Establishment of the Covelo Viticultural Area (2003R-412P), 8202-8206 [06-1457]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
8202
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
published by the Department of
Commerce for the previous calendar
year.’’
Pursuant to § 375.308(x)(1) of the
Commission’s Regulations, the authority
for the publication of such cost limits,
as adjusted for inflation, is delegated to
the Director of the Office of Energy
Projects. The cost limits for calendar
year 2006, as published in Table I of
§ 157.208(d) and Table II of § 157.215(a),
are hereby issued.
J. Mark Robinson,
Director, Office of Energy Projects.
Accordingly, 18 CFR part 157 is
amended as follows:
I
PART 157—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 157
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717w, 3301–
3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.
2. Table I in § 157.208(d) is revised to
read as follows:
I
§ 157.208 Construction, acquisition,
operation, replacement, and miscellaneous
rearrangement of facilities.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
§ 157.215 Underground storage testing
and development.
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
*
TTB Authority
TABLE II
Year
Limit
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
*
*
*
$2,700,000
2,900,000
3,000,000
3,100,000
3,200,000
3,300,000
3,400,000
3,500,000
3,600,000
3,800,000
3,900,000
4,000,000
4,100,000
4,200,000
4,300,000
4,400,000
4,500,000
4,550,000
4,650,000
4,750,000
4,850,000
4,900,000
5,000,000
5,100,000
5,250,000
*
[FR Doc. 06–1435 Filed 2–15–06; 8:45 am]
TABLE I
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Limit
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Year
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
*
*
Auto. proj.
cost limit
(Col. 1)
$4,200,000
4,500,000
4,700,000
4,900,000
5,100,000
5,200,000
5,400,000
5,600,000
5,800,000
6,000,000
6,200,000
6,400,000
6,600,000
6,700,000
6,900,000
7,000,000
7,100,000
7,200,000
7,300,000
7,400,000
7,500,000
7,600,000
7,800,000
8,000,000
8,200,000
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
Prior notice
proj. cost limit
(Col. 2)
$12,000,000
12,800,000
13,300,000
13,800,000
14,300,000
14,700,000
15,100,000
15,600,000
16,000,000
16,700,000
17,300,000
17,700,000
18,100,000
18,400,000
18,800,000
19,200,000
19,600,000
19,800,000
20,200,000
20,600,000
21,000,000
21,200,000
21,600,000
22,000,000
22,700,000
*
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[T.D. TTB–42; Re: Notice No. 32]
RIN 1513–AA90
Establishment of the Covelo
Viticultural Area (2003R–412P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This Treasury decision
establishes the 38,000-acre ‘‘Covelo’’
viticultural area in northern Mendocino
County, California, about 150 miles
north of San Francisco. 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.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Sutton, Regulations and Rulings
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., No.
158, Petaluma, California 94952;
telephone 415–271–1254.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
*
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 157
Administrative practice and
procedure, Natural Gas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
*
3. Table II in § 157.215(a)(5) is revised
to read as follows:
I
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 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.
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.
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
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Covelo Petition and Rulemaking
Automobile Association Mendocino and
Sonoma Coast map identifies Covelo as
a rural township in northwest
California. The 1988 DeLorme Northern
California map displays the town of
Covelo and ‘‘Covelo Road’’ (State
Highway 162), which runs through the
proposed viticultural area.
The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration California
Climatological Data report of October
1999 includes temperature data for the
Covelo weather station. The Covelo East
USGS quadrangle map shows that the
Covelo Ranger Station is situated about
a mile north of the town.
General Background
Boundary Evidence
Mr. Ralph Carter of Sonoma,
California, submitted a petition to
establish the ‘‘Covelo’’ viticultural area
in northern Mendocino County,
California. The Covelo area is about 150
miles north of San Francisco and 45
miles north of Ukiah. The proposed
Covelo viticultural area boundary line
encompasses Round Valley, Williams
Valley, and the surrounding foothills.
The small, rural town of Covelo lies
within Round Valley, and a portion of
the Round Valley Indian Reservation
overlaps with the northern end of the
proposed Covelo viticultural area.
This 38,000-acre proposed viticultural
area has 2 acres of planted grape vines,
with the potential for more vineyard
development in the valley and on the
surrounding hillsides. The petition did
not document a history of grape growing
in the Covelo area.
The bowl-shaped basin of Round
Valley, which lies within the proposed
Covelo viticultural area, is distinctly
different from the long, narrow valleys
more commonly found in Mendocino
County. In addition, the soils in the
Covelo area are, for the most part, very
deep, nearly level loam, which differ
significantly from the soils in the
surrounding areas. The proposed Covelo
viticultural area has a shorter growing
season when compared with other
Mendocino County viticultural areas
and comparatively high annual rain
levels with some snow.
Below, we summarize the evidence
presented in the petition and the
comments received in response to the
notice for public comment.
Distinctive elements of the proposed
Covelo viticultural area include its
geography, climate, and growing season.
The Covelo area’s geography, as noted
on USGS maps, is largely a round, flat
valley isolated from surrounding regions
by a ring of foothills and mountains.
The boundary line includes the foothills
immediately adjacent to the valley floor
because of the hillsides’ viticultural
potential, but excludes the higher and
steeper mountainous terrain, which is
less suitable for commercial viticulture.
The proposed Covelo area’s
microclimate is distinct from
surrounding areas due to its geographic
self-containment and inland location.
The area’s climate has significant day
and night temperature differences, and
a short grape-growing season. This
isolated valley microclimate differs from
the marine-influenced climates found in
most of the surrounding regions of
Mendocino County.
The boundary line of the proposed
Covelo viticultural area connects a
series of peaks and benchmarks in the
hills surrounding the Round and
Williams Valleys. These elevation
points vary from a low of 1,762 feet on
the southern boundary to a high of 2,792
feet on its northern boundary.
proposed viticultural area as the
petition specifies;
• Evidence relating to the
geographical features, such as climate,
soils, elevation, and physical features,
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.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Name Evidence
Covelo is the name of a small, rural
town within Round Valley in
Mendocino County, California. The
town appears on the USGS quadrangle
maps of Covelo East and Covelo West,
and on the 2002 Rand McNally
California map. The California State
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
Distinguishing Features
Geography
The proposed Covelo viticultural area
boundary surrounds Round Valley, a
bowl-shaped basin that includes the
town of Covelo. This broad, round, and
flat-floored valley differs from the long,
narrow valleys commonly found in
mountainous areas of Mendocino
County. The proposed boundary area
also includes the smaller Williams
Valley, located to Round Valley’s
northeast, and the hillsides that
surround the two valleys. The USGS
maps note that Round Valley’s floor
varies from 1,310 feet in elevation in the
southeast to 1,480 feet in elevation in
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8203
the northwest, while the surrounding
hillsides within the proposed
boundaries are less than 2,800 feet high.
The elevations of the proposed area
vary between 1,310 feet and
approximately 2,800 feet, contrasting
with the 4,000-foot to 7,000-foot
mountain elevations around the Covelo
area. These higher mountains
geographically and climatically isolate
the proposed Covelo viticultural area
from surrounding regions.
Climate
The mountains surrounding Round
Valley, together with the Coast Range to
the valley’s west, block the inland flow
of climate-moderating Pacific marine air
into the proposed Covelo viticultural
area. Given this geographic isolation,
the proposed Covelo viticultural area
has a continental climate, which has
greater temperature swings and a shorter
growing season than the marineinfluenced climate commonly found in
the surrounding regions of Mendocino
County.
The short growing season may be the
most distinguishing characteristic of the
proposed Covelo viticultural area. The
frost-free growing season is commonly
125 days, or about 4 months long.
Covelo’s average growing season
minimum temperature is also
significantly lower than that of the
Potter Valley viticultural area (27 CFR
9.82), which is about 33 miles south of
Covelo.
The proposed Covelo viticultural area,
with its annual 3,000 degree-days,
marginally falls into Region 3, of
Winkler’s climate classification system.
(Each degree of a day’s mean
temperature that is above 50 degrees F,
which is the minimum temperature
required for grapevine growth, is
counted as one degree-day; see ‘‘General
Viticulture,’’ Albert J. Winkler,
University of California Press, 1975).
The table below shows a comparison of
degree-days for grape-growing regions
near the proposed Covelo viticultural
area.
Mendocino grape-growing
regions
Covelo ...................................
Hopland ................................
Potter Valley viticultural area
(27 CFR 9.82) ...................
Redwood Valley viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.153) .........
Ukiah .....................................
Willits ....................................
Summation of
growing season degreeday units
3,000
3,313
3,341
2,914
3,460
2,224
The proposed Covelo viticultural area
summer temperatures have greater day-
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
8204
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
to-night variations (between 40 and 66
degrees in the valley) than the areas
surrounding it. Also, in October (the
final month of the summer growing
season) the valley has 90 fewer degreeday units of heat than other Region 3
viticultural areas in the Mendocino
region.
The Covelo area receives an average of
40 inches of rain a year, which is the
highest average of any valley in
northern Mendocino County. Annual
rainfall varies widely in the Covelo area.
In 1998, the area received 65 inches of
rain, while in 2000 it received 36
inches, according to the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s Climatological Data
Annual Summary reports of California
for 1997 through 2001. In addition, the
Covelo valley basin receives about 7
inches of snow annually, with higher
amounts falling on the surrounding
hillsides.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Geology and Soils
The proposed Covelo viticultural area
is composed of alluvial plains, alluvial
fans, and a valley basin, which are
geologically younger than the
surrounding higher elevations. While
the alluvial deposits on the valley floor
share the mineralogy of the Franciscan
rocks of the surrounding hills, the soils
differ distinctly from the foothill soils
surrounding the valley.
Feliz-Russian-Cole soils cover about
50 percent of the proposed Covelo
viticultural area. These soils, which are
found in the Round Valley basin, have
neutral-to-alkaline soil pH chemistry, in
contrast with the acidity found in the
hillside soils.
The Sanhedren-Speaker-Kekawaka
association, which is a deep to very
deep, well-drained loam and gravelly
loam, predominates in the northern,
eastern, and western foothills
surrounding Round Valley. In the
southern foothills, the DingmanBeaughton-Henneke association (a welldrained, gravelly loam and cobbly clay
loam) and the Hopland-YorktreeWitherell association (a well-drained
loam and sandy loam) predominate.
The soils of the Franciscan Formation,
a blue schist and semi-schist of
Franciscan Complex, cover the
mountainous terrain above proposed
Covelo viticultural area boundary line.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
TTB published a notice of proposed
rulemaking regarding the establishment
of the Covelo viticultural area in the
Federal Register as Notice No. 32 on
February 2, 2005 (70 FR 5393). In that
notice, TTB requested comments by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
April 4, 2005, from all interested
persons. TTB received six comments in
response to the notice with three
supporting and three opposing the
Covelo petition.
The three supporting comments
focused on Covelo’s unique climate,
grape-growing conditions, and the lack
of summer fog. A commenting winery
owner agrees that Covelo should be
recognized as a unique grape-growing
region and that consumers should have
a choice between Mendocino County
and Covelo wines. The opposing issues
are discussed below.
One opposing commenter suggested a
public hearing, stating concerns about
the impact on farms and the
introduction or encouragement of
significant viticulture activity in the
proposed area. A second commenter
questioned the ability of the Covelo area
to support commercial viticulture due to
the area’s early and late frost-prone
climate, poor hillside soils, Round
Valley’s high water table, and its
isolation from markets.
A third commenter opposed the
establishment of the Covelo viticultural
area due to his concern over the
possible negative effects of viticulture
on the Round Valley Indian Tribes.
Noting Round Valley’s name, this
commenter also expressed opposition to
the ‘‘Covelo’’ name, and, while
acknowledging that grapes can grow in
the area, expressed doubt that
commercial viticulture in the area
would be economically feasible. In
addition, this commenter also requested
a 90-day extension of the comment
period, but did not explain why this
extension was required.
Holding a hearing during the
rulemaking rarely takes place unless
specifically required by a statute.
Hearings to establish a viticultural area
are not required under the FAA Act.
TTB has consistently used the informal
rulemaking process, such as it is doing
in this matter, when considering
establishing a viticultural area. In
addition, both supportive and contrary
comments have been substantive and
thoughtful, and holding a public hearing
would provide little, if any, additional
value in the petitioning process. Also,
based on a lack of compelling
justification, TTB did not grant the
request for an extension of the comment
period for Notice No. 32.
In response to the opposition
comments, the petitioner provided
additional information and comments in
a rebuttal. In response to comments
questioning the legitimacy of the
proposed viticultural area’s name, the
petitioner notes that he did consider the
‘‘Round Valley’’ name, among others,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
but found that the name is used for
many other places in the United States.
Thus, the petitioner notes, ‘‘Round
Valley’’ would not be an appropriate
geographical name for this viticultural
area. TTB agrees and notes that a search
of the United States Geological Survey’s
Geographic Names Information System
shows ‘‘Round Valley’’ is the name of 95
geographical places in 9 states,
including places in 13 different
California counties. On the other hand,
according to the geographic names
system, the name ‘‘Covelo’’ is associated
only with the town of Covelo and the
nearby ranger station. In light of the
evidence presented, we believe the
Covelo name is appropriate for the
proposed viticultural area.
In response to commenters who
question the ability of the proposed
Covelo area to support commercial
viticulture due to its climate, poor soil,
high water table, and isolation, the
petitioner notes that one commercial
winery is currently using Covelo grapes
in its production, and that several
Covelo area vineyards produce wine
and table grapes for non-commercial
use. In addition, while the petitioner
acknowledges that the proposed area
has a short growing season climate, he
quotes an Oregon wine industry
member who notes, ‘‘The pinnacle of
wine quality always comes from grapes
grown in marginal climates.’’ The
petitioner also notes that other
Mendocino County viticultural areas,
such as Anderson Valley (27 CFR 9.86),
Potter Valley (27 CFR 9.82), and
Redwood Valley (27 CFR 9.153), have
short growing seasons similar to Covelo,
and that select varietals, including pinot
noir and chardonnay, do well in shorter
growing seasons.
The petitioner notes some growers
prefer the thinner soils and increased
drainage of hillside locations, which
naturally devigor the vine and improve
the quality while decreasing labor
intensity. As for the high water table
found on the valley floor, the petitioner
states that the water table is lower
during the growing season, and states
that successful vineyards result from the
selection of proper varietals and
rootstock, as well as proper irrigation
management.
As for the proposed area’s isolation
from the market, the petitioner states
that the distance from the proposed
Covelo viticultural area to some of the
grape-buying wineries of Mendocino
County is not excessive. The Covelo
area, the petitioner states, is within an
hour’s driving time of the wineries in
Potter Valley, Redwood Valley, and
Ukiah, and that the Vin De Tevis winery
is only 12 miles from Covelo.
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TTB agrees that while the proposed
Covelo viticultural area has a number of
potentially stressful growing conditions,
many winemakers prefer grapes grown
in more stressful conditions. The
success of commercial viticulture with
the proposed area will be determined by
climatic and market conditions and by
the efforts of vineyard proprietors, not
by the designation or non-designation of
Covelo as an American viticultural area.
In response to the concern over the
impact of viticulture on Round Valley’s
Native American residents, the
petitioner states that vineyard
operations will offer employment
opportunities to the area’s residents,
including Native Americans, who often
must leave the region to find work.
Although this information is
noteworthy, it has no bearing on
whether a viticultural area should be
established. In addition, TTB notes that
the viticultural area’s designation does
not impose any requirements on the
Round Valley tribes, and the tribes are
under no obligation to lease or sell any
land for vineyard development. Retail
alcohol sales within the Round Valley
reservation and within the Covelo
region remain under the control of their
respective local officials and voters.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary
description of the viticultural area in the
regulatory text published at the end of
this notice.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required
maps, and we list them below in the
regulatory text.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
TTB Finding
After careful review of the petition,
TTB finds that the evidence submitted
supports the establishment of the
proposed viticultural area. Therefore,
under the authority of the Federal
Alcohol Administration Act and part 4
of our regulations, we establish the
‘‘Covelo’’ viticultural area in Mendocino
County, California, effective 30 days
from this document’s publication date.
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. With the
establishment of this viticultural area
and its inclusion in part 9 of the TTB
regulations, its name, ‘‘Covelo,’’ is
recognized as a name of viticultural
significance. Consequently, wine
bottlers using ‘‘Covelo’’ in a brand
name, including a trademark, or in
another label reference as to the origin
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
of the wine, must ensure that the
product is eligible to use the 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.
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.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this regulation will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This regulation imposes no new
reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit
derived from the use of a viticultural
area name is 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 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
Rulings Division drafted this document.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, we amend 27 CFR, chapter 1,
part 9 as follows:
I
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8205
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
2. Amend subpart C by adding § 9.187
to read as follows:
I
§ 9.187
Covelo.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is
‘‘Covelo’’. For purposes of part 4 of this
chapter, ‘‘Covelo’’ is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved Maps. The appropriate
maps for determining the boundaries of
the Covelo viticultural area are four
United States Geological Survey
1:24,000 scale topographic maps. They
are titled:
(1) Dos Rios, California Quadrangle,—
Mendocino Co., 7.5 Minute Series,
edition of 1967, revised 1994;
(2) Covelo West, California
Quadrangle,—Mendocino Co., 7.5
Minute Series, edition of 1967,
photoinspected 1973;
(3) Covelo East, California
Quadrangle,—Mendocino Co., 7.5
Minute Series, edition of 1967, revised
1994; and
(4) Jamison Ridge, California
Quadrangle,—Mendocino Co., 7.5
Minute Series, edition of 1967, revised
1994.
(c) Boundary. The Covelo viticultural
area surrounds the town of Covelo in
northern Mendocino County, California.
The area’s boundaries are defined as
follows—
(1) Beginning on the Dos Rios map at
the intersection of State Highway 162
and the southern boundary of section
25, T22N, R13W (labeled Inspiration
Point on the map), proceed west 0.3
miles on Highway 162 to BM 2006 in
section 36, T22N, R13W; then
(2) Proceed straight west-northwest
1.5 miles to the 2,537-foot elevation
point in the northwest quadrant of
section 26, T22N, R13W, Dos Rios map;
then
(3) Proceed straight northwest 1.6
miles to the 2,488-foot peak in the
northwest quadrant of section 22, T22N,
R13W, Covelo West map; then
(4) Proceed straight north-northwest
0.75 miles to the 2,262-foot peak on the
section 15 and 16 boundary line, T22N,
R13W, and continue straight north 1.6
miles to the 2,247-foot peak on the
section 3 and 4 boundary line, T22N,
R13W, Covelo West map; then
(5) Proceed straight northerly 1 mile
to the 1,974-foot peak on the T22N/
T23N boundary line, and continue
straight north 1.6 miles to the 2,290-foot
peak in the northwest quadrant of
section 27, T23N, R13W, Covelo West
map; then
(6) Proceed straight northeast 1.2
miles to the 2,397-foot peak in the
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
8206
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
northeast quadrant of section 22, and
continue straight northeast 1.5 miles to
BM 2210 in the northeast quadrant of
section 14, T23N, R13W, Covelo West
map; then
(7) Proceed straight east-southeast
1.75 miles to the 2,792-foot peak in the
southwest quadrant of section 18, T23,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(8) Proceed straight northnortheasterly 0.9 mile to the 2,430-foot
elevation point in the southeast
quadrant of section 7, T23N, R12W,
Covelo East map; then
(9) Proceed straight east-northeast 1.6
miles to the peak of Coyote Rock in
section 9, T23N, R12W, Covelo East
map; then
(10) Proceed straight east-southeast
1.55 miles to the 2,435-foot elevation
point in the northern half of section 15,
and continue straight southeast 2.3
miles to the 2,066-foot peak in the
southwest quadrant of section 24, T23N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(11) Proceed straight south-southwest
0.6 mile to the 2,024-foot peak near the
section 26 eastern boundary line, T23N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(12) Proceed straight west-southwest
1.9 miles to the 2,183-foot peak in the
northwest quadrant of section 34, T23N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(13) Proceed straight south-southeast
1.2 miles to the 1,953-foot peak in the
northeast quadrant of section 3, T22N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(14) Proceed straight southerly 0.9
mile to the 2,012-foot peak in the
northeast quadrant of section 10, T22N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(15) Proceed straight south-southeast
1.4 miles along Dingman Ridge to the
2,228-foot peak along the section 14 and
15 boundary line, T22N, R12W, Covelo
East map; then
(16) Proceed straight southeast 0.95
mile to the 2,398-foot peak in the
northeast quadrant of section 23, T22N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(17) Proceed straight south-southeast
1.75 miles to the 2,474-foot elevation
point along the section 25 and 26
boundary line, T22N, R12W, Jamison
Ridge map; then
(18) Proceed straight west-southwest
0.9 mile to BM 2217 in the southwest
quadrant of section 26, and continue
straight westerly 1.5 miles to the 2,230foot peak northwest of Iron Spring, in
the southeast quadrant of section 28,
T22N, R12W, Jamison Ridge map; then
(19) Proceed straight southwest 0.65
mile to the 2,022-foot peak very near an
unimproved road in section 33, T22N,
R12W, Jamison Ridge map; then
(20) Proceed straight west-northwest
1.5 miles to the 1,762-foot peak in the
northeast quadrant of section 31, T22N,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
R12W, Jamison Ridge map, and
continue in the same line of direction
1.1 miles to the beginning point at the
intersection of State Highway 162 and
the southern boundary of section 25,
T22N, R13W (labeled Inspiration Point),
on the Dos Rios map.
Signed: December 15, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: January 19, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 06–1457 Filed 2–15–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[T.D. TTB–43; Re: Notice No. 47]
RIN: 1513–AA77
Establishment of the Rattlesnake Hills
Viticultural Area (2004R–678P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This Treasury decision
establishes the Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area in Yakima County in
south-central Washington State. The
68,500-acre area is entirely within the
established Yakima Valley and
Columbia Valley viticultural areas. 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.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
March 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
N. A. Sutton, Regulations and Rulings
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., No.
158, Petaluma, California 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 such
labels. The FAA Act also authorizes the
Secretary of the Treasury to issue
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
geographical 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.
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.
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8202-8206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1457]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[T.D. TTB-42; Re: Notice No. 32]
RIN 1513-AA90
Establishment of the Covelo Viticultural Area (2003R-412P)
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Treasury decision establishes the 38,000-acre ``Covelo''
viticultural area in northern Mendocino County, California, about 150
miles north of San Francisco. 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.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Sutton, Regulations and Rulings
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St.,
No. 158, Petaluma, California 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 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.
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. 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
[[Page 8203]]
proposed viticultural area as the petition specifies;
Evidence relating to the geographical features, such as
climate, soils, elevation, and physical features, 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.
Covelo Petition and Rulemaking
General Background
Mr. Ralph Carter of Sonoma, California, submitted a petition to
establish the ``Covelo'' viticultural area in northern Mendocino
County, California. The Covelo area is about 150 miles north of San
Francisco and 45 miles north of Ukiah. The proposed Covelo viticultural
area boundary line encompasses Round Valley, Williams Valley, and the
surrounding foothills. The small, rural town of Covelo lies within
Round Valley, and a portion of the Round Valley Indian Reservation
overlaps with the northern end of the proposed Covelo viticultural
area.
This 38,000-acre proposed viticultural area has 2 acres of planted
grape vines, with the potential for more vineyard development in the
valley and on the surrounding hillsides. The petition did not document
a history of grape growing in the Covelo area.
The bowl-shaped basin of Round Valley, which lies within the
proposed Covelo viticultural area, is distinctly different from the
long, narrow valleys more commonly found in Mendocino County. In
addition, the soils in the Covelo area are, for the most part, very
deep, nearly level loam, which differ significantly from the soils in
the surrounding areas. The proposed Covelo viticultural area has a
shorter growing season when compared with other Mendocino County
viticultural areas and comparatively high annual rain levels with some
snow.
Below, we summarize the evidence presented in the petition and the
comments received in response to the notice for public comment.
Name Evidence
Covelo is the name of a small, rural town within Round Valley in
Mendocino County, California. The town appears on the USGS quadrangle
maps of Covelo East and Covelo West, and on the 2002 Rand McNally
California map. The California State Automobile Association Mendocino
and Sonoma Coast map identifies Covelo as a rural township in northwest
California. The 1988 DeLorme Northern California map displays the town
of Covelo and ``Covelo Road'' (State Highway 162), which runs through
the proposed viticultural area.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration California
Climatological Data report of October 1999 includes temperature data
for the Covelo weather station. The Covelo East USGS quadrangle map
shows that the Covelo Ranger Station is situated about a mile north of
the town.
Boundary Evidence
Distinctive elements of the proposed Covelo viticultural area
include its geography, climate, and growing season. The Covelo area's
geography, as noted on USGS maps, is largely a round, flat valley
isolated from surrounding regions by a ring of foothills and mountains.
The boundary line includes the foothills immediately adjacent to the
valley floor because of the hillsides' viticultural potential, but
excludes the higher and steeper mountainous terrain, which is less
suitable for commercial viticulture.
The proposed Covelo area's microclimate is distinct from
surrounding areas due to its geographic self-containment and inland
location. The area's climate has significant day and night temperature
differences, and a short grape-growing season. This isolated valley
microclimate differs from the marine-influenced climates found in most
of the surrounding regions of Mendocino County.
The boundary line of the proposed Covelo viticultural area connects
a series of peaks and benchmarks in the hills surrounding the Round and
Williams Valleys. These elevation points vary from a low of 1,762 feet
on the southern boundary to a high of 2,792 feet on its northern
boundary.
Distinguishing Features
Geography
The proposed Covelo viticultural area boundary surrounds Round
Valley, a bowl-shaped basin that includes the town of Covelo. This
broad, round, and flat-floored valley differs from the long, narrow
valleys commonly found in mountainous areas of Mendocino County. The
proposed boundary area also includes the smaller Williams Valley,
located to Round Valley's northeast, and the hillsides that surround
the two valleys. The USGS maps note that Round Valley's floor varies
from 1,310 feet in elevation in the southeast to 1,480 feet in
elevation in the northwest, while the surrounding hillsides within the
proposed boundaries are less than 2,800 feet high.
The elevations of the proposed area vary between 1,310 feet and
approximately 2,800 feet, contrasting with the 4,000-foot to 7,000-foot
mountain elevations around the Covelo area. These higher mountains
geographically and climatically isolate the proposed Covelo
viticultural area from surrounding regions.
Climate
The mountains surrounding Round Valley, together with the Coast
Range to the valley's west, block the inland flow of climate-moderating
Pacific marine air into the proposed Covelo viticultural area. Given
this geographic isolation, the proposed Covelo viticultural area has a
continental climate, which has greater temperature swings and a shorter
growing season than the marine-influenced climate commonly found in the
surrounding regions of Mendocino County.
The short growing season may be the most distinguishing
characteristic of the proposed Covelo viticultural area. The frost-free
growing season is commonly 125 days, or about 4 months long. Covelo's
average growing season minimum temperature is also significantly lower
than that of the Potter Valley viticultural area (27 CFR 9.82), which
is about 33 miles south of Covelo.
The proposed Covelo viticultural area, with its annual 3,000
degree-days, marginally falls into Region 3, of Winkler's climate
classification system. (Each degree of a day's mean temperature that is
above 50 degrees F, which is the minimum temperature required for
grapevine growth, is counted as one degree-day; see ``General
Viticulture,'' Albert J. Winkler, University of California Press,
1975). The table below shows a comparison of degree-days for grape-
growing regions near the proposed Covelo viticultural area.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summation of
growing season
Mendocino grape-growing regions degree-day
units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Covelo.................................................. 3,000
Hopland................................................. 3,313
Potter Valley viticultural area (27 CFR 9.82)........... 3,341
Redwood Valley viticultural area (27 CFR 9.153)......... 2,914
Ukiah................................................... 3,460
Willits................................................. 2,224
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed Covelo viticultural area summer temperatures have
greater day-
[[Page 8204]]
to-night variations (between 40 and 66 degrees in the valley) than the
areas surrounding it. Also, in October (the final month of the summer
growing season) the valley has 90 fewer degree-day units of heat than
other Region 3 viticultural areas in the Mendocino region.
The Covelo area receives an average of 40 inches of rain a year,
which is the highest average of any valley in northern Mendocino
County. Annual rainfall varies widely in the Covelo area. In 1998, the
area received 65 inches of rain, while in 2000 it received 36 inches,
according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
Climatological Data Annual Summary reports of California for 1997
through 2001. In addition, the Covelo valley basin receives about 7
inches of snow annually, with higher amounts falling on the surrounding
hillsides.
Geology and Soils
The proposed Covelo viticultural area is composed of alluvial
plains, alluvial fans, and a valley basin, which are geologically
younger than the surrounding higher elevations. While the alluvial
deposits on the valley floor share the mineralogy of the Franciscan
rocks of the surrounding hills, the soils differ distinctly from the
foothill soils surrounding the valley.
Feliz-Russian-Cole soils cover about 50 percent of the proposed
Covelo viticultural area. These soils, which are found in the Round
Valley basin, have neutral-to-alkaline soil pH chemistry, in contrast
with the acidity found in the hillside soils.
The Sanhedren-Speaker-Kekawaka association, which is a deep to very
deep, well-drained loam and gravelly loam, predominates in the
northern, eastern, and western foothills surrounding Round Valley. In
the southern foothills, the Dingman-Beaughton-Henneke association (a
well-drained, gravelly loam and cobbly clay loam) and the Hopland-
Yorktree-Witherell association (a well-drained loam and sandy loam)
predominate.
The soils of the Franciscan Formation, a blue schist and semi-
schist of Franciscan Complex, cover the mountainous terrain above
proposed Covelo viticultural area boundary line.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the
establishment of the Covelo viticultural area in the Federal Register
as Notice No. 32 on February 2, 2005 (70 FR 5393). In that notice, TTB
requested comments by April 4, 2005, from all interested persons. TTB
received six comments in response to the notice with three supporting
and three opposing the Covelo petition.
The three supporting comments focused on Covelo's unique climate,
grape-growing conditions, and the lack of summer fog. A commenting
winery owner agrees that Covelo should be recognized as a unique grape-
growing region and that consumers should have a choice between
Mendocino County and Covelo wines. The opposing issues are discussed
below.
One opposing commenter suggested a public hearing, stating concerns
about the impact on farms and the introduction or encouragement of
significant viticulture activity in the proposed area. A second
commenter questioned the ability of the Covelo area to support
commercial viticulture due to the area's early and late frost-prone
climate, poor hillside soils, Round Valley's high water table, and its
isolation from markets.
A third commenter opposed the establishment of the Covelo
viticultural area due to his concern over the possible negative effects
of viticulture on the Round Valley Indian Tribes. Noting Round Valley's
name, this commenter also expressed opposition to the ``Covelo'' name,
and, while acknowledging that grapes can grow in the area, expressed
doubt that commercial viticulture in the area would be economically
feasible. In addition, this commenter also requested a 90-day extension
of the comment period, but did not explain why this extension was
required.
Holding a hearing during the rulemaking rarely takes place unless
specifically required by a statute. Hearings to establish a
viticultural area are not required under the FAA Act. TTB has
consistently used the informal rulemaking process, such as it is doing
in this matter, when considering establishing a viticultural area. In
addition, both supportive and contrary comments have been substantive
and thoughtful, and holding a public hearing would provide little, if
any, additional value in the petitioning process. Also, based on a lack
of compelling justification, TTB did not grant the request for an
extension of the comment period for Notice No. 32.
In response to the opposition comments, the petitioner provided
additional information and comments in a rebuttal. In response to
comments questioning the legitimacy of the proposed viticultural area's
name, the petitioner notes that he did consider the ``Round Valley''
name, among others, but found that the name is used for many other
places in the United States. Thus, the petitioner notes, ``Round
Valley'' would not be an appropriate geographical name for this
viticultural area. TTB agrees and notes that a search of the United
States Geological Survey's Geographic Names Information System shows
``Round Valley'' is the name of 95 geographical places in 9 states,
including places in 13 different California counties. On the other
hand, according to the geographic names system, the name ``Covelo'' is
associated only with the town of Covelo and the nearby ranger station.
In light of the evidence presented, we believe the Covelo name is
appropriate for the proposed viticultural area.
In response to commenters who question the ability of the proposed
Covelo area to support commercial viticulture due to its climate, poor
soil, high water table, and isolation, the petitioner notes that one
commercial winery is currently using Covelo grapes in its production,
and that several Covelo area vineyards produce wine and table grapes
for non-commercial use. In addition, while the petitioner acknowledges
that the proposed area has a short growing season climate, he quotes an
Oregon wine industry member who notes, ``The pinnacle of wine quality
always comes from grapes grown in marginal climates.'' The petitioner
also notes that other Mendocino County viticultural areas, such as
Anderson Valley (27 CFR 9.86), Potter Valley (27 CFR 9.82), and Redwood
Valley (27 CFR 9.153), have short growing seasons similar to Covelo,
and that select varietals, including pinot noir and chardonnay, do well
in shorter growing seasons.
The petitioner notes some growers prefer the thinner soils and
increased drainage of hillside locations, which naturally devigor the
vine and improve the quality while decreasing labor intensity. As for
the high water table found on the valley floor, the petitioner states
that the water table is lower during the growing season, and states
that successful vineyards result from the selection of proper varietals
and rootstock, as well as proper irrigation management.
As for the proposed area's isolation from the market, the
petitioner states that the distance from the proposed Covelo
viticultural area to some of the grape-buying wineries of Mendocino
County is not excessive. The Covelo area, the petitioner states, is
within an hour's driving time of the wineries in Potter Valley, Redwood
Valley, and Ukiah, and that the Vin De Tevis winery is only 12 miles
from Covelo.
[[Page 8205]]
TTB agrees that while the proposed Covelo viticultural area has a
number of potentially stressful growing conditions, many winemakers
prefer grapes grown in more stressful conditions. The success of
commercial viticulture with the proposed area will be determined by
climatic and market conditions and by the efforts of vineyard
proprietors, not by the designation or non-designation of Covelo as an
American viticultural area.
In response to the concern over the impact of viticulture on Round
Valley's Native American residents, the petitioner states that vineyard
operations will offer employment opportunities to the area's residents,
including Native Americans, who often must leave the region to find
work. Although this information is noteworthy, it has no bearing on
whether a viticultural area should be established. In addition, TTB
notes that the viticultural area's designation does not impose any
requirements on the Round Valley tribes, and the tribes are under no
obligation to lease or sell any land for vineyard development. Retail
alcohol sales within the Round Valley reservation and within the Covelo
region remain under the control of their respective local officials and
voters.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary description of the viticultural area in
the regulatory text published at the end of this notice.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and we list them below
in the regulatory text.
TTB Finding
After careful review of the petition, TTB finds that the evidence
submitted supports the establishment of the proposed viticultural area.
Therefore, under the authority of the Federal Alcohol Administration
Act and part 4 of our regulations, we establish the ``Covelo''
viticultural area in Mendocino County, California, effective 30 days
from this document's publication date.
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. With the establishment of this viticultural area and
its inclusion in part 9 of the TTB regulations, its name, ``Covelo,''
is recognized as a name of viticultural significance. Consequently,
wine bottlers using ``Covelo'' in a brand name, including a trademark,
or in another label reference as to the origin of the wine, must ensure
that the product is eligible to use the 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.
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.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
regulation imposes no new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit derived from the use of a
viticultural area name is 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 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 Rulings Division drafted this
document.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we amend 27 CFR, chapter 1,
part 9 as follows:
PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas
0
2. Amend subpart C by adding Sec. 9.187 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.187 Covelo.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Covelo''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``Covelo'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved Maps. The appropriate maps for determining the
boundaries of the Covelo viticultural area are four United States
Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. They are titled:
(1) Dos Rios, California Quadrangle,--Mendocino Co., 7.5 Minute
Series, edition of 1967, revised 1994;
(2) Covelo West, California Quadrangle,--Mendocino Co., 7.5 Minute
Series, edition of 1967, photoinspected 1973;
(3) Covelo East, California Quadrangle,--Mendocino Co., 7.5 Minute
Series, edition of 1967, revised 1994; and
(4) Jamison Ridge, California Quadrangle,--Mendocino Co., 7.5
Minute Series, edition of 1967, revised 1994.
(c) Boundary. The Covelo viticultural area surrounds the town of
Covelo in northern Mendocino County, California. The area's boundaries
are defined as follows--
(1) Beginning on the Dos Rios map at the intersection of State
Highway 162 and the southern boundary of section 25, T22N, R13W
(labeled Inspiration Point on the map), proceed west 0.3 miles on
Highway 162 to BM 2006 in section 36, T22N, R13W; then
(2) Proceed straight west-northwest 1.5 miles to the 2,537-foot
elevation point in the northwest quadrant of section 26, T22N, R13W,
Dos Rios map; then
(3) Proceed straight northwest 1.6 miles to the 2,488-foot peak in
the northwest quadrant of section 22, T22N, R13W, Covelo West map; then
(4) Proceed straight north-northwest 0.75 miles to the 2,262-foot
peak on the section 15 and 16 boundary line, T22N, R13W, and continue
straight north 1.6 miles to the 2,247-foot peak on the section 3 and 4
boundary line, T22N, R13W, Covelo West map; then
(5) Proceed straight northerly 1 mile to the 1,974-foot peak on the
T22N/T23N boundary line, and continue straight north 1.6 miles to the
2,290-foot peak in the northwest quadrant of section 27, T23N, R13W,
Covelo West map; then
(6) Proceed straight northeast 1.2 miles to the 2,397-foot peak in
the
[[Page 8206]]
northeast quadrant of section 22, and continue straight northeast 1.5
miles to BM 2210 in the northeast quadrant of section 14, T23N, R13W,
Covelo West map; then
(7) Proceed straight east-southeast 1.75 miles to the 2,792-foot
peak in the southwest quadrant of section 18, T23, R12W, Covelo East
map; then
(8) Proceed straight north-northeasterly 0.9 mile to the 2,430-foot
elevation point in the southeast quadrant of section 7, T23N, R12W,
Covelo East map; then
(9) Proceed straight east-northeast 1.6 miles to the peak of Coyote
Rock in section 9, T23N, R12W, Covelo East map; then
(10) Proceed straight east-southeast 1.55 miles to the 2,435-foot
elevation point in the northern half of section 15, and continue
straight southeast 2.3 miles to the 2,066-foot peak in the southwest
quadrant of section 24, T23N, R12W, Covelo East map; then
(11) Proceed straight south-southwest 0.6 mile to the 2,024-foot
peak near the section 26 eastern boundary line, T23N, R12W, Covelo East
map; then
(12) Proceed straight west-southwest 1.9 miles to the 2,183-foot
peak in the northwest quadrant of section 34, T23N, R12W, Covelo East
map; then
(13) Proceed straight south-southeast 1.2 miles to the 1,953-foot
peak in the northeast quadrant of section 3, T22N, R12W, Covelo East
map; then
(14) Proceed straight southerly 0.9 mile to the 2,012-foot peak in
the northeast quadrant of section 10, T22N, R12W, Covelo East map; then
(15) Proceed straight south-southeast 1.4 miles along Dingman Ridge
to the 2,228-foot peak along the section 14 and 15 boundary line, T22N,
R12W, Covelo East map; then
(16) Proceed straight southeast 0.95 mile to the 2,398-foot peak in
the northeast quadrant of section 23, T22N, R12W, Covelo East map; then
(17) Proceed straight south-southeast 1.75 miles to the 2,474-foot
elevation point along the section 25 and 26 boundary line, T22N, R12W,
Jamison Ridge map; then
(18) Proceed straight west-southwest 0.9 mile to BM 2217 in the
southwest quadrant of section 26, and continue straight westerly 1.5
miles to the 2,230-foot peak northwest of Iron Spring, in the southeast
quadrant of section 28, T22N, R12W, Jamison Ridge map; then
(19) Proceed straight southwest 0.65 mile to the 2,022-foot peak
very near an unimproved road in section 33, T22N, R12W, Jamison Ridge
map; then
(20) Proceed straight west-northwest 1.5 miles to the 1,762-foot
peak in the northeast quadrant of section 31, T22N, R12W, Jamison Ridge
map, and continue in the same line of direction 1.1 miles to the
beginning point at the intersection of State Highway 162 and the
southern boundary of section 25, T22N, R13W (labeled Inspiration
Point), on the Dos Rios map.
Signed: December 15, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: January 19, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 06-1457 Filed 2-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
