[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 27, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31718-31723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10921]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2020-0005; Notice No. 190]
RIN 1513-AC60
Proposed Establishment of The Burn of Columbia Valley
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 16,870-acre ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' viticultural
area in Klickitat County, Washington. The proposed AVA is located
entirely within 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 this proposed addition to its
regulations.
DATES: TTB must receive your comments on or before July 27, 2020.
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-2020-0005 as
posted on Regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov), the Federal e-
rulemaking portal. Please see the ``Public Participation'' section of
this document below for full details on how to comment on this proposal
via Regulations.gov, U.S. mail, or hand delivery, and for full details
on how to view or obtain copies of this document, its supporting
materials, and any comments related to this proposal.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act),
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels, and ensure that labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary has delegated the functions
and duties in the administration and enforcement of these provisions to
the TTB Administrator through Treasury Order 120-01, dated December 10,
2013 (superseding Treasury Order 120-01, dated January 24, 2003).
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to
establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate the use of their
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets
forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the
establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved AVAs.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i))
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region having distinguishing features, as described in part 9
of the regulations, and a name and a delineated boundary, as
established in part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow
vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or
other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to the
wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of
an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2))
outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and provides that any
interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region
as an AVA. Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes
standards for petitions for the establishment or modification of AVAs.
Petitions to establish an AVA must include the following:
Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is
nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;
An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of
the proposed AVA;
A narrative description of the features of the proposed
AVA 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;
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
[[Page 31719]]
appropriate for separate recognition; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
Petition To Establish The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA
TTB received a petition from Kevin Corliss, Vice President of
Vineyards for Ste. Michelle Wine Estates, Joan R. Davenport, Professor
of Soil Sciences at Washington State University, and John Derrick, Vice
President of Operations for Mercer Ranches, Inc., proposing to
establish ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' AVA. The proposed AVA is
located in Klickitat County, Washington, and is entirely within the
existing Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74). Within the 16,870-acre
proposed AVA, there are three (3) commercial vineyards which cover a
total of approximately 1,261 acres and are owned by two different
entities. The petition was originally submitted under the name ``The
Burn,'' but the petitioners later requested to change the name to the
more geographically specific ``The Burn of Columbia Valley.'' The
distinguishing features of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA
are its soils, climate, and topography.
Proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA
Name Evidence
According to an excerpt from History of Klickitat County \1\ that
was included in the petition, the origin of the name ``The Burn'' is
uncertain. One theory is that the Native Americans in the region would
burn the prairie grasses in order to discourage or frighten away
settlers, while another theory is that the Native Americans regularly
burned the area to insure adequate grass for their horses in the
spring. A third explanation is that the dry east winds that blow
through the region leave the farmers' wheat fields burned and
shriveled. Regardless of the derivation of the name, the petition
states that the region of the proposed AVA has been referred to as
``The Burn'' since at least the early 1900's, when mail destined for
the area carried the designation ``The Burn.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ May, Peter. History of Klickitat County. Goldendale, WA:
Klickitat Historical Society, 1982, p. 92.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition included evidence that the name ``The Burn'' continues
to be used to describe the region of the proposed AVA into modern
times. For example, the 1965 Goodnoe Hills and the 1971 Sundale, NW.
U.S.G.S. topographic maps both label the region of the proposed AVA as
``The Burn.'' Although the current paper U.S.G.S. topographic maps do
not label the region of the proposed AVA, the petition did include a
screen shot of the current U.S.G.S. online National Map \2\ which shows
the region between Rock Creek and Chapman Creek labeled as ``The
Burn.'' The National Map also shows a road named ``Burn Road'' running
through the region of the proposed AVA. In an email to TTB, one of the
petitioners states that, based on her knowledge of the history of the
region, the road derives its name from the common name for the region.
The petition also included a page from a high school biology website
that shows a photo of wildflowers growing ``in an area of south-central
Klickitat County known as The Burn.'' \3\ Finally, another web page
included in the petition provides general information about Klickitat
County and lists ``The Burn'' as an area within the county.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer.
\3\ http://science.halleyhosting.com/nature/bloomtime/egorge/11/19.html.
\4\ http://www.us-places.com/Washington/Klickitat-County.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boundary Evidence
The proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is a roughly
triangular region of gently sloping land in the southwestern portion of
the established Columbia Valley AVA. The northern bank of the Columbia
River forms the southern boundary of the proposed AVA (the base of the
triangle) and separates the proposed AVA from the flatter terrain
across the river in Oregon. The western boundary (the left edge of the
triangle) follows Paterson Slough, Rock Creek, and the boundary of the
trust lands held by the Yakima Nation. The petition states that the
trust lands were not included in the proposed AVA due to their steeper
slope angles and because tribal lands are excluded from commercial wine
grape production. The eastern boundary of the proposed AVA (the right
edge of the triangle) largely follows the bed of Chapman Creek and
separates the proposed AVA from steeper regions with higher elevations.
Distinguishing Features
According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the
proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA are its soils, climate, and
topography.
Soils
The petition states that there are 32 soil series found within the
proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, although approximately 80
percent of the soils within the proposed AVA are derived from only 9
soil series or complexes. The following table lists the nine most
commonly found soils within the proposed AVA, along with the percentage
of the total soils each series or complex comprises.
Table 1--Most Common Soils of the Proposed AVA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Soil series/complex name total soils
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walla Walla silt loam (without cemented substratum)..... 30.16
Rock outcrop-Haploxeroll complex........................ 13.57
Haploxeroll-Fluvaquent complex.......................... 8.37
Fluventic Haploxeroll-Riverwash complex................. 6.51
Rock outcrop Rubble and complex......................... 6.08
Wato silt loam.......................................... 4.85
Walla Walla silt loam (with cemented substratum)........ 4.07
Endicott silt loam...................................... 3.73
Endicott-Moxee complex.................................. 2.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the petition, the silty loam soils that comprise the
majority of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA have a good
plant-available water holding capacity. Such soils are capable of
delivering sufficient water to the vines during the growing season. The
higher water holding capacity of the soils also means that vines which
have been irrigated post-harvest will have adequate access to water
through the winter and thus will have a reduced risk of frost or freeze
injury to the roots. Finally, the petition states that the silty loam
soils of the proposed AVA are in the taxonomic order Mollisols, which
means they are relatively high in organic matter and can provide
adequate nutrients to the vines, particularly nitrogen.
The soils of the region due west of the proposed The Burn of
Columbia Valley AVA are the most similar to the soils of the proposed
AVA, with Walla Walla silt loam without cemented substratum comprising
41.55 percent of the soils. However, 24.27 percent of the soils found
in the region to the west are not found within the proposed AVA,
including the Cheviot-Tronsen complex, the Goodnoe-Swalecreek-Horseflat
complex, and Asotin silt loam. To the east and northeast of the
proposed AVA, only 8.39 percent of the land contains the 9 types of
soil that dominate the proposed AVA. Instead, the region contains
sizeable amounts of soil that are not present within the proposed AVA,
including the Renslow-Ralls-Wipple complex, Van Nostern silt
[[Page 31720]]
loam, and Van Nostern-Bakeoven complex. To the south of the proposed
AVA, only 14.60 percent of the soils are from the 9 series and
complexes that are most prevalent within the proposed AVA. Soils
present in the region to the south which are not present within the
proposed AVA include Ritzville silt loam, Willis silt loam, and Roloff-
Rock outcrop complex. To the northwest of the proposed AVA, the 9 soils
that dominate the proposed AVA cover only 12.54 percent of the region.
Soils found in the region but not in the proposed AVA include Colockum-
Cheviot complex, Swalecreek-Rockly complex, and Goldendale silt loam.
Climate
The proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA petition included
information on the climate of the proposed AVA, including growing
degree day \5\ (GDD) accumulations and precipitation amounts. The
climate information was developed from the weather records from 1981-
2010 from the Western Regional Climate Center.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2nd. ed. 1974), pages 61-64. In the
Winkler scale, the GDD regions are defined as follows: Region I =
less than 2,500 GDDs; Region II = 2,501-3,000 GDDs; Region III =
3,001-3,500 GDDs; Region IV = 3,501-4,000 GDDs; Region V = greater
than 4,000 GDDs.
\6\ https://wrcc.dri.edu.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition included information on the minimum, maximum, and
average annual GDD accumulations for the proposed AVA and the
surrounding regions for the period of record. The GDD information is
compiled in the following table.
Table 2--Annual GDD Accumulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Average Minimum Maximum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed AVA.................................................... 2,763 2,405 3,249
East-northeast.................................................. 2,414 1,723 3,298
South........................................................... 2,768 2,464 3,305
West............................................................ 2,570 1,766 3,191
Northwest....................................................... 2,178 1,570 2,995
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed AVA has higher average and minimum GDD accumulations
than each of the surrounding regions except the region to the south,
and a maximum GDD accumulation that is greater than two of the
surrounding regions. The petition states that the higher average GDD
accumulations within the proposed AVA indicate a climate that is warmer
than most of the surrounding regions. The petition shows that GDD
accumulations within the proposed AVA favor the production of grape
varietals that have higher heat unit requirements, including Cabernet
Sauvignon and Syrah, which are the two most commonly grown grape
varietals in the proposed AVA.
The petition included information on the minimum, maximum, and
average annual precipitation amounts for the proposed AVA and the
surrounding regions for the period of record. The precipitation
information is compiled in the following table.
Table 3--Annual Precipitation Amounts in Inches
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Average Minimum Maximum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed AVA.................................................... 8.76 6.65 10.44
East-northeast.................................................. 10.23 6.80 11.63
South........................................................... 9.39 6.67 10.38
West............................................................ 9.81 7.03 12.53
Northwest....................................................... 11.58 10.45 12.69
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA has average, minimum,
and maximum annual precipitation amounts that are lower than those of
each of the surrounding regions, except that the region to the south
has a lower maximum annual precipitation amount. The petition states
that the low rainfall amounts mean that vineyards in the proposed AVA
need supplemental irrigation. However, the petition notes that because
of the high water holding capacity of the soils of the proposed AVA,
vines remain adequately hydrated.
Topography
The proposed AVA is located on gently sloping bench lands above the
Columbia River. The average slope angle within the proposed AVA is 7.27
percent. The proposed AVA has a large contiguous expanse of land with
easterly, southeasterly, and southern aspects. The petition also
provided information about the average, maximum, and minimum elevations
of the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions. However, the petition
did not adequately describe the specific effects of elevation on
viticulture, so TTB cannot consider elevation to be a distinguishing
topographic feature of the proposed AVA.
When compared to the proposed AVA, each of the surrounding regions
has higher average slope angles with the exception of the region to the
south, which has a lower average slope angle. The regions to the west
and northwest of the proposed AVA have predominately southerly aspects.
The petition states that the regions to the south and east-northeast
have predominately southeasterly aspects, similar to those of the
proposed AVA. However, the petition states that the proposed AVA has a
larger contiguous region with a southeasterly aspect.
The petition states that the gentle slopes of the proposed AVA are
suitable for mechanical cultivation of vineyards, yet are steep enough
to avoid the pooling of cold air that could damage grapes. The
southeasterly aspect of the proposed AVA allows excellent sunlight
exposure for vineyards.
Summary of Distinguishing Features
The following table summarizes the distinguishing features of the
proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA and the surrounding regions.
[[Page 31721]]
Table 4--Summary of Distinguishing Features
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Soils Climate Topography
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed The Burn of Columbia Silty loam soils Average annual GDD Gently sloping bench
Valley AVA. including Walla Walla accumulations of 2,763, lands with average
silt loam without minimum annual GDD slope angle of 7.27
cemented substratum, accumulations of 2,405, percent and large
relatively high maximum annual GDD contiguous expanse of
organic material, accumulations of 3,249; land with easterly,
high water holding average annual southeasterly, and
capacity. precipitation of 8.76 southern aspects.
inches, minimum annual
precipitation of 6.65
inches, and maximum annual
precipitation of 10.44
inches.
East-northeast..................... Sizeable amount of Lower average and minimum Higher slope angles,
soils that are not annual GDD accumulation; predominately
present in proposed Higher maximum annual GDD southeasterly slope
AVA. accumulations; Higher aspects.
average, minimum, and
maximum annual
precipitation amounts.
South.............................. Sizeable amount of Higher average, minimum, Lower slope angles,
soils that are not and maximum annual GDD predominately
present in proposed accumulations; Higher southeasterly slope
AVA. average and minimum annual aspects.
precipitation amounts;
Lower maximum annual
precipitation amounts.
West............................... Silty loam soils Lower average, minimum, and Higher slope angles,
including Walla Walla maximum annual GDD predominately
silt loam without accumulations; Higher southerly slope
cemented substratum, average, minimum, and aspects.
but with soils not maximum annual
found in proposed AVA. precipitation amounts.
Northwest.......................... Sizeable amount of Lower average, minimum, and Higher slope angles,
soils that are not maximum annual GDD predominately
present in proposed accumulations; Higher southerly slope
AVA. average, minimum, and aspects.
maximum annual
precipitation amounts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of the Proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA to the
Existing Columbia Valley AVA
The Columbia Valley AVA was established by T.D. ATF-190, which was
published in the Federal Register on November 13, 1984 (49 FR 44895).
T.D. ATF-190 describes the Columbia Valley AVA as a large, treeless
basin surrounding the Yakima, Snake, and Columbia Rivers. Growing
Degree Day accumulations within the Columbia Valley AVA range from
2,000 to 3,000, and annual precipitation amounts are between 6 and 22
inches. Elevations within the Columbia Valley AVA are generally below
2,000 feet.
The proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA shares some of the
general viticultural features of the larger Columbia Valley AVA. For
instance, the average annual rainfall amounts and elevation within the
proposed AVA are within the range of those features for the Columbia
Valley AVA. However, the proposed AVA can accumulate over 3,000 GDDs
annually, indicating a climate that is slightly warmer than most of the
rest of the Columbia Valley AVA. Additionally, because the proposed The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA is much smaller than the Columbia Valley
AVA, the proposed AVA has a greater uniformity of characteristics
within its boundaries.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to establish the 16,870-acre ``The
Burn of Columbia Valley'' 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
The Burn of Columbia Valley 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 Sec.
4.25(e)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). If the wine is
not eligible for labeling with an AVA name and that name appears in the
brand name, then the label is not in compliance and the bottler must
change the brand name and obtain approval of a new label. Similarly, if
the AVA name appears in another reference on the label in a misleading
manner, the bottler would have to obtain approval of a new label.
Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing an AVA name
that was used as a brand name on a label approved before July 7, 1986.
See Sec. 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for
details.
If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, its name, ``The Burn of
Columbia Valley,'' will be recognized as a name of viticultural
significance under Sec. 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
4.39(i)(3)). The text of the proposed regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' 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 ``The Burn of Columbia
Valley.'' TTB is not proposing to designate ``The Burn,'' standing
alone, as a term of viticultural significance because the term ``The
Burn'' is used to refer to multiple areas in the United States.
Therefore, wine bottlers using ``The Burn,'' standing alone, in a brand
name or in another label reference on their wines would not be affected
by the establishment of this proposed AVA.
[[Page 31722]]
The approval of the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA would
not affect any existing AVA, and any bottlers using ``Columbia Valley''
as an appellation of origin in a brand name for wines made from grapes
grown within the Columbia Valley AVA would not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of the proposed The
Burn of Columbia Valley AVA would allow vintners to use ``The Burn of
Columbia Valley'' or ``Columbia Valley'' 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 The Burn of Columbia Valley
AVA. TTB is interested in receiving comments on the sufficiency and
accuracy of the name, boundary, topography, and other required
information submitted in support of the AVA petition. In addition,
because the proposed The Burn of Columbia Valley 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 The Burn of Columbia Valley
AVA should no longer 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 The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA on wine labels that include
the term ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' 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 by using one of the
following three methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the
online comment form posted with this document within Docket No. TTB-
2020-0005 on ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal, at
https://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available
under Notice No. 190 on the TTB website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files may be attached to comments
submitted via Regulations.gov. For complete instructions on how to use
Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on the ``Help'' tab at the
top of the page.
U.S. Mail: You may send comments via postal mail to the
Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street, NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005.
Hand Delivery/Courier: You may hand-carry your comments or
have them hand-carried to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau,
1310 G Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005.
Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this
document. Your comments must reference Notice No. 190 and include your
name and mailing address. Your comments also must be made in English,
be legible, and be written in language acceptable for public
disclosure. We do not acknowledge receipt of comments, and we consider
all comments as originals.
Your comment must clearly state if you are commenting on your own
behalf or on behalf of an organization, business, or other entity. If
you are commenting on behalf of an organization, business, or other
entity, your comment must include the entity's name as well as your
name and position title. If you comment via Regulations.gov, please
enter the entity's name in the ``Organization'' blank of the online
comment form. If you comment via postal mail, please submit your
entity's comment on letterhead.
You may also write to the Administrator before the comment closing
date to ask for a public hearing. The Administrator reserves the right
to determine whether to hold a public hearing.
Confidentiality
All submitted comments and attachments are part of the public
record and subject to disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your
comments that you consider to be confidential or inappropriate for
public disclosure.
Public Disclosure
TTB will post, and you may view, copies of this document, selected
supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments received about
this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2020-0005 on the Federal e-
rulemaking portal, Regulations.gov, at https://www.regulations.gov. A
direct link to that docket is available on the TTB website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 190. You may
also reach the relevant docket through the Regulations.gov search page
at https://www.regulations.gov. For instructions on how to use
Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on the ``Help'' tab at the
top of the page.
All posted comments will display the commenter's name, organization
(if any), city, and State, and, in the case of mailed comments, all
address information, including email addresses. TTB may omit voluminous
attachments or material that it considers unsuitable for posting.
You also may view copies of this document, all related petitions,
maps and other supporting materials, and any electronic or mailed
comments we receive about this proposal by appointment at the TTB
Public Reading Room, 1310 G Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC
20005. You may also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5- x 11-inch page.
Contact TTB's Regulations and Rulings Division at the above address, by
email using the web form at https://www.ttb.gov/contact-rrd, or by
telephone at 202-453-1039, ext. 175, to schedule an appointment or to
request copies of comments or other materials.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed regulation imposes no new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived
from the use of a viticultural area name would be the result of a
proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area.
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by
[[Page 31723]]
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted
this document.
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.__ The Burn of Columbia Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``The Burn of Columbia Valley''. For purposes of part 4 of
this chapter, ``The Burn of Columbia Valley'' is a term of viticultural
significance.
(b) Approved maps. The four United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of The
Burn of Columbia Valley viticultural area are titled:
(1) Sundale NW, OR-WA, 2017;
(2) Goodnoe Hills, WA, 2017;
(3) Dot, WA, 2017; and
(4) Sundale, WA-OR, 2017.
(c) Boundary. The Burn of Columbia Valley viticultural area is
located in Klickitat County in Washington. The boundary of The Burn of
Columbia Valley viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the Sundale NW map, at the
intersection of the Columbia River and the east shore of Paterson
Slough. From the beginning point, proceed northerly along the east
shore of Paterson Slough to its junction with Rock Creek, and
continuing northeasterly along Rock Creek to its intersection with the
boundary of the Yakima Nation Trust Land; then
(2) Proceed south, then east, then generally northeasterly along
the boundary of the Yakima Nation Trust Land, crossing onto the Goodnoe
Hills map, to the intersection of the Trust Land boundary with Kelley
Road; then
(3) Proceed north in a straight line to the intersection with the
main channel of Chapman Creek; then
(4) Proceed southeasterly (downstream) along Chapman Creek,
crossing over the Dot map and onto the Sundale map, to the intersection
of Chapman Creek with its southernmost tributary; then
(5) Proceed due east in a straight line to the creek running
through Old Lady Canyon; then
(6) Proceed southerly along the creek to its intersection with the
northern shoreline of the Columbia River; then
(7) Proceed westerly along the northern shoreline of the Columbia
River, returning to the beginning point.
Signed: March 31, 2020.
Mary G. Ryan,
Acting Administrator.
Approved: May 13, 2020.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2020-10921 Filed 5-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P