Administrative – Hospital CON – Constitutional – Dormant Commerce Clause

While the proper application of Project Review Criteria 16(c), 22 and 23(a) may have the effect of protecting competing providers who already have a presence in the service area, this particular group of providers is not limited to in-state interests. We find nothing in the record showing a discriminatory effect on interstate commerce from the proper application of these criteria. Likewise, there is nothing in the record showing that the Administrative Law Court’s application of these criteria places an undue burden on interstate commerce.

Therefore, we find no Dormant Commerce Clause violation in the application of these criteria.

We affirm the ALC’s amended final order requiring respondent South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control to issue a certificate of need to respondent Amisub of South Carolina, Inc.

Amisub of South Carolina, Inc. v. South Carolina Department of Health & Environmental Control (Lawyers Weekly No. 011-083-18, 21 pp.) (John Geathers, J.) Appealed from the Administrative Law Court (S. Phillip Lenski, ALJ) On remand from the Supreme Court. Substituted opinion. Douglas Muller, Trudy Hartzog Robertson, and E. Brandon Gaskins for appellant; Stuart Andrews, Daniel Westbrook, Ashley Caroline Biggers and Vito Michael Wicevic for respondents. S.C. App.