2017 ORS 183.471¹
Preservation of orders in electronic format
  • fees

(1) When an agency issues a final order in a contested case, the agency shall maintain the final order in a digital format that:

(a) Identifies the final order by the date it was issued;

(b) Is suitable for indexing and searching; and

(c) Preserves the textual attributes of the document, including the manner in which the document is paginated and any boldfaced, italicized or underlined writing in the document.

(2) The Oregon State Bar may request that an agency provide the Oregon State Bar, or its designee, with electronic copies of final orders issued by the agency in contested cases. The request must be in writing. No later than 30 days after receiving the request, the agency, subject to ORS 192.338 (Exempt and nonexempt public record to be separated), 192.345 (Public records conditionally exempt from disclosure) and 192.355 (Public records exempt from disclosure), shall provide the Oregon State Bar, or its designee, with an electronic copy of all final orders identified in the request.

(3) Notwithstanding ORS 192.324 (Copies or inspection of public records), an agency may not charge a fee for the first two requests submitted under this section in a calendar year. For any subsequent request, an agency may impose a fee in accordance with ORS 192.324 (Copies or inspection of public records) to reimburse the agency for the actual costs of complying with the request.

(4) For purposes of this section, a final order entered in a contested case by an administrative law judge under ORS 183.625 (Assignment of administrative law judges) (3) is a final order issued by the agency that authorized the administrative law judge to conduct the hearing.

(5) This section does not apply to final orders by default issued under ORS 183.417 (Procedure in contested case hearing) (3) or to final orders issued in contested cases by:

(a) The Department of Revenue;

(b) The State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision;

(c) The Department of Corrections;

(d) The Employment Relations Board;

(e) The Public Utility Commission of Oregon;

(f) The Oregon Health Authority;

(g) The Land Conservation and Development Commission;

(h) The Land Use Board of Appeals;

(i) The Division of Child Support of the Department of Justice;

(j) The Department of Transportation, if the final order relates to the suspension, revocation or cancellation of identification cards, vehicle registrations, vehicle titles or driving privileges or to the assessment of taxes or stipulated settlements in the regulation of vehicle related businesses;

(k) The Employment Department or the Employment Appeals Board, if the final order relates to benefits as defined in ORS 657.010 (Definitions);

(L) The Employment Department, if the final order relates to an assessment of unemployment tax for which a hearing was not held; or

(m) The Department of Human Services, if the final order was not related to licensing or certification. [2013 c.156 §2]

Note: 183.471 (Preservation of orders in electronic format) was added to and made a part of ORS chapter 183 by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

See annota­tions under ORS chapter 183.

Chapter 183

Notes of Decisions

A legislative delega­tion of power in terms as broad as those used in [former] ORS 471.295 (1) places upon the administrative agency a responsibility to es­tab­lish standards by which the law is to be applied. Sun Ray Drive-in Dairy, Inc. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 16 Or App 63, 517 P2d 289 (1973)

Administrative regula­tion providing that failure to perform responsibilities adequately was a ground for employee’s dismissal. Palen v. State Bd. of Higher Educ., 18 Or App 442, 525 P2d 1047 (1974), Sup Ct review denied

Where it was determined that agency invalidly terminated substantive policy, trial court did not have authority to order agency to resume policy in absence of validly adopted agency rule. Burke v. Children’s Services Division, 39 Or App 819, 593 P2d 1262 (1979), aff’d 288 Or 533, 607 P2d 141 (1980)

“Trending factors” published by the Depart­ment of Revenue and used to appraise prop­erty for purposes of prop­erty taxa­tion are not “rules” within the meaning of this chapter. Borden Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 286 Or 567, 595 P2d 1372 (1979)

Appellate court may review pro­ceed­ing meeting defini­tion of contested case whether or not pro­ceed­ing was formal administrative hearing. Patton v. State Bd. of Higher Ed., 293 Or 363, 647 P2d 931 (1982)

Circuit court could not entertain ac­tion for declaratory judg­ment di­rected at PERS, because PERS is subject to APA, which provides exclusive method for review of its ac­tions. FOPPO v. County of Marion, 93 Or App 93, 760 P2d 1353 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

Board of Educa­tion approval of textbook for use in state public schools was not “rule,” but was “order in other than contested case,” and jurisdic­tion for judicial review is in circuit court. Oregon Env. Council v. Oregon State Bd. of Ed., 307 Or 30, 761 P2d 1322 (1988)

Preponderance of evidence standard applies where initial license applica­tion is denied based on willful fraud. Sobel v. Board of Pharmacy, 130 Or App 374, 882 P2d 606 (1994), Sup Ct review denied

Completed Cita­tions

Wright v. Bateson, 5 Or App 628, 485 P2d 641 (1971), Sup Ct review denied, cert. denied, 405 US 930 (1972)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

State Speed Control Board subject to Administrative Procedures Act, (1974) Vol 36, p 1024; proxy voting at board meeting, (1974) Vol 36, p 1064; student con­duct pro­ceed­ings as “contested cases,” (1976) Vol 37, p 1461; rulemaking authority of Statewide Health Coordinating Council and of Certificate of Need Appeals Board, (1977) Vol 38, p 1229; Oregon Medical Insurance Pool is funda­mentally private-sector body, under virtually total private control, created by state to fulfill public purpose and is not state agency or public body subject to Administrative Procedures Act (APA), (1989) Vol 46, p 155

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 245 (1971); 53 OLR 364, 365 (1974); 10 WLJ 373, 420 (1974); 13 WLJ 499, 517, 525, 537 (1977); 57 OLR 334 (1978); 22 WLR 355 (1986); 36 WLR 219 (2000)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 183—Administrative Procedures Act; Review of Rules; Civil Penalties, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors183.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 183, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano183.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.