<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-22-1707-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>The <italic>Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport</italic>–Las Vegas Ozone Study
(<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS)</article-title><alt-title>The Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport-Las Vegas Ozone Study (<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS)</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{The Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport-Las Vegas Ozone Study (\textit{FAST}-LVOS)}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{A. O. Langford et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Langford</surname><given-names>Andrew O.</given-names></name>
          <email>andrew.o.langford@noaa.gov</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Senff</surname><given-names>Christoph J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Alvarez II</surname><given-names>Raul J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Aikin</surname><given-names>Ken C.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Baidar</surname><given-names>Sunil</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2 aff13">
          <name><surname>Bonin</surname><given-names>Timothy A.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Brewer</surname><given-names>W. Alan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Brioude</surname><given-names>Jerome</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5603-7924</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff4">
          <name><surname>Brown</surname><given-names>Steven S.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7477-9078</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Burley</surname><given-names>Joel D.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Caputi</surname><given-names>Dani J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Conley</surname><given-names>Stephen A.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6753-8962</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff8">
          <name><surname>Cullis</surname><given-names>Patrick D.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Decker</surname><given-names>Zachary C. J.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9604-8671</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Evan</surname><given-names>Stéphanie</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1014-0907</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2 aff14">
          <name><surname>Kirgis</surname><given-names>Guillaume</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff9 aff10">
          <name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>Meiyun</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3852-3491</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff11">
          <name><surname>Pagowski</surname><given-names>Mariusz</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Peischl</surname><given-names>Jeff</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9320-7101</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff8">
          <name><surname>Petropavlovskikh</surname><given-names>Irina</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5352-1369</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff12">
          <name><surname>Pierce</surname><given-names>R. Bradley</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff7">
          <name><surname>Ryerson</surname><given-names>Thomas B.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2800-7581</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Sandberg</surname><given-names>Scott P.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff8 aff15">
          <name><surname>Sterling</surname><given-names>Chance W.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Weickmann</surname><given-names>Ann M.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff9 aff10 aff16">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Li</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>NOAA Chemical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences,
University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Laboratoire de l'Atmosphere et des Cyclones (LACy), UMR 8105, CNRS,
Université de La Réunion, Météo-France, Saint-Denis, La
Reunion, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Chemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Department of Chemistry, St. Mary's College of California, Moraga, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources, University of
California, Davis, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Scientific Aviation, Inc., Boulder, Colorado, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff8"><label>8</label><institution>NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff9"><label>9</label><institution>Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA​​​​​​​</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff10"><label>10</label><institution>NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff11"><label>11</label><institution>NOAA Global Systems Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff12"><label>12</label><institution>NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research,
Cooperative Institute for<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Meteorological Satellite Studies, Madison, WI, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff13"><label>a</label><institution>now at: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, MA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff14"><label>b</label><institution>now at: 2210 Kirby Ave, Chattanooga, TN, USA​​​​​​​</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff15"><label>c</label><institution>now at: C&amp;D Technologies Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff16"><label>d</label><institution>now at: Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Science,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> The
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Andrew O. Langford (andrew.o.langford@noaa.gov)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>4</day><month>February</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <fpage>1707</fpage><lpage>1737</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>17</day><month>August</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>23</day><month>September</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>15</day><month>December</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>16</day><month>December</month><year>2021</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <?pagebreak page1708?><p id="d1e429">The <italic>Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport</italic>–Las Vegas Ozone Study (<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS) was conducted in May and June of 2017 to
study the transport of ozone (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) to Clark County, Nevada, a marginal
non-attainment area in the southwestern United States (SWUS). This 6-week (20 May–30 June 2017) field campaign used lidar, ozonesonde, aircraft, and
in situ measurements in conjunction with a variety of models to characterize
the distribution of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and related species above southern Nevada and
neighboring California and to probe the influence of stratospheric
intrusions and wildfires as well as local, regional, and Asian pollution on surface
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the Las Vegas Valley (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 900 m above sea level, a.s.l.). In this paper, we describe the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign and present
case studies illustrating the influence of different transport processes on
background O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Clark County and southern Nevada. The companion paper
by Zhang et al. (2020) describes the use of the AM4 and GEOS-Chem global
models to simulate the measurements and estimate the impacts of transported
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on surface air quality across the greater southwestern US and
Intermountain West. The <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS measurements found elevated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers above Las Vegas on more than 75 % (35 of 45) of the sample days and show that entrainment of these layers contributed to mean 8 h average regional
background O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations of 50–55 parts per billion by volume
(ppbv), or about 85–95 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. These high background
concentrations constitute 70 %–80 % of the current US National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 70 ppbv (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 120 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 900 m a.s.l.) for the daily maximum 8 h average (MDA8) and will make attainment of the more stringent standards of 60 or 65 ppbv currently being considered
extremely difficult in the interior SWUS.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e572">Ground-level ozone (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) is one of six “criteria” air pollutants
identified as serious threats to human health and welfare and made subject
to National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the US Clean Air Act
(CAA) (Karstadt et al., 1993). Ozone is not directly
emitted into the atmosphere by anthropogenic activities but is a secondary
product of photochemical reactions between nitrogen oxides (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>
nitric oxide (NO) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> nitrogen dioxide (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)) and carbon monoxide
(CO), methane (CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), or volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Thus,
efforts to control ambient O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations have sought to reduce
anthropogenic emissions of these precursors, and more stringent NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emission controls have contributed to a 36 % decrease in the annual mean
daily maximum 1 h NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the benchmark used to ascertain NAAQS
attainment, across the US between 2000 and 2019
(<uri>https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/nitrogen-dioxide-trends</uri>, last
access: 16 August 2021). In response, the US mean fourth-highest annual maximum
daily 8 h average (4MDA8) O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the metric by which compliance with the
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> NAAQS is determined, declined from 82 to 65 parts per billion by
volume (ppbv), or 21 % over the same period (<uri>https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/ozone-trends</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e680"><bold>(a)</bold> Shaded relief map of the contiguous US showing the
<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS study domain (red box). The dashed black line outlines the US Intermountain West. The San Joaquin Valley (SJV) was studied the previous summer in the CABOTS field campaign. <bold>(b, c)</bold> Expanded views of the study area. The solid and dashed black lines in <bold>(b)</bold> mark the state and Clark County borders, respectively. The dotted black line in <bold>(c)</bold> outlines the Las
Vegas metropolitan area. The color-filled circles mark regulatory O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
monitors maintained by Clark County (red), the US National Park Service
(green), and the California Air Resources Board (black). The magenta squares
and cyan triangles show baseline monitors operated by the Nevada Department
of Environmental Quality and White Mountain Research Center, respectively.
The yellow diamonds show the locations of Angel Peak (AP) and the North Las Vegas Airport (NLVA; see text). The
blue traces show the 28 June SA flight track, and the violet boxes outline
the 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 45 km H <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 56 km W) FLEXPART receptor domain.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e752">The air quality improvements in the US over the last 2 decades represent
a major success, but the gains have not been uniform, with large decreases
in the southeastern US (SEUS: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Virginia), where NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> declined by 39 % and
25 %, respectively, but much smaller changes in the southwestern US (SWUS:
Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico), where a 38 % reduction in
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> led to an O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> decline of just 11 %. The 4MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
decreased from 83 to 63 ppbv in the SEUS but only decreased from 77 to 69 ppbv in the SWUS. The weaker response to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reductions in the SWUS is attributed in part to increased oil and gas development (Pozzer
et al., 2020) and in part to the much higher background O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in this
region (EPA, 2013; Lefohn et al., 2014; Cooper et al., 2015). This
background is derived from a variety of non-controllable ozone sources
(NCOSs) including O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> produced by photochemical reactions of
anthropogenic emissions outside the US borders or by soils, vegetation,
lightning, or wildfires and by naturally occurring O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> transported
downward from the stratosphere (Jaffe et al., 2018). The high mean elevations of Colorado (2078 m a.s.l.), Wyoming (2047 m a.s.l.), Utah (1864 m a.s.l.), Nevada (1681 m a.s.l.), and Idaho (1528 m a.s.l.), which make up the heart of the Intermountain West (IMW), i.e., the
area of the US bounded by the Cascade (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4392 m a.s.l.) and Sierra
Nevada (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4421 m a.s.l.) mountains to the west and the Front Range of
the Rocky Mountains (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4401 m a.s.l.) to the east (Fig. 1a), make this
entire region particularly vulnerable to both stratospheric intrusions
(Lin et al., 2012a) and pollution transported across the Pacific Ocean
from East Asia (Lin et al., 2012b).</p>
      <p id="d1e860">Background O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> cannot be directly measured, but an upper limit can be
estimated from measurements at remote “baseline” locations sufficiently
removed from anthropogenic sources. Jaffe et al. (2018) estimated that the monthly mean
MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the higher elevations of the IMW is around 50 ppbv in late
spring, with the 4MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations exceeding 60 ppbv in some
locations. These high baseline concentrations constitute more than 70 % of
the 70 ppbv NAAQS set in 2015 (EPA, 2014) and limit the ability of
western air quality managers to maintain surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
below this standard through local control strategies (Cooper et al.,
2015; Uhl and Moore, 2018; Faloona et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e899">Concern about the potential impacts of stratospheric intrusions, Asian
pollution, and other NCOSs on NAAQS
attainment in the greater Las Vegas area motivated the first Las Vegas Ozone
Study (LVOS) conducted by the NOAA Chemical Sciences Laboratory (CSL) in
late May and June of 2013 (Langford et al., 2015b) in partnership with
the Clark County (Nevada) Department of Air Quality (CCDAQ). The LVOS 2013
field campaign was organized around the truck-mounted TOPAZ (Tunable Optical
Profiler for Aerosol and oZone) differential absorption lidar
(Alvarez et al., 2011), which is part of the
NASA-sponsored Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet). The lidar was deployed
for 6 weeks to a decommissioned US Air Force radar base on the summit of
Angel Peak (AP: 36.32<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>115.57<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 2680 m above
mean sea level, a.s.l.), about 45 km west of Las Vegas, in the Spring
Mountains (Fig. 1c). The lidar measurements were augmented by in situ measurements of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO and basic meteorological parameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e936">The LVOS 2013 campaign documented several episodes in which the appearance
of stratospheric intrusions, Asian pollution, or wildfire plumes at AP was
followed by MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations greater than 70 ppbv at multiple
regulatory monitors in Clark County and in some cases by exceedances of
the 2008 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> NAAQS of 75 ppbv then in effect. Since stratospheric
intrusions do not typically reach the relatively low elevations of Las Vegas
(620 m a.s.l.), it was hypothesized that some of the high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> episodes
resulted from entrainment of mid-tropospheric O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers
(Langford et al., 2017) by the deep-convective boundary layers that form over the Mojave Desert (Seidel et
al., 2012). This hypothesis could not be confirmed, however, because of the
placement of the lidar above the valley floor, and a more extensive follow-up
study, the <italic>Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport</italic>–Las Vegas Ozone Study (<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS), was conducted over the same time
period in 2017 to (i) test the entrainment hypothesis, (ii) determine the
representativeness of the LVOS 2013 results, and (iii) better characterize
the different sources of surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the Las Vegas Valley (LVV). In
this paper, we present an overview of the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign with brief examples
highlighting the influence of stratospheric intrusions, Asian pollution,
biomass<?pagebreak page1709?> burning, and both local and regional pollution on surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
Clark County and the greater IMW. The companion paper by Zhang et al. (2020)
uses the GFDL-AM4 and GEOS-Chem global models to simulate these measurements
and quantify the impacts of these processes on high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> events in
southern Nevada and the greater SWUS and IMW.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page1710?><sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Background</title>
      <p id="d1e1020">Previous airborne and ground-based lidar measurements have shown that
elevated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers are common features of the lower free troposphere
between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 and 6 km a.s.l. above California (Langford et al.,
2012; Ryerson et al., 2013; Faloona et al., 2020) and southern Nevada
(Langford et al., 2015b, 2017) in late spring and early summer, and it is
well established that the US west coast is one of the global hotspots for
deep stratosphere-to-troposphere transport (STT) of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in springtime
(Wernli and Bourqui, 2002; Sprenger and Wernli, 2003; James et al., 2003;
Skerlak et al., 2014, 2015; Breeden et al., 2021). This occurs primarily
through the formation of tropopause folds, tongues of lower stratospheric
air that descend isentropically beneath the jet stream circulating around
upper-level lows. These intrusions of dry, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich air often form near
the end of the North Pacific storm track and descend behind the mixture of
clean or polluted tropospheric air in the dry airstream (Wernli, 1997;
Cooper et al., 2004; Trickl et al., 2014). They are thus an important
mechanism for transport of East Asian pollution from the upper troposphere
down to the boundary layer above the western US (Brown-Steiner and
Hess, 2011; Lin et al., 2012a, b).</p>
      <p id="d1e1057">Tropopause folds typically follow one of two pathways as they reach the
middle troposphere. Many intrusions, particularly those formed by deep
closed lows, continue to curve cyclonically as they descend and wrap up
above the surface low in the lower troposphere (Danielsen, 1964).
These deep LC2 (<italic>lifecycle 2</italic>) intrusions (Thorncroft et al., 1993; Polvani and Esler,
2007) often reach the top of the boundary layer and sometimes even the
surface at higher elevations (Schuepbach et al., 1999; Stohl et al.,
2000; Bonasoni et al., 2000; Trickl et al., 2020). These intrusions were
first described by Reed and Danielsen (1958) and have long been
observed as steeply sloping tongues in ozone lidar curtains (Browell et
al., 1987; Ancellet et al., 1994; Vaughan et al., 1994; Langford et al.,
1996; Eisele et al., 1999).</p>
      <p id="d1e1063">Much less attention has been paid to the so-called LC1 (<italic>lifecycle 1)</italic> intrusions that are
sheared anticyclonically from elongated troughs to form quasi-horizontal
filaments in the middle and upper troposphere (Appenzeller and Davies,
1992; Appenzeller et al., 1996; Vaughan et al., 2001; Albers et al., 2021).
These <italic>streamers</italic> are well-known features of satellite water vapor imagery (Manney and Stanford, 1987) and can stretch for thousands of
kilometers. They usually roll up horizontally into a series of diminishing
vortices to be irreversibly mixed into the free troposphere (Wirth et
al., 1997; Vaughan and Worthington, 2000; Vaughan et al., 2001; Colette and
Ancellet, 2006), but they can also be dissipated by moist convection
(Langford and Reid, 1998). They are a significant source of
background O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the free troposphere (Albers et
al., 2021) but usually remain well above the boundary layer and thus do not
influence surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> directly.</p>
      <p id="d1e1090"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>Both types of intrusions are most common in winter, when cyclonic activity is
at a maximum, but stratospheric intrusions that form in late May and early
June are more likely to affect compliance with the ozone NAAQS since (i) more O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is available for transport from the lower stratospheric
reservoir in springtime (Albers et al., 2018), (ii) surface concentrations
are higher because of increased photochemical production, and (iii) deeper
afternoon mixed layers (Seidel et al., 2012) can potentially entrain some
intrusions that would otherwise pass overhead. Stratospheric influence plays
an important role in driving the observed year-to-year variability in
springtime ozone air quality over the western US (Lin et al., 2015).
The potential surface impacts of stratospheric intrusions and co-transported
pollution decrease in summer after the jet stream migrates poleward into
Canada, and deep convection lifts pollution higher into the upper troposphere
over East Asia (Hudman et al., 2004; Brown-Steiner and Hess, 2011).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><?xmltex \opttitle{\textit{FAST}-LVOS measurements and models}?><title><italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS measurements and models</title>
      <p id="d1e1114">The <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS field experiment was also organized around the TOPAZ lidar, which
was upgraded with a new data acquisition system in 2015. This upgrade more
than doubled the useful operating range of the lidar from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 to 8 km, which allowed it to reach higher altitudes than was possible during LVOS
2013, even while operating from a much lower-elevation site at the North Las
Vegas Airport (NLVA; 36.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>115.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 680 m a.s.l.),
located about 8 km NW of downtown Las Vegas. NOAA CSL also brought a
vertically staring Doppler lidar to the NLVA to characterize mixing between
the boundary layer and free troposphere and a mobile laboratory with a more
extensive suite of in situ measurements to the summit of AP. These primary
measurements were supplemented by measurements from a single-engine Mooney
TLS Bravo aircraft operated by Scientific Aviation, Inc. (SA) and by
ozonesondes launched by the NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) during
four 2 to 4 d intensive operating periods (IOPs) initiated when the
synoptic conditions showed that stratospheric intrusions or Asian pollution
transport events were likely.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Primary measurements</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>3.1.1</label><title>NOAA CSL TOPAZ lidar</title>
      <p id="d1e1166">The TOPAZ truck arrived in Las Vegas on the morning of 17 May and was
deployed to a secure CCDAQ enclosure on the north side of the NLVA. In
addition to the lidar, the truck was equipped with an automated weather
station (Airmar 150WX) and a commercial UV absorption O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor (2B
Technologies model 205) that sampled air 5 m above the ground. The
autonomous NOAA CSL vertically staring 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m micro-Doppler lidar was
placed near the TOPAZ truck to measure aerosol backscatter and vertical<?pagebreak page1711?> wind
variance for the estimation of boundary layer depths (Bonin et al.,
2018). The two lidars were located near the CCDAQ wind profiler (Fig. 2,
top) and visibility camera and about 500 m NNW of the National Weather
Service (NWS) KVGT meteorological tower.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1188">Photographs of the NLVA <bold>(a)</bold> and AP <bold>(b)</bold> <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS ground sites.
The NLVA photograph faces east and the AP photograph northwest. Note the
TOPAZ scanning mirror housing near the center of the photograph with the
lidar line of sight pointing away from the camera. The view of Angel Peak
was taken from the SA Mooney aircraft and shows the NOAA mobile lab parked
in the location occupied by the TOPAZ lidar during the 2013 LVOS campaign.
Photographs by Andrew Langford <bold>(a)</bold> and Dani Caputi <bold>(b)</bold>.​​​​​​​</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f02.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1212">TOPAZ uses a tuneable Ce:LiCaF solid-state laser and a unique transceiver
configuration to profile O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and particulate backscatter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) from
just above the surface to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 km above ground level (a.g.l.). The
lidar points vertically but uses a large steerable mirror on top of the
truck to sequentially deflect the co-axial laser beams and return signals
along a series of elevation angles. The scanner line of sight was oriented
to the east (parallel to the 7–25 runway) and successively tilted along
paths 2, 6, 20, and 90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> above the horizon. This cycle was repeated
every 8 min, and the vertical projections of the slant profiles merged
with the zenith profile to create vertical ozone and backscatter profiles
starting 27.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 m above the ground, with the lowest measurements
displaced about 800 m downrange. Ozone number densities were retrieved using
two wavelengths (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 287 and 294 nm) with 30 m range gates and a
smoothing filter that increased from 270 m wide at the minimum range (815 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15 m) to 1400 m wide at the maximum range. The ozone and backscatter
profiles were computed simultaneously using an iterative procedure
(Alvarez et al., 2011) incorporating the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
absorption cross-sections of Malicet et al. (1995) and
temperature and pressure profiles interpolated from the 3 h National Centers
for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) North American Regional Reanalysis
(NARR) to account for the temperature dependence of the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
cross-sections and to convert the calculated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> number densities to
mixing ratios. The effective O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical resolution increased from
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 m near the surface to 150 m at 500 m a.g.l. and 900 m at 6 km a.g.l. The maximum range was limited by solar background radiation during
the day and decreased from about 8 to 6 km near midday. Backscatter from
aerosols, smoke, and dust was also retrieved with 7.5 m resolution at 294 nm.</p>
      <p id="d1e1314">Total uncertainties in the 8 min O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> retrievals are estimated to
increase from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3 ppbv below 4 km to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10 ppbv at 8 km. The
upgraded TOPAZ system was extensively compared with measurements from the
same SA Mooney aircraft used here as well as the NASA Alpha Jet
(Hamill et al., 2016) in the 2016 CABOTS field
campaign (Langford et al., 2019) and
with electrochemical concentration cell (ECC) ozonesondes and ground-based TOLNet lidars in the 2016 Southern
California Ozone Observation Project (SCOOP) (Leblanc et al., 2018).
Both intercomparisons showed excellent agreement within the stated
uncertainties in the measurement techniques, particularly when the spatial
and temporal differences introduced by the different sampling methods are
considered.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>3.1.2</label><title>NOAA CSL Mobile Laboratory</title>
      <p id="d1e1348">The van-based CSL mobile laboratory (Wild et al.,
2017) was equipped with instruments to measure O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, water vapor
(H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O), carbon dioxide (CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, total
reactive nitrogen oxides (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), nitrous oxide (N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O), and
meteorological parameters. The NO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
measurements were made with a custom-built cavity ring-down spectrometer
(CRDS) (Washenfelder et al., 2011; Wild et al., 2014; Womack et al.,
2017); a commercial (Picarro) wavelength-scanned CRDS to measure CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Peischl et al., 2013); and a modified commercial (Los
Gatos) instrument using off-axis-integrated cavity output spectroscopy
(OA-ICOS) to measure N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, CO, and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (Coggon et al., 2016).
Additional details about these instruments can be found in the references.
Ozone was also measured by a commercial (2B Tech, Model 205) ultraviolet
photometer, and these data were used to fill in the gaps during brief
periods when the CRDS instrument was offline. There were no aerosol
measurements.</p>
      <p id="d1e1479">The mobile laboratory carried the same automated weather station (Airmar 150WX) as the TOPAZ truck and was also equipped with differential GPS and
sonic anemometers to measure absolute wind speed and direction while the van
was moving. The laboratory was parked on the southeastern edge of the AP summit
overlooking Kyle Canyon, the primary corridor for upslope transport from the
LVV, for most of the campaign. This is the same location (Fig. 2, bottom)
occupied by the TOPAZ truck during LVOS 2013 and provides an unobstructed
fetch to the west, south, and east. Northerly winds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 335 and
65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) were perturbed by one of the nearby buildings, but winds
from this direction were uncommon during the study. A few drives were
conducted between AP and the LVV on 23–25 May during IOP1 and again on 15
and 17 June. These measurements will be described elsewhere. The van was
also relocated to the NLVA for an intercomparison with the instruments on
the SA Mooney on 15 June. All of the measurements described here are from
AP.</p>
      <p id="d1e1498">The first LVOS campaign in 2013 used the relationships between the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, and CO measured on AP to infer the history of the air masses
sampled on the summit (Langford et al., 2015b). This was made possible
because of the relative remoteness and high elevation of the site, which
minimized the influences of nearby NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> or CO emissions and surface
deposition, and by the lack of rainfall and extreme aridity of the Mojave
Desert, which makes water vapor a semi-conserved tracer. Since CO has a
tropospheric lifetime of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 60 d and originates primarily from
soil emissions and combustion processes (Holloway et al., 2000),
concentrations are lower in the stratosphere than in the free troposphere
and terrestrial boundary layer. Conversely, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are much
higher in the stratosphere than in the troposphere. Thus, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO
tend to be negatively correlated in mixtures of stratospheric and free-tropospheric air, which is also very dry, but positively correlated in
mixtures of free-tropospheric<?pagebreak page1712?> air and urban pollution or biomass burning
plumes. The marine boundary layer is far removed from most natural and
anthropogenic sources of CO and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and has low concentrations of both
(Clark et al., 2015). Thus, the relationships between these three parameters
can be used to separate the influences of stratospheric intrusions and Asian
pollution from regional pollution and wildfires and distinguish air that
descended from the lower stratosphere or upper troposphere from air advected
inland from the Pacific Ocean.</p>
      <p id="d1e1563">This empirical approach was much improved by the addition of N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, NO,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements in the 2017
<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign. Nitrous oxide has a much longer tropospheric lifetime than
CO (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100 years) and originates primarily from natural and
fertilized soils (Tian et al., 2019) and the oceans (Tian et al.,
2020). It is thus well mixed throughout the free troposphere, with much lower
concentrations in the stratosphere, and can be used as a tracer for recent
agricultural and oceanic influences and stratospheric intrusions (Hintsa
et al., 1998; Assonov et al., 2013). The CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements provide
another useful tracer for Asian pollution (Xiao et al.,
2004) as well as oil and gas (Peischl et al., 2018), agricultural
(Peischl et al., 2012), and biomass burning (Delmas, 1994)
influences. The NO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements can be used to
identify air masses influenced by<?pagebreak page1713?> biomass burning or by local, regional, and
Asian pollution. In particular, the short lifetime (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2–4 h) of
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Laughner and Cohen, 2019) makes these measurements a
useful tracer for pollution from the LVV. The CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements can also
help identify pollution and biomass burning influences, although
interpretation of these measurements is complicated by the strong diurnal
variations created by photosynthetic uptake.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>3.1.3</label><title>Meteorological measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1683">The temperature, pressure, relative humidity, wind speed, and wind direction from
the automated weather stations in the TOPAZ truck at the NLVA and the mobile
laboratory on AP are summarized in Fig. S1  in the Supplement. The NLVA measurements were
supplemented by the NWS measurements from the KVGT tower, and vertical wind
information was also obtained from the radar wind profiler, ozonesondes, and
aircraft. The automated micro-Doppler lidar measurements near the TOPAZ
truck were used to calculate hourly averaged boundary layer heights
(Bonin et al., 2018), which ranged from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 to 4 km in the
afternoon. Mixed layer heights were also derived from the potential
temperature and relative humidity profiles acquired by the GML ozonesondes
(8 km distant) and from the afternoon (00:00 UT or 17:00 Pacific Daylight Time,
PDT) radiosondes launched from the Harry Reid (formerly McCarran)
International Airport (NWS station identifier KVEF) about 15 km to the
south. The figure also shows solar radiation measurements from a site in
Henderson near KVEF (cf. Fig. 1f) that were obtained from the University of
Utah MesoWest network (<uri>https://mesowest.utah.edu</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021) and from the Spring Mountain Youth Camp (SMYC), which
occupies the former cantonment area of the decommissioned Air Force base and
lies <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 800 m west and 120 m below the AP summit. The SMYC
measurements were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC)
(<uri>http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/weather/smyc.html</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Supplemental measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1715">The supplemental ozonesonde and aircraft sampling during the intensive
operating periods (IOPs) provided important context for the lidar and
surface measurements. The four IOPs were conducted on 23–25 May, 31 May–2 June, 10–14 June, and 27–30 June (no ozonesondes were launched on 14 and 27 June). The NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) launched a total of 30
ozonesondes (1 to 4 ozonesondes per day) from a park adjacent to the CCDAQ
Joe Neal monitoring site located about 8 km northwest of the NLVA during the
four IOPs. The ozonesondes (Sterling et al., 2018) measured O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations to altitudes well above the 8 km range of the lidar and
recorded temperature, relative humidity, and wind profiles, which helped
characterize the synoptic context.</p>
      <p id="d1e1727">The SA Mooney conducted daily flights between the NLVA and Big Bear, CA (cf.
Fig. 1b), during the four <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS IOPs, logging a total of 90 flight hours over 15 d. The aircraft carried a pilot and flight scientist, along with a 2B Technologies Model 205 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor, an Aerodyne Research cavity
attenuated phase shift (CAPS) NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor, and a Picarro 2301f
wavelength-scanned cavity ring-down spectrometer (WS-CRDS) to measure
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, ethane (C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O
(Trousdell et al., 2016). The 2B O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> data were sampled
at 2 s intervals, which corresponds to a mean distance of 150 m at the
typical level flight speed of 75 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The standard TLS flight plan
(Fig. 1b and c) began with a vertical profile to about 5 km a.s.l. above
North Las Vegas after take-off. The aircraft then flew to AP and spiralled
down around the summit to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 km a.s.l. (cf. Fig. 2, bottom). From there, the aircraft headed to Jean, NV (924 m a.s.l.), where the southernmost
CCDAQ O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor is located, and conducted another profile. The pilot
then followed the I-5 corridor before diverting south to Big Bear, CA, where
the aircraft landed and refueled. The return leg began with a profile above
Barstow, CA, before following the I-5 corridor back to Clark County with
additional profiles above Jean, AP, and North Las Vegas if fuel permitted.
The default flight plan was modified as necessary to account for air traffic
control requirements.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Ancillary measurements</title>
      <?pagebreak page1714?><p id="d1e1844">The CCDAQ maintains a network of continuous air monitoring stations (CAMSs) for
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and other parameters (e.g., NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, fine (PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and coarse (PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) particulates, meteorology) in the LVV and surrounding areas
(cf. Fig. 1). The CCDAQ also operates an upper-air station consisting of a radar wind profiler and profiling radiometer at the NLVA (cf. Fig. 2, top) and automated visibility cameras at the NLVA and M-Resort (cf. Fig. 1). The CAMS network included 11 active O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitors during the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign,
with the Joe Neal (C75), Walter Johnson (C71), and JD Smith (C2002, since
deactivated) monitors located within 8 km of the NLVA (cf. Fig. 1c). The
hourly averaged measurements from the TOPAZ monitor at the NLVA agreed with
the Joe Neal and Walter Johnson measurements to within 3 % on average,
with linear regression coefficients of determination of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.87
(NLVA-C75), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.76 (NLVA-C71), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.75 (C75-C71) when the
Doppler lidar showed the boundary layer was well mixed. The Joe Neal and
Walter Johnson O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements are discussed in Sects. 8 and 9 along
with those from the more distant Apex (C22, 32 km), Jean (C1019, 49 km),
Indian Springs (C7772, 58 km), and Mesquite (C23, 121 km) monitors located
outside the LVV. The CCDAQ also operated a temporary O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor at the
SMYC; these measurements averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 % lower (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.91)
than both the CRDS and 2B measurements from the mobile laboratory on the
summit and are not used in our analyses.</p>
      <p id="d1e1994">Surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from other monitors operated by federal, state,
local, and tribal agencies outside of Clark County were obtained from the
EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (<uri>https://www.epa.gov/aqs</uri>, last
access: 16 August 2021) and Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET)
(<uri>https://www.epa.gov/castnet</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021). The
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NVDEP) also operated three portable
solar-powered monitors at the Warm Springs Summit (WSSU; 38.184<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>116.425<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 2307 m a.s.l.), Railroad Valley (RRVA;
38.504<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>115.694<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 1413 m a.s.l.), and Cathedral
Gorge State Park (CGSP; 37.810<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>114.410<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 1513 m a.s.l.) to measure baseline O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS. Measurements were
previously made at these three sites as part of the Nevada Rural Ozone
Initiative (NVROI) (Fine et al., 2015a, b; Gustin et al., 2015).
Measurements from two remote research monitors operated by the White
Mountain Research Center (WMRC) (Burley and Bytnerowicz, 2011)
were also shared with the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS project. The WMRC maintains the highest
continuously operating surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitors in the continental US at
White Mountain Summit (WMS; 37.634<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>118.256<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 4342 m. a.s.l.) and Barcroft Observatory (BCO; 37.590<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>118.239<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; 3879 m a.s.l.) located <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 280 km NW of AP (cf. Fig. 1b).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Model support</title>
      <p id="d1e2179">Planning for the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS day-to-day activities and IOPs relied primarily on long-range weather forecasts from the NCEP Global Forecast System (GFS) obtained from the University of Wyoming (<uri>http://weather.uwyo.edu/models/fcst/gfs003.shtml</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021) and 4 d 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO forecasts from
the NOAA/NESDIS RAQMS (<uri>http://raqms-ops.ssec.wisc.edu/</uri>, last
access: 16 August 2021) (Pierce et al., 2003) model. The RAQMS model also
provided boundary conditions for the 13 km resolution NOAA rapid refresh
RAP-Chem (<uri>https://rapidrefresh.noaa.gov/RAPchem</uri>, last access: 15 August 2021) model. The daily forecasts from these two models were
supplemented by GOES-West water vapor imagery and other satellite products
obtained from the NOAA/NESDIS Regional and Mesoscale Meteorology Branch
(RMBB; <uri>http://rammb.cira.colostate.edu</uri>, last access: 16 August
2021) at the Colorado State University. Data interpretation was aided by the
NASA Modern-Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications
(MERRA-2) reanalysis (<uri>https://fluid.nccs.nasa.gov/reanalysis/classic_merra2/</uri>,
last access: 16 August 2021) online plotting resources (Gelaro et al., 2017); NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) HYSPLIT trajectories (Stein et al., 2015); and stratospheric, Asian pollution, and biomass burning tracers calculated with 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal resolution using the FLEXPART particle dispersion model driven by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) operational (0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) model (Brioude et al., 2007, 2009). The RAQMS, RAP-Chem, and FLEXPART models used in the study are described in more detail in the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS final report (<uri>https://csl.noaa.gov/projects/fastlvos/FAST-LVOSfinalreport604318-16.pdf</uri>,
last access: 7 December 2021). The <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS measurements were also simulated by the GEOS-Chem (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal, 0.2 to 1.0 km vertical resolution in the free troposphere) and AM4 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3125<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal, 0.1 to 1.0 km vertical resolution in the free troposphere) chemistry–climate models; these efforts are described in the companion paper by Zhang et al. (2020).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Meteorological contexts</title>
      <p id="d1e2345">The <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign can be divided into two meteorologically distinct
periods, a late spring period from mid-May to mid-June and an early summer
period from mid-June through the end of June. The Synoptic Discussion for
May 2017 from the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
(<uri>https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/synoptic/201705</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021) describes the jet stream as being very active in the late
spring period, with a series of closed lows and upper-level troughs crossing
the contiguous US every few days. These cyclonic systems spawned a series
of stratospheric intrusions that appear as potential vorticity (PV)
enhancements (Duncan et al., 2021) in the 300 hPa (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9.5 km a.s.l.)
NASA MERRA-2 Reanalysis plots in Fig. 3a–d. GOES water vapor images
coinciding with the PV analyses are displayed in Fig. S2. The first
extratropical cyclone, designated L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. 3a, passed through Nevada
before the official start of the campaign on 20 May, but the next three
low-pressure systems, labeled L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. 3b–d, were targeted by IOPs on 23–25 May, 31 May–2 June, and 11–14 June. The solar
radiation data in Fig. S1 show the appearance of cirrus ahead of the cold
fronts as well as perturbations in the normal diurnal variations in
pressure, temperature, dew point, and winds created by thermally driven
regional (e.g., plains–mountain) and mesoscale (e.g., valley and slope)
circulations (Stewart et al., 2002). There was no
measurable precipitation, but the temperatures on AP dropped below freezing
on the nights of 17–18 May and 11–12 June, and the cold fronts decreased the depth of the afternoon boundary layers above the NLVA to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 km, or roughly the elevation of AP above the valley.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2407">MERRA-2 300 hPa Absolute potential vorticity and geopotential
heights (dam) at <bold>(a)</bold> 00:00 UT 18 May, <bold>(b)</bold> 12:00 UT 25 May, <bold>(c)</bold> 06:00 UT 2 June, <bold>(d)</bold> 12:00 UT 12 June, <bold>(e)</bold> 12:00 UT 18 June, and <bold>(f)</bold> 06:00 UT 29 June.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?pagebreak page1716?><p id="d1e2435">The jet stream retreated north into Canada in the wake of L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the
NCEI Synoptic Discussion for June 2017 confirms that the expanding
subtropical ridge seen in Fig. 3e dominated the weather across the SWUS for
the rest of the campaign (<uri>https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/synoptic/201706</uri>, last access: 16 August
2021). The ridge brought clear skies, dry conditions, and record high
temperatures to Clark County, and June 2017 was the third-hottest in Las
Vegas since official record keeping began in 1948, and the extreme
temperatures and dry conditions exacerbated multiple wildfires across the
SWUS. The high temperatures at the NLVA exceeded 41 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
(106 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>F) each day during the last 2 weeks of the study, and the
daily records for Las Vegas were tied or exceeded on 5 straight days from 20
to 24 June. The official high of 47.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (117 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>F) at
Harry Reid International Airport on 20 June, the last day of astronomical
spring, tied the all-time Las Vegas record. Coincidentally, this record was
also tied on the final day of the first LVOS campaign (30 June 2013). The
daily high temperatures abated slightly to 42–43 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C during the
last few days of the campaign and IOP4, when a weak cold front associated
with the shallow trough (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in Fig. 3f passed through the LVV. The
temperatures on AP were typically 10–15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C lower due to its higher
elevation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Overview of results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>TOPAZ profiles</title>
      <p id="d1e2530">TOPAZ operated for an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 h a day over 45
consecutive days (17 May–30 June) during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS, accumulating a total of
4026 profiles or 537 h of observations. Approximately 60 % of the
profiles were acquired between the hours of 09:00 and 17:00 PDT, but there
were several extended runs including a 60 h continuous session from
11–13 June. The O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles are summarized as time–height
curtain plots in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. The scalloped appearance of
the individual curtains is caused by the diurnal variation in background
solar radiation, which determines the measurement signal-to-noise and thus
the maximum achievable altitude. The dark-gray curves show the boundary
layer heights from the Doppler lidar, and the red boxes outline the four
IOPs. The colored stripe along the bottom of Fig. 4 shows the NLVA
measurements from the in situ monitor in the truck. Preliminary TOPAZ measurements
from the afternoon of 17 May caught the remnants of a deep cyclonic
intrusion from the closed low (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in Fig. 3a, and free-tropospheric
layers and filaments were present in nearly all of the profiles measured
between mid-May and mid-June. The low backscatter in Fig. 5 shows that these
layers were not created by biomass burning, and most of the layers were
higher (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 km a.g.l) and more persistent than would be expected
for pollution lofted from the Los Angeles Basin by the “mountain chimney
effect” (Langford et al., 2010), but this process may
have contributed to some of the lower-lying “residual layers” in the ozone
curtains (e.g., 16 June). This suggests that most of the higher-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers
were stratospheric intrusions or Asian pollution plumes, a conclusion
supported by the AM4 and GEOS-Chem simulations (Zhang et al., 2020). Free-tropospheric O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers appeared less frequently after the jet stream
retreated into Canada, and photochemical production increased rapidly as the
subtropical ridge moved into the SWUS. The highest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
were usually measured in the boundary layer after mid-June, although Fig. 4
shows that this pattern was briefly interrupted on 18–19 June, when the
anticyclonic circulation transported clean marine air deep into the IMW.
High O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was present both in and above the boundary layer during the
last 3 d of the campaign, when IOP4 was conducted.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2614">Time–height curtain plots showing the TOPAZ ozone measurements
from the NLVA. The axes are altitude (Alt) above ground level and Pacific
Daylight Time (PDT). The continuous ribbon along the bottom shows the
measurements from the in situ surface monitor in the TOPAZ truck, and the dark-gray curves show the boundary layer heights inferred from the co-located Doppler lidar measurements. The red boxes bracket the four IOPs.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2625">Same as Fig. 4, but for the TOPAZ backscatter measurements.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2635">The backscatter curtains in Fig. 5 show that TOPAZ measured relatively low
backscatter during most of the campaign. The aerosol loading was usually
highest in the boundary layer, but comparisons to the near-IR Doppler lidar
measurements and ozonesondes show that the gradients in the UV profiles were
usually too weak to reliably define the boundary layer height. The
backscatter above the top of the<?pagebreak page1717?> boundary layer increased abruptly on 19 June, when smoke from fires in Arizona and Mexico drifted into the LVV, and
high backscatter was measured both in and above the boundary layer on 20 June, when smoke from the much closer Holcomb Fire reached Las Vegas. Note
that the boundary layer height determination relied heavily on the vertical
velocity variance profile when dispersed smoke was present. These
measurements will be described in more detail elsewhere along with those
from 23–26 June, when smoke from other regional wildfires reached Las Vegas
and possibly contributed to the high surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measured on those days.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Mobile laboratory measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e2656">The nearly continuous 1 min averaged in situ O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from the AP mobile laboratory are summarized in the top panel of Fig. 6; the lower
panels plot the corresponding CO, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, NO,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements. As
noted above, the lack of rainfall and extreme aridity of the Mojave Desert
allow us to use water vapor as a semi-conserved tracer, and each of the time
series is colorized by the co-measured H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O to show whether the sampled
air came from the lower stratosphere or upper troposphere (dry: violet–blue)
or from the terrestrial (moderate: green–yellow) or marine (moist:
yellow–red) lower troposphere. The letters A–G identify specific transport
episodes that are examined in more detail below. The mobile laboratory
measured 1 min O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios in excess of 80 ppbv on 8 of the 43
measurement days in the campaign and mixing ratios in excess of 70 ppbv on
17 d. The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> averaged 60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 ppbv and exceeded the NAAQS
on 4 d. Some of the highest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were measured in
very dry air with low NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during the night and early
morning (e.g., 8–9 June, episode C, and 11–12 June, episode D), but high
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was also measured in more humid air with elevated NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on some afternoons (e.g., 2 June, episode B). The AP wind
measurements show that all of the short-lived nocturnal peaks coincided with
strong southwesterly winds, while the broader afternoon peaks were
associated with weaker southeasterly upslope flow. The lowest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations of the campaign were measured on 18–19 June in very moist air
transported inland by the anticyclonic flow around the subtropical ridge
seen centered over southern Nevada in Fig. 3e.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e2814">Time series of the AP 1 min in situ measurements color-coded by the
co-measured H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O. The dashed black line in <bold>(a)</bold> shows the 2015 NAAQS of 70 ppbv. The gray regions bracket the four IOPs. The measurements labeled A–G are discussed in the text.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS3">
  <label>5.3</label><title>Comparisons and validation</title>
      <?pagebreak page1718?><p id="d1e2843">The vertical scanning capability of the TOPAZ lidar allows direct
comparisons with nearby surface in situ monitors. Figure 7a compares time series of the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios retrieved at 27.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 m a.g.l. (red) with the in situ measurements sampled 5 m a.g.l. at the truck (gray). The two series are in excellent agreement (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.91) when the co-located
Doppler lidar showed the boundary layer to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2500 m deep
(black). The TOPAZ lidar was not normally run overnight, but Fig. 7a shows
that the only significant differences between the time series occurred
during a 24 h run through the night of 31 May–1 June (IOP2) when
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> near the truck was titrated by NO emitted from nearby combustion
sources. These emissions did not affect the TOPAZ concentrations retrieved
about 20 m high and 800 m down range. The nocturnal losses were much smaller
on 25 May and 7–12 June, when winds from the passing cold fronts dispersed
the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and disrupted the shallow nocturnal inversion layers. Figure 7b is similar to Fig. 7a but compares the NLVA in situ measurements with the
TOPAZ mixing ratios at 2000 m a.g.l., the elevation of AP. Although TOPAZ
frequently measured higher O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aloft on 7–12 June when the boundary
layer was relatively shallow (Fig. S1), these measurements are also in good
agreement (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.76) when the boundary layer was deeper than 2500 m.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e2950">Time series comparing the TOPAZ O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios with the
NLVA and AP in situ measurements. <bold>(a)</bold> TPZ (0.03 km) and NLVA surface monitor in the TOPAZ truck, <bold>(b)</bold> TPZ 2.0 km a.g.l. and NLVA surface monitor, <bold>(c)</bold> NLVA and AP surface monitors, and <bold>(d)</bold> TPZ 2.0 km a.g.l. and AP surface monitor.
The gray bands show the four IOPs. The dashed horizontal lines show the 2015
NAAQS of 70 ppbv. The red points highlight measurements made when the mixed
layer was more than 2500 m deep.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2980">Figure 7c compares the in situ measurements from the NLVA (gray) with those from AP
(red). The most obvious difference between the time series is the lack of
surface deposition and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> titration on AP, which was exposed to free-tropospheric air during the night. The black points show that mixing ratios
were similar (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.46) when the boundary layer above
the NLVA was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2500 m. One notable exception is the measurements
from 23 June, when the measurements in the LVV may have been influenced by
smoke from the Brian Head Fire in southwestern Utah (cf. Fig. 5f). Although
difficult to see in Fig. 7c, the AP O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations typically lagged
those at the NLVA on days with well-developed upslope flow, including the
4 AP exceedance days (14, 16, 29, and 30 June). A key assumption of the
<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS experimental design was that the air sampled on the summit of AP was
representative of the air entrained by the mixed layer above the LVV. The
similarity between the 2000 m a.g.l. TOPAZ retrievals and the mobile
laboratory O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements in Fig. 7d shows that this was generally the
case when the boundary layer was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2500 m deep. The time series
are in good agreement (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.60) under these
conditions if the measurements from 23 June are excluded.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <label>6</label><title>Intensive operating periods</title>
      <p id="d1e3088">The aircraft and ozonesonde profiles acquired during the four IOPs provided
spatial context for the lidar measurements and helped distinguish
stratospheric intrusions from Asian pollution. The planning and successful
execution of these intensives relied on the ability of the RAQMS (96 h) and
RAP-Chem (48 h) models to predict stratospheric intrusion and pollution
transport events more than 48 h in advance so that the aircraft and
ozonesonde teams could return to Las Vegas from their home stations.
Examples of the model forecasts are shown in Fig. 8, which displays the
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO forecasts for 12:00 UT 12 June
(cf. Fig. 3d). The left panels of Fig. 8 show the 96 h total O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
(top) and CO (bottom) at 320 K (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 500 hPa or 5.8 km a.s.l. above Las Vegas) from RAQMS initialized at 12:00 UT on 7 June, and the right panels show the 36 h RAP-Chem O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO 500 hPa forecasts initialized at 00:00 UT on
11 June. Note that the higher-resolution RAP-Chem model gets its boundary
conditions from the RAQMS model. This example shows that the RAQMS model
captured both the timing and location of the stratospheric intrusion–Asian
pollution event 4 d out or 3 d before the start of IOP3 on 10 June.
The retrospective MERRA-2 PV analyses in Fig. 3 and FLEXPART stratospheric
ozone (STTO3) and Asian CO (ASIACO) tracer distributions
(<uri>https://csl.noaa.gov/projects/fastlvos/FAST-LVOSfinalreport604318-16.pdf</uri>,
last access: 7 December 2021) in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively, show that
stratospheric air and/or Asian pollution was present in the middle and upper
troposphere above Nevada during each of the IOPs. The correspondence between
the 96 h RAQMS forecasts in Fig. 8 and the retrospective FLEXPART
distributions in the third columns of Figs. 9 and 10 is particularly
impressive.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e3130">RAQMS (left) and RAP-Chem (right) O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (top) and CO (bottom)
forecasts for 12:00 UT 12 June 2017. The 320 K RAQMS forecasts were initialized at 12:00 UT 7 June, the 500 hPa RAP-Chem forecasts at 00:00 UT 11 June.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f08.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e3150">FLEXPART STTO3 tracer distributions during the four IOPs. The
plots show the distributions, from left to right, at 12:00 UT 25 May, 00:00 UT 2 June, 12:00 UT 12 June, and 06:00 UT 29 June and from top to bottom at 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 hPa. The approximate altitudes above sea level near Las Vegas corresponding to the different pressure surfaces are shown in the panels on the far right. The heavy black contour lines (e.g., in the upper left panel) indicate that the scale is saturated.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f09.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e3162">Same as Fig. 9, but for the ASIACO tracer.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f10.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3171">The curtain plots in Fig. 4 show that the TOPAZ lidar measured high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the middle and upper troposphere during each of the IOPs; the expanded
3 d curtain plots in Figs. 11–14 show these measurements in more detail.
The superimposed horizontal ribbons represent the NLVA and AP surface
measurements and the nearly vertical ribbons the ascending profiles from the
ozonesondes. Those portions of the descending profiles within 20 km of the
NLVA are also plotted. The NLVA and AP surface wind measurements and
continuous Doppler lidar boundary layer heights are also overlaid on<?pagebreak page1719?> the
curtains, with the boundary layer heights derived from the ozonesonde
potential temperature profiles (open black circles) plotted for comparison.
The heavy arrows at the top of each plot correspond to the MERRA-2 analyses
in Fig. 3. The labels A, B, D, and G match the corresponding peaks in Fig. 6.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e3185">Time–height curtain plots similar to those in Figs. 4 and 5,
but expanded to better show the TOPAZ <bold>(a)</bold> ozone and <bold>(b)</bold> backscatter measurements during IOP1. The dark-gray curves represent the boundary layer heights derived from the co-located Doppler lidar measurements. The superimposed horizontal bands in <bold>(a)</bold> show the AP and NLVA in situ O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements, and the near-vertical colored bands show the Joe Neal ozonesonde profiles. The barbs in both panels show the AP and NLVA surface winds and the open circles the mixing heights inferred from the ozonesondes. The heavy black arrow above <bold>(a)</bold> corresponds to the 12:00 UT 25 May PV plot from Fig. 3b. The 300 hPa surface lies at approximately 9 km a.g.l. The label “A” is the same as in Fig. 6.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f11.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e3217">Same as Fig. 11, but for IOP2. The heavy black arrow
corresponds to the 06:00 UT 2 June 300 hPa plot in Fig. 3c.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f12.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e3229">Same as Fig. 11, but for IOP3. The heavy black arrow
corresponds to the 12:00 UT 12 June 300 hPa plot in Fig. 3d.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f13.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e3240">Same as Fig. 11, but for IOP4. The heavy black arrow
corresponds to the 00:00 UT 29 June 300 hPa plot in Fig. 3f.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f14.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?pagebreak page1720?><p id="d1e3249">The SA aircraft profiles overlap with the midday ozonesonde profiles and are
omitted from the curtain plots for clarity, but Fig. 15 shows longitudinal
transects of the sections of the outbound (left) and inbound (right) flight
legs between the NLVA and AP on 25 May (IOP1), 2 June (IOP2), 12 June
(IOP3), and 28 June (IOP4). The flight tracks are colorized by the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
measurements, and the plots also show the mean lidar and ozonesonde profiles
and surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from the roughly 1 h interval bracketing
the NLVA and AP profiles. Ozonesondes were only launched between 09:00 and
15:00 PDT and thus did not overlap with the return flight legs. These plots
underscore the good agreement between the different <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
measurements and support the assumption that the air above AP was usually
representative of the air above the LVV. Similar plots colorized by H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O
and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are displayed in Figs. S2 and S3. Figure 16 shows the measured
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios along the outbound flight legs from the NLVA to Big
Bear and the inbound flight legs back to Jean. The AP profiles and TOPAZ
measurements are omitted from these plots as are the afternoon profiles
above the LVV. In the following sections, we briefly describe each of the
IOPs and compare the upper-air measurements with the FLEXPART STTO3 and
ASIACO tracer distributions. More complete descriptions of these
measurements are planned for future publications.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F15" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e3312">Ozone mixing ratios measured by the lidar, ozonesonde, and
aircraft and by the AP, Joe Neal (JN), and NLVA surface monitors during the
outgoing (left) and returning (right) flights on <bold>(a, b)</bold> 25 May, <bold>(c, d)</bold> 2 June, <bold>(e, f)</bold> 12 June, and <bold>(g, h)</bold> 28 June. The dashed horizontal lines show the boundary layer height inferred from the NLVA Doppler lidar measurements.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f15.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e3336">Ozone mixing ratios measured by the ozonesonde and aircraft on
the flights to and from Big Bear on <bold>(a)</bold> 25 May, <bold>(b)</bold> 2 June, <bold>(c)</bold> 12 June, and <bold>(d)</bold> 28 June. The TOPAZ measurements and AP aircraft profiles are omitted
for clarity, as are the Jean and NLVA aircraft profiles from the return
legs. The terrain profile is approximate.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f16.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS1">
  <label>6.1</label><title>IOP1: 23–25 May</title>
      <p id="d1e3364">The first IOP was timed to coincide with the arrival of the trough (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)
poised above the northern IMW in Fig. 3b. The PV analysis for the morning
(12:00 UT) of 25 May shows a deep cyclonic intrusion wrapping around L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and the FLEXPART STTO3 plots in the first column of Fig. 9 show a deep
cyclonic intrusion descending almost vertically to 700 hPa above northern
Nevada and California. The PV analysis in Fig. 3b also shows a thin
anticyclonic streamer stretching across southern Nevada from the tip of L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, now an elongated trough over the eastern US, and
FLEXPART shows this shallower feature on the 300 and 400 hPa surfaces. The
ASIACO tracer distributions in the first column of Fig. 10 show Asian
pollution mingled with the cyclonic intrusion and in a deep narrow band
stretching across northern Nevada between the cyclonic and anticyclonic
intrusions. Analysis of satellite CO measurements and the GFDL-AM4 and
GEOS-Chem model simulations by Zhang et al. (2020) also found a large Asian pollution
component in these layers.</p>
      <p id="d1e3394">The curtain plots for 23–25 May in Fig. 11 show layers with more than 100 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> above the LVV on all 3 d, but the layers were above
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6 km a.s.l. altitude ceiling of the SA Mooney on the first 2 d. The aircraft was able to reach the more diffuse band with 75 to 80 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> seen above 4.5 km a.g.l. on 25 May, however, and the plots in Figs. 15 and 16 show that this layer extended to the south at least as far as Barstow (cf. Fig. 1).</p>
      <?pagebreak page1721?><p id="d1e3422">Figure S3 shows that the air in this layer was extremely dry, but the absence
of a corresponding CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> enhancement in Fig. S4 suggests that this layer
was primarily of stratospheric origin. The lidar, aircraft, and ozonesonde
measurements also show that the high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aloft was separated from the
boundary layer by a layer of continental air with much lower O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations, and there was no obvious local mixing of the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aloft
into the boundary layer. The GFDL-AM4 simulations also found little evidence
for stratospheric or Asian pollution influences in Clark County surface air but estimated Asian contributions of 8–15 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to the surface
along the areas of northern California, Idaho, and Wyoming lying beneath the
bands seen in the 700 hPa STTO3 and ASIACO FLEXPART analyses.</p>
      <p id="d1e3470">The GFDL-AM4 and GEOS-Chem models did show large contributions from local
and regional pollution in the lowest few kilometers above Clark County
during IOP1, and the TOPAZ curtain plots also show moderately high (70–80 ppbv) O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the boundary layer on 23 May and what appears to be a residual layer with 70–80 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> above the boundary
layer on the morning of 24 May. The lidar also found 60–70 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
with high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in the boundary layer on the morning of 25 May that
decreased abruptly when the winds rotated to the southwest just after noon.
These measurements correspond to episode A in Fig. 6, and the outbound
aircraft measurements plotted in the top panels of Figs. S2 and S3 show that
the air above the LVV and AP was relatively moist and enriched in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The mobile laboratory also found moist air with moderate O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on AP but
also measured elevated CO, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O and the highest
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations measured during the campaign. The scatterplots in
Fig. 17 show that O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was positively correlated<?pagebreak page1722?> with all of these
tracers, and a 96 h HYSPLIT back trajectory launched 2 km above the NLVA
(Fig. 18, solid red line) meandered around the southern San Joaquin Valley
(SJV) within the shallow boundary layer in the valley, which is typically
less than 1 km deep in summer (Faloona et al., 2020), for more than 48 h before exiting through the Tejon Pass and crossing the Mojave Desert
to Las Vegas. This can explain the high N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations, which likely came from agricultural and oil and gas sources
in the SJV. The air parcel was also exposed to urban sources in the SJV, and
the high CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations show that the parcel
entrained additional urban pollution as it passed through the LVV en route
to AP.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F17"><?xmltex \currentcnt{17}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 17</label><caption><p id="d1e3618">Scatterplots showing the relationships between O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the
<bold>(a)</bold> N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, <bold>(b)</bold> CO, <bold>(c)</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(d)</bold> CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(e)</bold> NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(f)</bold> NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> tracers on AP during episodes A–G. The gray points show all of the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS measurements. The black points with error bars in <bold>(a)</bold>, <bold>(c)</bold>, and <bold>(d)</bold> represent the mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) June 2017 concentrations from the NOAA GML Mauna Loa Observatory.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f17.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F18"><?xmltex \currentcnt{18}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 18</label><caption><p id="d1e3727">NOAA HYSPLIT 96 h back trajectories launched 2 km above North Las
Vegas during episodes A–G. The small and large filled symbols are spaced 12 and 24 h apart, respectively. The trajectories were calculated using
the 40 km NCEP Eta Data Assimilation System (EDAS) meteorology.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f18.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3736">This interesting case illustrates yet another way that passing troughs can
influence surface air quality in the LVV. Figure 18 shows that the trajectory
initially followed the cyclonic circulation from L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (cf. Fig. 3b)
southward along the California coast (hence the high moisture content)
before crossing the Coast Range into the SJV on 23 May. The parcel
then followed the circulation northward into the LVV as the trough moved
east. The influence of the synoptic flow on<?pagebreak page1723?> the low-level winds is also seen
in the transport to AP, which occurred in the early morning and several
hours before the thermally forced upslope flow became established.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS2">
  <label>6.2</label><title>IOP2: 31 May–2 June</title>
      <p id="d1e3756">The second IOP focused on one in a series of shallow upper-level lows that
spun off of the Aleutian Low in late May and early June. The MERRA-2
analysis for 06:00 UT 2 June in Fig. 3c shows the low (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) approaching the Pacific Northwest. A narrow filament of high-PV air emanating from the low stretches anticyclonically above the Nevada–Utah border, but the
corresponding FLEXPART STTO3 distributions in the second column of Fig. 9
suggest that the intrusion was quite shallow. The ASIACO distributions in
Fig. 10 show bands of Asian pollution on both sides of the stratospheric
filament, with the pollution descending to at least 400 hPa above
California. The TOPAZ and ozonesonde measurements in Fig. 12a show two
downward-sloping bands of high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> between the top of the convective
mixed layer and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 km a.g.l. on the afternoon of 1 June, with the lowermost band appearing to merge with the mixed layer on the afternoon of 2 June. The backscatter curtains in Fig. 12b also show slightly higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in the uppermost layer at 5 km a.g.l. than in the lower one at 4 km a.g.l.</p>
      <p id="d1e3791">The aircraft and ozonesonde profiles in Fig. 15 also show the two O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
layers above the LVV in the morning, but the aircraft measurements show
little indication of the lower layer in the profile above AP, and Fig. 16
shows it to have been rather tenuous between Las Vegas and Barstow. Figures S2 and S3 show that both layers were very dry (3 %–8 % RH), but only the uppermost layer was elevated in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. This, together with the backscatter measurements in Fig. 12b,<?pagebreak page1724?> suggests that the upper layer was
mostly Asian pollution, while the lower layer was mostly stratospheric. The
TOPAZ curtain plot and afternoon aircraft profiles show that the convective
boundary layer completely entrained the lower (stratospheric) layer and
reached the bottom of the upper (Asian pollution) layer, where some
entrainment must also have taken place.</p>
      <p id="d1e3812">The mobile laboratory measurements from AP in Figs. 6 and 17 show a
pronounced O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> peak on the afternoon of 2 June (episode B), but the
other tracers show that this peak was caused by continental air and not the
stratospheric intrusion or Asian pollution plume, consistent with the
model-based attribution of the 2 June O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> peak to regional pollution
(Zhang et al., 2020). The sampled air had typical tropospheric N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O
concentrations and elevated CO, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations consistent with anthropogenic pollution. The high
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio points to local sources, and the wind barbs in Fig. 12 show that the air was transported up Kyle Canyon from the LVV by the
afternoon upslope flow. The HYSPLIT trajectory in Fig. 18 (green line)
approaches southern Nevada from the southeast without passing over
California or any of the fires burning in Mexico and Arizona at the time.
Similar local upslope events occurred frequently in late June (14, 16, 22,
and 30 June) after the subtropical ridge became established.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS3">
  <label>6.3</label><title>IOP3: 10–14 June</title>
      <p id="d1e3903">The third IOP was triggered by another deep closed low (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) that moved
into the western US in the second week of June. This cyclonic system was
unusually deep for mid-June, and the PV plot for 12:00 UT on 12 June in Fig. 3d
appears very similar to that for 00:00 UT 18 May (Fig. 3a). The cold front
brought strong (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) south-southwesterly winds to
Clark County and freezing temperatures (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) to AP on the night
of 11–12 June (Fig. S1). The FLEXPART STTO3 analyses in Fig. 9 show a deep
cyclonic stratospheric intrusion descending to at least 700 hPa over
southern Nevada, and the corresponding ASIACO analyses in Fig. 10 show
cyclonic bands of pollution descending ahead of the stratospheric air. The
RAQMS and RAP-Chem forecast plots in Fig. 8 appear similar.</p>
      <?pagebreak page1726?><p id="d1e3950">The third IOP was extended to 5 d (10–14 June), with aircraft sorties
flown on all 5 d and ozonesondes launched on 4 (10–13 June). The curtain
plot in Fig. 13a shows a continuous TOPAZ run of 60 h lasting from 08:00 PDT on 11 June to 21:00 PDT on 13 June. The lidar and superimposed ozonesonde
profiles show a complex network of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> filaments descending into the
lower troposphere, with more than 150 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> approaching to within
3.3 km of the surface at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 03:00 PDT on 12 June and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 250 ppbv measured at 5.5. km a.g.l. around 09:00 PDT. The aircraft, ozonesonde, and lidar profiles in Fig. 15
show more than 120 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> between 6 and 8 km a.g.l. in the early
afternoon of 12 June, and Fig. 16 shows the intrusion sloping downward to
the south, with more than 140 ppbv measured along the 5.5 km a.s.l. flight
leg between Barstow and Jean. The profiles near the NLVA and AP also show
elevated CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the air above and below the high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layer (Fig. S4), which along with the elevated backscatter beneath the tongue in Fig. 13b shows the Asian pollution descending ahead of the stratospheric air.</p>
      <?pagebreak page1727?><p id="d1e4013">Figure 13a shows that the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> maximum of 84 ppbv recorded around 23:00 PDT
on 11 June by the mobile laboratory on AP (episode D) occurred close to the
deepest penetration of the intrusion in the lidar curtain. The sampled air
was extremely dry (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.1 % H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O), and the stratospheric origin was confirmed by the low N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O concentrations in Fig. 6 and the negative
correlations of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> with CO, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O in Fig. 17. The
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> converter was offline during this episode, but the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations were near the detection limit. Similar chemical
characteristics were measured in the air sampled during the first of the two
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> peaks that appeared on the morning of 5 June and are mentioned in
Sect. 5.2. Figure 18 (purple line) shows the HYSPLIT back trajectory
descending from the northwest over the previous 72 h.</p>
      <p id="d1e4105">Interestingly, this large intrusion did not lead to particularly high
surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the LVV on 11–13 June since the high winds from the cold
front dispersed most of the locally produced O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and other pollutants
ahead of the descending stratospheric air (Langford et al., 2012). The
curtain plots do show a short-lived increase in the lowest 2 km on the
afternoon of 11 June, when the surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations briefly climbed
from 50 to 70 ppbv at the NLVA. However, the GFDL-AM4 model suggests that
the intrusion layer was mixed into regional pollution on 13–14 June and
pushed the MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to exceed the 70 ppbv NAAQS level at sites across
the SWUS, including several sites in Clark County (Zhang et al., 2020). Once
stratospheric air is mixed into local pollution, it loses its key
stratospheric characteristics (e.g., low CO and low H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O), challenging
diagnosis of its surface impacts directly based on observations. This case
study demonstrates the importance of integrating observational and modeling
analysis for the unambiguous attribution of high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> events in the SWUS
(Zhang et al., 2020).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS4">
  <label>6.4</label><title>IOP4: 27–30 June</title>
      <p id="d1e4171">The final IOP targeted a weak trough (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) that crossed the Canadian
border near the end of June. The MERRA-2 analysis for 06:00 UT 29 June (Fig. 3f)
shows the PV maximum on the western flank of the trough. The analysis also
shows the latest (L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in a series of cut-off lows (COLs) (Nieto et
al., 2005) that formed off the coast of California in late June. These COLs
typically meandered around the eastern Pacific for several days before
rejoining the main flow, and Fig. 3f shows a narrow filament connecting
L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to the remnants of L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (cf. Fig. 3e), which now lies above the
Midwest. The FLEXPART STTO3 tracer in Fig. 9 shows both a cyclonic intrusion
from L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> descending to 500–600 hPa above Oregon and the narrow filament
connecting the two COLs above southern Nevada on the 400 hPa surface. Figure 10 shows that there was significant Asian pollution between the filament and
the cyclonic intrusion.</p>
      <p id="d1e4219">The TOPAZ curtain plot in Fig. 14 shows high (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 80 ppbv) O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
above the boundary layer on 29 and 30 June, with up to 90 ppbv measured in
the boundary layer on 30 June. The SA profiles from these days (not shown)
found very dry air with depressed CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich layers above 4 km a.g.l., suggesting that they originated in the
stratosphere. The most interesting measurements are those from 28 June,
however, which show a thin layer with more than 100 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> but low
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> disappearing into the convective mixed layer in the early afternoon,
the most striking example of boundary layer entrainment observed during
<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS. The companion paper by Zhang et al. (2020) refers to this as an “unattributed event” since the layer was not resolved by either the AM4 (C192: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 200 m vertical) or
GEOS-Chem  global models and cannot be resolved by FLEXPART for that
matter. The spatial inhomogeneity of the layer is evidenced by the aircraft
measurements in Figs. 15 and 16. Figure S3 shows that the air was very dry
both within and above the mystery layer, and the combination of extreme
dryness and low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> rules out biomass burning or regional pollution. The
layer was also rich in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, suggesting that it was not a stratospheric
intrusion.</p>
      <p id="d1e4323">Figure 14 shows that the winds on the summit of AP were mostly southerly
during the morning and early afternoon of 28 June, and the mobile laboratory
sampled air with much lower O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations than that profiled by the
lidar. The winds briefly rotated to the northwest in the early evening,<?pagebreak page1728?> and
the mobile laboratory recorded a drop in relative humidity and increase in
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> around 18:30 PDT (episode G). The relationships in Fig. 17 suggest
that this spike was caused by Asian pollution, a conclusion supported by the
HYSPLIT back trajectory (dashed blue line) in Fig. 18, which descends from
the upper troposphere over the Pacific Ocean before passing over the SJV
well above the boundary layer. Although the transient peak in Fig. 6 was
detected more than 6 h after the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layer was entrained, it does
support the conclusion that Asian pollution was present in the vicinity of
AP on 28 June.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7">
  <label>7</label><title>Other transport examples</title>
      <p id="d1e4362">Not all of the interesting transport episodes occurred during one of the
four IOPs, and the labels C, E, and F in Figs. 6, 17, and 18 highlight three
other examples. Figure 6a shows that the highest 1 min O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 95 ppbv) measured on AP during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS 2017 were sampled during
episode C around 02:00 PDT on the morning of 9 June. The high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> lasted
for about an hour but occurred several hours after TOPAZ had ceased
operations for the night. However, the 8 June curtain plot in Fig. 4d shows
a 1 km deep layer of high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> just above the top of the boundary layer
throughout the observing session that appears to have persisted through the
night and into the next morning, when the lidar operations resumed. The
unusual dryness of the air sampled on AP and relationships between O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and the other measured species (Fig. 17) suggest that this layer was also
Asian pollution that recently descended from the upper troposphere. The
episode C measurements completely overlap with the measurements from 28 June
(episode G) in many of the scatterplots, suggesting a common origin. The
HYSPLIT trajectories in Fig. 18 are also similar, and the peak
concentrations measured by TOPAZ, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 105 ppbv on 8 June and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 115 ppbv on 28 June, are also comparable.</p>
      <p id="d1e4426">The 1 min mobile laboratory measurements from the morning of 18 June
(episode E) include both the highest H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (12 g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and lowest
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (29 ppbv) measured on AP during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS 2017. Figure 4f shows that TOPAZ also measured unusually low O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> throughout the
tropospheric column. As noted above, this episode is attributed to transport
of clean marine air deep into the IMW by the anticyclonic flow around the
subtropical ridge (Fig. 3e), and the HYSPLIT back trajectory (Fig. 18, dashed
red line) suggests that this moist background air was lifted into the lower
free troposphere above the Pacific Ocean more than 4 d earlier. Figures 6 and 17 show that the mobile laboratory also measured very low
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations on AP (the
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> converter was offline). The filled black circles in Fig. 17 show
that the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations measured at
AP on the morning of 18 June were comparable to the mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) June 2017 values measured at the high-elevation NOAA GML Mauna Loa
Observatory (<uri>https://gml.noaa.gov/dv/data/</uri>, last access: 16 August 2021). These measurements are thought to represent the background
concentrations in the free-tropospheric air reaching the US west coast.</p>
      <p id="d1e4569">The final example (episode F) coincides with the highest backscatter (Fig. 5f) measured above the NLVA during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS 2017. These measurements were made
about 24 h after the start of the Holcomb Fire near Big Bear on the
afternoon of 19 June (cf. Fig. 1). This fire grew rapidly but was battled
aggressively, and the expansion was checked at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 600 ha (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1500 acres) by the evening of 21 June. The anticyclonic path followed by the
HYSPLIT trajectory (dashed green line) in Fig. 18 passed directly over the
Holcomb Fire and possibly over older fires in Arizona and northern Mexico.
The curtain plots in Figs. 4f and 5f show that there was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 85 ppbv
of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the smoke that appeared at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 km a.g.l. on the
morning of 20 June but only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 ppbv of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the denser
smoke that appeared between 4 and 6 km a.g.l. in the afternoon and evening.
Some of the smoke from the second plume was entrained by the convective
boundary layer, and the CO time series from the mobile laboratory on AP shows
a corresponding rise to more than 140 ppbv. However, Fig. 17e shows that
there was little NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the second plume, which is consistent with the
absence of any O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> enhancement in either the sampled air or the lidar
measurements.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S8">
  <label>8</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Baseline ozone during \textit{FAST}-LVOS}?><title>Baseline ozone during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS</title>
      <p id="d1e4659">The top five panels of Fig. 19 show the hourly averaged and MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
measurements from the remote sampling sites operated by the WMRC and the
NVDEP during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS. All of these sites are located well away from populated
areas, with the WMRC located <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 310 km WNW of the LVV and the NVDEP
monitors located between 180 and 250 km to the north (cf. Fig. 1). The
bottom panel shows the measurements from the monitor maintained by the CCDAQ
in the town of Mesquite <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 120 km NE of Las Vegas, near the
Nevada–Utah border. MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations exceeding 65 and 70 ppbv are
highlighted in orange and red, respectively. The mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing
ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the standard deviation of the mean) is shown in
each plot. These measurements show a pronounced elevation trend consistent
with descent of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from the free troposphere and destruction at the
surface. The former is reflected in the higher mean values and episodic
increases at the higher elevations and the latter in the low nighttime
values at the lower elevations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F19" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{19}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 19</label><caption><p id="d1e4730">Time series of the 1 h average (gray line) and MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
(black staircase) measurements from the remote monitoring sites. The monitor
elevations are shown in parentheses. <bold>(a)</bold> White Mountain Summit, <bold>(b)</bold> Barcroft Observatory, <bold>(c)</bold> Warm Springs Summit, <bold>(d)</bold> Cathedral Gorge State Park, <bold>(e)</bold> Railroad Valley, and <bold>(f)</bold> Mesquite. MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations exceeding the
2015 NAAQS of 70 ppbv (dashed line) and a potential NAAQS of 65 ppbv are
highlighted in red and orange, respectively. The gray bands show the four
IOPs. The mean concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are calculated from the
15 May to 30 June MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f19.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?pagebreak page1729?><p id="d1e4797">The WMRC operates the highest-elevation long-term O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitors in the
continental US, with both the WMS (4.34 km a.s.l.) and BCO (3.88 km a.s.l.) located roughly 1 km higher than the CASTNET site in Gothic, CO
(2.93 km a.s.l.), which is the highest regulatory O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> monitor in the
US. The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measured at the WMS exceeded the 2015 NAAQS of 70 ppbv
on 17 of the 46 <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS sampling days, with a mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 ppbv between 15 May and 30 June, when there were persistent O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers
aloft, and 73 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11 ppbv between 23 May and 14 June, the 22 d interval
bracketing the beginning of the first and end of the third IOPs. High
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was measured during each of the four IOPs, with the 1 h peak
concentrations exceeding 100 ppbv on 16 May, 25–26 May, and 9–10 June. The
MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was greater than 65 ppbv on 24 d, including 18 of the 22 d between 23 May and 14 June, and the 4MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for the 6-week period
was 86 ppbv. The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were similar but about 8 ppbv
lower on average at the BCO.</p>
      <p id="d1e4901">The mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at WSSU, the highest-elevation NVDEP site at 2.3 km a.s.l., was about 17 ppbv lower than that at WMS, with a 4MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 61 ppbv. The large episodic increases measured by the WMRC monitors during the
IOPs did not reach the lower-lying NVDEP sites, and there were no NAAQS
exceedances by any of these non-regulatory monitors. Nevertheless, the mean
MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at these three remote sites ranged from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 to 55 ppbv, or 70 %–80 % of the NAAQS, between mid-May and the end of June, with 4MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
ranging from 59 to 62 ppbv (84 %–88 % of the NAAQS). An earlier analysis<?pagebreak page1730?> of
springtime (March–May) measurements from 2012 and 2013 at CGSP (Fine et
al., 2015a) found very similar mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations of 51 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6 and 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 ppbv, respectively. These measurements are comparable to the background (i.e., formed from natural sources plus anthropogenic sources in
countries outside the US) monthly mean springtime MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration of 50 ppbv estimated by Lin et al. (2012a, b) for higher elevations
in the IMW using the GFDL AM3 model for the year 2010 but are significantly
higher than the mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 ppbv derived by Zhang et al. (2011) using GEOS-Chem model runs for the years 2006–2008 and the upper limit of 40–45 ppbv for the seasonal mean MDA8 estimated by Dolwick et al. (2015) using Community
Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) and Comprehensive Air Quality Model with
Extensions (CAMx) runs for the year 2007. These differences should be viewed
with caution since they do not account for changes in Asian precursor
emissions or differences in trans-Pacific pollution transport and STT caused
by the position of the jet stream (Lin et al., 2015; Albers et al., 2018;
Breeden et al., 2021).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S9">
  <label>9</label><title>Implications for air quality attainment</title>
      <p id="d1e5004">The EPA has designated Las Vegas, Nevada, a marginal non-attainment area for
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<uri>https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/jnc.html</uri>,
last access: 16 August 2021). The warm and sunny conditions that lead to
rapid photochemical production of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> also drive the upslope flow into
the Spring Mountains that causes O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and other pollutants to accumulate
in the northwestern LVV. The highest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are usually
measured at the Joe Neal (C75) and Walter Johnson (C71) monitors (cf. Fig. 1), which had 2017 ozone design values, i.e., the 3-year running average of the
fourth-highest MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, of 74 and 72 ppbv, respectively. Figure 20
plots the hourly averaged and MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from these two sites
during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS, along with the corresponding measurements from the Apex (C22),
Jean (1019), and Indian Springs (C7772) monitors (cf. Fig. 1). The thin blue
line in each plot represents the average of the RRVA, CGSP, and WSSU MDA8
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from Fig. 19, which we use as an estimate for the
southern Nevada mean baseline MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The Joe Neal and Walter Johnson
monitors also recorded the highest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in Clark County
during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS and exceeded the 2015 NAAQS on 7 and 6 d, respectively.
Most of these exceedances coincided with the higher temperatures that
followed the poleward expansion of the subtropical ridge in mid-June (cf.
Fig. S1). Several of the other monitors located within a 15 km radius of the
NLVA also exceeded the NAAQS on at least 1 of these days. There was only
one exceedance each at the slightly more distant Apex (32 km NE) and Green
Valley (22 km SE) monitors and no exceedances at the Boulder City (40 km
SE), Jean (49 km SSE), or Indian Springs (58 km NW) monitors (cf. Fig. 1c).
Note that the Jean monitor was offline from 9–12 June. All of the CCDAQ monitors measured unusually low O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on 18–19 June.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F20" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{20}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 20</label><caption><p id="d1e5110">Time series of the 1 h (gray line) and MDA8 (black staircase)
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements from the CCDAQ <bold>(a)</bold> Joe Neal, <bold>(b)</bold> Walter Johnson, <bold>(c)</bold> JD Smith, <bold>(d)</bold> Jean, and <bold>(e)</bold> Indian Springs monitors. The distances from the
NLVA are shown in parentheses. Note that the Jean monitor was offline 9–12 June. The blue lines show the baseline MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> estimated from the mean of the NVDEP measurements. Panel <bold>(f)</bold> plots the differences
between the Indian Springs monitor and the Joe Neal (solid) and Walter
Johnson (dotted) monitors. MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations exceeding the 2015
NAAQS of 70 ppbv (dashed line) and a potential NAAQS of 65 ppbv are
highlighted in red and orange, respectively. The gray bands show the four
IOPs. The mean concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are calculated from the
15 May to 30 June MDA8 measurements.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/1707/2022/acp-22-1707-2022-f20.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e5177">The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measured by the Indian Springs monitor was very similar to
the NVDEP baseline values, with the largest differences arising on 16–17 June, when the anticyclonic marine incursion had reached the more northerly NVDEP sites but had not yet reached Clark County. The mean NVDEP and Indian Springs time series agree to within 3 % on average (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.69) if the
measurements from these 2 d are excluded. This suggests that the Indian
Springs measurements may be a good proxy for the LVV baseline O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during
the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaign, and the solid black line in Fig. 20f represents the difference between the Joe Neal MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations and the
Indian Springs monitor. The dotted line is similar but shows the difference
for the Walter Johnson monitor. The measurements from days where the MDA8
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations exceeded 65 or 70 ppbv are highlighted as before. The
MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at Joe Neal and Walter Johnson were
significantly higher than the baseline concentrations on 23 May, with the
Walter Johnson and Joe Neal monitors reaching 71 and 69 ppbv, respectively.
Although the lidar, aircraft, and ozonesonde observations showed high
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aloft throughout the first IOP, there was no obvious mixing of the
high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> into the boundary layer. There were multiple exceedances in the
San Joaquin Valley and South Coast air basins on 22–24 May, however, and the
elevated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the LVV on 23 May is most likely due to regional
transport and local production (cf. Sect. 6.1). Ozone was also elevated in
the LVV on 2–3 June, and the measurements in Fig. 12 do appear to show
entrainment of stratospheric O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and Asian pollution into the boundary
layer, although this supposition could not be confirmed by the AP
measurements. The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reached 68 and 65 ppbv, respectively, at
Walter Johnson and Joe Neal on 2 June and 70 and 69 ppbv on 3 June. The
descending O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> may also have contributed to an isolated cluster of NAAQS
exceedances at state and tribal monitors in southwestern Colorado and
northwestern New Mexico and to the MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 70 ppbv recorded at
Mesa Verde National Park on 3 June.</p>
      <p id="d1e5312">The high winds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the surface) preceding the
major intrusion event of 11–13 June (IOP3) cleared local pollution out of
the LVV ahead of the descending stratospheric air, and the MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations at Walter Johnson and Joe Neal reached only 59 and 57 ppbv on
11 June. Interestingly, the highest reported MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in
Clark County on that day were 63 and 60 ppbv at Indian Springs and Apex,
respectively. There were multiple NAAQS exceedances in Arizona on 13–15 June, however, including an MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration of 91 ppbv measured
on 14 June about 60 km northeast of Phoenix at the Tonto National Monument.
The GFDL-AM4 model estimated 20–30 ppbv MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> enhancements from
stratospheric influence around this site and other areas in Arizona on 14 June (see Fig. 9 in Zhang et al., 2020). The next highest values<?pagebreak page1731?> recorded at this site in 2017 were 78 ppbv on 15 June and 77 ppbv on 13 June.</p>
      <?pagebreak page1732?><p id="d1e5371">The Walter Johnson and Joe Neal measurements in Fig. 20 appear qualitatively
very different from the White Mountain Summit and Barcroft Observatory
measurements in Fig. 19. Nearly all of the NAAQS exceedances at the high
elevation sites occurred before the middle of June, when stratospheric
intrusions and Asian pollution plumes appeared frequently in the middle and
lower troposphere, but nearly all of the exceedances in the LVV occurred
after the middle of June, when higher temperatures and stagnant conditions
increased photochemical production of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the boundary layer. The
high temperatures also exacerbated regional wildfires, including the Holcomb
and Brian Head fires, whose plumes reached the LVV in the third week of June
(cf. Figs. 4f and 5f). Note that these fires did not increase surface
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at the Jean, Indian Springs, or Mesquite monitors, suggesting that
the smoke plumes were NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-limited, and significant O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> production
required additional NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from urban sources in the LVV (Singh et al.,
2012). High O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was measured both in and above the boundary layer on the
last 3 d of June during IOP4, with a clear example showing the
entrainment of a fine-scale Asian pollution plume by the growing convective
boundary layer on 28 June. This event contributed to MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 69 and
74 ppbv at Walter Johnson and Joe Neal as well as the only exceedance by
the Apex monitor which measured 71 ppbv. The high-elevation WMRC monitors
also measured elevated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lower free troposphere on 29 June, and
some of this O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> may have contributed to the exceedances in the LVV on
that day.</p>
      <p id="d1e5456">The 2013 LVOS and 2017 <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS campaigns were conducted over the same late
spring/early summer time period, but the distribution and sources of the
high O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> measured in Clark County during 2013 and 2017 were very
different. The MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exceeded 70 ppbv at one or more of the Clark
County monitors on 17 d in May and June of 2013 but only 8 d in May
and June of 2017. In 2013, 12 of the 17 exceedance days occurred <italic>before</italic> 13 June, and 9 were in May. In 2017, 7 of the 8 exceedance days occurred <italic>after</italic> 13 June,
with only 1 in May. Only one of the high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> events in 2017 affected
more than 4 of the 12 active monitors, but 8 of the 17 high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> events
in 2013 affected 4 of the 11 active monitors, and 4 affected 9 or more of
the CAMSs. These were the stratospheric intrusion and wildfire event of 4–5 May
(Langford et al., 2015a), stratospheric intrusion events of
21 and 25 May (Langford et al., 2018), and Asian pollution event of 21 June
(Langford et al., 2017). These major
events affected monitors outside of Las Vegas as well as those in the valley, and the Jean monitor exceeded 70 ppbv on 8 d in 2013 but not once in
2017 (the Indian Springs monitor was not installed until 2015).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S10" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>10</label><title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e5513">The 6-week-long <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS field campaign collected a wealth of lidar, surface,
aircraft, and ozonesonde measurements that greatly improve our understanding
of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> transport in Clark County, Nevada, and the greater southwestern
US and Intermountain West in late spring and early summer. Daily lidar
observations found high-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> layers in the lower and middle free
troposphere above Las Vegas on more than 75 % (35 of 45) of the
measurement days. The highest tropospheric concentrations were measured on
11–12 June, when both the lidar and an ozonesonde launched nearby found up to
250 ppbv within 5.5 km of the surface. Several of these elevated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
layers were also sampled by a high-elevation research monitor located more
than 300 km to the west-northwest, in the White Mountains of California
(Burley and Bytnerowicz, 2011), and the MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations at this site averaged more than 68 ppbv over the course of
the study. Simulations from the FLEXPART, GEOS-Chem, and AM4 models
(Zhang et al., 2020) show that the elevated layers were created by
stratospheric intrusions or long-range transport from Asia and, in most
cases, a mixture of the two. Aircraft measurements made during the four IOPs
support this conclusion, and the aircraft mapped the spatial distribution of
these plumes above the Mojave Desert in southern Nevada and California.
<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS also documented several fine-scale anticyclonic streamers in addition to the deep cyclonic intrusions that are the focus of most studies.</p>
      <p id="d1e5559">The <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS measurements also captured several examples of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> being
entrained from aloft by the convective boundary layer, and correlations
between the different tracers measured on AP (2.7 km a.s.l.) showed the
distinctive signatures of both stratospheric air and Asian pollution on
multiple occasions. The AP measurements also found wildfire influences and
evidence for regional transport of anthropogenic pollution from the San
Joaquin Valley in addition to local upslope transport of pollution from the
LVV. Although none of the stratospheric intrusions or Asian pollution events
<italic>directly</italic> caused any of the NAAQS exceedances in the LVV during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS, they clearly
added to the surface concentrations on at least 1 (14 June) of the
exceedance days and contributed to the mean MDA8 O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 50–55 ppbv
measured at the remote sites in rural Nevada during the study. These mean
baseline concentrations represent 70 %–80 % of the 2015 NAAQS of 70 ppbv,
making it more difficult for western air quality managers to maintain
surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations below the NAAQS in the IMW during late spring
and early summer (Cooper et al., 2015; Uhl and Moore, 2018).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5604">FLEXPART simulations presented in this paper are available upon request to the corresponding author (andrew.o.langford@noaa.gov). Field measurements during <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS are available at
<uri>https://csl.noaa.gov/projects/fastlvos/data.html</uri> (last access: 31 December; NOAA, 2021).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e5613">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1707-2022-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1707-2022-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5622">AOL and CJS conceived this study and planned the field campaign; AOL, CJS, RJA, SPS, AMW, IP, PDC, CWS, JP, TBR, SSB, ZCJD, GK, SAC, and DJC prepared the
instruments and carried out the field measurements; SB and TAB analyzed the
Doppler lidar data; KCA compiled and archived the mobile laboratory
measurements; LZ performed the GFDL-AM4 simulations and all analysis under
the supervision of ML; RBP and MP conducted the RAQMS and RAP-Chem model
forecasts, respectively; JB and SE executed the FLEXPART model calculations;
AOL did the analyses and wrote the article with inputs from all coauthors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5628">At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of <italic>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</italic>.<?pagebreak page1733?> The peer-review process was guided by an independent editor, and the authors also have no other competing interests to declare.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e5637">The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or the Department of Commerce.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5646">We would like to thank Zheng Li and Rodney Langston of the CCDAQ for their
support and assistance in the planning and execution of the project, Paul
Fransioli for providing the wind profiler and visibility camera data, and
various other CCDAQ personnel who provided logistical support during the
execution of the field campaign. We would also like to thank Sheryl Fontaine
and Daren Winkelman from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Air Quality Planning for providing the Railroad Valley, Warm
Springs Summit, and Cathedral Gorge State Park measurements. We are most
grateful to Zaheer Kamal for his able piloting of the SA Mooney aircraft. We
would also like to thank Richard Marchbanks for his assistance during the
field campaign and Cathy Burgdorf-Rasco for maintaining the <italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS data site. Finally, we would also like to thank Katherine Emma​​​​​​​ Knowland and an anonymous reviewer for their careful reading of the manuscript and helpful suggestions.</p><p id="d1e5651">The <italic>Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport</italic>–Las Vegas Ozone Study
(<italic>FAST</italic>-LVOS) field measurements and model simulations were funded by the Clark
County Department of Air Quality (CCDAQ) under contracts CBE 604318-16 and
CBE 605334-19 (NOAA CCSL), CBE 603380-17 (Scientific Aviation), and CBE
604279-16 (NOAA GFDL). The NOAA CSL lidar operations were also supported by
the NOAA Climate Program Office; Atmospheric Chemistry, Carbon Cycle, and
Climate (AC4) Program; and the NASA-sponsored Tropospheric Ozone Lidar
Network (TOLNet; <uri>http://www-air.larc.nasa.gov/missions/TOLNet/</uri>,
last access: 16 August 2021).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e5665">This research has been supported by the Clark
County Department of Air Quality (CCDAQ) under contracts CBE 604318-16 and
CBE 605334-19 (NOAA CCSL), CBE 603380-17 (Scientific Aviation), and CBE 604279-16 (NOAA GFDL); the NOAA Climate Program Office; Atmospheric Chemistry, Carbon Cycle, and Climate (AC4) Program; and the NASA-sponsored Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5671">This paper was edited by Andreas Hofzumahaus and reviewed by Katherine Emma Knowland and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Albers, J. R., Perlwitz, J., Butler, A. H., Birner, T., Kiladis, G. N.,
Lawrence, Z. D., Manney, G. L., Langford, A. O., and Dias, J.: Mechanisms
Governing Interannual Variability of Stratosphere-to-Troposphere Ozone
Transport, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 234–260, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017jd026890" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017jd026890</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Albers, J. R., Butler, A. H., Breeden, M. L., Langford, A. O., and Kiladis, G. N.: Subseasonal prediction of springtime Pacific–North American transport using upper-level wind forecasts, Weather Clim. Dynam., 2, 433–452, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-433-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/wcd-2-433-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Langford, A. O., Weickmann, A. M., Law, D. C., Machol, J. L., Merritt, D. A., Marchbanks, R. D., Sandberg, S. P., Brewer, W. A., Hardesty, R. M., and Banta, R. M.: Development and Application of a Compact, Tunable, Solid-State Airborne Ozone Lidar System for Boundary Layer Profiling, J. Atmos. Ocean Tech., 28, 1258–1272, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-10-05044.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Jtech-D-10-05044.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Beekmann, M., and Papayannis, A.: Impact of a cutoff low
development on downward transport of ozone in the troposphere, J. Geophys.
Res., 99, 3451–3468, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Appenzeller, C. and Davies, H. C.: Structure of stratospheric intrusions
into the troposphere, Nature, 358, 570–572, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Appenzeller, C., Davies, H. C., and Norton, W. A.: Fragmentation of
stratospheric intrusions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 1435–1456,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd02674" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/95jd02674</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Assonov, S. S., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Schuck, T., and Umezawa, T.:
N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O as a tracer of mixing stratospheric and tropospheric air based on
CARIBIC data with applications for CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Atmos. Environ., 79,
769–779, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.07.035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.07.035</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bonasoni, P., Evangelisti, F., Bonafe, U., Ravegnani, F., Calzolari, F.,
Stohl, A., Tositti, L., Tubertini, O., and Colombo, T.: Stratospheric ozone
intrusion episodes recorded at Mt. Cimone during the VOTALP project: case
studies, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1355–1365, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bonin, T. A., Carroll, B. J., Hardesty, R. M., Brewer, W. A., Hajny, K.,
Salmon, O. E., and Shepson, P. B.: Doppler Lidar Observations of the Mixing
Height in Indianapolis Using an Automated Composite Fuzzy Logic Approach,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 35, 473–490, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-17-0159.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Jtech-D-17-0159.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Breeden, M. L., Butler, A. H., Albers, J. R., Sprenger, M., and Langford, A. O.: The spring transition of the North Pacific jet and its relation to deep stratosphere-to-troposphere mass transport over western North America, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2781–2794, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2781-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-2781-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Trainer, M., Ryerson, T. B., Holloway, J. S., Baynard, T., Peischl, J., Warneke, C., Neuman, J. A., De Gouw, J., Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., Frost, G. J., McKeen, S. A., Hsie, E.-Y., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Nédélec, P.: Mixing between a stratospheric intrusion and a biomass burning plume, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4229–4235, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4229-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-4229-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page1734?><ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Feingold, G., Trainer, M., Freitas, S. R., Kowal, D., Ayers, J. K., Prins, E., Minnis, P., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G. J., and Hsie, E.-Y.: Effect of biomass burning on marine stratocumulus clouds off the California coast, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 8841–8856, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-8841-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-8841-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Danielsen, E. F., Ismail, S., Gregory, G. L., and Beck, S.
M.: Tropopause fold structure determined from airborne lidar and in situ
measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2112–2120, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brown-Steiner, B. and Hess, P.: Asian influence on surface ozone in the
United States: A comparison of chemistry, seasonality, and transport
mechanisms, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D17309, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015846" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD015846</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Burley, J. D. and Bytnerowicz, A.: Surface ozone in the White Mountains of
California, Atmos. Environ., 45, 4591–4602, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.062" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.062</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Clark, H., Sauvage, B., Thouret, V., Nedelec, P., Blot, R., Wang, K. Y.,
Smit, H., Neis, P., Petzold, A., Athier, G., Boulanger, D., Cousin, J. M.,
Beswick, K., Gallagher, M., Baumgardner, D., Kaiser, J., Flaud, J. M.,
Wahner, A., Volz-Thomas, A., and Cammas, J. P.: The first regular
measurements of ozone, carbon monoxide and water vapour in the Pacific UTLS
by IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28385, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28385" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v67.28385</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Coggon, M. M., Veres, P. R., Yuan, B., Koss, A., Warneke, C., Gilman, J. B.,
Lerner, B. M., Peischl, J., Aikin, K. C., Stockwell, C. E., Hatch, L. E.,
Ryerson, T. B., Roberts, J. M., Yokelson, R. J., and de Gouw, J. A.:
Emissions of nitrogen-containing organic compounds from the burning of
herbaceous and arboraceous biomass: Fuel composition dependence and the
variability of commonly used nitrile tracers, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
43, 9903–9912, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl070562" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016gl070562</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Colette, A. and Ancellet, G.: Variability of the tropospheric mixing and of
streamer formation and their impact on the lifetime of observed ozone
layers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L09808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006gl025793" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006gl025793</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cooper, O. R., Forster, C., Parrish, D. D., Trainer, M., Dunlea, E., Ryerson, T. B., Hubler, G., Fehsenfeld, F. C., Nicks, D., Holloway, J. S., Nowak, J.,
Brock, C., de Gouw, J., Warneke, C., Roberts, J. M., Flocke, F., and Moody,
J.: A case study of trans-Pacific warm conveyor belt transport: The
influence of merging airstreams on trace gas import to North America, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, D23S08, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003624" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003624</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cooper, O. R., Langford, A. O., Parrish, D. D., and Fahey, D. W.: Challenges
of a lowered US ozone standard, Science, 348, 1096–1097, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa5748" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.aaa5748</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Danielsen, E. F.: Project Springfield Report, Defense Atomic Support Agency,
Washington, D.C. DASA 1517, <uri>https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD0607980.pdf</uri> (last access: 28 January 2022.), 1964.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Delmas, R.: An overview of present knowledge on methane emission from
biomass burning, Fert. Res., 37, 181–190, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00748936" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF00748936</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dolwick, P., Akhtar, F., Baker, K. R., Possiel, N., Simon, H., and Tonnesen, G.: Comparison of background ozone estimates over the western United
States based on two separate model methodologies, Atmos. Environ., 109, 282–296, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.005</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Duncan, B. N., Malings, C. A., Knowland, K. E., Anderson, D. C., Prados, A.
I., Keller, C. A., Cromar, K. R., Pawson, S., and Ensz, H.: Augmenting the
Standard Operating Procedures of Health and Air Quality Stakeholders With
NASA Resources, Geohealth, 5, e2021GH000451, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GH000451" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021GH000451</ext-link>,
2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eisele, H., Scheel, H. E., Sladkovic, R., and Trickl, T.: High-resolution
lidar measurements of stratosphere-troposphere exchange, J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 319–330, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056&lt;0319:Hrlmos&gt;2.0.Co;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056&lt;0319:Hrlmos&gt;2.0.Co;2</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>EPA: Integrated Science Assessment of Ozone and Related Photochemical
Oxidants (Final Report), United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, <uri>https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=247492</uri> (last access: 28 January 2022), 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>EPA: Policy Assessment for the Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. Final Report, United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, <uri>https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/20140829pa.pdf</uri> (last access: 28 January 2022), 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Faloona, I. C., Chiao, S., Eiserloh, A. J., Alvarez, R. J., Kirgis, G.,
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Caputi, D., Hu, A., Iraci, L. T., Yates, E.
L., Marrero, J. E., Ryoo, J. M., Conley, S., Tanrikulu, S., Xu, J., and
Kuwayama, T.: The California Baseline Ozone Transport Study (CABOTS),
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E427–E445, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-18-0302.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Bams-D-18-0302.1</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fine, R., Miller, M. B., Burley, J., Jaffe, D. A., Pierce, R. B., Lin, M.
Y., and Gustin, M. S.: Variability and sources of surface ozone at rural
sites in Nevada, USA: Results from two years of the Nevada Rural Ozone
Initiative, Sci. Total Environ., 530, 471–482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.027</ext-link>, 2015a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fine, R., Miller, M. B., Yates, E. L., and Gustin, M. S.: Investigating the
influence of long-range transport on surface O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Nevada, USA using
observations from multiple measurement platforms, Sci. Total Environ.,
530–531, 493–504, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.125" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.125</ext-link>, 2015b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs, L.,
Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan, K.,
Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A., da
Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G. K., Koster, R., Lucchesi, R., Merkova, D.,
Nielsen, J. E., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M.,
Schubert, S. D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The Modern-Era Retrospective
Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2), J.
Climate, 30, 5419–5454, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-16-0758.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Jcli-D-16-0758.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gustin, M. S., Fine, R., Miller, M., Jaffe, D., and Burley, J.: The Nevada
Rural Ozone Initiative (NVROI): Insights to understanding air pollution in
complex terrain, Sci. Total Environ., 530, 455–470, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.046" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.046</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hamill, P., Iraci, L. T., Yates, E. L., Gore, W., Bui, T. P., Tanaka, T.,
and Loewenstein, M.: A New Instrumented Airborne Platform for Atmospheric
Research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 397–404, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00241.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Bams-D-14-00241.1</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hintsa, E. J., Boering, K. A., Weinstock, E. M., Anderson, J. G., Gary, B.
L., Pfister, L., Daube, B. C., Wofsy, S. C., Lowenstein, M., Podolske, J.
R., Margitan, J. J., and Bui, T. P.: Troposphere-to-stratosphere transport
in the lowermost stratosphere from measurements of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 2655–2658, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page1735?><ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Holloway, T., Levy, H., and Kasibhatla, P.: Global distribution of carbon
monoxide, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 12123–12147, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999jd901173" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999jd901173</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hudman, R. C., Jacob, D. J., Cooper, O. R., Evans, M. J., Heald, C. L.,
Park, R. J., Fehsenfeld, F., Flocke, F., Holloway, J., Hubler, G., Kita, K.,
Koike, M., Kondo, Y., Neuman, A., Nowak, J., Oltmans, S., Parrish, D.,
Roberts, J. M., and Ryerson, T.: Ozone production in transpacific Asian
pollution plumes and implications for ozone air quality in California, J.
Geophys. Res., 109, D23S10, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd004974" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004jd004974</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jaffe, D. A., Cooper, O. R., Fiore, A. M., Henderson, B. H., Tonneson, G.
S., Russell, A. G., Henze, D. K., Langford, A. O., Lin, M., and Moore, T.:
Scientific assessment of background ozone over the U.S.: Implications for
air quality management, Elem. Sci. Anth., 6, 56, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.309" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1525/elementa.309</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>James, P., Stohl, A., Forster, C., Eckhardt, S., Seibert, P., and Frank, A.:
A 15-year climatology of stratosphere-troposphere exchange with a Lagrangian
particle dispersion model: 2. Mean climate and seasonal variability J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8522, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002639" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002639</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Karstadt, M., Callaghan, B., and United States Environmental Protection
Agency: The plain English guide to the Clean Air Act, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency For sale by the U.S. G.P.O.,
Supt. of Docs., Washington, DC, 28 pp., ISBN 0160362830, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O. and Reid, S. J.: Dissipation and mixing of a small-scale
stratospheric intrusion in the upper troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
31265–31276, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Masters, C. D., Proffitt, M. H., Hsie, E. Y., and Tuck, A.
F.: Ozone measurements in a tropopause fold associated with a cut-off low
system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 2501–2504, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96gl02227" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96gl02227</ext-link>,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J., Banta, R. M., and Hardesty,
R. M.: Long-range transport of ozone from the Los Angeles Basin: A case
study, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L06807, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl042507" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010gl042507</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J.,
Hardesty, R. M., Johnson, B. J., and Oltmans, S. J.: Stratospheric influence
on surface ozone in the Los Angeles area during late spring and early summer
of 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00V06, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD016766</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Pierce, R. B., and Schultz, P. J.: Stratospheric
intrusions, the Santa Ana winds, and wildland fires in Southern California,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 6091–6097, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl064964" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015gl064964</ext-link>, 2015a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R.,
Holloway, J. S., Lin, M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S.
P., Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: An overview of the 2013 Las Vegas
Ozone Study (LVOS): Impact of stratospheric intrusions and long-range
transport on surface air quality, Atmos. Environ., 109, 305–322, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2014.08.040" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2014.08.040</ext-link>, 2015b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Alvarez, R. J., Brioude, J., Fine, R., Gustin, M. S., Lin,
M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S. P., Senff, C. J.,
Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: Entrainment of stratospheric air and
Asian pollution by the convective boundary layer in the southwestern U.S, J.
Geophys. Res., 122, 1312–1337, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025987</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, J., Evan, S., Iraci, L. T.,
Kirgis, G., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Newchurch, M. J., Pierce, R. B., Senff,
C. J., and Yates, E. L.: Coordinated profiling of stratospheric intrusions
and transported pollution by the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet)
and NASA Alpha Jet Atmospheric eXperiment (AJAX): Observations and
comparison to HYSPLIT, RAQMS, and FLEXPART, Atmos. Environ., 174, 1–14,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.11.031" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.11.031</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Kirgis, G., Senff, C. J., Caputi, D., Conley, S. A., Faloona, I. C., Iraci, L. T., Marrero, J. E., McNamara, M. E., Ryoo, J.-M., and Yates, E. L.: Intercomparison of lidar, aircraft, and surface ozone measurements in the San Joaquin Valley during the California Baseline Ozone Transport Study (CABOTS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 1889–1904, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-1889-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-1889-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Laughner, J. L. and Cohen, R. C.: Direct observation of changing NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
lifetime in North American cities, Science, 366, 723–727, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax6832" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.aax6832</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Leblanc, T., Brewer, M. A., Wang, P. S., Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M., Firanski, B., Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., Berkoff, T. A., Carrion, W., Gronoff, G., Aknan, A., Chen, G., Alvarez, R. J., Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Kirgis, G., Johnson, M. S., Kuang, S., and Newchurch, M. J.: Validation of the TOLNet lidars: the Southern California Ozone Observation Project (SCOOP), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6137–6162, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lefohn, A. S., Emery, C., Shadwick, D., Wernli, H., Jung, J., and Oltmans,
S. J.: Estimates of background surface ozone concentrations in the United
States based on model-derived source apportionment, Atmos. Environ., 84,
275–288, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2013.11.033" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2013.11.033</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Cooper, O. R., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O.,
Levy, H., Johnson, B. J., Naik, V., Oltmans, S. J., and Senff, C. J.:
Springtime high surface ozone events over the western United States:
Quantifying the role of stratospheric intrusions, J. Geophys. Res., 117,
D00v22, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018151" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012jd018151</ext-link>, 2012a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Cooper, O. R., Naik, V.,
Holloway, J., Johnson, B. J., Middlebrook, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Pollack,
I. B., Ryerson, T. B., Warner, J. X., Wiedinmyer, C., Wilson, J., and Wyman,
B.: Transport of Asian ozone pollution into surface air over the western
United States in spring, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00v07, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016961" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD016961</ext-link>, 2012b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O., Oltmans, S. J.,
Tarasick, D., and Rieder, H. E.: Climate variability modulates western US
ozone air quality in spring via deep stratospheric intrusions, Nat. Comm.,
6, 7105, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/Ncomms8105" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/Ncomms8105</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Malicet, J., Daumont, D., Charbonnier, J., Parisse, C., Chakir, A., and
Brion, J.: Ozone UV Spectroscopy .2. Absorption Cross-Sections and
Temperature-Dependence, J. Atmos. Chem., 21, 263–273, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/Bf00696758" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/Bf00696758</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Manney, G. L. and Stanford, J. L.: On the relation of 6.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m water
vapour features to isentropic distributions of potential vorticity, Q. J. R.
Meteorol. Soc., 113, 1048–1057, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nieto, R., Gimeno, L., De La Torre, L., Ribera, P., Gallego, D.,
Garcia-Herrera, R., Garcia, J. A., Nunez, M., Redano, A.<?pagebreak page1736?>, and Lorente, J.:
Climatological features of cutoff low systems in the Northern Hemisphere,
J. Climate, 18, 3085–3103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli3386.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Jcli3386.1</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>NOAA: Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport – Las Vegas Ozone Study (FAST-LVOS), NOAA [data set], <uri>https://csl.noaa.gov/projects/fastlvos/data.html</uri>, last access: 31 December 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Holloway, J. S., Trainer, M., Andrews, A. E.,
Atlas, E. L., Blake, D. R., Daube, B. C., Dlugokencky, E. J., Fischer, M.
L., Goldstein, A. H., Guha, A., Karl, T., Kofler, J., Kosciuch, E., Misztal,
P. K., Perring, A. E., Pollack, I. B., Santoni, G. W., Schwarz, J. P.,
Spackman, J. R., Wofsy, S. C., and Parrish, D. D.: Airborne observations of
methane emissions from rice cultivation in the Sacramento Valley of
California, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00v25 10.1029/2012jd017994,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Brioude, J., Aikin, K. C., Andrews, A. E.,
Atlas, E., Blake, D., Daube, B. C., de Gouw, J. A., Dlugokencky, E., Frost,
G. J., Gentner, D. R., Gilman, J. B., Goldstein, A. H., Harley, R. A.,
Holloway, J. S., Kofler, J., Kuster, W. C., Lang, P. M., Novelli, P. C.,
Santoni, G. W., Trainer, M., Wofsy, S. C., and Parrish, D. D.: Quantifying
sources of methane using light alkanes in the Los Angeles basin, California,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 4974–4990, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50413" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50413</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peischl, J., Eilerman, S. J., Neuman, J. A., Aikin, K. C., de Gouw, J.,
Gilman, J. B., Herndon, S. C., Nadkarni, R., Trainer, M., Warneke, C., and
Ryerson, T. B.: Quantifying Methane and Ethane Emissions to the Atmosphere
From Central and Western US Oil and Natural Gas Production Regions, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 7725–7740, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018jd028622" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018jd028622</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pierce, R. B., Al-Saadi, J. A., Schaack, T., Lenzen, A., Zapotocny, T.,
Johnson, D., Kittaka, C., Buker, M., Hitchman, M. H., Tripoli, G., Fairlie,
T. D., Olson, J. R., Natarajan, M., Crawford, J., Fishman, J., Avery, M.,
Browell, E. V., Creilson, J., Kondo, Y., and Sandholm, S. T.: Regional Air
Quality Modeling System (RAQMS) predictions of the tropospheric ozone budget
over east Asia, J. Geophys. Res, 108, 8825, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002jd003176" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002jd003176</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Polvani, L. M. and Esler, J. G.: Transport and mixing of chemical air
masses in idealized baroclinic life cycles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112,
D23102, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008555" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007jd008555</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pozzer, A., Schultz, M. G., and Helmig, D.: Impact of US Oil and Natural Gas
Emission Increases on Surface Ozone Is Most Pronounced in the Central United
States, Environ. Sci. Technol., 54, 12423–12433, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06983" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acs.est.9b06983</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Reed, R. J. and Danielsen, E. F.: Fronts in the vicinity of the tropopause,
Arch. Meteorol. Geophys. Bioklim., 11, 1–17, 1958.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ryerson, T. B., Andrews, A. E., Angevine, W. M., Bates, T. S., Brock, C. A.,
Cairns, B., Cohen, R. C., Cooper, O. R., de Gouw, J. A., Fehsenfeld, F. C.,
Ferrare, R. A., Fischer, M. L., Flagan, R. C., Goldstein, A. H., Hair, J.
W., Hardesty, R. M., Hostetler, C. A., Jimenez, J. L., Langford, A. O.,
McCauley, E., McKeen, S. A., Molina, L. T., Nenes, A., Oltmans, S. J.,
Parrish, D. D., Pederson, J. R., Pierce, R. B., Prather, K., Quinn, P. K.,
Seinfeld, J. H., Senff, C. J., Sorooshian, A., Stutz, J., Surratt, J. D.,
Trainer, M., Volkamer, R., Williams, E. J., and Wofsy, S. C.: The 2010
California Research at the Nexus of Air Quality and Climate Change (CalNex)
field study, J. Geophys. Res., 118, 5830–5866, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/Jgrd.50331" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/Jgrd.50331</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schuepbach, E., Davies, T. D., and Massacand, A. C.: An unusual springtime
ozone episode at high elevation in the Swiss Alps: contributions both from
cross-tropopause exchange and from the boundary layer, Atmos. Environ., 33,
1735–1744, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Seidel, D. J., Zhang, Y. H., Beljaars, A., Golaz, J. C., Jacobson, A. R.,
and Medeiros, B.: Climatology of the planetary boundary layer over the
continental United States and Europe, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D17106, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018143" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012jd018143</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Singh, H. B., Cai, C., Kaduwela, A., Weinheimer, A., and Wisthaler, A.:
Interactions of fire emissions and urban pollution over California: Ozone
formation and air quality simulations, Atmos. Environ., 56, 45–51,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2012.03.046" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2012.03.046</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Škerlak, B., Sprenger, M., and Wernli, H.: A global climatology of stratosphere–troposphere exchange using the ERA-Interim data set from 1979 to 2011, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 913–937, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-913-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-913-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skerlak, B., Sprenger, M., Pfahl, S., Tyrlis, E., and Wernli, H.: Tropopause
folds in ERA-Interim: Global climatology and relation to extreme weather
events, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 4860–4877, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022787" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD022787</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sprenger, M. and Wernli, H.: A northern hemisphere climatology of
cross-tropopause exchange for the ERA15 time period (1979–1993), J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8251, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002636" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002636</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R., Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D.,
and Ngan, F.: NOAA'S HYSPLIT Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling
System, B. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96, 2059–2077, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00110.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/Bams-D-14-00110.1</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sterling, C. W., Johnson, B. J., Oltmans, S. J., Smit, H. G. J., Jordan, A. F., Cullis, P. D., Hall, E. G., Thompson, A. M., and Witte, J. C.: Homogenizing and estimating the uncertainty in NOAA's long-term vertical ozone profile records measured with the electrochemical concentration cell ozonesonde, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3661–3687, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3661-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-3661-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stewart, J. Q., Whiteman, C. D., Steenburgh, W. J., and Bian, X. D.: A
climatological study of thermally driven wind systems of the US
Intermountain West, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 83, 699–708, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083&lt;0699:Acsotd&gt;2.3.Co;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083&lt;0699:Acsotd&gt;2.3.Co;2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stohl, A., Spichtinger-Rakowsky, N., Bonasoni, P., Feldmann, H.,
Memmesheimer, M., Scheel, H. E., Trickl, T., Hubener, S., Ringer, W., and
Mandl, M.: The influence of stratospheric intrusions on alpine ozone
concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1323–1354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00320-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00320-9</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Thorncroft, C. D., Hoskins, B. J., and McIntyre, M. E.: Two paradigms of
baroclinic-wave life-cycle behaviour, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 119, 17–55,
1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tian, H. Q., Yang, J., Xu, R. T., Lu, C. Q., Canadell, J. G., Davidson, E.
A., Jackson, R. B., Arneth, A., Chang, J. F., Ciais, P., Gerber, S., Ito,
A., Joos, F., Lienert, S., Messina, P., Olin, S., Pan, S. F., Peng, C. H.,
Saikawa, E., Thompson, R. L., Vuichard, N., Winiwarter, W., Zaehle, S., and
Zhang, B. W.: Global soil nitrous oxide emissions since the preindustrial
era estimated by an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models<?pagebreak page1737?>: Magnitude,
attribution, and uncertainty, Glob. Change Biol., 25, 640–659, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14514" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.14514</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tian, H. Q., Xu, R. T., Canadell, J. G., Thompson, R. L., Winiwarter, W.,
Suntharalingam, P., Davidson, E. A., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B.,
Janssens-Maenhout, G., Prather, M. J., Regnier, P., Pan, N. Q., Pan, S. F.,
Peters, G. P., Shi, H., Tubiello, F. N., Zaehle, S., Zhou, F., Arneth, A.,
Battaglia, G., Berthet, S., Bopp, L., Bouwman, A. F., Buitenhuis, E. T.,
Chang, J. F., Chipperfield, M. P., Dangal, S. R. S., Dlugokencky, E.,
Elkins, J. W., Eyre, B. D., Fu, B. J., Hall, B., Ito, A., Joos, F., Krummel,
P. B., Landolfi, A., Laruelle, G. G., Lauerwald, R., Li, W., Lienert, S.,
Maavara, T., MacLeod, M., Millet, D. B., Olin, S., Patra, P. K., Prinn, R.
G., Raymond, P. A., Ruiz, D. J., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wang, J.
J., Weiss, R. F., Wells, K. C., Wilson, C., Yang, J., and Yao, Y. Z.: A
comprehensive quantification of global nitrous oxide sources and sinks,
Nature, 586, 248–256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Giehl, H., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9941–9961, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Ries, L., and Sprenger, M.: Very high stratospheric influence observed in the free troposphere over the northern Alps – just a local phenomenon?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 243–266, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-243-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-243-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Trousdell, J. F., Conley, S. A., Post, A., and Faloona, I. C.: Observing entrainment mixing, photochemical ozone production, and regional methane emissions by aircraft using a simple mixed-layer framework, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 15433–15450, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-15433-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-15433-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Uhl, M. and Moore, T.: Western ozone NAAQS implementation and issues:
addressing background and transport, EM/Air and Waste Management
Association, September, 6, <uri>https://www.awma.org/content.asp?contentid=454</uri> (last access: 27 January 2022), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G. and Worthington, R. M.: Break-up of a stratospheric streamer
observed by MST radar, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 126, 1751–1769, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G., Price, J. D., and Howells, A.: Transport into the troposphere
in a tropopause fold, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 120, 1085–1103, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G., O'Connor, F. M., and Wareing, D. P.: Observations of Streamers
in the Troposphere and Stratosphere Using Ozone Lidar, J. Atmos. Chem., 38,
295–315, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Washenfelder, R. A., Wagner, N. L., Dube, W. P., and Brown, S. S.:
Measurement of Atmospheric Ozone by Cavity Ring-down Spectroscopy,
Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 2938–2944, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es103340u" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es103340u</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wernli, H.: A Lagrangian-based analysis of extratropical cyclones. II: a
detailed case-study, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 123, 1677–1706, 1997.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wernli, H. and Bourqui, M.: A Lagrangian “1-year climatology” of (deep)
cross-tropopause exchange in the extratropical Northern Hemisphere, J.
Geophys. Res., 107, 4021, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000812" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD000812</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wild, R. J., Edwards, P. M., Dube, W. P., Baumann, K., Edgerton, E. S.,
Quinn, P. K., Roberts, J. M., Rollins, A. W., Veres, P. R., Warneke, C.,
Williams, E. J., Yuan, B., and Brown, S. S.: A Measurement of Total Reactive
Nitrogen, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, together with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> via Cavity Ring-down
Spectroscopy, Environ. Sci. Technol., 48, 9609–9615, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es501896w" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es501896w</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wild, R. J., Dube, W. P., Aikin, K. C., Eilerman, S. J., Neuman, J. A.,
Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., and Brown, S. S.: On-road measurements of
vehicle NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission ratios in Denver, Colorado, USA, Atmos. Environ., 148, 182–189, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.10.039" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.10.039</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wirth, V., Appenzeller, C., and Juckes, M.: Signatures of induced vertical
air motion accompanying quasi-horizontal roll-up of stratospheric
intrusions, Mon. Weather Rev., 125, 2504–2519, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Womack, C. C., Neuman, J. A., Veres, P. R., Eilerman, S. J., Brock, C. A., Decker, Z. C. J., Zarzana, K. J., Dube, W. P., Wild, R. J., Wooldridge, P. J., Cohen, R. C., and Brown, S. S.: Evaluation of the accuracy of thermal dissociation CRDS and LIF techniques for atmospheric measurement of reactive nitrogen species, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 1911–1926, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1911-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-10-1911-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xiao, Y., Jacob, D. J., Wang, J. S., Logan, J. A., Palmer, P. I.,
Suntharalingam, P., Yantosca, R. M., Sachse, G. W., Blake, D. R., and
Streets, D. G.: Constraints on Asian and European sources of methane from
CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-CO correlations in Asian outflow, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D15S16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004475" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD004475</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Downey, N. V., Wood, D. A., Blewitt, D., Carouge, C. C., van Donkelaar, A., Jones, D. B. A., Murray, L. T., and Wang, Y. X.:
Improved estimate of the policy-relevant background ozone in the United
States using the GEOS-Chem global model with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> degrees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> degrees horizontal resolution over North America, Atmos. Environ., 45, 6769–6776, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2011.07.054" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2011.07.054</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Lin, M., Langford, A. O., Horowitz, L. W., Senff, C. J., Klovenski, E., Wang, Y., Alvarez II, R. J., Petropavlovskikh, I., Cullis, P., Sterling, C. W., Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Brown, S. S., Decker, Z. C. J., Kirgis, G., and Conley, S.: Characterizing sources of high surface ozone events in the southwestern US with intensive field measurements and two global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10379–10400, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10379-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-10379-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>The <i>Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport</i>–Las Vegas Ozone Study (<i>FAST</i>-LVOS)</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Albers, J. R., Perlwitz, J., Butler, A. H., Birner, T., Kiladis, G. N.,
Lawrence, Z. D., Manney, G. L., Langford, A. O., and Dias, J.: Mechanisms
Governing Interannual Variability of Stratosphere-to-Troposphere Ozone
Transport, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 234–260, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017jd026890" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017jd026890</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Albers, J. R., Butler, A. H., Breeden, M. L., Langford, A. O., and Kiladis, G. N.: Subseasonal prediction of springtime Pacific–North American transport using upper-level wind forecasts, Weather Clim. Dynam., 2, 433–452, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-433-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-433-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Alvarez II, R. J., Senff, C. J., Langford, A. O., Weickmann, A. M., Law, D. C., Machol, J. L., Merritt, D. A., Marchbanks, R. D., Sandberg, S. P., Brewer, W. A., Hardesty, R. M., and Banta, R. M.: Development and Application of a Compact, Tunable, Solid-State Airborne Ozone Lidar System for Boundary Layer Profiling, J. Atmos. Ocean Tech., 28, 1258–1272, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-10-05044.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-10-05044.1</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Ancellet, G., Beekmann, M., and Papayannis, A.: Impact of a cutoff low
development on downward transport of ozone in the troposphere, J. Geophys.
Res., 99, 3451–3468, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Appenzeller, C. and Davies, H. C.: Structure of stratospheric intrusions
into the troposphere, Nature, 358, 570–572, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Appenzeller, C., Davies, H. C., and Norton, W. A.: Fragmentation of
stratospheric intrusions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 1435–1456,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd02674" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd02674</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Assonov, S. S., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Schuck, T., and Umezawa, T.:
N<sub>2</sub>O as a tracer of mixing stratospheric and tropospheric air based on
CARIBIC data with applications for CO<sub>2</sub>, Atmos. Environ., 79,
769–779, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.07.035" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.07.035</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bonasoni, P., Evangelisti, F., Bonafe, U., Ravegnani, F., Calzolari, F.,
Stohl, A., Tositti, L., Tubertini, O., and Colombo, T.: Stratospheric ozone
intrusion episodes recorded at Mt. Cimone during the VOTALP project: case
studies, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1355–1365, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bonin, T. A., Carroll, B. J., Hardesty, R. M., Brewer, W. A., Hajny, K.,
Salmon, O. E., and Shepson, P. B.: Doppler Lidar Observations of the Mixing
Height in Indianapolis Using an Automated Composite Fuzzy Logic Approach,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 35, 473–490, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-17-0159.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Jtech-D-17-0159.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Breeden, M. L., Butler, A. H., Albers, J. R., Sprenger, M., and Langford, A. O.: The spring transition of the North Pacific jet and its relation to deep stratosphere-to-troposphere mass transport over western North America, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2781–2794, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2781-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2781-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Trainer, M., Ryerson, T. B., Holloway, J. S., Baynard, T., Peischl, J., Warneke, C., Neuman, J. A., De Gouw, J., Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., Frost, G. J., McKeen, S. A., Hsie, E.-Y., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Nédélec, P.: Mixing between a stratospheric intrusion and a biomass burning plume, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4229–4235, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4229-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4229-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Feingold, G., Trainer, M., Freitas, S. R., Kowal, D., Ayers, J. K., Prins, E., Minnis, P., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G. J., and Hsie, E.-Y.: Effect of biomass burning on marine stratocumulus clouds off the California coast, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 8841–8856, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-8841-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-8841-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Browell, E. V., Danielsen, E. F., Ismail, S., Gregory, G. L., and Beck, S.
M.: Tropopause fold structure determined from airborne lidar and in situ
measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2112–2120, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Brown-Steiner, B. and Hess, P.: Asian influence on surface ozone in the
United States: A comparison of chemistry, seasonality, and transport
mechanisms, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D17309, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015846" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD015846</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Burley, J. D. and Bytnerowicz, A.: Surface ozone in the White Mountains of
California, Atmos. Environ., 45, 4591–4602, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.062" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.062</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Clark, H., Sauvage, B., Thouret, V., Nedelec, P., Blot, R., Wang, K. Y.,
Smit, H., Neis, P., Petzold, A., Athier, G., Boulanger, D., Cousin, J. M.,
Beswick, K., Gallagher, M., Baumgardner, D., Kaiser, J., Flaud, J. M.,
Wahner, A., Volz-Thomas, A., and Cammas, J. P.: The first regular
measurements of ozone, carbon monoxide and water vapour in the Pacific UTLS
by IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28385, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28385" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28385</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Coggon, M. M., Veres, P. R., Yuan, B., Koss, A., Warneke, C., Gilman, J. B.,
Lerner, B. M., Peischl, J., Aikin, K. C., Stockwell, C. E., Hatch, L. E.,
Ryerson, T. B., Roberts, J. M., Yokelson, R. J., and de Gouw, J. A.:
Emissions of nitrogen-containing organic compounds from the burning of
herbaceous and arboraceous biomass: Fuel composition dependence and the
variability of commonly used nitrile tracers, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
43, 9903–9912, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl070562" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl070562</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Colette, A. and Ancellet, G.: Variability of the tropospheric mixing and of
streamer formation and their impact on the lifetime of observed ozone
layers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L09808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006gl025793" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006gl025793</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Cooper, O. R., Forster, C., Parrish, D. D., Trainer, M., Dunlea, E., Ryerson, T. B., Hubler, G., Fehsenfeld, F. C., Nicks, D., Holloway, J. S., Nowak, J.,
Brock, C., de Gouw, J., Warneke, C., Roberts, J. M., Flocke, F., and Moody,
J.: A case study of trans-Pacific warm conveyor belt transport: The
influence of merging airstreams on trace gas import to North America, J.
Geophys. Res., 108, D23S08, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003624" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003624</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Cooper, O. R., Langford, A. O., Parrish, D. D., and Fahey, D. W.: Challenges
of a lowered US ozone standard, Science, 348, 1096–1097, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa5748" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa5748</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Danielsen, E. F.: Project Springfield Report, Defense Atomic Support Agency,
Washington, D.C. DASA 1517, <a href="https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD0607980.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 28 January 2022.), 1964.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Delmas, R.: An overview of present knowledge on methane emission from
biomass burning, Fert. Res., 37, 181–190, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00748936" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00748936</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Dolwick, P., Akhtar, F., Baker, K. R., Possiel, N., Simon, H., and Tonnesen, G.: Comparison of background ozone estimates over the western United
States based on two separate model methodologies, Atmos. Environ., 109, 282–296, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.005</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Duncan, B. N., Malings, C. A., Knowland, K. E., Anderson, D. C., Prados, A.
I., Keller, C. A., Cromar, K. R., Pawson, S., and Ensz, H.: Augmenting the
Standard Operating Procedures of Health and Air Quality Stakeholders With
NASA Resources, Geohealth, 5, e2021GH000451, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GH000451" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GH000451</a>,
2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Eisele, H., Scheel, H. E., Sladkovic, R., and Trickl, T.: High-resolution
lidar measurements of stratosphere-troposphere exchange, J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 319–330, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056&lt;0319:Hrlmos&gt;2.0.Co;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056&lt;0319:Hrlmos&gt;2.0.Co;2</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
EPA: Integrated Science Assessment of Ozone and Related Photochemical
Oxidants (Final Report), United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=247492" target="_blank"/> (last access: 28 January 2022), 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
EPA: Policy Assessment for the Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. Final Report, United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, <a href="https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/20140829pa.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 28 January 2022), 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Faloona, I. C., Chiao, S., Eiserloh, A. J., Alvarez, R. J., Kirgis, G.,
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Caputi, D., Hu, A., Iraci, L. T., Yates, E.
L., Marrero, J. E., Ryoo, J. M., Conley, S., Tanrikulu, S., Xu, J., and
Kuwayama, T.: The California Baseline Ozone Transport Study (CABOTS),
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E427–E445, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-18-0302.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-18-0302.1</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Fine, R., Miller, M. B., Burley, J., Jaffe, D. A., Pierce, R. B., Lin, M.
Y., and Gustin, M. S.: Variability and sources of surface ozone at rural
sites in Nevada, USA: Results from two years of the Nevada Rural Ozone
Initiative, Sci. Total Environ., 530, 471–482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.027</a>, 2015a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Fine, R., Miller, M. B., Yates, E. L., and Gustin, M. S.: Investigating the
influence of long-range transport on surface O<sub>3</sub> in Nevada, USA using
observations from multiple measurement platforms, Sci. Total Environ.,
530–531, 493–504, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.125" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.125</a>, 2015b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs, L.,
Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan, K.,
Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A., da
Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G. K., Koster, R., Lucchesi, R., Merkova, D.,
Nielsen, J. E., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M.,
Schubert, S. D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The Modern-Era Retrospective
Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2), J.
Climate, 30, 5419–5454, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-16-0758.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-16-0758.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Gustin, M. S., Fine, R., Miller, M., Jaffe, D., and Burley, J.: The Nevada
Rural Ozone Initiative (NVROI): Insights to understanding air pollution in
complex terrain, Sci. Total Environ., 530, 455–470, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.046" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.046</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Hamill, P., Iraci, L. T., Yates, E. L., Gore, W., Bui, T. P., Tanaka, T.,
and Loewenstein, M.: A New Instrumented Airborne Platform for Atmospheric
Research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 397–404, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00241.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00241.1</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Hintsa, E. J., Boering, K. A., Weinstock, E. M., Anderson, J. G., Gary, B.
L., Pfister, L., Daube, B. C., Wofsy, S. C., Lowenstein, M., Podolske, J.
R., Margitan, J. J., and Bui, T. P.: Troposphere-to-stratosphere transport
in the lowermost stratosphere from measurements of H<sub>2</sub>O, CO<sub>2</sub>,
N<sub>2</sub>O, and O<sub>3</sub>, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 2655–2658, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Holloway, T., Levy, H., and Kasibhatla, P.: Global distribution of carbon
monoxide, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 12123–12147, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999jd901173" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999jd901173</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Hudman, R. C., Jacob, D. J., Cooper, O. R., Evans, M. J., Heald, C. L.,
Park, R. J., Fehsenfeld, F., Flocke, F., Holloway, J., Hubler, G., Kita, K.,
Koike, M., Kondo, Y., Neuman, A., Nowak, J., Oltmans, S., Parrish, D.,
Roberts, J. M., and Ryerson, T.: Ozone production in transpacific Asian
pollution plumes and implications for ozone air quality in California, J.
Geophys. Res., 109, D23S10, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd004974" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd004974</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Jaffe, D. A., Cooper, O. R., Fiore, A. M., Henderson, B. H., Tonneson, G.
S., Russell, A. G., Henze, D. K., Langford, A. O., Lin, M., and Moore, T.:
Scientific assessment of background ozone over the U.S.: Implications for
air quality management, Elem. Sci. Anth., 6, 56, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.309" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.309</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
James, P., Stohl, A., Forster, C., Eckhardt, S., Seibert, P., and Frank, A.:
A 15-year climatology of stratosphere-troposphere exchange with a Lagrangian
particle dispersion model: 2. Mean climate and seasonal variability J.
Geophys. Res., 108, 8522, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002639" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002639</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Karstadt, M., Callaghan, B., and United States Environmental Protection
Agency: The plain English guide to the Clean Air Act, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency For sale by the U.S. G.P.O.,
Supt. of Docs., Washington, DC, 28 pp., ISBN 0160362830, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O. and Reid, S. J.: Dissipation and mixing of a small-scale
stratospheric intrusion in the upper troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 103,
31265–31276, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Masters, C. D., Proffitt, M. H., Hsie, E. Y., and Tuck, A.
F.: Ozone measurements in a tropopause fold associated with a cut-off low
system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 2501–2504, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96gl02227" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96gl02227</a>,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J., Banta, R. M., and Hardesty,
R. M.: Long-range transport of ozone from the Los Angeles Basin: A case
study, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L06807, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl042507" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl042507</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J.,
Hardesty, R. M., Johnson, B. J., and Oltmans, S. J.: Stratospheric influence
on surface ozone in the Los Angeles area during late spring and early summer
of 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00V06, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016766</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Pierce, R. B., and Schultz, P. J.: Stratospheric
intrusions, the Santa Ana winds, and wildland fires in Southern California,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 6091–6097, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl064964" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl064964</a>, 2015a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R.,
Holloway, J. S., Lin, M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S.
P., Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: An overview of the 2013 Las Vegas
Ozone Study (LVOS): Impact of stratospheric intrusions and long-range
transport on surface air quality, Atmos. Environ., 109, 305–322, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2014.08.040" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2014.08.040</a>, 2015b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez, R. J., Brioude, J., Fine, R., Gustin, M. S., Lin,
M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S. P., Senff, C. J.,
Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: Entrainment of stratospheric air and
Asian pollution by the convective boundary layer in the southwestern U.S, J.
Geophys. Res., 122, 1312–1337, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025987</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Brioude, J., Evan, S., Iraci, L. T.,
Kirgis, G., Kuang, S., Leblanc, T., Newchurch, M. J., Pierce, R. B., Senff,
C. J., and Yates, E. L.: Coordinated profiling of stratospheric intrusions
and transported pollution by the Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet)
and NASA Alpha Jet Atmospheric eXperiment (AJAX): Observations and
comparison to HYSPLIT, RAQMS, and FLEXPART, Atmos. Environ., 174, 1–14,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.11.031" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.11.031</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Langford, A. O., Alvarez II, R. J., Kirgis, G., Senff, C. J., Caputi, D., Conley, S. A., Faloona, I. C., Iraci, L. T., Marrero, J. E., McNamara, M. E., Ryoo, J.-M., and Yates, E. L.: Intercomparison of lidar, aircraft, and surface ozone measurements in the San Joaquin Valley during the California Baseline Ozone Transport Study (CABOTS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 1889–1904, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-1889-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-1889-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Laughner, J. L. and Cohen, R. C.: Direct observation of changing NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>
lifetime in North American cities, Science, 366, 723–727, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax6832" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax6832</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Leblanc, T., Brewer, M. A., Wang, P. S., Granados-Muñoz, M. J., Strawbridge, K. B., Travis, M., Firanski, B., Sullivan, J. T., McGee, T. J., Sumnicht, G. K., Twigg, L. W., Berkoff, T. A., Carrion, W., Gronoff, G., Aknan, A., Chen, G., Alvarez, R. J., Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Kirgis, G., Johnson, M. S., Kuang, S., and Newchurch, M. J.: Validation of the TOLNet lidars: the Southern California Ozone Observation Project (SCOOP), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 6137–6162, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-6137-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Lefohn, A. S., Emery, C., Shadwick, D., Wernli, H., Jung, J., and Oltmans,
S. J.: Estimates of background surface ozone concentrations in the United
States based on model-derived source apportionment, Atmos. Environ., 84,
275–288, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2013.11.033" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2013.11.033</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Cooper, O. R., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O.,
Levy, H., Johnson, B. J., Naik, V., Oltmans, S. J., and Senff, C. J.:
Springtime high surface ozone events over the western United States:
Quantifying the role of stratospheric intrusions, J. Geophys. Res., 117,
D00v22, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018151" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018151</a>, 2012a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Cooper, O. R., Naik, V.,
Holloway, J., Johnson, B. J., Middlebrook, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Pollack,
I. B., Ryerson, T. B., Warner, J. X., Wiedinmyer, C., Wilson, J., and Wyman,
B.: Transport of Asian ozone pollution into surface air over the western
United States in spring, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D00v07, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016961" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016961</a>, 2012b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Lin, M. Y., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O., Oltmans, S. J.,
Tarasick, D., and Rieder, H. E.: Climate variability modulates western US
ozone air quality in spring via deep stratospheric intrusions, Nat. Comm.,
6, 7105, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/Ncomms8105" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/Ncomms8105</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Malicet, J., Daumont, D., Charbonnier, J., Parisse, C., Chakir, A., and
Brion, J.: Ozone UV Spectroscopy .2. Absorption Cross-Sections and
Temperature-Dependence, J. Atmos. Chem., 21, 263–273, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/Bf00696758" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/Bf00696758</a>, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Manney, G. L. and Stanford, J. L.: On the relation of 6.7&thinsp;µm water
vapour features to isentropic distributions of potential vorticity, Q. J. R.
Meteorol. Soc., 113, 1048–1057, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Nieto, R., Gimeno, L., De La Torre, L., Ribera, P., Gallego, D.,
Garcia-Herrera, R., Garcia, J. A., Nunez, M., Redano, A., and Lorente, J.:
Climatological features of cutoff low systems in the Northern Hemisphere,
J. Climate, 18, 3085–3103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli3386.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli3386.1</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
NOAA: Fires, Asian, and Stratospheric Transport – Las Vegas Ozone Study (FAST-LVOS), NOAA [data set], <a href="https://csl.noaa.gov/projects/fastlvos/data.html" target="_blank"/>, last access: 31 December 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Holloway, J. S., Trainer, M., Andrews, A. E.,
Atlas, E. L., Blake, D. R., Daube, B. C., Dlugokencky, E. J., Fischer, M.
L., Goldstein, A. H., Guha, A., Karl, T., Kofler, J., Kosciuch, E., Misztal,
P. K., Perring, A. E., Pollack, I. B., Santoni, G. W., Schwarz, J. P.,
Spackman, J. R., Wofsy, S. C., and Parrish, D. D.: Airborne observations of
methane emissions from rice cultivation in the Sacramento Valley of
California, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00v25 10.1029/2012jd017994,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Brioude, J., Aikin, K. C., Andrews, A. E.,
Atlas, E., Blake, D., Daube, B. C., de Gouw, J. A., Dlugokencky, E., Frost,
G. J., Gentner, D. R., Gilman, J. B., Goldstein, A. H., Harley, R. A.,
Holloway, J. S., Kofler, J., Kuster, W. C., Lang, P. M., Novelli, P. C.,
Santoni, G. W., Trainer, M., Wofsy, S. C., and Parrish, D. D.: Quantifying
sources of methane using light alkanes in the Los Angeles basin, California,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 4974–4990, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50413" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50413</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Peischl, J., Eilerman, S. J., Neuman, J. A., Aikin, K. C., de Gouw, J.,
Gilman, J. B., Herndon, S. C., Nadkarni, R., Trainer, M., Warneke, C., and
Ryerson, T. B.: Quantifying Methane and Ethane Emissions to the Atmosphere
From Central and Western US Oil and Natural Gas Production Regions, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 7725–7740, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018jd028622" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018jd028622</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Pierce, R. B., Al-Saadi, J. A., Schaack, T., Lenzen, A., Zapotocny, T.,
Johnson, D., Kittaka, C., Buker, M., Hitchman, M. H., Tripoli, G., Fairlie,
T. D., Olson, J. R., Natarajan, M., Crawford, J., Fishman, J., Avery, M.,
Browell, E. V., Creilson, J., Kondo, Y., and Sandholm, S. T.: Regional Air
Quality Modeling System (RAQMS) predictions of the tropospheric ozone budget
over east Asia, J. Geophys. Res, 108, 8825, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002jd003176" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002jd003176</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Polvani, L. M. and Esler, J. G.: Transport and mixing of chemical air
masses in idealized baroclinic life cycles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112,
D23102, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008555" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008555</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Pozzer, A., Schultz, M. G., and Helmig, D.: Impact of US Oil and Natural Gas
Emission Increases on Surface Ozone Is Most Pronounced in the Central United
States, Environ. Sci. Technol., 54, 12423–12433, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06983" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06983</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Reed, R. J. and Danielsen, E. F.: Fronts in the vicinity of the tropopause,
Arch. Meteorol. Geophys. Bioklim., 11, 1–17, 1958.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Ryerson, T. B., Andrews, A. E., Angevine, W. M., Bates, T. S., Brock, C. A.,
Cairns, B., Cohen, R. C., Cooper, O. R., de Gouw, J. A., Fehsenfeld, F. C.,
Ferrare, R. A., Fischer, M. L., Flagan, R. C., Goldstein, A. H., Hair, J.
W., Hardesty, R. M., Hostetler, C. A., Jimenez, J. L., Langford, A. O.,
McCauley, E., McKeen, S. A., Molina, L. T., Nenes, A., Oltmans, S. J.,
Parrish, D. D., Pederson, J. R., Pierce, R. B., Prather, K., Quinn, P. K.,
Seinfeld, J. H., Senff, C. J., Sorooshian, A., Stutz, J., Surratt, J. D.,
Trainer, M., Volkamer, R., Williams, E. J., and Wofsy, S. C.: The 2010
California Research at the Nexus of Air Quality and Climate Change (CalNex)
field study, J. Geophys. Res., 118, 5830–5866, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/Jgrd.50331" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/Jgrd.50331</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Schuepbach, E., Davies, T. D., and Massacand, A. C.: An unusual springtime
ozone episode at high elevation in the Swiss Alps: contributions both from
cross-tropopause exchange and from the boundary layer, Atmos. Environ., 33,
1735–1744, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Seidel, D. J., Zhang, Y. H., Beljaars, A., Golaz, J. C., Jacobson, A. R.,
and Medeiros, B.: Climatology of the planetary boundary layer over the
continental United States and Europe, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D17106, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018143" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018143</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Singh, H. B., Cai, C., Kaduwela, A., Weinheimer, A., and Wisthaler, A.:
Interactions of fire emissions and urban pollution over California: Ozone
formation and air quality simulations, Atmos. Environ., 56, 45–51,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2012.03.046" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2012.03.046</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Škerlak, B., Sprenger, M., and Wernli, H.: A global climatology of stratosphere–troposphere exchange using the ERA-Interim data set from 1979 to 2011, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 913–937, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-913-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-913-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Skerlak, B., Sprenger, M., Pfahl, S., Tyrlis, E., and Wernli, H.: Tropopause
folds in ERA-Interim: Global climatology and relation to extreme weather
events, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 4860–4877, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022787" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022787</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Sprenger, M. and Wernli, H.: A northern hemisphere climatology of
cross-tropopause exchange for the ERA15 time period (1979–1993), J. Geophys.
Res., 108, 8251, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002636" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002636</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R., Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D.,
and Ngan, F.: NOAA'S HYSPLIT Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling
System, B. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96, 2059–2077, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00110.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-14-00110.1</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Sterling, C. W., Johnson, B. J., Oltmans, S. J., Smit, H. G. J., Jordan, A. F., Cullis, P. D., Hall, E. G., Thompson, A. M., and Witte, J. C.: Homogenizing and estimating the uncertainty in NOAA's long-term vertical ozone profile records measured with the electrochemical concentration cell ozonesonde, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3661–3687, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3661-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3661-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Stewart, J. Q., Whiteman, C. D., Steenburgh, W. J., and Bian, X. D.: A
climatological study of thermally driven wind systems of the US
Intermountain West, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 83, 699–708, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083&lt;0699:Acsotd&gt;2.3.Co;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083&lt;0699:Acsotd&gt;2.3.Co;2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A., Spichtinger-Rakowsky, N., Bonasoni, P., Feldmann, H.,
Memmesheimer, M., Scheel, H. E., Trickl, T., Hubener, S., Ringer, W., and
Mandl, M.: The influence of stratospheric intrusions on alpine ozone
concentrations, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1323–1354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00320-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00320-9</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Thorncroft, C. D., Hoskins, B. J., and McIntyre, M. E.: Two paradigms of
baroclinic-wave life-cycle behaviour, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 119, 17–55,
1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Tian, H. Q., Yang, J., Xu, R. T., Lu, C. Q., Canadell, J. G., Davidson, E.
A., Jackson, R. B., Arneth, A., Chang, J. F., Ciais, P., Gerber, S., Ito,
A., Joos, F., Lienert, S., Messina, P., Olin, S., Pan, S. F., Peng, C. H.,
Saikawa, E., Thompson, R. L., Vuichard, N., Winiwarter, W., Zaehle, S., and
Zhang, B. W.: Global soil nitrous oxide emissions since the preindustrial
era estimated by an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models: Magnitude,
attribution, and uncertainty, Glob. Change Biol., 25, 640–659, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14514" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14514</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Tian, H. Q., Xu, R. T., Canadell, J. G., Thompson, R. L., Winiwarter, W.,
Suntharalingam, P., Davidson, E. A., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B.,
Janssens-Maenhout, G., Prather, M. J., Regnier, P., Pan, N. Q., Pan, S. F.,
Peters, G. P., Shi, H., Tubiello, F. N., Zaehle, S., Zhou, F., Arneth, A.,
Battaglia, G., Berthet, S., Bopp, L., Bouwman, A. F., Buitenhuis, E. T.,
Chang, J. F., Chipperfield, M. P., Dangal, S. R. S., Dlugokencky, E.,
Elkins, J. W., Eyre, B. D., Fu, B. J., Hall, B., Ito, A., Joos, F., Krummel,
P. B., Landolfi, A., Laruelle, G. G., Lauerwald, R., Li, W., Lienert, S.,
Maavara, T., MacLeod, M., Millet, D. B., Olin, S., Patra, P. K., Prinn, R.
G., Raymond, P. A., Ruiz, D. J., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wang, J.
J., Weiss, R. F., Wells, K. C., Wilson, C., Yang, J., and Yao, Y. Z.: A
comprehensive quantification of global nitrous oxide sources and sinks,
Nature, 586, 248–256, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Giehl, H., Scheel, H.-E., Sprenger, M., and Stohl, A.: How stratospheric are deep stratospheric intrusions?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9941–9961, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9941-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Trickl, T., Vogelmann, H., Ries, L., and Sprenger, M.: Very high stratospheric influence observed in the free troposphere over the northern Alps – just a local phenomenon?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 243–266, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-243-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-243-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Trousdell, J. F., Conley, S. A., Post, A., and Faloona, I. C.: Observing entrainment mixing, photochemical ozone production, and regional methane emissions by aircraft using a simple mixed-layer framework, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 15433–15450, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-15433-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-15433-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Uhl, M. and Moore, T.: Western ozone NAAQS implementation and issues:
addressing background and transport, EM/Air and Waste Management
Association, September, 6, <a href="https://www.awma.org/content.asp?contentid=454" target="_blank"/> (last access: 27 January 2022), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G. and Worthington, R. M.: Break-up of a stratospheric streamer
observed by MST radar, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 126, 1751–1769, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G., Price, J. D., and Howells, A.: Transport into the troposphere
in a tropopause fold, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 120, 1085–1103, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Vaughan, G., O'Connor, F. M., and Wareing, D. P.: Observations of Streamers
in the Troposphere and Stratosphere Using Ozone Lidar, J. Atmos. Chem., 38,
295–315, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Washenfelder, R. A., Wagner, N. L., Dube, W. P., and Brown, S. S.:
Measurement of Atmospheric Ozone by Cavity Ring-down Spectroscopy,
Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 2938–2944, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es103340u" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es103340u</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Wernli, H.: A Lagrangian-based analysis of extratropical cyclones. II: a
detailed case-study, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 123, 1677–1706, 1997.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Wernli, H. and Bourqui, M.: A Lagrangian “1-year climatology” of (deep)
cross-tropopause exchange in the extratropical Northern Hemisphere, J.
Geophys. Res., 107, 4021, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000812" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000812</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Wild, R. J., Edwards, P. M., Dube, W. P., Baumann, K., Edgerton, E. S.,
Quinn, P. K., Roberts, J. M., Rollins, A. W., Veres, P. R., Warneke, C.,
Williams, E. J., Yuan, B., and Brown, S. S.: A Measurement of Total Reactive
Nitrogen, NO<sub><i>y</i></sub>, together with NO<sub>2</sub>, NO, and O<sub>3</sub> via Cavity Ring-down
Spectroscopy, Environ. Sci. Technol., 48, 9609–9615, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es501896w" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es501896w</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Wild, R. J., Dube, W. P., Aikin, K. C., Eilerman, S. J., Neuman, J. A.,
Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., and Brown, S. S.: On-road measurements of
vehicle NO<sub>2</sub>&thinsp;∕&thinsp;NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emission ratios in Denver, Colorado, USA, Atmos. Environ., 148, 182–189, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.10.039" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.10.039</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Wirth, V., Appenzeller, C., and Juckes, M.: Signatures of induced vertical
air motion accompanying quasi-horizontal roll-up of stratospheric
intrusions, Mon. Weather Rev., 125, 2504–2519, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
Womack, C. C., Neuman, J. A., Veres, P. R., Eilerman, S. J., Brock, C. A., Decker, Z. C. J., Zarzana, K. J., Dube, W. P., Wild, R. J., Wooldridge, P. J., Cohen, R. C., and Brown, S. S.: Evaluation of the accuracy of thermal dissociation CRDS and LIF techniques for atmospheric measurement of reactive nitrogen species, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 1911–1926, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1911-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1911-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
Xiao, Y., Jacob, D. J., Wang, J. S., Logan, J. A., Palmer, P. I.,
Suntharalingam, P., Yantosca, R. M., Sachse, G. W., Blake, D. R., and
Streets, D. G.: Constraints on Asian and European sources of methane from
CH<sub>4</sub>-C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>6</sub>-CO correlations in Asian outflow, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D15S16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004475" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004475</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Downey, N. V., Wood, D. A., Blewitt, D., Carouge, C. C., van Donkelaar, A., Jones, D. B. A., Murray, L. T., and Wang, Y. X.:
Improved estimate of the policy-relevant background ozone in the United
States using the GEOS-Chem global model with 1∕2 degrees&thinsp; × &thinsp;2∕3 degrees horizontal resolution over North America, Atmos. Environ., 45, 6769–6776, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2011.07.054" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Atmosenv.2011.07.054</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Lin, M., Langford, A. O., Horowitz, L. W., Senff, C. J., Klovenski, E., Wang, Y., Alvarez II, R. J., Petropavlovskikh, I., Cullis, P., Sterling, C. W., Peischl, J., Ryerson, T. B., Brown, S. S., Decker, Z. C. J., Kirgis, G., and Conley, S.: Characterizing sources of high surface ozone events in the southwestern US with intensive field measurements and two global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10379–10400, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10379-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10379-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
