[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 125 (Monday, June 30, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36683-36689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15212]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2014-0006; Notice No. 144]
RIN 1513-AC09
Proposed Establishment of the Fountaingrove District 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 approximately 38,000-acre ``Fountaingrove District''
viticultural area in Sonoma County, California. The proposed
viticultural area lies entirely within the larger, multicounty North
Coast viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow
vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow
consumers to better identify wines they may purchase. TTB invites
comments on this proposed addition to its regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by August 29, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Please send your comments on this notice to one of the
following addresses (please note that TTB has a new address for
comments submitted by U.S. mail):
Internet: http://www.regulations.gov (via the online
comment form for this notice as posted within Docket No. TTB-2014-0006
at ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal);
U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and Rulings Division,
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12,
Washington, DC 20005; or
Hand delivery/courier in lieu of mail: Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite 200-E, Washington, DC
20005.
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific
instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for
information on how to request a public hearing or obtain or review
copies of the petition and supporting materials.
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 various
authorities through Treasury Department Order 120-01 (Revised), dated
December 10, 2013, to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions
and duties in the administration and enforcement of this law.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes the
establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets
forth standards for the preparation and submission to TTB of petitions
for the establishment or modification of American viticultural areas
(AVAs) and lists the approved AVAs.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i))
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region having distinguishing features as described in part 9 of
the regulations and a name and a delineated boundary as established in
part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow vintners and
consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or other
characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to the
wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of
an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations outlines the procedure
for proposing the establishment of 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
the standards for petitions requesting the establishment or
modification of AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA must include the
following:
Evidence that the region 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;
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.
Fountaingrove District Petition
TTB received a petition from Douglas Grigg of Walnut Hill
Vineyards, LLC, on behalf of the Fountaingrove Appellation Committee,
proposing the establishment of the ``Fountaingrove District'' AVA in
Sonoma County, California. The committee originally proposed the name
``Fountaingrove'' but later requested to change the name to
``Fountaingrove District'' in order to avoid affecting current use of
the word ``Fountaingrove,'' standing alone, in brand names on wine
labels. The
[[Page 36684]]
proposed AVA contains approximately 38,000 acres and has approximately
35 commercially-producing vineyards covering a total of 500 acres.
Cabernet sauvignon, chardonnay, sauvignon blanc, merlot, cabernet
franc, zinfandel, syrah, and viognier are the primary grape varieties
grown within the proposed AVA. According to the petition, the
distinguishing features of the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA
include temperature, soils, and topography. Unless otherwise noted, all
information and data pertaining to the proposed AVA contained in this
document are from the petition for the proposed Fountaingrove District
AVA and its supporting exhibits.
The proposed Fountaingrove District AVA is located in Sonoma
County, California, northeast of the city of Santa Rosa. The proposed
AVA lies within the larger, multicounty North Coast AVA (27 CFR 9.30).
The proposed Fountaingrove District AVA shares its boundaries with the
established Russian River Valley (27 CFR 9.66), Chalk Hill (27 CFR
9.52), Knights Valley (27 CFR 9.76), Calistoga (27 CFR 9.209), Diamond
Mountain District (27 CFR 9.166), Spring Mountain District (27 CFR
9.143), and Sonoma Valley (27 CFR 9.29) AVAs, but does not overlap any
of these AVAs. As it was originally submitted, the petition first
proposed a western boundary that slightly overlapped the established
Russian River Valley AVA, but after discussions with TTB, the
petitioner adjusted the proposed boundary to follow the established
Russian River Valley AVA boundary because the original proposed
boundary would have resulted in dividing at least one existing vineyard
between Russian River Valley AVA and the proposed Fountaingrove
District AVA.
Name Evidence
The proposed Fountaingrove District AVA derives its name from the
historic community of Fountain Grove, a utopian colony founded
northeast of the city of Santa Rosa in 1875 by Thomas Lake Harris. The
community included 400 acres of vineyards and a winery. By 1882, the
winery was producing 70,000 gallons of wine per year, making it one of
the 10 largest wineries in California at that time.
In 1880, Harris appointed his California lieutenant, Kanaye
Nagasawa, to take charge of the vineyard and winery operations and act
as developer and manager of the community's 2,000 acres of vineyards.
In 1900, Harris sold his interest in the vineyards and winery to
Nagasawa and five other members of the commune, and by 1908, Nagasawa
was the sole surviving owner of the Fountain Grove vineyards and
winery. During Prohibition, he kept the vineyards and winery facilities
productive by producing grape juice and cooking sherry. After
Prohibition was repealed in 1933, Nagasawa changed the name of the
winery and the community to ``Fountaingrove.'' Nagasawa died in 1934,
and the property was eventually sold and turned into a cattle ranch.
Although the original community no longer exists and the original
Fountaingrove Winery remains only as a few abandoned buildings, the
name ``Fountaingrove'' is still associated with the region of the
proposed Fountaingrove District AVA. The petition notes that several
modern subdivisions within the proposed AVA bear the ``Fountaingrove''
name, including Fountaingrove Ranch, Fountaingrove Village,
Fountaingrove II, and the Meadows at Fountaingrove, which are all built
on portions of the original Fountaingrove community and vineyards.
Fountaingrove Parkway is a road that runs through the southwestern
portion of the proposed AVA. Fountaingrove Lake is a large reservoir
within the proposed AVA. Finally, the petition listed several
businesses within the proposed AVA that use the name ``Fountaingrove,''
including Fountaingrove Inn Hotel and Conference Center, Fountaingrove
Lodge Retirement Community, Fountaingrove Golf and Athletic Club,
Fountaingrove Realty, Fountaingrove MedSpa, Fountaingrove Dentistry,
Fountaingrove Deli, and Fountaingrove Cleaners.
Boundary Evidence
The proposed AVA is a region of rolling hills and steeper mountains
with elevations that range from approximately 400 feet near the city of
Santa Rosa, at the southwestern boundary of the proposed AVA, to
approximately 2,200 feet in the eastern portion of the proposed AVA,
near the Sonoma-Napa County line.
The proposed boundary follows a series of elevation contours,
roads, county lines, USGS map section lines, and straight lines between
points marked on the relevant USGS maps. The northern portion of the
proposed boundary is shared with the southern boundaries of the
established Knights Valley and Chalk Hill AVAs. The eastern portion of
the proposed boundary is formed by a ridgeline in the Mayacmas
Mountains that forms the Sonoma-Napa County line. This portion of the
proposed boundary is shared with the established Calistoga, Diamond
Mountain District, and Spring Mountain District AVAs. Part of the
southern portion of the proposed boundary is shared with the
established Sonoma Valley AVA. The remainder of the proposed southern
boundary separates the hills and mountains of the proposed AVA from the
flat, urbanized terrain of the city of Santa Rosa. The western portion
of the proposed boundary is shared with the established Russian River
Valley AVA. The differences between the proposed Fountaingrove District
AVA and the adjacent established AVAs are discussed below.
Distinguishing Features
The distinguishing features of the proposed Fountaingrove District
AVA include its temperature, soils, and topography, and these are
discussed in detail below.
Temperature
The temperature of the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA is
moderated by cool breezes from the Pacific Ocean. The breezes enter the
region through a gap in the Sonoma Mountains between Taylor Mountain
(located south of the city of Santa Rosa) and Redwood Hill (located
north of the city). Because of the marine influence, the median growing
season temperature within the proposed AVA is 63.9 degrees Fahrenheit.
The petition provided the growing degree day units (GDD units),\1\
calculated in degrees Celsius (C), for 16 vineyards distributed
throughout the proposed AVA, and the petitioner determined the median
number of GDD units for the entire proposed AVA was 1,663.\2\ According
to the Winkler scale, this figure places the proposed AVA in the Warm
Region II category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the Winkler climate classification system, annual heat
accumulation during the growing season, measured in annual GDD,
defines climatic regions. One GDD accumulates for each degree
Fahrenheit that a day's mean temperature is above 50 degrees
Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius), the minimum temperature required
for grapevine growth. For temperatures measured in degrees Celsius,
the GDD ranges are defined as Region I, for fewer than 1,388 GDD
units, Region II from 1,388-1,667 GDD units, Region III for 1,667-
1,944 GDD units, Region IV for 1,944-2,222 GDD units, and Region V
for more than 2,222 GDD units (See Albert J. Winkler, General
Viticulture (Berkley: University of California Press, 1974), 61-64).
\2\ The GDD data was derived from 1971-2000 climate normals
using the data mapping system of the PRISM Climate Group at Oregon
State University. The PRISM mapping system combined climate normals
gathered from weather stations to estimate the general climate
patterns for the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions. Climate
normals are only calculated every 10 years, using 30 years of data,
and at the time the petition was submitted, the most recent climate
normals available were from the period of 1971-2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table was included in the petition and compares the
median
[[Page 36685]]
growing season temperatures and GDD units of the proposed Fountaingrove
District AVA to those of the surrounding established AVAs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Direction from growing season Average GDD
AVA name proposed AVA temperature unit Winkler category
(Celsius) accumulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fountaingrove District........... N/A................ 17.7 1,663 Warm Region II.
Russian River Valley............. West............... 17.1 1,520 Region II.
Bennett Valley................... Southwest.......... 17.4 1,589 Region II.
Chalk Hill....................... North.............. 17.6 1,634 Warm Region II.
Sonoma Valley.................... South.............. 17.8 1,676 Cool Region III.
Knights Valley................... North.............. 18.3 1,788 Region III.
Spring Mountain District......... East............... 18.3 1,785 Region III.
Diamond Mountain District........ East............... 18.7 1,818 Region III.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the table, the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA is
generally warmer than the region to the west and cooler than the region
to the east. The temperatures within the Chalk Hill AVA, which is north
of the proposed AVA, are similar to those in the Fountaingrove
District; however, the Knights Valley AVA, which is also north of the
proposed AVA, has significantly more GDD units than the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA because the higher hillsides of the Knights
Valley AVA shelter its broad valley floor from the marine breezes. The
Sonoma Valley AVA, immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the
proposed Fountaingrove District AVA, is slightly warmer.
The petition states that although the temperature differences
between the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA and the surrounding
regions appear slight, they do have a significant effect on
viticulture. The petition includes a chart grouping grape varietals by
maturation times based on average growing season temperatures.\3\
According to the chart, most varietals only ripen successfully (meaning
they achieve desired levels of acidity, sugars, and flavors) within a
3-to-4 degree C range of temperatures. As a result, cool-climate pinot
noir grapes ripen successfully in the cooler temperatures of the
neighboring Russian River Valley AVA, but do not grow reliably within
the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA, according to the petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Gregory V. Jones et al., ``Climate and Wine: Quality Issues
in a Warmer World,'' Climate Change, pages 319-343, December 1,
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition notes that even the same varietal of grapes grown at
opposite ends of the small range of ``optimal'' temperatures will have
different characteristics. For example, the petition states that
chardonnay grown in a Warm Region II area, such as the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA, will have a tropical fruit flavor, whereas
chardonnay grown in a cooler area will produce a drier, more mineral-
like flavor. Likewise, cabernet sauvignon, one of the most commonly
grown grapes in the proposed AVA, produces a lower alcohol wine with
subtle flavors when grown in a Warm Region II area, but often produces
wines with higher alcohol content and riper flavors when grown in
Region III and Region IV areas. Vintners consider these flavor and
alcohol differences when producing and blending their wines.
Soils
The soils within the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA are
derived primarily from Sonoma Volcanic and Franciscan Formation
bedrock. The volcanic soils include Goulding, Spreckels, Laniger, and
Felta series soils, which consist of pumiceous ash-flow tuff, and
Guenoc and Toomes series soils, which consist of basalt lava. These
volcanic soils are described in the petition as being well-drained and
having a balance of nutrients favorable for grape-growing. Soils
derived from the Franciscan Complex include the Boomer and Henneke
series. Henneke soils contain the mineral serpentine, which has high
levels of nickel and can be toxic to grapevines unless the soil is
ameliorated to lower the levels. Soils of the Boomer series have
desirably high levels of iron, which is an essential element for vine
growth and fruit development.
The following table shows the soil types found within the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA and the surrounding established AVAs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVA name and direction from proposed AVA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diamond Spring Proposed
Soil series Chalk Hill Russian Sonoma Knights Mountain Mountain Fountaingrove
(North) River Valley Valley Valley District District District
(West) (South) (North) (East) (East)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonoma Volcanics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goulding......................................... ............ ............ X X X X X
Laniger.......................................... ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............ X
Felta............................................ X X X ............ ............ ............ X
Forward.......................................... ............ ............ X X X X .................
Spreckels........................................ X X X ............ ............ ............ X
Toomes........................................... X X ............ X ............ ............ X
Guenoc........................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X
Kidd............................................. ............ ............ ............ ............ X X .................
Sobrante......................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X X
[[Page 36686]]
Hambright........................................ ............ ............ ............ ............ X ............ .................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Franciscan Complex
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dibble........................................... X X ............ ............ ............ ............ .................
Maymen........................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X X
Laughlin......................................... ............ X ............ X ............ ............ .................
Boomer........................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ X X X
Aiken............................................ ............ ............ ............ ............ X X X
Red Hill......................................... ............ ............ X X ............ ............ .................
Suther........................................... ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............ X
Yorkville *...................................... ............ X ............ X ............ ............ X
Henneke *........................................ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X X
Raynor *......................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X
Montara *........................................ X X ............ ............ ............ ............ X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
River and Terrace Deposits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cotati........................................... ............ X ............ ............ ............ ............ .................
Wright........................................... ............ X X ............ ............ ............ .................
Clear Lake....................................... ............ X X ............ ............ ............ .................
Arbuckle......................................... X X ............ X ............ ............ .................
Huichica......................................... X X X ............ ............ ............ .................
Yolo............................................. X X ............ X ............ ............ X
Zamora........................................... ............ X X ............ ............ ............ .................
Pleasanton....................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ X X
Cortina.......................................... ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............ .................
Haire............................................ X X X X ............ ............ X
Clough........................................... ............ ............ X X ............ ............ .................
Positas.......................................... X X ............ ............ ............ ............ .................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilson Grove Formation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goldridge........................................ ............ X ............ ............ ............ ............ .................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Indicates soil contains serpentine.
As shown in the table, the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA has
a greater diversity of soils than the surrounding AVAs. The proposed
AVA has fewer soils derived from river and terrace deposits than most
of the surrounding established AVAs. The petition states that soils
comprised of river and terrace deposits are generally not as well-
drained as volcanic soils and may require artificial drainage. Compared
to the surrounding regions, the proposed AVA also has more soils that
contain nickel-rich serpentine, which can be toxic to grapevines in
high levels. Therefore, soils that contain serpentine must often be
ameliorated in order to reduce the nickel levels so that the vines can
grow.
Topography
The proposed Fountaingrove District AVA is located on the western
slopes of the Mayacmas Mountains, northeast of the city of Santa Rosa.
The topography consists of low rolling hills and higher, steeper
mountains. Although there are some narrow floodplains along creeks, the
proposed AVA lacks the broad valley floors and floodplains that
characterize several of the surrounding established AVAs. The slopes
within the proposed AVA are primarily oriented towards the southwest.
Elevations range from approximately 400 feet to approximately 2,200
feet, and all of the vineyards within the proposed Fountaingrove
District AVA are planted at elevations between 450 and 2,115 feet.
Topography affects viticulture within the proposed AVA. According
to the petition, the hillsides form a ``thermal belt'' that traps warm
air, resulting in nighttime temperatures that are warmer than those of
the lower, flatter valleys of the surrounding regions. The warmer
temperatures reduce the risk of frost in the late spring and early
fall. The southwest aspect of most of the slopes within the proposed
AVA allows vineyards to be planted where they can receive the maximum
amount of sunlight and warmth.
Immediately to the west of the proposed AVA is the Russian River
Valley AVA. Elevations in the region begin at approximately 600 feet
along the border shared with the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA
and become lower and flatter southwest of the proposed AVA, within the
city of Santa Rosa. Elevations within much of the city are between 100
and 200 feet.
To the north of the proposed AVA are the Chalk Hill and Knights
Valley AVAs. The Chalk Hill AVA has a mountainous terrain with
elevations similar to those of the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA,
but the soils within the Chalk Hill AVA distinguish it from the
proposed AVA, as discussed later in this document. The Knights Valley
AVA has generally lower elevations and contains the broad, flat Knights
Valley and Franz Valley.
To the east of the proposed AVA are the Calistoga, Spring Mountain
District, and Diamond Mountain District AVAs, which have elevations and
terrain similar to the proposed AVA. However, moving east, the
mountainous topography of the Calistoga AVA quickly lowers to
elevations of around 300 feet within the broad, flat Napa Valley. The
slopes of the three established AVAs primarily face
[[Page 36687]]
northeast, compared to the southwest-facing slopes of the proposed AVA.
Because the established AVAs are located mostly on the lee side of the
Mayacmas Mountains, they are subject to less maritime influence than
the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA.
To the south of the proposed AVA, the Sonoma Valley AVA is marked
by a long, flat valley surrounded by the Mayacmas Mountains to the east
and the Sonoma Mountains to the west. The Sonoma Valley AVA receives
less of the cooling marine air than the proposed Fountaingrove District
AVA because of the shielding effect of the Sonoma Mountains.
Summary of Distinguishing Features
In summary, the temperature, soils, and topography of the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA distinguish it from the surrounding adjacent
AVAs. Compared to the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA, the Chalk
Hill and Knights Valley AVAs to the north both have more soils derived
from river and terrace deposits. Additionally, the Knights Valley AVA
has warmer temperatures and significantly larger valleys than the
proposed AVA. To the east, the Calistoga, Spring Mountain District, and
Diamond Mountain District AVAs are warmer, have less soil diversity,
and have mountain slopes oriented to the northeast. To the south, the
Sonoma Valley AVA is warmer, has more alluvial soils, and is dominated
by a large, flat valley rather than rolling hills and steeper
mountains. To the west, the Russian River Valley AVA has cooler
temperatures, more alluvial soils, and generally lower and flatter
elevations.
Comparison of the Proposed Fountaingrove District AVA to the Existing
North Coast AVA
The North Coast AVA was established by T.D. ATF-145, published in
the Federal Register on September 21, 1983 (48 FR 42973). It includes
all or portions of Napa, Sonoma, Mendocino, Lake, Marin, and Solano
Counties, California. TTB notes that the North Coast AVA contains all
or portions of approximately 40 established AVAs, in addition to the
area covered by the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA. In the
conclusion of the ``Geographical Features'' section of the preamble,
T.D. ATF-145 states that ``[d]ue to the enormous size of the North
Coast, variations exist in climatic features such as temperature,
rainfall, and fog intrusion.''
The proposed Fountaingrove District AVA shares the basic
viticultural feature of the North Coast AVA--the marine influence that
moderates growing season temperatures in the area. However, the
proposed AVA is much more uniform in its temperature, soils, and
topography than the diverse, multicounty North Coast AVA. In this
regard, TTB notes that T.D. ATF-145 specifically states that ``approval
of this viticultural area does not preclude approval of additional
areas, either wholly contained with the North Coast, or partially
overlapping the North Coast,'' and that ``smaller viticultural areas
tend to be more uniform in their geographical and climatic
characteristics, while very large areas such as the North Coast tend to
exhibit generally similar characteristics, in this case the influence
of maritime air off of the Pacific Ocean and San Pablo Bay.'' Thus, the
proposal to establish the Fountaingrove District AVA is not
inconsistent with what was envisioned when the North Coast AVA was
established.
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to establish the approximately
38,000-acre Fountaingrove District AVA merits consideration and public
comment, as invited in this notice.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of boundary for the petitioned-for
AVA in the proposed regulatory text published at the end of this
proposed rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the proposed regulatory text.
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, ``Fountaingrove
District,'' 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 name ``Fountaingrove District'' 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 AVA name as an appellation of origin if this proposed rule
is adopted as a final rule. TTB does not believe that
``Fountaingrove,'' standing alone, should have viticultural
significance if the proposed AVA is established, due to the current use
of ``Fountaingrove,'' standing alone, as a brand name on wine labels.
Accordingly, the proposed part 9 regulatory text set forth in this
document specifies only the full name ``Fountaingrove District'' as a
term of viticultural significance for purposes of part 4 of the TTB
regulations. Wine labels using either ``Fountaingrove'' or ``Fountain
Grove,'' standing alone, would not be affected if the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA is established.
The approval of the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA would not
affect any existing AVA, and any bottlers using ``North Coast'' as an
appellation of origin or in a brand name for wines made from grapes
grown within the North Coast AVA would not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of the proposed
Fountaingrove District AVA would allow vintners to use ``Fountaingrove
District'' and ``North Coast'' as appellations of origin for wines made
from grapes grown within the proposed Fountaingrove District 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 it should establish the proposed AVA. TTB is also interested in
receiving comments on the sufficiency and accuracy of the name,
boundary, soils, climate, and other required information submitted in
support of the petition. In addition, given the proposed Fountaingrove
District AVA's location within the existing North Coast AVA, TTB is
interested in comments on whether the evidence submitted in the
[[Page 36688]]
petition regarding the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA
sufficiently differentiates it from the existing North Coast AVA. TTB
is also interested in comments whether the geographic features of the
proposed AVA are so distinguishable from the surrounding North Coast
AVA that the proposed Fountaingrove District AVA should no longer be
part of that AVA. Please provide any available specific information in
support of your comments.
Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the
proposed Fountaingrove District AVA on wine labels that include the
term ``Fountaingrove District'' 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 AVA
name 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 AVA.
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this notice by using one of the
following three methods (please note that TTB has a new address for
comments submitted by U.S. Mail):
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the
online comment form posted with this notice within Docket No. TTB-2014-
0006 on ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal, at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available under
Notice No. 144 on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml">http://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.
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 200-E, Washington, DC 20005.
Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this
notice. Your comments must reference Notice No. 144 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. TTB does not acknowledge receipt of comments, and TTB
considers all comments as originals.
In your comment, please clearly state if you are commenting for
yourself or on behalf of an association, business, or other entity. If
you are commenting on behalf of an 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 or hand delivery/courier, 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 notice, selected
supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments received about
this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2014-0006 on the Federal e-
rulemaking portal, Regulations.gov, at http://www.regulations.gov. A
direct link to that docket is available on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 144. You may
also reach the relevant docket through the Regulations.gov search page
at http://www.regulations.gov. For information on how to use
Regulations.gov, click on the site's ``Help'' tab.
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 the Bureau considers unsuitable for
posting.
You may also view copies of this notice, all related petitions,
maps and other supporting materials, and any electronic or mailed
comments that TTB receives about this proposal by appointment at the
TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW., Washington, DC
20005. You may also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5- x 11-inch page.
Please note that TTB is unable to provide copies of the USGS quadrangle
maps or any similarly sized documents that may be included as part of
the AVA petition. Contact TTB's information specialist at the above
address or by telephone at 202-453-2270 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 Executive Order 12866 of September 30,
1993. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted
this notice of proposed rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB proposes 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. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.---- to read as follows:
Sec. 9.---- Fountaingrove District.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is
[[Page 36689]]
``Fountaingrove District.'' For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``Fountaingrove District'' 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
Fountaingrove District viticultural area are titled:
(1) Mark West Springs, CA; 1993;
(2) Calistoga, CA; 1997;
(3) Kenwood, CA; 1954; photorevised 1980; and
(4) Santa Rosa, CA; 1994.
(c) Boundary. The Fountaingrove District viticultural area is
located in Sonoma County, California. The boundary of the Fountaingrove
District viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the Mark West Springs map at the
intersection of the shared Sonoma-Napa County line with Petrified
Forest Road, section 3, T8N/R7W.
(2) From the beginning point, proceed southeasterly along the
Sonoma-Napa County line, crossing onto the Calistoga map and then the
Kenwood map, to the marked 2,530-peak of an unnamed mountain, section
9, T7N/R6W; then
(3) Proceed west-southwest in a straight line to the marked 2,730-
foot summit of Mt. Hood, section 8, T7N/R6W; then
(4) Proceed west-northwest in a straight line to the marked 1,542-
foot summit of Buzzard Peak, section 11, T7N/R7W; then
(5) Proceed west-southwest in a straight line, crossing onto the
Santa Rosa map, to the intersection of State Highway 12 and Los Alamos
Road; then
(6) Proceed due north in a straight line to the southern boundary
of section 9, T7N/R7W; then
(7) Proceed west-northwest along the southern boundaries of
sections 9, 4, and 5, T7N/R7W, to the western boundary of the Los
Guilicos Land Grant; then
(8) Proceed west-southwest along the southern boundaries of
sections 5, 6, and 7, T7N/R7W; then continue west-southwest along the
southern boundaries of sections 12 and 11, T7N/R8W, to the point where
the section 11 boundary becomes concurrent with an unnamed light-duty
road known locally as Lewis Road; and then continue west-southwest
along Lewis Road to the road's intersection with Mendocino Avenue in
Santa Rosa; then
(9) Proceed north-northwesterly along Mendocino Avenue to the
road's intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Bicentennial
Way; then
(10) Proceed north in a straight line, crossing through the marked
906-foot elevation peak in section 35, T8N/R8W, and, crossing on to the
Mark West Springs map, continue to the line's intersection with Mark
West Springs Road, section 26, T8N/R8W; then
(11) Proceed northerly along Mark West Springs Road, which turns
easterly and becomes Porter Creek Road, to the road's intersection with
Franz Valley Road, section 12, T8N/R8W; then
(12) Proceed northeasterly along Franz Valley Road to the western
boundary of section 6, T8N/R7W; then
(13) Proceed south along the western boundary of section 6, T8N/
R7W, to the southwest corner of section 6; then
(14) Proceed east, then east-northeast along the southern
boundaries of sections 6, 5, and 4, T8N/R7W, to the southeast corner of
section 4; then
(15) Proceed north along the eastern boundary of section 4, T8N/
R7W, to the Sonoma-Napa County line; then
(16) Proceed easterly along the Sonoma-Napa County line to the
beginning point.
Dated: June 23, 2014.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-15212 Filed 6-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P