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

South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent,

v.

Heidi F., George J., and John Doe Defendants,

Of whom George J. is the Appellant.

In the interests of three minor children under the age of 18.

Appeal From Lexington County
Richard W. Chewning, III, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-144
Submitted March 2, 2009 � Filed March 17, 2009��

AFFIRMED

Franklin G. Shuler, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Montford S. Caughman, of Lexington, for Respondent.

Henrietta Gill, of Leesville, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER CURIAM: George J. appeals the family court's order requiring him to comply with the terms of Placement Plan developed by the South Carolina Department of Social Services (DSS).� We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: South Carolina Code Ann. � 63-7-1680(H) (Supp. 2008) ("[A]ny objection to the sufficiency of a plan or the process by which a plan was developed must be made at the hearing on the plan.� Failure to request a hearing or to enter an objection at the hearing constitutes a waiver of the objection."); S.C. Coastal Conservation League v. SCDEC, 380 S.C. 349, 380, 669 S.E.2d 899, 915 (Ct. App. 2008) (internal citations omitted) (stating a party cannot use a motion to alter or amend an order "to present an issue to the court that could have been raised prior to judgment but was not so raised").�

AFFIRMED.[1]

HEARN, C.J., CURETON, A.J., and GOOLSBY, A.J., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.