Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Energy Facility Siting Council

When rulemaking, and upon request, an administrative agency "…shall provide a statement that identifies the objective of the rule and a statement of how the agency will subsequently determine whether the rule is in fact accomplishing that objective.” ORS 183.335(3)(d).

Petitioners appealed a final order by the Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC), an administrative agency that provides certification for organizations to develop energy facilities. The order established new procedural rules for reviewing amendments to applications for certification. Petitioners challenged the validity of the new rules. On review, Petitioners argued, inter alia, the EFSC failed to comply with administrative rulemaking procedures requiring an agency to disclose the proposed rules’ objective and the agency’s methods for determining whether the rules accomplish it. In response, the EFSC argued that it substantially complied with the rulemaking procedures because it released a statement of objectives and held discussions on how to track the rules’ success at council hearings. When rulemaking, and upon request, an administrative agency "…shall provide a statement that identifies the objective of the rule and a statement of how the agency will subsequently determine whether the rule is in fact accomplishing that objective.” ORS 183.335(3)(d).The Court held the agency failed to comply with ORS 183.335(3)(d) because oral discussions on tracking the rules’ success are not sufficient to meet the criteria of providing a statement. The Court held the rules invalid.