Establishment of The Burn of Columbia Valley Viticultural Area, 32191-32194 [2021-12771]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the ‘‘Palos Verdes Peninsula’’ AVA in
Los Angeles County, California,
effective 30 days from the publication
date of this document.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of the Palos Verdes Peninsula
AVA 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. You may also view the
Palos Verdes Peninsula AVA boundary
on the AVA Map Explorer on the TTB
website, at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/
ava-map-explorer.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Impact on Current Wine Labels
Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits
any label reference on a wine that
indicates or implies an origin other than
the wine’s true place of origin. For a
wine to be labeled with an AVA name
or with a brand name that includes an
AVA name, at least 85 percent of the
wine must be derived from grapes
grown within the area represented by
that name, and the wine must meet the
other conditions listed in 27 CFR
4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for
labeling with an AVA name and that
name appears in the brand name, then
the label is not in compliance and the
bottler must change the brand name and
obtain approval of a new label.
Similarly, if the AVA name appears in
another reference on the label in a
misleading manner, the bottler would
have to obtain approval of a new label.
Different rules apply if a wine has a
brand name containing an AVA name
that was used as a brand name on a
label approved before July 7, 1986. See
27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
With the establishment of the Palos
Verdes Peninsula AVA, its name, ‘‘Palos
Verdes Peninsula,’’ 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 ‘‘Palos Verdes Peninsula’’ 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.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 16, 2021
Jkt 253001
derived from the use of an AVA name
would be the result of a proprietor’s
efforts and consumer acceptance of
wines from that area. Therefore, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is
required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this final
rule is not a significant regulatory action
as defined by Executive Order 12866 of
September 30, 1993. Therefore, no
regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations
and Rulings Division drafted this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter
I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
32191
of the Pacific Ocean and the Torrance
corporate boundary at Malaga Cove,
R14W/T4S; then
(2) From the beginning point, proceed
east, then generally southeast, along the
Torrance corporate boundary, crossing
onto the Torrance map, to the corporate
boundary’s intersection with the Lomita
corporate boundary, R14W/T4S; then
(3) Proceed generally southeast along
the Lomita corporate boundary to its
intersection with Western Avenue,
R14W/T4S; then
(4) Proceed south along Western
Avenue, crossing onto the San Pedro
map, to the road’s intersection with the
Los Angeles city boundary, R14W/T5S;
then
(5) Proceed west, then generally
south, then southwest along the Los
Angeles city boundary to its intersection
with the Pacific Ocean at Palos Verdes
Peninsula Park, R14W/T5S; then
(6) Proceed clockwise along the
Pacific coastline to return to the
beginning point.
Signed: December 1, 2020.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: January 5, 2021.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2021–12770 Filed 6–16–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
2. Subpart C is amended by adding
§ 9.274 to read as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
§ 9.274
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
■
Palos Verdes Peninsula.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘Palos
Verdes Peninsula’’. For purposes of part
4 of this chapter, ‘‘Palos Verdes
Peninsula’’ 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 Palos
Verdes Peninsula viticultural area are
titled:
(1) Redondo Beach, CA, 1996;
(2) Torrance, Calif., 1964
(photorevised 1981); and
(3) San Pedro Calif., 1964
(photorevised 1981).
(c) Boundary. The Palos Verdes
Peninsula viticultural area is located in
the southwestern coastal region of Los
Angeles County, and contains the cities
of Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills,
Rolling Hills Estates, and Rancho Palos
Verdes, California. The boundary of the
Palos Verdes Peninsula viticultural area
is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the
Redondo Beach map at the intersection
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2020–0005; T.D. TTB–168;
Ref: Notice No. 190]
RIN 1513–AC60
Establishment of The Burn of
Columbia 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 16,870-acre ‘‘The Burn of
Columbia Valley’’ viticultural area in
Klickitat County, Washington. The
newly-established The Burn of
Columbia Valley viticultural area is
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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JNR1.SGM
17JNR1
32192
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
This final rule is effective July
19, 2021.
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:
DATES:
Background on Viticultural Areas
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 16, 2021
Jkt 253001
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;
• 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;
• The appropriate United States
Geological Survey (USGS) map(s)
showing the location of the proposed
AVA, with the boundary of the
proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon;
and
• A detailed narrative description of
the proposed AVA boundary based on
USGS map markings.
The Burn of Columbia Valley Petition
TTB received a petition from Kevin
Corliss, Vice President of Vineyards for
Ste. Michelle Wine Estates, Joan R.
Davenport, Professor of Soil Sciences at
Washington State University, and John
Derrick, Vice President of Operations for
Mercer Ranches, Inc., proposing to
establish ‘‘The Burn of Columbia
Valley’’ AVA. The proposed AVA is
located in Klickitat County,
Washington, and lies entirely within the
established Columbia Valley AVA (27
CFR 9.74). Within the 16,870-acre
proposed AVA, there are 3 commercial
vineyards, which cover a total of
approximately 1,261 acres and are
owned by two different entities. The
distinguishing features of the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA are
its soils, climate, and topography.
The soils of the proposed The Burn of
Columbia Valley are primarily silty
loams in the taxonomic order Mollisols.
The soils are described as having good
plant-available water holding capacity
that are capable of delivering sufficient
water to the vines during the growing
season. The soils are also relatively high
in organic material and provide
adequate nutrients, particularly
nitrogen, to the vines. The most
common soil series and complexes in
the proposed AVA are Walla Walla silt
loam (without cemented substratum),
Rock outcrop–Haploxeroll complex,
Haploxeroll–Fluvaquent complex,
Fluventic Haploxeroll–Riverwash
complex, Rock outcrop Rubble and
Complex, Wato silt loam, Walla Walla
silt loam (with cemented substratum),
Endicott silt loam, and Endicott–Moxee
complex.
The climate within the proposed The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is
characterized by an average annual
growing degree day 1 (GDD)
accumulation of 2,763 GDDs, with a
minimum of 2,405 GDDs and a
maximum of 3,249 GDDs. The average
annual GDD accumulations favor the
production of grape varietals with
higher heat unit requirements, such as
Cabernet Sauvignon and Syrah, which
are the two most commonly grown
grape varietals within the proposed
AVA. The proposed AVA receives an
average of 8.76 inches of precipitation
annually, with a minimum of 6.65
inches and a maximum of 10.44 inches.
Low annual rainfall amounts mean that
vineyards within the proposed AVA
require supplemental irrigation.
The topography of the proposed The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is
comprised of gently sloping bench lands
above the Columbia River. The average
slope angle within the proposed AVA is
7.27 percent, which is suitable for
mechanical cultivation of vineyards, yet
is steep enough to avoid the pooling of
cold air that could damage grapes. The
proposed AVA also has a large,
contiguous expanse of land with
easterly and southern aspects, as well as
a southeasterly aspect, which allows
excellent sunlight exposure for
vineyards.
To the east-northeast and northwest of
the proposed AVA, the soils include
series and complexes that are not
1 See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2nd. ed.
1974), pages 61–64. In the Winkler scale, the GDD
regions are defined as follows: Region I = less than
2,500 GDDs; Region II = 2,501–3,000 GDDs; Region
III = 3,001–3,500 GDDs; Region IV = 3,501–4,000
GDDs; Region V = greater than 4,000 GDDs.
E:\FR\FM\17JNR1.SGM
17JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
present within the proposed AVA,
including the Renslow–Ralls–Whipple
complex, Van Nostern silt loam, Van
Nostern–Bakeoven complex, Colockum–
Cheviot complex, Swalecreek–Rockley
complex, and Goldendale silt loam.
Average annual GDD accumulations to
the east-northeast and northwest of the
proposed AVA are lower, and average
annual rainfall amounts are higher than
within the proposed AVA. In the region
to the south of the proposed AVA, the
soils contain series and complexes also
not present within the proposed AVA,
including Ritzville silt loam, Willis silt
loam, and Roloff–Rock outcrop
complex. Average annual GDD
accumulations are higher in the region
south of the proposed AVA, as are
average annual precipitation amounts.
Additionally, in the region to the west
of the proposed AVA, the soils contain
complexes not present within the
proposed AVA, including the Cheviot–
Tronsen complex, Goodnoe–
Swalecreek–Horseflat complex, and
Asotin silt loam. The region to the west
of the proposed AVA has lower annual
GDD accumulations and higher average
annual rainfall amounts. When
compared to the proposed The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA, each of the
surrounding regions has higher average
slope angles except the region to the
south, which has lower average slope
angles.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 190 in the
Federal Register on May 27, 2020 (85
FR 31718), proposing to establish The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA. In the
notice, TTB summarized the evidence
from the petition regarding the name,
boundary, and distinguishing features
for the proposed AVA. The notice also
compared the distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA to the surrounding
areas. For a detailed description of the
evidence relating to the name,
boundary, and distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA, and for a detailed
comparison of the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA to the
surrounding areas, see Notice No. 190.
In Notice No. 190, 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
The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA’s
location within the Columbia Valley
AVA, TTB solicited comments on
whether the evidence submitted in the
petition regarding the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA
sufficiently differentiates it from the
established AVA. TTB also requested
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 16, 2021
Jkt 253001
comments on whether the geographic
features of the proposed AVA are so
distinguishable from the established
Columbia Valley AVA that the proposed
AVA should no longer be part of the
established AVA. The comment period
closed July 27, 2020.
In response to Notice No. 190, TTB
received 13 comments. The commenters
included local wine industry members,
local wine consumers, the Goldendale
Chamber of Commerce, the Klickitat
County Natural Resources & Economic
Development Department, and the
Columbia–Snake Rivers Irrigators
Association. Eleven of the comments
support creating the proposed The Burn
of Columbia Valley AVA so as to
distinguish this region from other areas
within the established Columbia Valley
AVA. One of the comments (comment
12) did not specifically express support
for or opposition to the proposed AVA,
but did state that the geography and
climate of the proposed The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA are ‘‘significantly
different than the existing Columbia
Valley AVA.’’ Only one comment
(comment 13), submitted by an
anonymous commenter, opposed
establishing the proposed AVA. The
commenter stated their belief that the
proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley
AVA was not sufficiently
distinguishable from the nearby
established Horse Heaven Hills AVA (27
CFR 9.188) and should be included in
that AVA instead of recognized as a new
AVA. However, the comment did not
include any evidence to support this
claim.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition
and the comments received in response
to Notice No. 190, TTB finds that the
evidence provided by the petitioner
supports the establishment of The Burn
of Columbia Valley AVA. 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 ‘‘The Burn of Columbia Valley’’
AVA in Klickitat County, Washington,
effective 30 days from the publication
date of this document.
TTB has also determined that The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA will
remain part of the established Columbia
Valley AVA. As discussed in Notice No.
190, The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA
shares some broad characteristics with
the established AVA. For example, the
proposed AVA and the Columbia Valley
AVA both have similar average annual
rainfall amounts. However, the
proposed AVA can accumulate
maximum GDDs of over 3,000 annually,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32193
indicating a climate that is slightly
warmer than the rest of the much larger
Columbia Valley AVA. Additionally,
because the proposed The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA is much smaller
than the Columbia Valley AVA, the
proposed AVA has a greater uniformity
of characteristics within its boundaries.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA 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 Burn of Columbia
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 27 CFR
4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for
labeling with an AVA name and that
name appears in the brand name, then
the label is not in compliance and the
bottler must change the brand name and
obtain approval of a new label.
Similarly, if the AVA name appears in
another reference on the label in a
misleading manner, the bottler would
have to obtain approval of a new label.
Different rules apply if a wine has a
brand name containing an AVA name
that was used as a brand name on a
label approved before July 7, 1986. See
27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
With the establishment of The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA, its name, ‘‘The
Burn of Columbia Valley,’’ 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 ‘‘The Burn of Columbia
Valley’’ 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.
TTB is not designating ‘‘The Burn,’’
standing alone, as a term of viticultural
significance because the term ‘‘The
E:\FR\FM\17JNR1.SGM
17JNR1
32194
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Burn’’ is used to refer to multiple areas
in the United States. Therefore, wine
bottlers using ‘‘The Burn,’’ standing
alone, in a brand name or in another
label reference on their wines will not
be affected by the establishment of this
AVA.
The establishment of The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA will not affect the
existing Columbia Valley AVA, and any
bottlers using ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as an
appellation of origin or in a brand name
for wines made from grapes grown
within the Columbia Valley will not be
affected by the establishment of this
new AVA. The establishment of The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA will
allow vintners to use ‘‘The Burn of
Columbia Valley’’ and ‘‘Columbia
Valley’’ as appellations of origin for
wines made primarily from grapes
grown within The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA 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
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 16, 2021
Jkt 253001
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
2. Subpart C is amended by adding
§ 9.276 to read as follows:
■
§ 9.276
The Burn of Columbia Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘The
Burn of Columbia Valley’’. For purposes
of part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘The Burn of
Columbia Valley’’ is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The four United
States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to
determine the boundary of The Burn of
Columbia Valley viticultural area are
titled:
(1) Sundale NW, OR–WA, 2017;
(2) Goodnoe Hills, WA, 2017;
(3) Dot, WA, 2017; and
(4) Sundale, WA–OR, 2017.
(c) Boundary. The Burn of Columbia
Valley viticultural area is located in
Klickitat County in Washington. The
boundary of The Burn of Columbia
Valley viticultural area is as described
below:
(1) The beginning point is on the
Sundale NW map, at the intersection of
the Columbia River and the east shore
of Paterson Slough. From the beginning
point, proceed northerly along the east
shore of Paterson Slough to its junction
with Rock Creek, and continuing
northeasterly along Rock Creek to its
intersection with the boundary of the
Yakima Nation Trust Land; then
(2) Proceed south, then east, then
generally northeasterly along the
boundary of the Yakima Nation Trust
Land, crossing onto the Goodnoe Hills
map, to the intersection of the Trust
Land boundary with Kelley Road; then
(3) Proceed north in a straight line to
the intersection with the main channel
of Chapman Creek; then
(4) Proceed southeasterly
(downstream) along Chapman Creek,
crossing over the Dot map and onto the
Sundale map, to the intersection of
Chapman Creek with its southernmost
tributary; then
(5) Proceed due east in a straight line
to the creek running through Old Lady
Canyon; then
(6) Proceed southerly along the creek
to its intersection with the northern
shoreline of the Columbia River; then
(7) Proceed westerly along the
northern shoreline of the Columbia
River, returning to the beginning point.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Signed: January 4, 2021.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: January 5, 2021.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2021–12771 Filed 6–16–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 45
[Docket ID: DOD–2021–OS–0047]
RIN 0790–AL22
Medical Malpractice Claims by
Members of the Uniformed Services
Department of Defense (DoD)
Office of General Counsel, DoD.
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
This interim final rule
implements requirements of the
National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2020 permitting
members of the uniformed services or
their authorized representatives to file
claims for personal injury or death
caused by a Department of Defense
(DoD) health care providers s in certain
military medical treatment facilities.
Because Federal courts do not have
jurisdiction to consider these claims,
DoD is issuing this rule to provide
uniform standards and procedures for
considering and processing these
actions.
SUMMARY:
This interim final rule is in effect
July 19, 2021. Comments must be
received by August 16, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: The DoD cannot receive
written comments at this time due to the
COVID–19 pandemic. Comments should
be sent electronically to the docket
listed above.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions
from members of the public is to make
these submissions available for public
viewing at https://www.regulations.gov
as they are received without change,
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\17JNR1.SGM
17JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 115 (Thursday, June 17, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32191-32194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12771]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2020-0005; T.D. TTB-168; Ref: Notice No. 190]
RIN 1513-AC60
Establishment of The Burn of Columbia 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 16,870-acre ``The Burn of Columbia Valley''
viticultural area in Klickitat County, Washington. The newly-
established The Burn of Columbia Valley viticultural area is 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.
[[Page 32192]]
DATES: This final rule is effective July 19, 2021.
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 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;
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;
The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS)
map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of
the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
The Burn of Columbia Valley Petition
TTB received a petition from Kevin Corliss, Vice President of
Vineyards for Ste. Michelle Wine Estates, Joan R. Davenport, Professor
of Soil Sciences at Washington State University, and John Derrick, Vice
President of Operations for Mercer Ranches, Inc., proposing to
establish ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' AVA. The proposed AVA is
located in Klickitat County, Washington, and lies entirely within the
established Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74). Within the 16,870-acre
proposed AVA, there are 3 commercial vineyards, which cover a total of
approximately 1,261 acres and are owned by two different entities. The
distinguishing features of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA
are its soils, climate, and topography.
The soils of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley are primarily
silty loams in the taxonomic order Mollisols. The soils are described
as having good plant-available water holding capacity that are capable
of delivering sufficient water to the vines during the growing season.
The soils are also relatively high in organic material and provide
adequate nutrients, particularly nitrogen, to the vines. The most
common soil series and complexes in the proposed AVA are Walla Walla
silt loam (without cemented substratum), Rock outcrop-Haploxeroll
complex, Haploxeroll-Fluvaquent complex, Fluventic Haploxeroll-
Riverwash complex, Rock outcrop Rubble and Complex, Wato silt loam,
Walla Walla silt loam (with cemented substratum), Endicott silt loam,
and Endicott-Moxee complex.
The climate within the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is
characterized by an average annual growing degree day \1\ (GDD)
accumulation of 2,763 GDDs, with a minimum of 2,405 GDDs and a maximum
of 3,249 GDDs. The average annual GDD accumulations favor the
production of grape varietals with higher heat unit requirements, such
as Cabernet Sauvignon and Syrah, which are the two most commonly grown
grape varietals within the proposed AVA. The proposed AVA receives an
average of 8.76 inches of precipitation annually, with a minimum of
6.65 inches and a maximum of 10.44 inches. Low annual rainfall amounts
mean that vineyards within the proposed AVA require supplemental
irrigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2nd. ed. 1974), pages 61-64. In the
Winkler scale, the GDD regions are defined as follows: Region I =
less than 2,500 GDDs; Region II = 2,501-3,000 GDDs; Region III =
3,001-3,500 GDDs; Region IV = 3,501-4,000 GDDs; Region V = greater
than 4,000 GDDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The topography of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is
comprised of gently sloping bench lands above the Columbia River. The
average slope angle within the proposed AVA is 7.27 percent, which is
suitable for mechanical cultivation of vineyards, yet is steep enough
to avoid the pooling of cold air that could damage grapes. The proposed
AVA also has a large, contiguous expanse of land with easterly and
southern aspects, as well as a southeasterly aspect, which allows
excellent sunlight exposure for vineyards.
To the east-northeast and northwest of the proposed AVA, the soils
include series and complexes that are not
[[Page 32193]]
present within the proposed AVA, including the Renslow-Ralls-Whipple
complex, Van Nostern silt loam, Van Nostern-Bakeoven complex, Colockum-
Cheviot complex, Swalecreek-Rockley complex, and Goldendale silt loam.
Average annual GDD accumulations to the east-northeast and northwest of
the proposed AVA are lower, and average annual rainfall amounts are
higher than within the proposed AVA. In the region to the south of the
proposed AVA, the soils contain series and complexes also not present
within the proposed AVA, including Ritzville silt loam, Willis silt
loam, and Roloff-Rock outcrop complex. Average annual GDD accumulations
are higher in the region south of the proposed AVA, as are average
annual precipitation amounts. Additionally, in the region to the west
of the proposed AVA, the soils contain complexes not present within the
proposed AVA, including the Cheviot-Tronsen complex, Goodnoe-
Swalecreek-Horseflat complex, and Asotin silt loam. The region to the
west of the proposed AVA has lower annual GDD accumulations and higher
average annual rainfall amounts. When compared to the proposed The Burn
of Columbia Valley AVA, each of the surrounding regions has higher
average slope angles except the region to the south, which has lower
average slope angles.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 190 in the Federal Register on May 27,
2020 (85 FR 31718), proposing to establish The Burn of Columbia Valley
AVA. In the notice, TTB summarized the evidence from the petition
regarding the name, boundary, and distinguishing features for the
proposed AVA. The notice also compared the distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas. For a detailed description
of the evidence relating to the name, boundary, and distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA, and for a detailed comparison of the
distinguishing features of the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas,
see Notice No. 190.
In Notice No. 190, 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 The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA's location within the Columbia Valley AVA, TTB solicited
comments on whether the evidence submitted in the petition regarding
the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA sufficiently
differentiates it from the established AVA. TTB also requested comments
on whether the geographic features of the proposed AVA are so
distinguishable from the established Columbia Valley AVA that the
proposed AVA should no longer be part of the established AVA. The
comment period closed July 27, 2020.
In response to Notice No. 190, TTB received 13 comments. The
commenters included local wine industry members, local wine consumers,
the Goldendale Chamber of Commerce, the Klickitat County Natural
Resources & Economic Development Department, and the Columbia-Snake
Rivers Irrigators Association. Eleven of the comments support creating
the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA so as to distinguish this
region from other areas within the established Columbia Valley AVA. One
of the comments (comment 12) did not specifically express support for
or opposition to the proposed AVA, but did state that the geography and
climate of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA are
``significantly different than the existing Columbia Valley AVA.'' Only
one comment (comment 13), submitted by an anonymous commenter, opposed
establishing the proposed AVA. The commenter stated their belief that
the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA was not sufficiently
distinguishable from the nearby established Horse Heaven Hills AVA (27
CFR 9.188) and should be included in that AVA instead of recognized as
a new AVA. However, the comment did not include any evidence to support
this claim.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition and the comments received in
response to Notice No. 190, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the
petitioner supports the establishment of The Burn of Columbia Valley
AVA. 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 ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' AVA in
Klickitat County, Washington, effective 30 days from the publication
date of this document.
TTB has also determined that The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA will
remain part of the established Columbia Valley AVA. As discussed in
Notice No. 190, The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA shares some broad
characteristics with the established AVA. For example, the proposed AVA
and the Columbia Valley AVA both have similar average annual rainfall
amounts. However, the proposed AVA can accumulate maximum GDDs of over
3,000 annually, indicating a climate that is slightly warmer than the
rest of the much larger Columbia Valley AVA. Additionally, because the
proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is much smaller than the
Columbia Valley AVA, the proposed AVA has a greater uniformity of
characteristics within its boundaries.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA 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 Burn of Columbia 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 27 CFR
4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA name
and that name appears in the brand name, then the label is not in
compliance and the bottler must change the brand name and obtain
approval of a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name appears in another
reference on the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have
to obtain approval of a new label. Different rules apply if a wine has
a brand name containing an AVA name that was used as a brand name on a
label approved before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
With the establishment of The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, its
name, ``The Burn of Columbia Valley,'' 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 ``The Burn of Columbia
Valley'' 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.
TTB is not designating ``The Burn,'' standing alone, as a term of
viticultural significance because the term ``The
[[Page 32194]]
Burn'' is used to refer to multiple areas in the United States.
Therefore, wine bottlers using ``The Burn,'' standing alone, in a brand
name or in another label reference on their wines will not be affected
by the establishment of this AVA.
The establishment of The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA will not
affect the existing Columbia Valley AVA, and any bottlers using
``Columbia Valley'' as an appellation of origin or in a brand name for
wines made from grapes grown within the Columbia Valley will not be
affected by the establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA will allow vintners to use ``The Burn of
Columbia Valley'' and ``Columbia Valley'' as appellations of origin for
wines made primarily from grapes grown within The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA 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. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.276 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.276 The Burn of Columbia Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``The Burn of Columbia Valley''. For purposes of part 4 of
this chapter, ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' is a term of viticultural
significance.
(b) Approved maps. The four United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of The
Burn of Columbia Valley viticultural area are titled:
(1) Sundale NW, OR-WA, 2017;
(2) Goodnoe Hills, WA, 2017;
(3) Dot, WA, 2017; and
(4) Sundale, WA-OR, 2017.
(c) Boundary. The Burn of Columbia Valley viticultural area is
located in Klickitat County in Washington. The boundary of The Burn of
Columbia Valley viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the Sundale NW map, at the
intersection of the Columbia River and the east shore of Paterson
Slough. From the beginning point, proceed northerly along the east
shore of Paterson Slough to its junction with Rock Creek, and
continuing northeasterly along Rock Creek to its intersection with the
boundary of the Yakima Nation Trust Land; then
(2) Proceed south, then east, then generally northeasterly along
the boundary of the Yakima Nation Trust Land, crossing onto the Goodnoe
Hills map, to the intersection of the Trust Land boundary with Kelley
Road; then
(3) Proceed north in a straight line to the intersection with the
main channel of Chapman Creek; then
(4) Proceed southeasterly (downstream) along Chapman Creek,
crossing over the Dot map and onto the Sundale map, to the intersection
of Chapman Creek with its southernmost tributary; then
(5) Proceed due east in a straight line to the creek running
through Old Lady Canyon; then
(6) Proceed southerly along the creek to its intersection with the
northern shoreline of the Columbia River; then
(7) Proceed westerly along the northern shoreline of the Columbia
River, returning to the beginning point.
Signed: January 4, 2021.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: January 5, 2021.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2021-12771 Filed 6-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P