Opinion ID: 835654
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Uniform Basis

Text: Simplot also contends that the department erred because it did not assess fees on a uniform basis, as required by ORS 632.940. As described previously, the department set separate fees for fresh pack inspections and processor inspections, setting fresh pack fees in cents per hundredweight, with minimum hourly rates, while setting processor fees in cents per hundredweight only. In Simplot's view, those separate fees were not uniform. We disagree. ORS 632.940 and ORS 632.945 recognize that the department may conduct different types of inspections and that the fees for inspections may vary. ORS 632.940, for example, provides that the department may prescribe a different scale of fees for different localities and may prescribe a reasonable charge for traveling expenses and services when such services involve unusual cost   . Fresh pack inspections and processor inspections are fundamentally different processes that take place in different locations and involve examinations of product under different criteria. Because those two methods of inspection are not equivalent, there is no reason to think that their attendant fees should be. The context that ORS 632.940 and ORS 632.945 provide confirms that a fee structure is uniform when it specifies the same price for the same service. That is exactly what the department did in this case. Because Simplot paid the same price for inspection services as other recipients of equivalent services, Simplot paid a uniform fee. Therefore, the department did not commit legal error in determining that the fees were uniform as that term is used in ORS 632.940. Finally, Simplot argues that the fresh pack inspection and processor inspection fees are not uniform because, as the final order found, [h]istorically, the fees assessed and collected for the fresh inspections were less than the total direct cost of providing fresh product inspection, and the fees assessed and collected [for processor inspections] were more than the total direct cost of the [processor inspections]. In our view, that fact may show how difficult it was for the agency to match income to revenue needs, but, for the reasons that we have just described, it does not demonstrate that the fresh pack inspections and processor inspection fees were not uniform. The decision of the Court of Appeals and the order of the Department of Agriculture are affirmed.