THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.� IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Isiah James #96883, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court
Judge John McLeod

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-511
Submitted September 2, 2008 � Filed September 8, 2008

AFFIRMED

Isiah James, pro se, for Appellant.

Robert W. Jacobs, S.C. Department of Corrections, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:� This is an appeal from the Administrative Law Court (ALC).� Isiah James argues the ALC erred in denying his motion to consolidate and dismissing his appeal. �We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR and the following authorities: Issue I: Rule 210(h), SCACR (providing the appellate court generally will not consider any fact that does not appear in the record on appeal); Germain v. Nichol, 278 S.C. 508, 509, 299 S.E.2d 335, 335 (1983) (holding the appealing party has the burden of providing a sufficient record); Issue II:� S.C. Code Ann. � 1-23-610 (Supp. 2007) (stating an appellate court may reverse or modify the decision of the ALC only if the appellant�s substantive rights have been prejudiced because the decision is clearly erroneous in light of the reliable and substantial evidence on the whole record, arbitrary or otherwise characterized by an abuse of discretion, or affected by other error of law); Sloan v. Friends of Hunley, Inc.,  369 S.C. 20, 25, 630 S.E.2d 474, 477 (2006) (holding an appellate court generally will not pass on moot and academic questions or consider a case where there remains no actual controversy).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

[1]� Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.