Establishment of the Candy Mountain Viticultural Area and Modification of the Yakima Valley Viticultural Area, 60358-60362 [2020-18741]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60358
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
14 CFR part 91, subpart K, the FAA suggests
that you notify your principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of
the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before
operating any aircraft complying with this
AD through an AMOC.
(h) Additional Information
(1) Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin
429–15–21, Revision B, dated May 11, 2017,
which is not incorporated by reference,
contains additional information about the
subject of this AD. For service information
identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter
Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de
l’Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4; telephone
450–437–2862 or 800–363–8023; fax 450–
433–0272; or at https://
www.bellcustomer.com. You may view the
referenced service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N–
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.
(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (Transport
Canada) AD No. CF–2016–11R2, dated
October 18, 2017. You may view the
Transport Canada AD on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No.
FAA–2018–0334.
(i) Subject
Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC)
Code: 2700, Flight Control System.
Issued on September 21, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
2. On page 53074, in the second
column, in the second full paragraph, in
the 15th line ‘‘$1 ×’’ should read ‘‘$1x’’.
3. On page 53074, in the second
column, in the second full paragraph, in
the 17th line ‘‘$99 ×’’ should read
‘‘$99x’’.
4. (a) On page 53075, in the third
column, in the first full paragraph, in
the 11th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(b) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
13th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(c) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
15th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(d) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
20th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(e) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
27th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(f) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
37th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
§ 1.245A–5
[Corrected]
5. On page 53086, in § 1.245A–5, in
the third column, in the second full
paragraph, in the 19th line the heading
‘‘(B) Special rules regarding carryover
foreign target stock.’’ should start a new
paragraph.
[FR Doc. 2020–21127 Filed 9–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
[FR Doc. C1–2020–18543 Filed 9–24–20; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
Internal Revenue Service
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
26 CFR Part 1
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
[TD 9909]
RIN 1545–BP35
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Limitation on Deduction for Dividends
Received From Certain Foreign
Corporations and Amounts Eligible for
Section 954 Look-Through Exception
Correction
In rule document 2020–18543
beginning on page 53068 in the issue of
Thursday, August 27, 2020, make the
following corrections:
1. (a) On page 53074, in the second
column, in the second full paragraph, in
the ninth line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(b) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
13th line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read
‘‘$100x’’.
(c) On the same page, in the same
column, in the same paragraph, in the
21st line ‘‘$100 ×’’ should read ‘‘$100x’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:33 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2019–0006; T.D. TTB–163;
Ref: Notice No. 184]
RIN 1513–AC42
Establishment of the Candy Mountain
Viticultural Area and Modification of
the Yakima Valley Viticultural Area
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 815-acre ‘‘Candy
Mountain’’ viticultural area in Benton
County, Washington. TTB is also
expanding the boundary of the existing
1,093-square mile Yakima Valley
viticultural area by approximately 72
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
acres in order to avoid a partial overlap
with the newly established Candy
Mountain viticultural area. Both the
existing Yakima Valley viticultural area
and the newly established Candy
Mountain viticultural area are located
entirely within the existing 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
October 26, 2020.
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 the functions
and duties in the administration and
enforcement of these provisions to the
TTB Administrator through Treasury
Order 120–01, dated December 10, 2013
(superseding Treasury Order 120–01,
dated January 24, 2003).
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 to TTB 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
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
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 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;
• If the proposed AVA is to be
established within, or overlapping, an
existing AVA, an explanation that both
identifies the attributes of the proposed
AVA that are consistent with the
existing AVA and explains how the
proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct
from the existing AVA and therefore
appropriate for separate recognition;
and
• A detailed narrative description of
the proposed AVA boundary based on
USGS map markings.
Candy Mountain Petition
TTB received a petition from Dr.
Kevin R. Pogue, a professor of geology
at Whitman College, proposing the
establishment of the ‘‘Candy Mountain’’
AVA in Benton County, Washington.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
The proposed Candy Mountain AVA
lies entirely within the established
Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74)
and partially within the established
Yakima Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.69). To
avoid the partial overlap, the petition
also proposed expanding the Yakima
Valley AVA by approximately 72 acres
so that the entire proposed Candy
Mountain AVA would be within the
established AVA. Dr. Pogue submitted
the petition on behalf of the following
industry members with wine businesses
within the proposed AVA: Ramer
Holtan, who is developing a commercial
wine grape vineyard on Candy
Mountain; Premiere Columbia Partners
LLC, owners of Candy Mountain
Vineyard; and Paul and Vickie Kitzke,
owners of Kitzke Cellars.
Within the 815-acre proposed AVA,
there are currently two producing
commercial vineyards, Candy Mountain
Vineyard and Kitzke Cellars, which
cover a total of approximately 54 acres.
Additionally, Mr. Holtan has secured
long-term leases from the Washington
Department of Natural Resources to
plant 200 additional acres of vineyards
within the proposed AVA. A copy of the
lease was included in the petition as
evidence of Mr. Holtan’s intent to grow
wine grapes. Currently, Kitzke Cellars is
the only winery within the proposed
AVA, although the petition notes that
other wineries in Washington produce
wines from grapes grown within the
proposed AVA. According to the
petition, the distinguishing features of
the proposed Candy Mountain AVA are
its soils and topography.
The soils of the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA are developed from
wind-deposited silt (loess) and fine sand
overlying sediment. The sediment is a
mixture of gravel and sand that was
derived directly from surging ice-age
flood waters and also includes silt and
fine sand that settled out of suspension
when the flood waters pooled behind
downstream topographic restrictions.
The loess and sediment, in turn, both
overlay basalt bedrock. The thickness of
the flood-water sediment within the
proposed Candy Mountain AVA
gradually decreases as one moves up the
mountain, and the sediment is not
found within the upper 70 feet of the
proposed AVA. By contrast, the regions
to the north, south, and west of the
mountain and the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA are at lower elevations
and, therefore, have thicker
accumulations of flood sediments in
their soils.
According to the petition, the soils of
the proposed AVA have an effect on
viticulture. The soils are fairly loose,
which allows for root expansion. The
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60359
soils also do not have a large water
holding capacity, meaning that vineyard
owners must monitor soil moisture
carefully to ensure the vines have
adequate access to water. Finally, the
thin soils allow roots to come into
contact with the underlying basalt
bedrock, which is comprised of
calcium-rich feldspars and other
minerals that are rich in iron and
magnesium, such as pyroxene and
olivine. The petition states that these
minerals and nutrients are only present
in the bedrock, so vines planted in the
surrounding regions where the soil is
thicker do not have the same access to
these elements as vines planted within
the proposed AVA.
Topography also distinguishes the
proposed Candy Mountain AVA from
the surrounding regions. The proposed
Candy Mountain AVA is located on the
southwest-facing slope of Candy
Mountain. Within the proposed AVA,
elevations range from 640 feet to 1,320
feet, and slope angles are gentle to
moderate and range from 2 to 20
degrees. Gentle slope angles facilitate
mechanized vineyard maintenance and
harvest. A south-facing slope aspect
increases the amount per unit area of
solar radiation that reaches the surface
and promotes photosynthesis in the
grape vines, as well as grape
development and maturation.
By contrast, the valley floor
surrounding both the entire Candy
Mountain and the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA is essentially flat, with
slope angles of less than 2 degrees, and
is susceptible to cold air pooling and the
associated frosts and freezes.
Additionally, much of the land
immediately surrounding the proposed
AVA is a valley floor with elevations
below 640 feet. The exception is the
northeastern side of Candy Mountain,
which has similar elevations to the
proposed Candy Mountain AVA but was
excluded from the proposed AVA due to
northeasterly slope aspect and steep
slope angles of up to 60 degrees.
Proposed Modification of the Yakima
Valley AVA
As previously noted, the petition to
establish the proposed Candy Mountain
AVA also requested an expansion of the
established 1,093-square mile Yakima
Valley AVA. The proposed Candy
Mountain AVA is located in the
northeastern portion of the Yakima
Valley AVA. Most of the proposed
Candy Mountain AVA would, if
established, be located within the
current boundary of the Yakima Valley
AVA. However, unless the boundary of
the Yakima Valley AVA is modified, a
small portion of the proposed Candy
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
60360
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Mountain AVA would be outside the
Yakima Valley AVA. The proposed
modification of the Yakima Valley AVA
boundary would increase the size of the
established AVA by 72 acres and would
result in the entire proposed Candy
Mountain AVA being within the Yakima
Valley AVA.
The petition states that the vineyards
within the proposed expansion area are
within the proposed Candy Mountain
AVA but lie approximately 600 feet
outside of the current boundary of the
Yakima Valley AVA. The vineyards did
not exist at the time the Yakima Valley
AVA was established. However, the
petition states that the proposed
expansion area is associated with both
the feature known as the Yakima Valley
and the Yakima Valley AVA. For
example, the proposed expansion area is
part of the larger Yakima River drainage
basin, which is a characteristic of the
Yakima Valley AVA. Additionally, the
petition states that the owners of Kitzke
Cellars, who manage the seven acres of
vineyards within the proposed
expansion area, have aligned themselves
with the Yakima Valley AVA through
their membership in Wine Yakima
Valley, which is the Yakima Valley
AVA’s marketing organization.
The petition asserts that the proposed
expansion area has similar soils,
elevation, slope angles, and slope aspect
as the remainder of the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA, which is within the
Yakima Valley AVA. The petition also
describes the general similarities that
the entire proposed Candy Mountain
AVA shares with the established
Yakima Valley AVA, such as similar soil
series and geology.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 184 in the
Federal Register on August 19, 2019 (84
FR 42863), proposing to establish the
Candy Mountain AVA and expand the
Yakima Valley AVA. In the notice, TTB
summarized the evidence from the
petition regarding the name, boundary,
and distinguishing features for the
proposed AVA and the proposed AVA
expansion area. The notice also
compared the distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA and the proposed
expansion area to the surrounding areas.
For a detailed description of the
evidence relating to the name,
boundary, and distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA and boundary
modification, and for a detailed
comparison of the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA to the
surrounding areas, see Notice No. 184.
In Notice No. 184, TTB solicited
comments on the accuracy of the name,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
boundary, and other required
information submitted in support of the
petition. In addition, given the proposed
Candy Mountain AVA’s location within
the Yakima Valley and Columbia Valley
AVAs, TTB solicited comments on
whether the evidence submitted in the
petition regarding the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA
sufficiently differentiates it from the two
established AVAs. TTB also requested
comments on whether the geographic
features of the proposed AVA are so
distinguishable from the two established
AVAs that the proposed AVA should no
longer be part of the established AVAs.
The comment period closed October 18,
2019.
In response to Notice No. 184, TTB
received a total of two comments. One
of the comments was from a winery
owner who sources grapes from both the
proposed Candy Mountain AVA and the
adjacent Red Mountain AVA (27 CFR
9.167). The commenter supports the
proposed Candy Mountain AVA
because ‘‘there do appear to be
differences due to a sense of place
between those two adjacent (proposed)
AVAs.’’ The second comment was from
the petitioner, Dr. Kevin Pogue. In his
comment, Dr. Pogue pointed out that the
proposed rule incorrectly identified the
size of the Yakima Valley AVA as 1,093
acres instead of 1,093 square miles. TTB
notes that it has corrected the
description of the size of the Yakima
Valley AVA in this final rule document.
Neither of the comments mentioned the
proposed expansion of the established
Yakima Valley AVA or the inclusion of
the proposed Candy Mountain AVA
within the established Yakima Valley or
Columbia Valley AVAs.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition
and the comments received in response
to Notice No. 184, TTB finds that the
evidence provided by the petitioner
supports the establishment of the Candy
Mountain AVA and the modification of
the Yakima Valley AVA boundary.
Accordingly, under the authority of the
FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, and
parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations,
TTB establishes the ‘‘Candy Mountain’’
AVA in Benton County, Washington,
and modifies the boundary of the
Yakima Valley AVA effective 30 days
from the publication date of this
document.
TTB has also determined that the
Candy Mountain AVA will remain part
of both the established Columbia Valley
AVA and the Yakima Valley AVA. As
discussed in Notice No. 184, the Candy
Mountain AVA shares some broad
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
characteristics with both established
AVAs. For example, the proposed AVA
is located within the Yakima River
drainage basin, which is a characteristic
of the Yakima Valley AVA. The
Warden-Shano Association and the
Scootenay-Starbuck Association soils
are found within both the proposed
AVA and the Yakima Valley AVA.
Elevations within the proposed AVA are
under 2,000 feet, which is a general
characteristic of the Columbia Valley
AVA. However, the Candy Mountain
AVA is located on an isolated mountain,
whereas the majority of the Yakima
Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs are
described as broad, flat valleys.
Additionally, the proposed AVA has
steeper slope angles than much of the
land within the Columbia Valley and
Yakima Valley AVAs.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of the Candy Mountain AVA
and the Yakima Valley AVA boundary
modification in the regulatory text
published at the end of this final rule.
Maps
The petitioners provided the required
maps, and they are listed below in the
regulatory text. The Candy Mountain
AVA boundary and the modified
Yakima Valley AVA boundary may also
be viewed on the AVA Map Explorer on
the TTB website, at https://www.ttb.gov/
wine/ava-map-explorer.
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 § 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.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
With the establishment of the Candy
Mountain AVA, its name, ‘‘Candy
Mountain,’’ 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
regulations clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the
name ‘‘Candy Mountain’’ 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 Candy
Mountain AVA will not affect the
existing Columbia Valley or Yakima
Valley AVAs, and any bottlers using
‘‘Columbia Valley’’ or ‘‘Yakima Valley’’
as an appellation of origin or in a brand
name for wines made from grapes grown
within the Columbia Valley or Yakima
Valley AVAs will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The
establishment of the Candy Mountain
AVA will allow vintners to use ‘‘Candy
Mountain,’’ ‘‘Yakima Valley,’’ and
‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as appellations of
origin for wines made primarily from
grapes grown within the Candy
Mountain AVA if the wines meet the
eligibility requirements for these
appellations.
The modification of the Yakima
Valley AVA boundary will allow
vintners to use ‘‘Yakima Valley,’’
‘‘Columbia Valley,’’ and ‘‘Candy
Mountain’’ as appellations of origin for
wines made primarily from grapes
grown within the expansion area if the
wines meet the eligibility requirements
for these appellations.
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
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.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
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. Amend § 9.69 by revising
paragraphs (b) and (c)(4), redesignating
paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(10) as
paragraphs (c)(11) through (16), and
adding new paragraphs (c)(5) through
(c)(10) to read as follows:
■
§ 9.69
Yakima Valley.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Approved maps. The United States
Geological Survey (USGS) maps used to
determine the boundary of the Yakima
Valley viticultural area are titled:
(1) Walla Walla, Washington
(1:250,000 scale), 1953; limited revision
1963;
(2) Yakima, Washington (1:250,000
scale), 1958; revised 1971;
(3) Benton City, WA (1:24,000 scale),
2013;
(4) Badger Mountain, Washington
(1:24,000 scale), 2013; and
(5) Richland, Washington (1:24,000
scale), 2014.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) Then southeast, crossing onto the
Benton City map, to the top of Red
Mountain;
(5) Then southeast to a point on East
Kennedy Road approximately 2,500 feet
east of an intermittent stream flowing
north into Lost Lake;
(6) Then southeast across the top of
Candy Mountain, crossing onto the
Badger Mountain map, and continuing
to the intersection with the
southernmost point of an unnamed road
known locally as Arena Road; then
(7) Proceed north for 0.45 mile along
Arena Road, crossing onto the Richland
map, to the intersection with the 670foot elevation contour; then
(8) Proceed generally east for 0.4 mile
along the elevation contour to the
intersection with Dallas Road; then
(9) Proceed south in a straight line for
0.5 mile, crossing onto the Badger
Mountain map, to the intersection with
Interstate 182; then
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60361
(10) Proceed southeast in a straight
line, crossing onto the Walla Walla map,
to the top of Badger Mountain;
*
*
*
*
*
■
3. Add § 9.272 to read as follows:
§ 9.272
Candy Mountain.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘Candy
Mountain’’. For purposes of part 4 of
this chapter, ‘‘Candy Mountain’’ is a
term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The three United
States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to
determine the boundary of the Candy
Mountain viticultural area are titled:
(1) Badger Mountain, Washington,
2013;
(2) Benton City, Washington, 2013;
and
(3) Richland, Washington, 2014.
(c) Boundary. The Candy Mountain
viticultural area is located in Benton
County in Washington. The boundary of
the Candy Mountain viticultural area is
as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the
Badger Mountain map at the
southernmost point of an unnamed road
known locally as Arena Road. From the
beginning point, proceed northwest in a
straight line for approximately 1.85
miles, crossing onto the Benton City
map, to the intersection with East
Kennedy Road NE; then
(2) Proceed westerly along East
Kennedy Road NE for approximately
2,500 feet to the intersection with an
intermittent creek approximately 0.8
mile south of Lost Lake; then
(3) Proceed southeasterly along the
easternmost fork of the intermittent
creek to the intersection with Interstate
82; then
(4) Proceed southeast along Interstate
82 for 2.25 miles, crossing over the
Richland map and onto the Badger
Mountain map, and continuing along
the ramp onto Interstate 182 to a point
due south of the intersection of Dallas
Road and an unnamed road known
locally as East 260 Private Road NE;
then
(5) Proceed north in a straight line for
0.5 mile, crossing onto the Richland
map, to the intersection of Dallas Road
and the 670-foot elevation contour; then
(6) Proceed west along the 670-foot
elevation contour for 0.4 mile to the
intersection with Arena Road; then
(7) Proceed southerly along Arena
Road for approximately 0.45 miles,
returning to the beginning point.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
60362
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Signed: April 14, 2020.
Mary G. Ryan,
Acting Administrator.
Approved: August 12, 2020.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020–18741 Filed 9–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 100 and 165
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0318]
2020 Quarterly Listings; Safety Zones,
Security Zones, and Special Local
Regulations
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notification of expired
temporary rules issued.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This document provides
notification of substantive rules issued
by the Coast Guard that were made
temporarily effective but expired before
they could be published in the Federal
Register. This document lists temporary
safety zones, security zones, and special
local regulations, all of limited duration
and for which timely publication in the
Federal Register was not possible.
DATES: This document lists temporary
Coast Guard rules that became effective,
primarily between July 2019 and March
SUMMARY:
2020, unless otherwise indicated, and
were terminated before they could be
published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Temporary rules listed in
this document may be viewed online,
under their respective docket numbers,
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on this document contact
Yeoman First Class Glenn Grayer, Office
of Regulations and Administrative Law,
telephone (202) 372–3862.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coast
Guard District Commanders and
Captains of the Port (COTP) must be
immediately responsive to the safety
and security needs within their
jurisdiction; therefore, District
Commanders and COTPs have been
delegated the authority to issue certain
local regulations. Safety zones may be
established for safety or environmental
purposes. A safety zone may be
stationary and described by fixed limits
or it may be described as a zone around
a vessel in motion. Security zones limit
access to prevent injury or damage to
vessels, ports, or waterfront facilities.
Special local regulations are issued to
enhance the safety of participants and
spectators at regattas and other marine
events.
Timely publication of these rules in
the Federal Register may be precluded
when a rule responds to an emergency,
or when an event occurs without
sufficient advance notice. The affected
public is, however, often informed of
these rules through Local Notices to
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Docket No.
USCG–2019–0623
USCG–2019–0547
USCG–2019–0539
USCG–2019–0611
USCG–2019–0396
USCG–2019–0583
USCG–2019–0473
USCG–2019–0601
USCG–2019–0680
USCG–2019–0713
USCG–2019–0723
USCG–2019–0731
USCG–2019–0708
USCG–2019–0668
USCG–2019–0711
USCG–2019–0766
USCG–2019–0779
USCG–2019–0791
USCG–2019–0805
USCG–2019–0969
USCG–2020–0002
USCG–2020–0016
USCG–2020–0018
USCG–2020–0026
USCG–2020–0059
USCG–2020–0020
USCG–2020–0083
USCG–2020–0070
VerDate Sep<11>2014
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
16:28 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
Mariners, press releases, and other
means. Moreover, actual notification is
provided by Coast Guard patrol vessels
enforcing the restrictions imposed by
the rule. Because Federal Register
publication was not possible before the
end of the effective period, mariners
were personally notified of the contents
of these safety zones, security zones,
special local regulations, regulated
navigation areas or drawbridge
operation regulations by Coast Guard
officials on-scene prior to any
enforcement action. However, the Coast
Guard, by law, must publish in the
Federal Register notice of substantive
rules adopted. To meet this obligation
without imposing undue expense on the
public, the Coast Guard periodically
publishes a list of these temporary
safety zones, security zones, special
local regulations, regulated navigation
areas and drawbridge operation
regulations. Permanent rules are not
included in this list because they are
published in their entirety in the
Federal Register. Temporary rules are
also published in their entirety if
sufficient time is available to do so
before they are placed in effect or
terminated.
The following unpublished rules were
placed in effect temporarily during the
period between July 2019 and March
2020 unless otherwise indicated. To
view copies of these rules, visit
www.regulations.gov and search by the
docket number indicated in the
following table.
Type
Location
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Safety Zone ............................................
Security Zones (Part 165) ......................
Safety Zone ............................................
Security Zones (Part 165) ......................
Safety Zone ............................................
Special Local Regulations ......................
Security Zones (Part 165) ......................
Safety Zone ............................................
Port Buffalo Zone ...................................
Cleveland, OH ........................................
Port Buffalo Zone ...................................
Clayton, NY ............................................
Cleveland, OH ........................................
Pacific Grove, CA ...................................
Kendall, NY .............................................
North Tonawanda, NY ............................
Erie, PA ..................................................
Port Buffalo Zone ...................................
Sodus Point, NY .....................................
Westfield, NY ..........................................
Conneaut, OH .........................................
Conneaut, OH .........................................
Lake Erie, Vermilion, OH ........................
Bratenahl, OH .........................................
Verona, NY .............................................
Presque Isle Bay, Erie, PA .....................
Cuyahoga River ......................................
Alameda, CA ..........................................
Ft Lauderdale, FL ...................................
Toledo, OH .............................................
Menominee, MI .......................................
New Orleans, LA ....................................
Port New York Zone ...............................
Tampa, FL ..............................................
Wildwood, NJ ..........................................
Chicago, IL .............................................
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Effective date
7/7/2019
7/12/2019
7/12/2019
7/20/2019
7/21/2019
7/27/2019
8/3/2019
8/3/2019
8/27/2019
9/1/2019
9/2/2019
9/3/2019
9/7/2019
9/7/2019
9/14/2019
9/17/2019
9/17/2019
10/1/2019
10/5/2019
1/5/2020
1/6/2020
1/9/2020
1/18/2020
1/18/2020
1/23/2020
1/25/2020
1/28/2020
1/28/2020
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 187 (Friday, September 25, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60358-60362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18741]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2019-0006; T.D. TTB-163; Ref: Notice No. 184]
RIN 1513-AC42
Establishment of the Candy Mountain Viticultural Area and
Modification of the Yakima Valley 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 815-acre ``Candy Mountain'' viticultural area in
Benton County, Washington. TTB is also expanding the boundary of the
existing 1,093-square mile Yakima Valley viticultural area by
approximately 72 acres in order to avoid a partial overlap with the
newly established Candy Mountain viticultural area. Both the existing
Yakima Valley viticultural area and the newly established Candy
Mountain viticultural area are located entirely within the existing
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 October 26, 2020.
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 the functions
and duties in the administration and enforcement of these provisions to
the TTB Administrator through Treasury Order 120-01, dated December 10,
2013 (superseding Treasury Order 120-01, dated January 24, 2003).
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 to TTB 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
[[Page 60359]]
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;
If the proposed AVA is to be established within, or
overlapping, an existing AVA, an explanation that both identifies the
attributes of the proposed AVA that are consistent with the existing
AVA and explains how the proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct from the
existing AVA and therefore appropriate for separate recognition; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
Candy Mountain Petition
TTB received a petition from Dr. Kevin R. Pogue, a professor of
geology at Whitman College, proposing the establishment of the ``Candy
Mountain'' AVA in Benton County, Washington. The proposed Candy
Mountain AVA lies entirely within the established Columbia Valley AVA
(27 CFR 9.74) and partially within the established Yakima Valley AVA
(27 CFR 9.69). To avoid the partial overlap, the petition also proposed
expanding the Yakima Valley AVA by approximately 72 acres so that the
entire proposed Candy Mountain AVA would be within the established AVA.
Dr. Pogue submitted the petition on behalf of the following industry
members with wine businesses within the proposed AVA: Ramer Holtan, who
is developing a commercial wine grape vineyard on Candy Mountain;
Premiere Columbia Partners LLC, owners of Candy Mountain Vineyard; and
Paul and Vickie Kitzke, owners of Kitzke Cellars.
Within the 815-acre proposed AVA, there are currently two producing
commercial vineyards, Candy Mountain Vineyard and Kitzke Cellars, which
cover a total of approximately 54 acres. Additionally, Mr. Holtan has
secured long-term leases from the Washington Department of Natural
Resources to plant 200 additional acres of vineyards within the
proposed AVA. A copy of the lease was included in the petition as
evidence of Mr. Holtan's intent to grow wine grapes. Currently, Kitzke
Cellars is the only winery within the proposed AVA, although the
petition notes that other wineries in Washington produce wines from
grapes grown within the proposed AVA. According to the petition, the
distinguishing features of the proposed Candy Mountain AVA are its
soils and topography.
The soils of the proposed Candy Mountain AVA are developed from
wind-deposited silt (loess) and fine sand overlying sediment. The
sediment is a mixture of gravel and sand that was derived directly from
surging ice-age flood waters and also includes silt and fine sand that
settled out of suspension when the flood waters pooled behind
downstream topographic restrictions. The loess and sediment, in turn,
both overlay basalt bedrock. The thickness of the flood-water sediment
within the proposed Candy Mountain AVA gradually decreases as one moves
up the mountain, and the sediment is not found within the upper 70 feet
of the proposed AVA. By contrast, the regions to the north, south, and
west of the mountain and the proposed Candy Mountain AVA are at lower
elevations and, therefore, have thicker accumulations of flood
sediments in their soils.
According to the petition, the soils of the proposed AVA have an
effect on viticulture. The soils are fairly loose, which allows for
root expansion. The soils also do not have a large water holding
capacity, meaning that vineyard owners must monitor soil moisture
carefully to ensure the vines have adequate access to water. Finally,
the thin soils allow roots to come into contact with the underlying
basalt bedrock, which is comprised of calcium-rich feldspars and other
minerals that are rich in iron and magnesium, such as pyroxene and
olivine. The petition states that these minerals and nutrients are only
present in the bedrock, so vines planted in the surrounding regions
where the soil is thicker do not have the same access to these elements
as vines planted within the proposed AVA.
Topography also distinguishes the proposed Candy Mountain AVA from
the surrounding regions. The proposed Candy Mountain AVA is located on
the southwest-facing slope of Candy Mountain. Within the proposed AVA,
elevations range from 640 feet to 1,320 feet, and slope angles are
gentle to moderate and range from 2 to 20 degrees. Gentle slope angles
facilitate mechanized vineyard maintenance and harvest. A south-facing
slope aspect increases the amount per unit area of solar radiation that
reaches the surface and promotes photosynthesis in the grape vines, as
well as grape development and maturation.
By contrast, the valley floor surrounding both the entire Candy
Mountain and the proposed Candy Mountain AVA is essentially flat, with
slope angles of less than 2 degrees, and is susceptible to cold air
pooling and the associated frosts and freezes. Additionally, much of
the land immediately surrounding the proposed AVA is a valley floor
with elevations below 640 feet. The exception is the northeastern side
of Candy Mountain, which has similar elevations to the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA but was excluded from the proposed AVA due to
northeasterly slope aspect and steep slope angles of up to 60 degrees.
Proposed Modification of the Yakima Valley AVA
As previously noted, the petition to establish the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA also requested an expansion of the established 1,093-
square mile Yakima Valley AVA. The proposed Candy Mountain AVA is
located in the northeastern portion of the Yakima Valley AVA. Most of
the proposed Candy Mountain AVA would, if established, be located
within the current boundary of the Yakima Valley AVA. However, unless
the boundary of the Yakima Valley AVA is modified, a small portion of
the proposed Candy
[[Page 60360]]
Mountain AVA would be outside the Yakima Valley AVA. The proposed
modification of the Yakima Valley AVA boundary would increase the size
of the established AVA by 72 acres and would result in the entire
proposed Candy Mountain AVA being within the Yakima Valley AVA.
The petition states that the vineyards within the proposed
expansion area are within the proposed Candy Mountain AVA but lie
approximately 600 feet outside of the current boundary of the Yakima
Valley AVA. The vineyards did not exist at the time the Yakima Valley
AVA was established. However, the petition states that the proposed
expansion area is associated with both the feature known as the Yakima
Valley and the Yakima Valley AVA. For example, the proposed expansion
area is part of the larger Yakima River drainage basin, which is a
characteristic of the Yakima Valley AVA. Additionally, the petition
states that the owners of Kitzke Cellars, who manage the seven acres of
vineyards within the proposed expansion area, have aligned themselves
with the Yakima Valley AVA through their membership in Wine Yakima
Valley, which is the Yakima Valley AVA's marketing organization.
The petition asserts that the proposed expansion area has similar
soils, elevation, slope angles, and slope aspect as the remainder of
the proposed Candy Mountain AVA, which is within the Yakima Valley AVA.
The petition also describes the general similarities that the entire
proposed Candy Mountain AVA shares with the established Yakima Valley
AVA, such as similar soil series and geology.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 184 in the Federal Register on August 19,
2019 (84 FR 42863), proposing to establish the Candy Mountain AVA and
expand the Yakima Valley AVA. In the notice, TTB summarized the
evidence from the petition regarding the name, boundary, and
distinguishing features for the proposed AVA and the proposed AVA
expansion area. The notice also compared the distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA and the proposed expansion area to the surrounding
areas. For a detailed description of the evidence relating to the name,
boundary, and distinguishing features of the proposed AVA and boundary
modification, and for a detailed comparison of the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas, see Notice No.
184.
In Notice No. 184, TTB solicited comments on the accuracy of the
name, boundary, and other required information submitted in support of
the petition. In addition, given the proposed Candy Mountain AVA's
location within the Yakima Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs, TTB
solicited comments on whether the evidence submitted in the petition
regarding the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA sufficiently
differentiates it from the two established AVAs. TTB also requested
comments on whether the geographic features of the proposed AVA are so
distinguishable from the two established AVAs that the proposed AVA
should no longer be part of the established AVAs. The comment period
closed October 18, 2019.
In response to Notice No. 184, TTB received a total of two
comments. One of the comments was from a winery owner who sources
grapes from both the proposed Candy Mountain AVA and the adjacent Red
Mountain AVA (27 CFR 9.167). The commenter supports the proposed Candy
Mountain AVA because ``there do appear to be differences due to a sense
of place between those two adjacent (proposed) AVAs.'' The second
comment was from the petitioner, Dr. Kevin Pogue. In his comment, Dr.
Pogue pointed out that the proposed rule incorrectly identified the
size of the Yakima Valley AVA as 1,093 acres instead of 1,093 square
miles. TTB notes that it has corrected the description of the size of
the Yakima Valley AVA in this final rule document. Neither of the
comments mentioned the proposed expansion of the established Yakima
Valley AVA or the inclusion of the proposed Candy Mountain AVA within
the established Yakima Valley or Columbia Valley AVAs.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition and the comments received in
response to Notice No. 184, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the
petitioner supports the establishment of the Candy Mountain AVA and the
modification of the Yakima Valley AVA boundary. Accordingly, under the
authority of the FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act
of 2002, and parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations, TTB establishes the
``Candy Mountain'' AVA in Benton County, Washington, and modifies the
boundary of the Yakima Valley AVA effective 30 days from the
publication date of this document.
TTB has also determined that the Candy Mountain AVA will remain
part of both the established Columbia Valley AVA and the Yakima Valley
AVA. As discussed in Notice No. 184, the Candy Mountain AVA shares some
broad characteristics with both established AVAs. For example, the
proposed AVA is located within the Yakima River drainage basin, which
is a characteristic of the Yakima Valley AVA. The Warden-Shano
Association and the Scootenay-Starbuck Association soils are found
within both the proposed AVA and the Yakima Valley AVA. Elevations
within the proposed AVA are under 2,000 feet, which is a general
characteristic of the Columbia Valley AVA. However, the Candy Mountain
AVA is located on an isolated mountain, whereas the majority of the
Yakima Valley and Columbia Valley AVAs are described as broad, flat
valleys. Additionally, the proposed AVA has steeper slope angles than
much of the land within the Columbia Valley and Yakima Valley AVAs.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of the Candy Mountain
AVA and the Yakima Valley AVA boundary modification in the regulatory
text published at the end of this final rule.
Maps
The petitioners provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the regulatory text. The Candy Mountain AVA boundary and the
modified Yakima Valley AVA boundary may also be viewed on the AVA Map
Explorer on the TTB website, at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer.
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 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.
[[Page 60361]]
With the establishment of the Candy Mountain AVA, its name, ``Candy
Mountain,'' 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 regulations clarifies this point. Consequently, wine
bottlers using the name ``Candy Mountain'' 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 Candy Mountain AVA will not affect the
existing Columbia Valley or Yakima Valley AVAs, and any bottlers using
``Columbia Valley'' or ``Yakima Valley'' as an appellation of origin or
in a brand name for wines made from grapes grown within the Columbia
Valley or Yakima Valley AVAs will not be affected by the establishment
of this new AVA. The establishment of the Candy Mountain AVA will allow
vintners to use ``Candy Mountain,'' ``Yakima Valley,'' and ``Columbia
Valley'' as appellations of origin for wines made primarily from grapes
grown within the Candy Mountain AVA if the wines meet the eligibility
requirements for these appellations.
The modification of the Yakima Valley AVA boundary will allow
vintners to use ``Yakima Valley,'' ``Columbia Valley,'' and ``Candy
Mountain'' as appellations of origin for wines made primarily from
grapes grown within the expansion area if the wines meet the
eligibility requirements for these appellations.
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
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. Amend Sec. 9.69 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c)(4),
redesignating paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(10) as paragraphs (c)(11)
through (16), and adding new paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(10) to read
as follows:
Sec. 9.69 Yakima Valley.
* * * * *
(b) Approved maps. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps
used to determine the boundary of the Yakima Valley viticultural area
are titled:
(1) Walla Walla, Washington (1:250,000 scale), 1953; limited
revision 1963;
(2) Yakima, Washington (1:250,000 scale), 1958; revised 1971;
(3) Benton City, WA (1:24,000 scale), 2013;
(4) Badger Mountain, Washington (1:24,000 scale), 2013; and
(5) Richland, Washington (1:24,000 scale), 2014.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Then southeast, crossing onto the Benton City map, to the top
of Red Mountain;
(5) Then southeast to a point on East Kennedy Road approximately
2,500 feet east of an intermittent stream flowing north into Lost Lake;
(6) Then southeast across the top of Candy Mountain, crossing onto
the Badger Mountain map, and continuing to the intersection with the
southernmost point of an unnamed road known locally as Arena Road; then
(7) Proceed north for 0.45 mile along Arena Road, crossing onto the
Richland map, to the intersection with the 670-foot elevation contour;
then
(8) Proceed generally east for 0.4 mile along the elevation contour
to the intersection with Dallas Road; then
(9) Proceed south in a straight line for 0.5 mile, crossing onto
the Badger Mountain map, to the intersection with Interstate 182; then
(10) Proceed southeast in a straight line, crossing onto the Walla
Walla map, to the top of Badger Mountain;
* * * * *
0
3. Add Sec. 9.272 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.272 Candy Mountain.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Candy Mountain''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``Candy Mountain'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The three United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the
Candy Mountain viticultural area are titled:
(1) Badger Mountain, Washington, 2013;
(2) Benton City, Washington, 2013; and
(3) Richland, Washington, 2014.
(c) Boundary. The Candy Mountain viticultural area is located in
Benton County in Washington. The boundary of the Candy Mountain
viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the Badger Mountain map at the
southernmost point of an unnamed road known locally as Arena Road. From
the beginning point, proceed northwest in a straight line for
approximately 1.85 miles, crossing onto the Benton City map, to the
intersection with East Kennedy Road NE; then
(2) Proceed westerly along East Kennedy Road NE for approximately
2,500 feet to the intersection with an intermittent creek approximately
0.8 mile south of Lost Lake; then
(3) Proceed southeasterly along the easternmost fork of the
intermittent creek to the intersection with Interstate 82; then
(4) Proceed southeast along Interstate 82 for 2.25 miles, crossing
over the Richland map and onto the Badger Mountain map, and continuing
along the ramp onto Interstate 182 to a point due south of the
intersection of Dallas Road and an unnamed road known locally as East
260 Private Road NE; then
(5) Proceed north in a straight line for 0.5 mile, crossing onto
the Richland map, to the intersection of Dallas Road and the 670-foot
elevation contour; then
(6) Proceed west along the 670-foot elevation contour for 0.4 mile
to the intersection with Arena Road; then
(7) Proceed southerly along Arena Road for approximately 0.45
miles, returning to the beginning point.
[[Page 60362]]
Signed: April 14, 2020.
Mary G. Ryan,
Acting Administrator.
Approved: August 12, 2020.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-18741 Filed 9-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
