Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Opening of the Comment Period for the Proposed and Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia River Populations of Bull Trout, 29998-30000 [05-10246]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29998
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
6. Section 101.139 is amended by
adding paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as
follows:
I
§ 101.139
Authorization of transmitters.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) 71,000–76,000 MHz; 81,000–
86,000 MHz. For equipment employing
digital modulation techniques, the
minimum bit rate requirement is 0.125
bit per second per Hz.
(i) 92,000–94,000 MHz; 94,100–95,000
MHz. For equipment employing digital
modulation techniques, the minimum
bit rate requirement is 1.0 bit per second
per Hz.
I 7. Section 101.147 is amended by
revising paragraph (z) to read as follows:
§ 101.147
Frequency Assignments.
*
*
*
*
*
(z) 71,000–76,000 MHz; 81,000–86,000
MHz; 92,000–94,000 MHz; 94,100–
95,000 MHz. (1) Those applicants who
are approved in accordance with FCC
Form 601 will each be granted a single,
non-exclusive nationwide license. Siteby-site registration is on a first-come,
first-served basis. Registration will be in
the Universal Licensing System until
the Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau announces by public notice, the
implementation of a third-party
database. See 47 CFR 101.1523. Links
may not operate until NTIA approval is
received. Licensees may use these bands
for any point-to-point non-broadcast
service.
(2) Prior links shall be protected using
the interference protection criteria set
forth in section 101.105. For
transmitters employing digital
modulation techniques and operating in
the 71,000–76,000 MHz or 81,000–
86,000 MHz bands, the licensee must
construct a system that meets a
minimum bit rate of 0.125 bits per
second per Hertz of bandwidth. For
transmitters that operate in the 92,000–
94,000 MHz or 94,100–95,000 MHz
bands, licensees must construct a
system that meets a minimum bit rate of
1.0 bit per second per Hertz of
bandwidth. If it is determined that a
licensee has not met these loading
requirements, then the database will be
modified to limit coordination rights to
the spectrum that is loaded and the
licensee will lose protection rights on
spectrum that has not been loaded.
I 8. Section 101.1505 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 101.1505
Segmentation plan.
(a) An entity may request any portion
of the 71–76 GHz and 81–86 GHz bands,
up to 5 gigahertz in each segment for a
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:21 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
total of 10 gigahertz. Licensees are also
permitted to register smaller segments.
(b) The 92–95 GHz band is divided
into three segments: 92.0–94.0 GHz and
94.1–95.0 GHz for non-government and
government users, and 94.0–94.1 GHz
for Federal Government use. Pairing is
allowed and segments may be
aggregated without limit. The bands in
paragraph (a) of this section can be
included for a possible 12.9 gigahertz
maximum aggregation. Licensees are
also permitted to register smaller
segments than provided here.
I 9. Section 101.1513 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 101.1513 License term and renewal
expectancy.
The license term is ten years,
beginning on the date of the initial
authorization (nationwide license)
grant. Registering links will not change
the overall renewal period of the
license.
I 10. Section 101.1523 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 101.1523 Sharing and coordination
among non-government licensees and
between non-government and government
services.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The licensee or applicant shall:
(1) Complete coordination with
Federal Government links according to
the coordination standards and
procedures adopted in Report and
Order, FCC 03–248, and as further
detailed in subsequent implementation
public notices issued consistent with
that order;
(2) Provide an electronic copy of an
interference analysis to the third-party
database manager which demonstrates
that the potential for harmful
interference to or from all previously
registered non-government links has
been analyzed according to the
standards of section 101.105 and
generally accepted good engineering
practice, and that the proposed nongovernment link will neither cause
harmful interference to, nor receive
harmful interference from, any
previously registered non-government
link; and
(3) Provide upon request any
information related to the interference
analysis and the corresponding link.
The third-party database managers shall
receive and retain the interference
analyses electronically and make them
available to the public. Protection of
individual links against harmful
interference from other links shall be
granted to first-in-time registered links.
Successful completion of coordination
via the NTIA automated mechanism
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
shall constitute successful non-Federal
Government to Federal Government
coordination for that individual link.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–10120 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–U
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018–AU31
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Opening of the Comment
Period for the Proposed and Final
Designation of Critical Habitat for the
Klamath River and Columbia River
Populations of Bull Trout
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; opening of comment
period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
opening of a public comment period on
the proposed and final designation of
critical habitat for the Klamath River
and Columbia River populations of bull
trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Due to
court action, we have determined that it
would be appropriate to reevaluate the
exclusions made in the final critical
habitat rule. We are opening this
comment period to allow all interested
parties to comment simultaneously on
the November 29, 2002, proposed rule
(67 FR 71235) and the October 6, 2004,
final rule (69 FR 59996). Copies of the
proposed and final rules, as well as the
economic analysis for the critical habitat
designation, are available on the
Internet at https://pacific.fws.gov/
bulltrout or from the Portland Regional
Office at the address and contact
numbers below.
DATES: We will accept public comments
until June 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
materials may be submitted to us by any
one of the following methods:
1. You may submit written comments
and information to John Young, Bull
Trout Coordinator, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Ecological Services,
911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR
97232;
2. You may hand-deliver written
comments and information to our office,
at the above address, or fax your
comments to 503/231–6243; or
3. You may also send comments by
electronic mail (e-mail) to
R1BullTroutCH@r1.fws.gov. For
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
directions on how to submit electronic
filing of comments, see the ‘‘Public
Comments Solicited’’ section. In the
event that our internet connection is not
functional, please submit your
comments by the alternate methods
mentioned above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Young, at the address above (telephone
503/231–6194; facsimile 503/231–6243).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
We published a proposed rule to
designate critical habitat for the
Klamath River and Columbia River
populations of bull trout on November
29, 2002 (67 FR 71235). The proposed
critical habitat designation included
approximately 18,471 miles (mi) (29,720
kilometers (km)) of streams, and 532,721
acres (ac) (215,585 hectares (ha)) of
lakes and reservoirs on Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, and Montana. The
final critical habitat designation was
published on October 6, 2004 (69 FR
59996), and included approximately
1,748 mi (2,813 km) of streams and
61,235 ac (24,781 ha) of lakes and
marshes. On December 14, 2004,
Alliance for the Wild Rockies et al.
(plaintiffs) filed a complaint challenging
the adequacy of the final designation. In
particular, the plaintiffs challenged the
exclusions made in the final rule,
pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Critical habitat receives protection
from destruction or adverse
modification through required
consultation under section 7 of the Act,
with regard to actions carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal
agency. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
requires that ‘‘The Secretary shall
designate critical habitat, and make
revisions thereto, under subsection
(a)(3) of this section on the basis of the
best scientific data available and after
taking into consideration the economic
impact, and any other relevant impact,
of specifying any particular area as
critical habitat. The Secretary may
exclude any area from critical habitat if
she determines that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless she determines,
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available, that the
failure to designate such area as critical
habitat will result in the extinction of
the species concerned.’’
The economic analysis estimated the
potential economic effects over a 10year period would range from $200 to
$260 million ($20 to $26 million per
year) for the bull trout. It is expected
that Federal agencies will bear 70
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:21 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
percent of these costs. The total
estimated costs associated with bull
trout consultation is expected to be $9.8
million annually, and total project
modification costs are expected to range
from $19.5 to $26.1 million annually.
Economic costs were considered in
balancing the benefits of including and
excluding areas from critical habitat.
The economic analysis is available on
the Internet and from the mailing
address in the ADDRESSES section above.
Once the public comment period has
closed, we will compile all comments
and data received and consider them for
use in our reevaluation of the final rule.
We will then reconsider all of the
relevant impacts of designating the
proposed areas as critical habitat on the
basis of our administrative record. We
do not intend to contract for a new
formal economic analysis, but we will
consider any new information received
regarding the economic impacts of the
designation. Upon completion of the
reconsideration process, we will issue a
new final rule designating critical
habitat for the Klamath River and
Columbia River populations of bull
trout.
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action
resulting from our November 2002
proposal will be as accurate and as
effective as possible. Therefore, we
solicit comments or suggestions from
the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested party concerning the portion
of the proposed rule subject to
reevaluation. We will accept written
comments and information during this
comment period on the November 29,
2002, proposed rule (67 FR 71235) and
the October 6, 2004, final rule (69 FR
59996). On the basis of public comment,
during the development of our new final
determination, we may find that areas
proposed are not essential, are
appropriate for exclusion under section
4(b)(2), or not appropriate for exclusion.
In all of these cases, this information
would be incorporated into our new
final determination with respect to
those areas. We specifically seek
comments on:
(1) The reasons why any of the habitat
identified in this rule should or should
not be determined to be critical habitat
as provided by section 4 of the Act,
including whether the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying such area as part of critical
habitat;
(2) Information related to the benefits
of designating any specific areas as
critical habitat for the bull trout;
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29999
(3) Information related to the benefits
of excluding any specific areas as
critical habitat for the bull trout;
(4) Specific information on the
amount and distribution of bull trout
habitat, and why those particular
amounts and distributions of habitat are
essential to the conservation of this
species;
(5) Any effects of the Ninth Circuit’s
recent decision in Gifford Pinchot Task
Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
378 F.3d 1059 (Ninth Cir. 2004) that we
should consider in our review of the
final designation of critical habitat for
the Klamath River and Columbia River
populations of bull trout (69 FR 59996);
(6) Any foreseeable economic or other
impacts resulting from the designation
of critical habitat, in particular, any
previously unidentified impacts on
small entities or families;
(7) Whether the draft economic
analysis identifies all State and local
economic costs and economic benefits
attributable to the critical habitat
designation. If not, what costs and
benefits are overlooked;
(8) Are the adjustments to local
governments’ economic data made by
the economic analysis reasonable? If
not, please provide alternative
interpretations and the justification for
the alternative, and/or the reasons the
interpretation in the economic analysis
is not correct;
(9) Any previously unidentified
impacts associated with likely
regulatory changes as a result of the
designation of critical habitat;
(10) Any previously unidentified
regional costs or benefits associated
with land use controls that derive from
the designation, to the extent possible
economic cost or benefit analysis should
be included as the Service will not
conduct additional economic analysis
on this rule;
(11) Whether the designation will
result in disproportionate economic
impacts to specific areas that should be
evaluated for possible exclusion from
the final designation;
(12) Some of the lands we have
identified as essential for the
conservation of the bull trout were
excluded from critical habitat
designation. We specifically solicit
comment on the inclusion or exclusion
of such areas and:
(a) Whether these areas are essential
and why;
(b) The benefits of including these
areas as essential habitat;
(c) The benefits of excluding these
areas as essential habitat;
(13) With specific reference to the
recent amendments to sections 4(a)(3)
and 4(b)(2) of the Act, we request
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
30000
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
information from the Department of
Defense to assist the Secretary of the
Interior in making a determination as to
whether to exclude critical habitat on
lands administered by or under the
control of the Department of Defense
based on the benefit of an Integrated
Natural Resources Management Plan
(INRMP) to the conservation of the
species; and information regarding
impacts to national security associated
with designation of critical habitat; and
(14) Whether our approach to critical
habitat designation could be improved
or modified in any way to provide for
greater public participation and
understanding, or to assist us in
accommodating public concern and
comments.
(15) Whether contemplated changes to
Federal land management plans should
be considered and if so, how.
Refer to the ADDRESSES section for
information on how to submit written
comments and information. Our final
determination on critical habitat for the
Klamath River and Columbia River
populations of bull trout will take into
consideration all comments and any
additional information received.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:21 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
Please submit electronic comments in
an ASCII file format and avoid the use
of special characters and encryption.
Please also include ‘‘Attn: RIN 1018–
AU31’’ and your name and return
address in your e-mail message. If you
do not receive a confirmation from the
system that we have received your email message, please contact the Bull
Trout Coordinator (see ADDRESSES
section).
Our practice is to make comments,
including names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours.
Individual respondents may request that
we withhold their home addresses from
the rulemaking record, which we will
honor to the extent allowable by law. In
some circumstances, we would
withhold from the rulemaking record a
respondent’s identity, as allowable by
law. If you wish for us to withhold your
name and/or address, you must state
this prominently at the beginning of
your comments. However, we will not
consider anonymous comments. We
will make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
Comments and materials received, as
well as supporting documentation used
to designate critical habitat, will be
available for inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours, in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Office at the above address.
Copies of the final economic analysis
and proposed and final rules are
available on the Internet at: https://
pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout or from the
Bull Trout Coordinator at the address
and contact numbers above.
Author
The primary author of this notice is
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 16, 2005.
Paul Hoffman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 05–10246 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29998-30000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10246]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AU31
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Opening of the
Comment Period for the Proposed and Final Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia River Populations of Bull
Trout
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; opening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
opening of a public comment period on the proposed and final
designation of critical habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia
River populations of bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Due to court
action, we have determined that it would be appropriate to reevaluate
the exclusions made in the final critical habitat rule. We are opening
this comment period to allow all interested parties to comment
simultaneously on the November 29, 2002, proposed rule (67 FR 71235)
and the October 6, 2004, final rule (69 FR 59996). Copies of the
proposed and final rules, as well as the economic analysis for the
critical habitat designation, are available on the Internet at https://
pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout or from the Portland Regional Office at the
address and contact numbers below.
DATES: We will accept public comments until June 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and materials may be submitted to us by any
one of the following methods:
1. You may submit written comments and information to John Young,
Bull Trout Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological
Services, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232;
2. You may hand-deliver written comments and information to our
office, at the above address, or fax your comments to 503/231-6243; or
3. You may also send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to
R1BullTroutCH@r1.fws.gov. For
[[Page 29999]]
directions on how to submit electronic filing of comments, see the
``Public Comments Solicited'' section. In the event that our internet
connection is not functional, please submit your comments by the
alternate methods mentioned above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Young, at the address above
(telephone 503/231-6194; facsimile 503/231-6243).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
We published a proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the
Klamath River and Columbia River populations of bull trout on November
29, 2002 (67 FR 71235). The proposed critical habitat designation
included approximately 18,471 miles (mi) (29,720 kilometers (km)) of
streams, and 532,721 acres (ac) (215,585 hectares (ha)) of lakes and
reservoirs on Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana. The final
critical habitat designation was published on October 6, 2004 (69 FR
59996), and included approximately 1,748 mi (2,813 km) of streams and
61,235 ac (24,781 ha) of lakes and marshes. On December 14, 2004,
Alliance for the Wild Rockies et al. (plaintiffs) filed a complaint
challenging the adequacy of the final designation. In particular, the
plaintiffs challenged the exclusions made in the final rule, pursuant
to section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Critical habitat receives protection from destruction or adverse
modification through required consultation under section 7 of the Act,
with regard to actions carried out, funded, or authorized by a Federal
agency. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that ``The Secretary shall
designate critical habitat, and make revisions thereto, under
subsection (a)(3) of this section on the basis of the best scientific
data available and after taking into consideration the economic impact,
and any other relevant impact, of specifying any particular area as
critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude any area from critical
habitat if she determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh
the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat,
unless she determines, based on the best scientific and commercial data
available, that the failure to designate such area as critical habitat
will result in the extinction of the species concerned.''
The economic analysis estimated the potential economic effects over
a 10-year period would range from $200 to $260 million ($20 to $26
million per year) for the bull trout. It is expected that Federal
agencies will bear 70 percent of these costs. The total estimated costs
associated with bull trout consultation is expected to be $9.8 million
annually, and total project modification costs are expected to range
from $19.5 to $26.1 million annually. Economic costs were considered in
balancing the benefits of including and excluding areas from critical
habitat. The economic analysis is available on the Internet and from
the mailing address in the ADDRESSES section above.
Once the public comment period has closed, we will compile all
comments and data received and consider them for use in our
reevaluation of the final rule. We will then reconsider all of the
relevant impacts of designating the proposed areas as critical habitat
on the basis of our administrative record. We do not intend to contract
for a new formal economic analysis, but we will consider any new
information received regarding the economic impacts of the designation.
Upon completion of the reconsideration process, we will issue a new
final rule designating critical habitat for the Klamath River and
Columbia River populations of bull trout.
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action resulting from our November 2002
proposal will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore,
we solicit comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested party concerning the portion of the proposed rule subject to
reevaluation. We will accept written comments and information during
this comment period on the November 29, 2002, proposed rule (67 FR
71235) and the October 6, 2004, final rule (69 FR 59996). On the basis
of public comment, during the development of our new final
determination, we may find that areas proposed are not essential, are
appropriate for exclusion under section 4(b)(2), or not appropriate for
exclusion. In all of these cases, this information would be
incorporated into our new final determination with respect to those
areas. We specifically seek comments on:
(1) The reasons why any of the habitat identified in this rule
should or should not be determined to be critical habitat as provided
by section 4 of the Act, including whether the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of critical
habitat;
(2) Information related to the benefits of designating any specific
areas as critical habitat for the bull trout;
(3) Information related to the benefits of excluding any specific
areas as critical habitat for the bull trout;
(4) Specific information on the amount and distribution of bull
trout habitat, and why those particular amounts and distributions of
habitat are essential to the conservation of this species;
(5) Any effects of the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Gifford
Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059
(Ninth Cir. 2004) that we should consider in our review of the final
designation of critical habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia
River populations of bull trout (69 FR 59996);
(6) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the
designation of critical habitat, in particular, any previously
unidentified impacts on small entities or families;
(7) Whether the draft economic analysis identifies all State and
local economic costs and economic benefits attributable to the critical
habitat designation. If not, what costs and benefits are overlooked;
(8) Are the adjustments to local governments' economic data made by
the economic analysis reasonable? If not, please provide alternative
interpretations and the justification for the alternative, and/or the
reasons the interpretation in the economic analysis is not correct;
(9) Any previously unidentified impacts associated with likely
regulatory changes as a result of the designation of critical habitat;
(10) Any previously unidentified regional costs or benefits
associated with land use controls that derive from the designation, to
the extent possible economic cost or benefit analysis should be
included as the Service will not conduct additional economic analysis
on this rule;
(11) Whether the designation will result in disproportionate
economic impacts to specific areas that should be evaluated for
possible exclusion from the final designation;
(12) Some of the lands we have identified as essential for the
conservation of the bull trout were excluded from critical habitat
designation. We specifically solicit comment on the inclusion or
exclusion of such areas and:
(a) Whether these areas are essential and why;
(b) The benefits of including these areas as essential habitat;
(c) The benefits of excluding these areas as essential habitat;
(13) With specific reference to the recent amendments to sections
4(a)(3) and 4(b)(2) of the Act, we request
[[Page 30000]]
information from the Department of Defense to assist the Secretary of
the Interior in making a determination as to whether to exclude
critical habitat on lands administered by or under the control of the
Department of Defense based on the benefit of an Integrated Natural
Resources Management Plan (INRMP) to the conservation of the species;
and information regarding impacts to national security associated with
designation of critical habitat; and
(14) Whether our approach to critical habitat designation could be
improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public
participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating
public concern and comments.
(15) Whether contemplated changes to Federal land management plans
should be considered and if so, how.
Refer to the ADDRESSES section for information on how to submit
written comments and information. Our final determination on critical
habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia River populations of bull
trout will take into consideration all comments and any additional
information received.
Please submit electronic comments in an ASCII file format and avoid
the use of special characters and encryption. Please also include
``Attn: RIN 1018-AU31'' and your name and return address in your e-mail
message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we
have received your e-mail message, please contact the Bull Trout
Coordinator (see ADDRESSES section).
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold
their home addresses from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to
the extent allowable by law. In some circumstances, we would withhold
from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity, as allowable by
law. If you wish for us to withhold your name and/or address, you must
state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. However, we
will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.
Comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used to designate critical habitat, will be available for
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, in the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Office at the above address.
Copies of the final economic analysis and proposed and final rules
are available on the Internet at: https://pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout or
from the Bull Trout Coordinator at the address and contact numbers
above.
Author
The primary author of this notice is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 16, 2005.
Paul Hoffman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 05-10246 Filed 5-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
