Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.330 (2026)

Description of organization; service of order; rules coordinator; order not final until put in writing

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      183.330 Description of organization; service of order; rules coordinator; order not final until put in writing. (1) In addition to other rulemaking requirements imposed by law, each agency shall publish a description of its organization and the methods whereby the public may obtain information or make submissions or requests.

      (2) Each state agency that adopts rules shall appoint a rules coordinator and file a copy of that appointment with the Secretary of State. The rules coordinator shall:

      (a) Maintain copies of all rules adopted by the agency;

      (b) Provide to the public, upon request, information pertaining to:

      (A) All rulemaking proceedings of the agency;

      (B) The status of the agency’s rules; and

      (C) All certificates and rules filed by the agency with the Secretary of State; and

      (c) Keep and make available the mailing list required by ORS 183.335 (8).

      (3) An order shall not be effective as to any person or party unless it is served upon the person or party either personally or by mail. This subsection is not applicable in favor of any person or party who has actual knowledge of the order.

      (4) An order is not final until it is reduced to writing. [1957 c.717 §2; 1971 c.734 §4; 1975 c.759 §3; 1979 c.593 §8; 1993 c.729 §2; 2001 c.220 §3; 2017 c.518 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1962–2009 · leading case: Swenson v. Dep't of Revenue, 553 P.2d 351 (Or. 1976).
Swenson v. Dep't of Revenue, 553 P.2d 351 (Or. 1976). “Plaintiff contends that defendant in fact did adopt a new rule without reducing it to writing and without following the hearing procedure required by ORS 183.330 et seq. This "new rule,” plaintiff argues, consisted of the adoption of a new method of valuation of timber crops for…”
State v. Alexander, 487 P.2d 1151 (Or. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “The principal point relied on is that the Drug Advisory Council did not give notice of intent to hold a public hearing before designating methamphetamine to be a dangerous drug, as required by ORS 183.330 (3) of the Administrative Procedures Act.”
Morgan v. Stimson Lumber Co., 607 P.2d 150 (Or. 1980). “This does not depend on a statutory grant of rulemaking authority. Indeed, by virtue of the APA an agency that disclaims having such authority cannot thereby escape the act’s provisions governing the making, publication, and judicial review of rules.”
Burke v. Pub. Welfare Div., 570 P.2d 87 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “ORS 183.330 to 183.390. Thus, our first inquiry must be whether the Indian Benefits provision of the Food Stamp Manual is a rule as defined in ORS 183.”
Lis v. Oregon State Bd. of Higher Educ., 577 P.2d 1370 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 5× “2 Plaintiff relies on former ORS 183.330(3) which established notice and hearing requirements for some administrative rulemaking proceedings.”
Larsen v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 219 P.3d 28 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). “, ORS 183.330 - 183.390 (governing administrative agency rulemaking); ORS 183.”
State v. Hudson House, Inc., 371 P.2d 675 (Or. 1962). · cites it 2× “We also note that ORS 183.330(1) requires each agency to adopt rules of procedure and the Department of Agriculture by its order AD-567, dated December 30, 1957, adopted in toto the Model Rules of Administrative Procedure In Contested Cases, as promulgated on December 9, 1957,…”
Int'l Council of Shopping Centers v. Oregon Env't Quality Comm'n, 597 P.2d 847 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “4 A prior version of ORS 183.330 did require the agency to "incorporate in any rules adopted a concise general statement of their basis and purpose.”
Oregon State Pharm. Ass'n v. State Pub. Welfare Comm'n, 432 P.2d 296 (Or. 1967). “Notice, it is urged, should have been given to interested parties of intended action and an opportunity afforded them to be heard and a concise general statement of the basis and purpose of the rule should have been adopted, as required by ORS 183.330. The Commission receives…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.330(1): 1 case
State v. Hudson House, Inc., 371 P.2d 675 (Or. 1962). “We also note that ORS 183.330(1) requires each agency to adopt rules of procedure and the Department of Agriculture by its order AD-567, dated December 30, 1957, adopted in toto the Model Rules of Administrative Procedure In Contested Cases, as promulgated on December 9, 1957,…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.330(3): 2 cases
Lis v. Oregon State Bd. of Higher Educ., 577 P.2d 1370 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “2 Plaintiff relies on former ORS 183.330(3) which established notice and hearing requirements for some administrative rulemaking proceedings.”
State v. Hudson House, Inc., 371 P.2d 675 (Or. 1962). “We also note that ORS 183.330(1) requires each agency to adopt rules of procedure and the Department of Agriculture by its order AD-567, dated December 30, 1957, adopted in toto the Model Rules of Administrative Procedure In Contested Cases, as promulgated on December 9, 1957,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.