Proposed Realignment of the Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco Viticultural Areas (2003R-083P), 3333-3335 [05-1192]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 14 / Monday, January 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No. 29]
RIN: 1513–AA72
Proposed Realignment of the Santa
Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco
Viticultural Areas (2003R–083P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau proposes to realign a
portion of the common boundary line
between the established Santa Lucia
Highlands and Arroyo Seco viticultural
areas in Monterey County, California.
We designate viticultural areas to allow
vintners to better describe the origin of
their wines and to allow consumers to
better identify wines they may
purchase. We invite comments on these
proposed amendments to our
regulations.
DATES: We must receive written
comments on or before March 25, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments to
any of the following addresses:
• Chief, Regulations and Procedures
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 29, P.O.
Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044–
4412.
• 202–927–8525 (facsimile).
• nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail).
• https://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/
index.htm. An online comment form is
posted with this notice on our Web site.
• https://www.regulations.gov (Federal
e-rulemaking portal; follow instructions
for submitting comments).
You may view copies of this notice,
the petition, the appropriate maps, and
any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB
Library, 1310 G Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220. To make an
appointment, call 202–927–2400. You
may also access copies of the notice and
comments online at https://www.ttb.gov/
alcohol/rules/index.htm.
See the Public Participation section of
this notice for specific instructions and
requirements for submitting comments,
and for information on how to request
a public hearing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N.A.
Sutton, Program Manager, Regulations
and Procedures Division, Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925
Lakeville Street, #158, Petaluma, CA
94952; telephone 415–271–1254.
SUMMARY:
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:25 Jan 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (the FAA Act, 27
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) requires that alcohol
beverage labels provide the consumer
with adequate information regarding a
product’s identity and prohibits the use
of misleading information on those
labels. The FAA Act also authorizes the
Secretary of the Treasury to issue
regulations to carry out its provisions.
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau (TTB) administers these
regulations.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) allows the establishment of
definitive viticultural areas and the use
of their names as appellations of origin
on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the
list of approved viticultural areas.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines
a viticultural area for American wine as
a delimited grape-growing region
distinguishable by geographical
features, the boundaries of which have
been recognized and defined in part 9
of the regulations. These designations
allow vintners and consumers to
attribute a given quality, reputation, or
other characteristic of a wine made from
grapes grown in an area to its
geographic origin. The establishment of
viticultural areas allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of
their wines to consumers and helps
consumers to identify wines they may
purchase. Establishment of a viticultural
area is neither an approval nor an
endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for
proposing an American viticultural area
and provides that any interested party
may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as a viticultural area.
Petitioners may use the same procedure
to request changes involving existing
viticultural areas. Section 9.3(b) of the
TTB regulations requires the petition to
include—
• Evidence that the proposed
viticultural area is locally and/or
nationally known by the name specified
in the petition;
• Historical or current evidence that
supports setting the boundary of the
proposed viticultural area as the
petition specifies;
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3333
• Evidence relating to the
geographical features, such as climate,
elevation, physical features, and soils,
that distinguish the proposed
viticultural area from surrounding areas;
• A description of the specific
boundary of the proposed viticultural
area, based on features found on United
States Geological Survey (USGS) maps;
and
• A copy of the appropriate USGS
map(s) with the proposed viticultural
area’s boundary prominently marked.
Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo
Seco Realignment Petition
Background
Paul Thorpe, on behalf of E. & J. Gallo
Winery, submitted a petition to TTB
requesting the realignment of a portion
of the common boundary between the
established Santa Lucia Highlands
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.139) and the
established Arroyo Seco viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.59). Both viticultural
areas are within the Monterey
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.98) in
Monterey County, California, which is
in turn within the larger multi-county
Central Coast viticultural area (27 CFR
9.75).
Currently, the portion of the originally
established common boundary in
question follows a straight line drawn
between the intersection of Paraiso and
Clark Roads and the northeast corner of
section 5, T19S, R6E, as shown on the
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Paraiso Springs, California, quadrangle
map.
The proposed realignment would
move this portion of the two areas’
common boundary line about 1,000 to
the east of the Paraiso and Clark Roads
intersection and less than 500 feet to the
east of the northeast corner of section 5,
T19S, R6E. This realignment would
transfer about 200 acres of land
currently within the Arroyo Seco
viticultural area to the Santa Lucia
Highlands area.
Rationale and Evidence for the
Proposed Realignment
According to the petitioner, the
proposed realignment of this portion of
the common boundary between the
Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco
viticultural areas would serve three
purposes: (1) It would bring the western
boundary of the Arroyo Seco viticultural
area into conformity with the western
boundary of the historical Arroyo Seco
Land Grant, which lends it name to the
Arroyo Seco viticultural area; (2) it
would conform the boundary line to
land ownership boundaries; and (3) it
would end the current division of the
E:\FR\FM\24JAP1.SGM
24JAP1
3334
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 14 / Monday, January 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Olsen Ranch vineyards between the two
viticultural areas.
Currently, a thin strip of land outside
of the Arroyo Seco Land Grant is within
the western-most portion of the Arroyo
Seco viticultural area. By moving the
common Santa Lucia Highlands and
Arroyo Seco boundary line to the east,
the Arroyo Seco Land Grant and Arroyo
Seco viticultural area will have the same
western boundary line.
The petitioner owns the Olsen Ranch,
the great majority of which lies within
the Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural
area. Currently, the vineyards on the
Olson Ranch, which were planted after
the establishment of the two viticultural
areas, are divided between the Arroyo
Seco and Santa Lucia Highlands
viticultural areas. By realigning this
portion of common boundary line
between the two viticultural areas, the
Olson Ranch vineyards will be
completely within the Santa Lucia
Highlands viticultural area.
The petition also explains that the
dominant physical feature of the
proposed realignment area is the
alluvial terracing that differentiates the
highlands along the western edge of the
Salinas Valley from the lower elevation
valley floor. These terraces, which are
above 600 feet in elevation, match the
terrain found in the Santa Lucia
Highlands viticultural area, the
elevation of which is generally between
600 feet and 1,200 feet, as the provided
USGS map shows. Also, the terraces and
higher elevations of the Santa Lucia
Highlands area contrast to the flatter
terrain and lower elevation valley floor
found in the Arroyo Seco viticultural
area.
The primary soils of the proposed
realignment area are of the Arroyo Seco
and Chualar series, according to the
1978 U.S. Department of Agriculture
Soil Survey of Monterey County,
California, cited in the petition. These
soils are generally loam or gravelly,
sandy loam, with underlying very
gravelly material, and they coincide
with the dominant soils of the Santa
Lucia Highlands viticultural area,
according to the petition.
The petition states that the climatic
conditions of the proposed realignment
area are similar to the Santa Lucia
Highlands viticultural area. The rainfall
in the proposed realignment area and
the Santa Lucia Highlands area is 10 to
15 inches a year, according to the
petition. In contrast, the lower valley
floor found in the Arroyo Seco
viticultural area averages less rain at 9.5
inches a year.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:25 Jan 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
TTB Finding
Based on the information provided in
the petition, we believe that it is
appropriate to propose the boundary
realignment between the Arroyo Seco
and Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural
areas requested in the petition.
Accordingly, we set forth below
proposed amendments to the boundary
descriptions for the two viticultural
areas found in §§ 9.59 and 9.139 of the
TTB regulations.
Impact on Current Wine Labels
Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits
any label reference on a wine that
indicates or implies an origin other than
the wine’s true place of origin. If we
realign the boundary between the
established Santa Lucia Highlands and
Arroyo Seco viticultural areas, wine
bottlers using ‘‘Santa Lucia Highlands’’
or ‘‘Arroyo Seco’’ in a brand name,
including a trademark, or in another
label reference as to the origin of the
wine, will still have to ensure that the
product is eligible to use the relevant
viticultural area’s name as an
appellation of origin.
For a wine to be eligible to use as an
appellation of origin the name of a
viticultural area specified in part 9 of
the TTB regulations, at least 85 percent
of the grapes used to make the wine
must have been grown within the area
represented by that name, and the wine
must meet the other conditions listed in
27 CFR 4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not
eligible to use the viticultural area name
as an appellation of origin and that
name appears in the brand name, then
the label is not in compliance and the
bottler must change the brand name and
obtain approval of a new label.
Similarly, if the viticultural area name
appears in another reference on the
label in a misleading manner, the bottler
would have to obtain approval of a new
label. Accordingly, if a new label or a
previously approved label uses the
names ‘‘Santa Lucia Highlands’’ or
‘‘Arroyo Seco’’ for a wine that does not
meet the 85 percent standard, the new
label will not be approved, and the
previously approved label will be
subject to revocation, upon the effective
date of the approval of the boundary
change.
Different rules apply if a wine has a
brand name containing a viticultural
area name that was used as a brand
name on a label approved before July 7,
1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
We invite comments from interested
members of the public on whether we
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
should realign the portion of the
common boundary between the Santa
Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco
viticultural areas as described above.
We are especially interested in the use
of the ‘‘Santa Lucia Highlands’’ and
‘‘Arroyo Seco’’ names as they apply to
the land within the proposed
realignment zone. We are also interested
in comments on the impact, if any, that
the proposed viticultural areas’
realignment may have on current wine
labels. Please support your comments
with specific information about the
viticultural areas’ names, boundaries,
distinguishing features, or impact on
current wine labels.
Submitting Comments
Please submit your comments by the
closing date shown above in this notice.
Your comments must include this
notice number and your name and
mailing address. Your comments must
be legible and written in language
acceptable for public disclosure. We do
not acknowledge receipt of comments,
and we consider all comments as
originals. You may submit comments in
one of five ways:
• Mail: You may send written
comments to TTB at the address listed
in the ADDRESSES section.
• Facsimile: You may submit
comments by facsimile transmission to
(202) 927–8525. Faxed comments
must—
(1) Be on 8.5- by 11-inch paper;
(2) Contain a legible, written
signature; and
(3) Be no more than five pages long.
This limitation assures electronic access
to our equipment. We will not accept
faxed comments that exceed five pages.
• E-mail: You may e-mail comments
to nprm@ttb.gov. Comments transmitted
by electronic mail must—
(1) Contain your e-mail address;
(2) Reference this notice number on
the subject line; and
(3) Be legible when printed on 8.5- by
11-inch paper.
• Online form: We provide a
comment form with the online copy of
this notice on our Web site at https://
www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm.
Select the ‘‘Send comments via e-mail’’
link under this notice number.
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: To
submit comments to us via the Federal
e-rulemaking portal, visit https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
You may also write to the
Administrator before the comment
closing date to ask for a public hearing.
The Administrator reserves the right to
determine, in light of all circumstances,
whether to hold a public hearing.
E:\FR\FM\24JAP1.SGM
24JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 14 / Monday, January 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Confidentiality
All submitted material is part of the
public record and subject to disclosure.
Do not enclose any material in your
comments that you consider
confidential or inappropriate for public
disclosure.
Public Disclosure
You may view copies of this notice,
the petition, the appropriate maps, and
any comments we receive by
appointment at the TTB Library at 1310
G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
You may also obtain copies at 20 cents
per 8.5- by 11-inch page. Contact our
librarian at the above address or
telephone (202) 927–2400 to schedule
an appointment or to request copies of
comments.
For your convenience, we will post
this notice and any comments we
receive on this proposal on the TTB
Web site. We may omit voluminous
attachments or material that we
consider unsuitable for posting. In all
cases, the full comment will be available
in the TTB Library. To access the online
copy of this notice, visit https://
www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm.
Select the ‘‘View Comments’’ link under
this notice number to view the posted
comments.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this proposed
regulation, if adopted, would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The proposed regulation imposes no
new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit
derived from the use of a viticultural
area name would be the result of a
proprietor’s efforts and consumer
acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by
Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735.
Therefore, it requires no regulatory
assessment.
Drafting Information
Nancy Sutton of the Regulations and
Procedures Division drafted this notice.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, we propose to amend title 27,
chapter 1, part 9, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:25 Jan 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
3335
Signed: January 10, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–1192 Filed 1–21–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
2. Section 9.59 is amended by revising
paragraph (c)(13), redesignating
paragraphs (c)(14) through (c)(19) as
(c)(16) through (c)(21), and adding new
paragraphs (c)(14) and (c)(15) to read as
follows:
§ 9.59
Arroyo Seco.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Boundary. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(13) Then east-northeasterly along
Clark Road for approximately 1,000 feet
to its intersection with an unnamed
light-duty road to the south.
(14) Then in a straight southsoutheasterly line for approximately 1.9
miles to the line’s intersection with the
southeast corner of section 33, T18S,
R6E (this line coincides with the
unnamed light duty road for
approximately 0.4 miles and later with
the eastern boundaries of sections 32
and 33, T18S, R6E, which mark the
western boundary of the historical
Arroyo Seco Land Grant).
(15) Then straight west along the
southern boundary of section 33, T18S,
R6E, to its southwest corner.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 9.139 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(9) and (c)(10),
redesignating paragraphs (c)(11) through
(c)(21) as (c)(12) through (c)(22), and
adding new paragraph (c)(11) to read as
follows:
§ 9.139
Santa Lucia Highlands.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Boundary. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(9) Then east-northeasterly along
Clark Road for approximately 1,000 feet
to its intersection with an unnamed
light-duty road to the south.
(10) Then in a straight southsoutheasterly line for approximately 1.9
miles to the line’s intersection with the
southeast corner of section 33, T18S,
R6E (this line coincides with the
unnamed light duty road for about 0.4
miles and later with the eastern
boundaries of sections 32 and 33, T18S,
R6E, which mark the western boundary
of the historical Arroyo Seco Land
Grant).
(11) Then straight west along the
southern boundaries of sections 33, 32,
and 31, T18S, R6E, to the southwest
corner of section 31.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R01–OAR–2004–ME–0004; A–1–FRL–
7862–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; ME;
Low Emission Vehicle Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Maine
on February 25, 2004 and December 9,
2004 which includes the Maine Low
Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program. The
regulations adopted by Maine include
the California LEV I light-duty motor
vehicle emission standards beginning
with model year 2001, California LEV II
light-duty motor vehicle emission
standards effective in model year 2004,
the California LEV I medium-duty
standards effective in model year 2003,
and the smog index label specification
effective model year 2002. The Maine
LEV regulation submitted does not
include any zero emission vehicle (ZEV)
requirements. Maine has adopted these
revisions to reduce emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen
oxides (NOX) in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA). In addition, they have worked to
ensure that their program is identical to
California’s, as required by section 177
of the CAA. The intended effect of this
action is to propose approval of the
Maine LEV program. This action is
being taken under section 110 of the
Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before February 23, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to
David Conroy, Unit Manager, Air
Quality Planning, Office of Ecosystem
Protection (mail code CAQ), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPANew England, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114–2023.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically, or through hand
delivery/courier, please follow the
detailed instructions described in part
(I)(B)(1)(i) through (iv) of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
E:\FR\FM\24JAP1.SGM
24JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 14 (Monday, January 24, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3333-3335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1192]
[[Page 3333]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No. 29]
RIN: 1513-AA72
Proposed Realignment of the Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco
Viticultural Areas (2003R-083P)
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to
realign a portion of the common boundary line between the established
Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco viticultural areas in Monterey
County, California. We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners
to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to
better identify wines they may purchase. We invite comments on these
proposed amendments to our regulations.
DATES: We must receive written comments on or before March 25, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments to any of the following addresses:
Chief, Regulations and Procedures Division, Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 29, P.O. Box 14412,
Washington, DC 20044-4412.
202-927-8525 (facsimile).
nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail).
https://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm. An online
comment form is posted with this notice on our Web site.
https://www.regulations.gov (Federal e-rulemaking portal;
follow instructions for submitting comments).
You may view copies of this notice, the petition, the appropriate
maps, and any comments we receive about this proposal by appointment at
the TTB Library, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. To make an
appointment, call 202-927-2400. You may also access copies of the
notice and comments online at https://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/
index.htm.
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific
instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for
information on how to request a public hearing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N.A. Sutton, Program Manager,
Regulations and Procedures Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau, 925 Lakeville Street, 158, Petaluma, CA 94952;
telephone 415-271-1254.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (the FAA
Act, 27 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) requires that alcohol beverage labels
provide the consumer with adequate information regarding a product's
identity and prohibits the use of misleading information on those
labels. The FAA Act also authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to
issue regulations to carry out its provisions. The Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers these regulations.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the
establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains
the list of approved viticultural areas.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i))
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region distinguishable by geographical features, the boundaries
of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations.
These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given
quality, reputation, or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes
grown in an area to its geographic origin. The establishment of
viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the
origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify
wines they may purchase. Establishment of a viticultural area is
neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in
that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations outlines the procedure
for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any
interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region
as a viticultural area. Petitioners may use the same procedure to
request changes involving existing viticultural areas. Section 9.3(b)
of the TTB regulations requires the petition to include--
Evidence that the proposed viticultural area is locally
and/or nationally known by the name specified in the petition;
Historical or current evidence that supports setting the
boundary of the proposed viticultural area as the petition specifies;
Evidence relating to the geographical features, such as
climate, elevation, physical features, and soils, that distinguish the
proposed viticultural area from surrounding areas;
A description of the specific boundary of the proposed
viticultural area, based on features found on United States Geological
Survey (USGS) maps; and
A copy of the appropriate USGS map(s) with the proposed
viticultural area's boundary prominently marked.
Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco Realignment Petition
Background
Paul Thorpe, on behalf of E. & J. Gallo Winery, submitted a
petition to TTB requesting the realignment of a portion of the common
boundary between the established Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.139) and the established Arroyo Seco viticultural area
(27 CFR 9.59). Both viticultural areas are within the Monterey
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.98) in Monterey County, California, which
is in turn within the larger multi-county Central Coast viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.75).
Currently, the portion of the originally established common
boundary in question follows a straight line drawn between the
intersection of Paraiso and Clark Roads and the northeast corner of
section 5, T19S, R6E, as shown on the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Paraiso Springs, California, quadrangle map.
The proposed realignment would move this portion of the two areas'
common boundary line about 1,000 to the east of the Paraiso and Clark
Roads intersection and less than 500 feet to the east of the northeast
corner of section 5, T19S, R6E. This realignment would transfer about
200 acres of land currently within the Arroyo Seco viticultural area to
the Santa Lucia Highlands area.
Rationale and Evidence for the Proposed Realignment
According to the petitioner, the proposed realignment of this
portion of the common boundary between the Santa Lucia Highlands and
Arroyo Seco viticultural areas would serve three purposes: (1) It would
bring the western boundary of the Arroyo Seco viticultural area into
conformity with the western boundary of the historical Arroyo Seco Land
Grant, which lends it name to the Arroyo Seco viticultural area; (2) it
would conform the boundary line to land ownership boundaries; and (3)
it would end the current division of the
[[Page 3334]]
Olsen Ranch vineyards between the two viticultural areas.
Currently, a thin strip of land outside of the Arroyo Seco Land
Grant is within the western-most portion of the Arroyo Seco
viticultural area. By moving the common Santa Lucia Highlands and
Arroyo Seco boundary line to the east, the Arroyo Seco Land Grant and
Arroyo Seco viticultural area will have the same western boundary line.
The petitioner owns the Olsen Ranch, the great majority of which
lies within the Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural area. Currently, the
vineyards on the Olson Ranch, which were planted after the
establishment of the two viticultural areas, are divided between the
Arroyo Seco and Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural areas. By realigning
this portion of common boundary line between the two viticultural
areas, the Olson Ranch vineyards will be completely within the Santa
Lucia Highlands viticultural area.
The petition also explains that the dominant physical feature of
the proposed realignment area is the alluvial terracing that
differentiates the highlands along the western edge of the Salinas
Valley from the lower elevation valley floor. These terraces, which are
above 600 feet in elevation, match the terrain found in the Santa Lucia
Highlands viticultural area, the elevation of which is generally
between 600 feet and 1,200 feet, as the provided USGS map shows. Also,
the terraces and higher elevations of the Santa Lucia Highlands area
contrast to the flatter terrain and lower elevation valley floor found
in the Arroyo Seco viticultural area.
The primary soils of the proposed realignment area are of the
Arroyo Seco and Chualar series, according to the 1978 U.S. Department
of Agriculture Soil Survey of Monterey County, California, cited in the
petition. These soils are generally loam or gravelly, sandy loam, with
underlying very gravelly material, and they coincide with the dominant
soils of the Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural area, according to the
petition.
The petition states that the climatic conditions of the proposed
realignment area are similar to the Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural
area. The rainfall in the proposed realignment area and the Santa Lucia
Highlands area is 10 to 15 inches a year, according to the petition. In
contrast, the lower valley floor found in the Arroyo Seco viticultural
area averages less rain at 9.5 inches a year.
TTB Finding
Based on the information provided in the petition, we believe that
it is appropriate to propose the boundary realignment between the
Arroyo Seco and Santa Lucia Highlands viticultural areas requested in
the petition. Accordingly, we set forth below proposed amendments to
the boundary descriptions for the two viticultural areas found in
Sec. Sec. 9.59 and 9.139 of the TTB regulations.
Impact on Current Wine Labels
Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a
wine that indicates or implies an origin other than the wine's true
place of origin. If we realign the boundary between the established
Santa Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco viticultural areas, wine bottlers
using ``Santa Lucia Highlands'' or ``Arroyo Seco'' in a brand name,
including a trademark, or in another label reference as to the origin
of the wine, will still have to ensure that the product is eligible to
use the relevant viticultural area's name as an appellation of origin.
For a wine to be eligible to use as an appellation of origin the
name of a viticultural area specified in part 9 of the TTB regulations,
at least 85 percent of the grapes used to make the wine must have been
grown within the area represented by that name, and the wine must meet
the other conditions listed in 27 CFR 4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not
eligible to use the viticultural area name as an appellation of origin
and that name appears in the brand name, then the label is not in
compliance and the bottler must change the brand name and obtain
approval of a new label. Similarly, if the viticultural area name
appears in another reference on the label in a misleading manner, the
bottler would have to obtain approval of a new label. Accordingly, if a
new label or a previously approved label uses the names ``Santa Lucia
Highlands'' or ``Arroyo Seco'' for a wine that does not meet the 85
percent standard, the new label will not be approved, and the
previously approved label will be subject to revocation, upon the
effective date of the approval of the boundary change.
Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing a
viticultural area name that was used as a brand name on a label
approved before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
We invite comments from interested members of the public on whether
we should realign the portion of the common boundary between the Santa
Lucia Highlands and Arroyo Seco viticultural areas as described above.
We are especially interested in the use of the ``Santa Lucia
Highlands'' and ``Arroyo Seco'' names as they apply to the land within
the proposed realignment zone. We are also interested in comments on
the impact, if any, that the proposed viticultural areas' realignment
may have on current wine labels. Please support your comments with
specific information about the viticultural areas' names, boundaries,
distinguishing features, or impact on current wine labels.
Submitting Comments
Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this
notice. Your comments must include this notice number and your name and
mailing address. Your comments must be legible and written in language
acceptable for public disclosure. We do not acknowledge receipt of
comments, and we consider all comments as originals. You may submit
comments in one of five ways:
Mail: You may send written comments to TTB at the address
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
Facsimile: You may submit comments by facsimile
transmission to (202) 927-8525. Faxed comments must--
(1) Be on 8.5- by 11-inch paper;
(2) Contain a legible, written signature; and
(3) Be no more than five pages long. This limitation assures
electronic access to our equipment. We will not accept faxed comments
that exceed five pages.
E-mail: You may e-mail comments to nprm@ttb.gov. Comments
transmitted by electronic mail must--
(1) Contain your e-mail address;
(2) Reference this notice number on the subject line; and
(3) Be legible when printed on 8.5- by 11-inch paper.
Online form: We provide a comment form with the online
copy of this notice on our Web site at https://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/
rules/index.htm. Select the ``Send comments via e-mail'' link under
this notice number.
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: To submit comments to us via
the Federal e-rulemaking portal, visit https://www.regulations.gov and
follow the instructions for submitting comments.
You may also write to the Administrator before the comment closing
date to ask for a public hearing. The Administrator reserves the right
to determine, in light of all circumstances, whether to hold a public
hearing.
[[Page 3335]]
Confidentiality
All submitted material is part of the public record and subject to
disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your comments that you
consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.
Public Disclosure
You may view copies of this notice, the petition, the appropriate
maps, and any comments we receive by appointment at the TTB Library at
1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. You may also obtain copies at
20 cents per 8.5- by 11-inch page. Contact our librarian at the above
address or telephone (202) 927-2400 to schedule an appointment or to
request copies of comments.
For your convenience, we will post this notice and any comments we
receive on this proposal on the TTB Web site. We may omit voluminous
attachments or material that we consider unsuitable for posting. In all
cases, the full comment will be available in the TTB Library. To access
the online copy of this notice, visit https://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/
index.htm. Select the ``View Comments'' link under this notice number
to view the posted comments.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed regulation imposes no new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived
from the use of a viticultural area name would be the result of a
proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as
defined by Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735. Therefore, it requires
no regulatory assessment.
Drafting Information
Nancy Sutton of the Regulations and Procedures Division drafted
this notice.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we propose to amend
title 27, chapter 1, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
2. Section 9.59 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(13),
redesignating paragraphs (c)(14) through (c)(19) as (c)(16) through
(c)(21), and adding new paragraphs (c)(14) and (c)(15) to read as
follows:
Sec. 9.59 Arroyo Seco.
* * * * *
(c) Boundary. * * *
* * * * *
(13) Then east-northeasterly along Clark Road for approximately
1,000 feet to its intersection with an unnamed light-duty road to the
south.
(14) Then in a straight south-southeasterly line for approximately
1.9 miles to the line's intersection with the southeast corner of
section 33, T18S, R6E (this line coincides with the unnamed light duty
road for approximately 0.4 miles and later with the eastern boundaries
of sections 32 and 33, T18S, R6E, which mark the western boundary of
the historical Arroyo Seco Land Grant).
(15) Then straight west along the southern boundary of section 33,
T18S, R6E, to its southwest corner.
* * * * *
3. Section 9.139 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(9) and
(c)(10), redesignating paragraphs (c)(11) through (c)(21) as (c)(12)
through (c)(22), and adding new paragraph (c)(11) to read as follows:
Sec. 9.139 Santa Lucia Highlands.
* * * * *
(c) Boundary. * * *
* * * * *
(9) Then east-northeasterly along Clark Road for approximately
1,000 feet to its intersection with an unnamed light-duty road to the
south.
(10) Then in a straight south-southeasterly line for approximately
1.9 miles to the line's intersection with the southeast corner of
section 33, T18S, R6E (this line coincides with the unnamed light duty
road for about 0.4 miles and later with the eastern boundaries of
sections 32 and 33, T18S, R6E, which mark the western boundary of the
historical Arroyo Seco Land Grant).
(11) Then straight west along the southern boundaries of sections
33, 32, and 31, T18S, R6E, to the southwest corner of section 31.
* * * * *
Signed: January 10, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-1192 Filed 1-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P