Alan M. Watson (UNAM), Nat Butler (ASU), Alexander Kutyrev (GSFC),
William H. Lee (UNAM), Michael G. Richer (UNAM), Ori Fox (STScI), J.
Xavier Prochaska (UCSC), Josh Bloom (UCB), Antonino Cucchiara (UVI),
Eleonora Troja (GSFC), Owen Littlejohns (ASU), Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz
(UCSC), Jes��s Gonz��lez (UNAM), Carlos Rom��n-Z����iga (UNAM), Harvey
Moseley (GSFC), John Capone (UMD), V. Zach Golkhou (U. Wash.), and Vicki
Toy (UMD) report:
The position and magnitudes of the uncataloged source reported by Watson
et al. (GCN Circ. 21968) are incorrect. We thank David Alexander Kann
for drawing our attention to this error.
The correct position is RA, Dec = 139.169462 52.693080 (J2000) or
09:16:40.67 +52:41:35.1. This position lies 0.4 arcsec from the enhanced
XRT position (Osborne et al., GCN Circ. 21970).
The correct magnitudes are
r = 21.17 +/- 0.06
i = 20.87 +/- 0.05
Z = 20.72 +/- 0.10
Y = 20.59 +/- 0.13
J = 20.36 +/- 0.14
H = 20.17 +/- 0.17
A fit to the i-band light curve of the source shows that the flux
behaves as t^(-0.9+/-0.4). That is, it is fading at the 2-sigma level.
The positional coincidence combined with the weak evidence for fading
suggest that this source might well be the afterglow of the GRB.