North Carolina register, April 1986 - June 1998

              ^.5i^j/cFyv(''^S'3^/,/^/^-^
en
NORTH CAROLINA
REGISTER
-sf**- VOLUME 11 • ISSUE 23 • Pages 1778 - 1812
March 3, 1997
IN THIS ISSUE
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Human Resources
%)eech & Language Pathologists & Audiologists
Contested Case Decisions
PUBLISHED BY
I-
%^,^,,,„:,..„„:^^J„.
The Office cfAdmiuisihna&veHear^^
Rules Division
PO Drawer 27447
Raleigh, NC27611-7447 %v *
Telephone (919) 733-2678 '^^^
Fax (919) 733-3462
This publication is printed on permanent, acid-free paper in compliance with G.S. 125-11.13
NORTH CAROLINA
IN THIS ISSUE
Volume 11, Issue 23
Pages 1778 - 1812
I. IN ADDITION
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Wildlife Resources Commission - Proclamation 1778
n. RULE-MAKING PROCEEDINGS
Human Resources
Departmental Rules 1779
Facility Services 1780
Medical Care Commission 1779 - 1780
Licensing Boards
Speech & Language Pathologists & Audiologists . . 1780
March 3, 1997
HI. PROPOSED RULES
Human Resources
Medical Assistance 1781 - 1785
This issue contains documents officially
filed through February 10, 1997.
Office of Administrative Hearings
Rules Division
424 North Blount Street (27601)
PC Drawer 27447
Raleigh, NC 27611-7447
(919) 733-2678
FAX (919) 733-3462
rV. CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
Index to AU Decisions 1786 - 1800
Text of Selected Decisions
96 ABC 1315 1801 - 1802
96 DHR 0670 1803 - 1807
96 EDC 0399 1808 - 181
1
V. CUMULATIVE EVDEX 1-46
Julian Mann III, Director
James R. Scarcella Sr., Deputy Director
Molly Masich, Director of APA Services
Ruby Creech, Publications Coordinator
Teresa Kilpatrick, Editorial Assistant
Jean Shirley, Editorial Assistant
Linda Richardson, Editorial Assistant
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
http://www.archive.org/details/northcarolinareg1123nort
rst
lative
of
the
regular
sion
oo oo 00 00 00 00 00 oo 00 OO oo oo oo OO oo oo oo OO 00 oo
ON ON a. a> On a> ON On ON O; On ^ On ON a^ On ON ON On o o o o O o o o O O O o O o o o o o o ?o
_llB^ in 1/1 w=l in in >n in in in in U-1 in <n •n in in in in m Wi
« O o O O o o o O o o O o o o o o o O o o
c
_w
e
llilp
1
>o
?
r- r- r- r- r^ r- t^ r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r-
^ ^ ^ On ON ^ ON CTn CT- ON ^ ON On On On ^ On ON
1
o o O o o o O o O o o o rj r^
r^ (N rj (N <N (N (N r4 (N (N r-i (N (N (N rj r^i p^ C! (N fj
rj (N O O S O o O S i S S S i o o oo O i 1 1
^
3
U9 '111 ^ ^O NO r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r~~ r~~ r~ r- r- r- r- r- r- r-
O- o ON ON Ov o* o^ ON ON o« ON ON On ON ON On ON On ^ ON
c 3 i 'C
(N s T* t m r- s >n r^ i*^ rs io o ^ in p-j in O c? rn o O O n o o
s g-i 1. (N (N r4 o O s s s s 3 in o O g i NO O o oo o oo o s 1
^^^^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^
s L.
4' i js r- r- oo 00 oo oo oo oo oo oo 00 oo oo 00 oo oo 00 oo oo oo b o Ov CT* o ON o- ON Os Ov OS ON ON ON On ON On ON ON ON On ON
-M -w QC O O <
W 1
O o
in
o
in
o
in
o o
in
O
in
o
m
o
tn
o
m
o
in
O
in
o
in
O
m
o
in
o
«n
o
m
o
in
o
in U 5 a o O o o O o o o o o o O o o O o o O O o
.a
|ISl|i
^o « NO nO r- r- r- r^ r- r- r- r^ r- r- r- r- r- r- r— r^
s:
Ov O; o- Os ^ On ^ ^ ON ^ CTn a- On On Ov On o- ON ON
. w o o O o o o o o o O o o o o *j;
*• (N r^^ r^ r^ (N rj (N rj (N rj (N r4 ri r-i fN rj (N r4 rs (N
1
s
1
—
^ <N rj o O S S o rn o i S S S g S £ O 00 o §
JD NO NO O r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r-~ r- r- r- r- r- r- r-a
?!
On o-
3
ON
?4
ON
in
ON ON ON
tn
On On ON ON
in
On
p5
ON On ON
m O O O o O o O O m
o ^^
rj (N o o s § s s s s s in o s s o s S OO O
1^'
-o o ^O nO o sO r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r~- r- r- r- r~-
s: Ov Ov ON a^ ON On ON a^ On On ON ON ON ON o- On ON ^ On
2 o oo rj r- r- o oo r*-. 00 3 o io o r- ^ O
r*1 O r-i m O m m r^ o c? o O ^ r-4 (N r5 ^ ^ (N f*\ rn en s s m in s r- r- r- O O O o O O O o o o o
t, fc- O ^ r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r-j
3
ON
r4 in
ON
r«i
On o- ON
in
On o>
tn
On
>n
ON
is
ON ON On
in
ON
tn fN
On
m
On
^ ^
~ o O o O o O o o O o
U. z u
2 S
(N rsi r*\ r^ s s in »n »n s -= r^ r^ (^ O^ On o i o o o O O O o o o o o o ^ o O
u 3 Q
Mu s< MCxJ
NOT
RULE-PROCl
t3 a 'C
o o NO r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r-
ON ON o^ o\ ON On On ON ON ON On ON ON ON ON On ON ON ^ ON
(N ^ ^ Tf m r- i «n r^ r^ fN NO o ^ m (N in o C? m O O o rn o O
s 1 s. rJ (N r^ o O o s o s i s in o s SO o S o oo o oo o ON o ON o
5 ^ o O nO so nO NO NO r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- T~~ r-
-1 ON ^ ON ON ON ON ON ^ ON ON On On ON o- On On On On On On
o Tt ^ ^
g
^
1
ON o ^ o ^ o ^ O •5^ ON m O m
•o g (N fS (N (N r^ C? <N O (N r^
i 1 o o ^ ^ *N rj ^ ^ (N rNj m m i s m m io 3
1 o O O O O o O O O O
^Z
a o o o o sC o r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- a
•a
ON
s:
ON ON ON ON a^ ON On On On ON ON On On On o- o- ON O; ^ i/^ ^ w~. rj io rj »n n ^ r-i ^ ^ in ^ U-. (S S ^ V,
u o o O o o o o o o o
< o o (N (N (N (N rS m s s in in 3 NO (^ r-a
J ^^ "" o o O O O o O o o o o o
uz
^ u £
l.
11 u 3
^ •<f Vl NO r- 00 s s (M 3 o g s 3 in s s 9
^ ^ f; ^ if zi zi ^ £ a zi ^ M fM rj rj •N ri <^ <^
E e
>
S
3B
•a
o
Os
u
a
in
•V
_o
C
U *
5 <
^ - o
a: = .H
3
a - = "H C < 2 S! ^ -5 <
t <
C -J
o a.
Z = Ml •_
= -3 ;£ ^ P ^
= C < o
a: :: :u
-^
^^ ? S
^ z H. c c •->
z ^ ^ a
O
c3
OM
co
c
2
3 < >, 1-
g «
~ o
S. — 3 -i
< 2
^< aa a.
S_ -c
— 'C tj ^
= ^
— 3 _
cti .3 O u ir.
Qi .=: —
u E c/i
j-= oc O
J= ^ 3
C/3
J
a£
o 5
2 .y
s^ —
-3 ^
so
c
§ fe
E ~-B
— o 2
O ^ B
s z
O
O S
CSS
5 o
-_j 3 r=
d r, '^ ii -6 s a
< > =
as -
Cd
Zi ^ y -S - - 2
zuXHbO><
< X
^ <
< > ^ CO
-" o X _n c >, "~.
u •^, u x^ —
z '5i O 1> ,-• u _u u 3 '^.
o c«
f - a
3 ^ Oi <
*. O w jj
"
1 I i i
i '• £ S 2
-3 3 c = -s
^ 3 »J = -
if t-§ i» = = v:
< :2: M
eo
sa
•^ -a ^
ux =='3o
z .^ s*
,*^
'^ "> ••
H<
v: a
U .—ii u;^
AA 11 5
Qu
X
O 1^ O 3 z X as
^ y CJ _> 5 r- < R -O Z i =
«j: .£ s
^ "5 >*)
A "S *
^ c —
U
r~^«fs
.=1 <
2 "E
^ 1
"5 —
»/ — a .3 :/; — _ -3
oz
is
:;— T-5 "-= ~^
a -^ ~ ' — :
r < 9 >. =
"
- ^ ^ y o _ _
, '-, ^ U '"-^ ^ "^
z5 i ^1 - ^
-3 u: := ^ — —
I 1^
3 3c
^ r a r" X Si
Si
HO
5 ^ '3 — - -5 5 " =. r; ^ — -3
- 3 [5 O >>
ji iJ
:/:;
cp Cl. E •O
wz
-3
O •5 yj -3 g
^ E |. j^
a z ;j
X c — o3
ua.^a.^3 asic
"3 _ s
>>.?", o = '-^
z
1_ CJ
CJj ~
ai 3
C/5 ^ O
^ -a '~J V5
-< " '— -
^s >,
jy: ^
r,-.
1-. c •6
i^ L-
;:> —
D
y: o X
u-y:
sz 'Ir
o >. >, «
c
•3
•J) E j^
L.
IT-;
W5
X.
'J
J2 1
-3
-3
33
C/5
c
'y:
1 a
"E.
-3
t—
Z
3
3
00
op
V3
>>
Eo
•3 o >, O u O
-3
3
1
3
o
>.
ly;
•5
^
^ J5
3
yj
3
_3
(X
\r.
£
iO o
>> u- _>.
>^
o
o
W2
3
'~J :/; o c^ Q O < t- ;3
—
ji
>
"5
r3
•3 3r
U g .o
'5j
g
< '^
3 3
>. ^ ^
ir ^. E"
as
;/^ — _
ai .
of; C
— C "J^' r- " 'J . _ .f^ ^ I .—
"5 E
^ -J
j! ^ —•J .— 3 XI
d
£^ o
u ou
C >, O
i J^ o.
E
O
r-;
tn •3 oi
c o ^
o \> '—
z y:
g
o
o ^ ,^ r^
p ^ ci
13 —
<^1
>
1
:y:
> X
<
X!
>
ir, O
O
^O
o ^
6
> —
:/5 3
3 >
-3
'3_
d
M O .3
7^ 3 3 '^
3
3
, o >-»
Q o Tt ^
c ^ a O
tfl
in 3 >
^ >1
^ "2
il
-3
; on ^ -3 ~ ^g -! ^^
'-^ '-J - r- 1^
Qi -= - .E d =,:
^ -^ '~ < '-^ ^ i: cj r: o rs o
•5 3 J Z— ^3
-3
1-1 = 1
~ ^ U - -a
-J -7- XI
O 3
•3 ^
c "
-3
3
O = Z H .3 5 X
IN ADDITION
This Section contains public notices that are required to be published m the Register or have been approved by the Codifier
ofRules for publication.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
PROCLAMATION
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, acting
pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §113-292(cl) and authority duly delegated by the Wildlife Resources
Commission, hereby declares that the season for harvesting striped bass by hook-and-line shall open in all waters
of the Roanoke River Striped Bass Management Area on Saturday, March 15, 1997 at 12:01 a.m.
Effective March 15, 1997, striped bass may be harvested from 12:01 a.m. on Saturdays through 12:00
midnight on Sundays AND from 12:01 a.m. until 12:00 midnight on Wednesdays. From 12:00 a.m. on Mondays
through 12:00 midnight on Tuesdays and from 12:01 a.m. on Thursdays through 12:00 midnight on Fridays, all
striped bass, regardless of condition, shall be immediately returned to the waters where taken and no striped bass
may be possessed.
The Roanoke River Striped Bass Management Area is defined as the inland and joint fishing waters of
the Roanoke River and its tributaries, extending from its mouth to Roanoke Rapids Dam, including the Cashie,
Middle, and Eastmost rivers and their tributaries.
This proclamation shall be effective at 12:01 a.m. March 15, 1997 and shall remain in effect until a new
proclamation closing described waters or portions thereof for striped bass fishing is issued.
NOTES:
a) This Proclamation is issued under the authority of N.C.G.S. §§113-132; 113-134; 113-292; 113-
304; and 113-305.
b) During the open season, the minimum length limit is 18 inches and the daily creel limit is 3 fish.
From April 1 through May 31, no striped bass between 22 and 27 inches in length may be
harvested.
c) From April 1 through June 30, only a single barbless hook or lure with a single barbless hook
(or hook with barb bent down) may be used in the inland waters of the Roanoke River upstream
of U.S. Highway 258 bridge.
d) Any person who violates this Proclamation also violates applicable law and is subject to the
sanctions provided by law.
NORTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION
/s/by Charles R. Fullwood 1-29-97
Executive Director Date
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1778
RULE-MAKING PROCEEDINGS
A Notice of Rule-making Proceedings is a statement of subject matter of the agency 's proposed rule making. The agency
must publish a notice of the subject matter for public comment at least 60 days prior to publishing the proposed text of
a rule. Publication of a temporary rule ser\'es as a Notice of Rule-making Proceedings and can be fourul in the Register
under the section heading of Temporary Rules. A Rule-rrxaking Agenda published by an agency ser\-es as Rule-making
Proceedings and can be found in the Register under the section heading of Rule-making Agendas. Statutory reference:
G.S. 150B-21.2.
TITLE 10 - DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES
CHAPTER 1 - DEPARTMENTAL RULES
A Jotice of Rule-making Proceedings is hereby given by
1 Vthe Department of Human Resources in accordance with
G.S. 150B-21.2. The agency shall subsequently publish in
the Register the text of the rule(s) it proposes to adopt as a
result of this notice of rule-making proceedings and any
comments received on this notice.
Citation to Existing Rules Affected by this Rule-Making:
W NCAC IB
Authority for the rule-making: G.S. 131D-4.2(h)
Statement of the Subject Matter: This rule will define the
annual State/County Special Assistance rate setting
methodology, which will include cost report documentation.
Also included will be the cost report format and audit
procedures.
Reason for Proposed Action: G.S. 131D-4.2(h) mandates
that the Department of Human Resources adopt rules for the
rate-setting methodology and audited cost reports in
accordance with G.S. 143B-10.
Comment Procedures: Anyone wishing to comment should
contact Tom Washburn, Department of Human Resources,
Office of Controller, 616 Oberlin Road. Raleigh, NC 27605;
919/733-0169.
******************
CHAPTER 3 - FACILITY SERVICES
SUBCHAPTER 3D - RULES AND REGULATIONS
GOVERNING AMBULANCE SERVICE
SUBCHAPTER 3M - MINIMUM STANDARDS
FOR MOBILE INTENSIVE CARE UNITS
A Jotice of Rule-making Proceedings is hereby given by
1 1 the North Carolina Medical Care Commission in
accordance with G.S. 150B-21.2. The agency shall
subsequently publish in the Register the text of the nde(s) it
proposes to adopt as a result of this notice of nde-making
proceedings and any comments received on this notice.
Citation to Existing Rules Affected by this Rule-Making:
10 NCAC 3D .0800 - .1500, 10 NCAC 3M - Other rules
may be proposed in the course of the rule-making process.
Authority for the rule-making: Chapter 131E, Article 7
Regulation of Ambulance Services; G.S. 131E-157
Statement of the Subject Matter:
10 NCAC 3D .0800 - .1500 - The North Carolina Medical
Care Commission proposes to amend the rules governing
ambulance service. The proposed amendments will come
from the recommendations of a statewide task force made up
of ambulance providers, physicians, nurses, administrators,
and EMS education specialists which has conducted an in
depth study of existing rules, including input from public
meetings. Amendments will include updates to definitions,
equipment requirements and inspection criteria for
ambulance vehicles, educational requirements and
certification criteria for Basic Life Support personnel, and
ambulance provider licensing criteria.
10 NCAC 3M - The North Carolina Medical Care
Commission proposes to amend the ndes governing
equipment and supply requirements for Advanced Life
Support (ALS) ambulance vehicles. The proposed
amendments will come from the recommendations of a
statewide task force made up of ambulance providers,
physicians, nurses, administrators, and EMS education
specialists which has conducted an in depth study of
existing rules, including input from public meetings.
Amendments will include updates to terminology and
deletion of equipment requirements for vehicles used at
the EMT-Advanced Intermediate level of care in
conjunction with changes to 21 NCAC 32H eliminating
this level of care.
Reason for Proposed Action:
10 NCAC 3D .0800 - .1500 - Chapter 131 E, Article 7
authorizes the Medical Care Commission to establish rules
for ambulance services including vehicles and personnel.
This is the first comprehensive review of these rules since
1989. These amendments are necessary to update the ndes
to refiect current emergency medical practice.
10 NCAC 3M - G.S. 131E- 15 7 authorizes the Medical Care
Commission to establish rules for equipment requirements for
ambulance vehicles. These amendments are necessary to
1779 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
RULE-MAKING PROCEEDINGS
update the equipment requirements for ALS vehicles to
reflect concurrent changes made in ALS certification levels
by the North Carolina Medical Board in 21 NCAC 32H.
Comment Procedures: Persons who wish to make comment
during the development of these rules should contact:
Mr. Ed Seagroves
NC Office of Emergency Medical Services
PO Box 29530
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0530
Tele: (919) 733-2285
FAX: (919) 733-7021
CHAPTER 3 - FACILITY SERVICES
SUBCHAPTER 3R - CERTinCATE OF
>fEED REGULATIONS
A Totice of Rule-making Proceedings is hereby given by
1 y the North Carolina Board of Examiners for Speech and
Language Pathologists and Audiologists in accordance with
G.S. 150B-21.2. The agency shall subsequently publish in
the Register the text of the rule(s) it proposes to adopt as a
result of this notice of rule-making proceedings and any
comments received on this notice.
Citation to Existing Rules Affected by this Rule-Making:
21 NCAC 64 .0303(4)
Authority for the rule-making: G.S. 90-298.1
Statement of the Subject Matter:
Adequacy of Treatment Records
Registered Assistants
Reason for Proposed Action: To adopt rules mandated by
G. S. 90-298. 1 as to registered assistants.
A Totice of Rule-making Proceedings is hereby given by
1 ythe Division of Facility Senices in accordance with
G.S. 150B-21.2. The agency shall subsequently publish in
the Register the text of the rule(s) it proposes to adopt as a
result of this notice of rule-making proceedings and any
comments received on this notice.
Citation to Existing Rules Affected by this Rule-Making:
10 NCAC 3R .3000
Comment Procedures: The record will be open for receipt
of written comments from March 10, 1997 mailed to the
North Carolina Board of Examiners for Speech and
Language Pathologists at P.O. Box 16885, Greensboro, NC
27416-0885 or delivered to a public hearing to be held on
April 2, 1997 at 2:00 p.m. at the Sheraton Imperial, 4700
Emperor Boulevard, Durham, NC (1-40 at Page Road).
Authority for the rule-making: G.S. 131£-176(25); 131E-
177(1): 131E-183(b)
Statement of the Subject Matter: Update need
determinations and policies for health senice facilities, beds
and services, including nursing homes, intermediate care
facilities for the mentally retarded (ICF/MR), end stage
renal disease (ESRD). home health agencies, inpatient
rehabilitation facilities, etc.
Reason for Proposed Action: To adopt new rules to reflect
changes in need determinations arui policies applicable to
health service facilities which also will appear in the 1998
State Medical Facilities Plan.
Comment Procedures: Comments, statements, data and
other information may be submitted in writing to Jackie
Sheppard. Ride-making Coordinator, P.O. Box 29530,
Raleigh, NC 27626-0530 no later than May 2, 1997.
TITLE 21 - OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING
BOARDS
CHAPTER 64 - BOARD OF EXAMINERS
OF SPEECH AND LANGUAGE
PATHOLOGISTS AND AUDIOLOGISTS
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1780
PROPOSED RULES
This Section contains the text ofproposed rules. At least 60 days prior to the publication of text, the agency published
a Notice of Rule-making Proceedings. The agency must accept comments on the proposed rule for at least 30 days from
the publication date, or until the public hearing, or a later date if specified in the notice by the agency. The required
comment period is 60 days for a rule that has a substantial economic impact of at least five million dollars
($5,000,000). Statutory reference: G.S. 150B-21.2.
TITLE 10 - DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES
Notice is hereby given in accordance with G.S.
150B-21.2 that the DHR - Division of Medical
Assistance intends to amerui rule cited as 10 NCAC 26H
.0104. Notice of Rule-making Proceedings was published in
the Register on November 15, 1996.
Proposed Effective Date: August 1, 1998
A Public Hearing will be conducted at 1:30 p.m. on April
3, 1997 at the Division of Medical Assistance, 1985
Umstead Drive, Kirby Building, Room 132, Raleigh, NC
27603.
Reason for Proposed Action: The objective of this
amendment is to allow nursing facility providers to procure
equipment which uses advanced technology to enhance the
efficiency, quality, or safety of the work of direct patient
care personnel.
Comment Procedures: Written comments concerning this
rule-making action must be submitted by April 3, 1997 to
Portia Rochelle, APA Coordinator, Division of Medical
Assistance, 1985 Umstead Drive, Raleigh, NC 27603.
Fiscal Note: This Rules does affect the expenditures or
revenues of state and local government funds. This Rule
does not have a substantial economic impact of at least five
million dollars ($5,000,000) in a 12-month period.
CHAPTER 26 - MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
SUBCHAPTER 26H - REIMBURSEMENT PLANS
SECTION .0100 - REIMBURSEMENT FOR
NURSING FACILITY SERVICES
.0104 COST REPORTING: AUDITING AND
SETTLEMENTS
(a) Each facility that receives payments from the North
Carolina Medicaid Program must prepare and submit a
report of its costs and other financial information, such as
the working trial balance, related to reimbursement
annually. The report must include costs from the fiscal
period beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30
and must be submitted to the state on or before the
December 31 that immediately follows the September 30
year end. A new provider must submit a report for the
period beginning with the date of certification and ending on
September 30. Hospital based nursing facilities with a fiscal
year ending other than September 30 and State operated
facilities with a June fiscal year ending must file their cost
reports within 90 days after their fiscal year ends. Facilities
that fail to file their cost reports by the due date are subject
to payment suspension until the reports are filed. The
Division of Medical Assistance may extend the deadline 30
days for filing the report if, in its view, good cause exists
for the delay. A good cause is an action that is
uncontrollable by the provider.
(b) Cost report format. The cost report must be
submitted on forms provided by the Division of Medical
Assistance. The account structure for the report is based on
the chart of accounts published by the American Healthcare
Association in 1979 but amended or modified to the extent
necessary to meet the special reimbursement requirements
of this plan. The Division of Medical Assistance shall make
one copy of the cost report format available to each facility
(combination facilities receive only one) on or before July
I of the reporting year for which the report is to be filed.
(c) Cost fmding and allocation. Costs must be reported
in the cost report in accordance with the following rules and
in the order of priority stated.
(1) Costs must be reported in accordance with the
specific provisions of this plan as set forth in this
Rule.
(2) Costs must be reported in conformance with the
Medicare Provider Reimbursement Manual,
HCFA 15.
(3) Costs must be reported in conformance with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
(d) The specific cost reporting guidelines related to this
plan are set forth in the following Paragraphs. The state
shall publish guidelines, consistent with the provisions of
this plan, concerning the proper accounting treatment for
items described in this Rule as related operating expenses.
A provider may request clarification in writing from the
state if there is uncertainty about the proper cost center
classification of any particular expense item.
(1) Nursing Cost Center includes the cost of nursing
staff, medical supplies, and related operating
expenses needed to provide nursing care to
patients, including medical records (including
forms), utilization review, the Medical Director
and the Pharmacy Consultant. The amount of
nursing time provided to each patient must be
recorded in order to allocate nursing cost between
skilled and intermediate nursing care.
(A) Effective October 1, 1996, Direct Patient
Care Equipment shall be reported to the
1781 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
PROPOSED RULES
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Nursing Cost Center and is defined as
equipment which meets all of the following
tests:
(i) Its primary purtwse is to enhance the
quality, efficiency, or safety of the
work of direct patient care
personnel:
(ii) It enables direct patient care
personnel to measure patients'
physical characteristics or to
implement the plans of care
(including assistance with activities
of daily Hying) of patients with
physical impairments or to promote
the safety of patients with cognitive
impairments:
(iii) It is not office or bedroom furniture:
and
(iv) It is not a communications device or
computer hardware or software.
The Division of Medical Assistance shall make
available a non-all-inclusive list of items which
may be reported as direct patient care equipment,
consistent with the provisions of this Rule. This
list may be prospectively modified bj; the Division
of Medical Assistance at any time, based on the
preponderance of evidence. Items reported as
direct patient care equipment which are not on
this list are subject to a case by case review
during any audit conducted under Paragraph (e) of
this Rule. Providers must demonstrate by a
preponderance of evidence that such items meet
the definition of direct patient care equipment as
stated in this Rule. Providers are required to
exercise the prudent buyer principle when
procuring direct patient care equipment. This
provision is applicable to lease or depreciation
expense incurred on or after October J_^ 1996
regardless of when the equipment was initially
leased or acquired. Direct patient care equipment
maintenance and repair costs shall be reported in
the Operation of Plant and Maintenance Cost
Center. All other costs associated with direct
patient care equipment shall be reported in the
cost centers that would be appropriate if the costs
were associated with other equipment.
Dietary Cost Center includes the cost of staff, raw
food, and supplies needed to prepare and deliver
food to patients.
Laundry and Linen Cost Center includes the cost
of staff, bed linens (replacement mattresses and
related operating expenses needed to launder
facility-provided items).
Housekeeping Cost Center includes the cost of
staff and supplies needed to keep the facility
clean.
Patient Activities Cost Center includes the cost of
staff, supplies, and related operating expenses
needed to provide appropriate diversionary
activities for patients.
(6) Social Services includes the cost of social workers
and related operating expenses needed to provide
necessary social services to patients.
(7) Ancillary Cost Center includes the cost of all
therapy services covered by the Medicaid program
and billable medical supplies. Providers must bill
Medicare Part B for those ancillary services
covered under the Medicare Part B program.
Ancillary cost centers include: Radiology,
Laboratory, Physical Therapy, Occupational
Therapy, Speech Therapy, Oxygen Therapy,
Intravenous Fluids, Billable Medical Supplies,
Parenteral/Enteral Therapy and life sustaining
equipment, such as oxygen concentrators,
respirators, and ventilators and other specifically
approved equipment.
(A) Effective October \^ 1996, air fluidized
beds (e.g. Clinitron beds), low air loss
mattresses or beds and alternating pressure
mattresses may be recorded in the life
sustaining equipment cost center. This
program is applicable to lease or
depreciation expense incurred on or after
October 1^ 1996 regardless of when the
equipment was initially leased or acquired.
(B) Effective October 1, 1994, a separate
ancillary cost center shall be established to
include costs associated with medically
related transportation for facility residents.
Medically related transportation costs
include the costs of vehicles leased or
owned by the facility, payroll costs
associated with transporting residents and
payments to third parties for providing
these services.
(8) Administrative and General Cost Center includes
all costs needed to administer the facility
including the staff costs for the administrator,
assistants, billing and secretarial personnel,
personnel director and pastoral expenses. It
includes the costs of copy machines, dues and
subscriptions, transportation, income taxes, legal
and accounting fees, start-up, and other
administrative costs as set forth in the Chart of
Accounts. Interest expense other than that
stemming from mortgages or loans to acquire
physical plant items shall be reported here.
(9) Property Ownership and Use:
(A) This cost center includes all allowable costs
related to the use of the physical assets
including building, fixed equipment and
movable equipment, that are required to
deliver patient care, except the special
equipment, as specified in .OlO' l
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1782
PROPOSED RULES
Subparagraphs (d)(1) or (d)(7) of this Rule. (11)
feite—tto—may—be
—
charged—1«—th«
life sustaining—equipment—eest
—
center.
SpociFically Except for the special
equipment noted in Subparagraphs (d)(1)
and (d)(7), it includes the following items:
(1) all equipment expense regardless of
equipment nature,
(ii) lease e.xpense for all physical assets,
(iii) depreciation of assets utilizing the
straight line method,
(iv) interest expense of asset related
liabilities, (e.g., mortgage expense),
(v) property taxes.
(B) For the purposes of computing allowable
lease expense and for balance sheet
presentation for Return on Equity
computations (see Rule .0105 of this
Section) , leases shall not be capitalized.
(C) In establishing the allowable cost for
depreciation and for interest on capital
indebtedness, with respect to an asset
which has undergone a change of
ownership, the valuation of the asset shall
be the lesser of allowable acquisition cost
less accumulated depreciation to the first
owner of record on or after July 18, 1984 (12)
or the acquisition cost to the new owner.
Depreciation recapture will not be
performed at sale. The method for
establishing the allowable related capital
indebtedness shall be as follows:
(i) The allowable asset value shall be (13)
divided by the actual acquisition
cost,
(ii) The product computed in step 1 shall
be multiplied times the value of any
related capital indebtedness,
(iii) The result shall be the liability
amount upon which interest may be
recorded at the rate set forth in the
debt instrument or such lower rate as
the state may prove is reasonable.
The allowable asset and liability
values established through the
process in this Rule shall be those
used in balance sheet presentations
for return on equity computation (see
Rule .0105 of this Section ). These (14)
procedures are established to
implement the provisions of PL
98-369 Section 2314.
(10) Operation of Plant and Maintenance Cost Center
includes all costs necessary to operate or maintain
the functionality and appearance of the plant.
These include: maintenance staff, utilities, repairs
and maintenance to all equipment.
Equipment Expense. Equipment is defined as an
item with a useful life of more than two years and
a value greater than five hundred dollars
($500.00). Equipment ownership and use costs
shall be reported in the Prope rty Ownership and
Use Cost Center.—Equipment maintenance and
repair costs shall be reported in the Operation of
Plant and Maintenance Cost Center.—Equipment
shall not be reported elsewhere.
(A) Effective October 1^ 1996, Direct Patient
Care Equipment depreciation or lease
expense incurred on or about October \^
1996, shall be reported under the Nursing
Cost Center, as noted under Subparagraph
(d)( 1
)
of this Rule. All other costs
associated with direct patient care
equipment shall be reported in the cost
centers that would be appropriate if the
costs were associated with other equipment.
(B) Other equipment ownership and use costs
shall be reported in the Property Ownership
and Use Cost Center. Other equipment
maintenance and repair costs shall be
reported in the Operation of Plant and
Maintenance Cost Center. Other equipment
shall be reported elsewhere.
Training Expense. Training expense must be
identified in the appropriate benefiting cost center.
The costs of training nurse aides must be
identified separately and may include the cost of
purchasing programs and equipment that have
been approved by the State for training or testing.
Home Office Costs. Home office costs are
generally charged to the Administrative and
General Cost Centers. However, personnel costs
which are direct patient care oriented may be
allocated to "direct" patient care cost centers if
time records are maintained to document the
performance of direct patient care services. No
Home office overhead may be so allocated. The
basis of this allocation among facilities
participating in the North Carolina Medicaid
program may be:
(A) specific time records of work performed at
each facility, or
(B) patient days in each facility to which the
costs apply relative to the total patient days
in all the facilities to which the costs apply.
Management Fees. Management fees are charged
to the Administrative and General Cost Center.
However, a portion of a management fee may be
allocated to a direct patient care cost center if
time records are maintained to document the
performance of direct patient care services. The
amount so allocated may be equal only to the
salary and fringe benefits of persons who are
performing direct patient care services while
1783 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
PROPOSED RULES
employed by the management company. Records
adequate to support these costs must be made
available to staff of the Division of Medical
Assistance. The basis of this allocation among
facilities participating in the North Carolina
Medicaid program may be:
(A) specific time records of work performed at
each facility, or
(B) patient days in each facility to which the
costs apply relative to the total patient days
in all the facilities to which the costs apply.
(15) Related Organization Costs. A nursing facility
shall demonstrate by convincing evidence to the
satisfaction of the Division of Medical Assistance
that the costs are reasonable. Reasonable costs of
related organizations shall be identified in
accordance with direct and indirect cost center
categories as follows:
(A) Direct Cost:
(i) Compensation of direct care staff
such as nursing personnel (aides,
orderlies, nurses), food service
workers, housekeeping staff and
other personnel who would normally
be accounted for in a direct cost
center,
(ii) Supplies and services that would
normally be accoimted for in a direct
cost center.
(iii) Capital, rental, maintenance,
supplies/repairs and utility costs
(gas, water, fuel, electricity) for
facilities that are not typically a part
of a nursing facility. These facilities
might include such items as
warehouses, vehicles for delivery
and offices which are totally
dedicated or clearly exceed the
number, size, or complexity required
for a normal nursing facility, its
home office, or management
company.
(iv) Compensation of all administrative
staff who perform no duties which
are related to the nursing facility or
its home office and who are neither
officers nor owners of the nursing
facilities or its home office.
(B) Indirect Cost:
(i) Capital, rental, maintenance,
supplies/repairs, and utility costs
which are normally or frequently a
part of a nursing facility. This
would include, for example, kitchen
and laundry facilities.
(ii) Except for salary and fringe benefits
of Personnel, Accounting and Data
Processing staff, home office costs
which are allocated by methods
approved by the Division of Medical
Assistance are direct costs when the
work performed is specific to the
related organization that provides a
direct care service or product to the
provider. In determining if an
allocation method is appropriate, a
case-by-case review shall be made
based on the preponderance of
evidence. A proposed allocation
method shall be denied if the review
supports a determination that the
associated cost either exceeds the
cost of comparable products or
services that could be purchased
elsewhere or was for services that
were not related to direct patient
care or services not covered by the
North Carolina Medical Assistance
program.
(iii) Compensation of all administrative
staff who perform any duties for the
nursing facility or its home office.
(iv) All compensation of all officers and
owners of the nursing facility or its
home office, or parent corporation.
A related organization must file a Medicaid Cost Statement
(DMA-4083) identifying its costs, adjustments to costs,
allocation of costs, equity capital, adjustments to equity
capital, and allocations of equity capital along with the
nursing facilities cost report. A home office, or parent
company, will be recognized as a related organization.
Auditable records to support these costs must be made
available to staff of the Division of Medical Assistance and
its designated contract auditors. Undocumented costs will
be disallowed. A nursing facility shall demonstrate by
convincing evidence to the satisfaction of the Division of
Medical Assistance that the criteria in the Medicare Provider
Reimbursement Manual, Section 1010, has been met in
order to be recognized as an exception to the related
organization principle. The related party principle is stated
in the Medicare Provider Reimbursement Manual, Section
1010, as follows: Costs applicable to services, facilities, and
supplies furnished to the provider by organizations related
to the provider by common ownership or control are
includable in the allowable cost of the provider at the cost
to the related organization. However, such cost must not
exceed the price of comparable services, facilities, or
supplies that could be purchased elsewhere. The purpose of
this principle is two-fold: to avoid the payment of a profit
factor to the provider through the related organization
(whether related by common ownership or control), and to
avoid payment of artificially inflated costs which may be
generated from less than arm's length bargaining. When a
related organization is deemed an exception; reasonable
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1784
PROPOSED RULES
charges by the related organization to the nursing facility are
recognized as allowable costs; receivable/payables from/to
the nursing facility and related organization deemed an
exception are not adjusted from the nursing facility's
balance sheet in computing equity capital. The Medicare
Provider Reimbursement Manual is often referred to as the
HCFA Publication #15-1 and is hereby incorporated by
reference including any subsequent amendments and
editions. A copy is available for inspection at the Division
of Medical Assistance, 1985 Umstead Drive, Raleigh, North
Carolina. Copies may be obtained from the US Department
of Commerce, National Technical Information Services,
Subscription Department, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161 at a cost of one hundred forty seven
dollars ($147.00). Purchasmg instructions may be received
by calling (703) 487-4650. Updates are available for an
additional fee.
(e) Auditing and Settlement. All filed cost reports must
be desk audited and interim reimbursement settlements made
in accordance with the provision of this plan. This
settlement is issued within 180 days of the date the cost
report was filed or within 180 days of December 31 of the
fiscal year to which the report applies, whichever is later.
The state may elect to perform field audits on any filed cost
reports within three years of the date of filing and issue a
fmal settlement on a time schedule that conforms to Federal
law and regulation. If the state decides not to field audit a
facility a fmal reimbursement notice may be issued based on
the desk audited settlement. The state may reopen and field
audit any cost report after the final settlement notice to
comply with Federal law and regulation or to enforce laws
and regulations prohibiting abuse of the Medicaid Program
and particularly the provisions of this reimbursement plan.
(0 This reimbursement limitation shall become effectiv e
in accordance with the provisions of G.S. 1Q8A 55(c).
These changes to the Reimbursement for Nursing Facility
Services will become effective when the Health Care
Financing Administration approves amendment 96-05
submitted to HCFA by the Director of the Division of
Medical Assistance on or about October \^ 1996.
Authority G.S. 108A-25(b); 108A-54; 108A-55; 42 C.F.R.
447. Subpart C.
1785 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
Ihis Section contains the full text of some of the more significant Administrative Law Judge decisions along with an index
to all recent contested cases decisions which are filed under North Carolina 's Administrative Procedure Act. Copies of
the decisions listed in the index and not published are available upon request for a minimal charge by contacting the
Office of Administrative Hearings, (919) 733-2698.
OmCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Chief Administrative Law Judge
JULIAN MANN, III
Senior Administrative Law Judge
FRED G. MORRISON JR.
ADMINISTRA TIVE LA W JUDGES
Brenda B. Becton
Sammie Chess Jr.
Beecher R. Gray
Meg Scott Phipps
Robert Roosevelt Reilly Jr.
Dolores O. Smith
Thomas R. West
AGENCY
CASE
NLTVIBER ALJ
DATE OF
DECISION
Pl-BLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
ADMINISTRATION
Douglas J, Register v. Department of Administration
Purchase and Contract
Budd Seed, Inc v Department of Administration
ALCOHOLIC BENTRAGE CONTROL CONCVDSSION
96 DOA 0172
96 DOA 0281
Osama Arafat Sadar v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v James Eads Sprowles
Cole Enieriainment. Inc v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Fuad Saif Murshed v Ale Bev. Ctl Comm & Durham Mem Bapi Ch,
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v Tremik, Inc-
Ciiy of Raleigh v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
and
Marshall Sieviari. ID. Robert David Park, and Park Stewart Inc
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v Maria Virginia Tramonuno
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v, Huffman Oil Co.. Inc.
Pinakin P Talate v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Entrepreneur, Inc
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Zell, Inc
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Henry Franklin Gurganus
Andrew Parker v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Barraq Sabri Alquza v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm v Partnership T/A T & L Groceries
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v, Cashion's Food Man, Inc.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. E.K.'s n. Inc. Carl E. Collins
Bro Bee. Inc v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Donald Ray Doak
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Janice Lorraine Jeter
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v Well Informed. Inc.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v Kubbard. Inc.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Siemmermans's. Inc.
Reilly
Chess
08/16/96
09/19/96
95 ABC 0721 Gray 07/09/96
95 ABC 0883*" Gray 07/10/96
95 ABC 0917 West 08/21/96 11:12 NCR 1027
95 ABC 0922 Chess 04/24/96
95 ABC 0925 Morrison 03/25/96
95 ABC 1143 Morrison 11/08/96 11:17 NCR 1362
95 ABC 1200 West 04/23/96
95 ABC 1251 West 04/03/96 11:03 NCR 166
95 ABC 1329 West 04/10/96
95 ABC 1363 Reilly 05/02/96
95 ABC 1366 West 06/17/96
95 ABC 1389 West 04/01/96
95 ABC 1402 Phipps 03/27/96
95 ABC 1424 Phipps 04/03/96
95 ABC 1443 West 03/26/96
95 ABC 1444 Gray 03/13/96
95 ABC 1458 Chess 08/12/96
95 ABC 1480 West 04/1 5/96
95 ABC 1488 West 03/29/96
96 ABC 0013 Reilly 04/26/96
96 ABC 0016 Chess 05/28/96
96 ABC 0017 Reilly 05/20/96
96 ABC 0018 Chess 05/28/96
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1786
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NfinviBER ALJ
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
Beroth Oil Company
Beroth Oil Company
Giles Rozier
Clifton Franklm Smith
George Wright and Alice Ramsuer v .Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm. 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Bayron Green 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Circle K Stores. Inc. 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Robert Montgomery McKnight96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Cadillacs Discotheque. Inc. 96
Gerald Audry Sellars v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Jacqueline Robin Anthony 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Factory Night Club. Inc. 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. C.NH, Enterprises. Inc. 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v, Millicent J Green 96
Ghassan Hasan Issa v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Abdelhakeem Muraweh Saleh 96
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Triangle Drive-In
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Beroth Oil Company
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Beroth Oil Company
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm. v. Crown Central Petroleum Corp
Dilthra Smith Pation v Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Virginia Caporal v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. James Eads Sprowles
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Chae Ypo Chong
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v Albert S. Carter
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v, Taleb Abed Rahman
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm v Cenlergrove Emertainmenl Ent.
Michael L. Harris D,B/A Big House Inc v. Alcoholic Beverage Control
Joseph Marcel Etienne v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Jesse Smith
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Winn Dixie Charlotte. Inc
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Winn Di.xie Charlotte, Inc.
Louis Corpening v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Joyce N. Capra
HARB Inc. v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Warner Enterprises. Inc.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. James Ramsey. Jr.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Russell Bernard Speller
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm. v. Ptnrshp.T/A Blue Front Groc
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm. v. Crown Central Petroleum Corp.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission v. Anthony Jerome Foster
Alcoholic Beverage Control Comm, v Park Entertainment. Inc.
ABC 0058
ABC 0097
ABC 0134
ABC 0135
ABC 0136
ABC 0160
ABC 0184
ABC 0226
ABC 0232
ABC 0234
ABC 0256
ABC 0381
ABC 0443
.-KBC 0447
.ABC 0448
ABC 0449
ABC 0450
ABC 0473
ABC 0474
ABC 0482
.ABC 0505
ABC 0507
ABC 0526*"
ABC 0530
ABC 0534
ABC 0551
ABC 0583
ABC 0680
ABC 0718
ABC 0804
ABC 0858
ABC 0859
ABC 0985
ABC 1060
ABC 1124
ABC 1315
ABC 1317
ABC 1394
ABC 1469
ABC 1584
ABC 1587
ABC 1928
Becton
Becton
Gray
Phipps
Phipps
Becton
Phipps
Phipps
Becton
Smith
Morrison
Chess
Reilly
Morrison
Morrison
Morrison
Morrison
Morrison
Reilly
Morrison
Morrison
Becton
Gray
Morrison
Morrison
West
Reilly
Phipps
Phipps
Gray
Morrison
Morrison
Gray
Reilly
Phipps
Gray
Gray
Smith
Smith
Gray
Reilly
Smith
04/16/96
08/23/96
11/06/96
05/09/96
12/04/96
06/25/96
05/09/96
08/02/96
07/09/96
06/13/96
05/23/96
08/27/96
06/11/96
08/30/96
08/30.'96
08/30/96
08/30/96
09/19/96
08/12/96
10/18/96
08/06/96
10/04/96
07/10/96
10/29/96
08/05/96
11/14/96
08/12/96
02/12/97
10/17/96
11/19/96
11/21/96
11/21/96
09/26/96
11/15/96
10/23/96
01/30/97
02/03/97
12/20/96
12/09/96
02/12/97
01/29/97
02/06/97
1 1 :08 NCR 564
11:13 NCR 1085
11:23 NCR 1801
CONftDSSION FOR AUCTIONEERS
John W Foster v Auctioneer Licensing Board
Barry G. York v. Auctioneer Licensing Board
96 CFA 0201
96 CFA 0297
Phipps
Smith
05/06/96
10/18/96
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
James J. Lewis v. Department of Correction
CREVIE CONTROL AND PUBLIC SAFETY
96 DOC 0772 West 09/05/96
Roland Lee Kelly. Jr. v. United Family Services. Victim .Assistance/Crime 95
Victims Compensation Comm.
Robert F. Bronsdon v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Helen B. Hunter-Reid v Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Deborah C Passarelli v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Kenneth Saunders v Victims Compensation Commission
Franklin McCoy Jones v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Ruby H Ford v Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Manuel Cervantes v. Victims Compensation Fund
Sheila Carol Blake v. Victims Compensation Commission
James T. Mungo v. Victims Compensation Commission
Jerome Crutchfield v. CPS. Victims Compensation Commission
William Theodore Frazier v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Emma Coble v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
CPS 0568 Morrison 05/29/96
95 CPS 1216 Chess 05/28/96
95 CPS 1336 Smith 03/29/96 11:02 NCR 93
95 CPS 1399 Reilly 07/18/96 11:09 NCR 814
95 CPS 1445 Chess 03/26/96
96 CPS 0056 Smith 07/03/96
96 CPS 0110 Reilly 04/1 8'96
96 CPS 0118 Chess 03/19/96
96 CPS 0280 West 07/10/96
96 CPS 0333 Reillv 07/09/96
96 CPS 0340 Phipps 09/05/96
96 CPS 0435 Chess 08/22/96
96 CPS 0468 Chess 09/25/96
1787 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
Donna Williams v Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Daisy Reid v Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Earlie McLaurin, Jr. Delano McLaurin. Sr v. Crime Victims Comp Comm96
Anthony P. Dawkins v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Judy Worley Milam v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
James A- Cherry v. Crime Control & Public Safety
Shirley M King v. Crime Victims Compensation
Mark Matthews for Child Victim v. Crime Victims Compensation Comm.
Clara Durham v. Victims Compensation
George Battle, Jr. v. Crime Control & I^jblic Safety
Shawn P, Saddler v. Victims Compensation Commission
David Carl Anderson v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
Douglas Alan West v. Crime Victims Compensation Commission
ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
CASE DATE OF
NUMBER ALJ DECISION
96 CPS 0493 Morrison 06/13/96
96 CPS 0499 West 11/18/96
96 CPS 0639 West 01/21/97
96 CPS 0716 Reilly 08/16/96
96 CPS 0717 Gray 11/21/96
96 CPS 0793 Phipps 01/17/97
96 CPS 0802 West 08/08/96
96 CPS 0832 Becton 08/20/96
96 CPS 0906 Phipps 09/23/96
96 CPS 1006 Phipps 01/17/97
96 CPS 1109 Morrison 01/02/97
96 CPS 1409 Smith 11/25/96
96 CPS 1888 West 01/03/97
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
Gribble & Assoc. & Four Seasons Car Wash v. EHNR
Webster Environmental Inc. v. EHNR, Asbestos Hazard Mgmt. Branch
Wilton Evans v. Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
David Martin Shelton v. Rockingham County Dept/Public Health, EHNR
Kinston Urological Associates, PA. v NC. Cancer Program
Kinston Urological Associates, PA. v. NC. Cancer Program
Elsie & Tony Cecchini v. Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
United Organics Corporation v. Environment. Health. & Natural Res.
Gerald Mac Clamrock v. Environment, Health. & Natural Resources
Phillip T. Goetz v Carteret County Health Center
John Milazzo v Environment. Health. & Natural Resources
Wayne Marshall, Pres. Metro Area Dev , Inc. v. EHNR
David J. Mohn v. Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
Robert D. Smith v. Brunswick County Health Dept , Bolivia, NC
Elizabeth Shepard Covin v. Environment, Health. &. Natural Resources
Reuben Massey v. Environment. Health, and Natural Resources
Joseph London v Environment. Health, and Natural Resources
95 EHR 0576 Gray 04/25/96
95 EHR 0647 Becton 01/24/97
95 EHR 0843 Reilly 07/17/96
95 EHR 0941 West 05/01/96
95 EHR 1198*- Smith 03/27/96 1 1 :02 NCR 97
95 EHR 1199*= Smith 03/27/96 11:02 NCR 97
95 EHR 1240 Reilly 04/22/96
96 EHR 0064 Smith 07/01/96
96 EHR 0168 Phipps 05/06/96
96 EHR 0596 Smith 01/23/97
96 EHR 0644 Reilly 08/13/96
96 EHR 0826 West 10/01/96
96 EHR 0947 Smith 10/04/96
96 EHR 1057 Chess 02/04/97
96 EHR 1258 Becton 01/14/97
96 EHR 1301 Reilly 12/18/96
96 EHR 1397 Reilly 12/10/96
Coastal Resources
Martin W Synger v Division of Coastal Management 95 EHR 1006
J. E. Smith Construction Co. v. Division of Coastal Management 96 EHR 0074
Theodore D. Barris v. Town of Long Beach, NC & Coastal Mgmt, EHNR 96 EHR 0277
Chess 05/13/96
Smith 02/23/96
West 05/09/96
Environmental Health
Forest Gate Motel v. Environment. Health, and Natural Resources 96 EHR 0076
Paradise Ridge Home Owners by Anne Norburn v. EHNR. Env. Health 96 EHR 0162
Zack Diakogiannis v. EHNR. Division of Environmental Health 96 EHR 0768
West 06/17/96
Phipps 05/06/96
Gray 01/08/97
Environmental Management
Frank A. Corriher & Sons Well Drilling. Inc. v. Env. Mgmt.. EHNR
North Buncombe Assoc of Concerned Citizens v. Env. Mgmt. EHNR
Ford Motor Company v. EHNR, Division of Environmental Management
Herman E. Smith v. Division of Environmental Management
Lake Summit Property Owners Assoc, v. EHNR, Environmental Mgmt.
Conover Lumber Co . Inc. v, EHNR. Division of Environmental Mgmt.
City of Reidsville. a Municipal Corp. v. EHNR. Environmental Mgmt.
Jack West d/b/a Jack West Tree Service v. Environmental Mgmt Comm.
The Smithfield Packing Co., Inc.. v. EHNR. Environmental Mgmt.
and
Citizens for Clean Industry. Inc. and Bladen Environment
Commscope. Inc v. EHNR. Division of Environmental Management
Stephen L Reedy v. EHNR. Division of Environmental Management
Rayco Utilities. Inc. v EHNR. Division of Environmental Management
Clover M Farms. Inc. v. EHNR, Division of Environmental Management
Providence Glen Associates v. Environmental Management, EHNR
Overcash Gravel & Grading Co , Inc. v. Division of Environmental Mgmt 96
95 EHR 0048 Phipps 09/20/96 11:14 NCR 1191
95 EHR 0108 Chess 02/03/97
95 EHR 0588 Smith 12/20/96
95 EHR 0962 West 04/30/96
95 EHR 1022 Reilly 12/30/96
95 EHR 1081 Reilly 04/12/96
95 EHR 1335 Gray 10/01/96 11:15 NCR 1249
95 EHR 1421 Morrison 04/08/96
95 EHR 1474 West 07/03/96
96 EHR 0078 Gray 12/23/96
96 EHR 0181 Gray 12/16/96
96 EHR 0367 Becton 10/04/96
96 EHR 0405 Becton 06/10/96
96 EHR 0648 Becton 08/12/96
EHR 0990 West 10/29/96
Land Resources
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1788
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NUMBER ALJ
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
K&G Properties, Inc. v. EHNR, Division of Land Resources
Marine Fisheries
95 EHR 1078 Smiih 03/25/96
Roberl I Swinson. Sr. v EHNR. Health & Nat Res . Marine Fisheries 95 EHR 0320
Grayden L. Fulcher and Michael Styron. Sr v. Div, of Marine Fisheries 96 EHR 0O03
Johnny R. Stotesberry v Marine Fisheries Commission 96 EHR 0072
Julian G. Gilgo v. Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 96 EHR 0692
Radiation Protection
Marsha L. Powell v EHNR, Division of Radiation Protection
Nancy S. Webb v. EHNR, Division of Radiation Protection
Olivia Joyce Foushee v. EHNR, Division of Radiation Protection
WWaste Management
R. Donald Phillips v. EHNR. Solid Waste Management Division
R Donald Phillips v EHNR. Solid Waste Management Division
GRACE and Margaret L. Caudle-Beck v. EHNR, Solid Waste Mgmt.
GRACE and Margaret L. Caudle-Beck v. EHNR, Solid Waste Mgmt.
Water Quality
Ben Moses v. EHNR, Division of Water Quality
WIC Program
Chess 03/29/96 11:03 NCR 168
Reilly 03/06/96
Gray 08/19/96 11:11 NCR 955
West 12/06/96 11:19 NCR 1530
96 EHR 1116 Smith 10/10/96
96 EHR 1131 Gray 10/23/96
96 EHR 1221 Chess 01/31/97
95 EHR 1190»'' Gray 05/22/96
96 EHR 0554*" Gray 05/22/96
96 EHR 1125 Phipps 12/06/96
96 EHR 1125 Phipps 02/18/97
96 EHR 1085
Lazelle Marks v EHNR, Division of Maternal and Child Health 95 EHR 0870
Ham Sader v. Nutrition Services, Div/Maternal & Child Health, EHNR 96 EHR 0054
Bob's Quick Mart. Bobby D Braswell v. Env., Health. & Natural Res. 96 EHR 0091
Larry E. Mis v USDA-Food/Cons Svc. Cory Menees-WIC Prog.. EHNR 96 EHR 0164
Naser H. Hammad v. Dept. of Environment. Healdi. & Natural Resources 96 EHR 0632
Jamil M Saleh v. Dept of Environment. Health. & Natural Resources 96 EHR 0634
Khaled M. Alzer v. Dept. of Environment. Health, & Natural Resources 96 EHR 0721
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
Marsha Dianne McKoy v. DHR, DMH/DD/SAS. Caswell Center
Carl D Davis v Department of Correction
HUMAN RESOURCES
90 EEC 0379
91 EEC 1101
Phipps
Chess
Smith
01/21/97
West 03/27/96
West 05/22/96
Smith 04/02/96
Phipps 03/19/96
Reilly 07/09/96
Phipps 09/04/96
Reilly 07/30/96
10/08/96
05/06/96
Cassandra M, Deshazo v. Christine E. Carroll, Chf Chid Abuse/Neg. Sec. 95 DHR 1410
Medicus Robinson v. Department of Human Resources 96 DHR 0167
Linda Gabriel Wallace v. Charlotte Health Care Center 96 DHR 1544
Phipps 03/28/96
Smith 04/12/96
Phipps 01/23/97
Division of Child Development
Molly Fallin v. Department of Human Resources
Molly Fallin v. Department of Human Resources
Mary T Hill v. DHR. Division of Child Development
lola Roberson v. DHR. Division of Child Development
Zannie M. Allen v DHR. Division of Child Development
Mt Pleasant Church v. DHR. Division of Child Development
Yvette Nivens v. DHR. Division of Child Development
Sarah M. Carr. CSWM v. DHR. Division of Child Development
Division of Facility Services
Eloise Brown v Dept of Human Resources. Division of Facility Services
Harry Martin Bastian v DHR. Division of Facility Services
Kelly Thomas v. DHR, Division of Facility Services
Community Care ttl v. DHR. Division of Facility Services
Community Care #4 v. DHR. Division of Facility Services
Billie Mitchell v. Department of Human Resources (DFS)
Jo Ann Boyd Capps v. DHR. Division of Facility Services
Peggy Murray v. DHR. Division of Facility Services
94 DHR 0872*' Gray 05/15/96
95 DHR 1013*' Gray 05/15/96
95 DHR 1192 Phipps 03/27/96
95 DHR 1244 Gray 05/16/96
96 DHR 0304 Gray 08/15/96
96 DHR 0720 Gray 11/19/96
96 DHR 1161 Morrison 11/19/96
96 DHR 2089 Smith 02/11/97
95 DHR 1002 Phipps 03/07/96
96 DHR 0287 West 08/21/96
96 DHR 0670 Becton 01/29/97 11:23 NCR 1803
96 DHR 0934 Becton 10/16/96
96 DHR 0935 Becton 10/16/96
96 DHR 0975 Phipps 01/02/97
96 DHR 1115 Gray 12/12/96
96 DHR 1531 Smith 01/31/97
7759 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NUMBER ALJ
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
Gloria J. Butler v DHR. Division of Facility Services 96 DHR 2113 West 01/31/97
Certificate of Need Section
Nash Hospitals. Inc. V DHR, Div/Facility Services, Cert, of Need Sect. 95 DHR 1176** Phipps 05/23/96
Pitt Cty Mem. Hospital. Inc. v. DHR. Div/Facility Svcs. Cert/Need Sect. 95 DHR 1177*' Phipps 05/23/96
Tar Heel Home Health. Inc v. DHR, Div/Facility Svcs, Cert/Need Sect. 96 DHR 0513 Morrison 01/22/97
1 1 ;06 NCR 389
11:06 NCR 389
11;22 NCR 1761
Group Care Licensure Section
Alex L. McCall v DHR, Div/Facility Svcs, Group Care Licensure Sec.
DHR. Facility Services. Group Care Licensure Sect. v. Petrova Evans
Leola Barnes. Shaw Family Care v. DHR. Fac. Svcs, Group Care Lie
Gracelane Rest Home v. Group Care Lie. Section, Div. of Soc. Svcs.
Medical Facilities Licensure Section
95 DHR 1456 Smith 03/26/96
96 DHR 0544 Phipps 08/21/96
96 DHR 0626 West 10/01/96
96 DHR 0944 Becton 10/16/96
Deborah Reddick v. Department of Human Resources
Stacey Yvette Franklin v. Facility Services, Medical Facilities Lie. Sec
Division of Medical Assistance
96 DHR 0240
96 DHR 0358
Judy Malcuit, Re Melissa Malcuit v DHR, Div. of Medical Assistance 96 DHR 0129
Durham Reg. Hsptl, Behavioral Hlth Svcs v Medical Assistance, DHR 96 DHR 0637
Jerry Heath v DHR, Division of Medical Assistance 96 DHR 0752
Division of Social Services
Cryslean Fields v. Department of Human Resources
Rozena Chambliss v. Department of Human Resources
Addie & Major Short v. Department of Human Resources
Mr. and Mrs. Jessie Stevenson v. DHR. Division of Social Services
William G. Fisher v. DHR, Div. of Social Services. Prog Integrity Branch95
Verna F Nunn v. Department of Human Resources
Nancy Hooker. Helen Tyndall v Department of Human Resources
Monica Ferrari and Justin Ferrari v. Pender County DSS
Monica Ferrari and Justin Ferrari v. New Hanover County DSS
Reilly
Morrison
06/18/96
05/16/96
Gray 06/12/96
West 09/20/96
Chess 10/07/96
95 DHR 1001 Gray 07/05/96
95 DHR 1044 Smith 03/12/96
95 DHR 1063 Morrison 03/19/96
95 DHR 1072 Phipps 03/15/96
95 DHR 1234 Morrison 03/19/96
95 DHR 1330 Gray 04/11/96
96 DHR 0155 Gray 04/26/96
96 DHR 1425 Morrison 12/13/96
96 DHR 1471 Morrison 12/13/96
Child Support Enforcement Section
Donald E Rideout Jr v Department of Human Resources
Christopher F Roakes v Department of Human Resources
Claude Eure Jr. v Department of Human Resources
Richard R. Fox. Sr. v. Department of Human Resources
Joselito D. Pilar v. Department of Human Resources
David Lee Grady v. Department of Human Resources
Patrick Orlando Crump v Department of Human Resources
Peter Robert Kovolsky v. Department of Human Resources
Tony Lee Zapata v Department of Human Resources
Lawrence Dow Dean v. Department of Human Resources
Carl E. Coffey v. Department of Human Resources
Keith Dewayne Senters v. Department of Human Resources
Lonnie Dawes v Department of Human Resources
Mickey Turner v. Department of Human Resources
James Joseph Gallagher v. Department of Human Resources
James Thomas McRac v. Department of Human Resources
Vincent E. Koehler v. Department of Human Resources
David J. Moseley v. Department of Human Resources
Derrick L. Conyers v. Department of Human Resources
Charles Edward Smith v. Department of Human Resources
Kevin Vereen v. Department of Human Resources
James Curtis Witwer v Department of Human Resources
Thornell Bowden v. Department of Human Resources
Herbert W Donahue Jr. v Department of Human Resources
Henry S. Sada v. Department of Human Resources
Charles F. Moore v. Department of Human Resources
Daniel Leslie Baker v. Department of Human Resources
Kenneth L. Lindsey v. Department of Human Resources
95 CSE 0952 Reilly 04/18/96
95 CSE 1131 Becton 05/03/96
95 CSE 1155 Phipps 06/12/96
95 CSE 1169 Becton 03/19/96
95 CSE 1180 Chess 03/01/96
95 CSE 1218 Morrison 03/26/96
95 CSE 1221 Smith 03/05/96
95 CSE 1230 Becton 03/11/96
95 CSE 1266 Gray 05/02/96
95 CSE 1267 Morrison 03/29/96
95 CSE 1270 Smith 03/15/96
95 CSE 1273 Phipps 04/01/96
95 CSE 1274 Smith 06/12/96
95 CSE 1278 Smith 03/14/96
95 CSE 1280 Chess 03/19/96
95 CSE 1296 Chess 03/15/96
95 CSE 1301 Phipps 05/09/96
95 CSE 1304 Chess 03/29/96
95 CSE 1308 Reilly 03/13/96
95 CSE 1309 West 03/07/96
95 CSE 1315 Phipps 05/06/96
95 CSE 1331 Becton 03/26/96
95 CSE 1345 Morrison 03/07/96
95 CSE 1346 Reilly 11/15/96
95 CSE 1367 Smith 03/21/96
95 CSE 1369 Chess 03/27/96
95 CSE 1373 Morrison 03/12/96
95 CSE 1375 West 06/24/96
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1790
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
John L. Pike v Deparimeni of Human Resources
Wm. R. Evans v. Departmenl of Human Resources
Rory J- Curry v. Department of Human Resources
Lorin A. Brown v. Department of Human Resources
Marcus Anthony Butts v Department of Human Resources
Cynthia Pmder v. Department of Human Resources
Rhonnie J, Williams v. Department of Human Resources
Ramon Domenech v. Department of Human Resources
Lennard J. Watson v. Department of Human Resources
Timothy R Brewer. Sr. v. Department of Human Resources
Dennis L. McNeill v. Department of Human Resources
Tony A Rogers v Department of Human Resources
Rick E. Atkins v. Department of Human Resources
Timothy A. Ratley (Jeanes) v. Department of Human Resources
Richard E, Reader v. Department of Human Resources
Wendel McDonald v. Department of Human Resources
Wilbur Dewayne Bault v Department of Human Resources
Reginald B. Bratton Sr. v Department of Human Resources
James C Smith v. Department of Human Resources
Ronald D. Johnson v Department of Human Resources
Johnny Leary v. Department of Human Resources
Jimmy Strickland v Department of Human Resources
John W Scott V. Department of Human Resources
Calvin S. Austin v. Department of Human Resources
Derek Henslee v. Department of Human Resources
Donald L, Carr, Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Norman Waycaster v. Department of Human Resources
Andre Duncan v. Department of Human Resources
Lorenzo Wilson v. Department of Human Resources
Mark Kevin Burns v. Department of Human Resources
Cyril Lloyd Payne v. Department of Human Resources
Charles H Johnson v. Department of Human Resources
Willie James Myers v. Department of Human Resources
Christopher F Byrne v Department of Human Resources
Richard Painall Burch v. Department of Human Resources
Charles Gillispie v Department of Human Resources
Teresa Reynolds v. Department of Human Resources
Thornell Bowden v Department of Human Resources
Kenneth Edward Burns v. Department of Human Resources
Carl R. Ritter v. Department of Human Resources
William Charles Rorie v. Department of Human Resources
Leon Gibson v. Departmenl of Human Resources
Dioni Delvalle, U v Department of Human Resources
Gerald Roger Beachum Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Anderson L Wardlow v. Department of Human Resources
Daniel J. Carter v. Department of Human Resources
Kelvin Tarlton v Department of Human Resources
Steven Craig Mooney v. Department of Human Resources
John L. Cherry Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Arthur Jemerson v. Department of Human Resources
Michael S. Covington v. Departmenl of Human Resources
Gary Steele v. Department of Human Resources
Terry Sealey v. Department of Human Resources
Jackie L. Kopczick v. Department of Human Resources
Virginia McDowell Ramsey v. Department of Human Resources
D. Wayne Gray v. Department of Human Resources
Claude R. Anderson v. Department of Human Resources
Alan Kendell Locklear v. Department of Human Resources
Douglas F. McBryde v. Department of Human Resources
Thomas White v. Department of Human Resources
James Trevor Emerson v. Department of Human Resources
Ray Davis Hood v. Department of Human Resources
Leon McNair v. Department of Human Resources
John William White v. Department of Human Resources
Hazel L. Walker v. Department of Human Resources
Tayloria Y. Manns v. Department of Human Resources
Carl S. McNair v. Department of Human Resources
David Agurs v. Department of Human Resources
CASE DATE OF
NUMBER ALJ DECISION
95 CSE 1376 Smith 03/21/96
95 CSE 1377 Becton 03/11/96
95 CSE 1380 Mann 03/15/96
95 CSE 1382 Reilly 04/18/96
95 CSE 1405 Smith 03/27/96
95 CSE 1406 Becton 03/11/96
95 CSE 1407 Chess 05/06/96
95 CSE 1408 Phipps 03/11/96
95 CSE 1414 Mann 08/23/96
95 CSE 1433 West 12/10/96
95 CSE 1435 Becton 03/13/96
95 CSE 1436 Chess 05/16/96
95 CSE 1437 Phipps 04/01/96
95 CSE 1465 Morrison 03/26/96
95 CSE 1469 Smith 04/29/96
95 CSE 1470 Becton 07/29/96
95 CSE 1475 West 03/13/96
96 CSE 0002 Mann 08/23/96
96 CSE 0034 Gray 05/10/96
96 CSE 0084 Smith 03/27/96
96 CSE 0085 Becton 05/03/96
96 CSE 0119 Chess 07/08/96
96 CSE 0130 Mann 03/15/96
96 CSE 0140 Phipps 05/17/96
96 CSE 0188 Reilly 05/17/96
96 CSE 0200 West 05/30/96
96 CSE 0245 Becton 05/16/96
96 CSE 0249 Chess 09/25/96
96 CSE 0257 Phipps 05/06/96
96 CSE 0271 Morrison 06/24/96
96 CSE 0272 Reilly 05/31/96
96 CSE 0295 West 07/15/96
96 CSE 0299 Becton 07/19/96
96 CSE 0336 Chess 06/26/96
96 CSE 0339 Phipps 06/27/96
96 CSE 0365 Mann 07/23 '96
96 CSE 0369 Gray 07/23/96
96 CSE 0370 Morrison 05/17/96
96 CSE 0379 Reilly 07/18/96
96 CSE 0380 West 05/08/96
96 CSE 0388 Smith 08/01/96
96 CSE 0389 Becton 07/02/96
96 CSE 0407 Chess 07/17/96
96 CSE 0411 Phipps 06/24/96
96 CSE 0412 Mann 08/05/96
96 CSE 0417 Gray 06/24/96
96 CSE 0424 Morrison 05/29/96
96 CSE 0425 Reilly 07/08/96
96 CSE 0426 West 06/24/96
96 CSE 0427 Smith 08/01/96
96 CSE 0428 Becton 08/02/96
96 CSE 0429 Chess 08/26/96
96 CSE 0430 Phipps 05/29/96
96 CSE 0431 Mann 06/05/96
96 CSE 0464 Gray 08/02/96
96 CSE 0465 Morrison 08/02/96
96 CSE 0502 Reilly 07/22/96
96 CSE 0503 West 05/30/96
96 CSE 0518 Becton 08/19/96
96 CSE 0519 Chess 08/29/96
96 CSE 0545 Phipps 07/25/96
96 CSE 0547 Mann 09/12/96
96 CSE 0557 Morrison 08/08/96
96 CSE 0558 Reilly 08/14/96
96 CSE 0559 West 06/24/96
96 CSE 0564 Smith 08/15/96
96 CSE 0568 Becton 06/24/96
96 CSE 0580 Chess 06/13/96
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
1791 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
King Sanders Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Sandra Kay Carpenter v Department of Human Resources
Christopher Clyde Barrino Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Clinton Sutton v Department of Human Resources
Dave L James v Department of Human Resources
Jonathan Bernard Copper v. Department of Human Resources
Stanley Lewis Turner v. Department of Human Resources
Lisa Privette v Department of Human Resources
Franklin D. Deese v. Department of Human Resources
Jan Smith Osborne v Department of Human Resources
Mark Allen Rose Sr. v. Department of Human Resources
Mark P. Crosby v. Department of Human Resources
Bernard D. Brothers v Department of Human Resources
Renee G. Arriola v. Department of Human Resources
Isaac Massey Jr. v Department of Human Resources
Darryl Leon White v. Department of Human Resources
Philip Purnell v. Department of Human Resources
Edwin Southards v Department of Human Resources
Mary Vanover v. Department of Human Resources
Cabot S. Pollard v Department of Human Resources
Johnnie B. Walton v. Department of Human Resources
Timothy P. Ruth v Department of Human Resources
Thomas Lee Glenn v. Department of Human Resources
William S. Freeman v. Department of Human Resources
James Benson v Cumberland Child Support Enforcement
Randy Dale Finnicum v. Department of Human Resources
William A. Cotton v. Department of Human Resources
Winston B. Scott v Department of Human Resources
Michael R. Bryant v. Department of Human Resources
Dallas F Butler v. Department of Human Resources
Robert James Moore Junior v. Department of Human Resources
Washington J. James, in v. Department of Human Resources
Leslie E. Little v Department of Human Resources
David W Thompson v. Department of Human Resources
Jimmie Lee Jones v. Department of Human Resources
Michael Sturdivant v. Department of Human Resources
Tommy R Thompson v. Department of Human Resources
Julian L Barrett v Department of Human Resources
Richard A. Patton Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Kenneth R. Blount v. Department of Human Resources
Anthony Bernard Crawford v. Department of Human Resources
Russell Pearson v. Department of Human Resources
Harry J Cook v. Department of Human Resources
Donald (Glendon) Ryan v. Department of Human Resources
Joseph Davis v Department of Human Resources
Jethero Davidson Jr v Department of Human Resources
Garry G. Hickman v. Departmtne of Human Resoruces
Jeffrey Len Ezzell v. Department of Human Resources
Tessa Jones v. Department of Human Resources
Wilbert J. Boykin v. Department of Human Resources
Wayne R. Frazier v. Department of Human Resources
Raymond G. Molina v. Department of Human Resources
Robert R. Pray v. Department of Human Resources
Marion A. Ward v. Department of Human Resources
Lee G. Sanders Jr v. Department of Human Resources
Robin G Staten v Department of Human Resources
Edward F. Murphy v. Department of Human Resources
Ken Lail v. Department of Human Resources
Robert A. Green v. Department of Human Resources
Michael Roddy v. Department of Human Resources
Charlie Thomas Smith v. Department of Human Resources
Clarence Stevenson. Jr. v. Department of Human Resourcs
Federico R. Alire v Department of Human Resources
Walter Love v. Department of Human Resourcees
William D. Wall v. Child Support Enforcement
S alvatore Mitchell Dichiera v. Department of Human Resources
Billy C Cummings v. Department of Human Resources
Randy Earl Richardson v. Northampton County Dept. of Social Services
CASE DATE OF
NUMBER ALJ DECISION
96CSE0581 Phipps 08/22/96
96 CSE 0595 Gray 08/29/96
96 CSE 0603 Morrison 08/26/96
96 CSE 0629 Reilly 08/29/96
96 CSE 0638 West 07/15/96
96 CSE 0642 Phipps 09/03/96
96 CSE 0650 Smith 02/05/97
96 CSE 0651 Becton 09/30/96
96 CSE 0690 Mann 07/23/96
96 CSE 0703 Gray 10/04/96
96 CSE 0732 Morrison 09/30/96
96 CSE 0733 Reilly 09/30/96
96 CSE 0774 Smith 11/13/96
96 CSE 0790 Becton 08/14/96
96 CSE 0844 Phipps 10/25/96
96 CSE 0845 Mann 10/29/96
96 CSE 0878 Phipps 10/25/96
96 CSE 0968 Gray 10/25/96
96 CSE 0981 Morrison 10/24/96
96 CSE 1012 Reilly 10/28/96
96 CSE 1071 Smith 11/14/96
96 CSE 1086 Becton 10/30/96
96 CSE 1170 Reilly 12/10/96
96 CSE 1184 Smith 01/10/97
96 CSE 1187 Phipps 02/06/97
96 CSE 1191 Gray 12/12/96
96 CSE 1212 Morrison 01/10/97
96 CSE 1223 West 02/10/97
96 CSE 1253 Phipps 01/14/97
96 CSE 1261 Phipps 02/06/97
96 CSE 1264 Mann 02/10/97
96 CSE 1276 Chess 11/04/96
96 CSE 1282 Smith 01/10/97
96 CSE 1298 Phipps 02/06/97
96 CSE 1300 Gray 02/07/97
96 CSE 1304 Reilly 02/06/97
96 CSE 1328 Mann 12/10/96
96 CSE 1330 Morrison 02/06/97
96 CSE 1331*" Reilly 02/06/97
96 CSE 1332 West 01/30/97
96 CSE 1333 Smith 11/14/96
96 CSE 1334 Becton 02/06/97
96 CSE 1339 Gray 12/12/96
96 CSE 1344 Becton 01/31/97
96 CSE 1346 Gray 02/18/97
96 CSE 1347 Morrison 11/14/96
96 CSE 1349*" West 02/10/97
96 CSE 1370*" Phipps 02/06/97
96 CSE 1371*" Mann 02/10/97
96 CSE 1375 Morrison 12/10/96
96 CSE 1377 West 02/10/97
96 CSE 1378 Gray 12/12/96
96 CSE 1379 Morrison 01/09/97
96 CSE 1380 Reilly 11/15/96
96 CSE 1400 Smith 02/10/97
96 CSE 1402 Gray 12/12/96
96 CSE 1412 Smith 12/12/96
96 CSE 1432 Becton 02/17/97
96 CSE 1437*'- Gray 12/12/96
96 CSE 1441*=° Smith 02/17/97
96 CSE 1445 Phipps 12/12/96
96 CSE 1457 Morrison 02/18/97
96 CSE 1461 Becton 02/17/97
96 CSE 1464*=' Gray 02/18/97
96 CSE 1472»" Morrison 02/18/97
96 CSE 1474 Smith 01/30/97
96 CSE 1475 Becton 02/17/97
96 CSE 1486 West 01/31/97
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1792
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
Mr. Rickey K. Terry v. Child Support Enforcement Agency
James McCollough v. Department of Human Resources
Mike Oser v. Department of Human Resources
Raleigh W. Nickerson v. Guilford County Child Support Enforcement
Dennis R Kozee v. Department of Human Resources
Mark Owens Frink v. Department of Human Resources
Kelvine Lance Thompson v. Department of Human Resources
Robert Venice Ragg, Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Larry D- Worthy v Forsyth County Child Support
Darryl Wiley v. Child Support Enforcement
Christopher A. Abney v. Department of Human Resources
Marcus Watkins v, Stanly Cty Department of Social Services
Mark PuUlam v. Department of Human Resources
James A- Fultz v. Department of Human Resources
James B. Miller v. Department of Human Resources
E. Burt Davis, Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Mari L Ross v. Department of Human Resources
Reginald A. Barnes v. Department of Human Resources
Boyce P- Banks v. Guildford County Child Support Enforcent Agency
Mark A. Blackburn v. Department of Human Resources
Spencer B. Miller v. Department of Human Resources
Kilamenjaro C- Clifton v. Department of Human Resources
Maria H. Morris v. Carteret County Child Support Agency
Jeffrey S- Lerner v. Department of Human Resources
James Todd Godfrey v Child Support Dept- of Social Services
Spencer L Allen v. Department of Human Resources
Gary Lee Heafner Sr. v. Department of Human Resources
Billie J- Swain v. Social Services Child Support
Jamal D- Wilborne Sr. v Child Support Enforcement & AFDC
James Jackson v. Department of Human Resources
Jeffrey Dale Grant v. Department of Human Resources
Harold Ray Armstrong, Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Joseph J. Dunn v. Department of Human Resources
Joseph J. Dunn v. Department of Human Resources
Gregory S. Wolbert v. Department of Human Resources
Archie Lee Oxendine v. Department of Human Resources
Michael Bell v. Department of Human Resources
Jerome Maddox v. Department of Human Resources
Ramon Domenech v. Department of Human Resources
William R. Briggs v. Department of Human Resources
Sanford Tyler v Department of Human Resources
Phillip L- Lewis V Department of Human Resources
John William Vestal Sr. v. Department of Human Resources
Charles F. Haag. Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Walter Richardson, Jr v. Department of Human Resources
Clifton Huff V. Child Support Enforcement Mecklenburg
Scott Sanders v. Department of Human Resources
Mark Stephens v. Department of Human Resources
Teresa Devalle v. Department of Human Resources
Larry Michael Rollins. Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Garry G. Hickman v. Department of Human Resources
Richard A Pation Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Kenneth Ray Lowery v. Department of Human Resources
Jeffrey Len Ezzell v. Department of Human Resources
Jeffrey Len Ezzell v. Department of Human Resources
Tessa Jones v. Department of Human Resources
Tessa Jones v. Department of Human Resources
Ronald Graham Moore v. Department of Human Resources
John G Howard, Jr. v. Deparunent of Human Resources
Gregory B. Phy v. Department of Human Resources
Raymond E. Smith v. Department of Human Resources
Robert A. Green v. Department of Human Resources
Michael Roddy v. Department of Human Resources
Kevin J. Miller v. Department of Human Resources
Timothy Schnell v. Department of Human Resources
Walter Love v. Department of Human Resources
Roger W. Taylor v. Department of Human Resources
William D. Wall v. Child Support Enforcement
CASE DATE OF
NfUMBER ALJ DECISION
96 CSE 1487 Smith 02/06/97
96 CSE 1490 Phipps 01/09/97
96 CSE 1503 Chess 01/24/97
96 CSE 1509 Gray 02/03/97
96 CSE 1518 Becton 01/31/97
96 CSE 1523 Mann 02/10/97
96 CSE 1538 Becton 01/09/97
96 CSE 1545 Chess 01/24/97
96 CSE 1546 Phipps 02/03/97
96 CSE 1547 Mann 02/10/97
96 CSE 1552 Reilly 01/30/97
96 CSE 1553 West 02/04/97
96 CSE 1559 Chess 01/24/97
96 CSE 1560 Phipps 01/30/97
96 CSE 1577 West 02/17/97
96 CSE 1579 Chess 01/28/97
96 CSE 1580 Phipps 01/14/97
96 CSE 1581 Mann 12/10/96
96 CSE 1593 Morrison 02/18/97
96 CSE 1596 Smith 01/30/97
96 CSE 1607 Morrison 01/09/97
96 CSE 1615 Morrison 01/09/97
96 CSE 1618 Smith 01/10/97
96 CSE 1621 Phipps 01/09/97
96 CSE 1669 Mann 02/17/97
96 CSE 1675 Smith 02/17/97
96 CSE 1684 Gray 02/03/97
96 CSE 1732 Smith 02/17/97
96 CSE 1736 Morrison 02/18/97
96 CSE 1739 Smith 02/17/97
96 CSE 1753 Reilly 01/30/97
96 CSE 1763 Gray 02/03/97
96 CSE 1770*" Mann 02/03/97
96 CSE 1771*" Mann 02/03/97
96 CSE 1783 Mann 02/10/97
96 CSE 1797 Morrison 01/30/97
96 CSE 1800 Morrison 01/09/97
96 CSE 1865 Chess 01/28/97
96 CSE 1912 Gray 02/03/97
96 CSE 2021 West 02/17/97
96 CSE 2067 Phipps 02/17/97
96 CRA 1225 Becton 12/18/96
96 CRA 1244 Reilly 12/10/96
96 CRA 1289 Phipps 12/12/96
96 CRA 1302 Morrison 12/10/96
96 CRA 1318 Mann 01/22/97
96 CRA 1320 Morrison 12/12/96
96 CRA 1321 Reilly 12/13/96
96 CRA 1329 Gray 01/13/97
96 CRA 1341 Reilly 01/10/97
96 CRA 1350*" West 02/10/97
96 CRA 1354*'" Reilly 02/06/97
96 CRA 1355 Becton 01/15/97
96 CRA 1368*" Phipps 02/06/97
96 CRA 1369 Phipps 12/12/96
96 CRA 1372 Mann 12/10/96
96 CRA 1373*" Mann 02/10/97
96 CRA 1374 Gray 01/14/97
96 CRA 1386 Reilly 12/13/96
96 CRA 1399 West 11/14/96
96 CRA 1404 West 01/10/97
96 CRA 1436*'- Gray 12/12/96
96 CRA 1442*^ Smith 02/17/97
96 CRA 1443 Becton 01/13/97
96 CRA 1447 Morrison 01/30/97
96 CRA 1465*=' Gray 02/18/97
96 CRA 1478 Mann 01/10/97
96 CRA 1481*" Morrison 02/18/97
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
1793 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
Barbara Renea Caldwell v Cumberland Ciy Child Support Enforcement
Lee G. Sanders Jr. v. Department of Human Resources
Brian Kevin King v. Department of Human Resources
Laura D Prince v Department of Human Resources
George D. Bnckell v. Department of Human Resources
Kelvine Lance Thompson v- Department of Human Resources
Marcus Waikins v. Stanly County Department of Social Services
Garry G Hickman v Department of Human Resources
David Lynn Jones v. Department of Human Resources
Keith W. Phillips v. Cleveland Cty Department of Social Services
Judy R Johnson v. Department of Human Resources
Levern Blue v. Department of Human Resources
Michael E- Kimbril v. Child Support Agency Buncombe County
Spencer L. Allen v. Department of Human Resources
Tommy Allen Springs v, Forsyth Cty Dept of Social Services
David Ray Rowdy v Dept. of Human Resources
John E. Gombocs v. Dept. of Human Resources
Charles John Widelski v. Department of Human Resources
Wayne L. Weeks v. Department of Human Resources
Amanda F. Blount v Cumberland Cty Child Support Enforcement
Norman Eugene Cameron v. Support Enforcement Fayeiieville
David J. Hildebrand v. Department of Human Resouces
Debra J. Davis v. Columbus County Dept. Social Service
Debra Wade v. Department of Human Resources
Casey C. Townsend v. Department of Human Resources
Samuel L. Powell v. Department of Human Resources
Samual L. Gordon v. Department of Human Resources
C- Lee Bartlett v. Department of Human Resources
Terence L. McMurray v. Department of Human Resources
Melinda S. Tunner v Department of Human Resources
Jeanne G. Bishop v. Department of Human Resources
Rebecca Beaver v. Department of Human Resources
Vivian B. White v. Department of Human Resources
Mary R. Mahon v. Department of Human Resources
Mary R Mahon v. Department of Human Resources
Laura Heidorf v. Department of Human Resources
Lois Floyd Barber v. Department of Human Resources
La Rue Herring v Department of Human Resources
Debra D Hammonds v Department of Human Resources
Vickie Osoria v Department of Human Resources
Trine P. Bollinger v Department of Human Resources
Christie L. Pittman v Department of Human Resources
Lorna Sharpe-Ester v. Department of Human Resources
CASE DATE OF
NUMBER ALJ DECISION
96CRA 1510 Reilly 01/14/97
% CRA 1515 Reilly 01/13/97
96 CRA 1516 West 01/13/97
96 CRA 1517 Smith 01/13/97
96 CRA 1526 Morrison 12/10/96
96 CRA 1537 Becton 12/18/96
96 CRA 1554 West 01/13/97
96 CRA 1563*" West 02/10/97
96 CRA 1565 West 01/13/97
96 CRA 1627 West 01/14/97
96 CRA 1631 Phlpps 01/14/97
96 CRA 1650 West 01/14/97
96 CRA 1666 Smith 01/14/97
96 CRA 1676 Smith 01/14/97
96 CRA 1733 Becton 02/06/97
96 CRA 1751 Gray 02/07/97
96 CRA 1755 Smith 02/10/97
96 CRA 1765 Reilly 02/06/97
96 CRA 1776 Becton 02/06/97
96 CRA 1790 West 02/10/97
96 CRA 1807 Smith 02/06/97
96 CRA 1819 Morrison 02/06/97
96 CRA 1842 Mann 02/10/97
96 CRA 1852 Smith 02/06/97
96 CRA 1856 Mann 02/10/96
96 CRA 1893 West 02/17/96
96 CRA 1919 Gray 02/18/96
96 CRA 1938 Morrison 02/18/96
96 CRA 1946 Morrison 02/18/96
95 DCS 0921 Morrison 05/09/96
95 DCS 0958 West 04/04/96
95 DCS 1114 Reilly 04/26/96
95 DCS 1115 Phipps 06/04/96
95 DCS 1137*'' Chess 06/11/95
95 DCS 1142*" Chess 06/11/96
96 DCS 0065 Reilly 03/22/96
96 DCS 0176 Gray 07/30/96
96 DCS 0298 Gray 11/06/96
96 DCS 0792 Chess 10/08/96
96 DCS 1140 Gray 12/12/96
96 DCS 1353 Smith 12/12/96
96 DCS 1561 Mann 01/27/97
96 DCS 1687 West 02/10/97
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
INSURANCE
Carol M. Hall v. Teachers & State Employees Comp. Major Medical Plan 95 INS 1141
Arthur Wayne Dempsey v. Department of Insurance
Deborah B Beavers v Teachers & St. Emp Comp Major Med Plan
Nadia A. Hakim v. Department of Insurance
Kathleen D. Jarvis v. Teachers & St. Emp. Comp. Major Med. Plan
Mary Alice Casey v. Department of Insurance
Nancy C. Lowe v. Teachers & State Employees Comp Major Med. Plan
Phipps
95 INS 1255 Smith
95 INS 1411 Smith
95 INS 1422 Smith
96 INS 0075 Morrison
96 INS 0148 Reilly
96 INS 0726 West
04/01/96
04/22/96
05/10/96
03/26/96
10/16/96
08/14/96
11/20/96
11:05 NCR 308
JUSTICE
Wendy Atwood v. Department of Justice (Company Police Program)
Deborah K. Torrance v. Company Police Program Administrator
John O. Beach v. Alarm Systems Licensing Board
Ronald R. Coats v. Alarm Systems Licensing Board
96 DOJ 0111 Chess 08/07/96
96 DOJ 0363 Becton 08/14/96
96 DOJ 1362 West 11/19/96
96 DOJ 1364 Phipps 11/26/96
Education and Training Standards Division
Freddie Levern Thompson v Criml. Justice Ed & Training Stds. Comm. 95 DOJ 0731
Shane Douglas Crawford v. Sheriffs' Ed & Training Stds. Comm. 95 DOJ 0943
Charles Henry Daniels v. Criml. Justice Ed. & Training Stds. Comm. 95 DOJ 1070
Valerie Maxine Brewington v. Criml. Justice Ed. & Training Stds. Comm. 95 DOJ 1129
Patricia Josephine Bonanno v. Sheriffs' Ed & Training Stds. Comm. 95 DOJ 1152
Chess 02/29/96
Reilly 05/17/96
West 06/12/96
Smith 04/12/96
Chess 03/25/96
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1794
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
Douglas Allan Siuari v Sheriffs' Ed & Training Sids, Comm.
Rick M Evoy v. Criminal Justice Ed & Training Sids Comm.
Windell Daniels v Criminal Justice Ed- & Training Sids. Comm.
Gregory Lee Daughiridge v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Sherrie Ann Gainey v. Sheriffs' Ed, & Training Sids Comm
Stuart Hugh Rogers v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Sids Comm
Brian Thomas Craven v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Larry D, Wesion v Sheriffs' Ed & Training Stds. Comm.
Carlton Gerald v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Ken Montie Oxendine v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
James Leon Hunt v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds Comm
David Kent Knight v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Demetrius Arnez Brown v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Claude F. Nunnery v. Sheriffs' Ed & Training Stds. Comm
John Charles Maloney v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds Comm
Jimmie L. Cooper v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm
Jerry Glenn Monette v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Carlton Gerald v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Woodrow Andrew Clark v. Criminal Justice Ed & Training Stds. Comm.
Warren Scott Nail v. Criminal Justice Ed & Training Stds Comm
Zoriana Lyczkowski v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Philip A Berezik, Jr v Criminal Justice Ed & Training Stds. Comm.
George Willie Gilliam v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
George Willie Gilliam v Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds Comm.
Glenn R Brammer v. Sheriffs' Ed. &. Training Standards Comm.
Timothy Wayne Fulford v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Brent Lee Millsaps v. Sheriffs' Ed & Training Stds Comm
James Michael Doe v Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Charles M Perry v. Criminal Justice Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
Gregory K. Knox v. Sheriffs' Ed. & Training Stds. Comm.
CASE DATE OF PUBLISHED DECISION
NUMBER ALJ DECISION REGISTER CITATION
95 DOJ 1 1 89 Morrison 06/06/96
95 DOJ 1235 Chess 03/25/96
95 DOJ 1320 Gray 07/24/96
96 DOJ 0027 Reilly 03/19/96
96 DOJ 0028 Becton 08/09/96
96 DOJ 0029 West 06/18/96
96 DOJ 0036 Gray 07/09/96
96 DOJ 0037 Smith 06/12/96
96 DOJ 0068 Gray 03/26/96
96 DOJ 0071 West 03/28/96
96 DOJ 0077 Phipps 07/25/96
96 DOJ 0115 West 03/28/96
96 DOJ 0138 Becton 08/09/96
96 DOJ 0305 Gray 08/28/96
96 DOJ 0306 Smith 08/16/96
96 DOJ 0352 Morrison 07/12/96
96 DOJ 0420 Morrison 07/26/96 11:10 NCR 874
96 DOJ 0432 Becton 08/07/96
96 DOJ 0515 West 10/07/96
96 DOJ 0576 Becton 08/07/96
96 DOJ 0619 Morrison 10/21/96
96 DOJ 0652 Reilly 11/13/96
96 DOJ 0656 Morrison 08/02/96
96 DOJ 0656 Phipps 01/28/97
96 DOJ 0839 Smith 09/05/96
96 DOJ 0840 Smith 09/16/96
96 DOJ 0841 Chess 09/24/96
96 DOJ 0957 Phipps 12/06/96
96 DOJ 1016 Smith 01/22/97
96 DOJ 1836 Reilly 02/03/97
""
Private Protective Services Board
Timothy A. Hawkins v. Private Protective Services Board
William F. Combs v. Private Protective Services Board
Randy C. Hoyle v Private Protective Services Board
Robert A. Gibson v. Private Protective Services Board
Jimmy D Matthews v Private Protective Services Board
Johnnie Lee King v Private Protective Services Board
Charlie C. Brackett v. Private Protective Services Board
Thomas R. Harris v. Private Protective Services Board
Private Protective Services Board v. Henry E. Byrd. Jr.
Larry Boggs v. Private Protective Services Board
Private Protective Services Board v Charles T. Mathis
Private Protective Services Board v. Ricky C. Mullinax
Private Protective Services Board v. Michael A Smith
Keith L. Saunders v. Private Protective Services Board
95 DOJ 1419 West 04/12/96
96 DOJ 0022 West 03/22/96
96 DOJ 0024 Smith 06/10/96
96 DOJ 0386 Smith 07/03/96
96 DOJ 0676 Reilly 07/11/96
96 DOJ 0677 Reilly 07/11/96
96 DOJ 0712 Becton 02/03/97
96 DOJ 0761 Reilly 07/11/96
96 DOJ 0796 Mann 08/19/96
96 DOJ 0797 Morrison 10/10/96
96 DOJ 0798 Mann 08/27/96
96 DOJ 0800 Becton 10/04/96
96 DOJ 0801 Becton 10/09/96
96 DOJ 1363 Smith 01/15/97
MEDICAL BOARD
Medical Board v. Martin A. Hatcher, M.D.
PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
92 BME0510 Gray 06/28/96 11:08 NCR 555
Lavern K. Suggs v NC Board of Education
JT S & TS , Parents of EM S. v. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schl. Sys.
L.O, v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education
Candyce Ewanda Newsome v. Hertford County Board of Education
W, and G.B.. on Behalf of C.B. v. Winston-Salem/Forsyth Cty Schools
Zelma J, Hillsman v. NC State Board of Education
Cyvonne Rush Bryant v. NC State Board of Education
Steve Wright Brown v. State Board of Education
Blaise Malveau v Cumberland County Board of Education
Blaise Malveau v Cumberland County Board of Education
John Barlow v. Watauga County Board of Education
Louis Craig Gill v. State Board of Education
John L. Archer v Department of Public Instruction
Pamela F. Cummings v. Department of Public Instruction
95 EDC 0383 Smith 03/13/96 11:01 NCR 50
95 EDC 1194 Mann 04/12/96
96 EDC 0285 Mann 05/31/96
96 EDC 0344 Chess 05/15/96
96 EDC 0349 Mann 09/03/96
96 EDC 0399 Phipps 01/27/97 11:23 NCR 1808
96 EDC 0591 Becton 09/11/96
96 EDC 0593 Reilly 10/11/96
96 EDC 0613 Chess 08/14/96
96 EDC 0614 Chess 08/14/96
96 EDC 0623 Reilly 07/24/96
96 EDC 0675 Smith 12/18/96 11:20 NCR 1624
96 EDC 0678 Smith 08/02/96
96 EDC 0742 Smith 08/16/96
1795 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
>fUMBER ALJ
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
Susie Whiiley/Brandon Whitley v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd of Ed. 96 EDC 0964 Chess
Michael Wayne Geter v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Board 96 EDC 1036 West
Ted Louis Raye v. State Board of Education 96 EDC 1055 Morrison
Felicia M. Moore v, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools & Dept. Public Ins. 96 EDC 1303 Smith
STATE PERSONNEL
Department of Administration
Jimmie A Hughes. Jr. v. Department of Administration 96 OSP 0008 Reilly
Jonathan L Fann v Department of Administration, Admin Personnel 96 OSP 0042 Gray
Carlton Gerald v. State Capitol Police. Department of Administration 96 OSP 0116 Gray
Administrative Office of the Court
Ethel R Tyson v. NC Judicial Dept . Administrative Office of the Court 96 OSP 0080 Smith
Albemarle Mental Health Center
Judy A. Gordon v. Albemarle Mental Health Center
Appalachian State University
96 OSP 0354
Janice S. Walton v ASU. Beverly Christian. Joan Critcher, Libby Clawson96 OSP 0055
Janice S. Walton v. Appalachian St University. Claude Cooper. Bill Ragan96 OSP 0062
Janice S. Carroll v Appalachian St University, Claude Cooper. Bill Ragan96 OSP 0063
Theresa Louise Whittington v. Appalachian State University 96 OSP 0350
A & T State University
Joey M. Carey v. A & T State University 96 OSP 0393
Caldwell County
Blake C Pace v. Caldwell County 96 OSP 0047
Catawba County Mental Health
Tonyer J. Ruff v, Catawba County Mental Health 96 OSP 0951
NC Central University
Francina Y. Tate v. Chancellor Julius L. Chambers. NC Central Univ.
Renee Lynch v. NC Central University
Central North Carolina School for the Deaf
Felicia S- Milton v. Central North Carolina School for the Deaf
95 OSP 1432
95 OSP 1461
95 OSP 1241
Department of Correction
Haydee Craver v Department of Correction. Pender Correctional Inst.
Gregory Allen Jones v. Department of Correction. Supt. Bonnie Boyelte
Carolyn Cheek v Department of Correction
Calvia L. Hill v Department of Correction, McCain Correctional Hospital
Alisha Louise Staley v. Randolph Correctional Center
Brenda Propst v Foothills Correctional Institution
Delon D Solomon v Department of Correction
Alisha Louise Staley v, Randolph Correctional Center
Ann Williams v. Department of Correction
Haydee C Craver v Department of Correction, Christopher Phillips
Dwight Taylor, Mike Estep, Jackie Boone, Robert Pitman, Jeffery Clark
V. Department of Correction
Dwight Taylor. Mike Estep. Jackie Boone. Robert Pitman. Jeffery Clark
V. Department of Correction
Dwight Taylor, Mike Estep. Jackie Boone, Robert Pitman, Jeffery Clark
V. Department of Correction
Dwight Taylor, Mike Estep, Jackie Boone, Robert Pitman, Jeffery Clark
Chess
West
Morrison
Becton
Smith
Smith
Chess
09/17/96
09/23/96
01/10/97
11/25/96
07/23/96
05/24/96
04/25/96
03/15/96
10/17/96
West 01/15/97
West 03/13/96
West 03/07/96
Smith 10/09/96
10/10/96
04/01/96
10/22/96
04/22/96
10/03/96
05/17/96
95 OSP 1046 Gray 03/12/96
95 OSP 1290 Phipps 05/14/96
95 OSP 1441 Smith 09/19/96
95 OSP 1460 Gray 05/17/96
96 OSP 0092 Gray 06/03/96
96 OSP 0199 Morrison 04/09/96
96 OSP 0258 West 07/02/96
96 OSP 0261 Morrison 08/05/96
96 OSP 0279 Phipps 10/31/96
96 OSP 0348 Phipps 05/15/96
96 OSP 0372*' Smith 07/05/96
96 OSP 0373*" Smith 07/05/96
96 OSP 0374*« Smith 07/05/96
96 OSP 0375*' Smith 07/05/96
11:15 NCR 1255
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1796
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NUMBER AU
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
V. Deparimem of Correction
Dwighi Taylor. Mike Estep. Jackie Boone, Robert Pitman, Jeffery Clark
V. Department of Correction
Rebecca A. Faison v- Department of Correction for Women 96
Calvia L Hill v. Department of Correction. McCain Correctional Hospital 96
Pamela Robinson v Department of Correction 96
James .A Klein v Department of Correction 96
James E Holmes v. Secretary Franklin Freeman (DOC), Parole Comm 96
Tony R Broffman v Department of Correction 96
Mary Hargraves v. Department of Correction
Michael S. Doe v. Caswell Center 96
Timothy L. Willis v Caswell Correctional Center 96
Alisha Louise Staley v Randolph Correctional Center 96
Sharon Oxendine v. Department of Correction 96
Larry W. Cole, Sr v Brown Creek Correctional Inst. 96
Martin Tyler Wells. Sr, v. Dept of Correction Sandhill Youth Center 96
Timothy J. Ciscel & Anita K Ciscel v, DOP/Piedmont Corr Inst 96
Charles H. Perry v Department of Correction 96
Craven County Health Department
Linda Walker v Craven County Health Department
Patricia Kemp v Craven County Health Department
Patricia Kemp v Craven County Health Department
Department of Crime Control and PubUc Safety
Jerry Lee Fields v State Highway Patrol
Gene Wells v Crime Control &. Public Safety, State Highway Patrol
Hearl Ojtendine v Crime Control & Public Safety, St Highway Patrol
Jerry Lee Fields v State Highway Patrol
Gene Wells v. Crime Control & Public Safety, State Highway Patrol
Peter Mason Griffin v Crime Control & Public Safety, St Hwy Patrol
Durham County Health Department
Lyila D Stockton v Durham County Health Department
96 DSP 0376" Smith
DSP 0383
DSP 0397
DSP 0403
OSP 0434
OSP 0538
OSP 0625
OSP 0691
OSP 0715
OSP 0780
OSP 0999
OSP 1136
OSP 1142
OSP 1149
OSP 1542
Becton
Gray
Phipps
Gray
Becton
Becton
96 OSP 0674
Phipps
West
Smith
Becton
Phipps
Chess
Chess
Reilly
95 OSP 1171*'* Smith
95 OSP 1233»'-' Smith
96 OSP 0324»'* Smith
95 OSP 0176 West
94 OSP 1721 Reilly 09/26/96
96 OSP 0150 Chess 05/08/96
96 OSP 0212 Gray 01/10/97
96 OSP 0759 Smith 12/19/96
East Carolina University
Gregory Lapicki v East Carolina University
Bela E, Karvaly, PhD. v. ECU Bd. of Trustees, Ch Richard R Eakin
Teresa Dail McCaskill v East Carolina University
Richard Paul Schneck v. ECU Human Res., Sch. of Med , Psych. Med
Employment Security Commission
Gene S Baker v Gov James B Hunt. Jr . Ann Q Duncan, Chairman,
Employment Security Commission
William Herbert Allen v Employment Security Commission
Patricia Gary v Employment Security Commission
Tonderher Lynch v Emp Security Comm., Austin Quality Foods, Inc
Jessie James Thomas. Jr. v Employment Security Commission
Department of Environment, Health, and Satural Resources
Roberta Ann "Robin" Hood v. Environment. Health, & Natural Resources 95 OSP 0035 Reilly
Kathy B Vinson v. Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources 95 OSP 0203 Gray
Donald E. Batts V. Division of Adult Health, EHNR 95 OSP 1071 Smith
07/05/96
10/01/96
08/15/96
12/18/96
10/29/96
02,'07/97
08/29/96
Smith
09/23/96
07/30/96
10; 16/96
10/22/96
02/10/97
01/28/97
01/24/97
01/02/97
01/24/97
01/24/97
01/24/97
94 OSP 1174»'° Gray 08/05/96
95 OSP 0249*' Smith 07/23/96
95 OSP 0697 Smith 10/16/96
95 OSP 0836*'» Gray 08/05/96
95 OSP 1050*' Smith 07/23/96
96 OSP 1309 Gray 12/12/96
07/02/96
04/09/96
09/18/96
10/01/96
09/05/96
93 OSP 0707 Becton 05/16/96 11:05 NCR 300
94 OSP 1688 West 06/11/96
95 OSP 0793 Chess 05/14/96
96 OSP 0275 Chess 05/21/96
96 OSP 1961 Phipps 01/27/97
11:13 NCR 1087
Fayetteville State University
William C Neal v. Fayetteville State University 95 OSP 0392 Smith
Guilford County Area Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities and Substance Abuse
Stuart Klatie v. Guilford Cty Area MH/DD/SAS, St. Per Comm. OSP 95 OSP 1179 Smith
04/22/96
07/19/96 11:10 NCR 865
1797 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NUMBER AU
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGiyrER CITATION
Department of Human Resources
Sheila Logan v. Black Mountain Center. Depl. of Human Resources
Myron A- Smith v. DHR, Division of Child Development
Ophelia Webb v. Edard R. Inman, Dir. Alamance Cty DSS, Alamance
Cty DSS. Alamance County, and DHR
Peggy Pledger v. Department of Human Resources. Dorothea Dix Hosp.
Peggy Pledger v. Department of Human Resources. Dorothea Dix Hosp
Peggy Pledger v Department of Human Resources. Dorothea Dix Hosp.
Gai! Mane Rodgers Lincoln v DHR, DMH/DD/SAS-Cherry Hosp .
Cherry Hospital
Cynthia D. Hickman v DHR, Central School for the Deaf
Johnny Earl Young v. Unit Head Director of Food & Nutrition
Peggy Pledger v. Department of Human Resources, Dorothea Dix Hosp.
Mary A- Boogaerts v. Cherry Hospital, Goldsboro, NC
Kelvin Parter v Dorothea Dix Hospital
Johnny Earl Young v. Unit Head Director of Food & Nutrition
Johnny Earl Young v. Unit Head Director of Food & Nutrition
Kim A. Bell v. Walter B Jones Alcohol & Drug Abuse Treatment Center
Allen J- Wright, Jr. v. Blue Ridge Area Authority
Lynn S. Hales v. John Umstead Hospital
Deborah Ayala v. DHR/DSS/Child Support Enforcement
Jacqueline C. Branch v Division of Facility Services
Buncombe County Department of Social Senices
Kathy Davis v. Buncombe County Department of Social Services
Caswell Center
Ramona C Jenkins v Department of Human Resources, Caswell Center
Ramona C. Jenkins v. Department of Human Resources, Caswell Center
Franklin D. Sutton v. Department of Human Resources, Caswell Center
Cumberland County Department of Social Ser\'tces
Ruth Fortner v, Cumberland County Department of Social Services 96 OSP 0829
Durham County Department of Social Services
Jan E. Smith v, Durham County Department of Social Services 95 OSP 1121
Halifax County Department of Social Ser\ices
Clairbel Thomas v. Halifax County DSS & Director, Halifax County DSS 95 OSP 0905
Haywood County Department of Social Services
Carol Hubbard v. Haywood County Department of Social Services 95 OSP 1084
Lenoir County Department of Social Ser\ices
95 OSP 0672 Chess 01/24/97
95 OSP 1033 Morrison 11/27/96
96 OSP 0112 Gray 03/13/96
96 OSP 0114*" Gray 11/05/96
96 OSP 0146*" Gray 11/05/96
96 OSP 0147*" Gray 11/05/96
96 OSP 0159 Chess 06/17/96
96 OSP 0191 Becton 09/23/96
96 OSP 0217 Reilly 08/13/96
96 OSP 0241*" Gray 11/05/96
96 OSP 0269 Becton 05/29/96
96 OSP 0294 Chess 08/07/96
96 OSP 0543 Reilly 07/09/96
96 OSP 0590 Reilly 07/09/96
96 OSP 0597 Becton 09/11/96
96 OSP 0665 Reilly 12/20/96
96 OSP 0729 West 10/02/96
96 OSP 1062 Smith 10/29/96
96 OSP 1089 Smith 12/09/96
95 OSP 1487 West
Sharron S. Moten v, Lenoir County DSS. Jack B. Jones
Felicia Ann Baker v Lenoir County DSS. Jack B. Jones
Division of Medical Assistance
Harold Wiggins v. Division of Medical Assistance
O'Bern- Center
96 OSP 1100
96 OSP 1101
95 OSP 1482
Becton
Morrison
West
Reilly
Gray
Gray
West
08/09/96
89 OSP 0411 Becton 03/26/96
91 OSP 0522 Becton 03/26/96 1 1 :02 NCR 89
94 OSP 0766 Smith 03/21/96
12/02/96
05/24/96
05/29/96
08/30/96
12/06/96
12/12/96
06/11/96
11:06 NCR 395
11:13 NCR 1092
Samuel Geddie v. O'Berry Center
Gale Worrells v. Department of Human Resources. O'Berry Center
Rockingham County Department of Social Senices
Lorretta Lawson v Rockingham County DSS
96 OSP 0414
96 OSP 1011
Morrison
Gray
96 OSP 0471
06/13/96
01/09/97
West
11:21 NCR 1699
06/13/96
11.23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1798
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
CASE
NUMBER AU
DATE OF
DECISION
PUBLISHED DECISION
REGISTER CITATION
Vance County Department of Social Services
Roben Eugene Davis v. Vance County Department of Social Services
Wake County Department of Social Services
Phylis Gilbert v. Wake County Department of Social Services
Wilson County Depanmenl of Social Services
Karen R, Davis v Wilson County Department of Social Services
Department of Insurance
Larry W. Creech v. Department of Insurance
Department of Labor
Kevin P, Kolbe. Sr v. Department of Labor
Sydney Cheryl Sutton v. Department of Labor
New Hanover County Board of Health
Tabandeh Zand v. New Hanover County Board of Health
Pembroke State University
Bruce W Hunt v. Pembroke State University
Department of Public Instruction
Johnny Leak v Public Schools of NC, Dept. of Public Instruction
McLennard Jay v. Person County Schools
Sandhill Community College
Earl Levon Womack v. Sandhill Community College Bd. of Trustees
Office of the State Controller
Angela M- Terry v. Office of the State Controller
North Carolina State University
Vernell Mitchell v. North Carolina Cooperative Extension
Frederick A. Parmley v. NCSU Public Safety
Harvey Lee Clemmons v. North Carolina State University
Andrew W. Gholson v. North Carolina State University
Tidelarui Mental Health Center
Lisa C. Selfridge v Tideland Mental Health Center
Department of Transportation
Pearlie M Simuel-Johnson v. Department of Transportation
Dorothy J- Grays v. Div, of Motor Vehicles. Dept. of Transportation
Bobby R. Mayo v Department of Transportation
James H- Broyhill v. Department of Transportation
Bobby R. Mayo v Department of Transportation
Pearlie M. Simuel-Johnson v. Department of Transportation
Lisa Ann Lee v. Department of Transportation
Melvin Duncan v. Department of Transportation
Greg Brown v. Department of Transportation
Jesse Wayne Castle v State Highway Maim., Guess Rd., Durham, NC
96 OSP 0157
95 OSP 1238
96 OSP 0394
95 OSP 0631
95 OSP 0968
95 OSP 1211
95 OSP 1035
95 OSP 1288
96 OSP 0861
96 OSP 0862
96 OSP 0573
96 OSP 0402
96 OSP 1144
ReiUy
Phipps
Chess
ReiUy
Morrison
Phipps
Smith
Beclon
Phipps
Phipps
Phipps
Becton
Smith
10/28/96
06/27/96
11/01/96
06/06/96
03/14/96
02/04/97
03/01/96
12/02/96
09/05/96
09/04/96
07/25/96
08/07/96
96 OSP 0132 Gray 05/10/96
96 OSP 1037 Smith 01/14/97
96 OSP 1426 Reilly 01/16/97
96 OSP 1730 Reilly 01/15/97
02/10/97
1 1 :07 NCR 434
11:01 NCR 58
94 OSP 0589-' Gray 03/01/96
94 OSP 1044 Reilly 04/12/96 11:03 NCR 173
95 OSP 0561*" Reilly 01/08/97
95 OSP 0673 Gray 12/02/96
95 OSP 0798*" Reilly 01/08/97
95 OSP 0837*' Gray 03/01/96
95 OSP 1099 Reilly 07/31/96
95 OSP 1462 Morrison 03/08/96
96 OSP 0048 Reilly 05/02/96
96 OSP 0087 Gray 04/15/96
* Consolidated cases
1799 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
AGENCY
Archie Brooks v. W. F. Rosser. Depanmeni of Transporiation
Jessie L. Allen et al v_ DMV Enforcemem Section
Dwighi Odell Graves v. DOT Maintenance. Caswell County
R-L. Singleton v Department of Transporiation
William Dean Gillenwater v Department of Transportation
Stephanie Taylor v. Department of Motor Vehicles
Tri-County Mental Health Complex
Deborah Heil v, Tn-County Mental Health Complex
CASE DATE OF PUBLISHED DECISION
NVnVIBER ALT DECISION REGISTER CITATION
96 OSP 0239 Smith 05/17/96
96 OSP 0408 Becton 08/12/96
96 OSP 0616 Morrison 10/24/96
96 OSP 0683 Becton 08/12/96
96 OSP 0684 Gray 12/13/96
96 OSP 0955 Becton 08/29/96 11:13 NCR 1095
95 OSP 1 100
95 OSP 0842 Chess
95 OSP 1060 Morrison
96 OSP 0026 Gray
96 OSP 0151 Chess
96 OSP 0248 Chess
96 OSP 0548 Chess
96 OSP 0977 Phipps
96 OSP 1000 Reilly
96 OSP 1103 Gray
96 OSP 1135 Chess
University of North Carolina
Pamela B. Edwards v. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Keith R. Cameron v. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Jerel H. Bonner v School of Nursing UNC at Chapel Hill
Bela E. Karvaly. PhD. v. UNC Bd. of Gov., Pres. CD Spangler. Jr
Carl E. Whigham v. UNC Hospitals at Chapel Hill
J. Scott Spears v Ralph Pederson and UNC-C
Nellie Joyce Ferguson v. UNC Physicians & Assoc., Charles Foskey, Dir.
Mae Helen Lewis v. UNC Greensboro - Physical Plant
Donna M. VanHook v. UNC Hospitals at Chapel Hill
Tommie Thompson v. UNCG, Physical Plant
Wake County Board of Health
Debbie L. Whitley v Env Health Div Wake Cty Dept of Health 96 OSP 1090
Western Carolina University
Kristin K. Parkinson v Western Carolina University
Winston Salem State University
Gejuan Long v. Winston Salem Stale University
Rebecca Williams v. Winston Salem State University
96 OSP 0987
96 OSP 0253
96 OSP 0807
STATE TREASURER
Donald B. Durham v Teachers' & St. Employees Retirement Sys.
Joyce Clyburn v Dept of State Treasurer Retirement Systems Division
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
92 DST 1066
96 DST 1087
Smith
Smith
Becton
Gray
Smith
Chess
Smith
03/22/96
06/28/96
06/24/96
03/12/96
05/08/96
06/11/96
08/30/96
10/02/96
10/21/96
01/29/97
01/29/97
09/05/96
10/22/96
01/17/97
01/23/97
07/17/96
10/18/96
11:01 NCR 61
11:09 NCR 810
James E. Phillips v Department of Transportation. Div. of Motor Vehicles96 DOT 1829
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
Reilly 12/10/96
Sylvia Jeffries v. University of NC Hospitals at Chapel Hill
James E. Boudwin v. University of NC Hospitals at Chapel Hill
Rufus T. Moore Jr. v. UNC Hospital
Marcia Spruill v. UNC Hospitals - Patient Accounts
Charles E. Houlk v. UNC Hospitals
96 UNC 0067 Gray 04/16/96
96 UNC 0343 Chess 07/22/96
96 UNC 0470 Reilly 08/12/96
96 UNC 0500 Becton 07/10/96
96 UNC 0588 Morrison 08/09/96
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1800
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF WAKE
IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
96 ABC 1315
N.C. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL
COMMISSION,
Petitioner,
V.
WARNER ENTERPRISES, LNC.
T/A THE CABOOSE
920 YEARGAN ROAD
GARNER, NC 27529,
Respondent.
RECOMMENDED DECISION
This contested case was heard before Beecher R. Gray, Administrative Law Judge, in the Office of Administrative
Hearings, on January 28, 1997 in Raleigh, North Carolina.
For Petitioner; Melissa C. Owens, Esq.
APPEARANCES
ISSUE
Whether the Respondent's employee consumed alcoholic beverages on the licensed premises on March 15, 1996,
in violation of ABC Commission Rule 4 NCAC 2S .0212(a).
FINPE^GS OF FACT
The undersigned Administrative Law Judge finds the following facts:
1
.
Respondent holds an on-premise Malt Beverage permit at a business known as The Caboose located at 920
Yeargan Road, Gamer, NC.
2. An administrative hearing for this matter was scheduled for January 28, 1997 by the Office of
Administrative Hearings.
3. Both parties were served and received Notice of Hearing by certified mail. Petitioner received Notice of
Hearing on December 11, 1996 and Respondent received Notice of Hearing on January 7, 1997.
4. Petitioner appeared through counsel, Melissa C. Owens, at the January 28, 1997 hearing.
5. Respondent failed to appear at the hearing.
6. On January 28, 1997 the Petitioner filed Motion for Sanctions with the Office of Administrative Hearings
for failure of the Respondent to appear at the January 28, 1997 administrative hearing.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge makes the following
Conclusions of Law:
1. The Office of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction in this matter.
2. ABC Commission Rule 26 NCAC 03 .0114(a) states in pertinent part:
1801 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
If a party fails to appear at a hearing the Administrative Law Judge may:
(1) Find that the allegations of or the issues set out in the notice of hearing or other pleading
may be taken as true or deemed proved without further evidence.
3. As the Respondent failed to appear at the January 28, 1997 administrative hearing, the allegations as set
out in the Petitioner's petition are deemed proved without further evidence. A copy of the petition is incorporated by
reference and attached hereto.
RECOMMENDED DECISION
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge
grants the Petitioner's Motion for Sanctions and recommends that the ABC Commission suspend the Respondent's ABC
permits for 10 days, with the last five (5) days of such suspension to be avoided upon payment of a $500.00 penalty.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the agency serve a copy of the final decision on the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O.
Drawer 27447, Raleigh, NC 27611-7447, in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 150B-36(b).
NOTICE
The agency making the final decision in this contested case is required to give each party an opportunity to file
exceptions to this recommended decision and to present written arguments to those in the agency who will make the final
decision. G.S. § 150B-36(a).
The agency is required by G.S. § 150B-36(b) to serve a copy of the final decision on all parties and to furnish a
copy to the parties' attorney on record and to the Office of Administrative Hearings .
The agency that will make the final decision in this contested case is the N.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control
Commission.
This the 28th day of January, 1997.
Beecher R. Gray
Administrative Law Judge
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1802
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DURHAM
IN THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
96 DHR 0670
KELLY THOMAS,
Petitioner,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN RESOURCES,
DIVISION OF FACILITY SERVICES,
Respondent.
This matter was heard before Brenda B. Becton, Administrative Law Judge, on October 17 and 18, 1996, in
Durham, North Carolina. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties were provided an opportunity to file written post-hearing
submissions.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: HOLLOWELL & ASSOCIATES, PA , Raleigh, N.C.; Deborah N. Meyer appearing.
For Respondent: Margaret DeLong Martin, Assistant Attorney General, North Carohna Department of Justice, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
ISSUE
Whether Respondent erred in its decision to list adverse findings in the Nurse Aide Registry against the Petitioner
on the grounds that:
1) On or about August 15,1995, the Petitioner, a nurse aide, did abuse E.H., a nursing home resident, by pinching
and holding the resident's nose while feeding the resident; and
2) On or about August 18, 1995, the Petitioner, a nurse aide, did abuse E.H., a nursing home resident, by repeatedly
placing a soiled towel over the resident's face; and
3) On or about August 20, 1995, the Petitioner, a nurse aide, did abuse E.H., a nursing home resident, by placing a
towel over the resident's face and by wiping the resident's mouth with a soiled washcloth.
STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED
18 U.S.C. 2510 et seq.
N.C. Gen. Stat. §8-97
N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-286 et seq.
N. C. Gen. Stat. §131E-111 (recodified as §131E-255 as of June 21, 1996)
N. C. Gen. Stat. §131E-117
N.C. Gen. Stat. §150B-29(a)
10 NCAC 3H .0315 (repealed eff. Jan. 1, 1996) (replaced by 10 NCAC 3H .2207)
10 NCAC 3H .0108 (repealed eff. Jan. 1, 1996) (replaced by 10 NCAC 3H .2001)
EXHIBITS
1)
The following exhibits offered by the Respondent were received in evidence:
Portions of the Agency file concerning this matter - Respondent's Exhibits A 1-10, A 12-28, A 31-34.
1803 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
2) A copy of Resident E.H.'s Power of Attorney - Respondent's Exhibit E.
3) Excerpts from Videotapes - Respondent's Videotape #106, Respondent's Videotape # 109, Respondent's Videotape
#111.
FINDINGS OF FACT
From official documents in the file, sworn testimony of the witnesses, and other competent and admissible evidence,
it is found as a fact that:
1. The Petitioner, Kelly Thomas, was a certified nursing assistant (CNA) working at Joseph F. Coble Health
Care Center, at all times relevant to this action.
2. E.H., was a resident of Joseph F. Coble Health Care Center, a nursing facility, at all times relevant to this
action.
3. Because of concerns the family of resident E.H. had about the care E.H. was receiving at the nursing
facility, Mr. Raymond Luper, grandson of E.H., installed a hidden video camera in E.H.'s room on August 9, 1995.
4. The video camera was located in a clock on the wall across from the foot of the resident's bed. The video
picture encompassed a full view of the resident in her bed and
of the activities of persons caring for the resident while in her room. Each videotape continuously recorded the activities
in E.H.'s room for at least a 24 hour period.
5. Mr. Luper changed the tapes approximately every 24 hours as needed to continuously tape the activities
in E.H.'s room. Mr. Luper compared the time on the videotape with the clock in the room after he took each tape out to
ensure the accuracy of the date and time depicted on the videotape. Mr. Luper routinely went home and reviewed the tapes
the same day or within the next few days from when he removed the tapes from the video recorder.
6. Mr. Luper stored the tapes under his bed at his sister's home imtil he placed them in a lock box at his bank
every few weeks.
7. E.H.'s daughter and granddaughter had power of attorney for E.H. at the time the video camera was
installed and operating at the facility. The power of attorney provided that the granddaughter had power over E.H.'s
personal relationships and affairs. Both E.H.'s daughter and granddaughter were aware of and consented to the hidden
camera videotaping of E.H. in her room. They stood outside the room while Mr. Luper installed the camera. E.H.'s
granddaughter is also E.H.'s guardian of the person.
8. The videotape excerpts shown in court are from the same videotapes that Mr. Luper obtained from the
video camera and reviewed.
9. The videotape excerpts shown in court show the same video pictures that Mr. Johnson, the abuse
investigator, reviewed and relied upon as evidence substantiating his findings in May 1996.
10. There is no evidence that the tapes have been altered in any way.
11. Most of Petitioner's activities while caring for E.H. are visible on the video tapes.
12. The videotape recording device used in this case had no microphone attached and was not capable of
recording sound while in use in the 24 hour recording mode that was used. The videotape recording device did not intercept
or acquire the contents of any audio or oral communication in any maimer. The videotapes obtained were obtained as a
result of silent video surveillance.
13. On August 15, 1995, Petitioner was videotaped while feeding E.H.
14. On August 15, 1995 at approximately 7:50 a.m.. Petitioner used her left hand to hold E.H.'s nose for
approximately 7 seconds while she spoon fed E.H. with her right hand. E.H. reacted by raising her hand and grabbing the
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1804
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
hand that Petitioner was feeding her with. Approximately one minute later, Petitioner again held E.H.'s nose for
approximately 7 seconds while she gave E.H. a drink from a cup. E.H. again reacted by raising her hand to remove the
cup from her mouth.
15. Petitioner testified that she held E.H.'s in order to get her to eat or drink. She further testified that E.H.
sometimes resisted eating, but after she had tasted what she was being offered, E.H. would sometimes continue eating.
Petitioner did not intend to harm E.H. by holding her nose, she was merely using a technique that her mother had used on
her when she little to try to get E.H. to eat. Petitioner testified that she knew E.H.'s family would be upset if they knew
E.H. was not eating.
16. On August 18. 1995, Petitioner was videotaped while giving E.H. a bed bath.
17. On August 18, 1995, at approximately 9:17 a.m., while Petitioner was giving
E.H. a bed bath. Petitioner put a bath towel over E.H.'s face for 1 minute and 17 seconds while she continued to wash the
resident. Petitioner then appears to use the same towel to di^' E.H.'s lower body. Thereafter, Petitioner tosses a towel over
E.H.'s face for approximately 2 minutes. Petitioner then used the same towel to dry the resident's perineal area. Thereafter,
Petitioner again appean to toss the same towel over the resident's face for almost 2 minutes. Petitioner then took the towel
off of E.H.'s face, completed the bath and left the room. Each time the towel was put over her face, E.H. reacted by raising
her hand toward her face and the towel. Each time. Petitioner pushed E.H.'s hand away. Petitioner testified that the reason
she covered E.H.'s face because was E.H. was coughing and she was concerned that she could catch whatever E.H. had.
18. On August 20, 1995, Petitioner was again videotaped while giving E.H. a bed bath.
19. On August 20, 1995, at approximately 11:03 a.m., Petitioner held a bath towel over E.H.'s face with her
hand for approximately 4 seconds while she was washing the resident. The towel covered the resident's eyes, nose, and
mouth. Thereafter, Petitioner used a wash cloth to wash the resident's perineal area and feet. She then wiped the resident's
mouth. Petitioner testified that there was more than one washcloth in the wash basin. It is not clear from the videotape
whether Petitioner used the same washcloth she had used to wash other parts of E.H.'s body to wipe E.H.'s mouth.
20. On Sunday afternoon, August 20, 1995, Mr. Luper reviewed the videotapes taken in E.H.'s room on
August 18th, 19th and 20th.
21. The next day, on August 21, 1995, Mr. Luper, notified the nursing facility about the manner in which
Petitioner had bathed his grandmother.
22. On September 11, 1995, Joseph F. Coble Health Care Center notified the Department of Facility Services
that there had been an allegation that Petitioner had abused resident E.H. by repeatedly placing a soiled towel and wash cloth
over the resident's nose and mouth.
23. Charles Johnson, an abuse investigator for Respondent, was assigned to investigate the allegation. Mr.
Johnson conducted an on-site investigation of this incident over several days in December 1995. He spoke with facility staff
and interviewed Mr. Luper. He reviewed the medical records of E.H. and personally observed E.H. Mr. Johnson made
telephone and written attempts to contact Petitioner, but received no response from Petitioner.
24. When Mr. Johnson interviewed Mr. Luper, and for several months thereafter, Mr. Luper would not
disclose to Mr. Johnson his physical whereabouts with respect to observing Petitioner caring for E.H. Mr. Johnson did not
complete his investigation of the allegations against Petitioner until May 1996 at which time he learned of the videotapes and
was able to personally review the tapes. Upon completing his investigation, Mr. Johnson recommended that Respondent
substantiate three allegations of abuse against Petitioner. Respondent accepted Mr. Johnson's recommendation.
25. By certified letter dated May 28. 1996, and received by the Petitioner on May 30, 1996, Respondent
notified Petitioner that an investigation of patient abuse by the Petitioner had been concluded and that documentation
regarding substantiation of three incidents of patient abuse would be entered into the State Nurse Aide Registry.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
1805 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 11:23
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The North Carolina Department of Human Resources is required by N.C. Gen. Stat. §131E-255 (formerly
N. C. Gen. Stat. §131E-111) to maintain a registry containing the names of all nurse aides working in nursing facilities
in North Carolina. The Department must include in the Registry any findings by the Department of abuse of a resident in
a nursing facility by a nurse aide.
2. The definition of abuse applicable to these incidents occurring in August 1995, is the following:
"Abuse" means the willful infliction of physical pain, injury, mental anguish or
unreasonable confinement which may cause or result in temporary or permanent mental or
physical injury, pain, harm, or death. Abuse includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(c) Physical abuse - hitting, slapping, kicking or corporeal punishment of a patient;
(d) Mental abuse - language or treatment which would be viewed by a reasonable person as involving
humiliation, harassment, threats of punishment or deprivation of a patient;
10 NCAC 3H .0108 (repealed eff. Jan. 1, 1996) (replaced by 10 NCAC 3H .2001).
3. The Joseph F. Coble Health Care Center in Durham, North Carolina is a nursing facility.
4. The videotapes of Petitioner bathing and feeding E.H. were properly authenticated pursuant to Rule 901
of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence. A proper foundation was laid for the admission of the videotapes as substantive
evidence based upon the testimony of Mr. Luper that he had installed the video camera; that it was working properly at the
time that the videotapes were taken; that he reviewed the videotapes shortly after they were obtained and that the video tapes
remain in the same condition and produce the same picmres as they did at that time; that the videotapes have not been edited
or altered; that the videotapes fairly and accurately recorded the actual appearance of the area videotaped and that he
recognizes Petitioner and E.H. as the individuals observed on the videotapes. See State y\ Caimon , 92 N.C. App. 246, 374
S.E.2d 604 (1988), reversed on other grounds. 326 N.C. 37, 387 S.E.2d 450 (1990). (A proper foundation for the admission
of a videotape may be shown by testimony that the pictures introduced at trial were the same as those the witness had
inspected immediately after processing or by testimony that the videotape had not been edited and that the picture fairly and
accurately recorded the actual appearance of the area videotaped.); See also. State v^ Holder, 331 N.C. 462, 418 S.E.2d
197 (1992) (testimony of persons who listened to a phone tape recording shortly after it was made that they recognized
defendant's voice and that the tape played in court was unaltered was sufficient to lay foundation and authenticate telephone
recording.)
5. The clarity and visibility of the events videotaped was sufficient to support the admissibility of the
videotapes as relevant evidence under Rule 402 of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence.
6. The videotape evidence relied upon by Respondent in this matter is not inadmissible under either Federal
or State electronic surveillance laws. Federal and State electronic surveillance laws prohibit the interception and disclosure
of wire, oral or electronic communications without the consent of at least one party to the communication. 18 USC §251 1;
N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-287. The videotape evidence in this action did not involve the interception of any wire, oral or
electronic commimications as such commimications are defmed imder either Federal or State law. 18 USC §2510; N.C. Gen.
Stat. §15A-286.
7. The Federal circuits have routinely held that silent video surveillance is not prohibited by the federal
electronic surveillance laws. Thompson y^ Johnson County Community College , 930 F. Supp. 501, 505 (1996). The
videotaf)e recording device used in this case had no microphone attached and was not capable of recording sound while in
use in the 24 hour recording mode that was used. The videotape recording device did not intercept or acquire the contents
of any audio or oral communication in any manner. The videotapes obtained were obtained as a result of silent video
surveillance.
8. Even if the videotape recording fell within the definition of an interception covered by Federal or State
electronic surveillance laws, which it does not, there would be no violation of either Federal or State law because such
interception would have been made with the consent of one party to the communication. The videotapes show Petitioner
and E.H. in E.H.'s room at the nursing facility. E.H.'s granddaughter, E.H.'s mother and E.H.'s grandson, Mr. Luper,
all were aware of and consented to the videotaping of E.H. on her behalf. E.H.'s granddaughter, Ann Luper Schmitt, had
11:23 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER March 3, 1997 1806
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
a general power of attorney for E.H. at all times relevant to this action, including power of attorney for her personal
relationships and affairs. Ann Luper Schmitt is now guardian of the person for E.H. Ann Luper Schmitt had the authority
to consent to the videotaping of E.H. on behalf of E.H. and did so consent.
9. The security against unreasonable searches and seizures afforded by the Fourth Amendment to the
Constimtion of the United States applies solely to governmental action. State y. Peele. 16 N.C. App. 227, 234, 192 S.E.2d
67 (1972), cerL denied 282 N.C. 429, 192 S.E.2d 838 (1972). The Respondent state agency did not participate in, and was
not in any way involved in, the videotaping of E.H. at the nursing facility. The videotaping was not done by anyone acting
imder color of law. Therefore, no Fourth Amendment search and seizure issue is applicable to this case. Petitioner's Fourth
Amendment rights were not violated.
10. With respect to the incident that occurred on August 15, 1995, the evidence fails to support a conclusion
that Petitioner willfully inflicted "physical pain, injury, mental anguish or unreasonable confinement which may cause or
result in temporary or permanent mental or physical injury, pain, harm, or death." The word "willful" means "something
more than an intention to commit the offense . . . [i]t implies committing the offense purposely and designedly in violation
of the law." State v. Whittle . 118 N.C. App. 130, 135,454 S.E.2d 688, 691 (1995), citing State v. Stephenson , 218 N.C.
258, 264, 10 S.E.2d 819, 823 (1940). While Petitioner admits to holding E.H.'s nose while feeding her, her testimony that
she did it in order to get E.H. to eat and not to harm E.H. was believable. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to
substantiate abuse of resident E.H. on August 15, 1995.
11. The Petitioner abused resident E.H. on August 18, 1995 when she repeatedly tossed a towel over E.H.'s
face. Petitioner knew or should have known that such actions could cause E.H. mental anguish and possibly physical harm.
Petitioner's actions were not motivated by concern for E.H., but rather concern for her own well being.
12. The Petitioner abused resident E.H. on August 20, 1995 when she wiped E.H.'s mouth with the same
washcloth she had just used to wash E.H.'s feet and perineal area. Even if Petitioner used a different wash cloth as she
contends, it would still be humiliating to have one's mouth washed out with the same water that had been used to clean the
rest of one's body.
13. The Respondent did not err in substantiating two of the three findings of alleged abuse by the Petitioner.
RECOMMENDED DECISION
The North Carolina Department of Human Resources will make the Final Decision in this contested case. It is
recommended that the agency adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions