Please see the attached pdf.

General Overview:

First of all, I would like to apologize for the long delay in providing the revision of the manuscript.

The authors investigate the linkages between atmospheric rivers and humid heat across the United States. For that, they use MERRA-2-based Guan-Waliser AR-detection algorithm and also daily maxima of 2-m wet-bulb temperature.

The manuscript is usually well written and the methodology is sound even if some points are not that clear.  In my opinion, the manuscript can be accepted after minor revision mentioned below.

• Even though the authors acknowledge the fact that AR have different phenomenology, I was wondering if the authors can enlarge the introduction relatively to that matter. In addition, can the authors also comment on the different between AR in the cold and warm season? And also, the different types of ARs that can reach different areas of the US?

• Section 2.1. the authors mentioned that they used 6-hourly data from MERRA-2, however in section 2.3 they mentioned that the use of hourly data for computing the 2-m wet-bulb temperature. I am assuming that the data here also comes from MERRA-2.

• Fig 1. Can you please put the name of the regions inside them? In the preset version is not very readable.

• Fig 1. Caption - Authors need to add the information regarding the relative risk. Higher values correspond to higher risk?

• Section 2.3 Can the authors expand the explanation regarding the computation of the percentiles? Did you compute the percentile after or before the 30-day smoothing? In addition, can the authors include a figure in the supplementary material explaining 3 days highest Tw value? And also, the difference between “regional” and “regional peak”?  

• Section 2.4 Did the authors use the axis of the AR, or the area of the AR? If you use the area provided by the Guan-Waliser AR-detection algorithm, then I don´t understand that a grid cell should be 100km from an AR.

• I am just wondering if having a new sub-section with a case study would also benefit the potential readers to better understand the methodology?

• Section 3.1. L160 onwards. You could add a figure on characterizing the different ARs that strike the different regions? It would help a lot in understanding the results. Are they associated with Extra-tropical cyclones? They are wind vs humidity driven?

• 2 Why the risk decreases if you go to the higher AR categories in some regions (eg. NGP, SGP and SE?)?

• I like figure 4. Maybe the authors can explain the physical process behind the heat conditioned on precipitation and IVT?

• Regarding the Midwest, is this a proper AR feature, or more related with an LLJ feature? At least in late winter some of the AR there are associated with a extra-tropical cyclone : https://blog.weather.us/atmospheric-river-to-bring-heavy-rain-and-possible-flooding-to-parts-of-the-east-coast-later-this-week/

• Regarding my point 8) and considering all the information provided in the manuscript, what is missing are the composites (SLP, GPT500, other variable ??) of the AR days for each one of the regions.