US to take more control of spill response website

Jul 05, 2010 by Harry R. Weber , Ap Business Writer

(AP)— The US government is expected to take over control of the central information website on the Gulf oil spill response that has been run jointly by various agencies and BP for the 2 1/2 months since the rig explosion.

The Department of Homeland Security wants a one-stop shop for information that is completely overseen by the government as it settles into the long-haul of dealing with the response to the disaster. The U.S. Coast Guard falls under Homeland Security's authority.

BP and the federal government are part of a unified command that is working together to try to contain the oil gusher, but the government has been directing BP at every turn.

A DHS spokesman told The Associated Press on Sunday that the joint relationship won't change when the website is given a dot-gov address instead of a dot-com address.

But who can post information to the site would change. Details are still being worked out.

The spokesman, Sean Smith, said the government wants to be as transparent as possible and increase Americans' access to information.

BP is helping pay for the current website. The government could still bill BP when it takes over the site.

The deepwaterhorizonresponse.com site may still be maintained during the changeover, but ultimately it will be taken down altogether when the government moves the response information to its own website.

A BP spokesman did not immediately respond to several requests for comment on the move, which could occur within days.

A frequent critic of the administration's response to the oil spill, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., was skeptical the change would amount to much.

"Given that the government taking over the hasn't exactly fixed things, it's hard to imagine the government taking over a making things much better either," Issa, a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, said in a statement e-mailed to the AP.

"In recent weeks, we've heard directly from local officials pleading for less bureaucracy, more resources and expressing an overall frustration with this administration's apparent pre-occupation with the public relations surrounding this catastrophe," he said.

Explore further: Beijing's focus on coal lost in haze of smog

More information: www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/index.cfm

not rated yet
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

BP says $2 billion spent on US oil spill

Jun 21, 2010

BP revealed Monday it has so far spent two billion dollars on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, after an internal BP document suggested the gusher might be spewing far faster than initially feared.

Bid to plug oil leak continues amid uncertainty

May 29, 2010

Engineers pushed forward with efforts to plug a disastrous Gulf of Mexico leak Saturday as locals and officials crossed their fingers that the untested "top kill" process would work.

Recommended for you

Beijing's focus on coal lost in haze of smog

1 hour ago

The soaring, grimy chimneys of the coal-fired power station have belched the last of their choking fumes into Beijing's air, authorities say—but experts doubt the plan will ease the capital's smog.

Stopping the leaks

18 hours ago

When a big old cast-iron water main blows, it certainly makes for a spectacular media event.

Alpine lifelines on the brink

20 hours ago

Only one in ten Alpine rivers are healthy enough to maintain water supply and to cope with climate impacts according to a report by WWF. The publication is the first-ever comprehensive study on the condition ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

omatumr
1 / 5 (1) Jul 05, 2010
"The Department of Homeland Security wants a one-stop shop for information"

That tyrannical decision is more frightening than the eruption itself!

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
ricarguy
not rated yet Jul 06, 2010
"The spokesman, Sean Smith, said the government wants to be as transparent as possible and increase Americans' access to information."

I wholeheartedly agree with Oliver on this one. We have seen a few times now what "transparency" means to those currently in charge in Washington...

Increasing access to information would mean increasing the number of sources, not eliminating them.

I shudder to think of Ms. Pelosi's quote..."We have to pass the bill before we can find out what's in it." That was transparency too. Government is bit by bit taking control of access to information. Meanwhile we have a Supreme Court nominee who wrote that its OK under some circumstances to have policies to ban certain political pamphlets or even to burn books...

This administration is like Jimmy Carter when it comes to public policy competence and Woodrow Wilson when it comes to arrogance and propaganda.