State expertise of mineral reserves: what it is and why

State expertise of mineral reserves - is not a formal «report verification», but a government peer review procedure that answers a key project management question: whether the submitted reserve estimate can be relied upon as a reliable basis for decision-making. A positive opinion records the conclusions about the reliability of the estimate and serves as a basis for state accounting and subsequent decisions on site development. The practical value of the expert review is in reducing project risks: the earlier methodological inconsistencies and gaps in the evidence base are identified, the lower the cost of corrections - in terms of timing, reworking of materials, disputes over source data and project manageability.

What is state expertise of reserves

In accordance with current regulations, an expert review is a review of documents and materials related to the estimation of reserves and related matters, such as feasibility studies, operational changes in the status of reserves, reassessments and write-offs. The focus is to verify that estimates of the quantity and quality of reserves, the extent to which the property is ready for development and its industrial significance are based on reliable source information, consistent methodology and reasonable conclusions.

It is important to distinguish between appraisal and exploration. Exploration generates the data and its interpretations; appraisal assesses whether these interpretations and calculations constitute a evidence base, In short, an expert review does not «create» reserves, but confirms the validity of their calculation. In short: the expertise does not "create" reserves, but confirms the validity of their calculation.

In the context of a field's life cycle, due diligence is associated with transitions between stages: from geological exploration to development, from initial calculation to design decisions, from a stable model to refinements and reassessments. Therefore, industry analytics emphasize the need for an integrated approach: inspections at each stage should be coordinated and work as a single quality assurance mechanism, rather than as a set of disparate formalities.

What is checked: Evidence and reproducibility of calculations

Substantive comments generally boil down to two criteria: evidentiary value и reproducibility.

Evidence involves the source and justification for each relevant parameter, from sampling design and laboratory data quality to the choice of estimation blocks, calculation methodology, modeling parameters and assumptions made. For solid minerals, this is particularly evident in the requirements for the quality of sampling and assays, justification of ore body boundaries, consideration of variability in composition and technological properties, and correct identification of raw material types and grades.

Reproducibility means the ability of an independent expert to repeat the calculations and obtain comparable results. Here failures arise not in mathematics, but in the organization of evidence: diversity of source data, discrepancies in tables and graphics, lack of traceability from primary materials to final indicators, unverifiable files. That is why the rules and recommendations of Rosnedra/FBU «GKZ» separately emphasize the requirements for the format of the electronic set and identification of sources, including register numbers of documents in FGIS «EFGI».

For self-checking before submission, apply a simple criterion: whether a specialist who was not involved in the work can open the set, trace the sources of key values and reproduce the calculation blocks without additional explanations. If not, the likelihood of comments increases dramatically - even with high quality geologic data.

Legal basis and participants in the process

The legal basis for the expertise is set forth in the Law of the Russian Federation «On Subsoil» and the Rules approved by Resolution No. 335 of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 01.03.2023 (effective from 01.09.2023; the previous Resolution No. 69 is no longer in force). These regulations define the objectives of the expertise (rational use of subsurface resources, determination of payments, establishment of site boundaries, maintenance of the state balance and cadastres), its subject matter and the general procedure for conducting it.

From the point of view of the participants in the process, it is reasonable to distinguish three levels of responsibility:

• Rosnedra - provision of the state service and approval of the results in accordance with the established procedure;
• authorized agency (FBU «GKZ») and expert commission - review of materials and preparation of a conclusion;
• applicant - Ensuring the quality of evidence, completeness, compliance with filing and formatting requirements, and payment for the procedure.

Two aspects that are often underestimated in practice:

• filing and registration are generally done electronically (via the subsoil user's personal cabinet or the USGU), so the technical correctness of the set becomes part of the quality of the submission;
• register numbers of documents in FGIS «EFGI» are indicated in the materials» - is the discipline of source tractability, without which peer review risks becoming a dispute over versions of data.

Sources for verifying up-to-date information:

• Rosnedra: description of the state service
• FBU «GKZ»: documents and requirements
• Official portal of legal information
• EPGU (State Services)

Outcome of the expert examination: what the report records

The results of the expert review are formalized in the form of an opinion, which records the expert conclusions on key aspects and serves as the basis for state registration and subsequent decisions on the site. This is not a «certificate of quality» but an official document that sets out what is recognized as justified and what limitations or comments need to be taken into account.

In terms of content, the opinion covers, inter alia:

• reliability and correctness of estimation of quantity and quality of reserves, the degree of preparation for commercial development and industrial significance;
• reasonableness of condition limits (geological, technological and economic);
• the reasonableness of reassessment of reserves based on the results of additional work or development, as well as in case of changes in market conditions;
• the reasonableness of the state balance sheet, write-offs and operational changes in the inventory records;
• for special cases - conclusions on the possibility of using subsoil areas for underground structures not related to mining, and other subjects of expertise.

A positive opinion reduces the uncertainty of the inputs and increases the manageability of the project: it provides a formal document that can be relied upon for design, schedule planning, financing, and dealing with regulators. The observations and limitations in the report are not formal claims, but a list of risks that need to be closed to avoid problems at later and more costly stages.

State Balance of Reserves: Status and Implications

State balance of reserves - a system of accounting of the state of the mineral resource base intended for managing the subsoil fund, planning the reproduction of the raw material base and controlling the rational use of resources.

According to the current rules, the expert opinion serves as a basis for putting the reserves on the state balance sheet and writing them off. In practice, this implies:

• regulatory aspect - Formation of the official volume and structure of reserves for further utilization;
• project aspect - consolidation of the basic model and parameters determining technical and economic solutions;
• management aspect - Increased accountability for data quality and the need to justify subsequent changes.

If public accounting and public reporting according to international standards (CRIRSCO/JORC) are required in parallel, these processes should be distinguished by purpose and responsibility. A detailed analysis of the relationship without substitution of concepts is given in the material «The NAEN and OERN Code: CRIRSCO, JORC and Public Reporting».

When expertise is required at different stages of a project

The expertise is not randomly selected, but is conducted at key points in the life cycle of a field, where data move from internal assessment to the basis for official decisions. In general terms, four typical situations stand out:

The rules allow for expert review at the stage of geological exploration, provided that the materials allow for an objective assessment of the quantity and quality of reserves, as well as extraction conditions. In addition, the rules explicitly state that minerals and groundwater may be extracted only after an expert review of reserves, except in specified cases (including certain groundwater extraction regimes and work on hard-to-recover minerals as part of technology development).

For a detailed look at the operational level (milestones, timelines, suspension) read the article «Procedure for the State Expert Review of Reserves: Stages and Timeframes».

FAQ

1) Can the state expert examination of reserves be considered a formal procedure?
No. While formal requirements are important, the focus is on the evidentiality and reproducibility of the reserve estimate. Therefore, even a lengthy report does not guarantee the absence of comments in the presence of inconsistencies or unverifiable elements.

2) What is more likely to elicit substantive rather than design comments?
Discontinuities in the traceability of the data, inconsistencies in the geologic model and estimation, conflicting assumptions in the sections, unverifiable calculation blocks, poor justification of parameters affecting conditionality and industrial significance.

3) Why is a favorable opinion so important for public recordkeeping?
The opinion records official conclusions on the reliability of the reserve estimate and the validity of its staging or changes in the state balance sheet, making the results applicable in subsequent regulatory and project procedures.

4) Where do I start preparing if the goal is to pass with a minimum of rework?
From ensuring the discipline of evidence and verifiability of the electronic kit: agree versions of the raw data, ensure tractability, check editable tables and correct files. Then follow the materials in the series: «Documents.» и «Formats.».