Robin v. Teacher Standards and Practices Comm.

Under ORS 183.650(2) and the implementing rule, OAR 137-003-0665(3), an agency must “identify the modifications and provide an explanation to the parties to the hearing as to why the agency made the modifications” if the agency “modifies the form of order issued” or “changes the outcome or the basis for the order”.

Petitioner appealed final order of the final order of the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (TSPC) that revoked her right to apply for a teaching license. Petitioner assigned error to the finding of conduct demonstrating “gross neglect of duty and “gross unfitness.” On appeal, Petitioner argued that the proposed order of the administrative judge and the insertion of findings related to the sanctions were an error without identifying or explaining its modifications. In response, TSPC argued that it had no obligation to explain the changes because the modifications did not change the outcome but merely “summarized” its adoption of the ALJ’s order. Under ORS 183.650(2) and the implementing rule, OAR 137-003-0665(3), an agency must “identify the modifications and provide an explanation to the parties to the hearing as to why the agency made the modifications” if the agency “modifies the form of order issued” or “changes the outcome or the basis for the order”. The Court of Appeals held that TSPC’s additions changed the basis of the order because it changed the order by adding multiple sentences and clauses that supplied new reasoning as well as “inserted additional factual inferences” so additional explanation was needed for the modifications. Reversed and remanded.