COLUMBIA - A dispute about who is responsible for informing police of DUI license suspension hearings has led to more cases being dismissed and drivers getting back on the road faster.

In South Carolina, licenses are suspended automatically for 90 days when a suspected drunken driver refuses to take a blood-alcohol test. People with a blood-alcohol level of at least .15 percent, nearly twice the state's .08 standard for drunk driving, also face immediate 30 day suspensions.

But drivers can appeal those automatic suspensions and get licenses back until their DUI charges are heard. For years, the state Department of Motor Vehicles handled the appeals. But since a law took effect Jan. 1, the South Carolina Administrative Law Court has been in charge of the hearings and oversees the hearing officers that handle those cases.

Since then, 70 percent of the 602 cases that went to administrative hearings were dismissed. That's up from 60 percent in 2005. Most of this year's dismissals came because the Administrative Law Court has not notified police of pending hearings.DMV officials say they're appealing about 200 of the 421 dismissed cases and haven't reinstated those licenses.

"It's a mess," said Marvin Kittrell, the administrative court's chief judge. He said his staff would start notifying police officers immediately and is pushing proposed legislation to more clearly give his office that responsibility.

The "mess" developed as Kittrell's court and DMV disagreed about who was responsible for notifying police of upcoming hearings.

DMV spokeswoman Beth Parks said when the Administrative Law Court took responsibility for the suspension appeals, it also became responsible for notifying police.

"We're relying on the Department of Motor Vehicles to notify us," said Col. Russell Roark, head of the state Highway Patrol. Roark says his division had been working with the DMV to develop a "cleaner" notification process involving sending hearing notices to officers by e-mail instead of by fax.

Kittrell hopes a bill up for debate this week in the House will clarify the roles. The House legislation and a similar bill in the Senate make it clear that arresting police officers or officers operating blood-alcohol test machines are parties in the case, not just witnesses. That change would require that they be notified.

That bill's sponsor, Rep. Greg Delleney, R-Chester, blames the DMV for the problem

"They're deliberately picking a fight," Delleney said. "Had there not been a problem to begin with, the administrative hearing officers would still be with them."

But the agency's department managers treated the officers "like stepchildren" and some cases left them locked out of offices.