About the Journal
Focus and Scope
For publication in the collection of scientific papers "Bulletin of the National University of Water and Environmental Engineering", a series of "Technical Sciences" accepted scientific articles corresponding to the following specialties:
194 - hydraulic constructions, water engineering and water technologies,
192 - construction and civil engineering,
113 - applied mathematics,
184 - mining,
122 - computer science,
141 - electric power industry, electrical engineering and electromechanics,
121 - software engineering,
191 - architecture and urban planning,
133 - industry engineering.
Designed for scientists, engineers, graduate students and students of educational institutions.
Peer Review Process
1. The author submits to the editorial board an article that meets the requirements of the journal's policy and the rules of preparation of articles for publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the accepted requirements are not registered and are not allowed for further consideration, as notified by their authors. The article is registered by the executive secretary in the journal of registration of articles with the indication of date of receipt, name, full name. author / s, places of work of the author / s. The article is assigned an individual registration number.
2. The Executive Secretary conducts a preliminary assessment of the articles received by the editors, the relevance of the content of the profile material and the subject of the journal, sends them for review to members of the editorial board, scientific editors, experts on the issues.
3. All manuscripts submitted to the editorial board are sent according to the profile of the research to one and, if necessary, to two reviewers. Appoints reviewers Editor-in-Chief of the journal. By decision of the Editor-in-Chief of the journal (under certain circumstances) the appointment of reviewers may be entrusted to a member of the editorial board. In some cases, the issue of selecting reviewers is decided at a meeting of the editorial board.
4. For reviewing articles, reviewers can be members of the editorial board of a scientific journal, as well as third-party highly qualified specialists who have deep professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific field, usually doctors of sciences, professors.
5. After receiving the article for consideration (within 4 days), the reviewer evaluates the possibility of reviewing materials, based on the compliance of their own qualifications in the direction of the author's research and the absence of any conflict of interest. If there are any competing interests, the reviewer may refuse to review and notify the editorial board. The latter must decide on the appointment of another reviewer.
6. The reviewer, as a rule, within 14 days makes a conclusion about the possibility of printing the article. Review deadlines may vary from case to case in order to create the conditions for the most objective assessment of the quality of the submitted materials, but should not exceed 1 calendar month.
7. Reviewing is carried out confidentially on the principles of double-blind reviewing (double "blind" reviewing, when neither the author nor the reviewer know about each other). The interaction between the author and the reviewers takes place through the executive secretary of the journal. At the request of the reviewer and in agreement with the working group of the editorial board, the interaction of the author and the reviewer can take place in an open mode (such a decision is made only if open interaction will improve the style and logic of presentation of research material).
8. For all articles submitted for review, the level of uniqueness of the author's text is determined using the appropriate software, which shows the level of uniqueness, source and proportion of text (Unicheque).
9. After the final analysis of the article, the reviewer fills out a standard form (Review Form), which contains the final recommendations. The editors inform the author of the review results by e-mail.
10. If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain adjustments to the article, the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments in the preparation of an updated version of the article or to refute them with arguments. The author adds a letter to the revised article, which contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made in the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer to make a decision and prepare a reasoned opinion on the possibility of publication. The date of acceptance of the article for publication is considered to be the date of receipt by the editorial board of the positive opinion of the reviewer (or the decision of the editorial board) on the expediency and possibility of publishing the article.
11. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editors of the journal. In this case, the article is considered at a meeting of the working group of the editorial board. The editorial board may send the article for additional or new review to another specialist. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject articles in case of inability or unwillingness of the author to take into account the wishes and comments of reviewers. At the request of the reviewer, the editorial board may submit the article to another reviewer with mandatory adherence to the principles of double-blind review.
12. The final decision on the possibility and expediency of publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief (or, on his behalf - a member of the editorial board), and if necessary - a meeting of the editorial board as a whole. After deciding on the admission of the article to publication, the executive secretary notifies the author and indicates the expected date of publication.
13. In case of receiving a positive decision on the possibility of publication, the article is sent to the editorial portfolio of the journal for publication in the order of priority and relevance.
14. The final decision on the composition of printed articles is recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the Academic Council of NUVGP, which is marked on the second page of the cover of the journal.
15. The article approved for publication is submitted to the technical editor. Minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article are made by the technical editor without the consent of the author. If necessary or at the request of the author, manuscripts in the form of a layout of the article are returned to the author for approval.
16. Responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article rests with the author of the article. The author and the reviewer are responsible for the accuracy of the given facts and data, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations and the scientific and practical level of the article.
Open Access Policy
This journal pursues a policy of immediate open access to published content, supporting the principles of free dissemination of scientific information and global exchange of knowledge for the general social progress.
