This paper explores the use of 50% reclaimed asphalt (RA) in surface course mixtures using two rejuvenators with different incorporation methods (wet and dry). It evaluates compaction, Marshall stability, and moisture sensitivity. The results show that if rejuvenation is suitable, the high RA content mixtures can perform similarly to 0% RA mixes in terms of mechanical durability. 

• The authors are advised to add the rationale behind selection of the two rejuvenators types in this study?? Are they representative of different rejuvenator classifications available in the market? 

• For the pellet-based system: was diffusion confirmed, or are the effects only assumed from mechanical data? 

• Please add adequate scienitific explainations why each rejuvenator behaves as is observed in this research. For instance, how might the pelletized rejuvenator interact differently with RA binder during mixing? 

• As many similar studies have been conducted in the past, so the authors are advised to highlight the novelty of this work. 

• Additional details on the number of test repeats and replicates will be useful? Statistical measures of accuracy such as coefficient of variation or standard deviation must be presented? 

• Also, you stated in the abstract that “ by restoring the maltene phase”; kindly provide a scienitific justification for this statement? Were any chemical tests performed ? How can you explain such mechanism based on the tests presented in this paper?