Dear Dr Vroon,

Thank you for your responses. Your responses to the reviewers are satisfactory. Especially considering that very minor changes were requested. Please proceed in revising and submitting a new version of your manuscript version.

That being said, in addition of the revisions requested by the reviewers, and this point is important I am also requesting that you remove what you call “age” but instead is a dataset displaying significant scatter. For example, VU120-O2a (2.69 ± 0.05 with a MSWD of 5.8) and with the MSWD value of 5.8 indicating a very large scatter. Basically, your P value should always be ≥ 0.05 and with the appropriate MSWD corresponding cut off. Such a data scatter cannot be considered an age and should not be listed as such in your table nor your graph as it does not define a true plateau age. Please remove though as they don’t respect the reporting norm outlined in Schaen et al. (2021) about what constitute an age. That they provide the same number or not, it does not matter. Same for when the 39Ar % drop below 50 % (which is already very generous boundary). No age should be give for those sample and none true age were obtained. Now, you have very few of those cases, but still, they need to be properly addressed before I can move this manuscript forward. The good news is that it won’t change anything at all to your story since most of your data are otherwise of excellent quality.

Also, at various places in the text, 40Ar/39Ar is written without subscripts (e.g. L 343) and written 39Ar/40Ar (L 441)– please fix.

This one is a minor point L 339: “we assume that the high temperature of a pyroclastic flow did completely reset the K-Ar system (of the obsidian clast)”. Of course, this depend of the time temperature history of the clast in the tuff, but I’m curious if you have references where such a case as been observed? I remember doing modelling of Ar loss for individual sanidine crystals, but I have to admit that I never did that with glass. I would assume that the Ar loss in this case would be close to 100% considering the flat shape for the spectrum. Please add some info about that in the text if you can.

Fred Jourdan

Dear Dr Vroon,

Thank you for carrying the revision of your manuscript and implementing the suggestions from the reviewers and myself. I found this manuscript suitable for publication in GChron and I will therefore recommend publication without further scientific corrections.

Thanks for submitting your work to GChron

Sincerly,

Dear Dr Vroon,

following the associate editor's recommendation I am pleased to accept your manuscript for publication in GChron. Many thanks for choosing GChron for your research.

All the best,

Georgina