General. At a hearing, the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence and rests with the grievant. A decision at a hearing shall be based on substantial evidence. Grievance Based on Disciplinary Proceedings. If a grievance is challenging the sufficiency of the evidence presented as part of a disciplinary proceeding: The administrative law judge shall affirm the decision of the disciplinary proceeding if the administrative law judge determines the original decision was based on substantial evidence. The administrative law judge may not substitute judgment on factual matters for that of the trier of fact who has the ability to observe witnesses and to weigh credibility. If a grievance is challenging the interpretation of the law, rules, policy, procedures, or regulations applicable to a disciplinary proceeding, the administrative law judge shall affirm the decision of the disciplinary proceeding if the administrative law judge determines that the interpretation was not erroneous, or an erroneous interpretation was not prejudicial. If a grievance charges that procedures applicable to a disciplinary proceeding were not followed, the administrative law judge shall: Determine if applicable procedures were properly followed; Determine if applicable procedures that were not followed were intended to provide the grievant a procedural benefit; Determine if the failure to follow applicable procedures made the procedure fundamentally unfair; Determine if the failure to follow applicable procedures prejudiced the grievant; and If the administrative law judge determines that applicable procedures were not followed and were intended to provide the grievant a procedural benefit and a failure to follow the applicable procedures made the proceeding fundamentally unfair or otherwise prejudiced the grievant: Vacate the decision of the disciplinary proceeding; and Remand the case for a new disciplinary proceeding, unless a remand could not remedy the procedural deficiency. If a grievance is challenging the sentence imposed at a disciplinary proceeding, the administrative law judge shall affirm the decision of the disciplinary proceeding if the sentence imposed does not violate any federal or State constitutional, statutory, regulatory, or policy requirement. Grievance Based on Institutional Administrative Decisions. If a grievance is challenging administrative decisions, including, but not limited to, classification and case management actions, the administrative law judge shall determine if the decision was: Arbitrary and capricious; or Inconsistent with law. The administrative law judge may determine that an administrative decision is arbitrary and capricious or inconsistent with the law if: The decision maker or makers did not follow applicable laws, regulations, policy or procedures; The applicable laws, regulations, policy or procedures were intended to provide the grievant a procedural benefit; and The failure to follow applicable laws, regulations, policy or procedures prejudiced the grievant.