Establishment of The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater Viticultural Area, 6902-6906 [2015-02553]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
6902
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
update control numbers assigned to
information collection requirements of
the Commission by the Office of
Management and Budget pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980.
‘‘single window’’ through which
exporters can comply with export laws
and regulations. We received no
comments on the certification in the
proposed rule; accordingly, no
Regulatory Flexibility analysis is
required and none has been prepared.
DATES:
Executive Orders
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
This rule has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, and has been
drafted according to the requirements of
those Executive Orders. It has also been
determined that this rule does not
contain policies with federalism
implications as that term is defined
under Executive Order 13132.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any
information collection subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
However, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no person is required
to respond to, nor shall a person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
current, valid Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) control number.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 30
Economic statistics, Exports, Foreign
trade, Reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements.
Accordingly, as discussed above, the
interim final rule amending title 15,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 30,
which was published at 79 FR 49659 on
August 22, 2014, is adopted as a final
rule without change.
Dated: January 30, 2015.
John H. Thompson,
Director, Bureau of the Census.
Effective date: February 9, 2015.
Daniel K. Chang, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551–6792, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Division of Investment
Management, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–8549.
The
Commission published a final rule at 76
FR 71872, on November 21, 2011, which
rescinded rules and forms adopted
under the Public Utility Holding
Company Act (‘‘PUHCA’’),1 revised
other rules and forms to correct
outdated references to PUHCA,
corrected outdated references due to
enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act of 2010 (‘‘the Dodd-Frank Act’’),
and made other ministerial corrections.2
Congress repealed PUHCA effective
2006, and the Dodd-Frank Act amended
various provisions of the federal
securities laws and removed references
to PUHCA from those laws.
The final rule contained a
typographical error that prevented an
amendment to the Code of Federal
Regulations.3 This technical amendment
is being published so that the table in
17 CFR 200.800(b) can be updated to
reflect that amendment.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 200
Administrative practice and
procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies), Classified
information, Conflicts of interest,
Government employees, Organization
and functions (Government agencies).
[FR Doc. 2015–02520 Filed 2–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
[Release No. 33–9273A, 34–65686A, 39–
2480A, IA–3310A and IC–29855A]
rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 200.800
[Amended]
2. In § 200.800(b), in the table, remove
the following entries: Form ET,
wherever it appears; Rule 1(a); Rule
1(b); Rule 1(c); Rule 2; Rule 3; Rule 7;
Rule 7(d); Rule 20(b); Rule 20(c); Rule
20(d); Rule 23; Rule 24; Rule 26; Rule
29; Rule 44; Rule 45; Rule 47(b); Rule
52; Form 53; Rule 54; Rule 57(a); Rule
57(b); Rule 58; Rule 62; Rule 71(a); Rule
72; Rule 83; Rule 87; Rule 88; Rule 93;
Rule 94; Rule 95; Rule 100(a); Uniform
System of Accounts for Mutual Service
Companies and Subsidiary Service
Companies, Public Utility Holding
Company Act of 1935; Preservation and
Destruction of Records of Registered
Public Utility Holding Companies and
of Mutual and Subsidiary Service
Companies; Form U5A; Form U5B;
Form U5S; Form U–1; Form U–13–1;
Form U–6B–2; Form U–57; Form U–9C–
3; Form U–12(I)–A; Form U–12(I)–B;
Form U–13E–1; Form U–R–1; Form U–
13–60; Form U–3A–2; Form U–3A3–1;
Form U–7D; Form U–33–S; Form ID,
259.602, 3235–0328; and Form SE.,
259.603, 3235–0327.
■
Dated: February 3, 2015.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–02465 Filed 2–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2014–0003; T.D. TTB–127;
Ref: Notice No. 142]
RIN 1513–AC05
Establishment of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater Viticultural Area
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Technical amendment.
AGENCY:
1 15
U.S.C. 79 (repealed effective 2006).
Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
3 The final rule incorrectly referenced 17 CFR
200.80(b) of Subpart M, rather than 17 CFR
200.800(b) of Subpart N. As a result of the incorrect
reference, the table in 17 CFR 200.800(b) of Subpart
N was not amended.
2 Public
The Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)
is making technical amendments to
Jkt 235001
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506; 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
Rescission of Outdated Rules and
Forms, and Amendments To Correct
References
13:55 Feb 06, 2015
1. The authority citation for part 200,
subpart N, continues to read as follows:
■
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
17 CFR Part 200
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Subpart N—Commission Information
Collection Requirements Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act: OMB
Control Numbers
Text of the Amendments
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
SUMMARY:
PART 200—ORGANIZATION;
CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND
INFORMATION AND REQUESTS
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the
approximately 3,770-acre ‘‘The Rocks
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09FER1.SGM
09FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
District of Milton-Freewater’’
viticultural area in Umatilla County,
Oregon. The viticultural area lies
entirely within the Walla Walla Valley
viticultural area which, in turn, lies
within the Columbia Valley viticultural
area. TTB designates viticultural areas
to allow vintners to better describe the
origin of their wines and to allow
consumers to better identify wines they
may purchase.
DATES: This final rule is effective March
11, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street
NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005;
phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act), 27
U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary
of the Treasury to prescribe regulations
for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits,
and malt beverages. The FAA Act
provides that these regulations should,
among other things, prohibit consumer
deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels and ensure that
labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity
and quality of the product. The Alcohol
and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
(TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The
Secretary has delegated various
authorities through Treasury
Department Order 120–01 (Revised),
dated December 10, 2013, to the TTB
Administrator to perform the functions
and duties in the administration and
enforcement of this law.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) authorizes 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) sets forth
standards for the preparation and
submission of petitions for the
establishment or modification of
American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved AVAs.
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 having
distinguishing features, as described in
part 9 of the regulations, and a name
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:55 Feb 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
and a delineated boundary, as
established 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 the wine’s geographic origin. The
establishment of AVAs allows vintners
to describe more accurately the origin of
their wines to consumers and helps
consumers to identify wines they may
purchase. Establishment of an AVA 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 (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines
the procedure for proposing an AVA
and provides that any interested party
may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as an AVA. Section 9.12
of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12)
prescribes standards for petitions for the
establishment or modification of AVAs.
Petitions to establish an AVA must
include the following:
• Evidence that the area within the
proposed AVA boundary is nationally
or locally known by the AVA name
specified in the petition;
• An explanation of the basis for
defining the boundary of the proposed
AVA;
• A narrative description of the
features of the proposed AVA affecting
viticulture, such as climate, geology,
soils, physical features, and elevation,
that make the proposed AVA distinctive
and distinguish it from adjacent areas
outside the proposed AVA boundary;
• The appropriate United States
Geological Survey (USGS) map(s)
showing the location of the proposed
AVA, with the boundary of the
proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon;
and
• A detailed narrative description of
the proposed AVA boundary based on
USGS map markings.
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
Petition
TTB received a petition from Dr.
Kevin R. Pogue, a professor of geology
at Whitman College in Walla Walla,
Washington, proposing the
establishment of the ‘‘The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater’’ AVA in Umatilla
County, Oregon, near the town of
Milton-Freewater. The proposed AVA
lies entirely within the Oregon portion
of the Walla Walla Valley AVA (27 CFR
9.91), which covers portions of Walla
Walla County, Washington and Umatilla
County, Oregon. The Walla Walla Valley
AVA is, in turn, entirely within the
larger Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6903
9.74), which covers multiple counties in
Washington and Oregon. The proposed
AVA contains approximately 3,770
acres and has approximately 250 acres
of commercially producing vineyards.
The petition names 19 wine producers
that have vineyards within the proposed
AVA, and it notes that three of the 19
producers also have winery facilities
within the proposed AVA.
According to the petition, the
distinguishing feature of the proposed
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
AVA is its soil. Approximately 96
percent of the proposed AVA is covered
with soil from the Freewater series,
including Freewater very cobbly loam
and Freewater gravelly silt loam. These
soils contain large amounts of loose,
uncemented gravel, cobbles, and
boulders that form very deep layers. The
rockiness of Freewater series soils
prevents erosion and discourages rot
and mildew by allowing water to drain
freely. The depth of the soil allows roots
to penetrate 30 feet or more before
hitting a restrictive layer of bedrock or
cemented soil. The numerous cobbles in
the soil absorb and store solar radiation,
which raises the soil and air
temperatures and reduces the risk of
frost damage in the late spring and early
fall. Finally, soils of the Freewater series
contain high amounts of calcium,
titanium, and iron, which are important
nutrients for vine growth.
By contrast, the soils surrounding the
proposed The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA are silt loams from the
Walla Walla, Ellisforde, Yakima,
Umapine, Hermison, Onyx, and Oliphan
series. Cobbles are uncommon or
entirely absent from these soils. The
soils are also not as deep as soils of the
Freewater series and are often underlain
by dense, compacted layers of sand and
silt called ‘‘Touchet beds.’’ The soils are
also less resistant to erosion than
Freewater series soils and contain lower
levels of calcium, titanium, and iron.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 142 in the
Federal Register on February 26, 2014
(79 FR 10742), proposing to establish
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
AVA. In the proposed rule, TTB
summarized the evidence from the
petition regarding the name, boundary,
and distinguishing feature—its cobbly
soils—for the proposed AVA. The
proposed rule also compared the
distinguishing feature of the proposed
AVA to the surrounding areas. For a
detailed description of the evidence
relating to the name, boundary, and
distinguishing feature of the proposed
AVA, and for a comparison of the
E:\FR\FM\09FER1.SGM
09FER1
6904
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
distinguishing feature of the proposed
AVA to the surrounding areas, see
Notice No. 142.
In Notice No. 142, TTB solicited
comments on the accuracy of the name,
boundary, and other required
information submitted in support of the
petition. In addition, TTB solicited
comments on whether the geographic
features of the proposed The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA are so
distinguishable from the established
Walla Walla Valley AVA and Columbia
Valley AVA that the proposed AVA
should not be part of those AVAs.
Additionally, TTB asked for comments
from winemakers who produce wine
made primarily from grapes grown
within the proposed AVA but who
would be ineligible to use the proposed
AVA name because their wines are fully
finished in facilities located in the
nearby city of Walla Walla, Washington.
The comment period closed on April 28,
2014.
rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Comments Received
In response to Notice No. 142, TTB
received a total of 20 comments, all of
which supported the establishment of
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
AVA. Commenters included local
vineyard owners and winemakers, a
wine reporter, and a regional alliance of
winemakers. TTB received no
comments opposing the establishment
of The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA. TTB also did not
receive any comments in response to its
question of whether the proposed The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA
is so distinguishable from the
established Walla Walla Valley and
Columbia Valley AVAs that the
proposed AVAs should not be part of
the established AVAs.
Use of USGS Topographic Maps To
Draw AVA Boundaries
One of the comments (comment 14)
was from the owner of a vineyard and
winery located within the proposed
AVA. Although the commenter
expressed support for the establishment
of the proposed AVA, he also stated his
concern regarding TTB’s requirement
that AVA boundaries be drawn using
features found on USGS topographic
maps. The commenter stated that
because only USGS maps were used to
draw the boundary, the proposed AVA
contains some soil that is not of the
Freewater series, which is the
distinguishing feature of the proposed
AVA, and also omits small pockets of
land containing Freewater series soils.
The commenter suggested that TTB
amend its regulations to allow AVA
boundaries to be drawn using ‘‘geologic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:55 Feb 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
or soils series contacts on published
geologic and soil maps.’’
Section 9.12(a)(4) of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR 9.12(a)(4)) requires
proposed AVA boundaries to be drawn
using features found on USGS maps,
such as roads, elevation contours, range
and township lines, rivers, and
mountain peaks. TTB’s requirement
mandating the use of this type of map
to mark AVA boundaries facilitates the
establishment of new AVAs that share a
concurrent boundary, or are located
entirely within or entirely overlap an
established AVA, by ensuring that the
features used to draw the boundary of
one AVA also appear on the maps used
to draw the boundary of the other. For
example, it would be difficult to
determine the exact location of a new
AVA in relation to an established AVA
if the new AVA’s boundaries followed
elevation contours and roads found on
a USGS map, but the established AVA’s
boundaries were marked on a soil
survey map that did not include
elevation contours or roads.
Furthermore, amending the regulation
requiring the use of USGS maps for
AVA boundary descriptions is outside
the scope of the notice of proposed
rulemaking to establish The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA and
would require a separate rulemaking.
Therefore, TTB is not taking any action
on this comment in this final rule.
Impact on Wines Fully Finished Across
State Lines
Of the 20 comments received in
response to Notice No. 142, 16
comments addressed the issue of wines
fully finished in the State of Washington
from grapes grown primarily within the
proposed The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA (comments 2, 3, 5–11,
13, and 15–20). Section 4.25(e)(3)(iv) of
TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)(iv))
requires wines labeled with an AVA
appellation of origin to be ‘‘fully
finished within the State, or one of the
States, within which the labeled
viticultural area is located.’’ Currently,
there are individuals who use facilities
in the nearby city of Walla Walla,
Washington, to fully finish wine made
primarily from grapes grown within the
proposed AVA, in part because of a lack
of custom crush or alternating
proprietorship facilities nearby in
Oregon. Additionally, several winery
owners located in Walla Walla stated
that they also own vineyards within the
proposed AVA and currently produce
wines from those grapes in their Walla
Walla facilities. Under the current TTB
regulations, such Washington-produced
wines would be eligible to use the
‘‘Walla Walla Valley’’ or ‘‘Columbia
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Valley’’ AVA names, due to the
proposed AVA’s location within both of
those multistate AVAs, but the wines
would not be eligible to use ‘‘The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater’’ as an
appellation of origin because the wine is
finished in Washington, outside the
state in which the AVA is located.
Each of the 16 comments stated that
TTB should amend its regulations to
allow wines produced primarily from
grapes grown within the proposed AVA
to be labeled with ‘‘The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater’’ AVA name even if
the wines are produced in facilities in
Washington. Of these commenters, 9
were from individuals who specifically
stated that they own vineyards within
the proposed AVA but own or use
facilities in Walla Walla for the
production of wine (comments 5, 6, 7,
9, 10, 11, 13, 18, and 19). Four
comments (comments 2, 3, 8, and 15)
were from individuals who would not
be affected directly by the TTB
restriction but still expressed support
for amending the regulations in order to
benefit other growers and winemakers
who may be impacted. An additional
comment (comment 16) was from the
Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance, on
behalf of its members in both
Washington and Oregon. Another
comment was from the editor and
publisher of Washington Wine Report
(comment 17). The final comment
(comment 20) was submitted on behalf
of a California-based winery and a
Washington-based winery, both of
which source grapes from the proposed
AVA.
All 16 of the comments essentially
stated that it is unreasonable for TTB to
allow wine made with grapes grown
within the proposed AVA and fully
finished in Washington to be labeled
with the ‘‘Walla Walla Valley’’ or
‘‘Columbia Valley’’ viticultural areas as
appellations of origin, but not with ‘‘The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater.’’
One commenter (comment 3) stated that
the current TTB regulations would
‘‘jeopardize the vineyard owners’ ability
to sell their grapes as the number of
winemakers within a reasonable range
who finish their wines in Oregon is
limited.’’ Another commenter (comment
6) believes the regulations should be
changed because ‘‘almost all of the
grapes grown [within the proposed
AVA] are used by Washington wineries
. . . ,’’ meaning that very few wines
would be eligible to use the proposed
AVA name as an appellation of origin.
The Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance
(comment 16) also notes that ‘‘[w]ines
made in Washington from grapes
sourced within the proposed AVA
constitute a significant percentage of the
E:\FR\FM\09FER1.SGM
09FER1
rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
wines produced by several Washington
wineries,’’ none of which would be able
to use the proposed AVA name as an
appellation of origin.
A small wine producing company that
owns a vineyard within the proposed
AVA states that it uses a custom crush
facility in the city of Walla Walla
because ‘‘[t]his is a very practical
business model for us because of the
high cost of building a facility and the
concentration of resources * * * in
Walla Walla’’ (comment 13). The
company goes on to say that the
inability to use ‘‘The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater’’ as an appellation of
origin for their wines ‘‘will be confusing
to consumers’’ because wine that is, in
the commenter’s words, ‘‘100% ‘The
Rocks District’ wine’’ will have to be
labeled as ‘‘Walla Walla Valley’’ or
‘‘Columbia Valley.’’ Because a
viticultural area designation is meant to
allow vintners to better describe the
origin of their wines and to allow
consumers to better identify wines they
may purchase, the commenter believes
that the company’s use of ‘‘The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater’’ as an
appellation of origin on their wines will
further both aforementioned goals.
Finally, the editor and publisher of
the Washington Wine Report (comment
17) offered a scenario to demonstrate the
‘‘contradictions’’ inherent in the current
TTB regulations. He notes that ‘‘a
winery could source grapes from The
Rocks District and then drive 450 miles
down to the Rogue Valley [in
southwestern Oregon] and label the
wines as from The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater.’’ He continues,
‘‘However, a winery would not be able
to truck the grapes 10 miles north to
Walla Walla and do the same . . . . This
defies logic and surely was not the
intention of this regulation.’’
TTB believes that amending the
regulations in 27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)(iv) to
allow AVA appellations of origin on
labels of wine made outside the State in
which the AVA is located would require
a notice of proposed rulemaking and
public comment period. Although
Notice No. 142 requested comments
concerning the appellation of origin
regulations, the proposed rule did not
formally propose any specific changes
to those regulations. Additionally, any
changes to the regulations concerning
the use of AVA names as appellations
of origin would apply not only to
persons wanting to use ‘‘The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater’’ as an
appellation of origin. Therefore, TTB is
not proposing to make any changes to
the regulation in this final rule.
However, TTB believes that the
number of comments submitted in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:55 Feb 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
response to Notice No. 142 indicates
that there is at least regional support for
amending the regulations regarding the
use of AVA names as appellations of
origin. Therefore, elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register, TTB is
publishing a notice of proposed
rulemaking, Notice No. 147, proposing
to allow wine to be labeled with an
AVA appellation of origin if the wine is
fully finished, except for cellar
treatment or blending that does not alter
the class and type of the wine, in a State
adjacent to the State in which the AVA
is located. Please refer to Notice No. 147
for information on how to submit
comments to TTB regarding the
proposed amendment to the regulations.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition
and the comments received in response
to Notice No. 142, TTB finds that the
evidence provided by the petitioner
supports the establishment of The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA.
Accordingly, under the authority of the
FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, and
part 4 of the TTB regulations, TTB
establishes the ‘‘The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater’’ AVA in Umatilla
County, Oregon, effective 30 days from
the publication date of this document.
TTB has also determined that The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA
will remain part of both the established
Walla Walla Valley and Columbia
Valley AVAs. As discussed in Notice
No. 142, the elevations, topography,
growing season, and climate of The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA
are similar to those of both the Walla
Walla Valley and Columbia Valley
AVAs. However, approximately 96
percent of The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA is covered by heavily
cobbled Freewater series soils, which
are found only in miniscule amounts
elsewhere in the Walla Walla Valley and
Columbia Valley AVAs, thus
distinguishing the proposed AVA from
the existing, surrounding AVAs.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of the AVA in the regulatory
text published at the end of this final
rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required
maps, and they 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
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6905
the wine’s true place of origin. For a
wine to be labeled with an AVA name
or with a brand name that includes an
AVA name, at least 85 percent of the
wine must be derived from grapes
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 for
labeling with an AVA name 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 AVA 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 an AVA 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.
With the establishment of this AVA,
its name, ‘‘The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater,’’ will be recognized as a
name of viticultural significance under
§ 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27
CFR 4.39(i)(3)). TTB has also
determined that the phrase ‘‘The Rocks
of Milton-Freewater’’ has viticultural
significance in relation to the AVA. The
text of the regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the
name ‘‘The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater’’ or ‘‘The Rocks of MiltonFreewater’’ in a brand name, including
a trademark, or in another label
reference as to the origin of the wine,
will have to ensure that the product is
eligible to use the AVA name as an
appellation of origin.
The establishment of The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA will
not affect any existing AVA, and any
bottlers using ‘‘Walla Walla Valley’’ or
‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as an appellation of
origin or in a brand name for wines
made from grapes grown within the
Walla Walla Valley or Columbia Valley
AVAs will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The
establishment of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater AVA will allow
vintners to use ‘‘The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater,’’ ‘‘Walla Walla
Valley,’’ and ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as
appellations of origin for wines made
from grapes grown within The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA, if the
wines meet the eligibility requirements
for the appellation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this regulation will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The regulation imposes no new
reporting, recordkeeping, or other
E:\FR\FM\09FER1.SGM
09FER1
6906
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
administrative requirement. Any benefit
derived from the use of an AVA name
would be the result of a proprietor’s
efforts and consumer acceptance of
wines from that area. Therefore, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is
required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this final
rule is not a significant regulatory action
as defined by Executive Order 12866 of
September 30, 1993. Therefore, no
regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations
and Rulings Division drafted this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter
I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
2. Subpart C is amended by adding
§ 9.249 to read as follows:
■
rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 9.249 The Rocks District of Milton–
Freewater.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater’’. For
purposes of part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater’’ and
‘‘The Rocks of Milton-Freewater’’ are
terms of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United
States Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale
topographic maps used to determine the
boundary of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater viticultural area are
titled:
(1) Milton-Freewater, Oreg., 1964; and
(2) Bowlus Hill, Oreg., 1964;
photoinspected 1976.
(c) Boundary. The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater viticultural area is
located in Umatilla County, Oregon. The
boundary of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater viticultural area is as
follows:
(1) The beginning point is found on
the Milton-Freewater map at the
intersection of an unnamed mediumduty road known locally as Freewater
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:55 Feb 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
Highway (State Route 339) and an
unnamed light-duty road known locally
as Crockett Road, section 26, T6N/R35E.
From the beginning point, proceed eastsoutheasterly in a straight line for 0.8
mile to the intersection of State
Highway 11 (Oregon-Washington
Highway) and an unnamed light-duty
road known locally as Appleton Road,
section 25, T6N/R35E; then
(2) Proceed southeasterly in a straight
line for 1.05 miles, crossing onto the
Bowlus Hill map, to the intersection of
three unnamed light-duty roads known
locally as Grant Road, Turbyne Road,
and Pratt Lane on the common
boundary between section 36, T6N/
R35E, and section 31, T5N/R36E; then
(3) Proceed southwesterly in a straight
line for 1.1 miles, crossing back onto the
Milton-Freewater map, to the
intersection of the Union Pacific
railroad tracks with the Walla Walla
River, section 1, T5N/R35E; then
(4) Proceed southwesterly and then
west-northwesterly along the Union
Pacific railroad tracks for 1.2 miles to
the intersection of the railroad tracks
with the 980-foot elevation contour line,
approximately 0.15 mile west of Lamb
Street, section 2, T5N/R35E; then
(5) Proceed west-northwesterly in a
straight line for 2.25 miles to the
intersection of the 840-foot elevation
contour line and an unnamed light-duty
road known locally as Lower Dry Creek
Road, section 33, T6N/R35E; then
(6) Proceed northwesterly in a straight
line for 0.8 mile to the intersection of
the 800-foot elevation contour line with
an unnamed light-duty road running
north-south in section 32, T6N/R35E;
then
(7) Proceed easterly in a straight line
for 0.9 mile to the intersection of the
840-foot elevation contour line with the
Hudson Bay Canal, section 33, T6N/
R35E; then
(8) Proceed due north in a straight
line for 0.25 mile to the line’s
intersection with Sunnyside Road,
section 33, T6N/T35E; then
(9) Proceed northeasterly in a straight
line for 0.5 mile to the intersection of
the 840-foot elevation contour line with
an unnamed medium-duty road known
locally as State Highway 332 (Umapine
Highway), eastern boundary of section
28, R6N/T35E; then
(10) Proceed east-northeasterly in a
straight line for 0.3 mile to the
intersection of three unnamed light-duty
roads known locally as Triangle Road,
Hodgen Road, and Appleton Road,
section 27, T6N/R35E; then
(11) Proceed east-northeasterly in a
straight line for 1.25 miles, returning to
the beginning point.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Signed: December 2, 2014.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: December 22, 2014.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2015–02553 Filed 2–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2015–0050]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Willamette River, Portland, OR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of temporary deviation
from drawbridge regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railway Bridge, also
known as the St. Johns RR Bridge,
across the Willamette River, mile 6.9, at
Portland, OR. The deviation is necessary
to facilitate installation of new rail
joints. This deviation allows the bridge
to remain in the closed to navigation
position during maintenance activities.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
7 a.m. on February 12, 2015 to noon on
February 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2015–0050] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may
also visit the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12–140 on the
ground floor of the Department of
Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Steven
Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Coast
Guard Thirteenth District; telephone
206–220–7282, email d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Burlington
Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09FER1.SGM
09FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 26 (Monday, February 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6902-6906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02553]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2014-0003; T.D. TTB-127; Ref: Notice No. 142]
RIN 1513-AC05
Establishment of The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
Viticultural Area
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes
the approximately 3,770-acre ``The Rocks
[[Page 6903]]
District of Milton-Freewater'' viticultural area in Umatilla County,
Oregon. The viticultural area lies entirely within the Walla Walla
Valley viticultural area which, in turn, lies within the Columbia
Valley viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow
vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow
consumers to better identify wines they may purchase.
DATES: This final rule is effective March 11, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act),
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary has delegated various
authorities through Treasury Department Order 120-01 (Revised), dated
December 10, 2013, to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions
and duties in the administration and enforcement of this law.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes 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) sets
forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the
establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved AVAs.
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 having distinguishing features, as described in part 9
of the regulations, and a name and a delineated boundary, as
established 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 the
wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of
an AVA 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 (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2))
outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and provides that any
interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region
as an AVA. Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes
standards for petitions for the establishment or modification of AVAs.
Petitions to establish an AVA must include the following:
Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is
nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;
An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of
the proposed AVA;
A narrative description of the features of the proposed
AVA affecting viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical
features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and
distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed AVA boundary;
The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS)
map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of
the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater Petition
TTB received a petition from Dr. Kevin R. Pogue, a professor of
geology at Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington, proposing the
establishment of the ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater'' AVA in
Umatilla County, Oregon, near the town of Milton-Freewater. The
proposed AVA lies entirely within the Oregon portion of the Walla Walla
Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.91), which covers portions of Walla Walla County,
Washington and Umatilla County, Oregon. The Walla Walla Valley AVA is,
in turn, entirely within the larger Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74),
which covers multiple counties in Washington and Oregon. The proposed
AVA contains approximately 3,770 acres and has approximately 250 acres
of commercially producing vineyards. The petition names 19 wine
producers that have vineyards within the proposed AVA, and it notes
that three of the 19 producers also have winery facilities within the
proposed AVA.
According to the petition, the distinguishing feature of the
proposed The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA is its soil.
Approximately 96 percent of the proposed AVA is covered with soil from
the Freewater series, including Freewater very cobbly loam and
Freewater gravelly silt loam. These soils contain large amounts of
loose, uncemented gravel, cobbles, and boulders that form very deep
layers. The rockiness of Freewater series soils prevents erosion and
discourages rot and mildew by allowing water to drain freely. The depth
of the soil allows roots to penetrate 30 feet or more before hitting a
restrictive layer of bedrock or cemented soil. The numerous cobbles in
the soil absorb and store solar radiation, which raises the soil and
air temperatures and reduces the risk of frost damage in the late
spring and early fall. Finally, soils of the Freewater series contain
high amounts of calcium, titanium, and iron, which are important
nutrients for vine growth.
By contrast, the soils surrounding the proposed The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater AVA are silt loams from the Walla Walla,
Ellisforde, Yakima, Umapine, Hermison, Onyx, and Oliphan series.
Cobbles are uncommon or entirely absent from these soils. The soils are
also not as deep as soils of the Freewater series and are often
underlain by dense, compacted layers of sand and silt called ``Touchet
beds.'' The soils are also less resistant to erosion than Freewater
series soils and contain lower levels of calcium, titanium, and iron.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 142 in the Federal Register on February
26, 2014 (79 FR 10742), proposing to establish The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater AVA. In the proposed rule, TTB summarized the evidence
from the petition regarding the name, boundary, and distinguishing
feature--its cobbly soils--for the proposed AVA. The proposed rule also
compared the distinguishing feature of the proposed AVA to the
surrounding areas. For a detailed description of the evidence relating
to the name, boundary, and distinguishing feature of the proposed AVA,
and for a comparison of the
[[Page 6904]]
distinguishing feature of the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas,
see Notice No. 142.
In Notice No. 142, TTB solicited comments on the accuracy of the
name, boundary, and other required information submitted in support of
the petition. In addition, TTB solicited comments on whether the
geographic features of the proposed The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater AVA are so distinguishable from the established Walla Walla
Valley AVA and Columbia Valley AVA that the proposed AVA should not be
part of those AVAs. Additionally, TTB asked for comments from
winemakers who produce wine made primarily from grapes grown within the
proposed AVA but who would be ineligible to use the proposed AVA name
because their wines are fully finished in facilities located in the
nearby city of Walla Walla, Washington. The comment period closed on
April 28, 2014.
Comments Received
In response to Notice No. 142, TTB received a total of 20 comments,
all of which supported the establishment of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater AVA. Commenters included local vineyard owners and
winemakers, a wine reporter, and a regional alliance of winemakers. TTB
received no comments opposing the establishment of The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater AVA. TTB also did not receive any comments in
response to its question of whether the proposed The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater AVA is so distinguishable from the established Walla
Walla Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs that the proposed AVAs should not
be part of the established AVAs.
Use of USGS Topographic Maps To Draw AVA Boundaries
One of the comments (comment 14) was from the owner of a vineyard
and winery located within the proposed AVA. Although the commenter
expressed support for the establishment of the proposed AVA, he also
stated his concern regarding TTB's requirement that AVA boundaries be
drawn using features found on USGS topographic maps. The commenter
stated that because only USGS maps were used to draw the boundary, the
proposed AVA contains some soil that is not of the Freewater series,
which is the distinguishing feature of the proposed AVA, and also omits
small pockets of land containing Freewater series soils. The commenter
suggested that TTB amend its regulations to allow AVA boundaries to be
drawn using ``geologic or soils series contacts on published geologic
and soil maps.''
Section 9.12(a)(4) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12(a)(4))
requires proposed AVA boundaries to be drawn using features found on
USGS maps, such as roads, elevation contours, range and township lines,
rivers, and mountain peaks. TTB's requirement mandating the use of this
type of map to mark AVA boundaries facilitates the establishment of new
AVAs that share a concurrent boundary, or are located entirely within
or entirely overlap an established AVA, by ensuring that the features
used to draw the boundary of one AVA also appear on the maps used to
draw the boundary of the other. For example, it would be difficult to
determine the exact location of a new AVA in relation to an established
AVA if the new AVA's boundaries followed elevation contours and roads
found on a USGS map, but the established AVA's boundaries were marked
on a soil survey map that did not include elevation contours or roads.
Furthermore, amending the regulation requiring the use of USGS maps for
AVA boundary descriptions is outside the scope of the notice of
proposed rulemaking to establish The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
AVA and would require a separate rulemaking. Therefore, TTB is not
taking any action on this comment in this final rule.
Impact on Wines Fully Finished Across State Lines
Of the 20 comments received in response to Notice No. 142, 16
comments addressed the issue of wines fully finished in the State of
Washington from grapes grown primarily within the proposed The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater AVA (comments 2, 3, 5-11, 13, and 15-20).
Section 4.25(e)(3)(iv) of TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)(iv))
requires wines labeled with an AVA appellation of origin to be ``fully
finished within the State, or one of the States, within which the
labeled viticultural area is located.'' Currently, there are
individuals who use facilities in the nearby city of Walla Walla,
Washington, to fully finish wine made primarily from grapes grown
within the proposed AVA, in part because of a lack of custom crush or
alternating proprietorship facilities nearby in Oregon. Additionally,
several winery owners located in Walla Walla stated that they also own
vineyards within the proposed AVA and currently produce wines from
those grapes in their Walla Walla facilities. Under the current TTB
regulations, such Washington-produced wines would be eligible to use
the ``Walla Walla Valley'' or ``Columbia Valley'' AVA names, due to the
proposed AVA's location within both of those multistate AVAs, but the
wines would not be eligible to use ``The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater'' as an appellation of origin because the wine is finished in
Washington, outside the state in which the AVA is located.
Each of the 16 comments stated that TTB should amend its
regulations to allow wines produced primarily from grapes grown within
the proposed AVA to be labeled with ``The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater'' AVA name even if the wines are produced in facilities in
Washington. Of these commenters, 9 were from individuals who
specifically stated that they own vineyards within the proposed AVA but
own or use facilities in Walla Walla for the production of wine
(comments 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 18, and 19). Four comments (comments
2, 3, 8, and 15) were from individuals who would not be affected
directly by the TTB restriction but still expressed support for
amending the regulations in order to benefit other growers and
winemakers who may be impacted. An additional comment (comment 16) was
from the Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance, on behalf of its members in
both Washington and Oregon. Another comment was from the editor and
publisher of Washington Wine Report (comment 17). The final comment
(comment 20) was submitted on behalf of a California-based winery and a
Washington-based winery, both of which source grapes from the proposed
AVA.
All 16 of the comments essentially stated that it is unreasonable
for TTB to allow wine made with grapes grown within the proposed AVA
and fully finished in Washington to be labeled with the ``Walla Walla
Valley'' or ``Columbia Valley'' viticultural areas as appellations of
origin, but not with ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater.'' One
commenter (comment 3) stated that the current TTB regulations would
``jeopardize the vineyard owners' ability to sell their grapes as the
number of winemakers within a reasonable range who finish their wines
in Oregon is limited.'' Another commenter (comment 6) believes the
regulations should be changed because ``almost all of the grapes grown
[within the proposed AVA] are used by Washington wineries . . . ,''
meaning that very few wines would be eligible to use the proposed AVA
name as an appellation of origin. The Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance
(comment 16) also notes that ``[w]ines made in Washington from grapes
sourced within the proposed AVA constitute a significant percentage of
the
[[Page 6905]]
wines produced by several Washington wineries,'' none of which would be
able to use the proposed AVA name as an appellation of origin.
A small wine producing company that owns a vineyard within the
proposed AVA states that it uses a custom crush facility in the city of
Walla Walla because ``[t]his is a very practical business model for us
because of the high cost of building a facility and the concentration
of resources * * * in Walla Walla'' (comment 13). The company goes on
to say that the inability to use ``The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater'' as an appellation of origin for their wines ``will be
confusing to consumers'' because wine that is, in the commenter's
words, ``100% `The Rocks District' wine'' will have to be labeled as
``Walla Walla Valley'' or ``Columbia Valley.'' Because a viticultural
area designation is meant to allow vintners to better describe the
origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines
they may purchase, the commenter believes that the company's use of
``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater'' as an appellation of origin
on their wines will further both aforementioned goals.
Finally, the editor and publisher of the Washington Wine Report
(comment 17) offered a scenario to demonstrate the ``contradictions''
inherent in the current TTB regulations. He notes that ``a winery could
source grapes from The Rocks District and then drive 450 miles down to
the Rogue Valley [in southwestern Oregon] and label the wines as from
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater.'' He continues, ``However, a
winery would not be able to truck the grapes 10 miles north to Walla
Walla and do the same . . . . This defies logic and surely was not the
intention of this regulation.''
TTB believes that amending the regulations in 27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)(iv)
to allow AVA appellations of origin on labels of wine made outside the
State in which the AVA is located would require a notice of proposed
rulemaking and public comment period. Although Notice No. 142 requested
comments concerning the appellation of origin regulations, the proposed
rule did not formally propose any specific changes to those
regulations. Additionally, any changes to the regulations concerning
the use of AVA names as appellations of origin would apply not only to
persons wanting to use ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater'' as an
appellation of origin. Therefore, TTB is not proposing to make any
changes to the regulation in this final rule.
However, TTB believes that the number of comments submitted in
response to Notice No. 142 indicates that there is at least regional
support for amending the regulations regarding the use of AVA names as
appellations of origin. Therefore, elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register, TTB is publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking,
Notice No. 147, proposing to allow wine to be labeled with an AVA
appellation of origin if the wine is fully finished, except for cellar
treatment or blending that does not alter the class and type of the
wine, in a State adjacent to the State in which the AVA is located.
Please refer to Notice No. 147 for information on how to submit
comments to TTB regarding the proposed amendment to the regulations.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition and the comments received in
response to Notice No. 142, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the
petitioner supports the establishment of The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater AVA. Accordingly, under the authority of the FAA Act, section
1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and part 4 of the TTB
regulations, TTB establishes the ``The Rocks District of Milton-
Freewater'' AVA in Umatilla County, Oregon, effective 30 days from the
publication date of this document.
TTB has also determined that The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater
AVA will remain part of both the established Walla Walla Valley and
Columbia Valley AVAs. As discussed in Notice No. 142, the elevations,
topography, growing season, and climate of The Rocks District of
Milton-Freewater AVA are similar to those of both the Walla Walla
Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs. However, approximately 96 percent of
The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA is covered by heavily
cobbled Freewater series soils, which are found only in miniscule
amounts elsewhere in the Walla Walla Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs,
thus distinguishing the proposed AVA from the existing, surrounding
AVAs.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of the AVA in the
regulatory text published at the end of this final rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they 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. For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name or with a
brand name that includes an AVA name, at least 85 percent of the wine
must be derived from grapes 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 for labeling with an AVA name
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 AVA 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 an AVA 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.
With the establishment of this AVA, its name, ``The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater,'' will be recognized as a name of viticultural
significance under Sec. 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
4.39(i)(3)). TTB has also determined that the phrase ``The Rocks of
Milton-Freewater'' has viticultural significance in relation to the
AVA. The text of the regulation clarifies this point. Consequently,
wine bottlers using the name ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater''
or ``The Rocks of Milton-Freewater'' in a brand name, including a
trademark, or in another label reference as to the origin of the wine,
will have to ensure that the product is eligible to use the AVA name as
an appellation of origin.
The establishment of The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA
will not affect any existing AVA, and any bottlers using ``Walla Walla
Valley'' or ``Columbia Valley'' as an appellation of origin or in a
brand name for wines made from grapes grown within the Walla Walla
Valley or Columbia Valley AVAs will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater AVA will allow vintners to use ``The Rocks District
of Milton-Freewater,'' ``Walla Walla Valley,'' and ``Columbia Valley''
as appellations of origin for wines made from grapes grown within The
Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA, if the wines meet the
eligibility requirements for the appellation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
regulation imposes no new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
[[Page 6906]]
administrative requirement. Any benefit derived from the use of an AVA
name would be the result of a proprietor's efforts and consumer
acceptance of wines from that area. Therefore, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30,
1993. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted
this final rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB amends title 27,
chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, 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. 9.249 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.249 The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater''. For purposes of
part 4 of this chapter, ``The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater'' and
``The Rocks of Milton-Freewater'' are terms of viticultural
significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United States Geological Survey 1:24,000
scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater viticultural area are titled:
(1) Milton-Freewater, Oreg., 1964; and
(2) Bowlus Hill, Oreg., 1964; photoinspected 1976.
(c) Boundary. The Rocks District of Milton-Freewater viticultural
area is located in Umatilla County, Oregon. The boundary of The Rocks
District of Milton-Freewater viticultural area is as follows:
(1) The beginning point is found on the Milton-Freewater map at the
intersection of an unnamed medium-duty road known locally as Freewater
Highway (State Route 339) and an unnamed light-duty road known locally
as Crockett Road, section 26, T6N/R35E. From the beginning point,
proceed east-southeasterly in a straight line for 0.8 mile to the
intersection of State Highway 11 (Oregon-Washington Highway) and an
unnamed light-duty road known locally as Appleton Road, section 25,
T6N/R35E; then
(2) Proceed southeasterly in a straight line for 1.05 miles,
crossing onto the Bowlus Hill map, to the intersection of three unnamed
light-duty roads known locally as Grant Road, Turbyne Road, and Pratt
Lane on the common boundary between section 36, T6N/R35E, and section
31, T5N/R36E; then
(3) Proceed southwesterly in a straight line for 1.1 miles,
crossing back onto the Milton-Freewater map, to the intersection of the
Union Pacific railroad tracks with the Walla Walla River, section 1,
T5N/R35E; then
(4) Proceed southwesterly and then west-northwesterly along the
Union Pacific railroad tracks for 1.2 miles to the intersection of the
railroad tracks with the 980-foot elevation contour line, approximately
0.15 mile west of Lamb Street, section 2, T5N/R35E; then
(5) Proceed west-northwesterly in a straight line for 2.25 miles to
the intersection of the 840-foot elevation contour line and an unnamed
light-duty road known locally as Lower Dry Creek Road, section 33, T6N/
R35E; then
(6) Proceed northwesterly in a straight line for 0.8 mile to the
intersection of the 800-foot elevation contour line with an unnamed
light-duty road running north-south in section 32, T6N/R35E; then
(7) Proceed easterly in a straight line for 0.9 mile to the
intersection of the 840-foot elevation contour line with the Hudson Bay
Canal, section 33, T6N/R35E; then
(8) Proceed due north in a straight line for 0.25 mile to the
line's intersection with Sunnyside Road, section 33, T6N/T35E; then
(9) Proceed northeasterly in a straight line for 0.5 mile to the
intersection of the 840-foot elevation contour line with an unnamed
medium-duty road known locally as State Highway 332 (Umapine Highway),
eastern boundary of section 28, R6N/T35E; then
(10) Proceed east-northeasterly in a straight line for 0.3 mile to
the intersection of three unnamed light-duty roads known locally as
Triangle Road, Hodgen Road, and Appleton Road, section 27, T6N/R35E;
then
(11) Proceed east-northeasterly in a straight line for 1.25 miles,
returning to the beginning point.
Signed: December 2, 2014.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: December 22, 2014.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2015-02553 Filed 2-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
