The authors are asked to revise the manuscript carefully according to reviewers' comments as shown below.

Referee #1
I recommend publication if the authors could change 'realistic emissions' in the abstract and the conclusions (and 3 other places) with 'a new emission inventory' or similar.

Referee #2
I think this revised manuscript will be accepted, after two points, i.e., treatment of BC and vertical levels in the model, are also explained in the manuscript. These points are explained in the Author’s Response, but they are not inserted into the revised manuscript. So I just ask the authors to add them to the updated manuscript.
1) As for the treatment of BC in the model (their answer of 2 in the specific comments from the reviewer), these two sentences are important; “The conversion of e-folding lifetime from hydrophobic to hydrophilic is considered to be 2.5 days. More details about the treatment of BC in WRF-Chem can be found in Kumar et al. (2015)”.
2) As for the vertical levels in the model (Table 3 in the Author’s Response), the information must be also inserted into the uploaded manuscript.