Search Documents

By James D. McClung, H. J. Gluskoter, M. R. Geer

INTRODUCTION The purpose of coal preparation is to improve the quality of coal to make it suitable for a specific purpose by (1 ) cleaning to remove inorganic impurities; (2) sizing-crushing or screening, or both; or (3) special treatment, such as dedusting. The properties and quantities of impurities in coal are of major importance in the design and operation of steam generating equipment. Al- though boilers are often designed and equipped to use a wide range of coals, no boiler will perform equally well with all types of coals. All coals have certain properties that place limitations on their most advantageous use. These limitations are especially stringent for many of the older installations. Because of a general lowering of quality of raw coal in recent years, the need for coal cleaning has significantly increased. Among the factors contributing to the need for increased coal preparation are (1) increased demand for quality brought on by market and environmental requirements; (2) increased extraneous dilution caused by mine, health, and safety laws; and (3) depletion of the higher-quality coal seams.

Jan 1, 1979

Prior to any detailed discussion, I'd like to say that Dr. Aplan has made direct hits on two important considerations: 1) The most demanding need in Fine Coal research is to develop improved methods of sulfur reduction. 2) The areas of particle (impurity) liberation and froth flotation hold real near-term promise as techniques for improved sulfur removal. Digressing for a moment, I thin kwe can all remember the time when the biggest problem facing coal research was simply defined - "No money!" In the mid 70's we suddenly found ourselves dealing with a product worth five to seven times the value it carried in the mid60's. All of a sudden, we're talking about a high-profile, high- value commodity. The coal industry still hasn't made the complete psychological adjustment - especially in the operating areas (prep plants included). We have a valuable material at hand which is, in' many cases still being processed as though it were a two or three dollar per ton item. Simply put, I think that while the industry has made some major strides during this transition, a stronger commitment of attitude (and finances) needs to be made toward deeper definition of beneficiation work. Back to specifics - Dr. Aplan has really highlighted three areas where strong research efforts are needed. 1) Liberation processes - not limited to mechanical comminution - must be more fully studied.The industry certainly needs a better handle on value returned (improved ability to beneficiate) for dollars spent on improved liberation. 2) Flotation processes probably hold the most promise for near- term improvement in fine coal beneficiation technology. Dr. Aplan’s.

Jan 1, 1979

By Kenneth K. Humphreys, R. M. Quinlan, Stan Venkatesan

INTRODUCTION 1 * The coal industry in the United States has undergone significant economic changes in recent years. For example, the price of coal remained relatively constant from 1950 to 1969 (see Figs. 5-1 and 5-2) but steam coal prices tripled and metallurgical coal prices doubled from 1969 to 1974. This price structure has created a new economic environment for coal preparation. Contributing factors to these price trends include: 1) Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. 2) Mid-East oil embargo of 1973.

Jan 1, 1979

Mr. Raden has described the practical problems associated with fines in phosphate rock beneficiation. In this discussion, a colloid chemical viewpoint is given to the problem of separating phosphate values from phosphatic clay slurries. The phosphatic clays are predominantly colloids of a complex mixture of many minerals (1). The constituents are typically 25% apatite, 40-50% clays, and various amounts of wavellite, quartz, dolomite, fluorite, and other minerals. The clays are montmorillonite, attapulgite, and illite, with some kaolinite. The various mineral colloids in the slurry are heterogeneously coagulated in the as-produced state. Dispersion of the coagulated state is evident from the fact that dispersing agents (certain polyelectrolytes) cause a large reduction in the viscosity of the slurry (2). The as-produced slurry settles from 4 to 8% solids within a week, but thereafter settles much more slowly in the form of a sediment of flocs. The supernatant liquid is often clear because of the cooperative action of the mutual interaction of particles during settling. Mineral segregation during settling has not been observed for the same reason. The initial slow settling rates indicate that the coagulated assemblies are very small. Efforts to separate apatite from the other minerals would be complicated by the heterogeneous coagulation state. Somehow the apatite must be "liberated" from its association with the other minerals before it can be physically separated. One approach for liberating apatite is to disperse the entire suspension. While this is feasible technically, for example by using certain polyelectrolytes (2), the reagent costs based on present

Jan 1, 1979

By R. F. Janke, J. F. Bossler

Introduction The commercial use of ion exchange resins to recover uranium evolved in the decade following 1950 when significant efforts were made to recover this vital element economically and efficiently from low grade ores. It was discovered that in both acid and alkaline systems, uranium exists as an anionic complex. This led to the application of anion exchange resins to concentrate and purify the uranium product. While this is the simplest statement of what an ion exchange resin does in the recovery of uranium, it should not be forgotten that the industry is continuing to evolve new methods in mining and processing which affect ion exchange operation. The inception of solution mining, the use of expanded bed ion exchange columns and the development of continuous ion exchange systems represent several examples of this continuing evolution in the industry. Throughout all of the changes in equipment designs and variations in solution compositions, the purpose of the ion exchange resin remains the same - to concentrate and purify uranium. Ion Exchange Resins When evaluating ion exchange resins for a uranium recovery project, the task that faces the chemist or process metallurgist is an assessment of the efficiency and, therefore, the economics of the various candidate resins for a given project. This assessment should include consideration of both physical factors such as particle size, density, hydraulic expansion and pressure drop as well as chemical factors such as the uranium loading and elution characteristics. For any given application, the differences in the physical and chemical behavior of ion exchange resins are a function of the conditions used to manufacture those resins. Therefore, an understanding of the way in which manufacturing variables affect resin behavior is important. Since most uranium recovery projects are concerned with recovery of the anionic complexes of uranium using anion exchange resins, this discussion will be restricted solely to the family of anion resins. The majority of the ion exchange resins used in commercial recovery operations look similar to the resins shown in Figure #1. [ ] Most of these materials are based on a styrene- divinylbenzene copolymer. The liquid monomers, styrene and divinylbenzene, are charged to a co-polymer reactor containing water. The water insoluble monomers are then mixed with the water to suspend oil-like droplets of the monomer mixture in. the water. The entire reaction mixture is then heated causing the monomers to polymerize into sol id thermoset plastic spheres. The spherical nature of the particle, the particle size distribution and the primary crosslinking level are fixed in this step in the production process. Figure 2 is a simplified illustration of this step of the process. [ ]

Jan 1, 1979

By Robert F. Winkle

A detailed breakdown of mining costs, available to management on monthly and year-to-date bases, is mandatory for a controlled and efficient mining operation. A simple lump sum reporting of costs may indicate a profit or loss differential, but it does not allow an effective search for areas of possible cost reduction. Moreover, functional reporting is necessary on a timely basis so as to note trends of increasing costs In specific areas, which in turn allow possible preventive action by management. Definitive cost information helps to eliminate the tendency to overlook areas where cost Improvements can be made. A good cost control system points out salient operational weaknesses by: ( 1 ) allowing comparison of functional costs with similar costs of other mines and (2) pinpointing sudden increases over unit empirical costs within the organization. In general, the cost accounting structure is relatively uniform within large open pit mines, but surprisingly some systems will overlook the need for detailed breakout in comparatively high cost areas. In some other systems, unrelated costs will be lumped together, preventing careful analysis of cost accrual.

Jan 1, 1979

By M. F. Werneke, J. A. Jones

The use of a unique class of sulfhydryl collectors, the monoalkyldithiocarbamate salts (RNHCS2M) as direct collectors for malchite and azurite is presented. Microflotation and laboratory scale flotation tests were performed to define the collector properties of these reagents under a variety of flotation conditions. On the basis of the results, it is proposed that some property of the amine-hydrogen atom in the reagent has a signification influence on the unusual activity of these collectors for oxide copper minerals.

Jan 1, 1979

By J. Wright, R. J. Tyler

Changes in the pore structure of hematite pellets during reduction to iron were investigated under a variety of experimental conditions. Pore structures were determined by a mercury penetration technique. The reduction temperature was found to be the major influence on structure, the pore system being bimodal below 7.50°C and unimodal above 900°C. Pore sizes ranging front 0.04 to 20 m were observed in complete metabolized pellets produced over the temperature range 650 - 1050°C. Gas composition and reduction rates also influenced the pore structure of the metabolized pellets, although to a lesser extent than the reduction temperature. An apparent activation energy of 24 kcal/mole was derived for the pore formation process.

Jan 1, 1979

By Joseph W. Leonard

In a recent publication in the SME Transactions of September, 1975, Volume 258, entitled “Potential for Further Lowering Sulfur in Intensively Cleaned Coal at Mines,” the writer discussed: (1) technical findings useful for the management of reserves to further lower sulfur in intensively cleaned coal and (2) a future coal preparation plant concept for the intensive cleaning of sulfur. The purpose of this technical note is to (1) illustrate the nomographs that can be formed when recovery is phased in with previous work, (2) make note of the powerful potential for predicting future cleaning performance in unmined areas, and (3) discuss resulting mathematical interrelationships.

Jan 1, 1979

By Wm. R. Dotson

Forty years ago the atom was split and the Age of Fission dawned. Uranium was the element used in this earth-shaking accomplishment. Thitherto almost unknown to the man in the street, uranium soon became widely and persistently sought. And the quest for this unique material is not likely to diminish during this century. To find is one thing; to own is another. Who owns uranium in the ground? Where no mineral rights in the land have been severed by devise, grant, reservation or lease, the uranium belongs to the fee simple owner of the land. But where there has been a conveyance or reservation of all or part of the "minerals", determining WHAT a substance is has been the traditional way of determining WHO owns it. What, then, is this element called uranium? The 1907 edition of Watts Dictionary of Chemistry calls it "a lustrous, hard, silver-white metal". Of nature's three prime divisions it falls within the embrace of the mineral kingdom - substances neither animal nor vegetable. In its natural state uranium always is combined with other elements or substances in the form of an ore mineral. May we, then, put to rest any doubt or question as to the nature of uranium and classify it for all purposes, including that of ownership, as mineral? Not quite! That self-same logic would find oil and gas primly ensconced in the animal or vegetable kingdom. Technically, oil and gas are not minerals but legally they have been classified as such. Why? The Supreme Court of Tennessee sought the answer in 1897 in the case of Murray v. Allard, 43 S.W. 355. After citing authorities pro and con, and while admitting their origin to be "decomposition of marine or vegetable organises" that court firmly concluded that since they were obtained by a form of mining, oil and gas were minerals. From the above example two elementary truths emerge. First, for purposes of ownership, uranium is and will be whatever the courts say it is. Secondly, the courts historically and currently favor a practical rather than technical test to determine the "mineral" character of a substance. So now we turn to the jurisprudence for enlightenment and definition. EARLY CASES ALLOT URANIUM TO MINERAL OWNERS Two early cases involving the ownership of uranium followed what had been well-settled mineral within the meaning of the conveyances involved, confirming ownership in the mineral owners. In 1956 the U. S. District Court for New Mexico in the case of New Mexico and Arizona Land Company v. Elkins, 137 F. Supp. 767, appeal dism'd 239 F.2d 645 (10th Cir. 1956), found that a 1946 deed reservation of "all oil, gas and minerals underlying or appurtenant to said lands" included uranium and thorium. The court reasoned that uranium and thorium, being minerals within the scientific, geological and practical meaning of the term, would certainly constitute minerals within the purview of the reservation. While agreeing that uranium and thorium were "minerals", defendants argued that at the tine of execution of the conveyance it could not have been the intention of the parties to reserve them because they had no commercial value in the locality and were, in fact, not known to there exist until their later discovery in 1950. The court re¬jected, as a matter of law, this "lack of knowledge" theory citing the Supreme Court of Kentucky holding in Maynard v. McHenry, 113 S.W. 2d 13, that: "The mere fact that a particular mineral has not been discovered in the vicinity of the land conveyed or is unknown at the time the deed is executed rules of construction and held that uranium was a does not alter the rule . . ." that a grant or exception of "mineral" in a deed includes all mineral substances which can be taken from the land unless restrictive language is used indicating that the parties contemplated something less general than all substances legally cognizable as minerals. Further, argued the defendants, the only feasible mining procedure for such substances was open pit or strip mining, which would destroy the value of the land for grazing or agriculture. Finding that the language of the reservation was clear and unambiguous, the court would not permit the admission of extrinsic evidence as to mining procedures required. Elkins is the first uranium case construing the granting clause involved. In 1958 the Texas Court of Civil Appeals at San Antonio, in Cain v. Neuman, 316 S.W. 2d 915, no writ, held that a 1918 lease conveying "all of the oil, gas, coal and other minerals in and under" the land involved covered uranium. The lease provided a royalty of 1/10th on "other minerals." "We find no Texas precedent which discusses uranium," said the court, "but the usual arguments that uranium is not embraced within a lease are that the ejusden generis rule excludes uranium from the meaning of the lease

Jan 1, 1979

By David R. Maneval, Jack M. Campbell

The regulatory process by which governmental authorities acknowledge and, in turn, permit the location, construction, and operation of large scale energy-related facilities has become extremely detailed in recent years. One example of the detail that is entailed in the regulatory process is the number of permits that must be acquired by operators prior to the construction and operation of energy-related facilities. It has been estimated, for example, that 75 permits are required prior to the opening of a new coal mine in Pennsylvania while 50 are required in Kentucky. From the perspective of facility owners and operators the regulatory process often appears overly complex and may be perceived as a constraint to the corporate decision making process. From the perspective of those responsible for administering regulations, the process is perceived as a means by which public desires-pursuant to social objectives such as environmental protection and occupational safety-can be achieved. As a result of conflicting organizational interests, the clash between energy facility owners and operators and their regulators appears to be inevitable. Furthermore, the resolution of this conflict lies in the trade-off between objectives and the costs of regulation. The balance of objectives and costs is a subject of the political process and not a topic of consideration in this paper. This paper is concerned with the actual administration of regulations, that is, the implementation of that which arises from the interplay of organizational interests. The paper assumes that environmental control laws will not likely be repealed, that regulations to implement the intent of these laws are here to stay and thus the paper seeks to assess how regulations are administered at various levels of government pursuant to objectives. The paper hypothesizes that the administration of objectives (or policy) has an impact on decision making which affects energy facility decision making. While recognizing the fact that regulatory policy cannot be totally divorced from administration, this paper proceeds under the assumption that elements of the regulatory process may be examined individually. The subject of this study is limited to the interplay between regulatory agencies and their clientele.

Jan 1, 1979

By Young C. Kim

The use of computer models to design the ultimate open pit limits during feasibility studies as well as during long-range mine planning is becoming an enforced practice in all types of mining, e.g., ferrous, non-ferrous, and coal. As a result, the state of the art in computerized ultimate pit limit design methodologies and associated computing and optimizing techniques has advanced considerably in recent years. Unfortunately, very little has been published to date regarding the preferred ultimate pit limit design philosophy, i.e., optimizing us satisfying, or regarding the modeling approaches being used for different types of orebodies. This paper reviews the current state of the art in various modeling approaches and optimizing techniques that are in use for different types of deposits, through available literatures and personal communications.

Jan 1, 1979

AGGLOMERATION U.S. 4,067,727 - In the sintering of a charge of iron oxide ore, a fuel and a flux on a travelling grate machine, the dust problem is minimized by providing a plurality of cooling zones and by directing heated dust-laden air from a first cooling zone to the sintering zone wherein the dust is filtered from the air by the material being sintered. Air from a further cooling zone can be exhausted directly to the atmosphere. Dust removal in the cooling zone is improved by using a purging zone in which higher pressure air agitates the dust in the sintered material. This patent is a division of U.S. Patent No. 3,973,762, dated Aug. 10, 1976. F. Cappel, assigned to Dravo Corp. Jan. 10, 1978. 6 pp. (75-5). Filed: 4-1-76 (672,748).

Jan 1, 1979

By David C. Yang

INTRODUCTION Over the world, and especially in the United States, there is increasing dependence upon progressively lower grade ore deposits. These lower grade ores are frequently difficult or impossible to process due to complex mineral assemblages being very finely disseminated. Thus, many of the conventional mineral concentration methods are not applicable to these ores. For the last few decades, research in the more exotic mineral processing techniques has been conducted, both in universities and in governmental and industrial laboratories. Since its inception, the Institute of Mineral Research of Michigan Technological University (MTU) has devoted much of its attention to the problems of processing refractory, low grade ores. Recently a new flotation system was developed which shows promise of being applicable to a broad range of ore types. This process has been the subject of two allowed patent applications. This paper describes the details of such a flotation system which is potentially useful for treating ultrafine minerals. Some highlights of the testing program on a variety of iron ores and a group of lithium-bearing ores will be presented. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES Both iron and lithium ore flotation treatments followed the same general procedures, with minor differences in pH and in reagent dosages. The method is rather simple, efficient and economical from the standpoint of recovery and the cost of reagents consumed.

Jan 1, 1979

By A. M. Abouzeid, S. Chander, D. W. Fuerstenau

Today numerous ores contain valuable minerals in finely disseminated form; and although the recovery of these fine mineral particles is generally exceedingly difficult, diminishing raw material resources necessitates the recovery of such mineral values. In many systems, the efficiency of recovering fine particles is still extremely low and often fine particles must be discarded as slimes. However, in recent years, various advances have taken place in the recovery of mineral particles in the very fine size range. In this paper, the background and performance of a number of processes for fine particle processing and separation are reviewed and discussed, particularly from the point of view of how fine particle recovery might be improved.

Jan 1, 1979

By Bruce T. Stanley

A key point in the design and operation of a modern mining operation is the construction of what is called an ore-body model or block model. This model is a representation of reality constructed from predicted information. The blocks involved are merely subsets of the overall model which allows manipulation of the contained information on a local scale. In general, block models enable mine planners to effectively select the most promising means of extracting the ore both physically and economically. The uses of a block model can be quite diversified, but one must realize that a single model that satisfies all curiosities and forms of expertise is difficult to construct.

Jan 1, 1979

By F. F. Peng, A. D. Walters, M. R. Geer, J. W. Leonard

INTRODUCTION Washability characteristics derived from float-and-sink analysis in Chapter 4 demonstrate that coal is intrinsically heterogeneous, and this heterogeneity is also evident in the proximate, ultimate, and size analyses. A range of particles from high to low specific gravity is usually seen in the run-of-mine coal. One objective of coal preparation is to recover the high quality float material (the particles of lower specific gravity) such that the recovered product meets certain quality specifications, as well as to reject or recycle low quality particles of higher specific gravity. The maximum recovery of cleaned coal at the required quality is of major concern to plant operators. However, the quantity and quality of products of coal cleaning, determined in the operation of actual commercial cleaning plants and by theoretical calculation based on run-of-mine washability studies, are known to be different with each coal. Therefore, during the last half century, coal preparation engineers have repeatedly sought methods to predict the technical and economical efficiency of separation of cleaning equipment and systems. Many formulas have been proposed by international investigators to evaluate the efficiency of various coal cleaning operations, primarily based on the yield and/or ash of the various products of coal cleaning. Performance criteria in use today are capable of defining all of the important aspects of a given concentrating operation; however each criterion has certain restrictions or limitations. It is important, therefore, to understand how such formulas can be used and the problems involved in their construction. Technical Measure of Plant Performance Conventional means for evaluating a preparation plant's performance are generally approached through the use of equipment performance mea-

Jan 1, 1979

By R. L. Vaughn, A. G. Moon

In 1972 a major renovation of the flotation and regrinding circuits was completed at Kennecott Copper Corporation's Chino Mines Division concentrator at Hurley, New Mexico. At that time a new lime distribution and control system was placed in operation. Lime is used to depress pyrite, and flotation at a high pH or alkalinity is required for optimum recovery of principal copper minerals, chalcopyrite and chalcocite with good rejection of the pyrite. Regrinding is also required to liberate chalcocite, much of which occurs as intimately associated chalcocite-pyrite middling grains. Accurate control of the lime addition is necessary to obtain both optimum metallurgy and minimum lime usage. At low pH levels, flotation cell control is difficult due to excess froth, but excessively high pH levels can go unnoticed because froth characteristics do not change from those experienced at the desired pH. With manual control of the lime addition, the desired pH can be exceeded for periods of up to two hours. Test Work Plant test work on a lime control system using conventional pH probes gave disappointing results with high electrode maintenance and poor control characteristics. For example, the rougher flotation cells are operated at a pH between 11.4 and 11.6 and the probes required cleaning at least once a day, and occasionally every shift. These high maintenance requirements were considered unreasonable for a plant-wide system using six or more control loops.

Jan 1, 1979

By John J. Borkert, Carl E. Gerity

In situ mining offers a new and proven method of exploiting sedimentary uranium deposits. The feasibility and economic evaluation of exploiting a uranium reserve by either open pit or underground mining should also include a similar study for in situ mining. This report compares the economics of mining several hypothetical uranium deposits at various depths, grades and reserve sizes by open pit and in situ mining. The evaluation process evolved establishing, where possible, common geological and logistical parameters to both methods of mining. The various assumptions that are unique to either open pit or in situ mining were also drafted, where possible, as equal and common functions to be used in each economic evaluation of the reserve models. After the various parameters were defined, they were programmed to an economic analysis of the various hypothetical uranium deposits by the selected mining method. From the vast array of cost evaluations, total capital and operating cost per pound U308 produced, DCF-ROI, and total net profits before State and Federal taxes were selected as the most meaningful results to compare. From the various geologic parameters used, it was determined that the economic viability of a mining venture is most sensitive to a depth-grade thickness ratio. The three selected evaluation products were plotted against the various depth-grade thickness ratios of the hypothetical uranium deposits. The results of the economic cost analyses show in situ mining generally to be a better method to maximize total net profits and to maximize return on investment.

Jan 1, 1979

By Dick Whittington, W. R. Taylor

GENERAL In mid-1974, a representative of ARCO Petroleum Company walked into our Austin offices and asked for a permit for ARCO's first Clay West Mine site. This was the first in situ uranium mining permit issued in the United States. That initial permit, issued in January 1975, was for three acres. The four years since have been characterized by growth and change. Today there are 16 permits approved for approximately 1,540 production acres issued to five companies at eight sites in four counties. There are approximately seven additional permit applications being processed or on the verge of being submitted for an estimated 2,000 additional acres of production. As a rough gauge of the financial scope of this activity, at the typical 40 production wells per acre and an estimated $2,000/well, operators hale installed or committed $122 million for production wells. This does not account for the exploration and development wells installed to delineate the ore or the cost of processing facilities for extracting the uranium. HISTORY OF URANIUM MINING IN TEXAS Information I have concerning early in situ uranium mining activities is "sketchy" but the apparent first on-site test of in situ uranium mining was conducted between 1967 and 1971 at the Dueterstat site, north of Yorktown in Gonzales County, by City Service. Others ran tests at the Bruni site in Webb County and the Burns and Clay West sites in Live Oak County in the mid-70's. During this period, Texas Water Quality Board personnel in the central and district offices maintained a general surveillance of these various test activities. Regulation of in situ uranium mining was formalized with the issuance of a permit in January 1975 with the advent of ARCO's initial production scale (3 acre) effort in the Clay West area at the Moser mine site. Since 1975, the accelerating rate of mining and exploration activity is noticeable. There were 16 exploratory rigs operating early in 1977. This year, the rig count is averaging 46--a 287% increase. HISTORY OF LEGISLATION Paralleling this mining activity was state and federal legislation which subjected in situ mining to environmental regulation. The following is a brief chronology of the legislation that is directly or indirectly related to uranium mining. As most of you know, disposal wells are an integral part of most in situ uranium mines operating in Texas. They are used both during production and during aquifer restoration following production. The wells are regulated by the Texas Injection Well Act, enacted in 1961 by the Texas Legislature. In 1967, the Water Quality Act established the Texas Water Quality Board, and provided for the regulation of water quality by the so-called permit system. In 1969, the Solid Waste Act was enacted by the Texas Legislature. The legislation provides for control of wastes from manufacturing, mining, and agriculture. This Act regulated uranium surface mining activities until 1975 when the Texas Surface and Mining Reclamation Act placed responsibility with the Railroad Commission for uranium open-pit mining and surface mining of coal and lignite. In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Public Law 92-500) was passed. This legislation forms the legal base for the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) and the subsequent point source effluent guidelines and standards. The November 6, 1975 issue of the Federal Register published interim final rules for Best Practical Treatment levels for effluent discharges from ore mining and dressing operations. Litigation was immediately initiated by eleven companies against these proposed rules, and they are currently being reconsidered for reissuance in 1979. In 1974, the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law 93-523) was enacted. A part of this legislation is the Underground Injection Congrol Program. The regulations implementing this program have undergone various public hearings and it is expected that they will be published in the Federal Register before the end of 1978. In 1975, the Texas Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (Senate Bill 55), providing for the Railroad Commission's authority to require reclamation of surface mines, was passed. In 1977, an amendment to Senate Bill 55 was introduced that proposed to place regulation of in situ mining of coal, lignite, and

Jan 1, 1979