Proposed Establishment of the Columbia Hills Viticultural Area, 96623-96627 [2024-28438]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules
hearing scheduled for December 6,
2024, at 10 a.m. ET is cancelled.
Regina L. Johnson,
Federal Register Liaison, Publications and
Regulations Section, Associate Chief Counsel
(Procedure and Administration).
[FR Doc. 2024–28462 Filed 12–4–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2024–0007; Notice No.
235]
RIN 1513–AD08
Proposed Establishment of the
Columbia Hills Viticultural Area
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the 29,387-acre ‘‘Columbia
Hills’’ American viticultural area (AVA)
in Klickitat County, Washington. The
proposed AVA is located entirely within
the boundaries of the existing Columbia
Valley AVA. TTB designates viticultural
areas to allow vintners to better describe
the origin of their wines and to allow
consumers to better identify wines they
may purchase. TTB invites comments
on these proposals.
DATES: TTB must receive your
comments on or before February 3,
2025.
SUMMARY:
You may electronically
submit comments to TTB on this
proposal, and view copies of this
document, its supporting materials, and
any comments TTB receives on it within
Docket No. TTB–2024–0007 as posted
on Regulations.gov (https://
www.regulations.gov), the Federal erulemaking portal. Alternatively, you
may submit comments via postal mail to
the Director, Regulations and Ruling
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box
12, Washington, DC 20005. Please see
the ‘‘Public Participation’’ section of
this document for further information
on the comments requested on this
proposal and on the submission,
confidentiality, and public disclosure of
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:04 Dec 04, 2024
Jkt 265001
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
provisions pursuant to section 1111(d)
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
as codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). In
addition, the Secretary of the Treasury
has delegated certain administrative and
enforcement authorities to TTB 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 of petitions for the
establishment or modification of
American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved AVAs.
96623
and allows any interested party to
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 that affect
viticulture, such as climate, geology,
soils, physical features, and elevation,
that make the proposed AVA distinctive
and distinguish it from adjacent areas
outside the proposed AVA boundary;
• The appropriate United States
Geological Survey (USGS) map(s)
showing the location of the proposed
AVA, with the boundary of the
proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon;
and
• A detailed narrative description of
the proposed AVA boundary based on
USGS map markings.
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.
Petition To Establish the Columbia Hills
AVA
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.
TTB received a petition from Dr.
Kevin R. Pogue, a geology professor,
proposing to establish the ‘‘Columbia
Hills’’ AVA. Dr. Pogue submitted the
petition on behalf of Robert Lorkowski,
owner of Cascade Cliffs Vineyard and
Winery, which is located within the
boundaries of the proposed AVA. The
proposed AVA is located in Klickitat
County, Washington, and is entirely
within the established Columbia Valley
AVA (27 CFR 9.74). There are
approximately 338 acres of vineyards,
owned by 19 different property owners,
within the proposed AVA, as well as
four wineries. The distinguishing
features of the proposed Columbia Hills
AVA are its topography, soils, and
climate.
Proposed Columbia Hills AVA
Requirements
Name Evidence
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines
the procedure for proposing an AVA
The proposed AVA takes its name
from the Columbia Hills, a 35-mile-long
ridgeline that parallels the north side of
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM
05DEP1
96624
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the Columbia River between Rowena
Gap and the mouth of Rock Creek, in
Klickitat County, Washington. The
proposed AVA is situated on the
southern slopes of the Columbia Hills.
The name ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ is marked
over the ridgeline on a copy of the
U.S.G.S. 1:250,000-scale topographic
map for the region of the proposed
AVA, which was included in the
petition.
The petition includes additional
evidence of use of the name ‘‘Columbia
Hills’’ within the region of the proposed
AVA. For example, the Columbia Hills
Historical State Park and the Columbia
Hills Natural Area Preserve are both
located in the proposed AVA. A 2011
item on a local newspaper’s website is
titled ‘‘Mt. Hood Cycling Classic
Columbia Hills Road Race.’’ 1 Finally, a
recreational vehicle campground in
Dallesport, Washington, which is within
the proposed AVA, is named ‘‘Columbia
Hills RV.’’
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Columbia Hills AVA
encompasses 29,387 acres along the
predominantly south-facing slopes of
the Columbia Hills. The proposed
southern boundary follows the
Columbia River, which marks the
southern edge of the hills. The proposed
western boundary follows the 300-meter
elevation contour along a feature known
as Rowena Gap, which marks a
pronounced change in topography
between the proposed AVA and the
region to the west. The proposed
northern boundary generally follows the
320-meter elevation contour to separate
the proposed AVA from higher
elevations that were not inundated by
ice age floods. The proposed eastern
boundary follows Rock Creek to
separate the proposed AVA from the
established The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.276), which is a
broad, relatively flat plateau that is a
separate geographic feature from the
Columbia Hills that form the proposed
AVA.
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Distinguishing Features
According to the petition, the
distinguishing features of the proposed
Columbia Hills AVA are its topography,
soils, and climate.
Topography
According to the petition, features
created by depositional and erosional
processes associated with catastrophic
ice age flooding dominate the
1 https://www.columbiagorgenews.com/archive/
video-mt-hood-cycling-classic-columbia-hills-roadrace/article_6a1c4211-11cc-5868-920218e06888c2a3.html. Accessed October 28, 2024.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:04 Dec 04, 2024
Jkt 265001
topography of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA. Erosion by the floodwaters
of the generally flat-lying layers of
bedrock created a series of stepped
terraces within the proposed AVA. The
petition states that these gently-sloped
terraces provide excellent locations for
vineyards within the otherwise steeplysloped valley of the Columbia River.
Large, gently-sloped gravel bars
deposited by ice-age floods also provide
level terrain for planting vineyards
within the proposed AVA. According to
the petition, the ice-age flooding along
the Columbia River generally did not
exceed 320 meters. Therefore, elevations
within the proposed Columbia Hills
AVA are limited to those at or below
320 meters to exclude regions without
the flood-related topographic features.
To the north of the proposed AVA,
the topography is much steeper and less
impacted by ice-age flooding. Elevations
within the higher elevations of the
Columbia Hills that are not included in
the proposed AVA reach 800 meters, as
shown on the 1980 version of the
Goldendale, Washington-Oregon
U.S.G.S. map included with the
petition. The same map also shows that
within the Simcoe Mountains, farther
north of the proposed AVA, elevations
exceed 1,400 meters. East of the
proposed AVA, within the established
The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA,
elevations reach as high as 445 meters.
The petition states that ice-age flooding
never inundated approximately 33
percent of the land within the
established The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA. West of the proposed AVA
is the established Columbia Gorge AVA
(27 CFR 9.178), which has a diverse
topography and elevations that reach
793 meters. According to the petition,
ice-age floods only covered 26 percent
of the land within the established
Columbia Gorge AVA.
Slopes within the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA have a uniformly southerly
aspect. The petition states that a
southerly aspect is the preferred
direction for viticulture in the higher
latitudes in the northern hemisphere
because the slopes receive the greatest
exposure to the sun’s rays. As a result,
south-facing slopes have higher soil
temperatures than slopes that face
north. According to the petition, warmer
soils encourage vine growth and speed
ripening of the fruit. By contrast, the
established The Burn of Columbia
Valley AVA, which is east of the
proposed AVA, consists of relatively flat
topography with varying aspects. The
petition states that west of the proposed
AVA, within the established Columbia
Gorge AVA, the aspect distribution is
also varied and essentially random. The
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
region to the north has a dominantly
southern aspect similar to that of the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA, but it is
above the maximum elevation of the iceage floods. Low-lying areas south of the
proposed AVA, in Oregon, have a
dominantly northern aspect.
Soils
The soils of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA are divided into two main
soil map units. Most of the area within
the proposed AVA features soils
mapped as the Cheviot-HorseflatRockly-Kiona unit, which are described
as ‘‘well-drained soils that formed in
colluvium and residuum derived from
basalt mixed with loess.’’ In the western
portion of the proposed AVA, the soils
belong to the Ewall-Dallesport-Rock
Outcrop unit. These soils consist of
wind-deposited sand that was draped
over the bedrock and gravel bars that
were left behind when the ice-age floods
ceased. The soils of the proposed AVA
are typically much coarser than the
loess-based soils that are common
elsewhere in the Columbia River basin
and are well drained to excessively well
drained. The petition states that the
coarse soils warm more quickly than
finer soils, which encourages vines to
root deeply. Furthermore, the petition
states that in many areas of the
proposed AVA, the soils are shallow,
which allows roots to encounter the
underlying basalt bedrock or gravel
substrate, which is uncommon in the
deep loess-derived soils found
elsewhere in the Columbia River basin,
and which become exposed to the
minerals and nutritive elements in those
rocks.
To the east of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA, soils of the Van NosternMorrow-Bakeoven soil unit cover
approximately 50 percent of the area
within the established The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA. These soils
occur largely above the maximum limit
of the ice-age floods and were not
subjected to flood erosion. These soils
contain large amounts of winddeposited loess. West of the proposed
AVA, the soils of the established
Columbia Gorge AVA are highly diverse
due to the large variations in bedrock,
slope angle, slope aspect, precipitation
amounts, and elevation. North and
south of the proposed AVA, the soils are
generally deep and derived from loess
over bedrock.
Climate
Eighty percent of the land within the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA is within
a mile of the Columbia River. According
to the petition, the river acts as a
thermal reservoir, moderating the
E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM
05DEP1
96625
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules
climate near its shores. Due to its
proximity to the river, the proposed
AVA generally has warmer growing
season temperatures, particularly during
the early morning hours, than the
surrounding regions. The petition states
that the warm climate of the proposed
AVA aids and accelerates the ripening
of grapes and allows for the cultivation
of warmer climate grape varietals such
as Grenache and Mourvedre.
The petition includes information on
the average growing season
temperatures,2 growing degree day 3
(GDD) accumulations, annual number of
frost-free days, and average growing
season maximum and minimum
temperatures from within the proposed
Columbia Hills AVA and each of the
surrounding regions except the region to
the east. Unless otherwise noted, all
climate data was collected from 2017 to
2021. The data, included in the petition
as tables 2 and 3, is shown in the
following tables and suggests that the
proposed AVA has a warmer climate
than each of the surrounding regions.
TABLE 1—AVERAGE GROWING SEASON TEMPERATURES IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
Location
(direction from proposed AVA)
2017
The Dalles (within) .......................................................................................................
Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................
Goldendale (north) .......................................................................................................
Moro (south) .................................................................................................................
Underwood (west) ........................................................................................................
Husum (west) ...............................................................................................................
2018
65.9
65.1
58.7
N/A
61.1
59.7
2019
66.2
65.3
58.3
59.7
61.4
60.2
2020
64
63.9
57
58
59.6
58.7
2021
65.3
65.2
58.5
58.7
60.9
59.9
67.7
66.6
59.5
59.2
62
60.2
TABLE 2—GROWING DEGREE DAY ACCUMULATIONS
Location
(direction from proposed AVA)
2017
The Dalles (within) .......................................................................................................
Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................
Goldendale (north) .......................................................................................................
Moro (south) .................................................................................................................
Underwood (west) ........................................................................................................
Husum (west) ...............................................................................................................
2018
3,431
3,275
2,205
N/A
2,530
2,287
2019
3,483
3,309
2,012
2,255
2,537
2,284
2020
3,097
3,091
1,834
2,006
2,258
2,107
2021
3,348
3,338
2,112
2,128
2,472
2,249
3,802
3,588
2,309
2,229
2,647
2,345
TABLE 3—FROST-FREE DAYS
Location
(direction from proposed AVA)
2017
The Dalles (within) .......................................................................................................
Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................
Goldendale (north) .......................................................................................................
Moro (south) .................................................................................................................
2018
254
253
142
N/A
2019
239
220
148
173
2020
223
208
148
163
2021
194
220
164
174
220
246
158
168
TABLE 4—AVERAGE GROWING SEASON MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
2017
Location
(direction from proposed AVA)
Max
The Dalles (within) .......................
Maryhill (within) ............................
Goldendale (north) .......................
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Min.
78.2
76.8
75
Moro (south) .................................
2018
Max
53.5
53.9
43
N/A
2019
Min.
Max
2020
Min.
Max
2021
Min.
Max
Min.
78.6
76.8
75
53.7
54.4
42
74.9
74.5
72
53
54
43
77.5
76.5
75
53
54.4
42
80.2
78.3
77
55.3
55.3
42
75
44
70
46
73
45
75
46
The petition also includes a brief
discussion of annual precipitation
amounts in the proposed Columbia Hills
AVA. The petition notes that the
proposed AVA is approximately 20
miles east of the only low elevation gap
in the Cascade Mountains where moist
marine air can enter the Columbia River
basin and influence its climate. The
marine influence rapidly diminishes as
one moves eastward from this gap. As
a result, the proposed Columbia Hills
AVA only receives about 10 to 20 inches
of rainfall annually. Due to the low
rainfall amounts, vineyards in the
proposed AVA require irrigation.
Farther east, within the established The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, annual
precipitation rates drop below 10
inches. By contrast, the established
Columbia Gorge AVA, which is west of
the proposed AVA and situated much
closer to the gap, receives over 30
inches of rainfall annually.
2 Defined in the petition as the period from April
1 to October 31.
3 See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2nd ed.),
pages 61–64 (1974). In the Winkler climate
classification system, annual heat accumulation
during the growing season, measured in annual
GDDs, defines climatic regions. One GDD
accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit (F) that a
day’s mean temperature is above 50 degrees F, the
minimum temperature required for grapevine
growth.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:04 Dec 04, 2024
Jkt 265001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM
05DEP1
96626
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Comparison of the Proposed Columbia
Hills AVA to the Existing Columbia
Valley AVA
T.D. ATF–190, published in the
Federal Register on November 13, 1984
(49 FR 44895), established the Columbia
Valley AVA. That decision describes the
AVA as a ‘‘large, treeless basin
surrounding the Yakima, Snake, and
Columbia Rivers in Washington and
Oregon.’’ The Columbia Valley AVA has
a broadly undulating or rolling
topography cut by rivers. With respect
to the climate of the AVA, the growing
season is over 150 days, annual rainfall
is 15 inches or less, and GDD
accumulations are typically over 2,000.
The proposed Columbia Hills AVA
shares several of the same
characteristics as the larger Columbia
Valley AVA, including a growing season
length of over 150 days, limited annual
rainfall, and GDD accumulations that
are over 2,000. Unlike the surrounding
Columbia Valley AVA, however, the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA is not a
large basin. It is instead a region of
hillslopes and flood-carved terraces
within a deeply incised river valley.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to
establish the 29,387-acre ‘‘Columbia
Hills’’ AVA merits consideration and
public comment, as invited in this
document.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary
descriptions of the petitioned-for AVA
in the proposed regulatory text
published at the end of this document.
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Maps
The petitioner provided the required
maps, and they are listed below in the
proposed regulatory text. You may also
view the proposed Columbia Hills AVA
boundary 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:04 Dec 04, 2024
Jkt 265001
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.
If TTB establishes this proposed AVA,
its name, ‘‘Columbia Hills,’’ will be
recognized as a name of viticultural
significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the
TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The
text of the proposed regulation clarifies
this point. Consequently, wine bottlers
using ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ in a brand
name, including a trademark, or in
another label reference as to the origin
of the wine, would have to ensure that
the product is eligible to use the
viticultural area’s name ‘‘Columbia
Hills.’’ The approval of the proposed
Columbia Hills AVA would not affect
any existing 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 Hills AVA would
not be affected by the establishment of
this new AVA. If approved, the
establishment of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA would allow vintners to use
‘‘Columbia Hills,’’ ‘‘Columbia Valley,’’
or both, as appellations of origin for
wines made from grapes grown within
the proposed AVA, if the wines meet
the eligibility requirements for the
appellation.
Because of the potential impact of the
establishment of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA on wine labels that include
the term ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ as discussed
above under Impact on Current Wine
Labels, TTB is particularly interested in
comments regarding whether there will
be a conflict between the proposed area
names and currently used brand names.
If a commenter believes that a conflict
will arise, the comment should describe
the nature of that conflict, including any
anticipated negative economic impact
that approval of the proposed AVA will
have on an existing viticultural
enterprise. TTB is also interested in
receiving suggestions for ways to avoid
conflicts, for example, by adopting a
modified or different name for the
proposed AVA.
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this
proposal as an individual or on behalf
of a business or other organization via
the Regulations.gov website or via
postal mail, as described in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
Your comment must reference Notice
No. 235 and must be submitted or
postmarked by the closing date shown
in the DATES section of this document.
You may upload or include attachments
with your comment. You also may
request a public hearing on this
proposal. The TTB Administrator
reserves the right to determine whether
to hold a public hearing.
Public Participation
Confidentiality and Disclosure of
Comments
Comments Invited
TTB invites comments from interested
members of the public on whether TTB
should establish the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA. TTB is interested in
receiving comments on the sufficiency
and accuracy of the name, boundary,
and other required information
submitted in support of the AVA
petition. In addition, because the
proposed AVA would be within the
existing Columbia Valley AVA, TTB is
interested in comments on whether the
evidence submitted in the petition
regarding the distinguishing features of
the proposed AVA sufficiently
differentiates it from the existing AVA.
TTB is also interested in comments on
whether the geographic features of the
proposed AVA are so distinguishable
from the Columbia Valley AVA that the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA should
not be part of the established AVA.
Please provide any available specific
information in support of your
comments.
All submitted comments and
attachments are part of the rulemaking
record and are subject to public
disclosure. Do not enclose any material
in your comments that you consider
confidential or that is inappropriate for
disclosure. TTB will post, and you may
view, copies of this document, the
related petition and selected supporting
materials, and any comments TTB
receives about this proposal within the
related Regulations.gov docket. In
general, TTB will post comments as
submitted, and it will not redact any
identifying or contact information from
the body of a comment or attachment.
Please contact TTB’s Regulations and
Rulings division by email using the web
form available at https://www.ttb.gov/
contact-rrd, or by telephone at 202–453–
2265, if you have any questions about
commenting on this proposal or to
request copies of this document, the
related petition and its supporting
materials, or any comments received.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM
05DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed
regulation, if adopted, would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The proposed regulation imposes no
new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit
derived from the use of a viticultural
area name would be the result of a
proprietor’s efforts and consumer
acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by
Executive Order 12866, as amended.
Therefore, it requires no regulatory
assessment.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, we propose to amend title 27,
chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
38 CFR Part 9
Subpart C—Approved American
Viticultural Areas
khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
RIN 2900–AR67
2. Add § 9.lll to read as follows:
Columbia Hills.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural
area described in this section is
‘‘Columbia Hills’’. For purposes of part
4 of this chapter, ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ is a
term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United
States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:100,000 scale topographic maps used
to determine the boundary of the
viticultural area are as follows:
(1) Hood River OR–WA, 1982; and
(2) Goldendale, WA–OR, 1980.
(c) Boundary. The Columbia Hills
viticultural area is located in Klickitat
County, Washington. The boundary of
the Columbia Hills viticultural area is as
described as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the
Hood River map at the intersection of
the northern shoreline of the Columbia
River and an unnamed creek due east of
the marked ‘‘Cold Spring.’’ From the
beginning point, proceed northerly
along the unnamed creek to its
intersection with the 300-meter
elevation contour; then
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:04 Dec 04, 2024
[FR Doc. 2024–28438 Filed 12–4–24; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
■
§ 9.lll
Signed: November 26, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: November 27, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy).
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
■
(2) Proceed east along the 300-meter
elevation contour to the eastern
boundary of the Hood River map; then
(3) Proceed north along the map
boundary for approximately 400 feet;
then
(4) Proceed east onto 320-meter
elevation contour on the Goldendale
map and continue east along the 320meter elevation contour to its
intersection with the boundary between
Range 18 East and Range 19 East, south
of Sand Spring Canyon; then
(5) Proceed southeast in a straight line
for 9,000 feet (1.7 miles) to the
intersection of the boundary between
sections 31 and 32, T3N/R19E and the
northern shoreline of the Columbia
River; then
(6) Proceed west along the northern
shoreline of the Columbia River,
returning to the beginning point.
Jkt 265001
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance
and Veterans’ Group Life Insurance—
Accelerated Benefit Option Regulation
Update
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulations governing Servicemembers’
Group Life Insurance (SGLI), Family
SGLI (FSGLI), and Veterans’ Group Life
Insurance (VGLI) to allow an alternate
applicant to apply for an Accelerated
Benefit when a member is terminally ill
and mentally incapacitated or when a
member’s insured spouse is terminally
ill and the member is mentally
incapacitated. VA also proposes to
define key terms to assist in
adjudicating FSGLI dependent child
and Accelerated Benefit claims, and to
remove addresses, telephone numbers,
and the reproduction of the Accelerated
Benefit application form from the text of
the regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 3, 2025.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96627
Comments must be
submitted through www.regulations.gov.
Except as provided below, comments
received before the close of the
comment period will be available at
www.regulations.gov for public viewing,
inspection, or copying, including any
personally identifiable or confidential
business information that is included in
a comment. We post the comments
received before the close of the
comment period on
www.regulations.gov as soon as possible
after they have been received. VA will
not post on Regulations.gov public
comments that make threats to
individuals or institutions or suggest
that the commenter will take actions to
harm an individual. VA encourages
individuals not to submit duplicative
comments; however, we will post
comments from multiple unique
commenters even if the content is
identical or nearly identical to other
comments. Any public comment
received after the comment period’s
closing date is considered late and will
not be considered in the final
rulemaking. In accordance with the
Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act of 2023, a PlainLanguage Summary (not more than 100
words in length) of this proposed rule
is available at Regulations.gov, under
RIN 2900–AR67.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Samantha Yerdon, Management and
Program Analyst, Department of
Veterans Affairs, Insurance Service
(310/290B); 5000 Wissahickon Avenue,
Philadelphia, PA 19144; (215) 842–
2000, ext. 5494 (this is not a toll-free
number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
1980 of title 38, United States Code,
authorizes the payment of accelerated
death benefits to terminally ill members
in the SGLI, FSGLI, and VGLI programs.
Consistent with the statute, current 38
CFR 9.14 allows terminally ill members
to receive up to 50 percent of the face
value of their insurance coverage before
they die if they have 9 months or less
to live.
Current § 9.14(c) only allows the
terminally ill member to apply for an
Accelerated Benefit, which is often used
to pay his or her medical bills or make
other financial arrangements before
death. During Policy Years 2020 through
2023 (July 1, 2019, through June 30,
2023), 223 terminally ill members
applied for and received such benefits.
Considering that terminally ill members
often have severe medical conditions
that render them unable to apply for the
Accelerated Benefit, VA proposes to
amend § 9.14(c) to allow an alternate
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM
05DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 234 (Thursday, December 5, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 96623-96627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-28438]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2024-0007; Notice No. 235]
RIN 1513-AD08
Proposed Establishment of the Columbia Hills Viticultural Area
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the 29,387-acre ``Columbia Hills'' American viticultural area
(AVA) in Klickitat County, Washington. The proposed AVA is located
entirely within the boundaries of the existing Columbia Valley AVA. TTB
designates viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the
origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines
they may purchase. TTB invites comments on these proposals.
DATES: TTB must receive your comments on or before February 3, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may electronically submit comments to TTB on this
proposal, and view copies of this document, its supporting materials,
and any comments TTB receives on it within Docket No. TTB-2024-0007 as
posted on Regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov), the Federal e-
rulemaking portal. Alternatively, you may submit comments via postal
mail to the Director, Regulations and Ruling Division, Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC
20005. Please see the ``Public Participation'' section of this document
for further information on the comments requested on this proposal and
on the submission, confidentiality, and public disclosure of comments.
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
provisions pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of
2002, as codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). In addition, the Secretary of the
Treasury has delegated certain administrative and enforcement
authorities to TTB 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 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 that affect viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical
features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and
distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed AVA boundary;
The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS)
map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of
the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
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.
Petition To Establish the Columbia Hills AVA
TTB received a petition from Dr. Kevin R. Pogue, a geology
professor, proposing to establish the ``Columbia Hills'' AVA. Dr. Pogue
submitted the petition on behalf of Robert Lorkowski, owner of Cascade
Cliffs Vineyard and Winery, which is located within the boundaries of
the proposed AVA. The proposed AVA is located in Klickitat County,
Washington, and is entirely within the established Columbia Valley AVA
(27 CFR 9.74). There are approximately 338 acres of vineyards, owned by
19 different property owners, within the proposed AVA, as well as four
wineries. The distinguishing features of the proposed Columbia Hills
AVA are its topography, soils, and climate.
Proposed Columbia Hills AVA
Name Evidence
The proposed AVA takes its name from the Columbia Hills, a 35-mile-
long ridgeline that parallels the north side of
[[Page 96624]]
the Columbia River between Rowena Gap and the mouth of Rock Creek, in
Klickitat County, Washington. The proposed AVA is situated on the
southern slopes of the Columbia Hills. The name ``Columbia Hills'' is
marked over the ridgeline on a copy of the U.S.G.S. 1:250,000-scale
topographic map for the region of the proposed AVA, which was included
in the petition.
The petition includes additional evidence of use of the name
``Columbia Hills'' within the region of the proposed AVA. For example,
the Columbia Hills Historical State Park and the Columbia Hills Natural
Area Preserve are both located in the proposed AVA. A 2011 item on a
local newspaper's website is titled ``Mt. Hood Cycling Classic Columbia
Hills Road Race.'' \1\ Finally, a recreational vehicle campground in
Dallesport, Washington, which is within the proposed AVA, is named
``Columbia Hills RV.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.columbiagorgenews.com/archive/video-mt-hood-cycling-classic-columbia-hills-road-race/article_6a1c4211-11cc-5868-9202-18e06888c2a3.html. Accessed October 28, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Columbia Hills AVA encompasses 29,387 acres along the
predominantly south-facing slopes of the Columbia Hills. The proposed
southern boundary follows the Columbia River, which marks the southern
edge of the hills. The proposed western boundary follows the 300-meter
elevation contour along a feature known as Rowena Gap, which marks a
pronounced change in topography between the proposed AVA and the region
to the west. The proposed northern boundary generally follows the 320-
meter elevation contour to separate the proposed AVA from higher
elevations that were not inundated by ice age floods. The proposed
eastern boundary follows Rock Creek to separate the proposed AVA from
the established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.276), which
is a broad, relatively flat plateau that is a separate geographic
feature from the Columbia Hills that form the proposed AVA.
Distinguishing Features
According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA are its topography, soils, and climate.
Topography
According to the petition, features created by depositional and
erosional processes associated with catastrophic ice age flooding
dominate the topography of the proposed Columbia Hills AVA. Erosion by
the floodwaters of the generally flat-lying layers of bedrock created a
series of stepped terraces within the proposed AVA. The petition states
that these gently-sloped terraces provide excellent locations for
vineyards within the otherwise steeply-sloped valley of the Columbia
River. Large, gently-sloped gravel bars deposited by ice-age floods
also provide level terrain for planting vineyards within the proposed
AVA. According to the petition, the ice-age flooding along the Columbia
River generally did not exceed 320 meters. Therefore, elevations within
the proposed Columbia Hills AVA are limited to those at or below 320
meters to exclude regions without the flood-related topographic
features.
To the north of the proposed AVA, the topography is much steeper
and less impacted by ice-age flooding. Elevations within the higher
elevations of the Columbia Hills that are not included in the proposed
AVA reach 800 meters, as shown on the 1980 version of the Goldendale,
Washington-Oregon U.S.G.S. map included with the petition. The same map
also shows that within the Simcoe Mountains, farther north of the
proposed AVA, elevations exceed 1,400 meters. East of the proposed AVA,
within the established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, elevations
reach as high as 445 meters. The petition states that ice-age flooding
never inundated approximately 33 percent of the land within the
established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA. West of the proposed AVA
is the established Columbia Gorge AVA (27 CFR 9.178), which has a
diverse topography and elevations that reach 793 meters. According to
the petition, ice-age floods only covered 26 percent of the land within
the established Columbia Gorge AVA.
Slopes within the proposed Columbia Hills AVA have a uniformly
southerly aspect. The petition states that a southerly aspect is the
preferred direction for viticulture in the higher latitudes in the
northern hemisphere because the slopes receive the greatest exposure to
the sun's rays. As a result, south-facing slopes have higher soil
temperatures than slopes that face north. According to the petition,
warmer soils encourage vine growth and speed ripening of the fruit. By
contrast, the established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, which is
east of the proposed AVA, consists of relatively flat topography with
varying aspects. The petition states that west of the proposed AVA,
within the established Columbia Gorge AVA, the aspect distribution is
also varied and essentially random. The region to the north has a
dominantly southern aspect similar to that of the proposed Columbia
Hills AVA, but it is above the maximum elevation of the ice-age floods.
Low-lying areas south of the proposed AVA, in Oregon, have a dominantly
northern aspect.
Soils
The soils of the proposed Columbia Hills AVA are divided into two
main soil map units. Most of the area within the proposed AVA features
soils mapped as the Cheviot-Horseflat-Rockly-Kiona unit, which are
described as ``well-drained soils that formed in colluvium and residuum
derived from basalt mixed with loess.'' In the western portion of the
proposed AVA, the soils belong to the Ewall-Dallesport-Rock Outcrop
unit. These soils consist of wind-deposited sand that was draped over
the bedrock and gravel bars that were left behind when the ice-age
floods ceased. The soils of the proposed AVA are typically much coarser
than the loess-based soils that are common elsewhere in the Columbia
River basin and are well drained to excessively well drained. The
petition states that the coarse soils warm more quickly than finer
soils, which encourages vines to root deeply. Furthermore, the petition
states that in many areas of the proposed AVA, the soils are shallow,
which allows roots to encounter the underlying basalt bedrock or gravel
substrate, which is uncommon in the deep loess-derived soils found
elsewhere in the Columbia River basin, and which become exposed to the
minerals and nutritive elements in those rocks.
To the east of the proposed Columbia Hills AVA, soils of the Van
Nostern-Morrow-Bakeoven soil unit cover approximately 50 percent of the
area within the established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA. These
soils occur largely above the maximum limit of the ice-age floods and
were not subjected to flood erosion. These soils contain large amounts
of wind-deposited loess. West of the proposed AVA, the soils of the
established Columbia Gorge AVA are highly diverse due to the large
variations in bedrock, slope angle, slope aspect, precipitation
amounts, and elevation. North and south of the proposed AVA, the soils
are generally deep and derived from loess over bedrock.
Climate
Eighty percent of the land within the proposed Columbia Hills AVA
is within a mile of the Columbia River. According to the petition, the
river acts as a thermal reservoir, moderating the
[[Page 96625]]
climate near its shores. Due to its proximity to the river, the
proposed AVA generally has warmer growing season temperatures,
particularly during the early morning hours, than the surrounding
regions. The petition states that the warm climate of the proposed AVA
aids and accelerates the ripening of grapes and allows for the
cultivation of warmer climate grape varietals such as Grenache and
Mourvedre.
The petition includes information on the average growing season
temperatures,\2\ growing degree day \3\ (GDD) accumulations, annual
number of frost-free days, and average growing season maximum and
minimum temperatures from within the proposed Columbia Hills AVA and
each of the surrounding regions except the region to the east. Unless
otherwise noted, all climate data was collected from 2017 to 2021. The
data, included in the petition as tables 2 and 3, is shown in the
following tables and suggests that the proposed AVA has a warmer
climate than each of the surrounding regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Defined in the petition as the period from April 1 to
October 31.
\3\ See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2nd ed.), pages 61-64 (1974). In the
Winkler climate classification system, annual heat accumulation
during the growing season, measured in annual GDDs, defines climatic
regions. One GDD accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit (F) that a
day's mean temperature is above 50 degrees F, the minimum
temperature required for grapevine growth.
Table 1--Average Growing Season Temperatures in Degrees Fahrenheit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location (direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dalles (within)...................................... 65.9 66.2 64 65.3 67.7
Maryhill (within)........................................ 65.1 65.3 63.9 65.2 66.6
Goldendale (north)....................................... 58.7 58.3 57 58.5 59.5
Moro (south)............................................. N/A 59.7 58 58.7 59.2
Underwood (west)......................................... 61.1 61.4 59.6 60.9 62
Husum (west)............................................. 59.7 60.2 58.7 59.9 60.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Growing Degree Day Accumulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location (direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dalles (within)...................................... 3,431 3,483 3,097 3,348 3,802
Maryhill (within)........................................ 3,275 3,309 3,091 3,338 3,588
Goldendale (north)....................................... 2,205 2,012 1,834 2,112 2,309
Moro (south)............................................. N/A 2,255 2,006 2,128 2,229
Underwood (west)......................................... 2,530 2,537 2,258 2,472 2,647
Husum (west)............................................. 2,287 2,284 2,107 2,249 2,345
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Frost-Free Days
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location (direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dalles (within)...................................... 254 239 223 194 220
Maryhill (within)........................................ 253 220 208 220 246
Goldendale (north)....................................... 142 148 148 164 158
Moro (south)............................................. N/A 173 163 174 168
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--Average Growing Season Maximum and Minimum Temperatures in Degrees Fahrenheit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Location (direction from proposed AVA) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Min. Max Min. Max Min. Max Min. Max Min.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dalles (within)................................. 78.2 53.5 78.6 53.7 74.9 53 77.5 53 80.2 55.3
Maryhill (within)................................... 76.8 53.9 76.8 54.4 74.5 54 76.5 54.4 78.3 55.3
Goldendale (north).................................. 75 43 75 42 72 43 75 42 77 42
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moro (south)........................................ N/A 75 44 70 46 73 45 75 46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition also includes a brief discussion of annual
precipitation amounts in the proposed Columbia Hills AVA. The petition
notes that the proposed AVA is approximately 20 miles east of the only
low elevation gap in the Cascade Mountains where moist marine air can
enter the Columbia River basin and influence its climate. The marine
influence rapidly diminishes as one moves eastward from this gap. As a
result, the proposed Columbia Hills AVA only receives about 10 to 20
inches of rainfall annually. Due to the low rainfall amounts, vineyards
in the proposed AVA require irrigation. Farther east, within the
established The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, annual precipitation rates
drop below 10 inches. By contrast, the established Columbia Gorge AVA,
which is west of the proposed AVA and situated much closer to the gap,
receives over 30 inches of rainfall annually.
[[Page 96626]]
Comparison of the Proposed Columbia Hills AVA to the Existing Columbia
Valley AVA
T.D. ATF-190, published in the Federal Register on November 13,
1984 (49 FR 44895), established the Columbia Valley AVA. That decision
describes the AVA as a ``large, treeless basin surrounding the Yakima,
Snake, and Columbia Rivers in Washington and Oregon.'' The Columbia
Valley AVA has a broadly undulating or rolling topography cut by
rivers. With respect to the climate of the AVA, the growing season is
over 150 days, annual rainfall is 15 inches or less, and GDD
accumulations are typically over 2,000.
The proposed Columbia Hills AVA shares several of the same
characteristics as the larger Columbia Valley AVA, including a growing
season length of over 150 days, limited annual rainfall, and GDD
accumulations that are over 2,000. Unlike the surrounding Columbia
Valley AVA, however, the proposed Columbia Hills AVA is not a large
basin. It is instead a region of hillslopes and flood-carved terraces
within a deeply incised river valley.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to establish the 29,387-acre
``Columbia Hills'' AVA merits consideration and public comment, as
invited in this document.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary descriptions of the petitioned-for AVA
in the proposed regulatory text published at the end of this document.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the proposed regulatory text. You may also view the proposed
Columbia Hills AVA boundary 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.
If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, its name, ``Columbia Hills,''
will be recognized as a name of viticultural significance under Sec.
4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the
proposed regulation clarifies this point. Consequently, wine bottlers
using ``Columbia Hills'' in a brand name, including a trademark, or in
another label reference as to the origin of the wine, would have to
ensure that the product is eligible to use the viticultural area's name
``Columbia Hills.'' The approval of the proposed Columbia Hills AVA
would not affect any existing 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 Hills AVA would not be affected
by the establishment of this new AVA. If approved, the establishment of
the proposed Columbia Hills AVA would allow vintners to use ``Columbia
Hills,'' ``Columbia Valley,'' or both, as appellations of origin for
wines made from grapes grown within the proposed AVA, if the wines meet
the eligibility requirements for the appellation.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
TTB invites comments from interested members of the public on
whether TTB should establish the proposed Columbia Hills AVA. TTB is
interested in receiving comments on the sufficiency and accuracy of the
name, boundary, and other required information submitted in support of
the AVA petition. In addition, because the proposed AVA would be within
the existing Columbia Valley AVA, TTB is interested in comments on
whether the evidence submitted in the petition regarding the
distinguishing features of the proposed AVA sufficiently differentiates
it from the existing AVA. TTB is also interested in comments on whether
the geographic features of the proposed AVA are so distinguishable from
the Columbia Valley AVA that the proposed Columbia Hills AVA should not
be part of the established AVA. Please provide any available specific
information in support of your comments.
Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the
proposed Columbia Hills AVA on wine labels that include the term
``Columbia Hills'' as discussed above under Impact on Current Wine
Labels, TTB is particularly interested in comments regarding whether
there will be a conflict between the proposed area names and currently
used brand names. If a commenter believes that a conflict will arise,
the comment should describe the nature of that conflict, including any
anticipated negative economic impact that approval of the proposed AVA
will have on an existing viticultural enterprise. TTB is also
interested in receiving suggestions for ways to avoid conflicts, for
example, by adopting a modified or different name for the proposed AVA.
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this proposal as an individual or on
behalf of a business or other organization via the Regulations.gov
website or via postal mail, as described in the ADDRESSES section of
this document. Your comment must reference Notice No. 235 and must be
submitted or postmarked by the closing date shown in the DATES section
of this document. You may upload or include attachments with your
comment. You also may request a public hearing on this proposal. The
TTB Administrator reserves the right to determine whether to hold a
public hearing.
Confidentiality and Disclosure of Comments
All submitted comments and attachments are part of the rulemaking
record and are subject to public disclosure. Do not enclose any
material in your comments that you consider confidential or that is
inappropriate for disclosure. TTB will post, and you may view, copies
of this document, the related petition and selected supporting
materials, and any comments TTB receives about this proposal within the
related Regulations.gov docket. In general, TTB will post comments as
submitted, and it will not redact any identifying or contact
information from the body of a comment or attachment. Please contact
TTB's Regulations and Rulings division by email using the web form
available at https://www.ttb.gov/contact-rrd, or by telephone at 202-
453-2265, if you have any questions about commenting on this proposal
or to request copies of this document, the related petition and its
supporting materials, or any comments received.
[[Page 96627]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed regulation imposes no new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived
from the use of a viticultural area name would be the result of a
proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as
defined by Executive Order 12866, as amended. Therefore, it requires no
regulatory assessment.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we propose to amend
title 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas
0
2. Add Sec. 9.___ to read as follows:
Sec. 9.___ Columbia Hills.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Columbia Hills''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``Columbia Hills'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The two United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:100,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the
viticultural area are as follows:
(1) Hood River OR-WA, 1982; and
(2) Goldendale, WA-OR, 1980.
(c) Boundary. The Columbia Hills viticultural area is located in
Klickitat County, Washington. The boundary of the Columbia Hills
viticultural area is as described as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the Hood River map at the
intersection of the northern shoreline of the Columbia River and an
unnamed creek due east of the marked ``Cold Spring.'' From the
beginning point, proceed northerly along the unnamed creek to its
intersection with the 300-meter elevation contour; then
(2) Proceed east along the 300-meter elevation contour to the
eastern boundary of the Hood River map; then
(3) Proceed north along the map boundary for approximately 400
feet; then
(4) Proceed east onto 320-meter elevation contour on the Goldendale
map and continue east along the 320-meter elevation contour to its
intersection with the boundary between Range 18 East and Range 19 East,
south of Sand Spring Canyon; then
(5) Proceed southeast in a straight line for 9,000 feet (1.7 miles)
to the intersection of the boundary between sections 31 and 32, T3N/
R19E and the northern shoreline of the Columbia River; then
(6) Proceed west along the northern shoreline of the Columbia
River, returning to the beginning point.
Signed: November 26, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: November 27, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2024-28438 Filed 12-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
