The authors have successfully addressed the reviewers’ comments. I would like the authors to update me on the status of the papers they refer to that are 'in preparation' and whether they are needed in this manuscript. I find it unsatisfactory to include such references unless absolutely necessary to the arguments presented in the current paper.

In addition, I have a few minor points that the authors should consider:

Page 1, line 23: ‘… from the Tropospheric…’
1, 32: ‘obtained by TCR-2.’
2, 25-23: You have put some of these stations down as GAW and some with the institutional affiliation. They are probably all part of GAW. I suggest you add the affiliations (e.g. NOAA for American Samoa) for those you have listed as GAW. It is more consistent.
4, 4: ‘…Similar trends were in results from the model members…’ I am not sure if that is right, but the current version is a bit unclear.
6, 2/3: something is wrong with this sentence. ‘…exercises because the data were..’ ??
7, 4: ‘.. regions where levels less than.’

Thank you and well done.