13160 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

meets the Delta Cross Channel at the 

Southern Pacific Railroad. 

* * * * * 

Signed: March 2, 2022. 

Mary G. Ryan, 

Administrator. 

Approved: March 2, 2022. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2022–05001 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2020–0009; T.D. TTB–177; 

Ref: Notice No. 194] 

RIN 1513–AC59 

Establishment of the San Luis Obispo 

Coast (SLO Coast) Viticultural Area 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the 

approximately 408,505-acre ‘‘San Luis 

Obispo Coast’’ viticultural area in San 

Luis Obispo County, California. TTB is 

also recognizing the abbreviated ‘‘SLO 

Coast’’ as the name of the AVA. The 

viticultural area is located entirely 

within the existing Central Coast 

viticultural area and encompasses the 

established Edna Valley and Arroyo 

Grande Valley AVAs. TTB designates 

viticultural areas to allow vintners to 

better describe the origin of their wines 

and to allow consumers to better 

identify wines they may purchase. 

DATES: This final rule is effective April 

8, 2022. 

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 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 (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines 

the procedure for proposing an AVA 

and allows any interested party to 

petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 

of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) 

prescribes standards for petitions 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 affecting 

viticulture, such as climate, geology, 

soils, physical features, and elevation, 

that make the proposed AVA distinctive 

and distinguish it from adjacent areas 

outside the proposed AVA boundary; 

• If the proposed AVA is to be 

established within, or overlapping, an 

existing AVA, an explanation that both 

identifies the attributes of the proposed 

AVA that are consistent with the 

existing AVA and explains how the 

proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct 

from the existing AVA and therefore 

appropriate for separate recognition; 

• The appropriate United States 

Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) 

showing the location of the proposed 

AVA, with the boundary of the 

proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; 

and 

• A detailed narrative description of 

the proposed AVA boundary based on 

USGS map markings. 

San Luis Obispo Coast (SLO Coast) 

AVA Petition 

TTB received a petition from the SLO 

Coast AVA Association, proposing to 

establish the ‘‘San Luis Obispo Coast’’ 

AVA. The petition also requested that 

TTB recognize ‘‘SLO Coast’’ as a name 

for the proposed AVA, as ‘‘SLO’’ is a 

frequently-used reference to the 

county’s initials as well as its relaxed 

culture. For purposes of the remainder 

of this document, TTB will refer to the 

proposed AVA as ‘‘SLO Coast.’’ The 

proposed AVA is located in San Luis 

Obispo County, California, and lies 

entirely within the established Central 

Coast AVA (27 CFR 9.75). If established, 

the proposed AVA would also entirely 

encompass the established Edna Valley 

(27 CFR 9.35) and Arroyo Grande Valley 

(27 CFR 9.129) AVAs. Within the 

approximately 480,585-acre proposed 

AVA, there are over 50 wineries, as well 

as an estimated 78 commercial 

vineyards covering approximately 3,942 

acres. The distinguishing features of the 

proposed SLO Coast AVA are its 

topography, climate, and soils. 

The petition describes the proposed 

SLO Coast AVA as a region of coastal 

terraces, foothills, and small valleys 

along the Pacific Coast. The region is 

oriented to the west, allowing the region 

to experience marine fog and cool 

marine air. According to the petition, 97 

percent of the proposed AVA is at or 

below 1,800 feet in elevation, which 

corresponds to the approximate limit of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13161 

1According to the petition, GDDs for a particular 

region are calculated by adding the total mean daily 

temperatures above 50 degrees Fahrenheit (F) for 

the days from April 1 through October 31. The 

formula is based on the concept that most vine 

shoot growth occurs in temperatures over 50 

degrees F. 

2See 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. 

the influence of the maritime climate. 

The maritime influence prevents 

temperatures from rising too high or 

dropping too low for optimal vineyard 

conditions. 

The proposed SLO Coast AVA’s 

proximity to the Pacific Ocean 

moderates its temperatures. The average 

growing degree day accumulation 

(GDDs) 1 for the proposed AVA from 

1971–2000 was 2,493, which places the 

proposed AVA in Region I of the 

Winkler scale.2 The minimum growing 

season temperature for 90 percent of the 

proposed AVA is between 47.5 and 52 

degrees Fahrenheit (F), based on data 

from 1981–2015. Also based on data 

from 1981–2015, twenty-one percent of 

the proposed AVA has an average 

maximum growing season temperature 

of less than 70 degrees F, while another 

68 percent of the proposed AVA has an 

average maximum growing season 

temperature between 70 and 78 degrees 

F. The petition also states that between 

2003 and 2015, the proposed AVA 

experienced nighttime fog cover 

between 35 and 55 percent of all nights 

during the growing season. 

According to the petition, the climate 

of the proposed AVA makes it suitable 

for growing early-to-mid-season grape 

varietals such as Chardonnay and Pinot 

Noir, which compromise 43 and 35 

percent, respectively, of the planted 

vineyard acreage of the proposed AVA. 

The petition also states that mild 

average minimum growing season 

temperatures lead to a shorter period of 

vine dormancy in the proposed AVA. 

The lower average maximum growing 

season temperatures (compared to 

surrounding regions) reduce the risk of 

fruit desiccation and produce higher 

levels of malic acid in the grapes, which 

increases total acidities and lowers pH 

values in the resulting wines. The 

nighttime fog lengthens the growing 

season by preventing temperatures from 

dropping significantly at night. 

The soils of the proposed SLO Coast 

AVA can be divided into four groups. 

The largest group, found in the north 

and central parts of the proposed AVA, 

is derived from the Franciscan 

Formation and is comprised of 

sandstone, shale, and metamorphosed 

sedimentary rocks. Examples of soil 

series in this group include Diablo, San 

Simeon, Shimmon, Conception, and 

Santa Lucia series. The second largest 

group consists of younger marine 

deposits and basin sediments from the 

Miocene and Pliocene periods. These 

soils are comprised of sandy loam and 

loams derived from marine deposits and 

include the Pismo, Briones, Tierrs, 

Gazos, Nacimiento, Linne, Balcom, and 

Sorrento soil series. These soils provide 

excellent drainage for vineyards, but 

may require irrigation during the 

growing season. The third group is 

derived from volcanic intrusion and 

represents a very small percentage of the 

soils within the proposed AVA. Most 

soils in this group are found on 

excessively steep slopes or rocky terrain 

that is unsuitable for viticulture. The 

final group is derived from wind 

deposits and comprises the sand dunes 

and low areas near the coast. These soils 

also cover a very small percent of the 

proposed AVA and are generally 

unsuitable for viticulture due to their 

excessive drainage and high sodium 

content. 

West of the proposed AVA is the 

Pacific Ocean. North of the proposed 

AVA, elevations rise over 3,000 feet in 

the steep, rough terrain of the Los 

Padres National Forest. To the northeast 

of the proposed AVA, GDD 

accumulations are higher and the region 

is classified as a Region II on the 

Winkler scale. Soils in this region are 

characterized by rocky outcrops and 

shallow soils derived from sandstone 

and metamorphic rock, as well as soils 

derived from igneous and granitic rocks. 

East of the proposed AVA is the 

eastern side of the Santa Lucia Range, 

which faces away from the Pacific 

Ocean and thus experience less marine 

influence than the proposed AVA. As a 

result, GDD accumulations are higher, 

falling within the Region II and III 

categories on the Winkler scale. Average 

minimum growing season temperatures 

are lower, and average maximum 

growing season temperatures are higher. 

Fog occurs less than 30 percent of all 

nights during the growing season. The 

soils to the east of the proposed AVA 

consist mainly of alluvial and terrace 

deposits. 

To the south of the proposed AVA is 

the Santa Maria Valley, which has a 

much flatter topography. GDD 

accumulations are higher than within 

the proposed AVA, and the region is 

characterized as Region II on the 

Winkler scale. Because the region has a 

flatter topography than the proposed 

SLO Coast AVA, the Santa Maria Valley 

is more exposed to the marine air. As a 

result, the Santa Maria Valley has higher 

average minimum growing season 

temperatures and lower average 

maximum growing season temperatures. 

Fog occurs over 55 percent of all nights 

during the growing season within the 

region to the south of the proposed 

AVA. Soils to the south of the proposed 

SLO Coast AVA consist of deep, fertile, 

sandy soils derived from alluvial 

deposits that contain less clay than the 

majority of soils within the proposed 

AVA. 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and 

Comments Received 

TTB published Notice No. 194 in the 

Federal Register on October 1, 2020 (85 

FR 61899), proposing to establish the 

SLO Coast AVA. In the notice, TTB 

summarized the evidence from the 

petition regarding the name, boundary, 

and distinguishing features for the 

proposed AVA. The notice also 

compared the distinguishing features of 

the proposed AVA to the surrounding 

areas. For a detailed description of the 

evidence relating to the name, 

boundary, and distinguishing features of 

the proposed AVA, and for a detailed 

comparison of the distinguishing 

features of the proposed AVA to the 

surrounding areas, see Notice No. 194. 

In Notice No. 194, TTB solicited 

comments on the accuracy of the name, 

boundary, and other required 

information submitted in support of the 

petition. In addition, given the proposed 

AVA’s location within the central Coast 

AVA, TTB solicited comments on 

whether the evidence submitted in the 

petition regarding the distinguishing 

features of the proposed AVA 

sufficiently differentiates it from the 

established AVA. TTB also requested 

comments on whether the geographic 

features of the proposed AVA are so 

distinguishable from the established 

Central Coast AVA that the proposed 

AVA should no longer be part of the 

established AVA. Finally, TTB 

requested comments on whether the 

proposed AVA is sufficiently 

distinguished from the established Edna 

Valley and Arroyo Grande Valley AVAs 

that it would encompass, as well as if 

one or both of the established AVAs are 

so distinct from the proposed SLO Coast 

AVA that it should not be included 

within the proposed AVA. The 

comment period closed November 30, 

2020. 

In response to Notice No. 194, TTB 

received four comments. None of the 

comments opposed the establishment of 

the proposed SLO Coast AVA, but three 

of the comments expressed concerns or 

questions about the proposed AVA. Two 

comments inquired as to the economic 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13162 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

impact of AVAs. One comment asked if 

there could ‘‘potentially be a negative 

economic impact on wineries with 

similar features that are unable to use 

the SLO name.’’ A second comment 

asked if ‘‘AVA wines’’ are ‘‘more 

lucrative and better for the economy’’ 

and notes ‘‘it would be interesting to 

study the cost of wines from an AVA 

versus the cost of wines not from AVAs, 

but still in the same region.’’ TTB notes 

that establishment of an AVA is not a 

guarantee of economic benefit. Any 

economic benefit derived from the use 

of an AVA name on a wine label is a 

result of the efforts of the proprietor and 

the acceptance of the consumers of the 

new AVA. Therefore, TTB is not able to 

accurately predict the economic benefits 

any given winery or vineyard may 

experience as a result of the 

establishment of an AVA, nor can TTB 

predict if wineries and vineyards in one 

AVA will experience greater economic 

success than wineries and vineyards 

outside of that AVA. However, any 

person may petition TTB to establish a 

new AVA. Alternatively, a person may 

petition TTB to expand the boundaries 

of an established AVA to include 

previously omitted vineyards if they 

believe the expansion area has the same 

distinguishing features and name usage 

as the established AVA. 

The second comment also asked if 

any land in the proposed SLO Coast 

AVA is not currently within an AVA. 

TTB notes that all of the land within the 

proposed SLO Coast AVA is already 

within the established multi-county 

Central Coast AVA. Additionally, some 

of the land is within either the 

established Edna Valley or Arroyo 

Grande Valley AVAs. 

Additionally, the second comment 

asked the purpose of overlapping AVAs. 

TTB notes that a certain set of 

distinguishing features characterizes 

any given established AVA. All lands 

within that AVA are assumed to share 

those features. However, TTB also 

recognizes that small variations in soil, 

climate, and/or topography may exist 

within any established AVA, 

particularly large, multi-county AVAs 

like the Central Coast AVA in which the 

proposed SLO Coast AVA is located. At 

the time an AVA was originally 

established, the available data may have 

made the region appear largely 

homogenous, but over time, new data 

may become available that highlights 

these small differences. Establishing 

new AVAs within established AVAs 

provides formal recognition for these 

small differences while still 

acknowledging the broader 

characteristics these new AVAs share 

with the established one. For example, 

the proposed SLO Coast AVA shares the 

primary climate characteristic of the 

Central Coast AVA, which is a marineinfluenced climate that is 

distinguishable from the climate of 

regions farther inland. As a result, 

vineyards in the proposed SLO Coast 

AVA and vineyards in the remaining 

portion of the Central Coast AVA will 

still have growing conditions that are 

more similar to each other than they are 

to the growing conditions in the 

warmer, drier inland regions east of the 

Central Coast AVA. However, the 

proposed SLO Coast AVA, by virtue of 

its location along the westernmost 

portion of the Central Coast AVA, 

receives more marine influence than the 

more inland regions of the Central Coast 

AVA. Vineyards in this more coastal 

region therefore experience slightly 

different growing conditions than 

vineyards elsewhere in the Central 

Coast AVA. Establishing a smaller AVA 

within the larger AVA also provides 

vintners with more flexibility in how 

they may choose to market their wines. 

The third comment specifically 

supported the proposed SLO Coast 

AVA. However, the comment also 

suggested that the overlap between the 

proposed SLO Coast AVA and the 

Central Coast, Edna Valley, and Arroyo 

Grande Valley AVAs may cause ‘‘the 

potential for tax discrepancies.’’ To 

avoid potential conflict, the comment 

suggested allowing vintners to vote on 

which AVA they wish to be located. The 

comment also recommended setting a 

timeline for businesses to adjust their 

business practices to being in a new 

AVA, noted suggestions for offsetting 

costs incurred when a winery switches 

from one AVA to another, and suggested 

forming a committee consisting of 2 to 

3 members from each AVA to ‘‘help lead 

the transition process’’ from one AVA to 

another. 

TTB notes that the establishment of 

an AVA simply allows vintners a new 

way to market their wines and does not 

involve the creation of new taxes. Wine 

industry members’ Federal excise tax 

payments are not based on the number 

of AVAs within which they are located. 

Additionally, including the Edna Valley 

and Arroyo Grande Valley AVAs in an 

established SLO Coast AVA, and 

including the SLO Coast AVA within 

the Central Coast AVA, would not force 

any label holders to make any changes 

to their business practices or impose on 

them any additional business costs. The 

Central Coast, Edna Valley, and Arroyo 

Grande Valley AVAs’ boundaries would 

remain unchanged, and label holders 

may continue using ‘‘Central Coast,’’ 

‘‘Edna Valley,’’ or ‘‘Arroyo Grande 

Valley’’ as appellations of origin on 

their wines. However, they would also 

have the option of using ‘‘San Luis 

Obispo Coast’’ or ‘‘SLO Coast’’ as an 

appellation of origin. 

In addition, because AVAs are 

established by Federal regulations, TTB 

publishes a notice of proposed 

rulemaking to inform potentially 

affected persons of the proposed AVA, 

similar to how other Federal agencies 

make known proposed changes to their 

regulations. The decision to establish 

the AVA or withdraw the proposal is 

based on the information included in 

the AVA petition and any additional 

relevant information that may be 

provided during the comment period. In 

this case, label holders had over a year 

to prepare for the potential creation of 

this AVA, as on October 1, 2020 TTB 

published an NPRM proposing the 

establishment of the ‘‘San Luis Obispo 

Coast’’ or ‘‘SLO Coast’’ AVA. Further, 

affected label holders had until 

November 30, 2020 to submit comments 

on the proposed AVA. 

TTB also notes that the SLO Coast 

AVA Association already exists to 

promote the region and may choose to 

work with vintners and wineries to 

promote the region. However, TTB does 

not have the authority to order such 

cooperation or to establish any 

association or advisory group to 

promote one or more AVAs. 

A fourth comment supports 

establishment of the ‘‘San Luis Obispo 

Coast’’ or ‘‘SLO Coast’’ AVA. This 

comment notes distinguishing features 

within the proposed AVA’s boundaries 

are different from areas outside these 

boundaries, and that establishing this 

AVA increases understanding of the 

diversity within San Luis Obispo 

County and the Central Coast AVA. 

TTB Determination 

After careful review of the petition 

and the comments received in response 

to Notice No. 194, TTB finds that the 

evidence provided by the petitioner 

supports the establishment of the San 

Luis Obispo Coast (SLO Coast) AVA. 

Accordingly, under the authority of the 

FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, and 

parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations, 

TTB establishes the ‘‘San Luis Obispo 

Coast’’ AVA, also known as the ‘‘SLO 

Coast’ AVA, in San Luis Obispo County, 

California, effective 30 days from the 

publication date of this document. 

TTB has also determined that the SLO 

Coast AVA will remain part of the 

established Central Coast AVA. As 

discussed in Notice No. 194, the SLO 

Coast AVA shares the same marineinfluenced climate as the Central Coast 

AVA. However, due to its smaller size 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13163 

and more coastal location, the SLO 

Coast AVA experiences more marine 

influence than the more inland portions 

of the Central Coast AVA. 

Furthermore, TTB has determined 

that the Edna Valley and Arroyo Grande 

AVAs will be within the SLO Coast 

AVA. As discussed in Notice No. 194, 

the Edna Valley and Arroyo Grande 

Valley AVA share the marineinfluenced climate and clay and loam 

soils as the SLO Coast AVA. However, 

the Edna Valley AVA has some unique 

characteristics, such as a narrower range 

of elevations than the SLO Coast AVA. 

The climate of the Edna Valley AVA is 

also mostly Region II on the Winkler 

scale with pockets of Region I climate, 

whereas the SLO Coast AVA is 

primarily Region I with pockets of 

Region II climate. The Arroyo Grande 

Valley AVA also has some 

characteristics that make it unique. For 

example, the Arroyo Grande is in a 

sheltered location within the SLO Coast 

AVA, which means that it received less 

direct marine influence that other more 

open portions of the SLO Coast AVA. 

Boundary Description 

See the narrative description of the 

boundary of the SLO Coast AVA in the 

regulatory text published at the end of 

this final rule. 

Maps 

The petitioners provided the required 

maps, and they are listed below in the 

regulatory text. The SLO Coast AVA 

boundary may also be viewed on the 

AVA Map Explorer on the TTB website, 

at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-mapexplorer. 

Impact on Current Wine Labels 

Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits 

any label reference on a wine that 

indicates or implies an origin other than 

the wine’s true place of origin. For a 

wine to be labeled with an AVA name 

or with a brand name that includes an 

AVA name, at least 85 percent of the 

wine must be derived from grapes 

grown within the area represented by 

that name, and the wine must meet the 

other conditions listed in 27 CFR 

4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for 

labeling with an AVA name and that 

name appears in the brand name, then 

the label is not in compliance and the 

bottler must change the brand name and 

obtain approval of a new label. 

Similarly, if the AVA name appears in 

another reference on the label in a 

misleading manner, the bottler would 

have to obtain approval of a new label. 

Different rules apply if a wine has a 

brand name containing an AVA name 

that was used as a brand name on a 

label approved before July 7, 1986. See 

27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details. 

With the establishment of the San 

Luis Obispo Coast AVA, its name, ‘‘San 

Luis Obispo Coast,’’ as well as the 

abbreviated ‘‘SLO Coast,’’ will be 

recognized as a name of viticultural 

significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the 

TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). TTB 

is also designating ‘‘San Luis Obispo 

Coast’’ and ‘‘SLO Coast’’ as terms of 

viticultural significance. The text of the 

regulations clarifies this point. 

Consequently, wine bottlers using the 

names ‘‘San Luis Obispo Coast’’ or 

‘‘SLO Coast’’ in a brand name, including 

a trademark, or in another label 

reference as to the origin of the wine, 

will have to ensure that the product is 

eligible to use the AVA name as an 

appellation of origin. 

The establishment of the SLO Coast 

AVA will not affect the existing Central 

Coast, Edna Valley, or Arroyo Grande 

Valley AVAs, and any bottlers using 

‘‘Central Coast,’’ ‘‘Edna Valley,’’ or 

‘‘Arroyo Grande Valley’’ as an 

appellation of origin or in a brand name 

for wines made from grapes grown 

within those AVAs will not be affected 

by the establishment of this new AVA. 

The establishment of the SLO Coast 

AVA will allow vintners to use ‘‘SLO 

Coast,’’ ‘‘San Luis Obispo Coast,’’ and 

‘‘Central Coast’’ as appellations of origin 

for wines made primarily from grapes 

grown within the SLO Coast AVA if the 

wines meet the eligibility requirements 

for the appellation. Additionally, 

vintners may use ‘‘SLO Coast’’ or ‘‘San 

Luis Obispo Coast’’ as an appellation of 

origin in addition to or in place of 

‘‘Edna Valley’’ or ‘‘Arroyo Grande 

Valley’’ for wines made primarily from 

grapes grown in the Edna Valley or 

Arroyo Grande Valley AVAs if the 

wines meet the eligibility requirements 

for either of those two appellations. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

TTB certifies that this regulation will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The regulation imposes no new 

reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

administrative requirement. Any benefit 

derived from the use of an AVA name 

would be the result of a proprietor’s 

efforts and consumer acceptance of 

wines from that area. Therefore, no 

regulatory flexibility analysis is 

required. 

Executive Order 12866 

It has been determined that this final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

as defined by Executive Order 12866 of 

September 30, 1993. Therefore, no 

regulatory assessment is required. 

Drafting Information 

Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations 

and Rulings Division drafted this final 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 

Wine. 

The Regulatory Amendment 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter 

I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as 

follows: 

PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL 

AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 9 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. 

Subpart C—Approved American 

Viticultural Areas 

■ 2. Subpart C is amended by adding 

§ 9.282 to read as follows: 

§ 9.282 San Luis Obispo Coast. 

(a) Name. The name of the viticultural 

area described in this section is ‘‘San 

Luis Obispo Coast’’. ‘‘SLO Coast’’ may 

also be used as the name of the 

viticultural area described in this 

section. For purposes of part 4 of this 

chapter, ‘‘San Luis Obispo Coast’’ and 

‘‘SLO Coast’’ are terms of viticultural 

significance. 

(b) Approved maps. The 24 United 

States Geological Survey (USGS) 

1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to 

determine the boundary of the San Luis 

Obispo Coast viticultural area are titled: 

(1) Burro Mountain, 1995; 

(2) Piedras Blancas, 1959; 

photoinspected 1976; 

(3) San Simeon, 1958; photoinspected 

1976; 

(4) Pebblestone Shut-In, 1959; 

photoinspected 1976; 

(5) Lime Mountain, 1948; photo 

revised 1979; 

(6) Cypress Mountain, 1979; 

(7) York Mountain, 1948; 

photorevised 1979; 

(8) Morro Bay North, 1995; 

(9) Atascadero, 1995; 

(10) San Luis Obispo, 1968; 

photorevised 1978; 

(11) Morro Bay South, 1965; 

photorevised 1978; 

(12) Lopez Mountain, 1995; 

(13) Arroyo Grande NE, 1985; 

(14) Tar Spring Ridge, 1995; 

(15) Nipomo, 1965; 

(16) Huasna Peak, 1995; 

(17) Twitchell Dam, 1959; 

photorevised 1982; 

(18) Santa Maria, 1959; photorevised 

1982; 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13164 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

(19) Oceano, 1965; revised 1994; 

(20) Pismo Beach, 1998; 

(21) Port San Luis, 1965; photorevised 

1979; 

(22) Cayucus, 1965; revised 1994; 

(23) Cambria, 1959; photorevised 

1979; and 

(24) Pico Creek, 1959; photorevised 

1979. 

(c) Boundary. The San Luis Obispo 

Coast viticultural area is located in San 

Luis Obispo County in California. The 

boundary of the San Luis Obispo Coast 

viticultural area is as described below: 

(1) The beginning point is on the 

Burro Mountain map at the intersection 

of the northern boundary of the Piedra 

Blanca Grant boundary and the Pacific 

Ocean. From the beginning point, 

proceed southeast along the grant 

boundary to its intersection with the 

western boundary of Section 15, T25S/ 

R6E; then 

(2) Proceed northeast in a straight line 

to a marked 1,462-foot peak in Section 

11, T25S/R6E; then 

(3) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the Piedras Blancas 

map, to a marked 2,810-foot peak in 

Section 19, T25S/R7E; then 

(4) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the San Simeon map, 

to the 2,397-foot peak of Garrity Peak in 

the Piedra Blanca Land Grant; then 

(5) Proceed east in a straight line to a 

marked 2,729-foot peak in Section 32, 

T25S/R8E; then 

(6) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the Pebblestone 

Shut-In map, to the 3,432-foot peak of 

Rocky Butte in Section 24, T26S/R8E; 

then 

(7) Proceed southeast in a straight line 

to the 2,849-foot peak of Vulture Rock 

in Section 29, T26S/R9E; then 

(8) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing over the Lime Mountain 

map and onto the Cypress Mountain 

map to the 2,933-foot peak of Cypress 

Mountain in Section 12, T27S/R9E; then 

(9) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the York Mountain 

map, to the intersection of Dover 

Canyon Road and a jeep trail in Dover 

Canyon in Section 14, T27S/R10E; then 

(10) Proceed southwesterly, then 

southeasterly along the jeep trail to the 

point where the jeep trail becomes an 

unnamed light-duty road, and 

continuing southeasterly along the road 

to its intersection Santa Rita Creek in 

Section 25, T27S/R10E; then 

(11) Proceed easterly along Santa Rita 

Creek to the point where the creek splits 

into a northern and a southern fork; 

then 

(12) Proceed east in a straight line to 

Cayucos Templeton Road, then proceed 

south along Cayucos Templeton Road, 

crossing onto the Morro Bay North map 

and continuing along the road as it 

becomes Santa Rita Road, to the 

intersection of the road with the 

northeast boundary of Section 20, T28S/ 

R11E; then 

(13) Proceed southeast along the 

northeast boundary of Section 20 to its 

intersection with the western boundary 

of the Los Padres National Forest; then 

(14) Proceed south, then southeasterly 

along the western boundary of the Los 

Padres National Forest, crossing over 

the Atascadero map and onto the San 

Luis Obispo map, to the intersection of 

the forest boundary with the boundary 

of the Camp San Luis Obispo National 

Guard Reservation at the northeastern 

corner of Section 32, T29S/R12E; then 

(15) Proceed south, then generally 

southwesterly along the boundary of 

Camp San Luis Obispo National Guard 

Reservation, crossing onto the Morro 

Bay South map and then back onto the 

San Luis Obispo map, and then 

continuing generally easterly along the 

military reservation boundary to the 

intersection of the boundary with a 

marked 1,321-foot peak along the 

northern boundary of the Potrero de San 

Luis Obispo Land Grant; then 

(16) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the Lopez Mountain 

map, to the southeastern corner of 

Section 18, T30S/R13E; then 

(17) Proceed southeasterly in a 

straight line to the southeast corner of 

Section 29; then 

(18) Proceed southeasterly in a 

straight line to a marked 2,094-foot peak 

in Section 2, T31S/R13E; then 

(19) Proceed southeasterly in a 

straight line, crossing onto the Arroyo 

Grande NE map, to the intersection of 

the 1,800-foot elevation contour and the 

western boundary of the Los Padres 

National Forest, along the eastern 

boundary of Section 12, T31S/R13E; 

then 

(20) Proceed south along the 

boundary of the Los Padres National 

Forest to the southeastern corner of 

Section 13, T31S/R13E; then 

(21) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,884-foot peak in 

Section 19, T31S/R14E; then 

(22) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to northwestern-most corner of the 

boundary of the Lopez Lake Recreation 

Area in Section 19, T31S/R14E; then 

(23) Proceed south, then generally 

east along the boundary of the Lopez 

Lake Recreation Area, crossing onto the 

Tar Spring Ridge map, to the 

intersection of the boundary with an 

unnamed light-duty road known locally 

as Lopez Drive west of the Lopez Dam 

spillway in Section 32, T31S/R14E; then 

(24) Proceed east along Lopez Drive to 

its intersection with an unnamed lightduty road known as Hi Mountain Road 

in Section 34, T31S/R14E; then 

(25) Proceed east along Hi Mountain 

Drive to its intersection with an 

unnamed light-duty road known locally 

as Upper Lopez Canyon Road in the 

Arroyo Grande Land Grant; then 

(26) Proceed north along Upper Lopez 

Canyon Road to its intersection with an 

unnamed, unimproved road that runs 

south to Ranchita Ranch; then 

(27) Proceed northeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,183-foot peak in 

Section 19, T31S/R15E; then 

(28) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,022-foot peak in 

Section 29, T31S/R15E; then 

(29) Proceed southwest in a straight 

line to a marked 1,310-foot peak in 

Section 30, T31S/R15E; then 

(30) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,261-foot peak in 

Section 32, T31S/R15E; then 

(31) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,436-foot peak in 

Section 4, T32S/R15E; then 

(32) Proceed southwest in a straight 

line to a marked 1,308-foot peak in the 

Huasna Land Grant; then 

(33) Proceed westerly in a straight line 

to a marked 1,070-foot peak in Section 

1, T32S/R14E; then 

(34) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,251-foot peak in the 

Huasna Land Grant; then 

(35) Proceed southwest in a straight 

line to a marked 1,458-foot peak in the 

Santa Manuela Land Grant; then 

(36) Proceed southeast in a straight 

line to a marked 1,377-foot peak in the 

Huasna Land Grant; then 

(37) Proceed southwest in a straight 

line, crossing onto the Nipomo map, to 

a marked 1,593-foot peak in the Santa 

Manuela Land Grant; then 

(38) Proceed southwest in a straight 

line to the jeep trail immediately north 

of a marked 1,549-foot peak in Section 

35, T32S/R14E; then 

(39) Proceed northwesterly along the 

jeep trail to its intersection with an 

unnamed, unimproved road in the Santa 

Manuela Land Grant; then 

(40) Proceed south along the 

unimproved road to its intersection with 

Upper Los Berros Road No. 2 in Section 

33, T32S/R14E; then 

(41) Proceed southeast along Upper 

Los Berros Road No. 2, crossing onto the 

Huasna Peak map, to the intersection of 

the road and State Highway 166; then 

(42) Proceed south, then westerly 

along State Highway 166, crossing over 

the Twitchell Dam, Santa Maria, and 

Nipomo maps, then back onto the Santa 

Maria map, to the intersection of State 

Highway 166 with U.S. Highway 101 in 

the Nipomo Land Grant; then 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13165 

(43) Proceed south along U.S. 

Highway 101 to its intersection with the 

north bank of the Santa Maria River; 

then 

(44) Proceed west along the north 

bank of the Santa Maria River to its 

intersection with the 200-foot elevation 

contour; then 

(45) Proceed generally west along the 

200-foot elevation contour, crossing 

over the Nipomo map and onto the 

Oceano map, to a point north of where 

the north-south trending 100-foot 

elevation contour makes a sharp 

westerly turn in the Guadalupe Land 

Grant; then 

(46) Proceed due south in a straight 

line to the 100-foot elevation contour; 

then 

(47) Proceed westerly along the 100- 

foot elevation contour to its intersection 

with State Highway 1 in the Guadalupe 

Land Grant; then 

(48) Proceed northwesterly in a 

straight line to the eastern boundary of 

the Pismo Dunes State Vehicular 

Recreation Area at Lettuce Lake in the 

Bolsa de Chamisal Land Grant; then 

(49) Proceed northerly along the 

eastern boundary of the Pismo Dunes 

State Vehicular Recreation Area to the 

point where the boundary makes a 

sharp westerly turn just west of Black 

Lake in the Bolsa de Chamisal Land 

Grant; then 

(50) Northerly along the Indefinite 

Boundary of the Pismo Dunes National 

Preserve to corner just west of Black 

Lake in the Bolsa de Chamisal Land 

Grant; then 

(51) Proceed east in a straight line to 

an unnamed four wheel drive road east 

of Black Lake in the Bolsa de Chamisal 

Land Grant; then 

(52) Proceed north along the western 

fork of the four wheel drive road as it 

meanders to the east of White Lake, Big 

Twin Lake, and Pipeline Lake, to the 

point where the road intersects an 

unnamed creek at the southeastern end 

of Cienega Valley in the Bolsa de 

Chamisal Land Grant; then 

(53) Proceed northwesterly along the 

creek to its intersection with an 

unnamed dirt road known locally as 

Delta Lane south of the Oceano Airport; 

then 

(54) Proceed northerly along Delta 

Lane to its intersection with an 

unnamed light-duty road known locally 

as Ocean Street; then 

(55) Proceed east in a straight line to 

State Highway 1; then 

(56) Proceed northerly on State 

Highway 1, crossing onto the Pismo 

Beach map, to the highway’s 

intersection with a light-duty road 

known locally as Harloe Avenue; then 

(57) Proceed west along Harloe 

Avenue to its intersection with the 

boundary of Pismo State Beach; then 

(58) Proceed northwesterly along the 

boundary of Pismo State Beach to its 

intersection with the Pacific Ocean 

coastline; then 

(59) Proceed northerly along the 

Pacific Ocean coastline, crossing over 

the Pismo Beach, Port San Luis, Morro 

Bay South, Morro Bay North, Cayucos, 

Cambria, Pico Creek, San Simeon, and 

Piedras Blancas maps and onto the 

Burro Mountain map, returning to the 

beginning point. 

Signed: March 2, 2022. 

Mary G. Ryan, 

Administrator. 

Approved: March 2, 2022. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2022–05000 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. USCG–2022–0136] 

Special Local Regulation; Annual 

Boyne Thunder Poker Run, Charlevoix, 

MI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS). 

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of 

regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce 

the Annual Boyne Thunder Poker Run 

special local regulation on Round Lake 

and Pine River Channel, Charlevoix, MI 

on July 9, 2022. This action is necessary 

and intended to protect the safety of life 

and property on navigable waters prior 

to, during, and immediately after this 

event. During the enforcement period, 

entry into, transiting, or anchoring 

within the safety zone are prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port Sault Sainte Marie or a designated 

representative. 

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 

100.929 will be enforced from 8 a.m. 

through 5 p.m. on July 9, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this notice of 

enforcement, call or email LT Deaven 

Palenzuela, Chief of Waterways 

Management Division, U.S. Coast 

Guard; telephone 906–635–3223, email 

ssmprevention@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard will enforce the special local 

regulation in 33 CFR 100.929 for the 

Annual Boyne Thunder Poker Run in 

Boyne City, MI from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on 

July 9, 2022. This action is being taken 

to protect the safety of life and property 

on navigable waters prior to, during, 

and immediately after the event. Our 

regulation for marine events within the 

Ninth Coast Guard District, 33 CFR 

100.929, specifies the location of the 

regulated area for the Annual Boyne 

Thunder Poker Run in Round Lake and 

Pine River Channel, Charlevoix, MI. 

During the enforcement period, no 

vessel may transit this regulated area 

without approval from the Captain of 

the Port Sault Sainte Marie or a 

designated representative. Vessels and 

persons granted permission to enter the 

special local regulated area shall obey 

all lawful orders or directions of the 

Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie, 

or an on-scene representative. The Coast 

Guard may be assisted by other Federal, 

State, or local law enforcement agencies 

in enforcing this regulation. 

In addition to this notice of 

enforcement in the Federal Register, the 

Coast Guard plans to provide 

notification of this enforcement period 

via the Local Notice to Mariners and/or 

marine information broadcasts. 

Dated: March 3, 2022. 

A.R. Jones, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sault Sainte Marie. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04949 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2022–0145] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zones; Christina River, 

Wilmington, DE; Darby Creek and 

Schuylkill River, Philadelphia, PA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing three temporary security 

zones for certain navigable waters of the 

Christina and Schuylkill Rivers and 

Darby Creek. The security zones are 

needed to safeguard persons, including 

those under the protection of the United 

States Capitol Police (USCP), and 

property from terrorist acts or incidents 

and to prevent terrorist acts or incidents 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1