Hurricane Dorian near peak intensity. (NOAA/RAMMB)
Andrew Freedman
Editor focusing on extreme weather, climate change, science and the environment.
President Trump told his staff that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration needed to correct a tweet that seemed to contradict his statement that Hurricane Dorian posed a significant threat to Alabama as of Sept. 1, in contrast to what the agency’s forecasters were predicting at the time. This led chief of staff Mick Mulvaney to call Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to tell him to fix the issue, senior administration officials said.
Trump had complained for several days about the issue, according to senior officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the matter.
Mulvaney then called Ross but did not instruct him to threaten any firings or offer any punitive threats, officials said. He simply told Ross that the agency needed to fix it immediately, leading to a new statement that was issued on Sept. 6. The New York Times reported some elements of these events earlier Wednesday.
The NOAA statement criticized the agency’s Birmingham Weather Forecast Office for issuing a definitive tweet on Sept. 1 that there would not be “any” impacts from Dorian in the state.
Trump told reporters he did not direct NOAA to issue such a statement on Wednesday afternoon. “No, I never did that,” Trump said. “I never did that. It’s a hoax by the media. That’s just fake news, right from the beginning, it was a fake story.”
Democrats on the House Science Committee are launching an investigation into the Commerce Department’s involvement in NOAA’s unusual decision to side with Trump over its scientists.
Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) and Oversight and Investigations Chairwoman Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) sent a letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross requesting information related to the department’s dealings with NOAA regarding Hurricane Dorian.
The committee, which has jurisdiction over NOAA, is requesting a briefing with Commerce Department staff who may have been involved in issuing instructions to NOAA that led to several directives issued to Weather Service staff and culminated in the Sept. 6 unsigned statement, which disavowed a tweet sent by the agency’s Birmingham Weather Service forecast office on Sept. 1. That tweet definitively stated that Alabama would not see any impacts from Dorian, and came in response to a flood of phone calls to the office from worried residents.
[NOAA leader, in Alabama speech, says ‘weather shouldn’t be a partisan issue’]
After sending the tweet, NWS staff learned the calls originated from a tweet from President Trump that falsely asserted the state “would most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated” by the powerful hurricane.
The NOAA statement on Sept. 6 admonished the Birmingham division for speaking “in absolute terms” when it tweeted Alabama would “NOT see any impacts from #Dorian.”
The NOAA statement resulted in part from pressure that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross brought to bear on Neil Jacobs, the acting head of NOAA, in an early morning phone call on Friday from Greece, where the secretary was traveling for meetings, according to three individuals familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to speak on a sensitive issue.
[NOAA’s chief scientist will investigate why agency backed Trump over its experts on Dorian, email shows]
“We are deeply disturbed by the politicization of NOAA’s weather forecast activities for the purpose of supporting incorrect statements by the president,” Johnson and Sherrill wrote to Secretary Ross. The House members are seeking answers to who ordered and helped draft the Sept. 6 statement, and whether Commerce Department or White House staff members involved in threatening NOAA leadership in order to secure the statement.
“We are committed to supporting the activities of the NWS and its dedicated staff. During your Senate confirmation hearing, you committed to allowing federal scientists to “be free to communicate data clearly and concisely” and that you would “not interfere with the release of factual scientific data,” they wrote to Ross.
They noted that based on press reports, it appears Secretary Ross violated the “values of scientific integrity.”
The Science Committee is requesting all records of communication between Commerce Department officials, NOAA and the White House between Sept. 1 and Sept. 9 pertaining to the president’s tweet and NOAA’s Sept. 6 statement.
The committee wants to hear from three Commerce Department officials in particular by September 30: NOAA deputy chief of staff Julie Kay Roberts, Commerce Department chief of staff Michael Walsh Jr., and Commerce Department director of policy Earl Comstock.
In reality, at the time Trump sent the Sept. 1 tweet, the only hurricane forecast product that was showing potential impacts in Alabama at the time of the president’s tweet was the probability of seeing tropical storm force winds, and even that only showed about a 5 percent chance of such conditions in a small portion of the state. The official track forecast at the time of his tweet showed the storm moving up the Southeast coast, away from Alabama.
Commerce Department Probes
In addition to the House Science Committee’s investigation, other groups are initiating probes into NOAA’s decision back President Trump’s claim that Alabama was at risk from Hurricane Dorian, despite contrary forecasts from its own scientists. These include the Department of Commerce’s Inspector General, and NOAA’s acting chief scientist.
[NOAA leader, in Alabama speech, says ‘weather shouldn’t be a partisan issue’]
A spokesperson for the National Weather Service confirmed Tuesday that the Commerce Department Inspector General had launched a probe. The spokesperson said two senior leaders had received notice of the investigation.
In addition, NOAA chief scientist Craig McLean wrote an email Sunday night saying he would be opening an investigation into whether the agency’s Sept. 6 statement, as well as previous emails to NWS staff, violated the agency’s scientific integrity policy.
“The content of this news release is very concerning as it compromises the ability of NOAA to convey life-saving information necessary to avoid substantial and specific danger to public health and safety,” he wrote. “If the public cannot trust our information, or we debase our forecaster’s warnings and products, that specific danger arises,” McLean wrote.
As a result, McLean told his staff that “I am pursuing the potential violations of our NOAA Administrative Order on Scientific Integrity.”
“I have a responsibility to pursue these truths,” he added. “I will.”
The scientific integrity policy includes a provision that states: “In no circumstance may any NOAA official ask or direct Federal scientists or other NOAA employees to suppress or alter scientific findings.”
These investigations are taking shape while outside groups called for inquiries and circulate letters of support for National Weather Service scientists.
Jane Lubchenco, head of NOAA under President Obama, Richard Spinrad, NOAA’s chief scientist under Obama, and, Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists Center for Science and Democracy, filed a joint request for NOAA to initiate an investigation into possible violations of NOAA’s Scientific Integrity Policy, Lubchenco wrote in an email.
Meanwhile, a new tropical weather system is brewing, and this one may actually hit Alabama.
