Proposed Establishment of the Eastern Connecticut Highlands Viticultural Area, 64047-64053 [2018-27016]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. The rule will not
have federalism implications warranting
the application of Executive Orders
12372 and 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform
The Department has reviewed the
regulation in light of sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to
eliminate ambiguity, minimize
litigation, establish clear legal
standards, and reduce burden.
place ‘‘information and communication
technology’’, wherever it occurs.
■ b. Remove the acronym ‘‘EIT’’ and
add in its place the acronym ‘‘ICT’’,
wherever it occurs.
§ 147.2
[Amended]
4. In § 147.2, remove ‘‘36 CFR 1194.4’’
and add in its place ‘‘E103.4 of
appendix A to 36 CFR part 1194.’’
■ 5. In § 147.3, revise the introductory
text and the definition of ‘‘Section 508.’’
■
Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This proposed rule is not an E.O.
13771 regulatory action because this
proposed rule is not significant under
E.O. 12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The regulations in 22 CFR part 147
are related to OMB Control Number
1405–0220, which is in effect. This rule
does not impose new or revised
information collection requirements
under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 147
Civil rights, Communications
equipment, Computer technology,
Government employees, Individuals
with disabilities, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Telecommunications.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Department of State
proposes to amend 22 CFR part 147 as
follows:
PART 147—INFORMATION AND
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
The Department of State adopts the
definitions in E103.4 of appendix A to
36 CFR part 1194.
*
*
*
*
*
Section 508 means section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
codified at 29 U.S.C. 794d.
§ 147.4
[Amended]
6. Amend § 147.4 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a), remove
‘‘Electronic and Information Technology
Accessibility Standards (36 CFR part
1194)’’ and add in its place ‘‘Revised
508 Standards (36 CFR 1194.1 and
appendices A, C and D to 36 CFR part
1194).’’
■ b. In paragraph (b), remove ‘‘36 CFR
part 1194’’ and add in its place ‘‘36 CFR
1194.1.’’
■
■
§ 147.5
[Amended]
7. In § 147.5, remove ‘‘EIT
Accessibility Standards’’ and add in its
place ‘‘Revised 508 Standards.’’
■
§ 147.6
[Amended]
8. Amend § 147.6 as follows:
a. In paragraph (b), remove
‘‘Electronic and Information Technology
Accessibility Standards, 36 CFR part
1194’’ and add in its place ‘‘Revised 508
Standards (36 CFR 1194.1 and
appendices A, C and D to 36 CFR part
1194).’’
■ b. In paragraph (c), remove ‘‘36 CFR
part 1194’’ and add in its place ‘‘36 CFR
1194.1’’.
■ c. In paragraph (d), remove ‘‘36 CFR
part 1194’’ and add in its place ‘‘36 CFR
1194.1’’.
■
■
§ 147.7
1. The authority citation for part 147
continues to read as follows:
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
■
Authority: 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 29 U.S.C. 794,
794d; 36 CFR part 1194.
2. Revise the heading for part 147 as
set forth above.
■
Subpart A of Part 147 [Amended]
3. In subpart A of part 147:
a. Remove ‘‘electronic and
information technology’’ and add in its
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
Dated: November 26, 2018.
Gregory B. Smith,
Director, Office of Civil Rights and Chief
Diversity Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018–26570 Filed 12–12–18; 8:45 am]
Definitions.
[Amended]
9. Amend § 147.7(b) by removing ‘‘36
CFR part 1194’’ and adding in its place
‘‘36 CFR 1194.1’’.
■ 10. Add § 147.9 to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
investigation, review, hearing or any
other activity related to the
administration of, or exercise of
authority under, or privilege secured by
section 508 and the regulations in this
part.
BILLING CODE 4710–15–P
§ 147.3
Executive Order 13563: Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review
The Department has considered this
rule in light of Executive Order 13563,
dated January 18, 2011, and affirms that
this regulation is consistent with the
guidance therein.
■
■
64047
§ 147.9 Intimidation and retaliation
prohibited.
No person may discharge, intimidate,
retaliate, threaten, coerce or otherwise
discriminate against any person because
such person has filed a complaint,
furnished information, assisted or
participated in any manner in an
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2018–0010; Notice No.
179]
RIN 1513–AC41
Proposed Establishment of the Eastern
Connecticut Highlands Viticultural
Area
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the approximately 1,246
square-mile ‘‘Eastern Connecticut
Highlands’’ viticultural area in all or
portions of Hartford, New Haven,
Tolland, Windham, New London, and
Middlesex Counties in Connecticut. The
proposed viticultural area is not within
and does not overlap any other
established AVA. 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. TTB
invites comments on this proposed
addition to its regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by
February 11, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Please send your comments
on this notice to one of the following
addresses:
• Internet: https://
www.regulations.gov (via the online
comment form for this notice as posted
within Docket No. TTB–2018–0010 at
‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal erulemaking portal);
• U.S. mail: Director, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street
NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; or
• Hand delivery/courier in lieu of
mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Suite
400, Washington, DC 20005.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
64048
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
See the Public Participation section of
this notice for specific instructions and
requirements for submitting comments,
and for information on how to request
a public hearing or view or obtain
copies of the petition and supporting
materials.
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
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
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, dated
December 10, 2013, (superseding
Treasury Order 120–01, dated January
24, 2003), to the TTB Administrator to
perform the functions and duties in the
administration and enforcement of these
provisions.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) authorizes TTB to establish
definitive viticultural areas and regulate
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
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 the 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;
• 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.
Eastern Connecticut Highlands Petition
TTB received a petition from Steven
Vollweiler, president of Sharpe Hill
Vineyard, proposing the establishment
of the approximately 1,246-square mile
‘‘Eastern Connecticut Highlands’’ AVA.
The proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA covers the eastern third
of the State and includes all or portions
of Hartford, New Haven, Tolland,
Windham, New London, and Middlesex
Counties. Sixteen commerciallyproducing vineyards covering
approximately 114.75 acres are
distributed throughout the proposed
AVA. An additional 20.5 acres of
commercial vineyards are planned for
the near future. Six wineries are also
within the proposed AVA, with an
additional three new wineries planned
for the near future. Grape varieties
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
planted within the proposed AVA
include cold-resistant varietals such as
St. Croix, Traminette, Vidal, Cayuga,
Frontenac, and Vignoles.
According to the petition, the
distinguishing features of the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
include its geology, topography, soils,
and climate. Unless otherwise noted, all
information and data pertaining to the
proposed AVA contained in this
document are from the petition for the
proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA and its supporting
exhibits.
Name Evidence
The proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA is located in what is
known and referred to as the upland
areas east of the Central Valley of
Connecticut. These upland areas are
commonly referred to as the ‘‘eastern
highlands.’’ The petition proposes
adding ‘‘Connecticut’’ to the proposed
AVA name in order to avoid confusion
with other regions in the United States
that are referred to as ‘‘eastern
highlands.’’
Examples of the use of the term
‘‘eastern highlands’’ to describe the
region of the proposed AVA include an
article about Connecticut’s
physiography that appears on the
Connecticut Department of Energy &
Environmental Protection’s web page.
The article describes the region of the
proposed AVA as ‘‘the Eastern Uplands
or Highlands region.’’ 1 The same web
page also contains an article on the Air
Line State Park Trail, which follows the
rail bed of a rail line that formerly ran
between Boston and New York City.
This article states that in order for the
rail line to be built, certain political and
physical obstacles needed to be
overcome, one of which was
‘‘Connecticut’s eastern highlands.’’ 2 In
its entry on Connecticut, an online
geography encyclopedia notes that,
‘‘The state is divided into two roughly
equal sections, usually called the
eastern highland and the western
highland, which are separated by the
Connecticut Valley lowland.’’ 3 As
supporting name evidence, the
petitioner provided a link to a hiking
website with a page titled ‘‘Eastern
Highlands Rock Climbing’’ 4 that
includes rock climbing locations within
the proposed AVA. The petition
included a map of the physical geology
1 https://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/wildlife/Pdf_
files/nongame/ctwap/2005cwcs/CWCSCh2.pdf.
2 https://www.ct.gov/deep/airlinetrail.
3 https://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/us/
connecticut-state-united-states-geography.html.
4 https://www.mountainproject.com/v/easternhighlands/10607668.
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
of Connecticut, which shows the three
regions of the State, including an area
labeled ‘‘Eastern Highlands.’’ Finally,
the petition notes that a major
healthcare organization that serves the
region of the proposed AVA is named
the Eastern Highlands Health District.
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA encompasses the
upland region of eastern Connecticut.
According to the petition, the proposed
boundary closely follows certain fault
lines that lie along the geologic
boundaries of the uplands region. The
eastern and southern proposed
boundaries approximate the Lake Char
Fault and the Honey Hill Fault,
respectively, and the western boundary
follows the Eastern Border Fault of the
Mesozoic Harford Basin. Beyond these
boundaries, the topography and climate
differ from within the proposed AVA.
The Massachusetts-Connecticut State
line forms the northern boundary of the
proposed AVA because the climate and
elevations of the region to the north of
the proposed AVA differ slightly from
the climate and elevations of the
proposed AVA and because the
proposed ‘‘Eastern Connecticut
Highlands’’ name does not extend into
Massachusetts.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Distinguishing Features
The distinguishing features of the
proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA are its geology,
topography, soils, and climate.
Geology
According to the petition, the varying
resistance to erosion of the underlying
rocks determines the topography and
the physiographic provinces of
Connecticut. The proposed Eastern
Connecticut Highlands AVA is
underlain by a Paleozoic formation
generally referred to by geologists as
Iapetus Terrane, named for the ancient
ocean that once covered the region. The
Iapetus Terrane is comprised largely of
metamorphic rocks that are difficult to
erode, resulting in the hills and
mountains that characterize the
landscape of the proposed AVA. The
underlying geology also plays a major
role in the formation of soils within the
proposed AVA. The topography and
soils of the proposed AVA will be
discussed later in this document.
To the west of the proposed AVA, the
region known as the Central Valley is
underlain by younger, more easily
eroded sandstone, shale, and basalt lava
flows that have a significantly different
chemical composition than the
geological formations of the proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
AVA. The regions to the east and south
of the proposed AVA are part of the
Avalonia Terrane, which consists of
older, Pre-Cambrian rocks.
Topography
The proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA is characterized by
hilly-to-mountainous terrain. Elevations
within the proposed AVA range from
about 200 feet in the valley floors
between the hills to just more than
1,000 feet at the highest elevations in
the northern portion. Along the eastern
and western edges of the proposed
AVA, the hills that run along the
Eastern Border fault and the Lake Char
Fault were formed from erosionresistant metamorphic rocks. As a
result, these hills tend to have sharp
ridgelines and high elevations. In the
central portion of the proposed AVA,
the hills formed from metamorphic
rocks that were less erosion-resistant
than the rocks along the eastern and
western edges. As a result, the hills in
the central portion of the proposed AVA
are more rounded and are ‘‘closely
crammed together, almost nudging each
other for more space.’’ 5 The petition
states that the tops of these hills have
concordant elevations, meaning that one
hilltop will have about the same
elevation as the neighboring hills. The
hilltop elevations decrease as one moves
from north to south. The petition states
that if one were to imagine placing a
gigantic sheet of plywood on top of the
hills, the plywood would form a plane
that gently slopes southward at about 10
to 20 feet per mile.
By contrast, the region to the west of
the proposed AVA is a broad, flat valley.
Elevations within the valley range from
about 150 feet to 250 feet. South of the
proposed AVA, within the region
known as the Coastal Slope, elevations
are also generally lower than within the
proposed AVA, ranging from sea level to
about 400 feet. The shoreline of this
coastal region consists of rocky
prominences separated by coves and
tidal lands that may extend several
miles inland. The highlands terrain of
the proposed AVA extends north into
Massachusetts and east into Rhode
Island, but the elevations differ in those
locations. The petition states that the
highlands of Massachusetts have
generally higher elevations than the
proposed AVA. The petition also notes
that the highlands of Rhode Island
diminish as one moves eastward, and
the elevations become lower.
5 Michael Bell, The Face of Connecticut. State
Geological and Natural History Survey of
Connecticut, Bulletin 100 (1985).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64049
The petition states that topography
affects viticulture within the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
because topography impacts the climate
of a region. Regions with higher
elevations, such as the proposed AVA,
generally have a colder climate than
regions with lower elevations, such as
the neighboring Central Valley.
Additionally, regions that are closer to
the coast, such as the Coastal Slope
region south of the proposed AVA and
the lower elevations of Rhode Island,
are more significantly affected by
maritime climate than higher inland
regions like the proposed AVA.
Temperatures affect the varietals of
grapes that can be successfully grown in
any given area, as will be discussed later
in this document.
Soils
According to the petition, Connecticut
was affected by the last Ice Age glacier,
which covered all of the State with ice
a mile or more thick. As the ice slowly
flowed in a generally southerly
direction, it scraped and eroded the
underlying bedrock, which contains an
abundance of mineral nutrients. Eroded
debris deposited by glaciers is referred
to as glacial till. Glacial till soils are
generally fertile and well-suited for
agriculture, including viticulture.
There are two main types of glacial
till—lodgement (or basal) till, which is
material deposited by glaciers as they
move across the landscape, and ablation
(or meltout) till, which is material
deposited as a stagnant or slow moving
glacier melts. The petition states that the
soils of the proposed Eastern
Connecticut Highlands AVA developed
on lodgement till. These soils are thick
sandy-to-silty loams and can range from
well to poorly drained and are typically
less permeable than soils formed from
ablation till. According to the petition,
the proposed AVA has the largest area
of lodgement till soils in the State. By
contrast, the Coastal Slope region of
Connecticut, south of the proposed
AVA, has the smallest amount of
lodgement till soils. The southern and
western regions of the State contain
large areas of ablation soils. Soils in the
Central Valley west of the proposed
AVA formed in widespread glacial lake
beds and are often poorly drained.
The petition also provided
information on the concentrations of
seven elements found in the soils of the
proposed AVA and the regions to the
east, south, and west that play
important roles in vine nutrition:
Calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium,
phosphorous, sulfur, and zinc. The
petition states that when compared to
the Central Valley, the proposed AVA
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
64050
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
has higher levels of calcium, iron,
magnesium, and sulfur, and lower levels
of potassium, phosphorous, and zinc.
The petition states that these differences
in soil chemistry are due to the very
different chemical composition of the
geological features underlying the
Central Valley, which are formed
primarily from sedimentary rocks and
basalt. Compared to the regions to the
east and south, the proposed AVA has
similar levels of calcium, phosphorus,
and sulfur, higher levels of iron,
magnesium, and zinc, and lower levels
of potassium. The petition states that
there are fewer chemical differences
between the soils of the proposed AVA
and the regions to the east and south
because similar metamorphic rocks
comprise the underlying geological
features of all three of these regions.
However, the proposed AVA does
contain some soils derived from mafic
rocks, which are igneous rocks that are
very rich in iron and magnesium and
contribute to the higher levels of those
elements within the proposed AVA’s
soils.
The petition notes that calcium plays
a role in a vine’s ability to uptake iron,
and too much calcium can inhibit iron
uptake. Iron is necessary for plants,
including grapevines, to undertake
chlorophyll synthesis, which allows for
the production of nutrients needed for
grapevine growth.6 Lack of iron may
lead to chlorosis—an iron deficiency
that may cause yellowing on grapevines
and ultimately lead to grapevine death.7
Magnesium is involved with
carbohydrate metabolism, and a lack of
magnesium may also lead to chlorosis.8
Phosphorous is involved with energy
transport in the vines, and a
phosphorous deficiency can reduce
grapevine growth and cause premature
grape ripening.9 Potassium helps
maintain fruit acidity by exchange with
hydrogen ions, and a potassium
deficiency can harm grapevines and
cause grapes to unevenly ripen or fail to
ripen.10 Higher levels of sulfur are
generally known to increase soil acidity
and provide grapevines with vitamins
necessary for grapevine growth.11
Finally, the petition included the
following table listing the most common
soil series of the proposed AVA, the
Central Valley to the west, and the
Avalon Terrane to the south and east.
The table shows that the proposed AVA
shares some of the same soils as the
regions to the south and east but
contains none of the soils found in the
region to the west. The petition states
that the greater difference in soils series
between the proposed AVA and the
Central Valley is due to the greater
differences in the underlying geology.
The proposed AVA and the regions to
the east and south have similar
underlying geologic structures, but the
slight chemical differences contribute to
the slight differences in soil series.
TABLE 1—SOIL SERIES
Proposed AVA
Central Valley
(west)
Avalon Terrane
(east and south)
Agawam-Merrimac-Hinckley,
Brimfield-Brookfield, Broadbrook-Rainbow, Canton-CharltonHollis, Charlton-Hollis, Hinckley-Merrimac,
Hollis-Charlton, Hollis-Woodbridge, PaxtonWoodbridge.
Branford-Manchester, Cheshire-WethersfieldManchester, Cheshire-Yalesville, ElridgeBancroft-Scitico, Hadley-Winooski, HartfordManchester, Holyoke-Wethersfield-Cheshire, Penwood-Manchester, Rumney-Podunk,
Wethersfield-Holyoke-Broadbrook,
Wethersfield-Ludlow,
Windsor-NinigretMerrimac.
Agawam-Merrimac-Hinckley,
BroadbrookRainbow, Canton-Charlton-Hollis, CharltonHollis, Hollis-Charlton, Narragansett-Hollis,
Paxton-Woodbridge.
Climate
The petition included information on
the average annual temperatures,
growing degree days (GDDs) 12, coldest
recorded temperature, average date of
the latest spring frost, and average date
of the earliest fall frost for the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
and the surrounding regions. The data
was gathered from 1996 to 2015 and is
included in the following table.
TABLE 2—CLIMATE
Average
annual
temperature
(fahrenheit)
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Location
(direction from proposed AVA)
Windham Airport (within) .....................................................
Windsor Locks, CT (west) ...................................................
Hartford, CT (west) ..............................................................
Groton, CT (south) ..............................................................
New Haven, CT (south) ......................................................
Worcester, MA (north) .........................................................
Fitchburg, MA (north) ..........................................................
Orange, MA (north) .............................................................
Lincoln, RI (east) .................................................................
Warwick, RI (east) ...............................................................
6 See James Schuster, Focus on Plant Problems—
Chlorosis. University of Illinois. https://extension.
illinois.edu/focus/index.cfm?problem=chlorosis
(viewed June 5, 2018).
7 Id; see also Albert J. Winkler et al., General
Viticulture 425–426 (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 2nd ed. 1974).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
8 General
Growing
degree days
50.1
51.3
52.2
51.5
52.5
50.5
49.7
47.2
50
52.2
Viticulture at 425.
at 415–418.
at 426–427.
12 In the Winkler climate classification system,
annual heat accumulation during the growing
11 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
¥13
¥11
¥4
¥5
¥2
¥16
¥11
¥22
¥9
¥6
2,780
3,036
3,185
2,709
3,057
2,445
2,667
2,409
2,577
3,029
9 Id.
10 Id.
Coldest
temperature
(fahrenheit)
Average
date of last
spring frost
May 3 .............
April 23 ..........
April 12 ..........
April 18 ..........
April 9 ............
April 20 ..........
April 23 ..........
May 10 ...........
April 24 ..........
April 12 ..........
Average
date of first
fall frost
October 15.
October 15.
October 23.
October 26.
November 1.
October 21.
October 17.
October 7.
October 23.
October 31.
season, measured in annual growing degree days
(GDDs), defines climatic regions. One GDD
accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit that a day’s
mean temperature is above 50 degrees, the
minimum temperature required for grapevine
growth. Id. at 61–64.
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
64051
The data shows that the proposed
AVA has average annual temperatures
that are generally similar to the
surrounding locations. However, this
data also shows more pronounced
differences in other climate
measurements. When compared to the
region to the north, the proposed AVA
has significantly higher GDD
accumulations than all three northern
locations, indicating warmer growing
season temperatures. The proposed
AVA also has a generally shorter
growing season than two of the northern
locations, as indicated by the later lastspring-frost date and earlier first-fallfrost date for the proposed AVA.
Compared to the regions to the south
and east, the proposed AVA has lower
GDD accumulations than two of the
locations. The proposed AVA also has a
shorter growing season than all four of
the southern and eastern comparison
locations, which are closer to the Long
Island Sound and thus benefit from
temperature-moderating marine breezes.
Finally, compared to the Central Valley
region to the west, the proposed AVA
has lower GDD accumulations and a
shorter growing season than both
western comparison locations.
The petition states that the GDD
accumulations within the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
and each of the surrounding regions are
sufficient to ripen most Vitis vinifera
varietals. However, the petition goes on
to state that cold hardiness is the prime
determinant of which varietals can be
successfully grown in the proposed
AVA. The proposed AVA has the lowest
minimum temperature of all of the
surrounding regions except for two
locations to the north. Most vinifera
varietals do poorly in climates with
extreme cold winter temperatures,
which can kill dormant vines, or late
spring frosts, which can damage tender
new vine growth. As a result, most
vineyards in the proposed AVA plant
cold-hardy non-vinifera hybrids such as
St. Croix, Traminette, Vidal, Cayuga,
Frontanec, and Vignoles. By contrast,
vineyards planted to the south of the
proposed AVA, within the warmer
coastal region, plant more vinifera
varietals including Cabernet franc,
Merlot, Riesling, and Chardonnay.
topography is characterized by a broad,
flat plain with underlying geological
features that are easily eroded. North of
the proposed AVA, the elevations are
generally higher. To the east and south,
the underlying geological features are
older, and the elevation of the
topography gradually descends to the
coast.
The soils of the proposed AVA
developed on the largest area of
lodgement till in the State and consist
of thick sandy-to-silty loams. The
regions to the east and south of the
proposed AVA share some of the same
soil series of the proposed AVA, but the
AVA has lower potassium levels and
higher levels of iron, magnesium, and
zinc than in these regions. Additionally,
the soils to the south and east of the
proposed AVA contain less lodgement
till. To the west of the proposed AVA,
the soils developed in glacial lake beds
and are of different soil series than the
soils of the proposed AVA. The soils to
the west of the proposed AVA also
contain lower levels of calcium, iron,
magnesium, and sulfur than the soils of
the proposed AVA.
The climate of the proposed AVA is
generally cooler than most of the
surrounding regions and is suitable for
growing cold-hardy hybrid varietals of
grapes. The regions to the south, east,
and west all have warmer lowestrecorded temperatures and earlier lastspring-frost dates than the proposed
AVA, making those regions more
suitable to growing vinifera varietals
that are less cold-hardy. The region to
the north of the proposed AVA has GDD
accumulations and lowest-recorded
temperatures that are generally lower
than for the proposed AVA.
wine to be labeled with 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 § 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB
regulations (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
§ 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27
CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details.
If TTB establishes this proposed AVA,
its name, ‘‘Eastern Connecticut
Highlands,’’ will be recognized as a
name of viticultural significance under
§ 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27
CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the proposed
regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the
name ‘‘Eastern Connecticut Highlands’’
in a brand name, including a trademark,
or in another label reference as to the
origin of the wine, would have to ensure
that the product is eligible to use the
AVA name as an appellation of origin if
this proposed rule is adopted as a final
rule. Accordingly, the proposed part 9
regulatory text set forth in this
document specifies the full name
‘‘Eastern Connecticut Highlands’’ as a
term of viticultural significance for the
proposed AVA for the purposes of part
4 of the TTB regulations.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to
establish the approximately 1,246
square-mile Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA merits consideration
and public comment, as invited in this
notice of proposed rulemaking.
Public Participation
Summary of Distinguishing Features
In summary, the geology, topography,
soils, and climate of the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
distinguish it from the surrounding
regions. The proposed AVA is a region
of hills and mountains with underlying
geological features that are resistant to
erosion. To the west of the proposed
AVA in the Central Valley, the
Maps
The petitioner provided the required
maps, and they are listed below in the
proposed regulatory text.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of the petitioned-for AVA in
the proposed regulatory text published
at the end of this proposed rule.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
TTB invites comments from interested
members of the public on whether it
should establish the proposed AVA.
TTB is also interested in receiving
comments on the sufficiency and
accuracy of the name, boundary, soils,
climate, and other required information
submitted in support of the petition.
Please provide any available specific
information in support of your
comments.
Because of the potential impact of the
establishment of the proposed Eastern
Connecticut Highlands AVA on wine
labels that include the term ‘‘Eastern
Connecticut Highlands’’ as discussed
above under Impact on Current Wine
Labels, TTB is particularly interested in
comments regarding whether there will
be a conflict between the proposed AVA
name and currently used brand names.
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
64052
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
If a commenter believes that a conflict
will arise, the comment should describe
the nature of that conflict, including any
anticipated negative economic impact
that approval of the proposed AVA will
have on an existing viticultural
enterprise. TTB is also interested in
receiving suggestions for ways to avoid
conflicts, for example, by adopting a
modified or different name for the AVA.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this
notice by using one of the following
three methods:
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You
may send comments via the online
comment form posted with this notice
within Docket No. TTB–2018–0010 on
‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal erulemaking portal, at https://
www.regulations.gov. A direct link to
that docket is available under Notice
No. 179 on the TTB website at https://
www.ttb.gov/wine/winerulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files
may be attached to comments submitted
via Regulations.gov. For complete
instructions on how to use
Regulations.gov, visit the site and click
on the ‘‘Help’’ tab.
• U.S. Mail: You may send comments
via postal mail to the Director,
Regulations and Rulings Division,
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12,
Washington, DC 20005.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: You may
hand-carry your comments or have them
hand-carried to the Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC
20005.
Please submit your comments by the
closing date shown above in this notice.
Your comments must reference Notice
No. 179 and include your name and
mailing address. Your comments also
must be made in English, be legible, and
be written in language acceptable for
public disclosure. TTB does not
acknowledge receipt of comments, and
TTB considers all comments as
originals.
In your comment, please clearly state
if you are commenting for yourself or on
behalf of an association, business, or
other entity. If you are commenting on
behalf of an entity, your comment must
include the entity’s name, as well as
your name and position title. If you
comment via Regulations.gov, please
enter the entity’s name in the
‘‘Organization’’ blank of the online
comment form. If you comment via
postal mail or hand delivery/courier,
please submit your entity’s comment on
letterhead.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
You may also write to the
Administrator before the comment
closing date to ask for a public hearing.
The Administrator reserves the right to
determine whether to hold a public
hearing.
Confidentiality
All submitted comments and
attachments are part of the public record
and subject to disclosure. Do not
enclose any material in your comments
that you consider to be confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
Public Disclosure
TTB will post, and you may view,
copies of this notice, selected
supporting materials, and any online or
mailed comments received about this
proposal within Docket No. TTB–2018–
0010 on the Federal e-rulemaking
portal, Regulations.gov, at https://
www.regulations.gov. A direct link to
that docket is available on the TTB
website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/
wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice
No. 179. You may also reach the
relevant docket through the
Regulations.gov search page at https://
www.regulations.gov. For information
on how to use Regulations.gov, click on
the site’s ‘‘Help’’ tab.
All posted comments will display the
commenter’s name, organization (if
any), city, and State, and, in the case of
mailed comments, all address
information, including email addresses.
TTB may omit voluminous attachments
or material that the Bureau considers
unsuitable for posting.
You may also view copies of this
notice, all related petitions, maps and
other supporting materials, and any
electronic or mailed comments that TTB
receives about this proposal by
appointment at the TTB Public Reading
Room, 1310 G Street NW, Washington,
DC 20005. You may also obtain copies
at 20 cents per 8.5 x 11-inch page.
Please note that TTB is unable to
provide copies of USGS maps or other
similarly-sized documents that may be
included as part of the AVA petition.
Contact TTB’s Public Reading Room at
the above address or by telephone at
202–822–9904 to schedule an
appointment or to request copies of
comments or other materials.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed
regulation, if adopted, would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The proposed regulation imposes no
new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit
derived from the use of a viticultural
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
area name would be the result of a
proprietor’s efforts and consumer
acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this
proposed 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 notice
of proposed rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, TTB proposes to amend 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.llto read as follows:
■
§ 9.ll
Eastern Connecticut Highlands.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘Eastern
Connecticut Highlands’’. For purposes
of part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘Eastern
Connecticut Highlands’’ is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The one United
States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:125,000 scale topographic map used to
determine the boundary of the Eastern
Connecticut Highlands viticultural area
is titled ‘‘State of Connecticut.’’
(c) Boundary. The Eastern
Connecticut Highlands viticultural area
is located in Hartford, New Haven,
Tolland, Windham, New London, and
Middlesex Counties in Connecticut. The
boundary of the Eastern Connecticut
Highlands viticultural area is as
described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the State
of Connecticut map at the intersection
of State Highway 83 and the
Massachusetts-Connecticut State line in
Somers. From the beginning point,
proceed east along the MassachusettsConnecticut State line approximately 33
miles to the intersection of the shared
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 239 / Thursday, December 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
State line and an unnamed road, known
locally as Bonnette Avenue, in
Thompson; then
(2) Proceed southeast along Bonnette
Avenue approximately 0.38 mile to its
intersection with an unnamed road
known locally as Sand Dam Road; then
(3) Proceed southeast along Sand Dam
Road approximately 1.5 miles to its
intersection with an unnamed road
known locally as Thompson Road; then
(4) Proceed south along Thompson
Road approximately 1,000 feet to its
intersection with an unnamed road
known locally as Quaddick Town Farm
Road; then
(5) Proceed east then south along
Quaddick Town Farm Road
approximately 5.5 miles into the town
of Putnam, where the road becomes
known as East Putnam Road, and
continuing south along East Putnam
Road approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with U.S. Highway 44; then
(6) Proceed west along U.S. Highway
44 approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with an unnamed road
known locally as Tucker Hill Road; then
(7) Proceed south along Tucker Hill
Road approximately 0.38 mile to its
intersection with an unnamed road
known locally as Five Mile River Road;
then
(8) Proceed southwest then west along
Five Mile River Road 1.75 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 21;
then
(9) Proceed south along State
Highway 21 approximately 2 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 12;
then
(10) Proceed south along State
Highway 12 approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with Five Mile River; then
(11) Proceed west along Five Mile
River approximately 0.13 mile to its
intersection with the highway marked
on the map State Highway 52 (also
known as Interstate 395); then
(12) Proceed south along State
Highway 52/Interstate 395
approximately 14.5 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 201;
then
(13) Proceed southeast along State
Highway 201 approximately 5.25 miles
to its intersection with State Highway
165; then
(14) Proceed southwest along State
Highway 165 approximately 10 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 2;
then
(15) Proceed west along State
Highway 2 approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with State Highway 82;
then
(16) Proceed southwest, then
northwest, then southwest along State
Highway 82 approximately 27.72 miles
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Dec 12, 2018
Jkt 247001
to its intersection with State Highway 9;
then
(17) Proceed southeast along State
Highway 9 approximately 3.7 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 80;
then
(18) Proceed west along State
Highway 80 approximately 15.7 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 77;
then
(19) Proceed north along State
Highway 77 approximately 8.3 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 17;
then
(20) Proceed northeast along State
Highway 17 approximately 6.8 miles to
the point where it becomes concurrent
with State Highway 9; then
(21) Proceed north along concurrent
State Highway 17–State Highway 9
approximately 0.75 mile the point
where State Highway 17 departs from
State Highway 9; then
(22) Proceed east along State Highway
17 approximately 0.25 mile, crossing
over the Connecticut River, to the
highway’s intersection with State
Highway 17A; then
(23) Proceed north along State
Highway 17A approximately 3 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 17;
then
(24) Proceed north along State
Highway 17 approximately 8 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 94;
then
(25) Proceed east along State Highway
94 approximately 4 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 83;
then
(26) Proceed north along State
Highway 83 approximately 25 miles,
returning to the beginning point.
SUMMARY:
Signed: June 25, 2018.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: December 4, 2018.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
AGENCY:
[FR Doc. 2018–27016 Filed 12–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
BOARD
29 CFR Chapter I
RIN 3142–AA13
The Standard for Determining JointEmployer Status; Extension of
Comment Period
AGENCY:
National Labor Relations
Board.
Proposed rule; second extension
of comment period.
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64053
The National Labor Relations
Board (the Board) published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal
Register of September 14, 2018, seeking
comments from the public concerning
the standard for determining jointemployer status under the National
Labor Relations Act. The date to submit
responses to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking is again extended for 30
days.
DATES: The comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking
published at 83 FR 46681, and first
extended at 83 FR 55329, is extended.
Comments must be received by the
Board on or before January 14, 2019.
Comments replying to the comments
submitted during the initial comment
period must be received by the Board on
or before January 21, 2019.
Dated: December 10, 2018.
Farah Z. Qureshi,
Associate Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–27024 Filed 12–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers
33 CFR Part 334
[COE–2018–0005]
Pacific Ocean at Naval Base Guam
Telecommunication Site, Finegayan
Small Arms Range, on the
Northwestern Coast of Guam; Danger
Zone
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
DoD.
Notice of proposed rulemaking
and request for comments.
ACTION:
The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) is proposing to revise
the existing regulations to establish a
danger zone at the U.S. Naval Base
Guam Telecommunication Site in the
Pacific Ocean, Guam. The Navy
requested establishment of a danger
zone extending over the Pacific Ocean
adjacent to the Finegayan Small Arms
Range. Establishment of a danger zone
would intermittently restrict
commercial, public, and private vessels
from entering or lingering in the
restricted safety zone to ensure public
safety during small arms training
activities. This danger zone is necessary
to minimize potential conflicts between
local populace activities and ongoing
military training in the subject area.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before January 14, 2019.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13DEP1.SGM
13DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 239 (Thursday, December 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64047-64053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27016]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2018-0010; Notice No. 179]
RIN 1513-AC41
Proposed Establishment of the Eastern Connecticut Highlands
Viticultural Area
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the approximately 1,246 square-mile ``Eastern Connecticut
Highlands'' viticultural area in all or portions of Hartford, New
Haven, Tolland, Windham, New London, and Middlesex Counties in
Connecticut. The proposed viticultural area is not within and does not
overlap any other established AVA. 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. TTB invites
comments on this proposed addition to its regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by February 11, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Please send your comments on this notice to one of the
following addresses:
Internet: https://www.regulations.gov (via the online
comment form for this notice as posted within Docket No. TTB-2018-0010
at ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal);
U.S. mail: Director, Regulations and Rulings Division,
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12,
Washington, DC 20005; or
Hand delivery/courier in lieu of mail: Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC
20005.
[[Page 64048]]
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific
instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for
information on how to request a public hearing or view or obtain copies
of the petition and supporting materials.
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, dated December
10, 2013, (superseding Treasury Order 120-01, dated January 24, 2003),
to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions and duties in the
administration and enforcement of these provisions.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to
establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate 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
the 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;
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.
Eastern Connecticut Highlands Petition
TTB received a petition from Steven Vollweiler, president of Sharpe
Hill Vineyard, proposing the establishment of the approximately 1,246-
square mile ``Eastern Connecticut Highlands'' AVA. The proposed Eastern
Connecticut Highlands AVA covers the eastern third of the State and
includes all or portions of Hartford, New Haven, Tolland, Windham, New
London, and Middlesex Counties. Sixteen commercially-producing
vineyards covering approximately 114.75 acres are distributed
throughout the proposed AVA. An additional 20.5 acres of commercial
vineyards are planned for the near future. Six wineries are also within
the proposed AVA, with an additional three new wineries planned for the
near future. Grape varieties planted within the proposed AVA include
cold-resistant varietals such as St. Croix, Traminette, Vidal, Cayuga,
Frontenac, and Vignoles.
According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the
proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA include its geology,
topography, soils, and climate. Unless otherwise noted, all information
and data pertaining to the proposed AVA contained in this document are
from the petition for the proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA
and its supporting exhibits.
Name Evidence
The proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA is located in what
is known and referred to as the upland areas east of the Central Valley
of Connecticut. These upland areas are commonly referred to as the
``eastern highlands.'' The petition proposes adding ``Connecticut'' to
the proposed AVA name in order to avoid confusion with other regions in
the United States that are referred to as ``eastern highlands.''
Examples of the use of the term ``eastern highlands'' to describe
the region of the proposed AVA include an article about Connecticut's
physiography that appears on the Connecticut Department of Energy &
Environmental Protection's web page. The article describes the region
of the proposed AVA as ``the Eastern Uplands or Highlands region.'' \1\
The same web page also contains an article on the Air Line State Park
Trail, which follows the rail bed of a rail line that formerly ran
between Boston and New York City. This article states that in order for
the rail line to be built, certain political and physical obstacles
needed to be overcome, one of which was ``Connecticut's eastern
highlands.'' \2\ In its entry on Connecticut, an online geography
encyclopedia notes that, ``The state is divided into two roughly equal
sections, usually called the eastern highland and the western highland,
which are separated by the Connecticut Valley lowland.'' \3\ As
supporting name evidence, the petitioner provided a link to a hiking
website with a page titled ``Eastern Highlands Rock Climbing'' \4\ that
includes rock climbing locations within the proposed AVA. The petition
included a map of the physical geology
[[Page 64049]]
of Connecticut, which shows the three regions of the State, including
an area labeled ``Eastern Highlands.'' Finally, the petition notes that
a major healthcare organization that serves the region of the proposed
AVA is named the Eastern Highlands Health District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/wildlife/Pdf_files/nongame/ctwap/2005cwcs/CWCSCh2.pdf.
\2\ https://www.ct.gov/deep/airlinetrail.
\3\ https://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/us/connecticut-state-united-states-geography.html.
\4\ https://www.mountainproject.com/v/eastern-highlands/10607668.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA encompasses the
upland region of eastern Connecticut. According to the petition, the
proposed boundary closely follows certain fault lines that lie along
the geologic boundaries of the uplands region. The eastern and southern
proposed boundaries approximate the Lake Char Fault and the Honey Hill
Fault, respectively, and the western boundary follows the Eastern
Border Fault of the Mesozoic Harford Basin. Beyond these boundaries,
the topography and climate differ from within the proposed AVA. The
Massachusetts-Connecticut State line forms the northern boundary of the
proposed AVA because the climate and elevations of the region to the
north of the proposed AVA differ slightly from the climate and
elevations of the proposed AVA and because the proposed ``Eastern
Connecticut Highlands'' name does not extend into Massachusetts.
Distinguishing Features
The distinguishing features of the proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA are its geology, topography, soils, and climate.
Geology
According to the petition, the varying resistance to erosion of the
underlying rocks determines the topography and the physiographic
provinces of Connecticut. The proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands
AVA is underlain by a Paleozoic formation generally referred to by
geologists as Iapetus Terrane, named for the ancient ocean that once
covered the region. The Iapetus Terrane is comprised largely of
metamorphic rocks that are difficult to erode, resulting in the hills
and mountains that characterize the landscape of the proposed AVA. The
underlying geology also plays a major role in the formation of soils
within the proposed AVA. The topography and soils of the proposed AVA
will be discussed later in this document.
To the west of the proposed AVA, the region known as the Central
Valley is underlain by younger, more easily eroded sandstone, shale,
and basalt lava flows that have a significantly different chemical
composition than the geological formations of the proposed AVA. The
regions to the east and south of the proposed AVA are part of the
Avalonia Terrane, which consists of older, Pre-Cambrian rocks.
Topography
The proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA is characterized by
hilly-to-mountainous terrain. Elevations within the proposed AVA range
from about 200 feet in the valley floors between the hills to just more
than 1,000 feet at the highest elevations in the northern portion.
Along the eastern and western edges of the proposed AVA, the hills that
run along the Eastern Border fault and the Lake Char Fault were formed
from erosion-resistant metamorphic rocks. As a result, these hills tend
to have sharp ridgelines and high elevations. In the central portion of
the proposed AVA, the hills formed from metamorphic rocks that were
less erosion-resistant than the rocks along the eastern and western
edges. As a result, the hills in the central portion of the proposed
AVA are more rounded and are ``closely crammed together, almost nudging
each other for more space.'' \5\ The petition states that the tops of
these hills have concordant elevations, meaning that one hilltop will
have about the same elevation as the neighboring hills. The hilltop
elevations decrease as one moves from north to south. The petition
states that if one were to imagine placing a gigantic sheet of plywood
on top of the hills, the plywood would form a plane that gently slopes
southward at about 10 to 20 feet per mile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Michael Bell, The Face of Connecticut. State Geological and
Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin 100 (1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By contrast, the region to the west of the proposed AVA is a broad,
flat valley. Elevations within the valley range from about 150 feet to
250 feet. South of the proposed AVA, within the region known as the
Coastal Slope, elevations are also generally lower than within the
proposed AVA, ranging from sea level to about 400 feet. The shoreline
of this coastal region consists of rocky prominences separated by coves
and tidal lands that may extend several miles inland. The highlands
terrain of the proposed AVA extends north into Massachusetts and east
into Rhode Island, but the elevations differ in those locations. The
petition states that the highlands of Massachusetts have generally
higher elevations than the proposed AVA. The petition also notes that
the highlands of Rhode Island diminish as one moves eastward, and the
elevations become lower.
The petition states that topography affects viticulture within the
proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA because topography impacts
the climate of a region. Regions with higher elevations, such as the
proposed AVA, generally have a colder climate than regions with lower
elevations, such as the neighboring Central Valley. Additionally,
regions that are closer to the coast, such as the Coastal Slope region
south of the proposed AVA and the lower elevations of Rhode Island, are
more significantly affected by maritime climate than higher inland
regions like the proposed AVA. Temperatures affect the varietals of
grapes that can be successfully grown in any given area, as will be
discussed later in this document.
Soils
According to the petition, Connecticut was affected by the last Ice
Age glacier, which covered all of the State with ice a mile or more
thick. As the ice slowly flowed in a generally southerly direction, it
scraped and eroded the underlying bedrock, which contains an abundance
of mineral nutrients. Eroded debris deposited by glaciers is referred
to as glacial till. Glacial till soils are generally fertile and well-
suited for agriculture, including viticulture.
There are two main types of glacial till--lodgement (or basal)
till, which is material deposited by glaciers as they move across the
landscape, and ablation (or meltout) till, which is material deposited
as a stagnant or slow moving glacier melts. The petition states that
the soils of the proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA developed
on lodgement till. These soils are thick sandy-to-silty loams and can
range from well to poorly drained and are typically less permeable than
soils formed from ablation till. According to the petition, the
proposed AVA has the largest area of lodgement till soils in the State.
By contrast, the Coastal Slope region of Connecticut, south of the
proposed AVA, has the smallest amount of lodgement till soils. The
southern and western regions of the State contain large areas of
ablation soils. Soils in the Central Valley west of the proposed AVA
formed in widespread glacial lake beds and are often poorly drained.
The petition also provided information on the concentrations of
seven elements found in the soils of the proposed AVA and the regions
to the east, south, and west that play important roles in vine
nutrition: Calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, phosphorous, sulfur,
and zinc. The petition states that when compared to the Central Valley,
the proposed AVA
[[Page 64050]]
has higher levels of calcium, iron, magnesium, and sulfur, and lower
levels of potassium, phosphorous, and zinc. The petition states that
these differences in soil chemistry are due to the very different
chemical composition of the geological features underlying the Central
Valley, which are formed primarily from sedimentary rocks and basalt.
Compared to the regions to the east and south, the proposed AVA has
similar levels of calcium, phosphorus, and sulfur, higher levels of
iron, magnesium, and zinc, and lower levels of potassium. The petition
states that there are fewer chemical differences between the soils of
the proposed AVA and the regions to the east and south because similar
metamorphic rocks comprise the underlying geological features of all
three of these regions. However, the proposed AVA does contain some
soils derived from mafic rocks, which are igneous rocks that are very
rich in iron and magnesium and contribute to the higher levels of those
elements within the proposed AVA's soils.
The petition notes that calcium plays a role in a vine's ability to
uptake iron, and too much calcium can inhibit iron uptake. Iron is
necessary for plants, including grapevines, to undertake chlorophyll
synthesis, which allows for the production of nutrients needed for
grapevine growth.\6\ Lack of iron may lead to chlorosis--an iron
deficiency that may cause yellowing on grapevines and ultimately lead
to grapevine death.\7\ Magnesium is involved with carbohydrate
metabolism, and a lack of magnesium may also lead to chlorosis.\8\
Phosphorous is involved with energy transport in the vines, and a
phosphorous deficiency can reduce grapevine growth and cause premature
grape ripening.\9\ Potassium helps maintain fruit acidity by exchange
with hydrogen ions, and a potassium deficiency can harm grapevines and
cause grapes to unevenly ripen or fail to ripen.\10\ Higher levels of
sulfur are generally known to increase soil acidity and provide
grapevines with vitamins necessary for grapevine growth.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See James Schuster, Focus on Plant Problems--Chlorosis.
University of Illinois. https://extension.illinois.edu/focus/index.cfm?problem=chlorosis (viewed June 5, 2018).
\7\ Id; see also Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture
425-426 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2nd ed. 1974).
\8\ General Viticulture at 425.
\9\ Id.
\10\ Id. at 415-418.
\11\ Id. at 426-427.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the petition included the following table listing the most
common soil series of the proposed AVA, the Central Valley to the west,
and the Avalon Terrane to the south and east. The table shows that the
proposed AVA shares some of the same soils as the regions to the south
and east but contains none of the soils found in the region to the
west. The petition states that the greater difference in soils series
between the proposed AVA and the Central Valley is due to the greater
differences in the underlying geology. The proposed AVA and the regions
to the east and south have similar underlying geologic structures, but
the slight chemical differences contribute to the slight differences in
soil series.
Table 1--Soil Series
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Valley Avalon Terrane (east
Proposed AVA (west) and south)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agawam-Merrimac-Hinckley, Branford-Manchester, Agawam-Merrimac-
Brimfield-Brookfield, Cheshire- Hinckley,
Broadbrook-Rainbow, Canton- Wethersfield- Broadbrook-Rainbow,
Charlton-Hollis, Charlton- Manchester, Canton-Charlton-
Hollis, Hinckley-Merrimac, Cheshire- Hollis, Charlton-
Hollis-Charlton, Hollis- Yalesville, Elridge- Hollis, Hollis-
Woodbridge, Paxton- Bancroft-Scitico, Charlton,
Woodbridge. Hadley-Winooski, Narragansett-
Hartford- Hollis, Paxton-
Manchester, Holyoke- Woodbridge.
Wethersfield-
Cheshire, Penwood-
Manchester, Rumney-
Podunk,
Wethersfield-
Holyoke-Broadbrook,
Wethersfield-
Ludlow, Windsor-
Ninigret-Merrimac.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate
The petition included information on the average annual
temperatures, growing degree days (GDDs) \12\, coldest recorded
temperature, average date of the latest spring frost, and average date
of the earliest fall frost for the proposed Eastern Connecticut
Highlands AVA and the surrounding regions. The data was gathered from
1996 to 2015 and is included in the following table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In the Winkler climate classification system, annual heat
accumulation during the growing season, measured in annual growing
degree days (GDDs), defines climatic regions. One GDD accumulates
for each degree Fahrenheit that a day's mean temperature is above 50
degrees, the minimum temperature required for grapevine growth. Id.
at 61-64.
Table 2--Climate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average annual Coldest
Location (direction from proposed AVA) temperature Growing degree temperature Average date of last spring Average date of first fall
(fahrenheit) days (fahrenheit) frost frost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windham Airport (within)................ 50.1 2,780 -13 May 3......................... October 15.
Windsor Locks, CT (west)................ 51.3 3,036 -11 April 23...................... October 15.
Hartford, CT (west)..................... 52.2 3,185 -4 April 12...................... October 23.
Groton, CT (south)...................... 51.5 2,709 -5 April 18...................... October 26.
New Haven, CT (south)................... 52.5 3,057 -2 April 9....................... November 1.
Worcester, MA (north)................... 50.5 2,445 -16 April 20...................... October 21.
Fitchburg, MA (north)................... 49.7 2,667 -11 April 23...................... October 17.
Orange, MA (north)...................... 47.2 2,409 -22 May 10........................ October 7.
Lincoln, RI (east)...................... 50 2,577 -9 April 24...................... October 23.
Warwick, RI (east)...................... 52.2 3,029 -6 April 12...................... October 31.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64051]]
The data shows that the proposed AVA has average annual
temperatures that are generally similar to the surrounding locations.
However, this data also shows more pronounced differences in other
climate measurements. When compared to the region to the north, the
proposed AVA has significantly higher GDD accumulations than all three
northern locations, indicating warmer growing season temperatures. The
proposed AVA also has a generally shorter growing season than two of
the northern locations, as indicated by the later last-spring-frost
date and earlier first-fall-frost date for the proposed AVA. Compared
to the regions to the south and east, the proposed AVA has lower GDD
accumulations than two of the locations. The proposed AVA also has a
shorter growing season than all four of the southern and eastern
comparison locations, which are closer to the Long Island Sound and
thus benefit from temperature-moderating marine breezes. Finally,
compared to the Central Valley region to the west, the proposed AVA has
lower GDD accumulations and a shorter growing season than both western
comparison locations.
The petition states that the GDD accumulations within the proposed
Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA and each of the surrounding regions
are sufficient to ripen most Vitis vinifera varietals. However, the
petition goes on to state that cold hardiness is the prime determinant
of which varietals can be successfully grown in the proposed AVA. The
proposed AVA has the lowest minimum temperature of all of the
surrounding regions except for two locations to the north. Most
vinifera varietals do poorly in climates with extreme cold winter
temperatures, which can kill dormant vines, or late spring frosts,
which can damage tender new vine growth. As a result, most vineyards in
the proposed AVA plant cold-hardy non-vinifera hybrids such as St.
Croix, Traminette, Vidal, Cayuga, Frontanec, and Vignoles. By contrast,
vineyards planted to the south of the proposed AVA, within the warmer
coastal region, plant more vinifera varietals including Cabernet franc,
Merlot, Riesling, and Chardonnay.
Summary of Distinguishing Features
In summary, the geology, topography, soils, and climate of the
proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA distinguish it from the
surrounding regions. The proposed AVA is a region of hills and
mountains with underlying geological features that are resistant to
erosion. To the west of the proposed AVA in the Central Valley, the
topography is characterized by a broad, flat plain with underlying
geological features that are easily eroded. North of the proposed AVA,
the elevations are generally higher. To the east and south, the
underlying geological features are older, and the elevation of the
topography gradually descends to the coast.
The soils of the proposed AVA developed on the largest area of
lodgement till in the State and consist of thick sandy-to-silty loams.
The regions to the east and south of the proposed AVA share some of the
same soil series of the proposed AVA, but the AVA has lower potassium
levels and higher levels of iron, magnesium, and zinc than in these
regions. Additionally, the soils to the south and east of the proposed
AVA contain less lodgement till. To the west of the proposed AVA, the
soils developed in glacial lake beds and are of different soil series
than the soils of the proposed AVA. The soils to the west of the
proposed AVA also contain lower levels of calcium, iron, magnesium, and
sulfur than the soils of the proposed AVA.
The climate of the proposed AVA is generally cooler than most of
the surrounding regions and is suitable for growing cold-hardy hybrid
varietals of grapes. The regions to the south, east, and west all have
warmer lowest-recorded temperatures and earlier last-spring-frost dates
than the proposed AVA, making those regions more suitable to growing
vinifera varietals that are less cold-hardy. The region to the north of
the proposed AVA has GDD accumulations and lowest-recorded temperatures
that are generally lower than for the proposed AVA.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to establish the approximately
1,246 square-mile Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA merits
consideration and public comment, as invited in this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of the petitioned-for
AVA in the proposed regulatory text published at the end of this
proposed rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the proposed 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, 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 Sec. 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB regulations (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 Sec. 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
4.39(i)(2)) for details.
If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, its name, ``Eastern
Connecticut Highlands,'' 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)). The text of the proposed regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the name ``Eastern Connecticut
Highlands'' in a brand name, including a trademark, or in another label
reference as to the origin of the wine, would have to ensure that the
product is eligible to use the AVA name as an appellation of origin if
this proposed rule is adopted as a final rule. Accordingly, the
proposed part 9 regulatory text set forth in this document specifies
the full name ``Eastern Connecticut Highlands'' as a term of
viticultural significance for the proposed AVA for the purposes of part
4 of the TTB regulations.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
TTB invites comments from interested members of the public on
whether it should establish the proposed AVA. TTB is also interested in
receiving comments on the sufficiency and accuracy of the name,
boundary, soils, climate, and other required information submitted in
support of the petition. Please provide any available specific
information in support of your comments.
Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the
proposed Eastern Connecticut Highlands AVA on wine labels that include
the term ``Eastern Connecticut Highlands'' as discussed above under
Impact on Current Wine Labels, TTB is particularly interested in
comments regarding whether there will be a conflict between the
proposed AVA name and currently used brand names.
[[Page 64052]]
If a commenter believes that a conflict will arise, the comment should
describe the nature of that conflict, including any anticipated
negative economic impact that approval of the proposed AVA will have on
an existing viticultural enterprise. TTB is also interested in
receiving suggestions for ways to avoid conflicts, for example, by
adopting a modified or different name for the AVA.
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this notice by using one of the
following three methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the
online comment form posted with this notice within Docket No. TTB-2018-
0010 on ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal, at
https://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available
under Notice No. 179 on the TTB website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml">https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files may be attached to comments
submitted via Regulations.gov. For complete instructions on how to use
Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on the ``Help'' tab.
U.S. Mail: You may send comments via postal mail to the
Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005.
Hand Delivery/Courier: You may hand-carry your comments or
have them hand-carried to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau,
1310 G Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005.
Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this
notice. Your comments must reference Notice No. 179 and include your
name and mailing address. Your comments also must be made in English,
be legible, and be written in language acceptable for public
disclosure. TTB does not acknowledge receipt of comments, and TTB
considers all comments as originals.
In your comment, please clearly state if you are commenting for
yourself or on behalf of an association, business, or other entity. If
you are commenting on behalf of an entity, your comment must include
the entity's name, as well as your name and position title. If you
comment via Regulations.gov, please enter the entity's name in the
``Organization'' blank of the online comment form. If you comment via
postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please submit your entity's
comment on letterhead.
You may also write to the Administrator before the comment closing
date to ask for a public hearing. The Administrator reserves the right
to determine whether to hold a public hearing.
Confidentiality
All submitted comments and attachments are part of the public
record and subject to disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your
comments that you consider to be confidential or inappropriate for
public disclosure.
Public Disclosure
TTB will post, and you may view, copies of this notice, selected
supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments received about
this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2018-0010 on the Federal e-
rulemaking portal, Regulations.gov, at https://www.regulations.gov. A
direct link to that docket is available on the TTB website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 179. You may
also reach the relevant docket through the Regulations.gov search page
at https://www.regulations.gov. For information on how to use
Regulations.gov, click on the site's ``Help'' tab.
All posted comments will display the commenter's name, organization
(if any), city, and State, and, in the case of mailed comments, all
address information, including email addresses. TTB may omit voluminous
attachments or material that the Bureau considers unsuitable for
posting.
You may also view copies of this notice, all related petitions,
maps and other supporting materials, and any electronic or mailed
comments that TTB receives about this proposal by appointment at the
TTB Public Reading Room, 1310 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20005. You
may also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5 x 11-inch page. Please note
that TTB is unable to provide copies of USGS maps or other similarly-
sized documents that may be included as part of the AVA petition.
Contact TTB's Public Reading Room at the above address or by telephone
at 202-822-9904 to schedule an appointment or to request copies of
comments or other materials.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed regulation imposes no new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived
from the use of a viticultural area name would be the result of a
proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this proposed 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 notice of proposed rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB proposes to amend
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.__to read as follows:
Sec. 9.__ Eastern Connecticut Highlands.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Eastern Connecticut Highlands''. For purposes of part 4 of
this chapter, ``Eastern Connecticut Highlands'' is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The one United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:125,000 scale topographic map used to determine the boundary of the
Eastern Connecticut Highlands viticultural area is titled ``State of
Connecticut.''
(c) Boundary. The Eastern Connecticut Highlands viticultural area
is located in Hartford, New Haven, Tolland, Windham, New London, and
Middlesex Counties in Connecticut. The boundary of the Eastern
Connecticut Highlands viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the State of Connecticut map at the
intersection of State Highway 83 and the Massachusetts-Connecticut
State line in Somers. From the beginning point, proceed east along the
Massachusetts-Connecticut State line approximately 33 miles to the
intersection of the shared
[[Page 64053]]
State line and an unnamed road, known locally as Bonnette Avenue, in
Thompson; then
(2) Proceed southeast along Bonnette Avenue approximately 0.38 mile
to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Sand Dam
Road; then
(3) Proceed southeast along Sand Dam Road approximately 1.5 miles
to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Thompson
Road; then
(4) Proceed south along Thompson Road approximately 1,000 feet to
its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Quaddick Town
Farm Road; then
(5) Proceed east then south along Quaddick Town Farm Road
approximately 5.5 miles into the town of Putnam, where the road becomes
known as East Putnam Road, and continuing south along East Putnam Road
approximately 1 mile to its intersection with U.S. Highway 44; then
(6) Proceed west along U.S. Highway 44 approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Tucker Hill Road;
then
(7) Proceed south along Tucker Hill Road approximately 0.38 mile to
its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Five Mile River
Road; then
(8) Proceed southwest then west along Five Mile River Road 1.75
miles to its intersection with State Highway 21; then
(9) Proceed south along State Highway 21 approximately 2 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 12; then
(10) Proceed south along State Highway 12 approximately 1 mile to
its intersection with Five Mile River; then
(11) Proceed west along Five Mile River approximately 0.13 mile to
its intersection with the highway marked on the map State Highway 52
(also known as Interstate 395); then
(12) Proceed south along State Highway 52/Interstate 395
approximately 14.5 miles to its intersection with State Highway 201;
then
(13) Proceed southeast along State Highway 201 approximately 5.25
miles to its intersection with State Highway 165; then
(14) Proceed southwest along State Highway 165 approximately 10
miles to its intersection with State Highway 2; then
(15) Proceed west along State Highway 2 approximately 1 mile to its
intersection with State Highway 82; then
(16) Proceed southwest, then northwest, then southwest along State
Highway 82 approximately 27.72 miles to its intersection with State
Highway 9; then
(17) Proceed southeast along State Highway 9 approximately 3.7
miles to its intersection with State Highway 80; then
(18) Proceed west along State Highway 80 approximately 15.7 miles
to its intersection with State Highway 77; then
(19) Proceed north along State Highway 77 approximately 8.3 miles
to its intersection with State Highway 17; then
(20) Proceed northeast along State Highway 17 approximately 6.8
miles to the point where it becomes concurrent with State Highway 9;
then
(21) Proceed north along concurrent State Highway 17-State Highway
9 approximately 0.75 mile the point where State Highway 17 departs from
State Highway 9; then
(22) Proceed east along State Highway 17 approximately 0.25 mile,
crossing over the Connecticut River, to the highway's intersection with
State Highway 17A; then
(23) Proceed north along State Highway 17A approximately 3 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 17; then
(24) Proceed north along State Highway 17 approximately 8 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 94; then
(25) Proceed east along State Highway 94 approximately 4 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 83; then
(26) Proceed north along State Highway 83 approximately 25 miles,
returning to the beginning point.
Signed: June 25, 2018.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: December 4, 2018.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2018-27016 Filed 12-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
