Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Reclassification of Continental U.S. Breeding Population of Wood Stork from Endangered to Threatened; Correction
This Proposed Rule document was issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
For related information, Open Docket Folder
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2012-0020; 92220-1113-0000-C6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassification of the Continental United States Breeding Population of the Wood Stork From Endangered to Threatened; Correction
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Proposed rule and notice of petition finding; correction.
On December 26, 2012, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, published a proposed rule and petition finding to reclassify the continental United States (U.S.) breeding population of wood stork from endangered to threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In that publication, we supplied an incorrect docket number for commenters to use when they send us comments. The correct docket number is FWS-R4-ES-2012-0020.
We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before February 25, 2013. We must receive requests for a public hearing in writing, at the address shown in theFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTsection, by February 11, 2013.
You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
For Further Information Contact
Field Supervisor, North Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256; telephone 904-731-3336; facsimile 904-731-3045. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Correction of Error
On December 26, 2012 (77 FR 75947), we published a petition finding and proposed rule to reclassify the continental U.S. breeding population of wood stork from endangered to threatened under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). In that publication, we supplied an incorrect docket number for commenters to use when they send us comments. We are publishing this notice to clarify that the correct docket number is FWS-R4-ES-2012-0020. However, if you already submitted a comment, you need not resubmit it.
In our DecemberFederal Registerpublication, we inadvertently asked commenters wishing to submit comments online via http://www.regulations.gov to search for our docket using the incorrect docket number, which actually did not appear anywhere on the regulations.gov site. However, users who searched based on key words (e.g., species name) rather than on the incorrect docket number were able to find the document and comment successfully. These comments have been placed into the correct docket. Therefore, if you already submitted a comment via regulations.gov, you need not resubmit it.
Commenting via U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery
We also asked commenters submitting hardcopy comments to refer to this incorrect docket number in their comments. However, comments we received by U.S. mail or hand delivery will be routed to the correct docket. If you already submitted a hardcopy comment, you need not resubmit it.
For the petition finding and proposed rule, please see our originalFederal Registerdocument at 77 FR 75947.
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2012-31718 Filed 1-2-13; 1:55 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
No documents available.
| || |
Comment Period Closed
Feb 25 2013, at 11:59 PM ET
Show More Details
Date Posted: Jan 3, 2013
CFR: 50 CFR Part 17
Federal Register Number: 2012-31718
Peter Frederick's Peer Review (U of Fl)
I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed reclassification of the wood stork from Endangered to Threatened. My comments represent my...
See attached comments:
This document is contained in
Related RINs: None
* This count refers to the total comment/submissions received on this document, as of 11:59 PM yesterday. Note: Agencies review all submissions, however some agencies may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof) such as those containing private or proprietary information, inappropriate language, or duplicate/near duplicate examples of a mass-mail campaign. This can result in discrepancies between this count and those displayed when conducting searches on the Public Submission document type. For specific information about an agency’s public submission policy, refer to its website or the Federal Register document.
Document text and images courtesy of the