29476 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Rules and Regulations
publications issued by the Railroad Background approximately 500 acres of planted Retirement Board. The merchandise also On August 23, 1978, ATF published varietal winegrapes. Currently two (2) bears the seal of the Railroad Retirement Treasury Decision ATF–53 (43 FR wineries and seventeen (17) vineyards Board. 37672, 54624) revising regulations in 27 exist within the Santa Rita Hills area. CFR part 4. These regulations allow the Two additional vineyards are being § 396.5 Penalty for misuse of the seal. developed. Unauthorized use of the seal of the establishment of defined viticultural Railroad Retirement Board may result in areas. The regulations also allow the Comments criminal prosecution under applicable name of an approved viticultural area to On September 11, 1998, ATF law. be used as an appellation of origin in published a notice of proposed the labeling and advertising of wine. Dated: May 22, 2001. rulemaking, Notice 866, in the Federal On October 2, 1979, ATF published Register, soliciting comments on the By Authority of the Board. Treasury Decision ATF–60 (44 FR proposed vitucultural area. Beatrice Ezerski, 56692) which added a new part 9 to 27 Secretary to the Board. CFR, providing for the listing of Analysis of Comments [FR Doc. 01–13654 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am] approved American viticultural areas. ATF received a total of 35 comments BILLING CODE 7905–01–P Section 4.25a(e)(1), Title 27, CFR, concerning this petition. Eleven letters defines an American Viticultural Area of support from various persons familiar (AVA) as a delimited grape-growing with the proposed AVA were submitted region distinguishable by geographical with the petition. These letters of DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY features, the boundaries of which have support included industry ‘‘experts,’’ been recognized and defined in subpart vintners, consultants, local politicians Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and C of part 9. Section 4.25a(e)(2) outlines (such as the Chair for the Santa Barbara Firearms the procedure for proposing an AVA. County Board of Supervisors and the Any interested person may petition ATF Mayor of the city of Lompoc), and 27 CFR Part 9 to establish a grape-growing region as a viticulturists. Seven of the eleven viticultural area. The petition should comments were from persons who had [T.D. ATF 454; Ref: Notice No. 866] include: also signed the petition. All 11 (a) Evidence that the name of the comments attested to the uniqueness of RIN 1512–AA07 proposed viticultural area is locally the area, its distinctive characteristics and/or nationally known as referring to (geological, geographic, and climatic) Establishment of Santa Rita Hills the area specified in the petition; and the local recognition of the area by Viticultural Area (98R–129 P) (b) Historical or current evidence that the proposed name. AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco the boundaries of the viticultural area ATF received 24 comments that and Firearms (ATF), Department of the are as specified in the petition; opposed the establishment of the Santa Treasury. (c) Evidence relating to the Rita Hills AVA. Most of these geographical features (climate, soil, ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. commenters were foreign/international elevation, physical features, etc.) which importers and distributors. The SUMMARY: This final rule establishes a distinguish the viticultural features of opposition in each response revolved viticultural area located in Santa the proposed area from surrounding around the similarity of the proposed Barbara County, California, to be known areas; name to an already established ‘‘Santa as ‘‘Santa Rita Hills.’’ The proposed area (d) A description of the specific Rita’’ brand of wine from Chile. boundaries of the viticultural area, occupies more than 48 square miles. All Commenters Opposing the This action is being taken as a result of based on features which can be found on United States Geological Survey Establishment of the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ a petition from viticulturists and Viticultural Area Presented the vintners of the proposed area under the (U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable scale; and Following To Support Their Contention direction of J. Richard Sanford (Sanford That the Petition To Establish the Santa Winery), Bryan Babcock (Babcock (e) A copy (or copies) of the appropriate U.S.G.S. map(s) with the Rita Hills Viticultural Area Should Be Vineyards and Winery), and Wesley D. Denied Hagen (Vineyard Manager of Clos Pepe boundaries prominently marked. There is already a well known and Vineyards). Petition The establishment of viticultural areas established ‘‘Santa Rita’’ vineyard and and the subsequent use of viticultural ATF received a petition under the winery located in Chile, Vina Santa area names as appellations of origin in direction of J. Richard Sanford (Sanford Rita, which was founded in 1880 and is wine labeling and advertising allow Winery) which was written by Wesley known worldwide. Vina Santa Rita is a wineries to designate the specific areas D. Hagen (Vineyard Manager of Clos public company whose shares are where the grapes used to make the wine Pepe Vineyards), on behalf of traded on the Santiago Stock Exchange. are grown and enable consumers to viticulturists and vintners working in This ‘‘Santa Rita’’ winery is the second better identify the wines they purchase. Santa Barbara County, California. The largest winery in Chile, with consumer petition, which was signed by 22 brand recognition in the Chilean wine EFFECTIVE DATE: July 30, 2001. people, 14 of whom are local wine grape industry. Large sums of money have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: growers, proposed to establish a been invested by both the ‘‘Santa Rita’’ Joyce A. Drake, ATF Specialist, viticultural area surrounded by but winery in Chile and various importers Regulations Division, Bureau of separate from the Santa Ynez Valley and distributors worldwide to advertise Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 650 AVA of California to be known as and promote the ‘‘Santa Rita’’ (Chile) Massachusetts Avenue, NW., ‘‘Santa Rita Hills.’’ The boundary of the brand. Washington, DC 20091–0221 (202)-927– viticultural area encloses an estimated The opposing commenters contend 8210. area slightly greater than forty-eight (48) that the establishment of a ‘‘Santa Rita SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: square miles and contains Hills’’ viticultural area would confuse
VerDate 11
wine consumers who already associate enologically for producing world class petition.) The patent issued included the name ‘‘Santa Rita’’ with the Chilean cool-climate grapes such as Pinot Noir 13,316 acres within the boundary of the wine. One commenter stated that, since and Chardonnay, because of the unique Santa Rita Land Grant. the names are phonetically identical climatic and geographical influences of The names ‘‘Santa Rita’’ and ‘‘Santa (sans the last word ‘‘Hills’’), a product the area. Rita Hills’’ are both well documented in labeled of a ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ the petition and are both supported by appellation may be seen as a variety of Discussion written comments evidencing local the Chilean ‘‘Santa Rita’’ as the Chilean Evidence of Name recognition of the name as referring to the area specified in the petition. ATF ‘‘Santa Rita’’ is surrounded by hills and ATF is satisfied that the petitioner mountains. Also, since both names finds that the name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ provided evidence that the name ‘‘Santa would refer to the same product (wine), is appropriate to identify the viticultural Rita Hills’’ is locally known as referring the likelihood of consumer confusion area based upon evidence submitted to the area specified in the petition. In would increase. with the petition, including The opponents believe Chile’s ‘‘Santa the exhibits and maps furnished with commenters’ support of the name Rita’’ owns a U.S. trademark and, the petition, there are numerous ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ to describe the therefore, the establishment of the references to both ‘‘Santa Rita’’ and viticultural area and U.S.G.S maps ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ viticultural area ‘‘Santa Rita Hills.’’ identifying the area as ‘‘Santa Rita would result in an infringement of the Evidence submitted with the petition Hills’’. ‘‘Santa Rita’’ registered mark under the relating to name includes: As to potential confusion between a Lanham Act. (a) The U.S.G.S. Lompoc, Lompoc product labeled with a ‘‘Santa Rita The opponents’ view is that the Hills, Los Alamos, and Santa Rosa Hills’’ AVA and wines labeled with the establishment of a ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ Quadrangle maps used to show the name ‘‘Santa Rita,’’ a similar issue was AVA would violate the U.S. obligations boundaries of the proposed area use the raised when ATF was presented with a under the Paris Convention and General name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ to identify the petition to establish a ‘‘Madera’’ AVA Agreement on Tariffs and Trade area. back in 1984. Some commenters to the (GATT), including Trade-Related (b) The U.S.G.S. Water-Resources petition, including the Portuguese Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Investigations Report 970–4056 Embassy, objected to the appellation of (TRIPS). (Evaluation of Ground Water Flow and ‘‘Madera’’ due to possible confusion Solute Transport in the Lompoc Area, with the Portuguese island of Madeira Arguments Supporting the Santa Barbara County, California) which had produced world famous Establishment of the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ discusses the ‘‘Santa Rita Upland wine for over 500 years. The Viticultural Area Basin.’’ The report indicates that ‘‘Santa commenters were concerned that the The name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ is locally Rita’’ is a recognized geological, use of the appellation’’Madera’’ would and/or nationally known as referring to geographical, and hydrological cause possible confusion with Madeira the specified area through maps, land appellation in Santa Barbara County, wine (a class and type of dessert wine). records, reports, and various texts. California. ATF had previously recognized Madeira These records show the Santa Rita area (c) An excerpt, ‘‘From the Missions to as a class and type of wine and as a dating back to 1845 (35 years prior to Prohibition,’’ in the publication Aged in semi-generic wine designation with the founding of the Santa Rita winery in Oak: The Story of the Santa Barbara geographical significance. When used as Chile). The Californian Santa Rita title County Wine Industry (1998), provided a class and type designation, Madeira was accredited and confirmed in the by the petitioner shows the vineyards had to be qualified with an appellation U.S. Patent Book ‘‘A’’ on June 25, 1875. and wineries in Santa Barbara County of origin if the wine was not from the The ‘‘Santa Rita’’ name is also used, prior to 1900 include the name ‘‘Santa island of Madeira. and ATF approved, as a brand name on Rita.’’ Although ATF recognized the other wines not from Chile. According (d) The text provided by the petitioner similarity in the names ‘‘Madera’’ and to documents found in ATF’s label files, from History of Santa Barbara County ‘‘Madeira,’’ ATF ruled in favor of the the ‘‘Santa Rita’’ name has been used on (1939) states, ‘‘Following the petitioner. All evidence showed that the wines from Italy and the United States. secularization of the Mission La proposed AVA was locally and This includes the use of the name Purisma, the rest of the valley was nationally known as ‘‘Madera’’ thus ‘‘Santa Rita’’ on wines from Longoria, a broken up into seven great ranchos meeting the requirement in 27 CFR winery in the Santa Rita Hills area granted to private owners. They were 4.25a(e)(2)(I). In addition, ATF did not whose proprietor, Richard Longoria, Santa Rosa, Santa Rita, Salsipuedes, La see any consumer confusion between submitted a letter of support as well. Purisima, Mission Vieja, Lompoc and a ‘‘Madera’’ and ‘‘Madeira’’ wine when Wines from the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ portion of the Jesus Maria.’’ (Italics ‘‘Madera’’ was used as an appellation of area have been recognized viticulturally added for emphasis.) origin on domestic wines. and enologically as distinct by world- The Land Records of Santa Barbara In the present case, while ATF also renowned writers and mentioned as County from the U.S.G.S. furnished by recognizes the similarity between the such in wine literature. Supporting the petitioner show the Santa Rita area name of the viticultural area ‘‘Santa Rita documentation shows that the area has dating back to 1845. According to this Hills’’ and the name ‘‘Santa Rita’’ in a cool climate and soils more conducive information, Santa Rita was established Chile, ATF is satisfied that the petition to growing ‘‘Region One’’ cool-climate as a recognized political and meets all of the requirements of 27 CFR grape varietals whereas the surrounding geographical region when a land grant 4.25a. Evidence submitted with the Santa Ynez Valley AVA provides a for Santa Rita was made to Jose Ramon petition amply supports the local warmer climate and soils for ‘‘Region Malo from Spanish governor Pio Pico on recognition of the name ‘‘Santa Rita Two’’ grape growing varietals. This April 12, 1845. The title was accredited Hills.’’ In addition, ATF does not distinction results in different wine to Jose Ramon Malo on June 25, 1875 by foresee a likelihood of consumer varietals from each region. President Ulysses S. Grant as confirmed confusion between the ‘‘Santa Rita The region of Santa Rita Hills is in the U.S. Patent Book A. (Pertinent Hills’’ AVA and other geographic areas recognized viticulturally and pages are shown as exhibits to the of the same name. Numerous labels
VerDate 11
bearing the name ‘‘Santa Rita’’ in one of the party responsible for importation appeared on labels approved prior to form or another have already been would, in the case of a product with a July 7, 1986, and if the wine is also approved (from the United States, Chile, ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ appellation, signal to labeled with an appellation of origin (or and Italy) dating from 1980, and ATF is consumers that the product is some other statement which the Director aware of no reported consumer domestically produced rather than finds to be sufficient to dispel the brand confusion as to the respective products’ Chilean in origin. The fact imported name’s geographic connotation). Thus, origins. products are also required by Customs the name ‘‘Santa Rita’’ may be used as As to objections to the use of the regulations to state the words ‘‘Product a brand name where the wine meets the name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ based upon of l’’ followed by the country of origin, appellation requirements of the potential violations of the Lanham Act further identifies the origin of imported regulations and is labeled in a way that and insofar as it implements U.S. products to consumers, as distinct from satisfies the regulatory requirements. As obligations on trademarks under the domestic products. Likewise, the fact always, all labels are reviewed on a Paris Convention, GATT, and TRIPS, that domestic products are required to case-by-case basis to determine whether these issues are matters of private indicate the name and address of the any particular label is likely to mislead dispute that do not restrict ATF’s bottler or packer, minimizes the consumers, including as to the origin of authority to establish a viticultural area likelihood of confusion between a the product. under the Federal Alcohol ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ wine and a product Administration Act (‘‘FAA Act’’), 27 of Santa Rita in Chile or any other place. Finally, the comments raise questions U.S.C. 205(e). Finally, under trademark law, the about the application of the Paris mere existence of a trademark does not Convention and the Agreement on Lanham Act necessarily preclude others from Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual It is ATF’s position that the rights indicating the geographic origin of their Property. Trademark rights mandated by granted by registered trademarks under products where the name is used in a these international obligations are the Lanham Act do not foreclose the descriptive sense rather than a implemented under the Lanham Act. right to use the same or similar names trademark sense. In the case of a ‘‘Santa Accordingly, any private rights in this on an alcohol beverage label under the Rita Hills’’ viticultural area, the name area are available for pursuit as FAA Act. In determining whether to would be used on a label in a provided for by that Act. establish a viticultural area of a descriptive sense, to describe the In consideration of the above, ATF is particular name that is identical or product’s appellation under the FAA adopting the name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ in similar to a trademarked name, ATF Act. considers whether the criteria set forth ATF has determined that, under the this final rule. ATF finds that the name in section 4.25a are met, whether the ‘‘misleading’’ standard of the FAA Act, ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ is appropriate to rulemaking record supports the use of the use of the name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ identify the viticultural area based upon the name for the designated area, and for this viticultural area is not likely to all of the evidence in the petition and whether the use of such name would be mislead the consumer. However, to the comments. deceptive or likely to create a extent that a trademark holder believes Evidence of Boundaries misleading impression as to the that the depiction of a viticultural area product’s origin. The existence of a name that contains all or part of a The ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA is located trademark is one factor in determining trademark results in an infringement, in Northern Santa Barbara County, whether the use of a particular name is then that holder may pursue an California, east of Lompoc (U.S. misleading to consumers. infringement action to prevent and Highway 1) and west of Buellton (U.S. In the case of the name ‘‘Santa Rita restrain the use of that viticultural area Highway 101). Precise boundaries can Hills,’’ ATF finds that Federal name by a winery on a wine label. The be found on the five (5) U.S.G.S. registration of the term ‘‘Santa Rita’’ holder of the trademark would have to Quadrangle maps (7.5 minute series under the Lanham Act does not limit establish the likelihood of confusion originally dated 1959) submitted with ATF’s authority to establish a based on the standard in the Lanham the petition. On these maps, the Santa viticultural area known as ‘‘Santa Rita Act and the circumstances surrounding Rita Hills are the dominant central Hills.’’ First, as previously indicated, the presentation of the viticultural area features of the area with its transverse the petition satisfies the requirements of name on the label. In cases where the (east/west) maritime throat stretching 27 CFR 4.25a. Second, no evidence in trademark holder succeeds in from Lompoc to a few miles west of the the rulemaking record or otherwise establishing an infringement, then the Buellton Flats. The Santa Rosa Hills to based on our experience in ability to enjoin the continued use of the south and the Purisima Hills to the administering and enforcing the use of that name by the winery ensures that north isolate the proposed area viticultural area designations, indicates the first in time right and exclusivity of geographically and climatically. that the name ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ would rights of the trademark holder are be misleading under the standard of the protected. It must be noted that, in Again, the U.S.G.S. Water-Resources Federal Alcohol Administration Act, 27 approving the name Santa Rita Hills for Investigations Report 970–4056 U.S.C. 205(e)(1). As previously stated, this viticultural area, ATF is not making describes the Santa Rita Upland Basin numerous labels bearing the name any determination on whether the use of as being ‘‘in hydrologic continuity with ‘‘Santa Rita’’ in one form or another this name constitutes an infringement the Lompoc Plain, Lompoc Upland and have already been approved (from the under the Lanham Act. Buellton Upland basins, but separated United States, Chile, and Italy) and It should be emphasized that the from the Santa Ynez River alluvium by there has been no evidence or other Santa Rita winery in Chile will not non-water-bearing rocks.’’ It goes on to indication that establishes that necessarily be precluded from using the state, ‘‘[a]n ongoing U.S.G.S. study treats consumers are confused as to the designation ‘‘Santa Rita’’ as a brand the Santa Rita Valley as a separate unit respective products’ origins. name on wine labels following issuance ***’’ and ‘‘* * * the eastern surface The fact that imported products are of this regulation. Pursuant to 27 CFR drainage divide between Santa Rita and required to state the words ‘‘Imported 4.39(i), a brand name of geographical Lompoc basins was used as a ground- by’’ followed by the name and address significance may be used if it previously water divide by the U.S.G.S.’’
VerDate 11
Climate Soil ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA as described below. The climatic features of the The soils of the Santa Rita Hills are viticultural area and thus the varietals broken down from an array of geological Boundary grown therein, set it apart from the parent material, with the most common The boundary of the ‘‘Santa Rita Santa Ynez Valley AVA, which borders types being loams, sandy loams, silt Hills’’ AVA may be found on the five (5) the viticultural area. The Santa Ynez loams, and clay loams. These soils are 1:24:000 scale U.S.G.S. Quadrangle 7.5– Valley area east of U.S. Highway 101 is based on large percentages of dune Minute Series maps included with the characterized by higher temperatures sand, marine deposits, recent alluvium, petition. The boundary is described in than the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA to the river wash, and terrace deposits, which § 9.162. west, which has a cool climate and is are shown on maps provided in the thus more conducive to growing exhibits of the petition. Soil samples Paperwork Reduction Act ‘‘Region One’’ cool-climate winegrape collected from selected sites within the varietals. By contrast, the eastern area of ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA and the adjacent The provisions of the Paperwork the Santa Ynez Valley, a ‘‘Region Two’’ Santa Ynez Valley AVA show a distinct Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. growing area, provides a warmer climate difference resulting from a high 3507(j)) and its implementing and is well known for the production of percentage of alluvial and marine sand regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, do not varietal winegrapes such as Cabernet within the Santa Rita Hills area. While apply to this Treasury Decision because Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Merlot, the soil samples from the ‘‘Santa Rita no requirement to collect information is Sauvignon Blanc, Mourvedre, and other Hills’’ AVA show higher percentages of imposed. varietals that require a significantly sand, silt and sandy loams, the soil Regulatory Flexibility Act higher temperature (degree days) for samples from the eastern Santa Ynez adequate ripening. The ‘‘Santa Rita Valley show a higher percentage of It is hereby certified that this Hills’’ AVA, to the west of U.S. Highway gravelly and clay loams. Also, soil regulation will not have a significant 101, is better known for varietals such analysis test results from several economic impact on a substantial as Chardonnay and Pinot Noir, which vineyards in the proposed ‘‘Santa Rita number of small entities. Any benefit are the predominant winegrapes there. Hills’’ AVA conducted by various labs derived from the use of a viticultural In addition, ambient temperature and in the area support the distinct soil data area name is the result of the evapotranspiration rates during veraison claims. proprietor’s own efforts and consumer and ripening are disparate for the two Topography acceptance of wines from a particular adjacent viticultural locales. The area. No new requirements are imposed. average post-veraison ripening The topography of the ‘‘Santa Rita Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility temperature is 14.7° F hotter within the Hills’’ AVA is distinct and isolated from analysis is not required. Santa Ynez Valley AVA than in the the rest of the Pacific Coast, the Central Executive Order 12866 ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA to the west. Coast, and the Santa Ynez Valley east of Similarly, the heating degree day U.S. Highway 101 and the Buellton It has been determined that this differential (with the base of 50° F) Flats. The AVA is demarcated by the regulation is not a significant regulatory between the two areas is 61 heating east-west ranges of the Purisma Hills on action as defined in Executive Order degree days, indicating an annual 92 the north and the Santa Rosa Hills on 12866. Accordingly, this regulation is heating degree days in the western the south, framing Santa Rita Hills. not subject to the analysis required by Lompoc boundary and an annual 153 When surveying the land within Santa this Executive Order. heating degree days in the eastern Rita Hills to determine what locales Cachuma Lake boundary. These would be the outer ‘‘edges,’’ the Drafting Information temperature differences are the result of petitioner states the following was taken The author of this document is Joyce a unique set of topographical, geological into account: viticultural viability A. Drake, Regulations Division, Bureau and climatic influences, particularly (primarily hillside and alluvial basin of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. coastal in origin. plantings) and the coastal influence The ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA is suitable for cool-climate still winegrape List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 production. The actual topography of situated within the clearly defined east/ Administrative practices and west transverse maritime throat, and the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA is an oak- studded, hill-laden maritime throat that procedures, Consumer protection, thus is susceptible to the ocean’s Viticultural areas, and Wine. cooling influence. This enables diurnal runs east to west, a few miles east of ocean breezes direct access to the Lompoc to a few miles west of Buellton Authority and Issuance coastal valleys between the Purisima Flats. The coastal influence enters from Hills and the Santa Rosa Hills, which the west, through Lompoc, and abruptly Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, house the AVA. The coastal influence is loses its influence at the eastern Part 9, American Viticultural Areas, is not nearly as pronounced in the Santa boundary, as demarcated on the amended as follows: Ynez Valley east of U.S. Highway 101 enclosed U.S.G.S. maps. Elevations and the Buellton Flats. In addition, the within the proposed boundary range PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL proximity of the AVA to the Pacific from near sea-level to ridge-line 1800 AREAS Ocean fills the hills and valleys of the feet above sea level. Paragraph 1. The authority citation ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ AVA in the late night ATF believes that the above for Part 9 continues to read as follows: and early morning hours with coastal statements relating to climate, soil, and fog. This intensifies the cool-climate topography are supported by the Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. influence on varietal winegrape petition and distinguish the production between the geological geographical features of the viticultural Par. 2. Subpart C is amended by boundaries of the Purisima Hills and the area from surrounding areas. adding § 9.162 to read as follows: Santa Rosa Hills. Accordingly, ATF is establishing the * * * * *
VerDate 11
Subpart C—Approved American 605 feet in the northern section of the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Viticultural Areas Santa Rosa Land Grant. T.7N., R. 33W. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and (12) Proceed west by southwest § 9.162 Santa Rita Hills. Firearms (a) Name. The name of the viticultural approximately 2 miles to the point area described in this section is ‘‘Santa where California Highway 246 intersects 27 CFR Parts 18, 19 and 24 Rita Hills.’’ with the 200-foot elevation contour line (b) Approved maps. The appropriate comprising the western border of the [T.D. ATF–455; Ref: Notice No. 823] maps for determining the boundary of Santa Rita Hills, within the Santa Rosa RIN 1512–AB59 the Santa Rita Hills viticultural area are Land Grant. T.7N., R. 34W, on the five (5) U.S.G.S. Quadrangle 7.5 Minute Lompoc, Calif., Quadrangle U.S.G.S. Volatile Fruit-Flavor Concentrate Series maps titled: map. Shipments and Alternation With Other Premises (2000R–290P) (1) ‘‘Lompoc, Calif.,’’ edition of 1959 (13) Proceed following the 200 foot (photorevised in 1982). (2) ‘‘Lompoc Hills, Calif.,’’ edition of elevation contour line south along the AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 1959 (photoinspected 1971). western border of the Santa Rita Hills to and Firearms (ATF), Department of the (3) ‘‘Los Alamos, Calif.,’’ edition of the extreme southern tip of the 200 foot Treasury. 1959. elevation contour that is .6 miles due ACTION: Final rule (Treasury decision). (4) ‘‘Santa Rosa Hills, Calif.,’’ edition west of an unnamed hilltop 361 feet in of 1959 (photoinspected 1978). elevation in the Canada de Salispuedes SUMMARY: This final rule specifically (5) ‘‘Solvang, Calif.,’’ edition of 1959 Land Grant. T.6N., R. 34W. authorizes the transfer of volatile fruit- flavor concentrate (VFFC) unfit for (photorevised 1982). (14) Proceed southeast 2.35 miles to (c) Boundary. The ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’ beverage use from one VFFC plant to an unnamed hilltop elevation 1070 feet. viticultural area is located within Santa another for further processing and Barbara County, California. The Section 18, T.6N., R. 33W, on the permits facilities to be alternately used boundary is as follows: Lompoc Hills, Calif., Quadrangle as a VFFC plant, a distilled spirits plant (1) The beginning point is found on U.S.G.S. map. or a bonded wine cellar. This rule the Solvang, California U.S.G.S. (15) Proceed east and slightly south allows greater flexibility in the Quadrangle map at an unnamed hilltop, 1.95 miles to an unnamed hilltop production processes and in the elevation 1600 feet, in section 27, T.6N, elevation 921 feet. Section 16, T.6N., R. equipment and facilities of VFFC plants. R. 32W, on the Solvang, Calif., 33W, on the Santa Rosa Hills, Calif., DATES: Effective date: May 31, 2001. Quadrangle U.S.G.S. map. Quadrangle U.S.G.S. map. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (2) Then proceed north and slightly (16) Proceed east by southeast 1.35 Robert P. Ruhf, Regulations Division, west 2.3 miles to an unnamed hilltop 650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, elevation 1174 feet, Section 15, T.6N., R. miles to an unnamed hilltop elevation 1307 feet at intersection between Washington, DC 20226; (202) 927–8210; 32W. or [email protected]. (3) Proceed west and slightly north Sections 22 and 23. T.6N., R. 33W. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1.85 miles to an unnamed hilltop (17) Proceed east 2.35 miles to an elevation 899 feet within the heart of the unnamed hilltop elevation 1507 feet in Background Santa Rosa Land Grant, T.7N., R. 32W, the southern area of the Santa Rosa Previously, ATF received a request to on the Santa Rosa Hills, Calif., Land Grant. T.6N., 32W. vary from the regulations in 27 CFR part Quadrangle U.S.G.S. map. 18, Production of Volatile Fruit Flavor (4) Proceed north approximately 2 (18) Proceed east by southeast 2.1 Concentrate. This request was to allow miles to an unnamed hilltop elevation miles to an unnamed hilltop elevation the transfer of volatile fruit-flavor 1063 feet within the northeastern part of 1279 feet in the southern area of the concentrate (VFFC) that is unfit for the Santa Rosa Land Grant, T.7N, R. Santa Rosa Land Grant. T.6N., 32W. beverage use for further processing from 32W, on the Los Alamos, Calif., (19) Then proceed east by southeast one proprietor of a volatile fruit Quadrangle U.S.G.S. map. 1.45 miles to the point of the beginning. (5) Proceed northwest 1.1 miles to an concentrate plant to another. The unnamed hilltop elevation 961 feet. Signed: May 25, 2001. current regulation regarding transfer of Section 29, T.7N., R. 32W. Bradley A. Buckles, volatile fruit-flavor concentrate (27 CFR (6) Proceed north and slightly east 1.1 Director. 18.54(a)) does not provide for such a miles to an unnamed elevation 1443 transfer. Timothy E. Skud, Another current regulation (27 CFR feet. Section 20, T. 7N., R. 32W. Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, (7) Proceed west 1.4 miles to an 18.51) allows the transfer to a (Regulatory, Tariff and Trade Enforcement). unnamed hilltop elevation 1479 feet. producer’s premises of ‘‘processing Section 24, T.7N., R. 33W. [FR Doc. 01–13645 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am] material’’ that is produced elsewhere (8) Proceed north 1.2 miles to an BILLING CODE 4810–31–P subject to certain restrictions and unnamed hilltop elevation 1705 feet. recordkeeping requirements. However, Section 13, T.7N., R. 33W. the definition of ‘‘processing material’’ (9) Proceed northwest approximately (27 CFR 18.11) does not include 2 miles to an unnamed hilltop elevation concentrate that is intended for further 1543. Section 10, T.7N., R. 33W. processing. Furthermore, the regulation (10) Proceed west and slightly south at 27 CFR 18.56 allows only a VFFC 1.6 miles to an unnamed hilltop proprietor to receive shipments of elevation 935 feet within the northern returned concentrate previously section of the Santa Rosa Land Grant. shipped by such proprietor. T.7N., R. 33W. Consequently, ATF proposed to (11) Proceed south by southwest 1.5 amend the regulations in 27 CFR 18.56 miles to an unnamed hilltop elevation to allow such transfers subject to the
VerDate 11