buyer received a written offer, before suit and at a time when he owned the security, to refund the consideration paid together with interest at six percent per year from the date of payment, less the amount of any income received on the security, and he failed to accept the offer within thirty days of its receipt or (b) if the buyer received such an offer before suit and at a time when he did not own the security, unless he rejected the offer in writing within thirty days of its receipt.
Section 35-1-1540.   No person who has made or engaged in the performance of any contract in violation of any provision of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder or who has acquired any purported right under any such contract with knowledge of the facts by reason of which its making or performance was in violation, may base any suit on the contract.
Section 35-1-1550.   Any condition, stipulation, or provision binding any person acquiring any security to waive compliance with any provision of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder is void.
Section 35-1-1560.   The rights and remedies provided by this chapter are in addition to any other rights or remedies that may exist at law or in equity, but this chapter does not create any cause of action not specified in this section or in Section 35-1-510.
Section 35-1-1570.   Nothing in this chapter limits the power of the State to punish any person for any conduct which constitutes a crime by statute or at common law.
Section 35-1-1580.   The securities commissioner may refer that evidence as is available concerning violations of this chapter or of any rule or order under this chapter to the appropriate Division of the Attorney General General's Office or the other appropriate circuit solicitor, prosecution, law enforcement, or licensing authorities who may, institute the appropriate criminal proceedings under this chapter.
Section 35-1-1590.   Any person who wilfully violates any provision of this chapter except Section 35-1-160, who wilfully violates any rule or order under this chapter or who wilfully violates Section 35-1-160, knowing the statement made to be false or misleading in any material respect, is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than fifty thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. However, no person may be imprisoned for the violation of any rule or order if he proves that he had no knowledge of the rule or order."/
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Senator SALEEBY explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the third time and ordered returned to the House of Representatives with amendments.

H. 3628 (Word version) -- Reps. Kelley, Harrison, Davenport, Allison, Keegan and Hodges: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 25, TITLE 17, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO JUDGMENT AND EXECUTION BY ADDING ARTICLE 5 SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT THE NAME OF A DEFENDANT CONVICTED FOR AN OFFENSE BASED ON CHILD SEXUAL OR PHYSICAL ABUSE BE ENTERED IN THE CENTRAL REGISTRY FOR CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT MAINTAINED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-650, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DUTIES OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, SO AS TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES FOR ENTERING THE NAME OF A PERPETRATOR IN THE CENTRAL REGISTRY FOR CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-670, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT IN RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS AND FOSTER HOMES, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE NAME OF A PERPETRATOR OF SUCH ABUSE OR NEGLECT IMMEDIATELY TO BE ENTERED ON THE CENTRAL REGISTRY UPON A FINDING OF THE ABUSE OR NEGLECT AND TO PROVIDE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR APPEAL; AND TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-680, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CENTRAL REGISTRY FOR CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT, SO AS TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES FOR MAINTAINING INFORMATION ON THE REGISTRY.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senator FAIR proposed the following amendment (JIC\6169AC.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 20-78-680(F), page 10, by deleting lines 41-42 and page 11, by deleting lines 1-5 and inserting:
/other information in its records when making decisions associated with administration or delivery of the department's programs and services/.
Amend title to conform.

Senator FAIR explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the third time and ordered returned to the House of Representatives with amendments.

H. 3780 (Word version) -- Reps. Young, Askins, Woodrum, Inabinett, Simrill, Bailey, Riser and Kirsh: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-11-110, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ARSON, SO AS TO REVISE THE ELEMENTS OF ARSON IN THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD DEGREES, AND REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR ARSON IN THE FIRST AND SECOND DEGREES.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senator PATTERSON proposed the following amendment (JUD3780.008), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 4, after line 39, in Section 45-2-35, as contained in SECTION 5, by inserting therein the following:
/(D)   An innkeeper of a lodging establishment, as defined in Section 45-2-20, may designate a specific room for use by the certified canine and the accompanying law enforcement officer or fire service personnel."/
Amend title to conform.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the third time and ordered returned to the House of Representatives with amendments.

H. 3637 (Word version) -- Reps. R. Smith, Mason, Sharpe, Clyburn, Beck, Felder, Kelley and Spearman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3360, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CALCULATION OF NEW AND ADDITIONAL NEW FULL-TIME JOBS FOR PURPOSES OF AN ANNUAL JOB TAX CREDIT, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AND PLACE A TIME LIMIT ON A TAYPAYER ELECTION FOR DETERMINATION OF NEW AND ADDITIONAL NEW FULL-TIME JOBS AND TO DEFINE "SINGLE SITE".

Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.
There was no objection.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senators RYBERG and MOORE proposed the following amendment(3637R001.WGR), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 2, by striking line 39, and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
/for taxable years beginning with 1997./
Amend title to conform.

Senator MOORE explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senators RYBERG and MOORE proposed the following amendment (JIC\6165HTC.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, in Section 12-6-3360(F)(2)(d), as contained in SECTION 1, page 2, line 14 by striking the period and inserting: \. However, this exclusion of a new job created by a job transferred from one site to another site does not extend to a job created at a new or expanded facility located in a county in which is located an 'applicable federal facility' as defined in Section 12-6-3450(A)(1)(b)./
Amend further, as and if amended, in Section 12-6-3360(M)(3), as contained in SECTION 2, page 2, line 25, by striking the period and inserting /.   However, this exclusion of a new job created by employee shifting does not extend to a job created at a new or expanded facility located in a county in which is located an 'applicable federal facility' as defined in Section 12-6-3450(A)(1)(b)./
Amend title to conform.

Senator MOORE explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the third time and ordered returned to the House of Representatives with amendments.

The following Bills and Joint Resolutions were read the third time and ordered sent to the House of Representatives:

S. 468 (Word version) -- Senators Lander and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 5, TITLE 10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE BOARD FOR BARRIER FREE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS FOR ACCESS BY HANDICAPPED PERSONS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE BOARD MEMBERS FROM SIX TO NINE AND REVISE MEMBERSHIP, TO REVISE DEFINITIONS, TO CLARIFY DUTIES OF THE BOARD, TO ADOPT THE LATEST NATIONAL TECHNICAL STANDARDS, TO ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE CHAPTER, AND TO CLARIFY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES.
On motion of Senator RAVENEL, with unanimous consent, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

S. 567 (Word version) -- Senators Wilson and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 13, TITLE 40, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF COSMETOLOGY AND COSMETOLOGISTS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40, AND AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO DISCONTINUE THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY PERMITS AND TO TRANSFER STUDENT RECORDKEEPING RESPONSIBILITIES FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION TO BEAUTY SCHOOLS.

S. 667 (Word version) -- Senator Moore: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 472 OF 1976, RELATING TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 4 OF MCCORMICK COUNTY, SO AS TO REQUIRE ALL CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO FILE A STATEMENT OF CANDIDACY WITH THE BOARD OF ELECTION AND REGISTRATION NOT LATER THAN TWELVE O'CLOCK NOON ON SEPTEMBER 1ST OF THE YEAR IN WHICH THE GENERAL ELECTION IS HELD, AND TO FURTHER REFINE THE PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEES IN THE EVENT THAT NO CANDIDATES OFFER IN THE GENERAL ELECTION FOR ANY FULL-TERM VACANCIES ON THE BOARD.
On motion of Senator MOORE, the Bill was taken up for immediate consideration.

S. 791 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, E-911 OPERATORS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2181, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

S. 792 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2186, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

S. 632 (Word version) -- Judiciary Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1895, RELATING TO OFFICES BY ADDING SECTION 7A SO AS TO ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE ON JULY 1, 1999, AND PROVIDE FOR ITS FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES TO BE DEVOLVED UPON STATE AGENCIES IN THE MANNER THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL PROVIDE BY LAW.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Joint Resolution. The question being the third reading of the Joint Resolution.

Senator PASSAILAIGUE proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (632R002.ELP), which was adopted:
Amend the joint resolution, as and if amended, by striking beginning on page 2, line 10 and continuing on to page 3, line 26.
Amend title to conform.

The amendment was adopted.

Senator DRUMMOND moved that the text of the Joint Resolution, as amended, be printed upon the pages of the Journal and the Joint Resolution be ordered to receive a third reading.

A JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1895, RELATING TO OFFICES BY ADDING SECTION 7A SO AS TO ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE ON JULY 1, 1999, AND PROVIDE FOR ITS FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES TO BE DEVOLVED UPON STATE AGENCIES IN THE MANNER THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL PROVIDE BY LAW.
Amend Title To Conform
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION   1.   It is proposed that Article VI of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended by adding:
"Section 7A.   Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of this article and Section 12 of Article IV or any other provision of this Constitution, the office of Secretary of State is abolished on July 1, 1999. The functions and duties of the Secretary of State must be devolved upon state agencies in the manner that the General Assembly shall provide by law."
SECTION   2.   The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Shall Article VI of the Constitution of this State be amended by adding Section 7A so as to abolish the office of Secretary of State on July 1, 1999, and provide that the functions and duties of the office must be devolved upon state agencies in the manner that the General Assembly shall provide by law?

The question then was the third reading of the Joint Resolution.

The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:

Alexander                 Anderson                  Bryan
Cork                      Courson                   Courtney
Drummond                  Elliott                   Fair
Ford                      Giese                     Glover
Gregory                   Hayes                     Holland
Hutto                     Jackson                   Land
Lander                    Leatherman                Leventis
Martin                    Matthews                  McConnell
McGill                    Mescher                   Moore
O'Dell                    Passailaigue              Patterson
Peeler                    Rankin                    Ravenel
Reese                     Rose                      Russell
Ryberg                    Saleeby                   Setzler
Short                     Smith, J. Verne           Thomas
Waldrep                   Washington                Williams
Wilson

The Joint Resolution was read the third time, passed and ordered sent to the House of Representatives.

The following Bill and Joint Resolution having been read the second time with notice of general amendments were ordered placed on the third reading Calendar:

H. 4026 (Word version) -- Rep. H. Brown: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 35, TITLE 11, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA CONSOLIDATED PROCUREMENT CODE, SO AS TO REVISE THE SOUTH CAROLINA CONSOLIDATED PROCUREMENT CODE, TO PROVIDE GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO THE CONSOLIDATED PROCUREMENT CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR WRITTEN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS REQUIRED BY THIS CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO PROCUREMENT INFORMATION, TO PROVIDE FOR REPORTING THE PURCHASE OF FURNITURE AND CERTAIN OTHER PURCHASES, TO PROVIDE FOR PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATION AND FOR EXCEPTIONS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF OFFICES AND FOR THE RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OF THOSE OFFICES UNDER THIS CODE, TO PROVIDE FOR ADVISOR COMMITTEES AND TRAINING, TO PROVIDE FOR AUDITING AND FISCAL REPORTING, TO PROVIDE FOR SOURCE SELECTION, CONTRACTS AND AUDITS, TO PROVIDE FOR METHODS OF SOURCE SELECTION, TO PROVIDE FOR CANCELLATION OF SOLICITATIONS, TO PROVIDE FOR TYPES AND FORMS OF CONTRACTS, TO PROVIDE FOR INSPECTION OF PLANTS AND PLACES OF BUSINESS AND AUDIT OF RECORDS, TO PROVIDE FOR DETERMINATIONS AND REPORTS IN CONNECTION WITH COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING, CORRECTION OR WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS, AND CANCELLATION OF AWARDS, TO PROVIDE FOR REGULATION OF SPECIFICATIONS, TO PROVIDE FOR CONSTRUCTION, ARCHITECT-ENGINEER, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND LAND SURVEYING SERVICES, TO PROVIDE FOR INDEFINITE DELIVERY CONTRACTS, AND FOR MODIFICATIONS AND TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS FOR SUPPLIES AND SERVICES, TO PROVIDE FOR COST PRINCIPLES, SUPPLY MANAGEMENT, WAREHOUSES AND INVENTORY, TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF SALE, LEASE, TRANSFER, AND DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS SUPPLIES AND OTHER PROPERTY, TO PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL REMEDIES, THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESOLUTION OF CONTROVERSIES, AND FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PROCUREMENT REVIEW PANEL, TO PROVIDE FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS AND FOR COOPERATIVE PURCHASING, AND TO PROVIDE FOR CERTIFICATION AND ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY BUSINESSES; TO ADD SECTION 1-11-55 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR LEASING OF REAL PROPERTY, TO ADD SECTION 1-11-56 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD MANAGEMENT OF STATE AGENCY LEASING OF SPACE, TO ADD SECTION 1-11-57 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE EXCHANGE OF TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY BY GOVERNMENTAL BODIES OTHER THAN POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS, AND TO ADD SECTION 1-11-58 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR INVENTORY AND ANNUAL REPORTS OF ALL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNED BY STATE AGENCIES, AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 1-1-1110 AND 1-11-35 RELATING TO CERTAIN PROCUREMENT AND INVENTORY PROVISIONS.

Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to take up the Bill for immediate consideration.
There was no objection.

H. 4197 (Word version) -- Education and Public Works Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO AREA VOCATIONAL CENTERS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2128, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.

H. 3499 (Word version) -- Reps. Knotts, Whatley, Cobb-Hunter, Neal, Kennedy, Govan, Lanford, Fleming, Simrill, Bailey, Altman, Stille, Harrell, Young, Sandifer, McCraw, Clyburn, Wilkins, Scott, Chellis, Davenport, Harrison, D. Smith, Riser, Webb, Barrett, Tripp, Klauber, J. Smith, Keegan, Delleney, Bauer, Campsen, Hawkins, McMaster and Haskins: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 17-13-45 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT WHEN A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER RESPONDS TO A DISTRESS CALL IN A NEIGHBORING JURISDICTION, THE AUTHORITY, RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, AND IMMUNITIES THAT APPLY TO AN OFFICER WITHIN THE JURISDICTION IN WHICH HE IS EMPLOYED, ARE EXTENDED TO AND INCLUDE THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTION.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.

Senator BRYAN proposed the following amendment (JUD3499.001), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 1, line 27, in Section 17-13-45, as contained in SECTION 1, by striking the word /neighboring/ and inserting therein the word /adjacent/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, page 1, line 32, in Section 17-13-45, as contained in SECTION 1, by striking the word /neighboring/ and inserting therein the word /adjacent/.
Amend title to conform.

Senator BRYAN explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senator WILSON proposed the following amendment (JUD3499.003), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/SECTION   ___.   The 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 55-11-355.   No property of the Richland-Lexington Airport District is a barrier to the contiguity requirements for the purposes of annexation. Any municipality which is contiguous to property owned by the district may annex, as provided by law, any property contiguous to the district."/
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Senator WILSON explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senator WILSON proposed the following amendment (JUD3499.002), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/SECTION   .   Section 55-11-350 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding at the end:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, any public road, street, or highway located in the Richland-Lexington Airport District which is contiguous to or intersects the corporate limits of a municipality is within the police jurisdiction of that municipality. Summonses issued by municipal police officers in the jurisdiction authorized pursuant to this paragraph must be tried in municipal court, and all fines and forfeitures collected under the provisions of this paragraph may be retained by the enforcing municipality."/
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Senator WILSON explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time and ordered placed on the third reading Calendar with notice of general amendments.

H. 3546 (Word version) -- Reps. Knotts, Whatley, Bauer, Rice and Koon: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-610, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TAKING EMERGENCY PHYSICAL OR PROTECTIVE CUSTODY OF A CHILD BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES SHALL CONDUCT A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER GROUNDS FOR ASSUMING LEGAL CUSTODY OF THE CHILD EXIST; TO PROVIDE THAT UPON CONCLUDING AFTER A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION THAT THE CHILD SHOULD BE RETURNED TO THE CHILD'S PARENT, GUARDIAN, OR CUSTODIAN, THE DEPARTMENT SHALL CONSULT WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RATHER THAN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO TOOK EMERGENCY PHYSICAL CUSTODY OF THE CHILD, AND THAT IF THE AGENCY OBJECTS TO THE RETURN OF THE CHILD, THE DEPARTMENT MUST ASSUME LEGAL CUSTODY OF THE CHILD UNTIL A PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING CAN BE HELD; TO CHANGE THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES SHALL CONDUCT A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION UNDER THIS SECTION TO NINETY-SIX HOURS RATHER THAN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS AFTER THE CHILD WAS TAKEN INTO EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE CUSTODY BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER; TO PROVIDE THAT THE FAMILY COURT SHALL SCHEDULE A PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING TO BE HELD WITHIN NINETY-SIX HOURS RATHER THAN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS OF THE TIME THE CHILD WAS TAKEN INTO EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE CUSTODY OR WITHIN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS OF THE TIME THE CHILD WAS TAKEN INTO EMERGENCY PHYSICAL CUSTODY IF LEGAL CUSTODY SUBSEQUENTLY WAS ASSUMED BY THE DEPARTMENT; AND TO PROVIDE THAT IF THE FOURTH DAY, RATHER THAN THE THIRD DAY, FALLS UPON A SATURDAY, SUNDAY, OR HOLIDAY, THE PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING MUST BE HELD NO LATER THAN THE NEXT WORKING DAY.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.

Senator THOMAS proposed the following amendment (3546R001.DLT), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 6, after line 29, by adding the following:
/Where the sole basis for taking a child into emergency protective custody is excessive corporal punishment of a child aged six or older and there is no injury to the child other than isolated superficial lesions, other children in the home shall not be taken into emergency protective custody solely on account of the excessive corporal punishment of one child. However, the officer may take into consideration, for the purpose of taking other children in the home into protective custody, any prior history of domestic violence, alcohol or drug abuse, if known or evident at the time of the initial contact, or other circumstances indicative of danger to the children./
Amend title to conform.

Senator THOMAS explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senators COURTNEY and THOMAS proposed the following amendment (JUD3546.002), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 2, beginning on line 33, in Section 20-7-610(A)(1), as contained in SECTION 2, by striking line 33 in its entirety and inserting therein the following:
/20-7-736. When a child is taken into emergency protective custody following an incident of excessive corporal punishment and the only injury to the child is external lesions or minor bruises, other children in the home shall not be taken into emergency protective custody solely on account of the injury of one child through excessive corporal punishment. However, the officer may take emergency protective custody of other children in the home if a threat of harm to them is further indicated by factors including, but not limited to, a prior history of domestic violence or other abuse in the home, alcohol or drug abuse if known or evident at the time of the initial contact, or other circumstances indicative of danger to the children;/
Amend title to conform.

Senator COURTNEY explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was read the second time and ordered placed on the third reading Calendar with notice of general amendments.

The following Bill having been read the second time was ordered placed on the third reading Calendar:

H. 4150 (Word version) -- Reps. Jennings and Kinon: A BILL TO REPEAL ACT 524 OF 1996 RELATING TO THE MARLBORO COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD.
(On motion of Senator SALEEBY)

On motion of Senator SALEEBY, H. 4150 was ordered to receive a third reading on Wednesday, June 4, 1997.

H. 3819 (Word version) -- Reps. Harrell, Beck, J. Hines, Walker, Altman, Leach, Mason, Jennings, Simrill, Kinon, Limbaugh, Dantzler, Sandifer, R. Smith, Allison, Campsen, Knotts, Barrett, Seithel, Cobb-Hunter, Cooper, Young, Townsend, Felder, Kennedy, Woodrum, Hinson, Haskins, M. Hines, Harvin, Klauber, Fleming, Kelley, Limehouse, Young-Brickell, Whatley, Wilkins, Boan, McMahand, Littlejohn, Cato, H. Brown, Stuart, Robinson, Phillips, Riser, McKay, Lanford, Keegan, Edge, Jordan, Witherspoon, Gourdine, Hodges, Wilder, J. Smith, Chellis, Baxley, Kirsh and Sharpe: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 44 TO TITLE 12 SO AS TO ENACT THE "FEE IN LIEU OF TAX SIMPLIFICATION ACT OF 1997" SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR SIMPLIFICATION OF FEE IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAX TRANSACTIONS; TO DEFINE CERTAIN TERMS, INCLUDING "ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY"; TO PROVIDE FOR APPROVAL BY LOCAL COUNTY COUNCILS OF FEE AGREEMENTS; TO PROVIDE FOR CALCULATION OF THE REQUIRED FEE PAYMENTS; TO PROVIDE FOR APPLICATION OF THE FEE TO REPLACEMENT PROPERTY AND A CREDIT AGAINST THE FEE FOR COSTS OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS; TO PROVIDE FOR DISTRIBUTION OF THE FEE, PENALTIES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER OR THE FEE AGREEMENTS, CONSEQUENCES OF TRANSFERS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY AND OF TERMINATION OF FEE AGREEMENTS, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFILIATE SPONSORS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-220, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS OF CERTAIN CLASSES OF PROPERTY FROM AD VALOREM TAXATION, SO AS TO INCLUDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY AS AN EXEMPTION.

Senator LAND asked unanimous consent to make a motion to take up the Bill for immediate consideration.
There was no objection.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee on Finance.

Senator LEATHERMAN explained the amendment.

The Committee on Finance proposed the following amendment (BBM\9495MM.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 12-44-30, as contained in SECTION 1, page 3, by striking item (8) and inserting:
/(8)   'Enhanced investment' means a project which results in a total investment by a sponsor of:
(a)   at least two hundred million dollars, which when added to the previous investments, results in a total investment of at least four hundred million dollars, and which is creating at least two hundred new full-time jobs at the project;
(b)   at least four hundred million dollars of property qualifying for the fee and which is creating at least two hundred new full-time jobs at the project. The new full-time jobs requirement of this item does not apply to a taxpayer which paid more than fifty percent of all property taxes actually collected in the county for more than the twenty-five years ending on the date of the agreement;
(c)   at least four hundred million dollars in a county classified as either least developed or underdeveloped, by a limited liability company and/or one or more of the members or equity holders where a member or equity holder is creating, at a site qualifying for the fee, at least one hundred new full-time jobs with an average annual salary of at least forty thousand dollars within four years of the date of execution of the fee agreement./
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, by adding appropriately numbered sections to read:
/SECTION   .   A.   Section 4-10-20 of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 317 of 1990, is amended to read:
"Section 4-10-20.   A county, upon referendum approval, may levy a sales and use tax of one percent on the gross proceeds of sales within the county area which are subject to tax under Chapter 36 of Title 12 and the enforcement provisions of Chapter 54 of Title 12. The sale of items with a maximum tax levied in accordance with Section 12-36-2110(A), (B) and (C) and Article 17 of Chapter 36 of Title 12 are exempt from the local sales and use tax. The adopted rate also applies to tangible personal property subject to the use tax in Section 12-36-1310. Taxpayers required to remit taxes under Section 12-36-1310 shall identify the county or municipality in the county area in which tangible personal property purchased at retail is stored, used, or consumed in this State. Utilities are required to report sales in the county or municipality in which consumption of the tangible personal property occurs. A taxpayer subject to the tax imposed by Section 12-36-920, who owns or manages rental units in more than one county or municipality, shall report separately in his sales tax return the total gross proceeds from business done in each county or municipality."
B.   Section 12-36-2110(D) of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 110 of 1991, is amended to read:
"(D)   The maximum tax levied pursuant to this chapter on the sale or use of each item of machinery for research and development is three hundred dollars. As used in this subsection, 'machinery for research and development' means machinery used directly and exclusively in research and development in the experimental or laboratory sense for new products, new uses for existing products, or for improving existing products. 'Machinery' includes machines and the parts of machines, attachments, and replacements used or manufactured for use on or in the operation of the machines and which are necessary to the operation of the machines and are customarily so used. To be eligible for the limitation imposed by this subsection, the machinery must be located in a separate facility devoted exclusively to research and development as defined in this subsection. The limitation does not extend to machinery used in connection with efficiency surveys, management studies, consumer surveys, economic surveys, advertising, promotion, or research in connection with literary, historical, or similar projects."
C.   Notwithstanding any other effective date provided in this act, this section is effective for sales or use made on or after December 1, 1992.
SECTION   ____.   Section 12-6-3360(L) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 462 of 1996, is further amended to read:
"(L)   Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a county with a population under twenty twenty-five thousand as determined by the most recent United States Census shall receive the next increased credit designation for purposes of the credit allowed by this section."/
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

The amendment was adopted.

Senators DRUMMOND, LAND and GIESE proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (JIC\6178HTC.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/ SECTION ___.   A.   Chapter 41, Title 2 of the 1976 Code is reenacted to read:

Section 2-41-5.   There is established the Tax Study Commission composed of nine members, three appointed by the President pro tempore of the Senate from the membership of the Senate, who shall serve ex officio, three appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives from the membership of the House, who shall serve ex officio, and three nonlegislative members appointed by the Governor. The terms of members of the commission appointed by the Governor are coterminous with the term of the appointing Governor.
Section 2-41-15.   The commission shall:
(1)   make a detailed and careful study of the revenue laws of the State, together with all other laws of the State which have a bearing upon the study of the revenue laws, and to make recommendations to the General Assembly;
(2)   provide for the revision of revenue laws so as to provide a more easily understandable and workable system of revenue laws for the State;
(3)   recommend changes in the basic tax structure of the State and in the rates of taxation, together with predicted revenue effects of the charges together with proposed alternate sources of revenue, to the end that our revenue system may be stable and equitable, and yet so fair when compared with the tax structures of other states, that business enterprises and persons would be encouraged by the economic impact of the South Carolina revenue laws to move themselves and their business enterprises into the State;
(4)   recommend study of alternate sources of revenue found in the tax structures of other states, and particularly in the other southeastern states, and to make a report of the economic impact of the South Carolina tax structure upon the business enterprises of various types of industry, as compared with those of other southeastern states; and
(5)   make recommendations for long range revenue planning, and for future amendments of the revenue laws of South Carolina.
Section 2-41-25.   The commission may:
(1)   hold public hearings;
(2)   examine all the records of the Department of Revenue, or on file with the Department of Revenue, or any other agencies of the State;
(3)   receive testimony of any employees of the State or any other witnesses who may assist the commission in its duties; and
(4)   call for assistance in the performance of its duties from any employees or agencies of the State or any of its political subdivisions.
The commission may administer oaths, issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum, and compel the attendance of witnesses, and do all things necessary to accomplish the objective and purposes of this chapter.
Section 2-41-35.   The Governor shall appoint the commission chairman from among his appointees. The commission may adopt by majority vote rules not inconsistent with this chapter it considers proper with respect to matters relating to the discharge of its duties under this chapter.
Section 2-41-45.   Professional and clerical services for the commission must be made available from the staffs of the General Assembly, the office of the Governor, the Department of Revenue, and other state agencies and institutions.
Section 2-41-55.   The commission shall make reports and recommendations at least annually to the General Assembly and the Governor. These findings and recommendations must be published and made available to the public.
Section 2-41-65.   The members of the commission shall receive the per diem, mileage, and subsistence as is allowed by law for members of boards, committees, and commissions when engaged in the exercise of their duties as members of the commission. These expenses for legislative members must be paid from approved accounts of their respective houses and these expenses of gubernatorial appointees must be paid from funds appropriated for the operation of the office of the Governor. All other costs and expenses of the commission must be paid in equal proportion by the Office of the Governor, the Senate, and the House of Representatives."
B.   This section takes effect upon approval by the Governor./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Senator LAND explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senator COURSON asked unanimous consent to make a motion to amend the amendment.
Senator LANDER objected.

Senator DRUMMOND proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (JIC\6186HTC.97), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/SECTION ___.   If any portion of the value of motor vehicles which may be registered upon payment of the fees provided in Section 56-3-620 of the 1976 Code and trucks with an empty weight of not more than five thousand pounds is exempted from the property tax, all property taxing entities must be reimbursed in a timely manner for the revenue not collected, regardless of the date the exemption first applies, beginning in the same fiscal year in which funds are first appropriated by the General Assembly to provide this reimbursement. The exempted value of such property is nevertheless considered taxable property for purposes of bonded indebtedness pursuant to Sections 14 and 15 of Article X of the Constitution of this State and for purposes of computing the "index of taxpaying ability" pursuant to Section 59-20-20(3) of the 1976 Code./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Senator LAND explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

There being no further amendments, the question then was the second reading of the Bill.

The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:

Alexander                 Anderson                  Bryan
Cork                      Courson                   Courtney
Drummond                  Elliott                   Fair
Ford                      Giese                     Glover
Gregory                   Hayes                     Holland
Hutto                     Jackson                   Land
Lander                    Leatherman                Leventis
Martin                    Matthews                  McConnell
McGill                    Mescher                   Moore
O'Dell                    Passailaigue              Patterson
Peeler                    Rankin                    Ravenel
Reese                     Rose                      Russell
Ryberg                    Saleeby                   Setzler
Short                     Smith, J. Verne           Thomas
Waldrep                   Washington                Williams
Wilson

The Bill was read the second time, passed and ordered to a third reading.

On motion of Senator LEATHERMAN, with unanimous consent, H. 3819 was ordered to receive a third reading on Wednesday, June 4, 1997.

H. 4088 (Word version) -- Rep. Townsend: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ERECT TRAFFIC SIGNS AT EXIT 68 ON INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 20 IN RICHLAND COUNTY THAT INFORM MOTORISTS THAT THE SOUTH CAROLINA FIRE ACADEMY MAY BE ACCESSED FROM THIS EXIT.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and returned to the House.

H. 4231 (Word version) -- Reps. Delleney, Canty and D. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO FIX 12:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997, AS THE TIME FOR ELECTING A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, WHOSE UNEXPIRED TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 1998; TO ELECT A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, SEAT 3, WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2001; AND TO ELECT A SUCCESSOR TO A CERTAIN JUDGE OF THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, SEAT 3, WHOSE TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2001.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Concurrent Resolution. The question being the adoption of the previously proposed amendment (JUD4231.001) by Senator McCONNELL.

Senator McCONNELL explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

Senators RYBERG and THOMAS desired to be recorded as voting against the adoption of the amendment.

There being no further amendments, the Concurrent Resolution was adopted and ordered returned to the House with amendments.

Senators RYBERG and THOMAS desired to be recorded as voting against the adoption of the Concurrent Resolution.

H. 3850 (Word version) -- Reps. Robinson and Vaughn: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-2-75, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO REQUIRED SIGNATURES ON TAX RETURNS, SO AS TO OMIT REFERENCE TO SOUTH CAROLINA CODE AND TO ADD REFERENCE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; TO AMEND SECTION 12-21-2738, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LICENSING OF GAMING MACHINES, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT ONE-HALF THE PENALTY BE RETAINED AND EXPENDED BY THE AGENCY CHARGING THE VIOLATION; TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCE TO "GAS AND OTHER FUELS" TO "MOTOR FUEL, BLENDED FUEL, AND ALTERNATIVE FUEL" IN THE EXEMPTION PERTAINING THERETO; TO AMEND SECTION 12-54-40, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO MAKE A TIMELY PAYMENT OF TAX DUE THE STATE BECAUSE OF NEGLIGENCE OR FRAUD, SO AS TO UPDATE REFERENCE TO SOUTH CAROLINA CODE; TO AMEND SECTION 12-60-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN THE REVENUE PROCEDURES ACT, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE MEANING OF "ASSESSMENT"; TO AMEND SECTION 1-23-120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO RULEMAKING, SO AS TO UPDATE REFERENCE TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE; TO AMEND SECTION 8-21-790, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DISPOSITION OF FEES FOR SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES, SO AS TO REQUIRE NO LESS THAN MONTHLY PAYMENTS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 56-31-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PRIVATE CAR RENTAL SURCHARGES, SO AS TO MAKE THEM PAYABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NOT TO THE STATE TREASURER'S OFFICE.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

Senator MOORE proposed the following amendment (3850R001.TLM), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page [3850-3], by deleting line 37 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
/assessed and collected by the commission department/.
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, page [3850-3], by deleting lines 41 through 42, continuing on page [3850-4], lines 1 through 2, and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
/suspended., and One-half of this This penalty must be deposited to the credit of the general fund of the State and one-half must be retained by or forwarded to the law enforcement or administrative agency charging the violation."/
Amend the bill further, as and if amended, page [3850-5], by deleting line 3 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
/(2)   If the commission department establishes that any portion of an/.
Amend title to conform.

Senator MOORE explained the amendment.

The amendment was adopted.

On motion of Senator PASSAILAIGUE, the Bill was carried over.

Senator MARTIN assumed the Chair at 1:26 P.M.

The following Bills and Joint Resolution were carried over:

H. 3038 (Word version) -- Reps. Vaughn, Haskins, Kirsh and Riser: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 26-1-25, SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL METHODS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION MEMBERS ENDORSEMENTS REQUIRED FOR APPLICATIONS FOR NOTARY PUBLIC COMMISSIONS CONSISTING OF THE SIGNATURES OF THE CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY OF A COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION AND THE DELEGATION CHAIRMAN AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TO THE DELEGATION AND TO PROVIDE FOR NOTIFICATION TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF A DELEGATION'S USE OF THESE ADDITIONAL METHODS.
On motion of Senator SETZLER, the Bill was carried over.

H. 3605 (Word version) -- Reps. Sharpe and Harrison: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-45-90, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MEDIA OF PAYMENT OF TAXES COLLECTED BY COUNTY TREASURERS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE COLLECTION OF CHECKS TENDERED IN PAYMENT OF COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL TAXES THAT ARE DISHONORED BY THE DRAWEE BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION OR OTHERWISE RETURNED TO THE TREASURER UNPAID, TO PROVIDE THAT PAYMENT OF CHECKS TENDERED AS PAYMENT FOR COUNTY OR MUNICIPAL TAXES THAT ARE DISHONORED OR RETURNED UNPAID BY THE DRAWEE BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION MAY BE ENFORCED IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY CHAPTER 11, TITLE 34, SO LONG AS NO PERSON SHALL BE TWICE PUT IN JEOPARDY FOR THE SAME OFFENSE, TO PROVIDE THAT COUNTY OR MUNICIPAL TAXES REMAINING UNPAID AS A RESULT OF THE DISHONOR OR RETURN OF A CHECK BY THE DRAWEE BANK REMAIN A LIEN ON PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE TAX UNTIL THE TAXES AND ALL PENALTIES, INTEREST AND OTHER CHARGES DUE THEREON ARE PAID IN FULL, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE REMEDIES PROVIDED BY THIS SECTION ARE CUMULATIVE TO ALL OTHER REMEDIES PROVIDED BY LAW FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAXES.
On motion of Senator PASSAILAIGUE, the Bill was carried over.

H. 3563 (Word version) -- Reps. Sandifer, Parks, Canty and Lanford: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 19, TITLE 40, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF EMBALMERS AND FUNERAL DIRECTORS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSURE AND REGULATION OF EMBALMERS AND FUNERAL DIRECTORS.
On motion of Senator PEELER, the Bill was carried over.

H. 3862 (Word version) -- Reps. Harrison, Rodgers, Edge, Koon, Limehouse, McMaster, Hawkins, H. Brown, Allison, Knotts, Meacham, Campsen, Barfield, Mason, Leach, Littlejohn, Young-Brickell, Cato, Sandifer, Law, Wilkins, Stuart, Woodrum, Simrill, Young, Kelley, Barrett, Sharpe, Whatley, Trotter, Vaughn, Cotty, D. Smith, Haskins, Loftis, Witherspoon, Harrell, Riser, Fleming, Martin and Walker: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTIONS 20-7-6890, 20-7-6895, 20-7-6900, AND 20-7-6905, SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE YOUTH INDUSTRIES PROGRAM WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT TO CONTRACT WITH PRIVATE INDUSTRIES TO PROVIDE SERVICES RELATIVE TO PACKAGING, MANUFACTURING, AND PROCESSING GOODS AND TO ESTABLISH THE MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING OF GOODS FOR STATE ENTITIES AND TO MAKE IT UNLAWFUL IN THIS STATE TO SELL GOODS MADE BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS AND TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-7815, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST COMMITTING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE A PERSON WHO IS SERIOUSLY HANDICAPPED BY MENTAL ILLNESS OR MENTAL RETARDATION, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCE FROM "PERSON" TO "JUVENILE" AND TO REQUIRE THE CONSENT OF THE JUVENILE PAROLE BOARD WHEN AN AGENCY TO WHICH A JUVENILE HAS BEEN COMMITTED SEEKS TO RELEASE THE CHILD; TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-8305, RELATING TO THE BOARD OF JUVENILE PAROLE, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT A JUVENILE HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAR PERSONALLY BEFORE THE BOARD EVERY THREE MONTHS AND INSTEAD AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO CONDUCT PAROLE HEARINGS BY TWO-WAY CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION.
On motion of Senator MOORE, the Bill was carried over.

S. 345 (Word version) -- Senators Leatherman and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 48, CHAPTER 27, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LICENSING AND REGULATION OF FORESTERS, SO AS TO CONFORM THIS CHAPTER TO THE STATUTORY ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS IN CHAPTER 1, TITLE 40 AND AMONG OTHER THINGS TO ESTABLISH MAXIMUM LIMITS ON FINES AND IMPRISONMENT FOR VIOLATIONS, TO REVISE EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LICENSURE, AND TO REQUIRE A WRITTEN CONTRACT BE EXECUTED TO PERFORM SERVICES CONSIDERED THE PRACTICE OF FORESTRY.
On motion of Senator PEELER, the Bill was carried over.

H. 4198 (Word version) -- Education and Public Works Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, RELATING TO CHARTER SCHOOLS REGULATION, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 2164, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Senator BRYAN explained the Resolution.

On motion of Senator PATTERSON, the Joint Resolution was carried over.

The PRESIDENT assumed the Chair at 1:45 P.M.

THE CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED CALENDAR HAVING BEEN COMPLETED, THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO THE MOTION PERIOD.

H. 3764 (Word version) -- Reps. Cato, Harrison, Cromer, Altman, Hawkins, J. Hines, Bauer, Lee, Limehouse, Wilder, Campsen, Fleming, Haskins, Kelley, Mason, Walker, Mullen, Barrett, Neilson, Hinson, Seithel, Inabinett, Cobb-Hunter, Scott, Chellis, McKay, Webb, Sandifer, Young, Woodrum, Young-Brickell, Bailey, Simrill, Sharpe, Stuart, Spearman, Koon, McCraw, Kirsh, Trotter, H. Brown, Boan, Limbaugh, Knotts, Gourdine, Kinon, Dantzler, Law, Meacham, Robinson, Riser, D. Smith, Bowers, Baxley, Quinn, Edge, Maddox, Whatley, Vaughn, McMahand, F. Smith, Battle, Miller, Davenport, Harrell, Hodges, Harvin, Pinckney, Littlejohn, Gamble, Wilkins and Clyburn: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-2-30, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO USE OF THE TITLE AND DESIGNATIONS AS "CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT" AND THE FORM OF PRACTICES THAT MAY BE USED SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN PROVISIONS FOR FORMS OF PRACTICE; TO AMEND SECTION 40-2-190, RELATING TO REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT THE EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENT MUST BE EXPERIENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY, TO PROHIBIT A MINIMUM EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENT FOR AUDITING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 40-2-380, RELATING TO THE PROMULGATION OF REGULATIONS BY THE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY SO AS TO REQUIRE THE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY TO PROMULGATE REGULATIONS CONFORMING TO AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS STANDARDS FOR CONTINGENT FEES, COMMISSIONS, AND FORMS OF PRACTICE AND TO PROVIDE THAT UNTIL THESE REGULATIONS ARE PROMULGATED, THE INSTITUTE STANDARDS APPLY.
On behalf of the Chairmen's Committee, Senator DRUMMOND moved that the Bill be made a Special Order.

The Bill was made a Special Order.

At 2:10 P.M., on motion of Senator MOORE, the Senate agreed to go into Executive Session.
On motion of Senator MOORE, the seal of secrecy was removed and the Senate stood adjourned.

At 2:17 P.M., on motion of Senator DRUMMOND, the Senate adjourned to meet tomorrow at 11:00 A.M.

* * *

This web page was last updated on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 10:47 A.M.