1. All scientific articles, entering the staff, have to take up the most topical issues of technique and technology of conducting mining and surveying works, scientific achievements and practice of increase of efficiency of these works, applied scientific researches, introductions of new development in mining, construction and other areas, questions of safety and ecology at the production of mining works corresponding to subject of the magazine.
  2. The manuscript of the article must be executed in accordance with the set rules that is published in a magazine.
  3. The author can present together with article the review executed by the member of staff of the magazine supervising this subject or expert - scientist and expert in this area (by a doctor, candidate of sciences).
  4. Correctness of registration of articles and their quality are estimated by the editor-in-chief. The decision on the direction of article on the review is also made by the editor-in-chief.
  5. Reviewing of scientific articles for the purpose of their expert assessment is carried out by members of expert advice in which all associate editors are included. All reviewers are confessed specialists in subject of the reviewed materials and have during the last 3 years of publication on subject of the reviewed article.
  6. Reviewing carries the closed character. The review is provided to the author of article on his writing query without a signature and pointing of surname, position, job of reviewer.
  7. In a review the following questions are taken up:

a) accordance of the contents of article to the subject declared in the name;

b) accordance of article to modern achievements of science and practice;

c) estimation of readiness of the manuscript to edition concerning language and style, accordance to the set requirements for registration of materials of the manuscript;

d) expediency of publication of article taking into account the literature before produced on this matter;

e) admission of volume of manuscript on the whole and its separate elements (text, tables, illustrative material, bibliographic links), expediency of placing in the article of tables, illustrative material and their accordance to the stated subject, and also the inaccuracies and mistakes made by author.

  1. A reviewer must give recommendations to the author and staff on improvement of manuscript. Remarks and wishes of reviewer must be objective and fundamental, directed on increase of scientific and methodical levels of manuscript.
  2. The final part of the review must contain valid conclusions about the manuscript in whole and clear recommendation about expedience of its publication in the magazine: recommended, recommended taking into account correction of the defects marked a reviewer or not recommended the article to the publication in a magazine entering the List of HCC.
  3. In case of a negative assessment of the manuscript in the whole a reviewer has to prove the conclusions especially convincingly.
  4. Edition sends to authors of the presented materials the copy of reviews or motivated refusal, and also obligated to direct the copies of reviews in Department of Education and Science of the Russian Federation at entering release of corresponding query.

Articles needing completion sent to the author together with the review and remarks of editor. On his query the motivated refuse (correspondence with authors of articles, except exceptional cases, edition conducts by e-mail) is sent the author of the article not accepted to the publication.

  1. The decision on expediency of publication after reviewing is made by the editor-in-chief (deputy chief editor), and if necessary – an editorial board in general
  2. Not allowed to publication: 

– articles which authors refuse to eliminate the allowed defects in registration of articles;

– articles which authors don't react to constructive remarks of the reviewer.

  1. Not reviewed:

– articles of members of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Academy of mountain sciences, if member of academy only or the first of authors of the publication;

– articles recommended to the publication by mountain forums: the scientific reports heard at conventions, congresses, conferences etc., and also the resolutions (decision) of forums recommended to the publication and issued in the form of articles;

– informative, information and advertizing, imaginary articles, reports and announcements.

  1. Reviews are stored in edition and staff of the magazine during 5 years.