183.355 Filing
and taking effect of rules; filing of executive orders; copies; fees; rules. (1) The Secretary of State shall
by rule prescribe requirements for the manner and form for filing rules
adopted, amended or repealed by agencies. The Secretary of State may refuse to
accept for filing any rules that do not comply with the requirements.
(2)(a) Each
agency shall file with the office of the Secretary of State each rule adopted
by the agency.
(b) Unless
otherwise provided by rule adopted by the Secretary of State, an agency
adopting a rule incorporating published standards by reference is not required
to file a copy of those standards with the Secretary of State if:
(A) The standards
adopted are unusually voluminous and costly to reproduce; and
(B) The rule
filed with the Secretary of State identifies the location of the standards so
incorporated and the conditions of their availability to the public.
(3) Each rule is
effective upon filing as required by subsection (2) of this section, except
that:
(a) If a later
effective date is required by statute or specified in the rule, the later date
is the effective date.
(b) A temporary
rule becomes effective upon filing with the Secretary of State, or at a
designated later date, only if the statement required by ORS 183.335 (5) is
filed with the rule. The agency shall take appropriate measures to make
temporary rules known to the persons who may be affected by them.
(4) When a rule
is amended or repealed by an agency, the agency shall file the amendment or
notice of repeal with the Secretary of State.
(5) A certified
copy of each executive order issued, prescribed or promulgated by the Governor
shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State.
(6) A rule is not
valid or effective against any person or party until the rule is filed in
accordance with this section. However, if an agency, in disposing of a
contested case, announces in its decision the adoption of a general policy
applicable to the case and subsequent cases of like nature the agency may rely
upon the decision in disposition of later cases.
(7) The Secretary
of State shall, upon request, supply copies of rules, or orders or designated
parts of rules or orders, in the format requested, making and collecting
therefor fees prescribed by ORS 177.130. All receipts from the sale of copies
shall be deposited in the State Treasury to the credit of the Secretary of
State Miscellaneous Receipts Account established under ORS 279A.290.
(8) The Secretary
of State shall establish and collect fees from agencies filing rules under this
section. The fees shall be established in amounts calculated to be necessary to
generate revenues adequate to pay costs incurred by the Secretary of State in
performing the following duties that are not paid for by subscriber fees or
other fees prescribed by law:
(a) Publication
of the compilation referred to in ORS 183.360 (1);
(b) Electronic
publication of the bulletin referred to in ORS 183.360 (3); and
(c) Electronic
publication of rules and other information relating to rules under ORS 183.365.
(9) All fees
collected under subsection (8) of this section shall be deposited in the State
Treasury to the credit of the Secretary of State Miscellaneous Receipts Account
established under ORS 279A.290.
(10) No later
than 10 days after an agency files an adopted, amended or repealed rule with
the Secretary of State, other than a rule amended for a purpose described in
ORS 183.335 (7), the Secretary of State shall:
(a)
Electronically transmit the rule to the Legislative Counsel in accordance with
ORS 183.715; and
(b) Provide to
the agency that filed the rule a written confirmation that the rule was
transmitted to the Legislative Counsel. [1971 c.734 §5; 1973 c.612 §2; 1975
c.759 §7; 1977 c.798 §2b; 1979 c.593 §13; 1991 c.169 §2; 2003 c.794 §207; 2009
c.289 §1; 2017 c.518 §3]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
37
cases (
9 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case:
Wheaton v. Kulongoski, 147 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
Wheaton v. Kulongoski, 147 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 14× “DHS's procedural failure bears on the correct disposition of this case, but it does not mean that DHS's notices were not final.”
Meltebeke v. Bureau of Labor & Indus., 903 P.2d 351 (Or. 1995).
· cites it 4× “310(8) (defining a "rule" as "any agency directive, standard, regulation or statement of general applicability that implements, interprets or prescribes law or policy"); ORS 183.”
Application of Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 561 P.2d 154 (Or. 1977).
· cites it 2× “Thus ORS 183.355(5) provides that "if an agency, in disposing of a contested case, announces in its decision the adoption of a general policy applicable to such case and subsequent cases of like nature the agency may rely upon such decision in disposition of later cases.”
Wasco Cnty. v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Local No. 2752, 613 P.2d 1067 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 4× “5 The second alternative for adopting the rule, the one the Board used on remand, was that implied by ORS 183.355(5): "No rule of which a certified copy is required to be filed shall be valid or effective against any person or party until a certified copy is filed in accordance…”
Anderson v. Bd. of Parole, 740 P.2d 760 (Or. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Notice of such adoption shall be filed with the Secretary of State in the manner provided by ORS 183.355 for the filing of rules. The model rules may be amended from time to time by an adopting agency or the Attorney General after notice and opportunity for hearing as required…”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 716 P.2d 724 (Or. 1986).
· cites it 2× “See ORS 183.355(5), 183.484(4)(b)(B). Perhaps FDAB could adapt to its own use procedures such as those of the Court of Appeals, which also hears cases only in panels, for in banc discussion of difficult or doubtful legal issues, while recognizing that ORS 342.”
Burke v. Child.'s Servs. Div., 552 P.2d 592 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 2× “335, and filed with the Secretary of State, ORS 183.355, it is not effective. ORS 183.”
Cole v. Multnomah Cnty., 592 P.2d 221 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 2× “If the state manual had been adopted as an administrative rule, we would expect at least evidence that it had been filed with the Secretary of State pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, ORS 183.355(1). If the county manual had the force of legislation, we would expect…”
Mooney v. Oregon Health Auth., 500 P.3d 79 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“And con- trary to the OHA’s suggestion that the guidance is not a rule but, instead, part of an otherwise unreviewable executive order, there is nothing on the face of the guidance or in the record supplied to us by the OHA (which contains only the guidance itself) that would…”
Homestyle Direct, LLC v. Dep't of Human Servs., 311 P.3d 487 (Or. 2013).
“See ORS 183.355(5) (“[I]f an agency, in disposing of a contested case, announces in its decision the adoption of a general policy applicable to such case and subsequent cases of like nature, the agency may rely upon such decision in disposition of later cases”).”
Oregon Bus. Plan. Council v. Dep't of Land Conservation & Dev., 626 P.2d 350 (Or. 1981).
“Next, as also noted by the Court of Appeals, LCDC apparently does not publish notice of intended "acknowledgment orders” in the Administrative Rules Bulletin and does not file such orders with the Secretary of State, as would be required by the provisions of ORS 183.355(l)(a)…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(1) — 2 cases
Cole v. Multnomah Cnty., 592 P.2d 221 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
“If the state manual had been adopted as an administrative rule, we would expect at least evidence that it had been filed with the Secretary of State pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, ORS 183.355(1). If the county manual had the force of legislation, we would expect…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(2) — 5 cases
Wheaton v. Kulongoski, 147 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“DHS's procedural failure bears on the correct disposition of this case, but it does not mean that DHS's notices were not final.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(2)(a) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(2)(b) — 3 cases
Wheaton v. Kulongoski, 147 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“DHS's procedural failure bears on the correct disposition of this case, but it does not mean that DHS's notices were not final.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(4) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(5) — 19 cases
Meltebeke v. Bureau of Labor & Indus., 903 P.2d 351 (Or. 1995).
“310(8) (defining a "rule" as "any agency directive, standard, regulation or statement of general applicability that implements, interprets or prescribes law or policy"); ORS 183.”
Application of Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 561 P.2d 154 (Or. 1977).
“Thus ORS 183.355(5) provides that "if an agency, in disposing of a contested case, announces in its decision the adoption of a general policy applicable to such case and subsequent cases of like nature the agency may rely upon such decision in disposition of later cases.”
Wasco Cnty. v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Local No. 2752, 613 P.2d 1067 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
“5 The second alternative for adopting the rule, the one the Board used on remand, was that implied by ORS 183.355(5): "No rule of which a certified copy is required to be filed shall be valid or effective against any person or party until a certified copy is filed in accordance…”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 716 P.2d 724 (Or. 1986).
“See ORS 183.355(5), 183.484(4)(b)(B). Perhaps FDAB could adapt to its own use procedures such as those of the Court of Appeals, which also hears cases only in panels, for in banc discussion of difficult or doubtful legal issues, while recognizing that ORS 342.”
Mooney v. Oregon Health Auth., 500 P.3d 79 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“And con- trary to the OHA’s suggestion that the guidance is not a rule but, instead, part of an otherwise unreviewable executive order, there is nothing on the face of the guidance or in the record supplied to us by the OHA (which contains only the guidance itself) that would…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(6) — 6 cases
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(6)(a) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(l)(a) — 2 cases
Oregon Bus. Plan. Council v. Dep't of Land Conservation & Dev., 626 P.2d 350 (Or. 1981).
“Next, as also noted by the Court of Appeals, LCDC apparently does not publish notice of intended "acknowledgment orders” in the Administrative Rules Bulletin and does not file such orders with the Secretary of State, as would be required by the provisions of ORS 183.355(l)(a)…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.355(l)(b) — 1 case
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.