The paper was sent out for a second review and several additional issues were raised. These issues need to be adequately addressed for the paper to be accepted in GMD. Additionally, this is a long paper with a lot of detailed description. For the most part, I find that this detail is merited and is consistent with the goals of GMD, which include better and more complete documentation of geophysical models. Due to the length, however, it remains difficult for one or even several reviewers to confirm that all equations are correct. I would strongly encourage the authors to thoroughly review the entire document to ensure that everything is correct and to minimize errors that could mislead readers. Specific issues to address, as identified by the reviewer, are listed in the attached file.