This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

6931 

Vol. 80, No. 26 

Monday, February 9, 2015 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 4 

[Docket No. TTB–2015–0003; Notice No. 

147] 

RIN 1513–AC13 

Use of American Viticultural Area 

Names as Appellations of Origin on 

Wine Labels 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) is proposing to 

amend its regulations to permit the use 

of American viticultural area names as 

appellations of origin on labels for 

wines that would otherwise qualify for 

the use of the AVA name, except that 

the wines have been fully finished in a 

State adjacent to the State in which the 

viticultural area is located, rather than 

the State in which the labeled 

viticultural area is located. The proposal 

would provide greater flexibility in 

wine production and labeling while still 

ensuring that consumers are provided 

with adequate information as to the 

identity of the wines they purchase. 

TTB permits the use of viticultural area 

names as appellations of origin on wine 

labels, so that vintners may better 

describe the origin of their wines and 

consumers may better identify the wines 

they may purchase. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 10, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Please send your comments 

on this proposed rule to one of the 

following addresses: 

• Internet: http://www.regulations.gov 

(via the online comment form for this 

proposed rule as posted within Docket 

No. TTB–2015–0003 at 

‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal erulemaking 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 proposed rule for specific 

instructions and requirements for 

submitting comments, and for 

information on how to request a public 

hearing. 

You may view copies of this proposed 

rule and any comments that TTB 

receives about this proposal at http://

www.regulations.gov within Docket No. 

TTB–2015–0003. A link to that docket is 

posted on the TTB Web site at http://

www.ttb.gov/wine/winerulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 147. 

You also may view copies of this 

proposed rule and any comments that 

TTB receives about this proposal by 

appointment at the TTB Information 

Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20005. Please call 202– 

453–2270 to make an appointment. 

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 Wine Labeling and 

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) allows 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 of petitions for the 

establishment or modification of 

American viticultural areas and lists the 

approved viticultural areas. 

Definitions 

Appellation of Origin: An appellation 

of origin may be used on a wine label 

in order to describe the origin of the 

fruit or agricultural products used to 

produce the wine. Section 4.25(a)(1) of 

the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(a)(1)) 

defines an appellation of origin for 

American wine as: (i) The United States; 

(ii) a State, or (iii) two or no more than 

three contiguous States; (iv) a county, or 

(v) two or no more than three counties 

from the same State; or (vi) a viticultural 

area. Section 4.25 also sets forth the 

eligibility requirements for the use of an 

appellation of origin. 

American Viticultural Area (AVA): 

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 

delineated boundary as established in 

part 9 of the regulations. These 

American viticultural area (AVA) 

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 its geographic origin. Establishment 

of an AVA is neither an approval nor an 

endorsement by TTB of the wine 

produced in that area. 

Current Requirements for Use of 

Appellations of Origin 

Section 4.25(b)(1) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.52(b)(1)), in part, 

sets forth the requirements for labeling 

an American wine with a State name as 

an appellation of origin. For a wine 

labeled with a State appellation of 

origin, at least 75 percent of the wine 

must be derived from fruit or 

agricultural products grown in the State 

used as the appellation, and the wine 

must be fully finished in either the 


rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6932 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

labeled State or in an adjacent State. In 

the case of multi-State appellations of 

origin, which may consist of two or 

three contiguous States, § 4.25(d)(1) 

requires that all the fruit or other 

agricultural products used in the wine 

be grown in the States indicated in the 

appellation and that the wine must be 

fully finished within one of those States. 

Wine is considered to be ‘‘fully 

finished’’ if it is ready to be bottled, 

except that cellar treatment and 

blending that does not result in an 

alteration of class and type is still 

permitted. 

Section 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)), in part, 

sets forth the requirements for labeling 

American wine with an AVA as an 

appellation of origin. Under this section, 

at least 85 percent of the wine must be 

derived from grapes grown within the 

named AVA. Additionally, in order to 

use the name of an AVA that is located 

entirely within a single State, 

hereinafter referred to as a ‘‘single-State 

AVA,’’ the wine must also be fully 

finished within the State in which the 

labeled AVA is located. In the case of 

AVAs that cover two or more States, 

hereinafter referred to as ‘‘multi-State 

AVAs,’’ the wine must be fully finished 

within one of the States in which the 

AVA is located. 

These current regulations, including 

the requirement that a wine labeled 

with an AVA appellation of origin must 

be fully finished within the State (or one 

of the States) in which the AVA is 

located, are derived from T.D. ATF–53, 

published in the Federal Register by 

TTB’s predecessor agency, the Bureau of 

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) at 

43 FR 37672 on August 23, 1978. Prior 

to publication of that Treasury Decision, 

ATF did not have codified definitions 

for ‘‘appellation of origin’’ or 

‘‘viticultural area,’’ and there was no 

systematic approach to designating a 

region as a ‘‘viticultural area.’’ The ATF 

regulatory requirements for the use of an 

appellation of origin on a wine label 

prior to T.D. ATF–53 stated that: (1) At 

least 75 percent of the wine be derived 

from fruit or other agricultural products 

grown in the named region; (2) the wine 

be fully manufactured and finished 

within the State containing the named 

region; and (3) the wine be made in 

compliance with the named region’s 

laws and regulations. 

TTB Notice No. 142—Proposal To 

Establish The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA 

On February 26, 2014, TTB published 

Notice No. 142 in the Federal Register, 

proposing the establishment of ‘‘The 

Rocks District of Milton-Freewater’’ 

AVA in Umatilla County, Oregon (see 

79 FR 10742). Elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register, TTB is publishing 

T.D. TTB–127, which formally 

establishes The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater as an AVA. The AVA is 

located near the Oregon-Washington 

State line, approximately 10 miles south 

of the city of Walla Walla, Washington. 

The AVA is also located within the 

larger Walla Walla Valley and Columbia 

Valley AVAs, both of which cover 

portions of Washington and Oregon. 

During the public comment period for 

Notice No. 142, TTB received comments 

from several winemakers who primarily 

use grapes grown within The Rocks 

District of Milton-Freewater but fully 

finish their wines using custom crush 

facilities across the State line in Walla 

Walla, Washington. Some of the 

commenters stated that they use custom 

crush facilities in Walla Walla because 

there are no such facilities nearby in 

Oregon. TTB understands custom crush 

facilities to be businesses that provide a 

variety of winemaking services, such as 

grape crushing, fermentation, barrel and 

tank storage, wine analysis, and 

bottling, for clients that do not have 

their own facilities. Other commenters 

stated that they own wineries in Walla 

Walla and also own vineyards both in 

Washington and in The Rocks District of 

Milton-Freewater AVA. 

Because The Rocks District of MiltonFreewater AVA is a single-State AVA 

located in Oregon, under current TTB 

wine labeling regulations, none of these 

commenters would be able to use that 

AVA name as an appellation of origin, 

even if 85 percent of the grapes in their 

wines came from The Rocks District of 

Milton-Freewater AVA, because their 

wines are fully finished in Washington. 

However, their wines could be labeled 

with the Columbia Valley or Walla 

Walla Valley AVA names as 

appellations or origin because The 

Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA 

is located within both of those AVAs, 

and both the Columbia Valley and Walla 

Walla Valley AVAs are multi-State 

AVAs that cover portions of Oregon and 

Washington. Additionally, their wines 

could be labeled simply with the 

political appellation ‘‘Oregon,’’ since 

wines labeled with a State appellation 

of origin may be fully finished in an 

adjacent State. 

Several commenters stated that fully 

finishing their wines in Oregon, rather 

than in Washington, would be 

burdensome because they would have to 

either transport their grapes to the 

nearest Oregon custom crush facility, 

which is over 200 miles away from The 

Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA, 

or build their own private wineries in 

Oregon. Others commented that it 

makes little sense for TTB to allow the 

use of a single-State AVA name as an 

appellation of origin for a wine made 

from grapes that are grown in that 

viticultural area but are transported 

hundreds of miles across a single State, 

while prohibiting the use of that same 

AVA name on a wine simply because 

the grapes are transported across a State 

line to a winery located only 10 miles 

from the vineyard. Accordingly, these 

commenters asked TTB to amend its 

regulations to allow wines fully finished 

in Washington to be labeled with The 

Rocks District of Milton-Freewater AVA 

appellation of origin, so that consumers 

would have more detailed and accurate 

information as to the origin of the grapes 

used to make the wine. 

TTB Analysis 

TTB has determined that the concerns 

raised in the comments on Notice No. 

142 have merit. TTB acknowledges that 

the current regulations would allow 

wine that is fully finished in 

Washington and made primarily from 

grapes grown within The Rocks District 

of Milton-Freewater AVA to be labeled 

only with the less specific ‘‘Walla Walla 

Valley,’’ ‘‘Columbia Valley,’’ or 

‘‘Oregon’’ appellations of origin. TTB 

notes that the purpose of the AVA 

program is to provide consumers with 

additional information on the wines 

they may purchase by allowing vintners 

to describe more accurately the origin of 

the grapes used in the wine. Therefore, 

TTB is proposing to amend its 

regulations at § 4.25(e)(3)(iv) to allow 

wines that meet the requirements of 

§ 4.25(e)(3)(i) and (ii) to be labeled with 

a single-State AVA name as an 

appellation of origin if the wine was 

fully finished either within the State in 

which the AVA is located or within an 

adjacent State. 

TTB believes that vintners, grape 

growers, and consumers would benefit 

from the removal of the requirement in 

§ 4.25(e)(3)(iv) that wines labeled with 

an AVA appellation of origin be fully 

finished within the same State as the 

AVA. Vintners would have a greater 

choice in both where they fully finish 

their wines and what appellation of 

origin they use. Grape growers within a 

single-State AVA may have more buyers 

for their grapes if vintners in adjacent 

States are allowed to label their wines 

with the AVA name. Finally, consumers 

would have a more accurate idea of the 

origin of the grapes in their wine if 

vintners who fully finish their wine in 

a State adjacent to the State where the 

AVA is located were able to label their 

wines with a more specific single-State 

AVA appellation of origin, such as The 


rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6933 

Rocks District of Milton-Freewater, 

rather than a less specific State 

appellation of origin, such as Oregon, or 

even a broader multi-State appellation 

of origin, such as Columbia Valley. 

TTB does not believe that the 

proposed amendment will cause 

consumer confusion. Section 

4.25(b)(1)(ii) allows wines eligible for 

labeling with a State appellation of 

origin to be fully finished in an adjacent 

State. Section 4.25(e)(3)(iv) only 

requires wine labeled with any AVA 

appellation of origin to have been fully 

finished somewhere within the State in 

which the AVA is located, not within 

the AVA itself. Additionally, 

§ 4.25(e)(3)(iv) currently allows wines 

eligible for labeling with a multi-State 

appellation of origin to be fully finished 

within any one of the States in which 

the AVA is located, not just within the 

State in which the grapes were grown. 

Since the promulgation of the 

appellation of origin regulations, TTB is 

not aware of any reported instances in 

which the regulations regarding the 

fully finishing of wine in an adjacent 

State resulted in consumer confusion 

relating to the origin of the wine or 

grapes. Therefore, TTB believes 

consumers are aware that the 

appellation of origin on a wine label is 

a statement of the origin of the grapes 

used to make the wine, and it would not 

be misleading or confusing to 

consumers if a wine labeled with a 

single-State AVA appellation of origin 

was actually fully finished in an 

adjacent State. 

Therefore, for the reasons discussed 

above, TTB is proposing to amend its 

regulations to allow wines that meet the 

requirements of § 4.25(e)(3)(i) and (ii) to 

be labeled with a single-State AVA 

appellation of origin if the wine is fully 

finished either within the State in 

which the AVA is located or an adjacent 

State. If adopted, this amendment 

would bring the requirements for using 

a single-State AVA appellation of origin 

more in line with the requirements for 

using a State appellation of origin. This 

change would give grape growers and 

wine makers within a single-State AVA 

greater flexibility and more options in 

producing and marketing their products, 

options that are currently available to 

growers and wine makers within multiState AVAs and those who use State 

appellations of origin. Additionally, the 

amendment would enable wine 

producers to provide consumers with 

more specific information on the origin 

of the grapes used to make the wine. 

TTB’s proposed changes to its 

appellations of origin regulations are 

limited to the scope of the commenters’ 

request, which was, specifically, to 

allow wines to be labeled with a singleState AVA appellation of origin even if 

the wine was fully finished in a State 

adjacent to the State in which the AVA 

is located. Therefore, TTB is not 

proposing any additional changes to the 

regulations concerning the use of 

appellations of origin, including the 

percentage of grapes used in the wine 

that must come from the labeled 

appellation or the requirements for use 

of the term ‘‘estate bottled’’ in 

conjunction with an AVA appellation of 

origin. 

Furthermore, TTB is not proposing 

any changes to the regulations 

concerning the use of multi-State AVA 

names as appellations of origin because 

the commenters’ request was limited to 

single-State AVAs. Additionally, 

winemakers who label their wines with 

a multi-State AVA appellation of origin 

already have the flexibility to use 

winemaking facilities, including custom 

crush facilities, in at least one other 

State if they choose, unlike winemakers 

who label their wines with a singleState AVA appellation of origin. 

However, TTB is interested in hearing 

from winemakers whose wines are 

ineligible to be labeled with a multiState AVA appellation of origin solely 

because they fully finish their wines in 

an adjacent State that is not part of the 

multi-State AVA. 

Public Participation 

Comments Invited 

TTB invites comments from interested 

members of the public on the proposed 

changes to the regulations regarding the 

use of AVA names as appellations of 

origin on wine labels. TTB is 

particularly interested in how 

effectively the proposed changes will 

further TTB’s mission of ensuring that 

consumers are provided with adequate 

information about the identity of 

beverage alcohol products and 

preventing consumer deception. Please 

provide specific information in support 

of your comments. 

Although the amendment in this 

notice of proposed rulemaking is 

limited to wines labeled with a singleState AVA appellation of origin, TTB is 

interested in comments on whether TTB 

should propose a similar amendment for 

wines labeled with multi-State AVA 

appellations of origin. Additionally, 

TTB would like comments on whether 

TTB should allow wines labeled with 

any domestic appellation of origin to be 

fully finished in any U.S. State. TTB 

may consider these comments for future 

rulemakings. 

Submitting Comments 

You may submit comments on this 

proposed rule by using one of the 

following three methods: 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You 

may send comments via the online 

comment form posted with this 

proposed rule within Docket No. TTB– 

2015–0003 on ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the 

Federal e-rulemaking portal, at http://

www.regulations.gov. A direct link to 

that docket is available under Notice 

No. 147 on the TTB Web site at 

http://www.ttb.gov/wine/winerulemaking.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 

proposed rule. Your comments must 

reference Notice No. 147 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. In your 

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 


rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6934 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 26 / Monday, February 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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 proposed rule and any 

online or mailed comments received 

about this proposal within Docket No. 

TTB–2015–0003 on the Federal erulemaking 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. 147. 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 

proposed rule 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. 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 amendments merely 

provide industry members with more 

options and additional flexibility in 

wine labeling decisions. The proposed 

regulation imposes no new reporting, 

recordkeeping, or other administrative 

requirement. 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 4 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Advertising, Labeling, 

Packaging and containers, Wine. 

Proposed Regulatory Amendment 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, TTB proposes to amend title 

27, chapter I, part 4, Code of Federal 

Regulations, as follows: 

PART 4—LABELING AND 

ADVERTISING OF WINE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 4 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205, unless otherwise 

noted. 

Subpart C—Standards of Identity for 

Wine 

■ 2. Section 4.25 is amended by revising 

paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to read as follows: 

§ 4.25 Appellations of origin. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iv) In the case of American wine, it 

has been fully finished (except for cellar 

treatment pursuant to § 4.22(c), and 

blending which does not result in an 

alteration of class and type under 

§ 4.22(b)) within the State the 

viticultural area is located in or an 

adjacent State, or, for a viticultural area 

located in two or more contiguous 

States, within one of the States in which 

the viticultural area is located. 

* * * * * 

Signed: December 2, 2014. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

Approved: December 22, 2014. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2015–02552 Filed 2–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

GULF COAST ECOSYSTEM 

RESTORATION COUNCIL 

40 CFR Part 1850 

[Docket Number: 110142015–1111–01] 

Procedures for Disclosure of Records 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 

and Privacy Act 

AGENCY: Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This Proposed Rule sets forth 

the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration 

Council’s (Council) proposed 

regulations regarding the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA), Privacy Act 

(PA), and declassification and public 

availability of national security 

information. 

DATES: Comments are due March 11, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: The Council invites 

comments on the proposed FOIA and 

PA regulations. Comments may be 

submitted through one of these 

methods: 

Electronic Submission of Comments: 

Interested persons may submit 

comments electronically through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. Electronic 

submission of comments allows the 

commenter maximum time to prepare 

and submit a comment, ensures timely 

receipt, and enables the Council to make 

them available to the public. Comments 

submitted electronically through the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site can 

be viewed by other commenters and 

interested members of the public. 

Mail: Send to Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council, 500 Poydras Street, 

Suite 1117, New Orleans, LA 70113. 

Email: Send to FOIAcomments@

RestoreTheGulf.gov. 

In general, the Council will make 

such comments available for public 

inspection and copying on its Web site, 

http://www.restorethegulf.gov/ without 

change, including any business or 

personal information provided, such as 

names, addresses, email addresses, or 

telephone numbers. All comments 

received, including attachments and 

other supporting materials, will be part 

of the public record and subject to 

public disclosure. You should only 

submit information that you wish to 

make publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Roberson at 202–482–1315. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The RESTORE Act, Public Law 112– 

141 (July 6, 2012), codified at 33 U.S.C. 

1321(t) and note, makes funds available 

for the restoration and protection of the 

Gulf Coast Region through a new trust 

fund in the Treasury of the United 

States, known as the Gulf Coast 

Restoration Trust Fund (Trust Fund). 

The Trust Fund will contain 80 percent 

of the administrative and civil penalties 

paid by the responsible parties after July 

6, 2012, under the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act in connection 

with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

These funds will be invested and made 

available through five components of 

the RESTORE Act. 


rljohnson on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS