Under ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges OAR 291-100-0110(1)(d)(A), a rule adopted by the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) that provides guidance in the implementation of a sentencing statute, ORS 137.635. According to petitioner, the rule is invalid because “it exceeds DOCs statutory authority and violates express constitutional provisions and prohibitions to the contrary and the plain language of the statute, ORS 137.635.” Having reviewed the parties’ arguments, we reject petitioners contentions and conclude that the challenged rule is valid. See ORS 183.400(4) (court shall declare a rule invalid only if the rule violates constitutional provisions, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency that adopted the rule, or was adopted without compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures).
OAR 291-100-0110(1)(d)(A) held valid.
PER CURIAM