Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 29475

them from loss, alteration, or

destruction;

(ii) To limit access to the records to

properly authorized personnel, the

directors of the company, and the

Commission (including its examiners

and other representatives); and

(iii) To reasonably ensure that any

reproduction of a non-electronic

original record on electronic storage

media is complete and true, and legible

when retrieved.

* * * * *

Dated: May 24, 2001.

By the Commission.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–13586 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

20 CFR Part 369

RIN 3220–AB49

Use of the Seal of the Railroad

Retirement Board

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Railroad Retirement

Board (Board) amends its regulations to

add a part explaining when use of the

Board’s seal is permitted. Federal law

prohibits the use of an agency seal

except as authorized by regulation. The

Board previously had no such

regulation.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective

May 31, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marguerite P. Dadabo, Assistant General

Counsel, Railroad Retirement Board,

(312) 751–4945, TDD (312) 751–4701.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Railroad Retirement Board is an

independent agency in the executive

branch of the United States Government

which is charged with the

administration of the Railroad

Retirement Act (45 U.S.C. 231 et seq.)

and the Railroad Unemployment

Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 351 et seq.).

Use of agency seals is governed by 18

U.S.C. 701 which prohibits the use of

agency seals except as authorized under

regulations made pursuant to law. This

proscription is intended to protect the

public against the use of a recognizable

assertion of authority with intent to

deceive (U.S. v. Goeltz, 513 F.2d 193

(C.A. Utah 1975), cert. den. 423 U.S.

830). The regulations of the Railroad

Retirement Board previously did not

include provisions for the authorization

of use of the Agency’s seal. The Board

is adding Part 369 to its regulations to

explain when use of the Board’s seal is

permitted.

The Board published this rule as a

proposed rule on January 3, 2001 (66 FR

314–315) and invited comments by

March 5, 2001. No comments were

received. Accordingly, the proposed

rule is adopted as a final rule without

change.

In order to comply with the

President’s June 1, 1998 memorandum

directing the use of plain language for

all proposed and final rulemaking, the

regulatory paragraphs introduced by the

above rule changes have been written in

plain language.

This rule concerns agency

management and is not a regulation as

defined in Executive Order 12866.

Therefore, no regulatory impact analysis

is required. There are no information

collections associated with this rule.

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 369

Railroad retirement, Seals and

insignia.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, the Railroad Retirement

Board adds Part 369 to title 20, chapter

II, subchapter F of the Code of Federal

Regulations as follows:

PART 369—USE OF THE SEAL OF THE

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Sec.

369.1 Unofficial use of the seal of the

Railroad Retirement Board.

369.2 Authority to grant written permission

for use of the seal.

369.3 Procedures for obtaining permission

to use the seal.

369.4 Inappropriate use of the seal.

369.5 Penalty for misuse of the seal.

Authority: 18 U.S.C. 701; 45 U.S.C. 231f.

§ 369.1 Unofficial use of the seal of the

Railroad Retirement Board.

Use of the seal of the Railroad

Retirement Board for non-Agency

business is prohibited unless

permission for use of the seal has been

obtained in accordance with this part.

§ 369.2 Authority to grant written

permission for use of the seal.

The Board hereby delegates authority

to grant written permission for the use

of the seal of the Railroad Retirement

Board to the Director of Administration.

§ 369.3 Procedures for obtaining

permission to use the seal.

Requests for written permission to use

the seal of the Railroad Retirement

Board shall be in writing and shall be

directed to the Director of

Administration of the Railroad

Retirement Board. The request should,

at a minimum, contain the following

information:

(a) Name and address of the requester.

(b) A description of the type of

activity in which the requester is

engaged or proposes to engage.

(c) A statement of whether the

requester considers the proposed use or

imitation to be commercial or noncommercial, and why.

(d) A brief description and illustration

or sample of the proposed use, as well

as a description of the product or

service in connection with which it will

be used. This description will provide

sufficient detail to enable the Director of

Administration to determine whether

the intended use of the seal is consistent

with the interests of the government.

(e) In the case of a non-commercial

use, a description of the requesting

organization’s function and purpose

shall be provided.

§ 369.4 Inappropriate use of the Seal.

The Railroad Retirement Board shall

not grant permission for use of the seal

in those instances where use of the seal

will give the unintended appearance of

Agency endorsement or authentication.

Situations where use of the seal of the

Railroad Retirement Board would be

inappropriate include, but are not

limited to, the following examples:

(a) A consulting firm makes

arrangements with a railroad to conduct

a retirement planning seminar for its

employees. Included in the material

distributed to the seminar attendees is a

booklet, prepared by the consulting

firm, which displays the seal of the

Railroad Retirement Board on the cover

and contains information regarding

benefits payable under the Railroad

Retirement Act.

(b) A former employee of the Railroad

Retirement Board owns a coffee and

donut shop, frequented by present and

past railroad workers. Many of the

shop’s customers know of the owner’s

prior employment with the Board and

frequently ask him questions related to

benefits payable under the Railroad

Unemployment Insurance and Railroad

Retirement Acts. The shop owner

prepares and distributes to his

customers a monthly flyer listing benefit

questions presented to him during the

month, as well as his answers to the

questions. The flyer displays the seal of

the Board.

(c) A retired railroad employee works

part-time in a train hobby shop. The

shop owner, at the former railroad

worker’s suggestion, develops and sells

items such as coffee mugs and computer

mouse pads with text relevant to

benefits paid by the Railroad Retirement

Board. The text is taken from

29476 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 105 / Thursday, May 31, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

publications issued by the Railroad

Retirement Board. The merchandise also

bears the seal of the Railroad Retirement

Board.

§ 396.5 Penalty for misuse of the seal.

Unauthorized use of the seal of the

Railroad Retirement Board may result in

criminal prosecution under applicable

law.

Dated: May 22, 2001.

By Authority of the Board.

Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 01–13654 Filed 5–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms

27 CFR Part 9

[T.D. ATF 454; Ref: Notice No. 866]

RIN 1512–AA07

Establishment of Santa Rita Hills

Viticultural Area (98R–129 P)

AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco

and Firearms (ATF), Department of the

Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes a

viticultural area located in Santa

Barbara County, California, to be known

as ‘‘Santa Rita Hills.’’ The proposed area

occupies more than 48 square miles.

This action is being taken as a result of

a petition from viticulturists and

vintners of the proposed area under the

direction of J. Richard Sanford (Sanford

Winery), Bryan Babcock (Babcock

Vineyards and Winery), and Wesley D.

Hagen (Vineyard Manager of Clos Pepe

Vineyards).

The establishment of viticultural areas

and the subsequent use of viticultural

area names as appellations of origin in

wine labeling and advertising allow

wineries to designate the specific areas

where the grapes used to make the wine

are grown and enable consumers to

better identify the wines they purchase.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 30, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joyce A. Drake, ATF Specialist,

Regulations Division, Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 650

Massachusetts Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20091–0221 (202)-927–

8210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 23, 1978, ATF published

Treasury Decision ATF–53 (43 FR

37672, 54624) revising regulations in 27

CFR part 4. These regulations allow the

establishment of defined viticultural

areas. The regulations also allow the

name of an approved viticultural area to

be used as an appellation of origin in

the labeling and advertising of wine.

On October 2, 1979, ATF published

Treasury Decision ATF–60 (44 FR

56692) which added a new part 9 to 27

CFR, providing for the listing of

approved American viticultural areas.

Section 4.25a(e)(1), Title 27, CFR,

defines an American Viticultural Area

(AVA) as a delimited grape-growing

region distinguishable by geographical

features, the boundaries of which have

been recognized and defined in subpart

C of part 9. Section 4.25a(e)(2) outlines

the procedure for proposing an AVA.

Any interested person may petition ATF

to establish a grape-growing region as a

viticultural area. The petition should

include:

(a) Evidence that the name of the

proposed viticultural area is locally

and/or nationally known as referring to

the area specified in the petition;

(b) Historical or current evidence that

the boundaries of the viticultural area

are as specified in the petition;

(c) Evidence relating to the

geographical features (climate, soil,

elevation, physical features, etc.) which

distinguish the viticultural features of

the proposed area from surrounding

areas;

(d) A description of the specific

boundaries of the viticultural area,

based on features which can be found

on United States Geological Survey

(U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable

scale; and

(e) A copy (or copies) of the

appropriate U.S.G.S. map(s) with the

boundaries prominently marked.

Petition

ATF received a petition under the

direction of J. Richard Sanford (Sanford

Winery) which was written by Wesley

D. Hagen (Vineyard Manager of Clos

Pepe Vineyards), on behalf of

viticulturists and vintners working in

Santa Barbara County, California. The

petition, which was signed by 22

people, 14 of whom are local wine grape

growers, proposed to establish a

viticultural area surrounded by but

separate from the Santa Ynez Valley

AVA of California to be known as

‘‘Santa Rita Hills.’’ The boundary of the

viticultural area encloses an estimated

area slightly greater than forty-eight (48)

square miles and contains

approximately 500 acres of planted

varietal winegrapes. Currently two (2)

wineries and seventeen (17) vineyards

exist within the Santa Rita Hills area.

Two additional vineyards are being

developed.

Comments

On September 11, 1998, ATF

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking, Notice 866, in the Federal

Register, soliciting comments on the

proposed vitucultural area.

Analysis of Comments

ATF received a total of 35 comments

concerning this petition. Eleven letters

of support from various persons familiar

with the proposed AVA were submitted

with the petition. These letters of

support included industry ‘‘experts,’’

vintners, consultants, local politicians

(such as the Chair for the Santa Barbara

County Board of Supervisors and the

Mayor of the city of Lompoc), and

viticulturists. Seven of the eleven

comments were from persons who had

also signed the petition. All 11

comments attested to the uniqueness of

the area, its distinctive characteristics

(geological, geographic, and climatic)

and the local recognition of the area by

the proposed name.

ATF received 24 comments that

opposed the establishment of the Santa

Rita Hills AVA. Most of these

commenters were foreign/international

importers and distributors. The

opposition in each response revolved

around the similarity of the proposed

name to an already established ‘‘Santa

Rita’’ brand of wine from Chile.

All Commenters Opposing the

Establishment of the ‘‘Santa Rita Hills’’

Viticultural Area Presented the

Following To Support Their Contention

That the Petition To Establish the Santa

Rita Hills Viticultural Area Should Be

Denied

There is already a well known and

established ‘‘Santa Rita’’ vineyard and

winery located in Chile, Vina Santa

Rita, which was founded in 1880 and is

known worldwide. Vina Santa Rita is a

public company whose shares are

traded on the Santiago Stock Exchange.

This ‘‘Santa Rita’’ winery is the second

largest winery in Chile, with consumer

brand recognition in the Chilean wine

industry. Large sums of money have

been invested by both the ‘‘Santa Rita’’

winery in Chile and various importers

and distributors worldwide to advertise

and promote the ‘‘Santa Rita’’ (Chile)

brand.

The opposing commenters contend

that the establishment of a ‘‘Santa Rita

Hills’’ viticultural area would confuse