resubpolicy-prl
                                                            REVISED 8/06

                 Physical Review Letters Resubmittal Policy

It is the intent of the resubmittal policy to reduce, insofar as
possible, the time between initial submittal and a final editorial
decision; iterative improvement of a manuscript through extended
anonymous review is felt to be inappropriate.  Thus, we make every
effort to conclude the anonymous review process with a firm editorial
decision no later than at the end of the second round of anonymous
referee evaluation.  This decision can be to publish the paper in its
current form, publish after the authors have considered some optional
referee suggestions, or to publish provided specific changes are made;
otherwise, the decision is to reject the manuscript.

The following is a scenario of a manuscript receiving negative
decisions, as affected by our policy.  We do not discuss here favorable
decisions or special cases.

If the author responds to the first round of referee reports, further
referee evaluation may take place.  The editor will inform the authors
of a decision against publication as soon as possible.  If at this
point the author feels there is sufficient cause for an extra degree of
consideration and resubmits the manuscript, this is considered to be a
formal appeal.  The editor will consult a Divisional Associate Editor
(DAE), that is, a member of the PRL Editorial Board.

The appeal process differs from the anonymous referee process.  The DAE
recommendation is based upon the complete editorial file (all editorial
decisions including referee identity and qualifications) as well as the
scientific content of the manuscript.  The DAE may act as ``super''
referee and evaluate the manuscript as a specialist or may seek further
anonymous referee evaluation.  In most cases, there already will be
sufficient material in the file for the DAE to offer an informed
recommendation.

The author of a paper that has been rejected subsequent to a DAE review
may request that the case be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief of the
American Physical Society. This request should be addressed to the
Chairman of the DAEs who will review the file and, if appropriate,
forward the entire file to the Editor-in-Chief. Such appeals must be
based on the fairness of the review process, and must not be a request
for another scientific review. The questions to be answered in this
review are: Were our procedures followed appropriately and did the
paper receive a fair hearing? A decision by the Editor-in-Chief is the
final level of review.