Opinion
WCD 6-1985; CA A38782
Submitted on petitioner's petition for reconsideration filed July 28 of former opinion ( 85 Or. App. 219, 736 P.2d 230 (1987)) filed May 1, 1988.
Reconsideration allowed, rule upheld September 16, reconsideration denied December 18, 1987, petition for review allowed January 20, 1988 ( 305 Or. 21). See later issue Oregon Reports
Judicial Review from Workers' Compensation Department.
Vernon Cook, Gresham, for petition.
Before Warden, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM
Reconsideration allowed; rule upheld.
In this challenge to a rule of the Workers' Compensation Department brought under ORS 183.400, petitioner seeks review of our decision, which "affirmed" without opinion. Cook v. Workers' Compensation Dept., 85 Or. App. 219, 736 P.2d 230 (1987). We consider the petition for review as one for reconsideration. ORAP 10.10. We allow reconsideration and uphold the rule.
A challenge to an administrative rule in this court is an original proceeding, and our determination of the rule's validity should, generally, be by written opinion. Cook v. Workers' Compensation Dept., 79 Or. App. 21, 717 P.2d 658, rev den 301 Or. 666 (1986).
We have considered petitioner's arguments challenging the validity of OAR 436-10-050 and find them to be without merit.
Reconsideration allowed; rule upheld.