Referee 1 ***********************************************************************

The technical content of the paper is valuable and of practical importance.  It could
be an important reference for developers of complex finite element meshes.  A
weakness of the presentation is its reliance upon almost exclusively pictorial
descriptions of concepts, and a relative dearth of defined terms and algorithms.
This difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that the standard of English grammar and
usage are rather poor.  As a result, some of the reasoning and explanations are
rather difficult to follow..

F: Presentation Changes

The paper would benefit from thorough review by a proofreader improving the English
usage and grammar.

Referee 2 ***********************************************************************
This is an interesting paper that would benefit from some changes
1) The computational structure of system is not described -- what machines and
   programming models has it been implemented on. Does it run in parallel?
2) The English style needs attention e.g. in abstract "in corporation" is
   used instead of in cooperation
3) Some discussion is needed of performance
4) Is this system part of the "production GEOFEM" ?