The following conclusions were drawn from the study: (1) The US will continue to require new sources of energy fuels and substitutes for petrochemical feedstocks into the foreseeable future. Most of this requirement will be met using coal. However, the cost of mining, transporting, cleaning, and preparing coal, disposing of ash or slag and scrubbing stack gases continues to rise; particularly, in the Eastern US where the need is greatest. UCG avoids these pitfalls and, as such, should be considered a viable alternative to the mining of deeper coals. (2) Of the two possible product gases LBG and MBG, MBG is the most versatile. (3) The most logical use for UCG product in the Eastern US is to generate power on-site using a combined-cycle or co-generation system. Either low or medium Btu gas (LBG or MBG) can be used. (4) UCG should be an option whenever surface gasification is considered; particularly, in areas where deeper, higher sulfur coal is located. (5) There are environmental and social benefits to use of UCG over surface gasification in the Eastern US. (6) A site could be chosen almost anywhere in the Illinois and Ohio area where amenable UCG coal has been determined due to the existence of existing transportation or transmission systems. (7) The technology needs to be demonstrated and the potential economic viability determined at a site in the East-North-Central US which has commercial quantities of amenable bituminous coal before utilities will show significant interest.