Proposed Change to Vintage Date Requirements (2005R-212P), 38058-38060 [05-13041]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
38058
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
requirements, Social security,
Unemployment compensation.
Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
Accordingly, under the authority of
26 U.S.C. 7805, the notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–142686–01) that was
published in the Federal Register on
November 14, 2001 (66 FR 57023) is
withdrawn.
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05–12956 Filed 6–30–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
petition, 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:
Marjorie D. Ruhf, Regulations and
Procedures Division, Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW., Washington, DC 20220;
telephone 202–927–8202.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Wine Labeling
TTB Authority
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 4
[Notice No. 49]
RIN 1513–AB11
Proposed Change to Vintage Date
Requirements (2005R–212P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau proposes to change
the minimum content requirement for
vintage date statements on some wine
labels. We take this action in response
to a petition from a trade association
representing California wineries. We
invite comments on this proposed
amendment to our regulations.
DATES: We must receive your written
comments on or before August 30, 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. 49, 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 the petition,
this notice, and any comments we
receive about this notice 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
SUMMARY:
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:07 Jun 30, 2005
Jkt 205001
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 consumers with
adequate information regarding product
identity and prohibits the use of
misleading information on such 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.
Vintage Date Requirements
Current Requirements
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) contains the rules governing
labeling of wine. The current rule for
the use of a vintage date on a wine label
is found in § 4.27 (27 CFR 4.27). Section
4.27 requires that 95 percent of the
grapes in a vintage-dated wine be
harvested in the calendar year shown on
the label and that the wine be labeled
with an appellation of origin other than
a country.
Before 1972, regulations in part 4
defined the phrase ‘‘vintage wine’’ as
wine that was made ‘‘wholly from
grapes gathered in the same calendar
year and grown and fermented in the
same viticultural area, and conforming
to the standards prescribed in Classes 1,
2, and 3 of § 4.21.’’ In T.D. 7185 (37 FR
7974), published on April 22, 1972, the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which
administered the FAA Act at the time,
amended that definition to allow the
addition of up to five percent of other
wines to vintage wine. An industry
association had requested this change in
order to allow producers to replace wine
lost by evaporation and leakage during
the aging period. In adopting the
change, the IRS recognized that
requiring vintage wine to be derived
wholly from grapes gathered in the
stated year was ‘‘unnecessarily
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
restrictive when viewed in the light of
practices in some of the principal wine
producing countries of the world.’’ The
IRS also concluded that liberalization of
the vintage date regulations ‘‘would not
be adverse to the consumer interest.’’
Vintage Date Petition
The Wine Institute, a trade association
of California wineries, submitted a
petition to TTB to amend paragraph (a)
of § 4.27 to allow wine labeled with a
State, multistate, county, or multicounty
appellation of origin (or the foreign
equivalent of a State or county) to bear
a vintage date if at least 85 percent of
the wine is derived from grapes
harvested in the labeled calendar year.
The Wine Institute proposes to retain
the current requirement that at least 95
percent of the grapes in a vintage-dated
wine be harvested in the year shown on
the label (the ‘‘95 percent rule’’) for
wine with an American viticultural area
(or its foreign equivalent) as an
appellation of origin. An American
viticultural area is a delimited grape
growing region approved by TTB that is
distinguishable by geographical
features; the American viticultural areas
are listed in part 9 of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR part 9). A foreign
equivalent of an American viticultural
area is a delimited place or region, other
than a political subdivision, which has
been established by the country of
origin.
In support of its request, the
petitioner provided information
comparing the vintage date labeling
requirement of the United States to
those of other wine producing countries.
This information shows that the 95
percent rule for vintage wine used by
the United States is unusually high
when compared to the vintage date
requirements of other countries.
Specifically, the petitioner notes that
Australia, New Zealand, and the
Member States of the European Union
have an 85 percent same-year content
requirement for vintage-dated wine,
while Chile and South Africa require
that only 75 percent of the grapes in a
vintage-dated wine be grown in the year
shown on the label. The petitioner did
not provide information on precedents
for their proposed dual standard for
vintage labeling of wine from
viticultural areas and other appellations
of origin. We note, however, that the
TTB appellation of origin regulations
use a multiple standard for the
percentage of grapes that must be grown
in the labeled appellation, that is, 85
percent for a wine labeled with a
viticultural area appellation, 75 percent
for single State or county appellations,
E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM
01JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
or 100 percent for multistate or
multicounty appellations.
The petitioner argues that the current
95 percent rule for vintage wine, as set
forth in § 4.27, places U.S. wine
producers at a competitive disadvantage
in two principal ways:
• The ability of domestic producers to
blend wines for the best possible
characteristics is limited by the 95
percent rule. The petitioner claims this
is most important in ‘‘mid-range wines,
where consistency of flavor and
mouthfeel is desirable between years
and where a large proportion of the
global wine market exists.’’ In support
of this point, the petitioner provided
several examples of the use of small
amounts of wine from a different
vintage to give consistency and better
value to consumers.
• Although the 95 percent rule
applies equally to foreign vintage wines
imported into the United States,
regulators in the United States do not
have access to the records of foreign
producers to verify that they follow the
95 percent rule for wines they export to
the United States. The petitioner
suggests that domestic producers of
vintage wine may be competing with
foreign producers that do not conform to
the 95 percent standard.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
In this notice, TTB proposes to revise
paragraph (a) of § 4.27 in order to add
the 85 percent standard as proposed in
the petition. The proposed revision
includes a reorganization of the text in
order to accommodate the separate 85
and 95 percent vintage date rules.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
We invite comments from interested
members of the public on whether we
should make the proposed change to the
vintage date rules. We specifically invite
comments on whether the proposed
amendment will continue to ensure that
consumers have adequate information
about the identity of wines that are
labeled with vintage dates, and are not
misled by the use of vintage dates on
wine labels. We are also interested in
comments on the perceived effect on
consumers of using two vintage date
standards rather than the current single
standard approach. In addition to
comments on this specific proposal, we
are interested in suggestions on other
approaches that might achieve a similar
result. We also invite comments on an
appropriate delayed effective date.
Finally we solicit comments on how any
new rule should be applied. For
example, should it apply to wines
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:07 Jun 30, 2005
Jkt 205001
bottled after the effective date, or wines
removed for consumption or sale after
the effective date? Please provide
specific information in support of your
comments.
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.
38059
Library at 1310 G Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220. You may also
obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5 × 11
inch page. Contact our librarian at the
above address or by telephone at 202–
927–2400 to schedule an appointment
or to request copies of comments.
For your convenience, we will post
the petition, 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 copies of the petition, this
notice, and the posted comments, 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
amendment, if adopted, would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The proposed amendment provides
greater flexibility to wine producers and
importers without imposing any new
reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. 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
Marjorie D. Ruhf of the Regulations
and Procedures Division drafted this
notice.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 4
Advertising, Customs duties and
inspection, Imports, Labeling, Packaging
and containers, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Trade
practices, Wine.
The Proposed Amendment
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.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, we propose to amend 27 CFR,
chapter 1, part 4, as follows:
PART 4—LABELING AND
ADVERTISING OF WINE
Public Disclosure
You may view copies of the petition,
this notice, and any comments we
receive by appointment at the TTB
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. The authority citation for part 4
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205, unless otherwise
noted.
2. Amend § 4.27 by revising paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM
01JYP1
38060
§ 4.27
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Vintage wine.
Signed: May 31, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: June 16, 2005.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 05–13041 Filed 6–30–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
29 CFR Part 1610
RIN 3046–AA75
Freedom of Information Act Fee
Schedule
Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC or the
Commission) is seeking comments on
proposed revisions to its Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) fee schedule.
The updated schedule of fees reflects
increases in the direct costs incurred by
the Commission in responding to
requests for records.
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:07 Jun 30, 2005
The agency must receive
comments on or before August 30, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to Stephen Llewellyn,
Acting Executive Officer, Executive
Secretariat, Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, 1801 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20507. As a
convenience to commenters, the
Executive Secretariat will accept
comments of six pages or less
transmitted by facsimile (‘‘FAX’’)
machine. The telephone number of the
FAX receiver is (202) 663–4114. This is
not a toll free number. The six-page
limitation is necessary to assure access
to the equipment. Receipt of FAX
transmissions will not be acknowledged
although a sender may request
confirmation by calling the Executive
Secretariat at (202) 663–4070 (voice) or
(202) 663–4074 (TTY). These are not toll
free numbers. Copies of comments
submitted by the public will be
available for review at the Commission’s
library, room 6502, 1801 L Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, between the hours of
9:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. Additionally,
members of the public may submit
comments through https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas J. Schlageter, Assistant Legal
Counsel, or Michelle Zinman, Senior
General Attorney at (202) 663–4640
(voice) or (202) 663–7026 (TTY). This
notice is also available in the following
formats: large print, Braille, audiotape
and electronic file on computer disk.
Requests for this notice in an alternative
format should be made to EEOC’s
Publication Center at 1–800–669–3362.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EEOC is
proposing to amend 29 CFR part 1610.
This section contains a schedule of fees
utilized by the Commission for purposes
of assessing costs to individuals who
seek access to records under the FOIA,
5 U.S.C. 552. The present fee schedule
was last amended in 1983 and has
become outdated. It does not reflect
increases in direct costs to the
Commission for manual search and
review of records. Also, it does not
account for technological advances,
including computer searches, the direct
costs of retrieving records from federal
records centers, or the direct costs of
making records available in electronic
and alternative formats. The changes are
being made in accordance with the
Office of Management and Budget’s
Uniform Freedom of Information Act
Fee Schedule and Guidelines, 52 FR
10012 (1987).
The higher costs of manual search and
review are attributable to increases in
the salaries of the involved personnel.
DATES:
(a) General. Vintage wine is wine
labeled with the year of harvest of the
grapes and made in accordance with the
standards prescribed in classes 1, 2, or
3 of § 4.21. The wine must be labeled
with an appellation of origin other than
a country (which does not qualify for
vintage labeling). The appellation must
be shown in direct conjunction with the
designation required by § 4.32(a)(2), in
lettering substantially as conspicuous as
that designation. In no event may the
quantity of wine removed from the
producing winery, under labels bearing
a vintage date, exceed the volume of
vintage wine produced in that winery
during the year indicated by the vintage
date. The following additional rules
apply to vintage labeling:
(1) If an American or imported wine
is labeled with a viticultural area
appellation of origin, at least 95 percent
of the wine must have been derived
from grapes harvested in the labeled
calendar year; or
(2) If an American or imported wine
is labeled with an appellation of origin
other than a country or viticultural area,
at least 85 percent of the wine must
have been derived from grapes
harvested in the labeled calendar year.
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
We surveyed our field offices to
determine who was conducting the
FOIA searches and reviews. We found
that the vast majority were done by
clerical or paralegal staff, although some
offices used professional staff. A small
number of field offices reported that
managers sometimes conducted
searches and reviews. Further, at
headquarters, managers and Senior
Executive Service (SES) employees
occasionally conduct searches and
reviews. In order to more accurately
reflect the actual efforts and costs
involved, we are replacing the current
two-tier fee schedule (clerical and
professional) with a five-tier schedule
(clerical, paralegal, professional,
managerial, and Senior Executive
Service (SES) employees). Based upon
our field survey, we determined that the
average grade and step level for clerical
personnel performing these functions
was GS 6/Step 5; for paralegals was GS
11/Step 8; and for professional
personnel was GS 12/Step 5. We
calculated the proposed fees for these
three categories by using the hourly
rates in the U.S. Office of Personnel and
Management’s (OPM) 2005 Salary Table
paid to persons at the average grade/step
indicated in the previous sentence and
adding 16 percent for benefits, as
prescribed by the OMB guidance
referred above. For managers (GS–15)
and SES employees, we used the
average GS–15 and added 16 percent for
benefits.
We added several definitions for
clarification. The terms ‘‘direct cost,’’
‘‘search,’’ and ‘‘duplication’’ have been
defined using standard language that
can be found in the FOIA regulations of
several other government agencies,
including OMB. We also clarified that
requesters will be charged other direct
costs when applicable, e.g., computer
search time, record retrieval costs,
computer duplication costs, etc. Finally,
we have increased the fees for
attestation and certification of records to
better reflect the actual costs of
preparing these documents, and defined
both terms to differentiate them from
each other. The fees for attestation and
certification of records under EEOC’s
Privacy Act regulations will
subsequently be amended to mirror
these fee changes under the FOIA.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866
Pursuant to Executive Order 12866,
EEOC has determined that the
regulation will not have an annual effect
on the economy of $100 million or more
or adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM
01JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 126 (Friday, July 1, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38058-38060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-13041]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 4
[Notice No. 49]
RIN 1513-AB11
Proposed Change to Vintage Date Requirements (2005R-212P)
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
change the minimum content requirement for vintage date statements on
some wine labels. We take this action in response to a petition from a
trade association representing California wineries. We invite comments
on this proposed amendment to our regulations.
DATES: We must receive your written comments on or before August 30,
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. 49, 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 the petition, this notice, and any comments
we receive about this notice 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 petition, 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: Marjorie D. Ruhf, Regulations and
Procedures Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW., Washington, DC 20220; telephone 202-927-8202.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Wine Labeling
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 consumers with adequate information regarding product identity
and prohibits the use of misleading information on such 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.
Vintage Date Requirements
Current Requirements
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) contains the rules
governing labeling of wine. The current rule for the use of a vintage
date on a wine label is found in Sec. 4.27 (27 CFR 4.27). Section 4.27
requires that 95 percent of the grapes in a vintage-dated wine be
harvested in the calendar year shown on the label and that the wine be
labeled with an appellation of origin other than a country.
Before 1972, regulations in part 4 defined the phrase ``vintage
wine'' as wine that was made ``wholly from grapes gathered in the same
calendar year and grown and fermented in the same viticultural area,
and conforming to the standards prescribed in Classes 1, 2, and 3 of
Sec. 4.21.'' In T.D. 7185 (37 FR 7974), published on April 22, 1972,
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which administered the FAA Act at
the time, amended that definition to allow the addition of up to five
percent of other wines to vintage wine. An industry association had
requested this change in order to allow producers to replace wine lost
by evaporation and leakage during the aging period. In adopting the
change, the IRS recognized that requiring vintage wine to be derived
wholly from grapes gathered in the stated year was ``unnecessarily
restrictive when viewed in the light of practices in some of the
principal wine producing countries of the world.'' The IRS also
concluded that liberalization of the vintage date regulations ``would
not be adverse to the consumer interest.''
Vintage Date Petition
The Wine Institute, a trade association of California wineries,
submitted a petition to TTB to amend paragraph (a) of Sec. 4.27 to
allow wine labeled with a State, multistate, county, or multicounty
appellation of origin (or the foreign equivalent of a State or county)
to bear a vintage date if at least 85 percent of the wine is derived
from grapes harvested in the labeled calendar year. The Wine Institute
proposes to retain the current requirement that at least 95 percent of
the grapes in a vintage-dated wine be harvested in the year shown on
the label (the ``95 percent rule'') for wine with an American
viticultural area (or its foreign equivalent) as an appellation of
origin. An American viticultural area is a delimited grape growing
region approved by TTB that is distinguishable by geographical
features; the American viticultural areas are listed in part 9 of the
TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9). A foreign equivalent of an American
viticultural area is a delimited place or region, other than a
political subdivision, which has been established by the country of
origin.
In support of its request, the petitioner provided information
comparing the vintage date labeling requirement of the United States to
those of other wine producing countries. This information shows that
the 95 percent rule for vintage wine used by the United States is
unusually high when compared to the vintage date requirements of other
countries. Specifically, the petitioner notes that Australia, New
Zealand, and the Member States of the European Union have an 85 percent
same-year content requirement for vintage-dated wine, while Chile and
South Africa require that only 75 percent of the grapes in a vintage-
dated wine be grown in the year shown on the label. The petitioner did
not provide information on precedents for their proposed dual standard
for vintage labeling of wine from viticultural areas and other
appellations of origin. We note, however, that the TTB appellation of
origin regulations use a multiple standard for the percentage of grapes
that must be grown in the labeled appellation, that is, 85 percent for
a wine labeled with a viticultural area appellation, 75 percent for
single State or county appellations,
[[Page 38059]]
or 100 percent for multistate or multicounty appellations.
The petitioner argues that the current 95 percent rule for vintage
wine, as set forth in Sec. 4.27, places U.S. wine producers at a
competitive disadvantage in two principal ways:
The ability of domestic producers to blend wines for the
best possible characteristics is limited by the 95 percent rule. The
petitioner claims this is most important in ``mid-range wines, where
consistency of flavor and mouthfeel is desirable between years and
where a large proportion of the global wine market exists.'' In support
of this point, the petitioner provided several examples of the use of
small amounts of wine from a different vintage to give consistency and
better value to consumers.
Although the 95 percent rule applies equally to foreign
vintage wines imported into the United States, regulators in the United
States do not have access to the records of foreign producers to verify
that they follow the 95 percent rule for wines they export to the
United States. The petitioner suggests that domestic producers of
vintage wine may be competing with foreign producers that do not
conform to the 95 percent standard.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
In this notice, TTB proposes to revise paragraph (a) of Sec. 4.27
in order to add the 85 percent standard as proposed in the petition.
The proposed revision includes a reorganization of the text in order to
accommodate the separate 85 and 95 percent vintage date rules.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
We invite comments from interested members of the public on whether
we should make the proposed change to the vintage date rules. We
specifically invite comments on whether the proposed amendment will
continue to ensure that consumers have adequate information about the
identity of wines that are labeled with vintage dates, and are not
misled by the use of vintage dates on wine labels. We are also
interested in comments on the perceived effect on consumers of using
two vintage date standards rather than the current single standard
approach. In addition to comments on this specific proposal, we are
interested in suggestions on other approaches that might achieve a
similar result. We also invite comments on an appropriate delayed
effective date. Finally we solicit comments on how any new rule should
be applied. For example, should it apply to wines bottled after the
effective date, or wines removed for consumption or sale after the
effective date? Please provide specific information in support of your
comments.
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.
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 the petition, this notice, 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 x
11 inch page. Contact our librarian at the above address or by
telephone at 202-927-2400 to schedule an appointment or to request
copies of comments.
For your convenience, we will post the petition, 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 copies of the petition, this notice, and
the posted comments, 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 amendment, if adopted, would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed amendment provides greater flexibility to wine
producers and importers without imposing any new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. 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
Marjorie D. Ruhf of the Regulations and Procedures Division drafted
this notice.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 4
Advertising, Customs duties and inspection, Imports, Labeling,
Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Trade practices, Wine.
The Proposed Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we propose to amend 27
CFR, chapter 1, part 4, as follows:
PART 4--LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF WINE
1. The authority citation for part 4 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205, unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 4.27 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
[[Page 38060]]
Sec. 4.27 Vintage wine.
(a) General. Vintage wine is wine labeled with the year of harvest
of the grapes and made in accordance with the standards prescribed in
classes 1, 2, or 3 of Sec. 4.21. The wine must be labeled with an
appellation of origin other than a country (which does not qualify for
vintage labeling). The appellation must be shown in direct conjunction
with the designation required by Sec. 4.32(a)(2), in lettering
substantially as conspicuous as that designation. In no event may the
quantity of wine removed from the producing winery, under labels
bearing a vintage date, exceed the volume of vintage wine produced in
that winery during the year indicated by the vintage date. The
following additional rules apply to vintage labeling:
(1) If an American or imported wine is labeled with a viticultural
area appellation of origin, at least 95 percent of the wine must have
been derived from grapes harvested in the labeled calendar year; or
(2) If an American or imported wine is labeled with an appellation
of origin other than a country or viticultural area, at least 85
percent of the wine must have been derived from grapes harvested in the
labeled calendar year.
* * * * *
Signed: May 31, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: June 16, 2005.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 05-13041 Filed 6-30-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
