Editorial Workflow Policy

NextGen Chemical Engineering Journal (NGCEJ) follows a structured and transparent editorial workflow to ensure fairness, quality, and integrity in the publication process. The journal applies a systematic peer review process in accordance with internationally recognized scholarly publishing practices.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s official submission system.

Upon submission, authors must ensure:

• The manuscript follows Author Guidelines.

• All required documents are provided.

• Ethical declarations and conflict of interest statements are included.

• A confirmation email is sent upon successful submission.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

The Editor or Editorial Office conducts a preliminary review to assess:

• Relevance to journal scope

• Compliance with formatting guidelines

• Ethical compliance

• Completeness of submission documents

• Plagiarism screening

• Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be:

• Returned for technical correction, or

• Rejected without external review (desk rejection).

3. Assignment to Handling Editor

If the manuscript passes initial screening:

• It is assigned to a Handling Editor or Section Editor.

• The editor evaluates scientific quality and suitability.

• Qualified independent reviewers are selected.

4. Peer Review Process

NGCEJ follows a Double-Blind Peer Review system:

Author identities are concealed from reviewers.

Reviewer identities are concealed from authors.

Reviewer Evaluation

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent experts.

Reviewers evaluate:

Originality and novelty

Scientific rigor and methodology

Relevance to chemical engineering

Quality of data and analysis

Clarity of presentation

Reviewers submit recommendations:

Accept

Minor Revision

Major Revision

Reject

5. Editorial Decision

The Handling Editor reviews all reviewer comments and makes a recommendation.

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on:

Reviewer reports

Editorial evaluation

Journal standards

The decision is communicated to the author with reviewer comments.

6. Revision Process

If revisions are requested:

Authors must respond to all reviewer comments.

A revised manuscript must be submitted within the specified deadline.

Revised manuscripts may be sent for further review if necessary.

Failure to submit revisions within the deadline may result in withdrawal of the manuscript.

7. Final Acceptance

Once the manuscript satisfies all academic and ethical requirements:

A formal acceptance letter is issued.

The manuscript proceeds to copyediting and formatting.

8. Copyediting and Proofreading

The accepted manuscript undergoes:

Language editing (if required)

Formatting according to journal style

Reference verification

Authors receive page proofs for final approval before publication.

9. Publication

After final approval:

The article is published online in the assigned issue.

The article becomes permanently accessible on the journal website.

10. Corrections and Retractions

If errors or ethical concerns are identified post-publication:

Corrections may be issued for minor errors.

Retractions may be issued for serious violations.

Retraction notices remain permanently accessible.

11. Appeals Process

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written request explaining the reason for appeal.

The appeal will be reviewed objectively by the editorial board. The final decision after appeal is binding.

12. Estimated Timeline (For Transparency)

Initial screening: 3–7 days

Peer review: 2–4 weeks

Revision period: 1–3 weeks

Final decision: 1 week after revision

Publication: Within scheduled issue

Actual timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.