‘Weather shouldn’t be partisan issue’ says NOAA head

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — The acting administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Neil Jacobs, defended his agency at a major weather industry conference on Tuesday morning in an emotional speech, as controversy swirls over how agency officials responded to President Trump’s inaccurate claim on Sept. 1 that Alabama “would most likely be hit [much] harder than anticipated” by Hurricane Dorian.

Jacobs defended the agency’s unusual, unsigned statement released on Sept. 6, which backed Trump’s false claim about Alabama and admonished the Weather Service’s Birmingham division for speaking “in absolute terms.”

“I have the utmost respect for what you do because I understand how difficult numerical weather prediction is, and how even more complicated conveying risk to the public is. The purpose of the NOAA statement was to clarify the technical aspects of the potential impacts of Dorian,” Jacobs said. “What it did not say, however, is that we understand and fully support the good intent of the Birmingham weather office, which was to calm fears and support public safety.”

Regarding impacts from Hurricane Dorian, Jacobs said, “At one point Alabama was in the mix, as was the rest of the Southeast.”

“At one point the Gulf states were at greater risk than the Atlantic coast,” Jacobs said.

The NOAA statement Sept. 1 resulted in part from pressure that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross brought to bear on Jacobs in an early morning phone call on Friday from Greece, where the secretary was traveling for meetings, according to three people who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.

According to a federal official with knowledge of the matter, Ross wanted NOAA to issue a statement backing the president’s contention that Alabama was forecast to be impacted by the hurricane, even if it was outside the official forecast cone. NOAA is a Commerce Department agency.

Ross’ involvement in the statement was first reported by the New York Times.

According to two people, Jacobs initially resisted issuing such a statement and also tried to block the inclusion of a paragraph that called out the Birmingham Weather Service office for its tweet that many perceived as correcting Trump. The acting NOAA head lost both those arguments.

Trump has maintained that he was correct in saying Alabama was at direct risk of significant impacts from Dorian, despite the lack of evidence to support his claim. At the time of his first tweet mentioning Alabama, the NWS’ forecast guidance showed only a very small risk [about 5 percent] of tropical-storm-force winds for a small portion of Alabama. However, Alabama was not in the storm forecast track or “cone of uncertainty” from the National Hurricane Center, which showed Hurricane Dorian skirting the East Coast far away from Alabama.

The NWS’ Birmingham office quickly stated Alabama “would NOT see any impacts” from the storm. NWS Director Louis Uccellini said Monday that the Birmingham office was responding to an influx of calls from concerned residents that began after Trump sent the tweet, but that the Alabama forecasters only learned that Trump’s tweet was what instigated the calls after they sent their tweet.

Jacobs seemed to dispute some of the reporting about the Trump administration pulling strings to get NOAA to correct its forecast, thereby putting politics above science. “There is no pressure to change the way you communicate forecast risk into the future. No one’s job is under threat: not mine, not yours,” Jacobs said.