Establishment of the Rattlesnake Hills Viticultural Area (2004R-678P), 8206-8211 [06-1459]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Rattlesnake Hills Petition and
Rulemaking
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
General Background
Mr. Gail Puryear, a vineyard owner,
along with 10 other vineyard and
winery owners in the Rattlesnake Hills
region, submitted a petition to TTB
proposing the establishment of the
68,500-acre Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area in eastern Yakima
County in south-central Washington
State. The proposed viticultural area is
within the Yakima Valley viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.69), which, in turn, is
within the larger Columbia Valley
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.74). As of
2005, the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area has 1,227 acres of vines
in commercial production.
The proposed viticultural area
encompasses a portion of the
Rattlesnake Hills, an east-west chain of
hills located north of the Yakima River
and south of the Moxee Valley between
the Hanford Reservation in the east and
Union Gap in the west. The
distinguishing features of the proposed
viticultural area include its topography,
climate, and soils. The evidence
submitted in support of the petition is
summarized below.
Name Evidence
The Rattlesnake Hills are well
documented on government and
commercial maps. The current USGS,
1:24,000 scale, topographic maps for
Elephant Mountain, Granger NE,
Granger NW, Toppenish, Wapato, and
Yakima East all identify the Rattlesnake
Hills in Yakima County, Washington.
The American Automobile Association
(AAA) map of Oregon and Washington
State of February 2003 places the
Rattlesnake Hills in south-central
Washington, between the towns of
Yakima and Kennewick. The 1996–1997
Washington State Highways map,
published by the Washington State
Department of Transportation, shows
the Rattlesnake Hills to the east and
west of State Highway 241 and south of
State Highway 24.
The 1910 USGS Zillah map, reprinted
in 1935, identifies the Rattlesnake Hills
along the T12N/T11N township line in
ranges R21E and R22E. While this
historical map shows no settlements
within the Rattlesnake Hills, it places
the towns of Zillah, Granger, and
Sunnyside to the south along or near the
Yakima River.
The Rattlesnake Hills are also
mentioned in various publications. For
example, an article published in the
August 1997 edition of Sunset
magazine, ‘‘Bringing Home the
Harvest—Pacific Northwest,’’ by Jim
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
McCausland, describes a tour of the
Yakima, Washington region, and
includes a description of the Roza Canal
at the base of the orchard- and vineyardcovered Rattlesnake Hills.
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area is an isolated grapegrowing region with boundaries defined
by the area’s distinctive topography,
climate, and soils. The Rattlesnake Hills
name applies to the entire area within
the proposed boundaries, as shown on
the USGS maps.
Nancy B. Hultquist, Ph.D., professor
of Geography and Land Studies at
Central Washington University in
Ellensburg, and John F. Hultquist, Ph.D.,
former Adjunct Assistant Professor of
Geography, Central Washington
University, prepared the boundary
documentation and geographical
evidence for the Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area petition. This
information is described below.
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area, within the larger
Yakima Fold Belt, includes a series of
asymmetrical anticlines separated by
basins. The north boundary line of the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area approximates the range’s east-towest ridgeline, which separates the
range’s gentler-sloping south side from
its steeper north side. The proposed
area’s east boundary line follows the
120° west longitude line and power
lines from the Bonneville Dam. The
south boundary line meanders along the
Sunnyside Canal, which flows southeast
from the Yakima River. The terrain to
the north of the Sunnyside Canal,
within the proposed viticultural area, is
hilly and characterized by ridge spurs.
The west boundary line uses a
combination of the Sunnyside Canal
and Interstate Highway 82, which, in
this region, lie just east of the Yakima
River.
Rising higher than the surrounding
portions of the Yakima Valley region,
elevation is a primary distinguishing
feature of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area. The proposed
boundary line is set at a minimum of
850 feet in elevation, which generally
corresponds to the upslope of the
foothills. With irrigation, viticulture is
considered possible at elevations
between 850 feet and 2,000 feet.
Regional elevations below the 850foot contour line are not conducive to
successful viticulture based on
damaging spring and fall frosts, heavy
winterkill conditions, alkali soils, and
high water tables. Vineyards planted in
the region at elevations below 850 feet
generally have failed after years of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8207
struggle. For example, the Thalheimer
vineyard project, 2 miles south of
Sunnyside Canal and close to the city of
Granger, is below 850 feet in elevation
and lies outside the proposed boundary.
The project lasted 10 years,
experiencing consistent vine damage
from winterkill conditions. Also,
William Pettit planted chardonnay
grapes west of Toppenish on the valley
floor, seven miles south of the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area. The
vineyard suffered annual winterkill
caused by vines reaching down to
perennial water. With only three
successful vintages in six years, Mr.
Pettit removed the vineyard in 1987.
Distinguishing Features
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area’s distinguishing
features include its topography,
moderate microclimate, and soil
characteristics.
Topography
The Rattlesnake Hills rise to 3,000 in
elevation, placing the hills’ ridgeline up
to 2,000 feet above the north flank of the
Yakima River Valley. Running east to
west, the Hills’ ridgeline creates northand south-facing slopes. While the
northern slope falls steeply away from
the ridgeline, the more gently sloping
south side of the Rattlesnake Hills has
dissected canyons, ridges, and terraces
running south to the Yakima River.
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area, with elevations
between 850 feet and 3,085 feet, lies on
the south slope of the Rattlesnake Hills
in Yakima County, and includes a
multitude of landscapes with differing
aspects and hill slope positions. Low
glacial terraces comprise the balance of
the terrain found within the proposed
viticultural area. Vineyards are usually
located on the southern ridges and
terraces in areas with good air drainage,
which lessens the potential for frost
damage and winterkill conditions. As
compared to the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area, the rest of the
established Yakima Valley viticultural
area is lower in elevation, with a flatter,
more open and consistent landscape.
Climate
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area has a more temperate
climate than surrounding regions and is
more protected by its topography from
damaging winter weather. The
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
petition includes data collected from 11
weather stations in south-central
Washington State, operated by
Washington State University (WSU) as
part of the Public Agricultural Weather
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
8208
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
System (PAWS). The Buena station at
900 feet in elevation and the Outlook
station at 1,300 feet in elevation are both
within the proposed viticultural area
boundary. While still in south-central
Washington State, the other nine
stations are beyond the proposed area’s
boundary.
The PAWS weather data provides an
annual total and a 10-year average of the
heat accumulation, as measured in
degree days, for each station. (Each
degree that a day’s mean temperature is
above 50 degrees Fahrenheit, which is
the minimum temperature required for
grapevine growth, is counted as one
degree day. See ‘‘General Viticulture,’’
by Albert J. Winkler, University of
California Press, 1974.) The chart below
shows the 10-year average for the
annual growing degree day total for each
of the PAWS stations.
Degree days,
10-year annual
average
Weather station
Parker .............................................................................................................................................
Wapato ...........................................................................................................................................
Moxee .............................................................................................................................................
Sunnyside .......................................................................................................................................
Port of Sunnyside ...........................................................................................................................
WSU Roza ......................................................................................................................................
WSU HQ .........................................................................................................................................
Benton City .....................................................................................................................................
Badger Canyon ..............................................................................................................................
Buena .............................................................................................................................................
Outlook ...........................................................................................................................................
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
The degree day temperatures within
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area vary significantly from
the surrounding regions, according to
PAWS data. Growing season
temperatures are especially warmer in
the Red Mountain viticultural area (27
CFR 9.167) to the east of the proposed
viticultural area around Badger Canyon
and Benton City. Also, the portion of the
Yakima River Valley located between
the Rattlesnake Hills region and Red
Mountain generally has a cooler
growing season, as documented by the
Port of Sunnyside and WSU Roza
weather stations.
Topography also affects the proposed
area’s climate. To the west, the high
altitude Cascade Range shields eastern
Washington, including the Rattlesnake
Hills region, from much of the Pacific
Ocean’s climatic influence and rainfall.
In addition, while polar air from
Canada, funneled by strong winds into
eastern Washington, can damage or kill
grape vines, the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area is protected from
these freezing winds by the Umptanum
and Yakima Ridges, which lie to the
northeast, and by the main ridgeline of
the Hills themselves. These ridges and
hills divert the damaging winds
eastward toward the Red Mountain and
Walla Walla Valley (27 CFR 9.91)
viticultural areas.
Soil
The soils of the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area differ from soils in
other Washington State viticultural
areas and regions. In the rooting zone,
or the depth of soil penetrated by plant
roots, silt-loam or loam is the
predominant soil type found within the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area. These finer soils textures contrast
to the sandy soils of the nearby Prosser
Flats, Red Mountain, and Horse Heaven
Hills regions, as well as with the silty
soils found in the surrounding Yakima
Valley region.
The formation of the soils in the
Rattlesnake Hills area was influenced by
glacial fluvial (water transported) and
eolian (wind transported) soils. The
topsoil layer is generally formed by
loess and lesser amounts of volcanic
ash. When Mount St. Helens erupted in
1980, the Rattlesnake Hills region
received between one half-inch and one
inch of volcanic ash. Formation
influences on deeper soil layers include
volcanic cobbles and tuffaceous sands
from the Ellensburg Formation. The
Rattlesnake Hills, at or above 1,100 feet
in elevation, perch beyond the influence
of the Missoula Floods. Soils above the
flood line developed on older volcanic
sediments of the Ellensburg Formation.
These soil parent materials weathered in
a climate with dry summers and 6 to 12
inches of annual rainfall.
Common soil characteristics within
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area include a mesic soil
regime. The annual soil temperature is
between 8 degrees and 15 degrees
Celsius (46.4–59 °F). Mean summer soil
temperatures vary between 15 degrees
and 22 degrees Celsius (59–71.6 °F).
Also, the soil pH is consistent, ranging
from neutral at pH 6.6 to mildly alkaline
at pH 8.4.
The primary soils suitable for
viticulture within the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
include the Warden Series silt loams
and a composite of Harwood-Burke-
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3133
2540
2096
2498
2554
2552
2588
3036
3297
2683
2870
Location in relation to
Rattlesnake Hills area
1 mile west.
7 miles west.
2 miles north.
2.5 miles east.
6 miles southeast.
11 miles southeast.
14 miles southeast.
30 miles southeast.
40 miles southeast.
In Rattlesnake Hills.
In Rattlesnake Hills.
Wiehl series silt loams. The Warden
Series soils, which are very deep and
well drained, occupy terraces underlain
by glacial fluvial sediments. The
Harwood-Burke-Wiehl series, a complex
composition of three distinctively
different soils, covers the ridge tops and
side slopes of the range’s steep hills.
This three-soil composition forms from
loess (wind-blown, silt-sized material)
that overlies remnants of the Ellensburg
Formation. The composition is common
within the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area but is seldom found
elsewhere in the Yakima Valley
viticultural area. Also, the soil is
shallow, which is in contrast to the
uniformly deep, silt-loamy and sandy
soils found in the balance of the Yakima
Valley viticultural area.
Other soils in the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
include the Kiona silt loam series in the
northwest corner. Also, along the top of
the Rattlesnake Ridge, the Lickskillet
series of stony silt loam and the
Starbuck series provide a suitable
viticultural environment when
irrigation is available.
The steeper north-facing slopes of the
Rattlesnake Hills, immediately beyond
the proposed viticultural area’s northern
boundary line, are covered with
Lickskillet, a very stony silt loam. The
very stony soils, steep slopes, and lack
of irrigation make this terrain unsuitable
for viticulture. The topography east of
the proposed boundary line is a large
basin with Warden Series silt loams and
some Esquatzel silty loam on two to five
percent slopes.
Along the southern boundary line of
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area, and south beyond
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Sunnyside Canal, is the Yakima River
Valley. The Esquatzel Series of silt
loams dominate this large, flat-bottomed
valley, according to the ‘‘Soil Survey of
Yakima County Area, Washington’’
(Lenfesty and Reedy, 1985). The valley
also has Warden Series soils that are
more geologically eroded and at a lower
elevation than the Warden Series of the
Rattlesnake Hills region to the north.
Past the western border of the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area the hills drop down to the Yakima
River. Immediately west of the river,
and beyond the proposed boundaries,
lies a valley floor with Weirman
Association soils. Continuing westward
from the boundary line, the AshueNaches Association occupies the
bottomland of an older Yakima River
floodplain. Also, as the Yakima River
Valley rises westward to Ahtanum
Ridge, the prevalent Warden Series soil
creates a common link to the
Rattlesnake Hills area. However, the
Warden Series soil in the Rattlesnake
Hills terrain includes the exposure of
the Ellensburg Formation, unlike the
Ahtanum Ridge soil.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
On June 1, 2005, TTB published a
notice of proposed rulemaking regarding
the establishment of the Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area in the Federal
Register (70 FR 31396) as Notice No. 47.
In that notice, TTB requested comments
by August 1, 2005, from all interested
persons. TTB received 28 comments in
response, including 14 in support, 11 in
opposition, and 3 from the petitioner
responding to the concerns of the
opposing comments.
Comments
Name: Public comments confirm the
appropriateness of the ‘‘Rattlesnake
Hills’’ name for the proposed
viticultural area, with 9 vineyard and
winery owners with 15 to 24 years of
viticulture experience in the region
agreeing with the chosen name. Also, a
winery owner holding the Federal
trademark for ‘‘Rattlesnake Ridge’’
wholly supports the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills name and
establishment of the viticultural area.
Boundary: Some comments support
the proposed viticultural area’s
boundaries as appropriate, meaningful,
and discernible. The Hultquists, who
supplied geographic information in the
original petition, comment that while
USGS topographic maps do not show
the boundaries of the region’s climates,
cold damage, or soil types, they do show
nearby roads, power lines, elevation
points, and other labeled landmarks that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:40 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
can be used in defining the boundary
lines of a proposed viticultural area.
The two geographers also note that
while the ‘‘Rattlesnake Hills’’ name also
refers to the hills beyond the proposed
viticulture area to the east, that region
is devoid of vineyards or wineries. The
Hultquists state that the proposed
boundary lines were drawn to surround
only the region’s vineyards and
wineries, which start about 10 miles
south of the range’s north-facing slope at
Sagebrush Ridge, a feature shown on the
USGS Grandview and Sagebrush Ridge
topographical quadrangle maps.
Several vineyard and winery owners
with up to 28 years of viticulture
experience in the region oppose the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area boundaries as arbitrary. These
commenters state that because the
Rattlesnake Hills range stretches beyond
the proposed viticultural area boundary,
the boundary lines should be extended
to include more of the range. One
commenter points to the proposed
eastern boundary line (along the 120°
west longitude line) as particularly
random, and describes the
distinguishing features of the
Rattlesnake Hills range as continuing
east for 27 miles to the Red Mountain
viticultural area. TTB notes, however,
that the commenters do not provide
documentation to support their claims
of arbitrary boundary lines, and fail to
include proposed expanded boundaries
and substantive justification.
In response, the petitioner explains
that the proposed boundary lines were
developed by studying the viticultural
feasibility of the Rattlesnake Hills
region, including its topography,
climate, and soils. The petitioner
concludes that the entire Rattlesnake
Hills landform would make a poor
viticultural area, with three-fourths of
its geographical area unsuitable for
viticulture. The petitioner states that the
northwestern region of the Rattlesnake
Hills range suffers from a lack of water,
a north-facing mountain slope, and a
colder climate. The range’s northeastern
region is on the Hanford Reservation, a
sealed nuclear site that is not conducive
to any type of agricultural use.
Topography: Supporting commenters
confirm that the geographical isolation
and higher elevations of the proposed
viticultural area set the region apart,
even from the topography of other
portions of the Rattlesnake Hills range.
An opposing commenter notes that the
topography of the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area is not as
consistent as described in the petition.
However, this commenter does not
include documentation to support this
claim.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8209
TTB notes that the topography of the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area, as explained in Notice No. 47 and
summarized above, describes numerous
geographical variations. The
topographical description of the
proposed viticultural area includes
references to the proposed area’s ridges,
canyons and terraces, and the petition
states that the area has a ‘‘multitude of
landscapes with differing aspect and
hill slope positions.’’
Climate: Offering anecdotal evidence,
some supporting commenters
emphasize the distinctive milder
climate within the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area, which has more
annual degree days of heat
accumulation and a more frost-free
environment when compared to other
portions of the Yakima Valley
viticultural area.
Several opposing commenters,
however, state that the proposed
viticultural area is not distinctive,
including the amount of heat
accumulated during the growing season
as measured in degree days. One
commenter notes that the petition’s
climatic information lacks specific
vineyard data and relies solely on
PAWS data, while other commenters
note that the winter cold damage
comparison is based on elevation rather
than the proposed boundary lines.
In response, the petitioner states that
the PAWS data collected at various
stations in the region over a 10-year
period is reliable evidence of the
climatic differences between the
proposed viticultural area and the
surrounding regions. Citing PAWS
information, the petitioner states that
east of the Bonneville power lines cold
air flows downward into a large basin at
the bottom of Washout Canyon, and
notes that the Sunnyside weather
station, located within the basin,
records the coldest temperatures of the
11 stations in the region.
The petitioner also explains that frost
occurs two to three weeks earlier in the
large basin area than within the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area. The colder climate steers
agriculture in the basin toward dairy,
corn, alfalfa, and grapes for juice rather
than wine. For example, the southeast
portion of the basin, near Benton City,
is used for dry-land agriculture and is
characterized by wheat fields and
rangelands. The petitioner notes that
this region dips toward the Yakima
River and is exposed to more frost
damage, winterkill, and a higher water
table, which makes the region below
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
8210
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
850 feet in elevation incompatible with
grape growing.
Originally the petitioner considered
extending the proposed viticultural area
to include the Black Canyon region,
located about six miles east of the
proposed boundary line toward Red
Mountain. However, the petitioner cites
a May 2003 freeze at the 1,300-foot
elevation of Vineyard del Sol that froze
vines to the ground. On the same night,
the petitioner states there was no known
frost damage within the proposed
viticultural area boundary, even in
vineyards at 900-foot elevations with no
frost protection. Therefore, the
petitioner contends that although Black
Canyon is part of the Rattlesnake Hills
geographical landform, the area’s
climate is significantly different.
The petitioner claims that the cold air
drainage effect is less harsh within the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area east of the proposed boundary line
at the 120° longitude line. Stating that
more cold air will drain down higher
mountains than lower ones, the
petitioner notes that inside the proposed
eastern boundary the Rattlesnake Hills
average 2,000 feet in elevation while
elevations to the east average 3,000 feet.
The petitioner also states that the cold
air effect causes cold air to accumulate
in a narrow valley and disperse in a
wide valley, and, therefore, the
narrowing of the central Yakima Valley
east of the 120th meridian influences
the movement of cold air in the region.
Soil: Supporting commenters state
that the proposed viticultural area is
distinguished by superior soils with
good drainage compared to surrounding
regions. Other commenters claim,
however, that the soils of the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area are
common in the surrounding Yakima
Valley viticultural area.
The petitioner relies on the expertise
of soil scientist Alan Busacca, PhD, to
provide geological and soil information
for the proposed viticultural area and
the areas outside its proposed
boundaries. After careful review, TTB
believes that the soil facts and data
narrative prepared by Dr. Busacca and
presented in the petition constitute
adequate evidence and documentation
to support the conclusions reached in
the petition.
Economic Impact: Some commenters
favor establishing a distinct viticultural
area to separate the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area from
the larger, surrounding Yakima Valley
area, as well as from the much larger
Columbia Valley viticultural areas. A
commenter states that Washington State
vintners will be able to market wine
products with more accuracy,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
Boundary Description
efficiency, and profitability with
establishment of new viticultural areas.
In addition, a member of the Yakima
County Planning Department believes
that establishment of the Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area will assist Yakima
County in planning for its economic
development.
Several opposing commenters voice
concerns about the detrimental effect of
establishing the Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area within the larger
Yakima Valley viticultural area. One
commenter states that the establishment
of the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
will confuse consumers and undermine
the success of the Yakima Valley
viticultural area, and a second
commenter stated that there are no
significant differences between the two
viticultural areas. TTB notes that neither
commenter included evidence or
documentation to support these claims.
In response, the petitioner states that
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area grape-growing industry
is characterized by small ‘‘artisan estate
wineries,’’ while the Yakima Valley
viticultural area has some larger
commercial vineyard estates.
Overall, TTB notes that, with the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural
area entirely inside the larger Yakima
Valley viticultural area, the two areas do
share some general characteristics.
However, the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area also has separate
and significant distinguishing features,
as noted above in the summary of the
petition evidence. Furthermore, the
possible impact of one viticultural area
on another one is not, standing alone, a
sufficient basis on which to deny a
petition for a new viticultural area.
TTB also notes that the issue of
consumer confusion normally stems
from similarities in the names of
viticultural areas or from the similarity
of a proposed viticultural area name to
a brand name on a wine label. The
names ‘‘Yakima Valley’’ and
‘‘Rattlesnake Hills’’ have no apparent
similarity that would confuse wine
consumers.
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, ‘‘Rattlesnake
Hills,’’ is recognized as a name of
viticultural significance. Consequently,
wine bottlers using ‘‘Rattlesnake Hills’’
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.
TTB Finding
Regulatory Flexibility Act
After careful review of the petition
and the comments received, 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
‘‘Rattlesnake Hills’’ viticultural area in
Yakima County in south-central
Washington State, effective 30-days
from this document’s publication date.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
See the narrative boundary
description of the viticultural area in the
regulatory text published at the end of
this document.
Maps
The maps for determining the
boundary of the viticultural area are
listed below in the regulatory text.
Impact on Current Wine Labels
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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.
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
2. Subpart C is amended by adding
§ 9.193 to read as follows:
I
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with RULES
§ 9.193
Rattlesnake Hills.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is
‘‘Rattlesnake Hills’’. For purposes of
part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘Rattlesnake
Hills’’ is a term of viticultural
significance.
(b) Approved Maps. The appropriate
maps for determining the boundaries of
the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
are eight United States Geological
Survey 1:24,000 scale topographic
maps. They are titled:
(1) Yakima East Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1953,
photorevised 1985;
(2) Elephant Mountain Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1953,
photorevised 1985;
(3) Granger NW Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1965;
(4) Granger NE Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1964;
(5) Sunnyside Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1965,
photorevised 1978;
(6) Granger Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1965;
(7) Toppenish Quadrangle,
Washington—Yakima Co., 1958,
photorevised 1985; and
(8) Wapato Quadrangle, Washington—
Yakima Co., 1958, photorevised 1985.
(c) Boundary. The Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area is located in Yakima
County, Washington. The area’s
boundary is defined as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:31 Feb 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
(1) The beginning point is on the
Yakima East map at the point where a
line drawn straight east from the west
end of the Wapato Dam on the Yakima
River intersects Interstate Highway 82,
section 17, T12N/R19E. This line
coincides with the boundary of the
Yakima Valley viticultural area (27 CFR
9.69). From the beginning point, the
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
boundary line—
(2) Proceeds straight eastward,
crossing onto the Elephant Mountain
map, to the 2,192-foot peak of Elephant
Mountain, section 16, T12N/R20E; then
(3) Continues straight east-southeast,
crossing over the northeast corner of the
Toppenish map, and continuing onto
the Granger NW map, to the 2,186-foot
pinnacle of Zillah Peak, section 32,
T12N/R21E; then
(4) Continues straight eastward,
crossing onto the Granger NE map, to
the 3,021-foot peak of High Top
Mountain, section 32, T12N/R22E; then
(5) Continues straight east-southeast
to the 2,879-foot peak in the northeast
quadrant of section 3, T11N/R22E, and
continues in the same direction in a
straight line until the line intersects
with the 120°00′ west longitude line in
section 1 of T11N/R22E along the east
margin of the Granger NE map; then
(6) Proceeds straight south along the
120°00′ west longitude line to its
intersection with a set of power lines in
section 24, T11N/R22E, on the east
margin of the Granger NE map; then
(7) Follows the power lines
southwest, crossing onto the Sunnyside
map, to their intersection with the
Sunnyside Canal, section 8, T10N/R22E;
then
(8) Follows the meandering
Sunnyside Canal generally northwest,
crossing over the northeast corner of the
Granger map, and continuing over the
Granger NW map, the Toppenish map,
and onto the Wapato map to the canal’s
intersection with Interstate Highway 82,
section 27 west boundary line, T12N/
R19E; then
(9) Follows Interstate Highway 82
northwest for 2.75 miles, crosses onto
the Yakima East map, and returns to the
beginning point.
Signed: December 19, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: January 19, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 06–1459 Filed 2–15–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8211
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 100, 117 and 165
[USCG–2006–23919]
Quarterly Listings; Safety Zones,
Security Zones, Special Local
Regulations and Drawbridge Operation
Regulations
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of temporary rules
AGENCY:
ACTION:
issued.
SUMMARY: This document provides
required notice of substantive rules
issued by the Coast Guard and
temporarily effective between April 1,
2005 and September 30, 2005 that were
not published in the Federal Register.
This quarterly notice lists temporary
local regulations, temporary drawbridge
operation regulations, security zones,
and safety zones, all of limited duration
and for which timely publication in the
Federal Register was not possible.
DATES: This document lists temporary
Coast Guard rules that became effective
and were terminated between April 1,
2005 and September 30, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Management
Facility maintains the public docket for
this notice. Documents indicated in this
notice will be available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Room PL–401, 400
Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC
20593–0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays. You may electronically access
the public docket for this notice on the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on this notice contact Ms.
Lesley Mose, Office of Regulations and
Administrative Law, telephone (202)
267–1477. For questions on viewing, or
on submitting material to the docket,
contact Ms. Angie Ames, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–5115.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coast
Guard District Commanders and
Captains of the Port (COTP) must be
immediately responsive to the safety
and security needs within their
jurisdiction; therefore, District
Commanders and COTPs have been
delegated the authority to issue certain
local regulations. Safety zones may be
established for safety or environmental
purposes. A safety zone may be
stationary and described by fixed limits
or it may be described as a zone around
a vessel in motion. Security zones limit
E:\FR\FM\16FER1.SGM
16FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8206-8211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1459]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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)
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 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 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.
[[Page 8207]]
Rattlesnake Hills Petition and Rulemaking
General Background
Mr. Gail Puryear, a vineyard owner, along with 10 other vineyard
and winery owners in the Rattlesnake Hills region, submitted a petition
to TTB proposing the establishment of the 68,500-acre Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area in eastern Yakima County in south-central Washington
State. The proposed viticultural area is within the Yakima Valley
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.69), which, in turn, is within the larger
Columbia Valley viticultural area (27 CFR 9.74). As of 2005, the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area has 1,227 acres of vines
in commercial production.
The proposed viticultural area encompasses a portion of the
Rattlesnake Hills, an east-west chain of hills located north of the
Yakima River and south of the Moxee Valley between the Hanford
Reservation in the east and Union Gap in the west. The distinguishing
features of the proposed viticultural area include its topography,
climate, and soils. The evidence submitted in support of the petition
is summarized below.
Name Evidence
The Rattlesnake Hills are well documented on government and
commercial maps. The current USGS, 1:24,000 scale, topographic maps for
Elephant Mountain, Granger NE, Granger NW, Toppenish, Wapato, and
Yakima East all identify the Rattlesnake Hills in Yakima County,
Washington. The American Automobile Association (AAA) map of Oregon and
Washington State of February 2003 places the Rattlesnake Hills in
south-central Washington, between the towns of Yakima and Kennewick.
The 1996-1997 Washington State Highways map, published by the
Washington State Department of Transportation, shows the Rattlesnake
Hills to the east and west of State Highway 241 and south of State
Highway 24.
The 1910 USGS Zillah map, reprinted in 1935, identifies the
Rattlesnake Hills along the T12N/T11N township line in ranges R21E and
R22E. While this historical map shows no settlements within the
Rattlesnake Hills, it places the towns of Zillah, Granger, and
Sunnyside to the south along or near the Yakima River.
The Rattlesnake Hills are also mentioned in various publications.
For example, an article published in the August 1997 edition of Sunset
magazine, ``Bringing Home the Harvest--Pacific Northwest,'' by Jim
McCausland, describes a tour of the Yakima, Washington region, and
includes a description of the Roza Canal at the base of the orchard-
and vineyard-covered Rattlesnake Hills.
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area is an isolated
grape-growing region with boundaries defined by the area's distinctive
topography, climate, and soils. The Rattlesnake Hills name applies to
the entire area within the proposed boundaries, as shown on the USGS
maps.
Nancy B. Hultquist, Ph.D., professor of Geography and Land Studies
at Central Washington University in Ellensburg, and John F. Hultquist,
Ph.D., former Adjunct Assistant Professor of Geography, Central
Washington University, prepared the boundary documentation and
geographical evidence for the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
petition. This information is described below.
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area, within the larger
Yakima Fold Belt, includes a series of asymmetrical anticlines
separated by basins. The north boundary line of the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area approximates the range's east-to-
west ridgeline, which separates the range's gentler-sloping south side
from its steeper north side. The proposed area's east boundary line
follows the 120[deg] west longitude line and power lines from the
Bonneville Dam. The south boundary line meanders along the Sunnyside
Canal, which flows southeast from the Yakima River. The terrain to the
north of the Sunnyside Canal, within the proposed viticultural area, is
hilly and characterized by ridge spurs. The west boundary line uses a
combination of the Sunnyside Canal and Interstate Highway 82, which, in
this region, lie just east of the Yakima River.
Rising higher than the surrounding portions of the Yakima Valley
region, elevation is a primary distinguishing feature of the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area. The proposed boundary line is set
at a minimum of 850 feet in elevation, which generally corresponds to
the upslope of the foothills. With irrigation, viticulture is
considered possible at elevations between 850 feet and 2,000 feet.
Regional elevations below the 850-foot contour line are not
conducive to successful viticulture based on damaging spring and fall
frosts, heavy winterkill conditions, alkali soils, and high water
tables. Vineyards planted in the region at elevations below 850 feet
generally have failed after years of struggle. For example, the
Thalheimer vineyard project, 2 miles south of Sunnyside Canal and close
to the city of Granger, is below 850 feet in elevation and lies outside
the proposed boundary. The project lasted 10 years, experiencing
consistent vine damage from winterkill conditions. Also, William Pettit
planted chardonnay grapes west of Toppenish on the valley floor, seven
miles south of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area. The
vineyard suffered annual winterkill caused by vines reaching down to
perennial water. With only three successful vintages in six years, Mr.
Pettit removed the vineyard in 1987.
Distinguishing Features
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area's distinguishing
features include its topography, moderate microclimate, and soil
characteristics.
Topography
The Rattlesnake Hills rise to 3,000 in elevation, placing the
hills' ridgeline up to 2,000 feet above the north flank of the Yakima
River Valley. Running east to west, the Hills' ridgeline creates north-
and south-facing slopes. While the northern slope falls steeply away
from the ridgeline, the more gently sloping south side of the
Rattlesnake Hills has dissected canyons, ridges, and terraces running
south to the Yakima River.
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area, with elevations
between 850 feet and 3,085 feet, lies on the south slope of the
Rattlesnake Hills in Yakima County, and includes a multitude of
landscapes with differing aspects and hill slope positions. Low glacial
terraces comprise the balance of the terrain found within the proposed
viticultural area. Vineyards are usually located on the southern ridges
and terraces in areas with good air drainage, which lessens the
potential for frost damage and winterkill conditions. As compared to
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area, the rest of the
established Yakima Valley viticultural area is lower in elevation, with
a flatter, more open and consistent landscape.
Climate
The proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area has a more
temperate climate than surrounding regions and is more protected by its
topography from damaging winter weather. The Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area petition includes data collected from 11 weather
stations in south-central Washington State, operated by Washington
State University (WSU) as part of the Public Agricultural Weather
[[Page 8208]]
System (PAWS). The Buena station at 900 feet in elevation and the
Outlook station at 1,300 feet in elevation are both within the proposed
viticultural area boundary. While still in south-central Washington
State, the other nine stations are beyond the proposed area's boundary.
The PAWS weather data provides an annual total and a 10-year
average of the heat accumulation, as measured in degree days, for each
station. (Each degree that a day's mean temperature is above 50 degrees
Fahrenheit, which is the minimum temperature required for grapevine
growth, is counted as one degree day. See ``General Viticulture,'' by
Albert J. Winkler, University of California Press, 1974.) The chart
below shows the 10-year average for the annual growing degree day total
for each of the PAWS stations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Degree days,
Weather station 10-year annual Location in relation to Rattlesnake Hills area
average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parker..................................... 3133 1 mile west.
Wapato..................................... 2540 7 miles west.
Moxee...................................... 2096 2 miles north.
Sunnyside.................................. 2498 2.5 miles east.
Port of Sunnyside.......................... 2554 6 miles southeast.
WSU Roza................................... 2552 11 miles southeast.
WSU HQ..................................... 2588 14 miles southeast.
Benton City................................ 3036 30 miles southeast.
Badger Canyon.............................. 3297 40 miles southeast.
Buena...................................... 2683 In Rattlesnake Hills.
Outlook.................................... 2870 In Rattlesnake Hills.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The degree day temperatures within the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area vary significantly from the surrounding regions,
according to PAWS data. Growing season temperatures are especially
warmer in the Red Mountain viticultural area (27 CFR 9.167) to the east
of the proposed viticultural area around Badger Canyon and Benton City.
Also, the portion of the Yakima River Valley located between the
Rattlesnake Hills region and Red Mountain generally has a cooler
growing season, as documented by the Port of Sunnyside and WSU Roza
weather stations.
Topography also affects the proposed area's climate. To the west,
the high altitude Cascade Range shields eastern Washington, including
the Rattlesnake Hills region, from much of the Pacific Ocean's climatic
influence and rainfall. In addition, while polar air from Canada,
funneled by strong winds into eastern Washington, can damage or kill
grape vines, the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area is
protected from these freezing winds by the Umptanum and Yakima Ridges,
which lie to the northeast, and by the main ridgeline of the Hills
themselves. These ridges and hills divert the damaging winds eastward
toward the Red Mountain and Walla Walla Valley (27 CFR 9.91)
viticultural areas.
Soil
The soils of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
differ from soils in other Washington State viticultural areas and
regions. In the rooting zone, or the depth of soil penetrated by plant
roots, silt-loam or loam is the predominant soil type found within the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area. These finer soils
textures contrast to the sandy soils of the nearby Prosser Flats, Red
Mountain, and Horse Heaven Hills regions, as well as with the silty
soils found in the surrounding Yakima Valley region.
The formation of the soils in the Rattlesnake Hills area was
influenced by glacial fluvial (water transported) and eolian (wind
transported) soils. The topsoil layer is generally formed by loess and
lesser amounts of volcanic ash. When Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980,
the Rattlesnake Hills region received between one half-inch and one
inch of volcanic ash. Formation influences on deeper soil layers
include volcanic cobbles and tuffaceous sands from the Ellensburg
Formation. The Rattlesnake Hills, at or above 1,100 feet in elevation,
perch beyond the influence of the Missoula Floods. Soils above the
flood line developed on older volcanic sediments of the Ellensburg
Formation. These soil parent materials weathered in a climate with dry
summers and 6 to 12 inches of annual rainfall.
Common soil characteristics within the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area include a mesic soil regime. The annual soil
temperature is between 8 degrees and 15 degrees Celsius (46.4-59
[deg]F). Mean summer soil temperatures vary between 15 degrees and 22
degrees Celsius (59-71.6 [deg]F). Also, the soil pH is consistent,
ranging from neutral at pH 6.6 to mildly alkaline at pH 8.4.
The primary soils suitable for viticulture within the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area include the Warden Series silt
loams and a composite of Harwood-Burke-Wiehl series silt loams. The
Warden Series soils, which are very deep and well drained, occupy
terraces underlain by glacial fluvial sediments. The Harwood-Burke-
Wiehl series, a complex composition of three distinctively different
soils, covers the ridge tops and side slopes of the range's steep
hills. This three-soil composition forms from loess (wind-blown, silt-
sized material) that overlies remnants of the Ellensburg Formation. The
composition is common within the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area but is seldom found elsewhere in the Yakima Valley
viticultural area. Also, the soil is shallow, which is in contrast to
the uniformly deep, silt-loamy and sandy soils found in the balance of
the Yakima Valley viticultural area.
Other soils in the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
include the Kiona silt loam series in the northwest corner. Also, along
the top of the Rattlesnake Ridge, the Lickskillet series of stony silt
loam and the Starbuck series provide a suitable viticultural
environment when irrigation is available.
The steeper north-facing slopes of the Rattlesnake Hills,
immediately beyond the proposed viticultural area's northern boundary
line, are covered with Lickskillet, a very stony silt loam. The very
stony soils, steep slopes, and lack of irrigation make this terrain
unsuitable for viticulture. The topography east of the proposed
boundary line is a large basin with Warden Series silt loams and some
Esquatzel silty loam on two to five percent slopes.
Along the southern boundary line of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area, and south beyond
[[Page 8209]]
Sunnyside Canal, is the Yakima River Valley. The Esquatzel Series of
silt loams dominate this large, flat-bottomed valley, according to the
``Soil Survey of Yakima County Area, Washington'' (Lenfesty and Reedy,
1985). The valley also has Warden Series soils that are more
geologically eroded and at a lower elevation than the Warden Series of
the Rattlesnake Hills region to the north.
Past the western border of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area the hills drop down to the Yakima River. Immediately
west of the river, and beyond the proposed boundaries, lies a valley
floor with Weirman Association soils. Continuing westward from the
boundary line, the Ashue-Naches Association occupies the bottomland of
an older Yakima River floodplain. Also, as the Yakima River Valley
rises westward to Ahtanum Ridge, the prevalent Warden Series soil
creates a common link to the Rattlesnake Hills area. However, the
Warden Series soil in the Rattlesnake Hills terrain includes the
exposure of the Ellensburg Formation, unlike the Ahtanum Ridge soil.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
On June 1, 2005, TTB published a notice of proposed rulemaking
regarding the establishment of the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area
in the Federal Register (70 FR 31396) as Notice No. 47. In that notice,
TTB requested comments by August 1, 2005, from all interested persons.
TTB received 28 comments in response, including 14 in support, 11 in
opposition, and 3 from the petitioner responding to the concerns of the
opposing comments.
Comments
Name: Public comments confirm the appropriateness of the
``Rattlesnake Hills'' name for the proposed viticultural area, with 9
vineyard and winery owners with 15 to 24 years of viticulture
experience in the region agreeing with the chosen name. Also, a winery
owner holding the Federal trademark for ``Rattlesnake Ridge'' wholly
supports the proposed Rattlesnake Hills name and establishment of the
viticultural area.
Boundary: Some comments support the proposed viticultural area's
boundaries as appropriate, meaningful, and discernible. The Hultquists,
who supplied geographic information in the original petition, comment
that while USGS topographic maps do not show the boundaries of the
region's climates, cold damage, or soil types, they do show nearby
roads, power lines, elevation points, and other labeled landmarks that
can be used in defining the boundary lines of a proposed viticultural
area.
The two geographers also note that while the ``Rattlesnake Hills''
name also refers to the hills beyond the proposed viticulture area to
the east, that region is devoid of vineyards or wineries. The
Hultquists state that the proposed boundary lines were drawn to
surround only the region's vineyards and wineries, which start about 10
miles south of the range's north-facing slope at Sagebrush Ridge, a
feature shown on the USGS Grandview and Sagebrush Ridge topographical
quadrangle maps.
Several vineyard and winery owners with up to 28 years of
viticulture experience in the region oppose the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area boundaries as arbitrary. These commenters state
that because the Rattlesnake Hills range stretches beyond the proposed
viticultural area boundary, the boundary lines should be extended to
include more of the range. One commenter points to the proposed eastern
boundary line (along the 120[deg] west longitude line) as particularly
random, and describes the distinguishing features of the Rattlesnake
Hills range as continuing east for 27 miles to the Red Mountain
viticultural area. TTB notes, however, that the commenters do not
provide documentation to support their claims of arbitrary boundary
lines, and fail to include proposed expanded boundaries and substantive
justification.
In response, the petitioner explains that the proposed boundary
lines were developed by studying the viticultural feasibility of the
Rattlesnake Hills region, including its topography, climate, and soils.
The petitioner concludes that the entire Rattlesnake Hills landform
would make a poor viticultural area, with three-fourths of its
geographical area unsuitable for viticulture. The petitioner states
that the northwestern region of the Rattlesnake Hills range suffers
from a lack of water, a north-facing mountain slope, and a colder
climate. The range's northeastern region is on the Hanford Reservation,
a sealed nuclear site that is not conducive to any type of agricultural
use.
Topography: Supporting commenters confirm that the geographical
isolation and higher elevations of the proposed viticultural area set
the region apart, even from the topography of other portions of the
Rattlesnake Hills range. An opposing commenter notes that the
topography of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area is not
as consistent as described in the petition. However, this commenter
does not include documentation to support this claim.
TTB notes that the topography of the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area, as explained in Notice No. 47 and summarized above,
describes numerous geographical variations. The topographical
description of the proposed viticultural area includes references to
the proposed area's ridges, canyons and terraces, and the petition
states that the area has a ``multitude of landscapes with differing
aspect and hill slope positions.''
Climate: Offering anecdotal evidence, some supporting commenters
emphasize the distinctive milder climate within the proposed
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area, which has more annual degree days
of heat accumulation and a more frost-free environment when compared to
other portions of the Yakima Valley viticultural area.
Several opposing commenters, however, state that the proposed
viticultural area is not distinctive, including the amount of heat
accumulated during the growing season as measured in degree days. One
commenter notes that the petition's climatic information lacks specific
vineyard data and relies solely on PAWS data, while other commenters
note that the winter cold damage comparison is based on elevation
rather than the proposed boundary lines.
In response, the petitioner states that the PAWS data collected at
various stations in the region over a 10-year period is reliable
evidence of the climatic differences between the proposed viticultural
area and the surrounding regions. Citing PAWS information, the
petitioner states that east of the Bonneville power lines cold air
flows downward into a large basin at the bottom of Washout Canyon, and
notes that the Sunnyside weather station, located within the basin,
records the coldest temperatures of the 11 stations in the region.
The petitioner also explains that frost occurs two to three weeks
earlier in the large basin area than within the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area. The colder climate steers agriculture in the
basin toward dairy, corn, alfalfa, and grapes for juice rather than
wine. For example, the southeast portion of the basin, near Benton
City, is used for dry-land agriculture and is characterized by wheat
fields and rangelands. The petitioner notes that this region dips
toward the Yakima River and is exposed to more frost damage,
winterkill, and a higher water table, which makes the region below
[[Page 8210]]
850 feet in elevation incompatible with grape growing.
Originally the petitioner considered extending the proposed
viticultural area to include the Black Canyon region, located about six
miles east of the proposed boundary line toward Red Mountain. However,
the petitioner cites a May 2003 freeze at the 1,300-foot elevation of
Vineyard del Sol that froze vines to the ground. On the same night, the
petitioner states there was no known frost damage within the proposed
viticultural area boundary, even in vineyards at 900-foot elevations
with no frost protection. Therefore, the petitioner contends that
although Black Canyon is part of the Rattlesnake Hills geographical
landform, the area's climate is significantly different.
The petitioner claims that the cold air drainage effect is less
harsh within the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area east of
the proposed boundary line at the 120[deg] longitude line. Stating that
more cold air will drain down higher mountains than lower ones, the
petitioner notes that inside the proposed eastern boundary the
Rattlesnake Hills average 2,000 feet in elevation while elevations to
the east average 3,000 feet. The petitioner also states that the cold
air effect causes cold air to accumulate in a narrow valley and
disperse in a wide valley, and, therefore, the narrowing of the central
Yakima Valley east of the 120th meridian influences the movement of
cold air in the region.
Soil: Supporting commenters state that the proposed viticultural
area is distinguished by superior soils with good drainage compared to
surrounding regions. Other commenters claim, however, that the soils of
the proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area are common in the
surrounding Yakima Valley viticultural area.
The petitioner relies on the expertise of soil scientist Alan
Busacca, PhD, to provide geological and soil information for the
proposed viticultural area and the areas outside its proposed
boundaries. After careful review, TTB believes that the soil facts and
data narrative prepared by Dr. Busacca and presented in the petition
constitute adequate evidence and documentation to support the
conclusions reached in the petition.
Economic Impact: Some commenters favor establishing a distinct
viticultural area to separate the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area from the larger, surrounding Yakima Valley area, as
well as from the much larger Columbia Valley viticultural areas. A
commenter states that Washington State vintners will be able to market
wine products with more accuracy, efficiency, and profitability with
establishment of new viticultural areas. In addition, a member of the
Yakima County Planning Department believes that establishment of the
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area will assist Yakima County in
planning for its economic development.
Several opposing commenters voice concerns about the detrimental
effect of establishing the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area within
the larger Yakima Valley viticultural area. One commenter states that
the establishment of the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area will
confuse consumers and undermine the success of the Yakima Valley
viticultural area, and a second commenter stated that there are no
significant differences between the two viticultural areas. TTB notes
that neither commenter included evidence or documentation to support
these claims.
In response, the petitioner states that the proposed Rattlesnake
Hills viticultural area grape-growing industry is characterized by
small ``artisan estate wineries,'' while the Yakima Valley viticultural
area has some larger commercial vineyard estates.
Overall, TTB notes that, with the proposed Rattlesnake Hills
viticultural area entirely inside the larger Yakima Valley viticultural
area, the two areas do share some general characteristics. However, the
proposed Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area also has separate and
significant distinguishing features, as noted above in the summary of
the petition evidence. Furthermore, the possible impact of one
viticultural area on another one is not, standing alone, a sufficient
basis on which to deny a petition for a new viticultural area.
TTB also notes that the issue of consumer confusion normally stems
from similarities in the names of viticultural areas or from the
similarity of a proposed viticultural area name to a brand name on a
wine label. The names ``Yakima Valley'' and ``Rattlesnake Hills'' have
no apparent similarity that would confuse wine consumers.
TTB Finding
After careful review of the petition and the comments received, 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 ``Rattlesnake Hills'' viticultural area in Yakima County
in south-central Washington State, effective 30-days from this
document's publication date.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary description of the viticultural area in
the regulatory text published at the end of this document.
Maps
The maps for determining the boundary of the viticultural area are
listed below in the regulatory text.
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, ``Rattlesnake
Hills,'' is recognized as a name of viticultural significance.
Consequently, wine bottlers using ``Rattlesnake Hills'' 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.
[[Page 8211]]
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. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.193 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.193 Rattlesnake Hills.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Rattlesnake Hills''. For purposes of part 4 of this
chapter, ``Rattlesnake Hills'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved Maps. The appropriate maps for determining the
boundaries of the Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area are eight United
States Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. They are
titled:
(1) Yakima East Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1953,
photorevised 1985;
(2) Elephant Mountain Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1953,
photorevised 1985;
(3) Granger NW Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1965;
(4) Granger NE Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1964;
(5) Sunnyside Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1965,
photorevised 1978;
(6) Granger Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1965;
(7) Toppenish Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1958,
photorevised 1985; and
(8) Wapato Quadrangle, Washington--Yakima Co., 1958, photorevised
1985.
(c) Boundary. The Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area is located in
Yakima County, Washington. The area's boundary is defined as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the Yakima East map at the point
where a line drawn straight east from the west end of the Wapato Dam on
the Yakima River intersects Interstate Highway 82, section 17, T12N/
R19E. This line coincides with the boundary of the Yakima Valley
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.69). From the beginning point, the
Rattlesnake Hills viticultural area boundary line--
(2) Proceeds straight eastward, crossing onto the Elephant Mountain
map, to the 2,192-foot peak of Elephant Mountain, section 16, T12N/
R20E; then
(3) Continues straight east-southeast, crossing over the northeast
corner of the Toppenish map, and continuing onto the Granger NW map, to
the 2,186-foot pinnacle of Zillah Peak, section 32, T12N/R21E; then
(4) Continues straight eastward, crossing onto the Granger NE map,
to the 3,021-foot peak of High Top Mountain, section 32, T12N/R22E;
then
(5) Continues straight east-southeast to the 2,879-foot peak in the
northeast quadrant of section 3, T11N/R22E, and continues in the same
direction in a straight line until the line intersects with the
120[deg]00' west longitude line in section 1 of T11N/R22E along the
east margin of the Granger NE map; then
(6) Proceeds straight south along the 120[deg]00' west longitude
line to its intersection with a set of power lines in section 24, T11N/
R22E, on the east margin of the Granger NE map; then
(7) Follows the power lines southwest, crossing onto the Sunnyside
map, to their intersection with the Sunnyside Canal, section 8, T10N/
R22E; then
(8) Follows the meandering Sunnyside Canal generally northwest,
crossing over the northeast corner of the Granger map, and continuing
over the Granger NW map, the Toppenish map, and onto the Wapato map to
the canal's intersection with Interstate Highway 82, section 27 west
boundary line, T12N/R19E; then
(9) Follows Interstate Highway 82 northwest for 2.75 miles, crosses
onto the Yakima East map, and returns to the beginning point.
Signed: December 19, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: January 19, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 06-1459 Filed 2-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
