Standards of Identity and the Use of Semi-generic Designations and Retsina on Certain European Wines Imported into the United States, 7804-7805 [E8-2392]

Download as PDF rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES 7804 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2008 / Notices for the driver’s forward field of vision is 70 percent, per U.S. and Japanese regulations, rather than 75 percent required in European regulations. This is supported through a cost-benefit analysis, which shows no perceptible difference in light transmission and savings in energy usage. The light transmission test procedure used in the GTR was adopted from the European and Japanese test procedures, because they are based on the driver’s field of view and thus better approximate normal driving conditions. For the other optical quality tests, the main differences between the standards and regulations examined were not the requirements but just the test procedures. These differences were resolved by selecting the European and Japanese test procedures for the same reasons mentioned above. The GTR also includes environmental resistance requirements related to temperature change, fire, chemical resistance, abrasion, radiation, high temperature and humidity. The first four of these were common to all the examined regulations. The remaining three requirements had minor differences, which the GTR resolved by selecting the best alternatives. For example, in the case of resistance to radiation, the major difference between the American and European approaches is that the former specifies 100 hours exposure, using a specified radiation source, while the later specifies 100 hours of exposure at 1400 W/m2. Since the European procedure ensures a constant level of exposure and allows for alternative sources of UV radiation during testing, it was deemed more flexible and was thus selected for the GTR. In July 2007, NHTSA received comments on the draft GTR from the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Glazing Committee. In October, the agency made recommendations to the informal working group to implement some of the SAE comments into the GTR. The comments accepted in the GTR included editorial corrections, clarifications to Part A of the draft GTR (the technical rationale and justifications section), adding a definition for ‘‘Uniformly toughenedglass’’, and clarifying what would be considered a sharp edge for the fragmentation test. Several other points were not incorporated since they fell outside the scope of the GTR, were not relevant or already addressed in previous notices, or could not reasonably be pursued without conducting lengthy additional research and validation testing that is not supported by the majority of the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:44 Feb 08, 2008 Jkt 214001 Contracting Parties to the 1998 Agreement. SAE’s comments can be found in the docket of this notice. The informal working group submitted the draft GTR to the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG) for consideration at the October 2007 session. The October 2007 session of GRSG voted to recommend the GTR to WP.29. The GTR is expected to be voted on at the March 2008 session of WP.29. In anticipation of this vote, NHTSA requests comments on the draft GTR. The draft GTR that will be considered can be found in the docket for this notice. Once the GTR is established through consensus voting at WP.29, NHTSA will initiate domestic rulemaking to amend its existing FMVSS to incorporate approved provisions of the GTR. This will allow for further opportunity to consider comments from interested parties through the usual rulemaking process. If NHTSA’s rulemaking process leads it to either not adopt or to modify aspects of the GTR, the agency will seek to amend the GTR in accordance with established procedures under the 1998 Global Agreement and WP.29, as it recently did with the door lock GTR. Issued on: February 5, 2008. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E8–2474 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB Ruling 2008–1] Standards of Identity and the Use of Semi-generic Designations and Retsina on Certain European Wines Imported into the United States Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury. ACTION: General notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau issues this ruling to clarify the standard of identity that applies to certain European wines when they are imported into the United States. This ruling is effective on January 24, 2008. DATES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Gittes, Program Manager, International Trade Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220; telephone 202–927–8104. PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TTB Ruling 2008–1 Standards of Identity and the Use of Semi-generic Designations and Retsina on Certain European Wines Imported into the United States 27 CFR 4.21 Standards of Identity Wines using one of the 17 specified designations listed in Annex II of the Agreement Between the United States of America and the European Community on Trade in Wine, which originate in the applicable European Union member State and which comply with the European Union standard for such wines, will meet the United States standard of identity or the trade understanding for such wine. TTB RUL. 2008–1 The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau has been asked if the adoption of the Agreement Between the United States of America and the European Community on Trade in Wine (‘‘the Agreement’’) and the related statutory change regarding semi-generic designations and Retsina affect the standard of identity that applies to certain European wines when they are imported into the United States. Background On March 10, 2006, the United States and the European Community (EC) signed the Agreement in which the United States agreed to seek to change the legal status of 17 designations listed in Annex II of the Agreement in order to restrict their use solely to wine originating in the applicable European Union (EU) member State, except as provided for under a ‘‘grandfather’’ provision. These 17 designations are: Burgundy, Claret, Chablis, Champagne, Chianti, Malaga, Marsala, Madeira, Moselle, Port, Retsina, Rhine Wine or Hock, Sauterne, Haut Sauterne, Sherry, and Tokay. The Agreement’s ‘‘grandfather’’ provision allows persons or their successors in interest to continue to label non-EU wines with one of the 17 listed designations if that term is used only on labels for wine bearing the brand name, or the brand name and the fanciful name, if any, for which the applicable Certificate of Label Approval (COLA) or Certificate of Exemption from Label Approval was issued by the Secretary of the Treasury before March 10, 2006. Legislation changing the legal status of the 17 designations in the Agreement was enacted by Congress and signed by the President on December 20, 2006, as section 422 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (‘‘the Act’’), Public E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2008 / Notices Law 109–432, 120 Stat. 2922, 2972. As amended by the Act, section 5388(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 5388(c)) contains a provision regarding the use of the 17 designations listed in the Agreement. The provision states that, in the case of wine of the EC, the listed designations may be used only if the wine conforms to the standard of identity, if any, for such wine contained in the regulations issued under section 5388 (27 CFR 24.257 and, by reference, 27 CFR 4.21) or, if there is no such standard, to the trade understanding of such class and type. All other wines bearing the listed designations are subject to two additional requirements: (1) That the wine be marked with an appropriate appellation of origin disclosing the origin of the wine, and (2) that the person, or the person’s successor in interest, using a listed designation hold a COLA or Certificate of Exemption from Label Approval issued by the Secretary of the Treasury before March 10, 2006, for a wine label bearing that designation and that brand name or brand name and fanciful name. Held, that an EU wine product that bears one of the 17 designations listed in section 5388(c)(3)(C)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and that conforms to the EU standard for such wine complies with the United States standard of identity or the trade understanding for such wine. The recent amendment to 26 U.S.C. 5388(c) concerning semi-generic designations does not require such EU wine products imported into the United States to meet a new standard of identity. Signed: January 24, 2008. John J. Manfreda, Administrator. [FR Doc. E8–2392 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–31–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control Additional Designations of Individuals Pursuant to Executive Order 13448 Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Notice. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) is publishing the names of three newly-designated individuals and four entities whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13448 of October 18, 2007, ‘‘Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Burma.’’ VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:44 Feb 08, 2008 Jkt 214001 The designation by the Director of OFAC of three individuals and four entities identified in this notice, pursuant to Executive Orders 13448, is effective February 5, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistant Director, Compliance Outreach & Implementation, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. (Treasury Annex), Washington, DC 20220, Tel.: 202/622– 2490. DATES: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic and Facsimile Availability Information about these designations and additional information concerning OFAC are available from OFAC’s Web site (https://www.treas.gov/ofac) or via facsimile through a 24-hour fax-ondemand service, Tel.: 202/622–0077. Background On October 18, 2007, the President signed Executive Order 13448 (the ‘‘Order’’) pursuant to, inter alia, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et. seq.). In the Order, the President took additional steps with respect to, and expanded, the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13047 of May 20, 1997, to address the Government of Burma’s continued repression of the democratic opposition. The President identified twelve individuals and entities as subject to the economic sanctions in the Annex to the Order. Section 1 of the Order blocks, with certain exceptions, all property and interests in property that are in, or hereafter come within, the United States, or within the possession or control of United States persons, of the persons listed in the Annex, as well as those persons determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of State, to satisfy any of the criteria set forth in subparagraphs (b)(i)–(b)(vi) of Section 1. On February 5, 2008, the Director of OFAC exercised the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority to designate, pursuant to one or more of the criteria set forth in Section 1, subparagraphs (b)(i)–(b)(vi) of the Order, the following three individuals and four entities, whose names have been added to the list of Specially Designated Nationals and whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13448: Individuals 1. MANN, AUNG THET (a.k.a. SHWE MANN KO KO); Burma; DOB 19 Jun 1977; c/o Ayer Shwe Wah PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7805 Company Limited; c/o Htoo Group of Companies; c/o Htoo Trading Company Limited (individual) [BURMA] 2. THEIN, U KYAW; Burma; 503 Sembawang Rd., #02–29, 757707, Singapore; DOB 25 Oct 1947; citizen Burma; nationality Burma; National ID No. S2733659J (Singapore) issued 7 Jul 2005; c/o Air Bagan Holdings Pte. Ltd.; c/o Htoo Wood Products Pte. Ltd.; c/o Pavo Aircraft Leasing Pte. Ltd.; c/o Pavo Trading Pte. Ltd.; permanent resident Singapore (individual) [BURMA] 3. THIHA (a.k.a. THI HA); Burma; DOB 24 Jun 1960; c/o Htoo Group of Companies; c/o Htoo Trading Company Limited (individual) [BURMA] Entities 1. AYER SHWE WAH COMPANY LIMITED (a.k.a. AYER SHWE WA; a.k.a AYE YAR SHWE WAH; a.k.a. AYEYA SHWE WAR COMPANY); 5 Pyay Road, Hlaing Township, Yangon, Burma [BURMA] 2. HTOO GROUP OF COMPANIES; 5 Pyay Road, Hlaing Township, Yangon, Burma [BURMA] 3. MYANMAR AVIA EXPORT COMPANY LIMITED (a.k.a. MYANMAR AVIA EXPORT) [BURMA] 4. PAVO AIRCRAFT LEASING PTE. LTD.; 3 Shenton Way, #24–02 Shenton House, 068805, Singapore [BURMA] Dated: February 5, 2008. Adam J. Szubin, Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. [FR Doc. E8–2425 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4811–42–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control Additional Designations of Individuals Pursuant to Executive Order 13448 Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) is publishing the names of four newly-designated individuals whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13448 of October 18, 2007, ‘‘Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Burma.’’ E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7804-7805]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2392]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

[TTB Ruling 2008-1]


Standards of Identity and the Use of Semi-generic Designations 
and Retsina on Certain European Wines Imported into the United States

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION: General notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau issues this 
ruling to clarify the standard of identity that applies to certain 
European wines when they are imported into the United States.

DATES: This ruling is effective on January 24, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Gittes, Program Manager, 
International Trade Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 
1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220; telephone 202-927-8104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

TTB Ruling 2008-1

Standards of Identity and the Use of Semi-generic Designations and 
Retsina on Certain European Wines Imported into the United States

27 CFR 4.21 Standards of Identity

    Wines using one of the 17 specified designations listed in Annex II 
of the Agreement Between the United States of America and the European 
Community on Trade in Wine, which originate in the applicable European 
Union member State and which comply with the European Union standard 
for such wines, will meet the United States standard of identity or the 
trade understanding for such wine.

TTB RUL. 2008-1

    The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau has been asked if the 
adoption of the Agreement Between the United States of America and the 
European Community on Trade in Wine (``the Agreement'') and the related 
statutory change regarding semi-generic designations and Retsina affect 
the standard of identity that applies to certain European wines when 
they are imported into the United States.

Background

    On March 10, 2006, the United States and the European Community 
(EC) signed the Agreement in which the United States agreed to seek to 
change the legal status of 17 designations listed in Annex II of the 
Agreement in order to restrict their use solely to wine originating in 
the applicable European Union (EU) member State, except as provided for 
under a ``grandfather'' provision. These 17 designations are: Burgundy, 
Claret, Chablis, Champagne, Chianti, Malaga, Marsala, Madeira, Moselle, 
Port, Retsina, Rhine Wine or Hock, Sauterne, Haut Sauterne, Sherry, and 
Tokay. The Agreement's ``grandfather'' provision allows persons or 
their successors in interest to continue to label non-EU wines with one 
of the 17 listed designations if that term is used only on labels for 
wine bearing the brand name, or the brand name and the fanciful name, 
if any, for which the applicable Certificate of Label Approval (COLA) 
or Certificate of Exemption from Label Approval was issued by the 
Secretary of the Treasury before March 10, 2006.
    Legislation changing the legal status of the 17 designations in the 
Agreement was enacted by Congress and signed by the President on 
December 20, 2006, as section 422 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act 
of 2006 (``the Act''), Public

[[Page 7805]]

Law 109-432, 120 Stat. 2922, 2972. As amended by the Act, section 
5388(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 5388(c)) 
contains a provision regarding the use of the 17 designations listed in 
the Agreement. The provision states that, in the case of wine of the 
EC, the listed designations may be used only if the wine conforms to 
the standard of identity, if any, for such wine contained in the 
regulations issued under section 5388 (27 CFR 24.257 and, by reference, 
27 CFR 4.21) or, if there is no such standard, to the trade 
understanding of such class and type. All other wines bearing the 
listed designations are subject to two additional requirements: (1) 
That the wine be marked with an appropriate appellation of origin 
disclosing the origin of the wine, and (2) that the person, or the 
person's successor in interest, using a listed designation hold a COLA 
or Certificate of Exemption from Label Approval issued by the Secretary 
of the Treasury before March 10, 2006, for a wine label bearing that 
designation and that brand name or brand name and fanciful name.
    Held, that an EU wine product that bears one of the 17 designations 
listed in section 5388(c)(3)(C)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
and that conforms to the EU standard for such wine complies with the 
United States standard of identity or the trade understanding for such 
wine. The recent amendment to 26 U.S.C. 5388(c) concerning semi-generic 
designations does not require such EU wine products imported into the 
United States to meet a new standard of identity.

    Signed: January 24, 2008.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-2392 Filed 2-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.