My minor corrections are posted in the supplement (pdf) section below. 

Review of Carturan et al. “Modern air, englacial and permafrost temperatures at high altitude on Mt. Ortles, (3905 m a.s.l.) in the Eastern European Alps”, submitted to Earth System Science Data (ESSD).

The manuscript by Carturan et al. presents a multi-year observational dataset of air temperature, englacial temperature and permafrost (soil and rockwall) temperatures at a high elevation site in the European Alps.  

The authors present a clear and well-written article describing the dataset, its quality control and some potential applications for the scientific community. The writing is clear and concise while providing sufficient detail to explain the datasets and their limitations. The dataset is highly valuable within the fields of glaciology and permafrost research as it provides a rare insight into processes occurring at high elevation, summit sites in the Alps.  I have only a few minor comments/suggestions, but I would otherwise recommend this manuscript for publication in ESSD.  

L76-77: Can the authors also cite some more recent literature here? I think that it is useful to highlight that forcing uncertainty remains a strong challenge for high elevation, ungauged regions, especially where glaciers are located.

L80: I think the authors can cite some more recent and highly relevant papers regarding the investigation of glacier cooling, particularly given the first-author’s own work in the Ortles-Cevedale. 

L94: I find the site description section to be well-detailed.  While the Appendix provides a clear overview of the instruments, I would personally like to see at least one of the photos of the Mt. Ortles station brought forward into the main text.  

L106-109: I understand that it is not the main goal of the manuscript to provide data on snowfall/precipitation at this site, but I think it would highlight the value of such high elevation stations if the authors could briefly describe how much snow might otherwise be estimated at this elevation using only low-elevation pluviometer stations or a single grid from reanalysis data.  What about liquid precipitation at this site? Is there something to say about the relevance of the other data gathered at this station (e.g. the SR50) for constraining forcing uncertainty at high elevations?

L174-191: The authors provide many air temperature observations and aptly describe their susceptibility to heating errors and issues related to the changing snow conditions. I feel that the authors could provide an additional figure to highlight the deviations between air temperature observations on an hourly basis and show the magnitudes of the heating effects for different conditions.  Although a full analysis/parameterisation of this heating error is not necessary, I think such a figure would emphasise well a lot of potential data issues that the authors allude to in the text (e.g. L305-311).  I do think that the QA flags provided in the data series are very helpful.  Figure 3 is, however, not so informative for the impact on the temperature series, even if the resultant impact of the sensor height above snow on air temperature is mostly obvious.

Figure 7: Please correct the legend that reads the depths of rockwall temperatures in ‘m’, not ‘cm’ (cf. L287)