American Nuclear Society

Home / Publications / Journals / Nuclear Technology / Information for Reviewers

Information for Reviewers

Reviewer Login

Please click the "Login" button from the menu provided at and log in to the system as "Reviewer."  You may then view and/or download manuscripts assigned to you for review or submit your comments to the editor.

Updating Your Information with Editorial Manager

If you receive a request to review but have not registered with Editorial Manager, it means that either the journal's Editor or the journal office registered you into the system as a potential reviewer.  Your username and password were provided in the original registration letter and can also be requested through a link on  Your username and password is confidential to you, therefore you need to store this carefully.

When you log into the system for the first time, please go to "Update my Information" in the navigation bar at the top of the page.  There you can change your username and password, verify that the information provided is correct, add more pertinent contact details, and add your personal classifications.

General Peer Review Information

Generally, manuscripts are sent to 2-3 referees.  The identity of referees is strictly confidential and you are requested to not communicate directly with the authors.  You are also asked to not disclose your identity to the authors or discuss the papers you have reviewed with colleagues unless the paper has been published.

The Editor of the journal will invite you to serve as a reviewer of a manuscript.  If invited, you will receive an e-mail invitation.  You then must log on to the site at using your username and password or hotlinks provided in the e-mail.  After reviewing the abstract or previewing the manuscript, you can then agree or decline to review the manuscript.  If you agree, you are requested to submit your review comments no later than three weeks after you receive the manuscript.  You may also decline to review the manuscript if you have a conflict of interest, if it is outside your scope of expertise, or if you are unable to complete the review during the time requested.

Performing the Manuscript Review

When reviewing the submitted contribution, please consider the following list of questions, at least partially, in your review.

  1. Is this an original contribution? Is new and important information presented?
  2. Are the title and, particularly, the abstract consistent with the text?
  3. Is the manuscript correct and complete?
  4. Is the subject presented clearly? Are the conclusions clear and consistent with the work done?
  5. Does it give adequate credit to earlier work in the field? If no, please identify omitted work, if possible, by indicating specific references.
  6. Your recommendation:
    1. Publication as is
    2. Publication after minor revision following comments provided
    3. Publication after major revision following comments provided
    4. Rejection
  7. Should it be published as:
    1. technical paper, or
    2. technical note?

If revision or rejection is indicated, please give detailed, specific, and substantive comments.

In a technical note authors may present preliminary results of work in progress or extension/refinement of results already published; work on subjects of limited interest to NT readers may also appear as a technical note.  A note may also summarize information presented fully elsewhere, e.g., a lab report or the proceeding of a meeting.

A reviewer is not expected to include a manuscript in the review.  However, in addition to your review, we would appreciate information on any errors that you may note, or minor changes in wording you may wish to suggest.  We would appreciate it if you would indicate such errors or suggested changes on the manuscript, and upload it along with your review or fax a copy to 708-579-8313.

Please remember that THE COPY EDITORS WILL NOT CORRECT UNITS.  All American Nuclear Society publications require the use of SI units; if the author(s) used non-SI or mixed units please state this in your review.

Thank you for acting as a referee for our journal and the communities that Nuclear Technology serves.  We rely on the expertise of our reviewers and their reports to maintain the quality of the journal.

To get detailed instructions for reviewing papers on the NT review site, please view the Tutorial for Reviewers.

Last updated October 21, 2015, 1:07pm CDT.

Questions or comments about the site? Contact the ANS Webmaster.