<p>Dear Rebecca,<br /><br />I have the following questions in your previous edits on the paper (word file). Please let me know when you see my message. thanks as always.<br /><br /></p>
<p>Q1: Page 11, Line 239, [Comment RM21] &ndash; Here, can I write the sentence as follows?</p>
<p>For instance, D3 was found dominantly in influent and effluent samples, while D6 was present in higher concentrations in influent samples and lower concentrations in effluent compared to D4, as a result of higher removal efficiency due to larger molecular size. Different removal processes may affect treatment efficiency; however, the removal of cVMS was not affected by types of treatment processes.<sup>10,53,70,72</sup></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Q2. Page 20, Line 435: In the following sentence, you revised &ldquo;advance treatment&rdquo;.. I previously wrote it as &ldquo;advanced treatment&rdquo; Should it be &ldquo;advance&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;advanced&rdquo;? please check it.</p>
<p>Also you suggested to cite reference at the end of the sentence. But the result has not been published, it was based on my field experience. In this case, should I say (unpublished) at the end of the sentence. For example, -------(i.e. MF, UF) (unpublished)???</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Line 435: &ldquo;Avenues for future search exist in this field. In field research by one of us (Joo), for example, detergents widely used in consumer products including siloxanes were found to be hardly removed by membrane separation, often requiring advance treatment following pretreatment with pressured membranes (i.e. MF,UF).</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Q3. Page 19, Line 392-394: In the following sentence, &ldquo;during&rdquo; is repeated twice and wonder if this was a mistake or you think repeating the same word in the sentence should be fine? Please check the following sentence.</p>
<ul>
<li>Running through a UF unit, concentrations of siloxanes were lower than those from influents, but siloxanes are too small to be rejected by UF and may have just been retained by adsorption on cake layers formed during the operation during membrane crossing.<sup>86</sup></li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Q4. Page 23, Line 490-491: In the following sentence, is the word &ldquo;that&rdquo; proper instead of using &ldquo;the&rdquo;? please check.</p>
<ul>
<li>In contrast to adsorption and absorption, refrigeration-condensation technology does not require disposal of its adsorption media, eliminating that waste disposal issue.</li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Q5. Page 34, Line 744-745, In your comment [RM40], you said &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think your meaning is clear here. Do you mean that because siloxanes have an intrinsic property of transitioning to a gaseous phase in both aquatic and terrestrial environments, significant residues were still detected in effluent water and sludges after such integrated treatment.&rdquo;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Here I meant to say &ldquo;because siloxanes have an intrinsic property of transitioning to a gaseous phase in both aquatic and terrestrial environments, significant residues were still detected in effluent water and sludges after such integrated treatment&rdquo;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Thus, should I leave the following sentence as it is? Or if you think it should be revised? Then how would you suggest to revise it? Please let me know.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>While thermal treatments implemented as pretreatment to biological processes were effective in increasing volatilization, siloxanes, due to their intrinsic properties (i.e. partitioning from aquatic and terrestrial environments to a gaseous phase)&nbsp;, have noticeable residues still detected in effluent waters and sludges.<sup>18,53</sup></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;<a href="#_msoanchor_1">[RM40]</a>I don&rsquo;t think your meaning is clear here.&nbsp; Do you mean that because siloxanes have an intrinsic property of transitioning to a gaseous phase in both aquatic and terrestrial environments, significant residues were still detected in effluent water and sludges after such integrated treatment.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>