Isolated Thunderstorms
H 89° L 68°
  • cloudy-day
    Current Conditions
    Isolated Thunderstorms. H 89° L 68°
  • partly-cloudy-tstorms-day
    Isolated Thunderstorms. H 89° L 68°
  • cloudy-day
    Partly Cloudy. H 88° L 67°

Krmg news on demand

00:00 | 00:00


Krmg traffic on demand

00:00 | 00:00


Krmg weather on demand

00:00 | 00:00

Winter weather: What is the coldest temperature ever recorded in each state?

Winter weather: What is the coldest temperature ever recorded in each state?

How To Prepare For Winter Weather

Winter weather: What is the coldest temperature ever recorded in each state?

You don’t need someone to ask, “Cold enough for you?,” or hear “Bundle up!” when you head out.

The nation is in the grip of an extended spell of cold weather that has seen temperatures plummet to as low as 33 below zero (in Whitehead, N.H. on Tuesday morning.)

As the cold weather has taken hold across the country, records have been set and broken. Even states in the usually moderate South have seen lows in the 20s and teens.

The list below shows the coldest temperature ever logged in all 50 states since such records have been kept, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Only one state, Hawaii, has escaped a record low below zero. The coldest recorded low was in Alaska where on Jan. 23, 1971 in Prospect Creek, the temperature was recorded at -80 degrees.

  1. Alabama: −27 °F, Jan. 30, 1966, New Market
  2. Alaska: −80 °F, Jan. 23, 1971, Prospect Creek
  3. Arizona: −40 °F, Jan. 7, 1971, McNary
  4. Arkansas: −29 °F, Feb. 13, 1905, Gravette
  5. California: −45 °F, Jan. 20, 1937, Boca
  6. Colorado: −61 °F, Feb. 1, 1985, Maybell
  7. Connecticut: −37 °F, Feb. 16, 1943, Norfolk
  8. Delaware: −17 °F, Jan. 17, 1893, Millsboro
  9. District of Columbia: −15 °F, Feb. 11, 1899, Washington
  10. Florida: −2 °F, Feb. 13, 1899, Tallahassee
  11. Georgia: −17 °F, Jan. 27, 1940, Chatsworth
  12. Hawaii: 15 °F, Jan. 5, 1975, Mauna Kea Observatories
  13. Idaho: −60 °F, Jan. 18, 1943, Island Park
  14. Illinois: −36 °F, Jan. 5, 1999, Congerville
  15. Indiana: −36 °F, Jan. 19, 1994, New Whiteland
  16. Iowa: −47 °F, Feb. 3, 1996, Elkader
  17. Kansas: −40 °F, Feb. 13, 1905, Lebanon
  18. Kentucky: −37 °F, Jan. 19, 1994, Shelbyville
  19. Louisiana: −16 °F, Feb. 13, 1899, Minden
  20. Maine: −50 °F, Jan. 16, 2009, Clayton Lake
  21. Maryland: −40 °F, Jan. 13, 1912, Oakland
  22. Massachusetts: −40 °F, Jan. 22, 1984, Chester 
  23. Michigan: −51 °F, Feb. 9, 1934, Vanderbilt
  24. Minnesota: −60 °F, Feb. 2, 1996, Tower
  25. Mississippi: −19 °F, Jan. 30, 1966, Corinth
  26. Missouri: −40 °F, Feb. 13, 1905, Warsaw
  27. Montana: −70 °F, Jan. 20, 1954, Lincoln (Rogers Pass)
  28. Nebraska: −47 °F, Dec. 22, 1989, Oshkosh
  29. Nevada: −50 °F, Jan. 8, 1937, San Jacinto
  30. New Hampshire: −47 °F, Jan. 22, 1885, Randolph
  31. New Jersey: −34 °F, Jan. 5, 1904, River Vale
  32. New Mexico: −50 °F, Feb. 1, 1951, Gavilan
  33. New York: −52 °F, Feb. 18, 1979, Old Forge
  34. North Carolina, −34 °F, Jan. 21, 1985, Burnsville
  35. North Dakota, −60 °F, Feb. 15, 1936, Parshall
  36. Ohio, −39 °F, Feb. 10, 1899, Milligan
  37. Oklahoma, −31 °F, Feb. 10, 2011, Nowata
  38. Oregon, −54 °F, Feb. 10, 1933, Seneca
  39. Pennsylvania, −42 °F, Jan. 5, 1904, Smethport
  40. Rhode Island, −28 °F, Jan. 17, 1942, Richmond
  41. South Carolina, −22 °F, Jan. 21, 1985, Landrum 
  42. South Dakota, −58 °F, Feb. 17, 1936, McIntosh
  43. Tennessee, −32 °F, Dec. 30, 1917, Mountain City
  44. Texas, −23 °F, Feb. 8, 1933, Seminole
  45. Utah, −50 °F, Jan. 5, 1913, Strawberry Tunnel
  46. Vermont, −50 °F, Dec. 30, 1933, Bloomfield
  47. Virginia, −30 °F, Jan. 22, 1985, Pembroke
  48. Washington, −48 °F, Dec. 30, 1968, Mazama
  49. West Virginia, −37 °F, Dec. 30, 1917, Lewisburg
  50. Wisconsin, −55 °F, Feb. 4, 1996, Couderay
  51. Wyoming, −63 °F, Feb. 9, 1933, Moran

Read More

There are no comments yet. Be the first to post your thoughts. or Register.

  • Under growing pressure from the House to change how lawmakers deal with workplace harassment claims and damage awards, the Senate on Thursday approved a package of reforms that would not allow members to use taxpayer funds to pay any legal settlements, and change the process for Congressional employees to bring complaints against lawmakers. “This is an incredibly important moment,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who joined with Senators in both parties to forge a compromise that was approved on a voice vote. “We are completely overhauling the sexual harassment policies of the Congress,” Klobuchar said on the Senate floor. The Senate just passed bipartisan reforms to fix Congress's broken process for reporting sexual harassment, and finally end taxpayer-funded harassment settlements. This is a big step in the right direction towards transparency and accountability. — Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) May 24, 2018 “These reforms are commonsense,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who had been more and more vocal in recent days about the lack of action on a similar measure passed by the House. Along with streamlining the process for employees to bring a complaint – and then have it evaluated by Congressional officials – the plan would force members to personally pay for any legal settlement, and not have taxpayers foot the bill. “Hardworking taxpayers should not foot the bill for a Member’s misconduct, and victims should not have to navigate a system that stands in the way of accountability,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO). The extra protections for employees would also be extended to unpaid staffers on Capitol Hill, including interns, legislative fellows, and detailees from other executive branch offices. As the Senate approved the plan, the leaders of the House Ethics Committee confirmed that ex-Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-PA) had reimbursed taxpayers for a $39,000 settlement involving a former female staffer in his office. “We understand he sent that reimbursement payment to the Treasury. We welcome that action,” said ethics chair Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN), and the top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), in a joint statement. “There is overwhelming bipartisan consensus in the House that Members should be personally accountable for settlements paid with public funds to resolve claims against them alleging sexual harassment,” Brooks and Deutch wrote in a statement. But what about when lawmakers leave the Congress? The ethics leaders said even then – they should still have to pay up. Ethics committee writes in new letter they believe “any proposal to reform the CAA should include provisions to ensure that Members remain personally liable for their own conduct with respect to discrimination and retaliation & that they remain liable even if they leave Congress” — Alex Moe (@AlexNBCNews) May 24, 2018 Brooks and Deutch also noted that ex-Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX) – who had resigned without following through on a promise to pay off an $84,000 settlement – was a perfect example of why the system needs to be changed. “Farenthold publicly promised to reimburse the U.S. Treasury for $84,000 in funds paid to settle the lawsuit brought against him for claims of sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation,” they wrote. “Last week, he announced that he would not do so,” the two added. The House and Senate must still hammer out a compromise measure between the bills passed by each chamber – but the Senate vote gives a new shot of energy to the effort, though there are House members who feel the Senate plan is not strong enough, especially in dealing with lawmakers. “I’m optimistic that we can finish the job and get this bill signed into law,” Gillibrand added.
  • The opioid epidemic has now made its way into marine life in Washington’s Puget Sound. Scientists who track pollution have for the first time, discovered traces of oxycodone in mussels. >> Read more trending news  But scientists say those mussels don’t end up on your plate.  The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, or WDFW, gets clean mussels from Penn Cove on Whidby Island and puts them into areas they want to test for water contamination – like in urban waters. And they’ve discovered there’s enough oxycodone in Elliot Bay for mussels to test positive.  “What we eat and what we excrete goes into the Puget Sound,” said Jennifer Lanksbury, a biologist at the WDFW.  Scientists deposit mussels in cages in 18 locations. They teamed up with the Puget Sound Institute to analyze the data and discovered that three locations were positive for trace amounts of oxycodone - two near Bremerton’s shipyard and Elliot Bay near Harbor Island. “It’s telling me there's a lot of people taking oxycodone in the Puget Sound area. The contamination is likely coming from wastewater treatment plants,” Lanksbury said.  >> Trending: Sunken treasure worth $17 billion on 300-year-old shipwreck discovered off Colombian coast After people consume oxycodone, some of it ends up in the toilet, and it goes into wastewater. The water gets filtered, but King County Wastewater Management said although their system can catch a lot of contaminants, it can't specifically filter out drugs.  >> Trending: Great Pacific Garbage Patch 16 times larger than estimates: 87,000 tons of plastic and growing And opioids, antibiotics, drugs for depression - mussels are testing positive for all of it.  “Those are definitely chemicals that are out there in the nearshore waters and they may be having an impact on the fish and shellfish that live there,” Lanksbury said. Again, Lanksbury says people have nothing to worry about when it comes to eating mussels from a restaurant or shop because they come from clean locations. “They’re clean and healthy and delicious. We love to eat mussels from the Puget Sound. We use them for our food and we use them for contaminant analysis,” Lanksbury said.  But the study shows it’s another sign of what's ending up in the water and harming marine life.  “People should be wary,” Lanksbury said. “Hopefully our data shows what’s out there and can get the process started for cleaning up our waters.”  >> Trending: Your bottled water is probably contaminated with tiny plastic particles, health experts say This was a one-time study for prescription drugs, but Fish and Wildlife officials will seek more funding to continue testing and tracking what happening to in the water over time. 
  • Police were called to a restaurant near Lake Hefner Thursday night in  Oklahoma City where several people have been shot or injured. Oklahoma police say the suspected shooter is dead. Police say three people are injured. KRMG has a reporter headed to the scene. Tune to NEWS102.3 and AM740 KRMG for the latest.
  • An idea to help police patrol under area bridges is approved by the Tulsa City Council. The new ordinance gives police the authority to patrol under bridges that were previously considered state property. The plan is designed to help the City of Tulsa deal with damage under bridges. Leaders with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation say sometimes fires started by people living in homeless camps can do damage. ODOT has also paid for environmental agencies to clean out drug paraphernalia and human waste.
  • A Portland, Oregon, family contacted Amazon to investigate after they say a private conversation in their home was recorded by Amazon's Alexa – the voice-controlled smart speaker – and the recorded audio was sent to the phone of a random person in Seattle, who was in the family’s contact list. >> Amazon announces kids-friendly version of Echo 'My husband and I would joke and say, 'I'd bet these devices are listening to what we're saying,'' said Danielle, who did not want KIRO-TV to use her last name. Every room in her family home was wired with the Amazon devices to control her home's heat, lights and security system. But Danielle said that two weeks ago, the family's love for Alexa changed with an alarming phone call. 'The person on the other line said, 'Unplug your Alexa devices right now,'' she said. ''You're being hacked.'' >> Amazon working on home robot, report says That person was one of her husband's employees, calling from Seattle. 'We unplugged all of them and he proceeded to tell us that he had received audio files of recordings from inside our house,' she said. 'At first, my husband was, like, 'No, you didn't!' And the (recipient of the message) said, 'You sat there talking about hardwood floors.' And we said, 'Oh gosh, you really did hear us.'' Danielle listened to the conversation when it was sent back to her, and she couldn't believe someone 176 miles away heard it, too. 'I felt invaded,' she said. 'A total privacy invasion. Immediately, I said, 'I'm never plugging that device in again because I can't trust it.'' >> Amazon’s Alexa’s random laugh is creeping users out Danielle says she unplugged all the devices, and she repeatedly called Amazon. She says an Alexa engineer investigated. 'They said, 'Our engineers went through your logs, and they saw exactly what you told us; they saw exactly what you said happened, and we're sorry.' He apologized like 15 times in a matter of 30 minutes, and he said, 'We really appreciate you bringing this to our attention; this is something we need to fix!'' But Danielle says the engineer did not provide specifics about why it happened or if it's a widespread issue. 'He told us that the device just guessed what we were saying,' she said. Danielle said the device did not audibly advise her it was preparing to send the recording, something it’s programmed to do. >> Read more trending news  When KIRO-TV asked Amazon questions, the company sent this response: “Amazon takes privacy very seriously. We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence. We are taking steps to avoid this from happening in the future.' Amazon offered to “de-provision” Danielle’s Alexa communications so she could keep using its 'Smart Home' features. But Danielle is hoping Amazon gives her a refund for her devices, which she said representatives have been unwilling to do. She says she’s curious to find out if anyone else has experienced the same issue. 'A husband and wife in the privacy of their home have conversations that they're not expecting to be sent to someone (in) their address book,' she said.