The motions to dismiss are granted. The finding of no jurisdiction issued by the Director of the Department of Natural Resources on July 11, 1990, is affirmed.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is an agency within the meaning of IC 4-21.5.
2. The DNR is the state agency responsible for the regulation of surface coal mining.
3. IC 4-21.5, IC 4-13.1, and 310 IAC 12 apply to these proceedings.
4. The Natural Resources Commission (NRC) is the ultimate authority within the meaning of IC 4-21.5 over all administrative appeals taken from DNR decisions.
5. On June 8, 1990, the DNR accepted a petition filed under IC 13-4.1-14-5 which asked the director to designate a large area of Daviess County as unsuitable for mining in that the operation would affect natural hazard lands including areas of unstable geology.
6. The concern of the petitioners was surface subsidence caused by the collapse of abandoned underground mines.
7. On July 11, 1990, the Director of the DNR issued a ruling that he did not have jurisdiction to grant the petition because the lands involved were not natural hazard lands.
8. 310 IAC 12-1-3 defines natural hazard lands as areas where natural conditions exist which are subject to cave-ins or other such hazards.
9. The ruling referred to in paragraph 7 above is an agency action within the meaning of IC 4-21.5-1-4 and a determination of status within the meaning of IC 4-21.5-3-5.
10. IC 4-21.5-3-7 states that a petition for review must be filed within 15 days after notice of the order unless a longer period is set by statute.
11. IC 13-4.1-11-8 establishes a 30 day period to file appeals involving notices of violations and cessation orders.
12. Even assuming there is a thirty day period following a DNR agency action in which to file an appeal, the claimant did not file until 47 days had elapsed.
13. The claimant was twice given an opportunity by the administrative law judge to file any statements or arguments which would provide a justification or excuse for not filing earlier. To date none have been provided.
14. Accordingly, the conclusion is reached that the claimant does not qualify for review of the Director's determination because of the failure to file for review within the time limits as provided by law.