Establishment of the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley Viticultural Area; Modification of the Calistoga Viticultural Area, 83431-83435 [2024-23655]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
83431
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Country
Listed person and address
Federal Register citation
Vast Polymers, Ambalaj Sanayi Ve Ticaret Limited Sirketi, a.k.a. Novaroll, Atakoy
7–8–9–10, Kisim Mah. Cobancesme, E–5 Yan Yol Cad. A No: 22/1 Ic Kapi: 164
Bakirkoy, Istanbul, Türkiye.
*
*
*
Matthew S. Borman,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Strategic Trade and Technology Security.
[FR Doc. 2024–23638 Filed 10–15–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2023–0002; T.D. TTB–197;
Ref: Notice No. 221]
RIN 1513–AC78
Establishment of the Crystal Springs
of Napa Valley Viticultural Area;
Modification of the Calistoga
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 4,000-acre ‘‘Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley’’ American
viticultural area (AVA) in Napa County,
California. The newly-established AVA
is located entirely within the existing
North Coast and Napa Valley
viticultural areas. TTB also is modifying
the existing Calistoga AVA in response
to comments received during the
comment period. 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
November 15, 2024.
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:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Oct 15, 2024
Jkt 265001
*
*
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.
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, once
approved, a name and a delineated
boundary codified 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 allows any interested party to
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
89 FR [INSERT FEDERAL REGISTER
PAGE NUMBER], October 16, 2024.
Sfmt 4700
*
*
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 to
establish or modify 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.
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley Petition
TTB received a petition from Steven
Burgess, president of Burgess Cellars,
Inc., proposing to establish the ‘‘Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley’’ AVA. Mr.
Burgess submitted the petition on behalf
of local vineyard owners and
winemakers. The proposed AVA is
located in Napa County, California, and
lies entirely within the established
North Coast (27 CFR 9.30) and Napa
Valley (27 CFR 9.23) AVAs. Within the
proposed AVA, there are approximately
30 commercial vineyards covering a
total of approximately 230 acres. The
distinguishing feature of the proposed
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA is
its topography.
The petition describes the proposed
AVA as an ‘‘all hillside’’ region with no
E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM
16OCR1
83432
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
flat areas along the western face of the
Vaca Range. Slope angles range from 15
to 40 percent within the proposed AVA
and are generally west-to-southwesterly
facing. According to the petition, westand southwesterly-facing slopes receive
larger amounts of solar radiation than
north- and east-facing slopes. The
higher solar radiation amounts can
allow grapes to easily mature each
growing season. Elevations in the
proposed AVA range from 400 to 1,400
feet. According to the petition, the
reason for limiting the proposed AVA to
this range of elevations is that the 400foot contour generally marks the
transition point between the foothills of
the Vaca Range and the floor of the
Napa Valley. The lower foothills and
valley floor are more susceptible to
frosts than the elevations within the
proposed AVA and, therefore, are more
likely to need frost protection
equipment in the vineyards.
Additionally, the 1,400-foot contour
along the northern boundary of the
proposed AVA coincides with the
southern boundary of the established
Howell Mountain AVA (27 CFR 9.94).
According to the petition, elevations
over 1,400 feet are also more susceptible
to frosts due to adiabatic cooling, also
known as elevation cooling.
To the north of the proposed AVA,
the elevations rise up to 2,200 feet
within the established Howell Mountain
AVA. The topography of the Howell
Mountain AVA contains hillsides, like
the proposed Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA, but also has a rolling,
plateau-like feature at the summit. The
region to the east of the proposed AVA
has elevations like those of the proposed
AVA, but the slopes have a more
easterly to northeasterly exposure.
South and west of the proposed AVA
are the established St. Helena (27 CFR
9.149) and Calistoga (27 CFR 9.209)
AVAs, which have lower elevations and
include the flat lands along the floor of
the Napa Valley. The petition describes
slope angles within the established St.
Helena AVA as mostly less than 5
percent, while the established Calistoga
AVA is described as having ‘‘a
multitude of * * * slopes, from steep
mountains to benchlands to fans, to flat
valley floors to riparian habitats.’’
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 221 in the
Federal Register on March 2, 2023 (88
FR 13072), proposing to establish the
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA. In
the notice, TTB summarized the
evidence from the petition regarding the
name, boundary, and distinguishing
feature of the proposed AVA. The notice
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Oct 15, 2024
Jkt 265001
also included the information from the
petition comparing the distinguishing
feature of the proposed AVA to the
surrounding areas. For a detailed
description of the evidence and for a
detailed comparison of the proposed
AVA to the surrounding areas, see
Notice No. 221.
In Notice No. 221, 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
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA’s
location within the North Coast and
Napa Valley AVAs, TTB solicited
comments on whether the evidence
submitted in the petition sufficiently
differentiates it from the established
AVAs. TTB also requested comments on
whether the features of the proposed
AVA are so distinguishable from the
established AVAs that the proposed
AVA should no longer be part of one or
the other, or both of, the established
AVAs. The comment period originally
closed May 1, 2023. TTB extended the
comment period for an additional 60
days, until June 30, 2023, because of a
request submitted during the comment
period (comment 6). See Notice No.
221A, which published in the Federal
Register on May 2, 2023 (88 FR 27420).
TTB received 15 comments in
response to Notices No. 221 and 221A.
However, one comment was submitted
in duplicate, so only 14 comments are
posted to the public docket. One
comment (comment 6) requested a 90day extension of the comment period. In
response to the request, the petitioner
submitted a comment (comment 8)
expressing his opposition to a comment
period extension. In Notice No. 221A,
TTB agreed to extend the comment
period for an additional 60 days.
Eight comments (comments 4, 5, 7, 9,
11, 12, 13, and 14) expressed support for
the proposed AVA. Three of those
comments (comments 4, 7, and 9)
support the proposed AVA without
suggesting any additional changes.
Three of the supporting comments
(comments 5, 11, 13, and 14) express
support for the proposed AVA if certain
changes to the boundary are made.
These proposed changes, and TTB’s
response to the requests, are discussed
later in this document. The original
petitioner submitted a comment
(comment 12) agreeing to the proposed
boundary changes.
One comment (comment 1) does not
specifically support or oppose the
proposed AVA but instead expresses
concern that an AVA designation would
provide tax breaks for vineyard owners
and other landowners within the area.
The commenter also expressed concern
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that property taxes on other property
owners in Napa County outside of the
proposed AVA would increase to make
up for the loss of tax revenue that tax
breaks would cause. In response, the
petitioner submitted a comment
(comment 2) stating that California does
not provide tax breaks for properties
within an AVA. The comment goes on
to say that ‘‘property in California is
subject to Proposition 13 which
establishes a base year assessed value
upon purchase or new construction,’’
and the establishment of an AVA would
not impact a property’s ‘‘factored base
year assessed value’’.
Property taxes and tax assessments
are local matters and are outside TTB’s
authority and the scope of this proposed
rulemaking document. TTB’s
establishment of an AVA through the
federal rulemaking process does not in
itself have a tax effect.
Comment 3 also does not specifically
express support for or opposition to the
proposed AVA. The comment includes
a link to a newspaper article about the
proposed Crystal Springs of Napa Valley
AVA. The commenter notes that the
article’s writer frequently refers to the
proposed AVA simply as ‘‘Crystal
Springs,’’ and appears to be concerned
that truncating the name could lead to
confusion. Instead, the commenter
states that the writer ‘‘missed the
opportunity to explain how an AVA that
technically mentions another AVA in its
name as Crystal Springs of Napa Valley
might, does not lead to brand
confusion.’’ In Notice No. 221, TTB
proposed that the name ‘‘Crystal Springs
of Napa Valley’’ be recognized as a
name of viticultural significance. As
TTB stated in that notice, TTB is not
proposing to make ‘‘Crystal Springs’’
standing alone a term of viticultural
significance, due to the number of other
locations in the United States. that are
known simply as ‘‘Crystal Springs.’’
Therefore, in this final rule, TTB is
finalizing its proposal that only the full
AVA name may appear as an
appellation of origin on wine labels.
One commenter (comment 10) claims
to be the ‘‘real owner of Chrystal [sic]
Springs of Napa Valley’’ but provided
no explanation or supporting
information. TTB notes that designation
of an AVA does not confer or change
ownership of property within the AVA,
and that there is no ‘‘owner’’ of an AVA.
Establishment of an AVA simply
permits winemakers to provide
additional information to consumers
about the origin of the grapes used to
make their wine, and providing that
information is voluntary. Any
winemaker may label their wines with
the AVA name as an appellation of
E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM
16OCR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
origin if the wines meet the regulatory
requirements for use of the AVA name.
Furthermore, TTB notes that the Bureau
has not identified any labels that use the
name ‘‘Crystal (or ‘‘Chrystal’’) Springs of
Napa Valley.’’ Therefore, TTB does not
believe that establishment of the
‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa Valley’’ AVA
will affect any wine industry member’s
use of their business name on their wine
label, nor did any commenter indicate
that establishing the AVA would have
that affect.
Comment 13, submitted by Napa
Valley Vintners (NVV), proposes several
changes to the boundary of the proposed
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA.
The first change would remove a partial
overlap with the established St. Helena
AVA. As originally proposed, the
southernmost portion of the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA boundary,
which follows the 400-foot elevation
contour, would partially overlap the St.
Helena AVA. To remove the overlap,
NVV suggests following the 400-foot
elevation contour to the point where it
meets the St. Helena city limits, which
forms the boundary of the St. Helena
AVA, and then following the city limits
until they again intersect the 400-foot
elevation. NVV notes that the St. Helena
city limits are not shown on the 2015
USGS St. Helena quadrangle map the
petitioner used to draw the proposed
AVA boundary. Instead, NVV
recommends using the version of the
map that was used to create the St.
Helena AVA boundary, which is the
1960 (revised 1993) version.
Appellation St. Helena and the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA petitioner
both submitted comments supporting
the proposed boundary change
(comments 5 and 12, respectively). TTB
agrees with the comments and is
amending the proposed boundary to
eliminate the partial overlap with the
established St. Helena AVA and to
utilize the version of the USGS map that
shows the St. Helena city limits.
In comment 13, NVV also requested
substituting the 1960 (revised 1993)
version of the St. Helena quadrangle
map for the 2015 version to avoid the
appearance of a second partial overlap
with the St. Helena AVA. NVV notes
that the 1960 version of the map shows
the 400-foot elevation contour extending
into the Bell Canyon reservoir, while the
2015 version stops the elevation contour
at the reservoir’s dam. The NVV states
that, as a result, the proposed Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley’s use of the 400foot elevation contour for its boundary
gives the appearance of a partial overlap
with the St. Helena AVA at the
reservoir. TTB notes that although the
use of different versions of the map
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Oct 15, 2024
Jkt 265001
gives the appearance of a partial
overlap, such an overlap does not
actually exist because both the St.
Helena AVA boundary description and
the proposed AVA boundary
description follow the 400-foot
elevation contour. As such, even though
the 2015 version of the map does not
show the contour extending into the
reservoir, the contour still exists, and
the boundaries of both AVAs still follow
it. As discussed earlier, TTB has agreed
to adopt the older version of the map for
the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
boundary description in order to use the
St. Helena city limits to remove another
partial overlap. Adopting the older map
will also eliminate any confusion about
the location of the St. Helena and
proposed Crystal Springs of Napa Valley
AVAs’ boundaries near the Bell Canyon
reservoir.
Calistoga AVA Boundary Modification
Comments
One comment (comment 11)
requested a change to the proposed
AVA boundary to fully include a
vineyard, which is currently split
between the proposed AVA and the
established Calistoga AVA (27 CFR
9.209). The vineyard, known as the
Crystal Springs Vineyard, sits along
North Fork of Crystal Springs Road
between the northwestern portion of the
proposed AVA and the eastern portion
of the Calistoga AVA. Approximately 11
acres of the vineyard are within the
Calistoga AVA, and the remaining 6
acres are within the proposed Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA. The
comment points out that the vineyard’s
name shows a current association with
the proposed ‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley’’ name. The comment also states
that elevations within the vineyard are
between 500 and 1,200 feet, which is
within the range of elevations in the
proposed AVA and higher than the floor
of the Calistoga Valley, and it has a
similar climate and hillside topography
and soils as the proposed AVA.
The NVV comment (comment 13) also
requests this boundary change and
includes a letter from the Calistoga
Wine Growers organization that
supports the change. The NVV comment
also suggests replacing the 2015 USGS
Calistoga quadrangle map used to draw
the proposed AVA with the 1997
version used to draw the original
Calistoga AVA, to ensure that the
proposed revisions to both boundaries
refer to the same marked features and
will align with the other maps used to
make the remainder of the Calistoga
AVA boundary. The proposed Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA petitioner
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
83433
also submitted a comment (comment 12)
expressing support for these changes.
After reviewing the comments and
related documents, TTB is making this
change to the boundaries of the
Calistoga AVA and the proposed Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA so that the
Crystal Springs Vineyard is located
entirely within the Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley AVA.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition
and the comments received in response
to Notice No. 221, TTB finds that the
evidence provided by the petitioner
supports establishing the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA with the
boundary modifications requested in the
comments. 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
‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa Valley’’ AVA
in Napa County, California, effective 30
days from the publication date of this
document. TTB is also modifying the
boundary of the established Calistoga
AVA, as requested during the comment
period, effective 30 days from the
publication of this document.
TTB has also determined that the
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
will remain part of the established
North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs. As
discussed in Notice No. 221, the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA shares
some broad characteristics with the
established AVAs. For example, the
proposed AVA is comprised of hillside
slopes, which also occur in the North
Coast and Napa Valley AVAs, and it
also has a marine-influenced climate.
However, the proposed AVA lacks flat
valleys, which are common in both the
North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs, and
it is not as influenced by the ocean as
the more coastal regions of the North
Coast AVA.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the
boundary of the Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA and the modified Calistoga
AVA boundary 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 Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley AVA boundary and the
modified Calistoga AVA boundary may
also be viewed on the AVA Map
Explorer on the TTB website, at https://
www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer.
E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM
16OCR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
83434
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
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 Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA, its name,
‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa 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 regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the
name ‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa 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 ‘‘Crystal
Springs,’’ standing alone, as a term of
viticultural significance due to the
number of locations in the United States
and elsewhere known as ‘‘Crystal
Springs.’’
The establishment of the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA will not
affect the existing North Coast or Napa
Valley AVAs, and any bottlers using
‘‘North Coast’’ or ‘‘Napa Valley’’ as an
appellation of origin or in a brand name
for wines made from grapes grown
within the North Coast or Napa Valley
AVAs will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The
establishment of the Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley AVA will allow vintners to
use ‘‘Crystal Springs of Napa Valley,’’
‘‘Napa Valley,’’ and ‘‘North Coast’’ as
appellations of origin for wines made
primarily from grapes grown within the
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA if
the wines meet the eligibility
requirements for these appellations.
After November 16, 2026, bottlers
who use ‘‘Calistoga’’ as an appellation of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Oct 15, 2024
Jkt 265001
origin on wines made primarily from
grapes grown in the area that was
removed from the Calistoga AVA will
no longer be able to use ‘‘Calistoga’’ as
an appellation of origin and would only
be eligible to use ‘‘Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley,’’ ‘‘North Coast,’’ ‘‘Napa
Valley,’’ or a combination of these
appellations as appellations of origin on
those wines.
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, as
amended. Therefore, no regulatory
assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations
and Rulings Division drafted this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter
I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
2. Amend § 9.209 by revising
paragraphs (c)(8) and (9) to read as
follows:
■
§ 9.209
Calistoga.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(8) Follows the 400-foot contour line
easterly approximately 0.6 mile to its
intersection with the eastern edge of the
Calistoga map, denoted by a north-south
longitude line labeled as longitude 122
degrees, 30 minutes;
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(9) Continues north along the
longitude line approximately 0.5 mile to
its intersection with the 880-foot
contour line in section 2, T8N/R6W;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Subpart C is amended by adding
§ 9.296 to read as follows:
§ 9.296
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is ‘‘Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley’’. For purposes
of part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley’’ is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United
States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to
determine the boundary of the
viticultural area are titled:
(1) St. Helena, CA, 1960, revised 1993;
and
(2) Calistoga, CA, 1997.
(c) Boundary. The Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley viticultural area is located
in Napa County, California. Within the
boundary description that follows, the
viticultural area encompasses all areas
at or below 1,400 feet in elevation. The
boundary of the Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley viticultural area is as described
as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the St.
Helena map at the intersection of
Howell Mountain Road and White
Cottage Road. From the beginning point,
proceed southeasterly along Howell
Mountain Road to its intersection with
the St. Helena city limits in section 29,
T8N/R5W; then
(2) Proceed west then south along the
St. Helena city limits to its intersection
with the 400-foot elevation contour
along the western edge of section 29,
T8N/R5W; then
(3) Proceed northwesterly along the
400-foot elevation contour to its
intersection with the western edge of
the St. Helena map, denoted by the
north-south longitude line labeled as
longitude 122 degrees, 30 minutes; then
(4) Proceed due north along the
longitude line approximately 0.5 mile to
its intersection with the 880-foot
elevation contour in section 2, T8N/
R6W; then
(5) Proceed northwesterly along the
meandering 880-foot elevation contour,
crossing onto the Calistoga map, and
continuing along the elevation contour
(with a brief return to the St. Helena
map) to its intersection with Biter Creek
in the section 34, T9N/R6W, on the
Calistoga map; then
(6) Proceed northerly (upstream)
along Biter Creek to its intersection with
the 1,400-foot elevation contour; then
(7) Proceed southeasterly along the
meandering 1,400-foot elevation
E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM
16OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
contour, crossing onto the St. Helena
map, to the intersection of the elevation
contour with White Cottage Road; then
(8) Proceed easterly along White
Cottage Road for approximately 130 feet,
returning to the beginning point.
Signed: October 4, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: October 7, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Tax Policy.
On June 21, 2024, the Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), with a request for
comments, entitled ‘‘Drawbridge
Operation Regulation; Townsend Gut,
Southport, ME’’, in the Federal Register
(89 FR 51993), to seek your comments
on whether the Coast Guard should
consider temporarily modifying the
current operating schedule to the
Southport (SR27) Bridge. During the
comment period which ended July 22,
2024, no public comments were
received.
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2024–0400]
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Townsend Gut, Southport, ME
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is
temporarily revising the operating
schedule that governs the Southport
(SR27) Bridge at mile 0.7 across
Townsend Gut between Boothbay
Harbor and Southport, ME. This action
is necessary to allow Maine Department
of Transportation (ME DOT) to conduct
rehabilitation of the bridge. During the
effective period, the bridge will be
unable to open to marine traffic due to
an operational imbalance while the
work is being conducted.
DATES: This rule is effective without
actual notice from October 16, 2024,
through 11:59 p.m. on May 30, 2025.
For purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from 12:01 a.m. on
September 30, 2024 through October 16,
2024.
ADDRESSES: To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Type the docket
number USCG–2024–0400 in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH’’. In
the Document Type column, select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Gary Croot, First Coast Guard
District, Project Officer, telephone 206–
815–1364, email Gary.T.Croot@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Oct 15, 2024
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Advance, Supplemental)
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
[FR Doc. 2024–23655 Filed 10–15–24; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
Jkt 265001
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule
under authority 33 U.S.C. 499. The
Southport Swing Bridge carries Maine
State Route 27 across Townsend Gut at
mile 0.7 between Boothbay Harbor, ME
and Southport, ME. The bridge has a
vertical clearance of 10.0 feet at Mean
High Water and 52.0 feet horizontal
clearance when in the closed position.
Waterway users include recreational
boaters and commercial fishing vessels.
The existing drawbridge operating
regulation is 33 CFR 117.537 and
requires the bridge to open on request,
except that from April 29 through
September 30, between 6 a.m. and 6
p.m. the draw shall open on signal on
the hour and half hour only, after an
opening request is given.
ME DOT requested a temporary
change to the regulation to allow the
bridge to remain in the closed to
navigation position so they can conduct
bridge rehabilitation which includes
replacing the bridge deck, and electrical
and mechanical systems upgrades. The
bridge will be unable to open to marine
traffic due to an operational imbalance
while the work is being conducted.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes
and the Final Rule
The public comment period opened
on June 21, 2024, and closed on July 22,
2024. No public comments were
received during the public comment
period.
This temporary final rule will stay the
current regulation in § 117.537, which
requires the Southport (SR27) Bridge to
open on request from October 1 through
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
83435
April 28. From April 29 through
September 30, the bridge is required to
open on request from 6 p.m. through 6
a.m. and on request on the hour and half
hour only from 6 a.m. through 6 p.m.
This temporary final rule adds a
temporary regulation in § 117.T538 to
allow the bridge to remain in the closed
to navigation position from September
30, 2024 through May 30, 2025. Vessels
that can pass under the bridge while in
the closed position may do so. Vessels
that are too large to pass under the
bridge while in the closed position may
navigate around Southport Island.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
This rule has not been designated a
‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094
(Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the ability of vessels to use
an alternate route. Vessels that are able
to pass under the bridge while in the
closed position may continue to do so.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires federal agencies to consider the
potential impact of regulations on small
entities during rulemaking. The term
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small
businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and
operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions
with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard received no comments
from the Small Business Administration
on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the bridge
may be small entities, for the reasons
stated in section V.A above, this rule
E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM
16OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 83431-83435]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23655]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2023-0002; T.D. TTB-197; Ref: Notice No. 221]
RIN 1513-AC78
Establishment of the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley Viticultural
Area; Modification of the Calistoga 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 4,000-acre ``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley''
American viticultural area (AVA) in Napa County, California. The newly-
established AVA is located entirely within the existing North Coast and
Napa Valley viticultural areas. TTB also is modifying the existing
Calistoga AVA in response to comments received during the comment
period. 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 November 15, 2024.
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.
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, once approved, a name and a delineated boundary
codified 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 allows any interested
party to 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 to establish or modify 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.
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley Petition
TTB received a petition from Steven Burgess, president of Burgess
Cellars, Inc., proposing to establish the ``Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley'' AVA. Mr. Burgess submitted the petition on behalf of local
vineyard owners and winemakers. The proposed AVA is located in Napa
County, California, and lies entirely within the established North
Coast (27 CFR 9.30) and Napa Valley (27 CFR 9.23) AVAs. Within the
proposed AVA, there are approximately 30 commercial vineyards covering
a total of approximately 230 acres. The distinguishing feature of the
proposed Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA is its topography.
The petition describes the proposed AVA as an ``all hillside''
region with no
[[Page 83432]]
flat areas along the western face of the Vaca Range. Slope angles range
from 15 to 40 percent within the proposed AVA and are generally west-
to-southwesterly facing. According to the petition, west- and
southwesterly-facing slopes receive larger amounts of solar radiation
than north- and east-facing slopes. The higher solar radiation amounts
can allow grapes to easily mature each growing season. Elevations in
the proposed AVA range from 400 to 1,400 feet. According to the
petition, the reason for limiting the proposed AVA to this range of
elevations is that the 400-foot contour generally marks the transition
point between the foothills of the Vaca Range and the floor of the Napa
Valley. The lower foothills and valley floor are more susceptible to
frosts than the elevations within the proposed AVA and, therefore, are
more likely to need frost protection equipment in the vineyards.
Additionally, the 1,400-foot contour along the northern boundary of the
proposed AVA coincides with the southern boundary of the established
Howell Mountain AVA (27 CFR 9.94). According to the petition,
elevations over 1,400 feet are also more susceptible to frosts due to
adiabatic cooling, also known as elevation cooling.
To the north of the proposed AVA, the elevations rise up to 2,200
feet within the established Howell Mountain AVA. The topography of the
Howell Mountain AVA contains hillsides, like the proposed Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA, but also has a rolling, plateau-like
feature at the summit. The region to the east of the proposed AVA has
elevations like those of the proposed AVA, but the slopes have a more
easterly to northeasterly exposure. South and west of the proposed AVA
are the established St. Helena (27 CFR 9.149) and Calistoga (27 CFR
9.209) AVAs, which have lower elevations and include the flat lands
along the floor of the Napa Valley. The petition describes slope angles
within the established St. Helena AVA as mostly less than 5 percent,
while the established Calistoga AVA is described as having ``a
multitude of * * * slopes, from steep mountains to benchlands to fans,
to flat valley floors to riparian habitats.''
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published Notice No. 221 in the Federal Register on March 2,
2023 (88 FR 13072), proposing to establish the Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA. In the notice, TTB summarized the evidence from the
petition regarding the name, boundary, and distinguishing feature of
the proposed AVA. The notice also included the information from the
petition comparing the distinguishing feature of the proposed AVA to
the surrounding areas. For a detailed description of the evidence and
for a detailed comparison of the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas,
see Notice No. 221.
In Notice No. 221, 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 Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA's location within the North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs, TTB
solicited comments on whether the evidence submitted in the petition
sufficiently differentiates it from the established AVAs. TTB also
requested comments on whether the features of the proposed AVA are so
distinguishable from the established AVAs that the proposed AVA should
no longer be part of one or the other, or both of, the established
AVAs. The comment period originally closed May 1, 2023. TTB extended
the comment period for an additional 60 days, until June 30, 2023,
because of a request submitted during the comment period (comment 6).
See Notice No. 221A, which published in the Federal Register on May 2,
2023 (88 FR 27420).
TTB received 15 comments in response to Notices No. 221 and 221A.
However, one comment was submitted in duplicate, so only 14 comments
are posted to the public docket. One comment (comment 6) requested a
90-day extension of the comment period. In response to the request, the
petitioner submitted a comment (comment 8) expressing his opposition to
a comment period extension. In Notice No. 221A, TTB agreed to extend
the comment period for an additional 60 days.
Eight comments (comments 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14) expressed
support for the proposed AVA. Three of those comments (comments 4, 7,
and 9) support the proposed AVA without suggesting any additional
changes. Three of the supporting comments (comments 5, 11, 13, and 14)
express support for the proposed AVA if certain changes to the boundary
are made. These proposed changes, and TTB's response to the requests,
are discussed later in this document. The original petitioner submitted
a comment (comment 12) agreeing to the proposed boundary changes.
One comment (comment 1) does not specifically support or oppose the
proposed AVA but instead expresses concern that an AVA designation
would provide tax breaks for vineyard owners and other landowners
within the area. The commenter also expressed concern that property
taxes on other property owners in Napa County outside of the proposed
AVA would increase to make up for the loss of tax revenue that tax
breaks would cause. In response, the petitioner submitted a comment
(comment 2) stating that California does not provide tax breaks for
properties within an AVA. The comment goes on to say that ``property in
California is subject to Proposition 13 which establishes a base year
assessed value upon purchase or new construction,'' and the
establishment of an AVA would not impact a property's ``factored base
year assessed value''.
Property taxes and tax assessments are local matters and are
outside TTB's authority and the scope of this proposed rulemaking
document. TTB's establishment of an AVA through the federal rulemaking
process does not in itself have a tax effect.
Comment 3 also does not specifically express support for or
opposition to the proposed AVA. The comment includes a link to a
newspaper article about the proposed Crystal Springs of Napa Valley
AVA. The commenter notes that the article's writer frequently refers to
the proposed AVA simply as ``Crystal Springs,'' and appears to be
concerned that truncating the name could lead to confusion. Instead,
the commenter states that the writer ``missed the opportunity to
explain how an AVA that technically mentions another AVA in its name as
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley might, does not lead to brand
confusion.'' In Notice No. 221, TTB proposed that the name ``Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley'' be recognized as a name of viticultural
significance. As TTB stated in that notice, TTB is not proposing to
make ``Crystal Springs'' standing alone a term of viticultural
significance, due to the number of other locations in the United
States. that are known simply as ``Crystal Springs.'' Therefore, in
this final rule, TTB is finalizing its proposal that only the full AVA
name may appear as an appellation of origin on wine labels.
One commenter (comment 10) claims to be the ``real owner of
Chrystal [sic] Springs of Napa Valley'' but provided no explanation or
supporting information. TTB notes that designation of an AVA does not
confer or change ownership of property within the AVA, and that there
is no ``owner'' of an AVA. Establishment of an AVA simply permits
winemakers to provide additional information to consumers about the
origin of the grapes used to make their wine, and providing that
information is voluntary. Any winemaker may label their wines with the
AVA name as an appellation of
[[Page 83433]]
origin if the wines meet the regulatory requirements for use of the AVA
name. Furthermore, TTB notes that the Bureau has not identified any
labels that use the name ``Crystal (or ``Chrystal'') Springs of Napa
Valley.'' Therefore, TTB does not believe that establishment of the
``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley'' AVA will affect any wine industry
member's use of their business name on their wine label, nor did any
commenter indicate that establishing the AVA would have that affect.
Comment 13, submitted by Napa Valley Vintners (NVV), proposes
several changes to the boundary of the proposed Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA. The first change would remove a partial overlap with the
established St. Helena AVA. As originally proposed, the southernmost
portion of the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA boundary, which
follows the 400-foot elevation contour, would partially overlap the St.
Helena AVA. To remove the overlap, NVV suggests following the 400-foot
elevation contour to the point where it meets the St. Helena city
limits, which forms the boundary of the St. Helena AVA, and then
following the city limits until they again intersect the 400-foot
elevation. NVV notes that the St. Helena city limits are not shown on
the 2015 USGS St. Helena quadrangle map the petitioner used to draw the
proposed AVA boundary. Instead, NVV recommends using the version of the
map that was used to create the St. Helena AVA boundary, which is the
1960 (revised 1993) version. Appellation St. Helena and the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA petitioner both submitted comments
supporting the proposed boundary change (comments 5 and 12,
respectively). TTB agrees with the comments and is amending the
proposed boundary to eliminate the partial overlap with the established
St. Helena AVA and to utilize the version of the USGS map that shows
the St. Helena city limits.
In comment 13, NVV also requested substituting the 1960 (revised
1993) version of the St. Helena quadrangle map for the 2015 version to
avoid the appearance of a second partial overlap with the St. Helena
AVA. NVV notes that the 1960 version of the map shows the 400-foot
elevation contour extending into the Bell Canyon reservoir, while the
2015 version stops the elevation contour at the reservoir's dam. The
NVV states that, as a result, the proposed Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley's use of the 400-foot elevation contour for its boundary gives
the appearance of a partial overlap with the St. Helena AVA at the
reservoir. TTB notes that although the use of different versions of the
map gives the appearance of a partial overlap, such an overlap does not
actually exist because both the St. Helena AVA boundary description and
the proposed AVA boundary description follow the 400-foot elevation
contour. As such, even though the 2015 version of the map does not show
the contour extending into the reservoir, the contour still exists, and
the boundaries of both AVAs still follow it. As discussed earlier, TTB
has agreed to adopt the older version of the map for the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA boundary description in order to use the St.
Helena city limits to remove another partial overlap. Adopting the
older map will also eliminate any confusion about the location of the
St. Helena and proposed Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVAs' boundaries
near the Bell Canyon reservoir.
Calistoga AVA Boundary Modification Comments
One comment (comment 11) requested a change to the proposed AVA
boundary to fully include a vineyard, which is currently split between
the proposed AVA and the established Calistoga AVA (27 CFR 9.209). The
vineyard, known as the Crystal Springs Vineyard, sits along North Fork
of Crystal Springs Road between the northwestern portion of the
proposed AVA and the eastern portion of the Calistoga AVA.
Approximately 11 acres of the vineyard are within the Calistoga AVA,
and the remaining 6 acres are within the proposed Crystal Springs of
Napa Valley AVA. The comment points out that the vineyard's name shows
a current association with the proposed ``Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley'' name. The comment also states that elevations within the
vineyard are between 500 and 1,200 feet, which is within the range of
elevations in the proposed AVA and higher than the floor of the
Calistoga Valley, and it has a similar climate and hillside topography
and soils as the proposed AVA.
The NVV comment (comment 13) also requests this boundary change and
includes a letter from the Calistoga Wine Growers organization that
supports the change. The NVV comment also suggests replacing the 2015
USGS Calistoga quadrangle map used to draw the proposed AVA with the
1997 version used to draw the original Calistoga AVA, to ensure that
the proposed revisions to both boundaries refer to the same marked
features and will align with the other maps used to make the remainder
of the Calistoga AVA boundary. The proposed Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley AVA petitioner also submitted a comment (comment 12) expressing
support for these changes.
After reviewing the comments and related documents, TTB is making
this change to the boundaries of the Calistoga AVA and the proposed
Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA so that the Crystal Springs Vineyard
is located entirely within the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition and the comments received in
response to Notice No. 221, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the
petitioner supports establishing the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
with the boundary modifications requested in the comments. 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 ``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley'' AVA in Napa County,
California, effective 30 days from the publication date of this
document. TTB is also modifying the boundary of the established
Calistoga AVA, as requested during the comment period, effective 30
days from the publication of this document.
TTB has also determined that the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
will remain part of the established North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs.
As discussed in Notice No. 221, the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
shares some broad characteristics with the established AVAs. For
example, the proposed AVA is comprised of hillside slopes, which also
occur in the North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs, and it also has a
marine-influenced climate. However, the proposed AVA lacks flat
valleys, which are common in both the North Coast and Napa Valley AVAs,
and it is not as influenced by the ocean as the more coastal regions of
the North Coast AVA.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA and the modified Calistoga AVA boundary 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 Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA
boundary and the modified Calistoga AVA boundary may also be viewed on
the AVA Map Explorer on the TTB website, at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer.
[[Page 83434]]
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 Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA,
its name, ``Crystal Springs of Napa 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 regulation clarifies
this point. Consequently, wine bottlers using the name ``Crystal
Springs of Napa 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 ``Crystal Springs,''
standing alone, as a term of viticultural significance due to the
number of locations in the United States and elsewhere known as
``Crystal Springs.''
The establishment of the Crystal Springs of Napa Valley AVA will
not affect the existing North Coast or Napa Valley AVAs, and any
bottlers using ``North Coast'' or ``Napa Valley'' as an appellation of
origin or in a brand name for wines made from grapes grown within the
North Coast or Napa Valley AVAs will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of the Crystal Springs
of Napa Valley AVA will allow vintners to use ``Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley,'' ``Napa Valley,'' and ``North Coast'' as appellations of
origin for wines made primarily from grapes grown within the Crystal
Springs of Napa Valley AVA if the wines meet the eligibility
requirements for these appellations.
After November 16, 2026, bottlers who use ``Calistoga'' as an
appellation of origin on wines made primarily from grapes grown in the
area that was removed from the Calistoga AVA will no longer be able to
use ``Calistoga'' as an appellation of origin and would only be
eligible to use ``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley,'' ``North Coast,''
``Napa Valley,'' or a combination of these appellations as appellations
of origin on those wines.
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, as amended.
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. 9.209 by revising paragraphs (c)(8) and (9) to read as
follows:
Sec. 9.209 Calistoga.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(8) Follows the 400-foot contour line easterly approximately 0.6
mile to its intersection with the eastern edge of the Calistoga map,
denoted by a north-south longitude line labeled as longitude 122
degrees, 30 minutes;
(9) Continues north along the longitude line approximately 0.5 mile
to its intersection with the 880-foot contour line in section 2, T8N/
R6W;
* * * * *
0
3. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.296 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.296 Crystal Springs of Napa Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley''. For purposes of part 4
of this chapter, ``Crystal Springs of Napa Valley'' is a term of
viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the
viticultural area are titled:
(1) St. Helena, CA, 1960, revised 1993; and
(2) Calistoga, CA, 1997.
(c) Boundary. The Crystal Springs of Napa Valley viticultural area
is located in Napa County, California. Within the boundary description
that follows, the viticultural area encompasses all areas at or below
1,400 feet in elevation. The boundary of the Crystal Springs of Napa
Valley viticultural area is as described as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the St. Helena map at the
intersection of Howell Mountain Road and White Cottage Road. From the
beginning point, proceed southeasterly along Howell Mountain Road to
its intersection with the St. Helena city limits in section 29, T8N/
R5W; then
(2) Proceed west then south along the St. Helena city limits to its
intersection with the 400-foot elevation contour along the western edge
of section 29, T8N/R5W; then
(3) Proceed northwesterly along the 400-foot elevation contour to
its intersection with the western edge of the St. Helena map, denoted
by the north-south longitude line labeled as longitude 122 degrees, 30
minutes; then
(4) Proceed due north along the longitude line approximately 0.5
mile to its intersection with the 880-foot elevation contour in section
2, T8N/R6W; then
(5) Proceed northwesterly along the meandering 880-foot elevation
contour, crossing onto the Calistoga map, and continuing along the
elevation contour (with a brief return to the St. Helena map) to its
intersection with Biter Creek in the section 34, T9N/R6W, on the
Calistoga map; then
(6) Proceed northerly (upstream) along Biter Creek to its
intersection with the 1,400-foot elevation contour; then
(7) Proceed southeasterly along the meandering 1,400-foot elevation
[[Page 83435]]
contour, crossing onto the St. Helena map, to the intersection of the
elevation contour with White Cottage Road; then
(8) Proceed easterly along White Cottage Road for approximately 130
feet, returning to the beginning point.
Signed: October 4, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: October 7, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Tax Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-23655 Filed 10-15-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
