Skip to content 
Procedure for state expertise of reserves is set by the rules, but the practical result is almost always determined by the quality of the set of materials and the discipline of work through electronic services. Inconsistencies in the composition of documents, variation of source data or technical defects in files lead to clarifications, revisions and re-uploads - in other words, time wasted where the project had hoped for a “linear” schedule.
Below is a working flowchart of the process: from application to conclusion, with a guide to deadlines, grounds for suspension and management recommendations to keep the procedure under control within the company.
- General outline of the process: from the set of materials to the conclusion
- Filing and registration: what counts as a correct filing
- Review of materials: how the inspection is conducted
- Suspension: reasons and correct finalization
- Final conclusion and further actions of the applicant
- How to manage the process internally: calendar and roles
- FAQ
General outline of the process: from the set of materials to the conclusion
The procedure is organized as a sequence of control stages, which check: (1) correctness of submission, (2) completeness and possibility of expert analysis, (3) reproducibility of calculations, (4) legal fixation of the result. The substantive examination starts only after it is confirmed: the kit allows for analysis without a «version dispute» and without technical limitations.
The process conventionally involves six steps:
- Kit preparation (including electronic files and signatures).
- Submitting an application through an electronic service (personal cabinet of a subsoil user or USGU).
- Compliance check composition and design requirements (including suitability of materials for analysis).
- Formation of the expert commission and triggering the due diligence period.
- Expert review and preparation of a draft opinion.
- Formalizing the result (conclusion and further action on public records).
Timeline
| Parameter | Deadline | What's important to consider |
|---|---|---|
| Registration of the application | Automatically | Via USGU/personal office, without a separate application file |
| Term of examination (general case) | Up to 45 working days | From the date of establishment of the expert commission |
| Groundwater (individual cases) | 15 / 25 / 35 working days | Depending on the subject and object category |
| Maximum period of public service without suspensions | Up to 74 working days | If the examination has not been suspended |
| Suspension due to incomplete materials | Up to 30 working days | To submit clarifying/requested materials |
| Suspension under a separate scenario for UHS | Up to 45 working days | In case of deviation of inventory volume ≤ 20% from the declared volume |
| Increase in total time for finalization | +15 working days | When the applicant submits finalized materials |
| Stage | What's going on | What is important to the applicant |
|---|---|---|
| Feeding | The application is submitted electronically; registration is automatic. | Verify signatory credentials, file readiness, and kit structure. |
| Compliance check | The documents and materials are checked for compliance with the requirements and the possibility of starting the analysis. | This is where returns/clarifications are most likely to occur due to formal and technical discrepancies. |
| Establishment of a commission | An expert commission shall be formed from out-of-state experts and employees of the authorized institution. | From the date of establishment of the commission, the period of the examination begins to run. |
| Expertise | Analyze the evidence base, methodologies, calculations, and consistency of materials. | Need a willingness to confirm data sources promptly and respond substantively. |
| Suspension (if necessary) | Clarifying documents or finalizing materials are requested. | The deadline shall be suspended until submissions are made within the prescribed period. |
| Result | The conclusion is issued and further actions in the state registration circuit are initiated. | It is important to interpret the findings and constraints correctly and build them into design decisions. |
Use official sources to verify up-to-date requirements:
- Rosnedra (official website)
- GKZ FBU: regulatory documents
- Official Internet portal of legal information
- EPGU (State Services)
Regulatory documents and files that you have already downloaded on the site are collected in the the navigational material of the series.
Filing and registration: what counts as a correct filing
The application for expert review is filled out electronically via the USGU or the subsoil user's personal cabinet; as a rule, the application is not attached as a separate file. Correctness of filling in the fields and attaching materials is part of a legally significant submission.
Criteria for Correct Submission:
- One set of materials in the established structure depending on the type of expertise and object.
- Files suitable for analysis: open without errors, readable, not corrupted, not password protected.
- Editable key elements: tables and calculations - in editable formats (with duplication if required by regulations).
- Electronic signatures where applicable, and confirmed powers of the signatory.
- Traceability of data sources: indication of register numbers of documents in FGIS EFGI and consistency of references to sources.
Detailed control of material composition - in the article «Documents for the State Expert Review of Reserves: Composition and Requirements». Requirements for electronic files and frequent technical reasons for returns are discussed in the material «File formats for state stockpile evaluation: requirements and errors».
Review of materials: how the inspection is conducted
After confirmation of compliance of the set, an expert commission shall be formed, including freelance experts and employees of the authorized institution. To ensure the independence of the analysis, the share of full-time employees in the commission shall be limited.
From the date of establishment of the commission, the term of the expert review begins: in general, - maximum 45 working days. Shortened terms (15, 25 or 35 working days - depending on the subject and category of the object) are established for groundwater expertise. The maximum term of providing the state service in the absence of suspensions is as follows 74 working days.
The peer review focuses on three tasks:
- Verifiability of initial data (sufficiency, quality, consistency).
- Reproducibility of calculations (possibility of independent repetition of key counting steps).
- Consistency of findings (reasonableness of conditions, ratios, limitations and assumptions - within the scope of the subject matter of the examination).
For the applicant, this means the need to promptly justify the decisions made - from the selection of parameters to the formation of the final tables of reserves. If the chain of evidence is incomplete, the procedure almost inevitably goes into a rework mode.
Suspension: reasons and correct finalization
Suspension is a statutory mechanism whereby the examination period is suspended until identified deficiencies are corrected. It is usually not related to the “quality of the geology in general” but to the inability to analyze the submitted set or the need for clarification on individual scenarios.
Basic Grounds for Suspension:
- Incompleteness of materialsIf the documents and materials do not allow for analysis, a notification of clarification is sent; the deadline for submission is 30 working days.
- Special case for hydrocarbon feedstock: in case of deviation of stock volume by no more than 20% from the declared one, a notification on the need for finalization is sent; the deadline for submission of finalized materials is - 45 working days.
Notifications are sent through the submission channel (subsoil user's personal cabinet or EPUG). Notification monitoring is a critical management function: missing a message almost always turns into a calendar loss.
Recommendations for refinements that reduce the risk of re-suspension:
- Clearly define the outline of the remarks: what is missing or what exactly prevents analysis (file, version, contradiction, unverifiability).
- Address the cause, not the effect.: an explanatory note without restoring tractability and consistency usually does not solve the problem.
- Maintain version discipline: update the model - synchronize tables, graphics and text, otherwise you will get a secondary inconsistency notice.
- Do a technical check before reloading: openability, editable, no damage, correctness of signatures and archives.
Final conclusion and further actions of the applicant
The outcome of the procedure is the conclusion of the state expert review. From a management point of view, this is the moment when technical calculations become regulatory-relevant data applicable for state registration and subsequent decisions on the site.
After receiving the opinion, the applicant generally has three tasks to accomplish:
- Correctly interpret the findings: what is recognized as reasonable, what limitations are imposed, what needs to be taken into account in the following stages.
- Ensure consistency of subsequent documents with approved parameters (design, condition feasibility studies, reporting, etc.).
- Prepare the next step on the project: additional exploration, recalculation, operational changes in reserves, agreement of individual decisions (if applicable).
Exactly what the opinion captures and how it relates to the state balance of reserves is detailed in the base article of the series: «State Expert Review of Mineral Reserves: Purpose and Result».
How to manage the process internally: calendar and roles
Without a designated person in charge, the procedure quickly turns into uncoordinated correspondence between departments and loss of control over deadlines. The optimal model is to allocate a process owner and divide roles by function.
Recommended role structure (minimum composition):
- Process owner - calendar, communications, notification monitoring, final kit.
- Chief Geologist / Resource Manager - consistency of model and counting, substantive answers.
- Modeling / GIS / databases - version control of sources and reproducibility of calculations.
- Lawyers / licensing - grounds, credentials, correctness of site information.
- Finance - timely and correct payment (when required), control of payment destination.
- Document management / IT - electronic signatures, archives, technical suitability of files.
It is better to build the calendar in a countdown fashion from the target date of the opinion, pledging:
- internal pre-examination and consistency checks of the kit;
- buffer for possible suspension (30 or 45 working days - by scenario);
- An additional 15 working days if finalized materials are submitted.
| Reference point | What to check | Typical risks |
|---|---|---|
| Before serving | Single set, data versions, tables and graphics, captions, archives | Section inconsistencies, unopened files, version discrepancies |
| After filing | Monitoring of notifications in the personal account/EPGU, control of deadlines | Missed notification and loss of control over the calendar |
| When commenting | List of reasons, improvement plan, testing the impact of changes | Fixed one thing, violated another; repeated comments on traceability |
| Before reloading | Technical verification: discoverability, editable, signatures, archives | Return for technical reasons with corrected content |
The issues of payment and payment processing are presented in a separate material: «Fee for state expertise of reserves: calculation and payment procedure».
FAQ
1) From what date is the examination period calculated: from the date of filing or from the establishment of the commission?
The key term of the expert review is calculated from the date of establishment of the expert commission. The total term of the public service includes preparatory and final stages before and after the expert review.
2) How is a suspension different from a denial (return) at the filing stage?
Suspension means that the examination temporarily does not continue until the submission of clarifying or finalized materials within the established deadlines. Refusal/rejection at the submission stage is related to violation of the requirements to composition and design or impossibility to accept the set for consideration.
3) What suspension periods are most commonly applied?
Two typical scenarios: up to 30 working days for submission of clarifying materials in case of incomplete set and up to 45 working days for finalization under a separate scenario for hydrocarbons. When submitting finalized materials, the total period is increased by 15 working days.
4) How do you minimize the risk of suspension?
Ensure verifiability of materials: single version of data, traceability, reproducibility of calculations and technical correctness of the electronic set. Start with articles «Documents.» и «Formats.».