Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 4797

(with the voltage at any given time never 

falling below the minimum voltage indicated 

by the solid line in Figure 1), the plant must 

stay online. The Interconnection Customer 

may not disable low voltage ride-through 

equipment while the wind plant is in 

operation.

Two key features of this proposed 

regulation are: 

1. A wind generating plant must have 

LVRT capability down to 15 percent of the 

rated line voltage for 0.625 seconds; 

2. A wind generating plant must be able to 

operate continuously at 90 percent of the 

rated line voltage, measured at the high 

voltage side of the wind plant substation 

transformer(s). 

The wind generating plant may ask the 

Transmission Provider for a variation of the 

parameters of this regulation, and the 

Transmission Provider may agree to such a 

variation provided it does so on a comparable 

and not unduly discriminatory basis among 

wind generators. The Transmission Provider 

may waive the low voltage ride-through 

requirement on a comparable and not unduly 

discriminatory basis for all wind plants.

ii. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 

(SCADA) Capability 

The wind plant shall provide SCADA 

capability to transmit data and receive 

instructions from the Transmission Provider. 

The Transmission Provider and the wind 

plant Interconnection Customer shall 

determine what SCADA information is 

essential for the proposed wind plant, taking 

into account the size of the plant, its 

characteristics, location, and importance in 

maintaining generation resource adequacy 

and transmission system reliability in its 

area. 

iii. Power Factor Design Criteria (Reactive 

Power) 

A wind plant shall maintain a power factor 

within the range of 0.95 leading to 0.95 

lagging, measured at the high voltage side of 

the wind plant substation transformer(s). The 

power factor range requirement can be met 

by using, for example, power electronics 

designed to supply this level of reactive 

capability (taking into account any 

limitations due to voltage level, real power 

output, etc.) or fixed and switched capacitors 

if agreed to by the Transmission Provider, or 

a combination of the two. The 

Interconnection Customer shall not disable 

power factor equipment while the wind plant 

is in operation. Wind plants shall also be able 

to provide sufficient dynamic voltage support 

in lieu of the power system stabilizer and 

automatic voltage regulation at the generator 

excitation system if the Interconnection 

System Impact Study shows this to be 

required for system reliability. 

The Transmission Provider may agree to 

waive or defer compliance with the reactive 

power standard. However, any such waiver 

or exemption must be considered a nonconforming agreement pursuant to section 

11.3 of the LGIP.

[FR Doc. 05–1693 Filed 1–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Notice No. 30] 

RIN 1513–AA67 

Proposed Expansion of the Russian 

River Valley Viticultural Area (2003R–

144T)

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau has received a 

petition proposing the expansion of the 

existing Russian River Valley 

viticultural area in Sonoma County, 

California. The proposed 30,200-acre 

expansion would increase the size of 

this viticultural area to 126,200 acres. 

We designate viticultural areas to allow 

vintners to better describe the origin of 

their wines and to allow consumers to 

better identify wines they may 

purchase. We invite comments on this 

proposed amendment to our regulations.

DATES: We must receive written 

comments on or before April 1, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to 

any of the following addresses: 

• Chief, Regulations and Procedures 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 30, P.O. 

Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044–

4412. 

• 202–927–8525 (facsimile). 

• nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail). 

• http://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/

index.htm. An online comment form is 

posted with this notice on our Web site. 

• http://www.regulations.gov (Federal 

e-rulemaking portal; follow instructions 

for submitting comments). 

You may view copies of this notice, 

the petition, the appropriate maps, and 

any comments we receive about this 

proposal by appointment at the TTB 

Library, 1310 G Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20220. To make an 

appointment, call 202–927–2400. You 

may also access copies of the notice and 

comments online at http://www.ttb.gov/

alcohol/rules/index.htm.

See the Public Participation section of 

this notice for specific instructions and 


EP31JA05.006</GPH>
4798 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

requirements for submitting comments, 

and for information on how to request 

a public hearing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

N. A. Sutton, Regulations and 

Procedures Division, Alcohol and 

Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925 

Lakeville St., No. 158, Petaluma, CA 

94952; telephone 415–271–1254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background on Viticultural Areas 

TTB Authority 

Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol 

Administration Act (the FAA Act, 27 

U.S.C. 201 et seq.) requires that alcohol 

beverage labels provide the consumer 

with adequate information regarding a 

product’s identity and prohibits the use 

of misleading information on those 

labels. The FAA Act also authorizes the 

Secretary of the Treasury to issue 

regulations to carry out its provisions. 

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau (TTB) administers these 

regulations. 

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) contains the 

list of approved viticultural areas. 

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 

distinguishable by geographical 

features, the boundaries of which have 

been recognized and defined 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 its 

geographic origin. The establishment of 

viticultural areas allows vintners to 

describe more accurately the origin of 

their wines to consumers and helps 

consumers to identify wines they may 

purchase. Establishment of a viticultural 

area 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 an American viticultural area 

and provides that any interested party 

may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as a viticultural area. 

Section 9.3(b) of the TTB regulations 

requires the petition to include—

• Evidence that the proposed 

viticultural area is locally and/or 

nationally known by the name specified 

in the petition; 

• Historical or current evidence that 

supports setting the boundary of the 

proposed viticultural area as the 

petition specifies; 

• Evidence relating to the 

geographical features, such as climate, 

elevation, physical features, and soils, 

that distinguish the proposed 

viticultural area from surrounding areas; 

• A description of the specific 

boundary of the proposed viticultural 

area, based on features found on United 

States Geological Survey (USGS) maps; 

and 

• A copy of the appropriate USGS 

map(s) with the proposed viticultural 

area’s boundary prominently marked. 

Petitioners may use the same 

procedure to request changes involving 

existing viticultural areas.

Russian River Valley Expansion 

Petition 

General Background 

TTB has received a petition from the 

Russian River Valley Winegrowers, a 

wine industry association based in 

Fulton, California, proposing a 30,200-

acre expansion of the established 

Russian River Valley viticultural area 

(27 CFR 9.66). The established Russian 

River Valley viticultural area is located 

in Sonoma County, California, about 50 

miles north of San Francisco. As it 

currently exists, the Russian River 

Valley viticultural area generally lies 

north and west of Santa Rosa, north of 

Sebastopol, east of the Bohemian 

Highway (about 7 miles inland from the 

Pacific coast), and south of Healdsburg. 

The Chalk Hill viticultural area (27 

CFR 9.52) lies entirely within the 

existing Russian River Valley 

viticultural area’s northeastern third, 

while about 90 percent of the Sonoma 

County Green Valley viticultural area 

(27 CFR 9.57) is within the Russian 

River Valley area’s southwestern third. 

In turn, the Russian River Valley 

viticultural area is entirely within the 

Northern Sonoma viticultural area (27 

CFR 9.70), and is largely within the 

Sonoma Coast viticultural area (27 CFR 

9.116). These two larger Sonoma County 

areas are within the multi-county North 

Coast viticultural area (27 CFR 9.30). 

In the vicinity of the city of Santa 

Rosa, the Russian River Valley 

Winegrowers’ proposed expansion area 

includes the mix of rural, suburban, and 

urban land between Santa Rosa and 

Mendocino Avenues in Santa Rosa and 

the area’s present eastern boundary. To 

the south, the proposed expansion 

would incorporate the remainder of the 

Sonoma County Green Valley 

viticultural area into the Russian River 

Valley area, as well as a large rural 

region to the west, south, and east of 

Sebastopol. 

As petitioned, the expansion 

proposed by the Russian River Valley 

Winegrowers includes a smaller, 767-

acre expansion approved by TTB in 

2003. For details regarding this earlier 

expansion, see T.D. TTB–7, published 

in the Federal Register on December 2, 

2003, at 68 FR 67367. T.D. TTB–7 is also 

posted on the TTB Internet Web site at 

http://www.tttb.gov.

Cooling coastal fog, which moves 

inland from the Pacific Ocean via the 

valleys of the Russian River and its 

tributaries, is the dominant 

distinguishing viticultural feature of the 

existing Russian River Valley 

viticultural area. The expansion petition 

states that the reach of this coastal fog 

is the most significant factor for 

including the land in the proposed 

expansion within the established area. 

Other factors noted in the petition 

include the expansion area’s location 

within the Russian River Valley 

watershed, and, to a lesser extent, the 

expansion area’s geology and soils, 

which are similar to what is found in 

the existing viticultural area. 

Below, we summarize the evidence 

presented in the Russian River Valley 

Winegrowers’ petition. 

Name Evidence 

The petition offers evidence that the 

land in the proposed expansion area to 

the east and south of the current 

Russian River Valley viticultural area is 

also referred to as the Russian River 

Valley. A State of California hydrology 

map shows that the Russian River 

Valley, including the proposed 

expansion area, is within the Russian 

River Valley watershed. 

The petition also included an article 

from the July 2002 Wine Enthusiast 

magazine (page 31) that defined the 

Russian River Valley as ‘‘the box-shaped 

region that extends from Healdsburg to 

Santa Rosa in the east, and from 

Occidental to Guerneville in the west.’’

This description includes the proposed 

eastern boundary expansion. The 1996 

‘‘Wine Country’’ guidebook (page 196), 

also included in the petition, provides 

a ‘‘Russian River Region’’ map that 

includes the east and south sides of the 

proposed expansion. 

The Homes and Land real estate 

magazine (Vol, 18, No. 7, summer of 

2002) lists a ‘‘Russian River Appellation 

Vineyard Estate’’ on pages 32 and 33. 

The petition indicates that this estate is 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 4799

within the eastern portion of the 

proposed expansion area. 

The Wine News June/July 2002 

magazine publication includes an article 

titled ‘‘Russian River Valley Pinot Noir’s 

Promised Land’’ which discusses this 

winegrowing area. On page 60 it notes 

that the 24-acre Meredith Vineyard is 

‘‘located at the southern end of the RRV 

[Russian River Valley].’’ This vineyard 

is in the proposed expansion area as 

well, as noted on the United States 

Geological Service Sebastopol 

quadrangle map. 

Boundary Evidence 

The petition explains that, 

historically, agriculture in the proposed 

expansion area has included apples, 

prunes, cherries, berries, grapes, and 

other crops. As noted in the petition, 

local resident Lee Bondi recalls that in 

the early 1900s his family made wine 

from Palomino grapes on their ranch in 

the expansion area. Dena Bondelie, also 

a resident living within the proposed 

expansion area, remembers her father 

talking about the Zinfandel wine made 

by her grandfather at their Darby Lane 

property. 

Tom Henderson, an area resident, 

recalls that during World War II his 

grandparents grew berries, corn, 

pumpkins, and acorn squash to 

supplement their apple crop, on their 

Sander Road property. Ms. Merry 

Edwards, a current resident, states that 

when she first moved to the area in 

1977, it was heavily planted with 

apples. Some apple and prune orchards 

are being replaced with vineyards 

because of the changing agricultural 

markets, according to the Russian River 

Valley Winegrowers group. 

As of spring 2003, according to the 

petition, there are approximately 1,070 

acres planted with grapes within the 

proposed expansion area, with another 

200 acres under development for 

commercial viticulture purposes. 

Distinguishing Features 

Treasury Decision ATF–159 of 

October 21, 1983 (48 FR 48813), 

established the Russian River Valley as 

a viticultural area. This Treasury 

Decision stated:

The Russian River viticultural area 

includes those areas through which flow the 

Russian River or some of its tributaries and 

where there is a significant climate effect 

from coastal fogs. The specific growing 

climate is the principal distinctive 

characteristic of the Russian River Valley 

viticultural area. The area designated is a 

cool growing coastal area because of fog 

intruding up the Russian River and its 

tributaries during the early morning hours.

Climate 

The Russian River Valley viticultural 

area expansion petition states that fog is 

the single most unifying and significant 

feature of the area. This is consistent 

with statements in the original 1983 

Russian River Valley viticultural area 

petition. The proposed expansion area 

also has heavy fog as documented by 

Robert Sisson, Sonoma County 

Viticulture Farm Advisor Emeritus, on 

his 1976 map titled ‘‘Lines of Heaviest 

and Average Maximum Fog Intrusion 

for Sonoma County.’’

The current petition and Treasury 

Decision ATF–159, which established 

the Russian River Valley viticultural 

area, both refer to the Winkler degreeday (or accumulated heat units) system, 

which classifies grape-growing climatic 

regions. (Each degree that a day’s mean 

temperature is above 50 degrees F, 

which is the minimum temperature 

required for grapevine growth, is 

counted as one degree day; see ‘‘General 

Viticulture,’’ Albert J. Winkler, 

University of California Press, 1975.) As 

noted in Treasury Decision ATF–159, 

‘‘The Russian River Valley viticultural 

area is termed ‘coastal cool’ with a range 

of 2000 to 2800 accumulated heat 

units.’’

The petition provides growing season 

temperature data from 2001 for four 

vineyards within the proposed 

expansion boundaries.

Vineyard 

Degree days

(accumulated

heat units) 

Le Carrefour ....................... 2,636 

Osley East .......................... 2,567 

Osley West ......................... 2,084 

Bloomfield ........................... 2,332 

The table above shows that the degree 

days for all four vineyards fall within 

the 2,000 to 2,800 accumulated heat 

units range of Winkler’s ‘‘coastal cool’’

climate. This evidence suggests that 

these vineyards have the same grapegrowing climate found within the 

established Russian River Valley 

viticultural area. 

Elevation 

The terrain within the Russian River 

Valley viticultural area’s proposed 

expansion ranges in elevation from 

about 70 feet to the east of Sebastopol, 

to around 800 feet in the expansion 

area’s west toward Occidental, as noted 

on USGS maps. These elevations, 

according to USGS maps of this portion 

of Sonoma County, are similar to those 

found within most of the established 

Russian River Valley viticultural area. 

Soils 

As indicated in the petition, there is 

a similar range and diversity of soils in 

the proposed expansion area and the 

originally established Russian River 

Valley viticultural area. This similarity 

is documented on the Sonoma County 

Soil Survey maps (USDA Conservation 

Service, U.S. Forest Service, and 

University of California Agricultural 

Experiment Station, undated) on survey 

sheets 65, 66, 73, 74, 80, 82, 88, 89, 96, 

and 97. 

The predominant soils within the 

proposed Russian River Valley 

viticultural area expansion the petition 

notes, are Huichica Loam, Yolo Clay 

Loam, and Yolo Silt Loam. These soils 

are depicted on sheet 74 of the Sonoma 

County Soil Survey. They are also found 

within the established Russian River 

Valley viticultural area in vineyards to 

the north of the proposed expansion 

area, as documented on pages 57 and 66 

of the soil survey. The 1983 Treasury 

Decision ATF–159 does not identify the 

predominant soils of the area. Nor does 

it indicate that the soils of the 

viticultural area are unique. 

Watershed 

According to the petition, the large 

Russian River watershed includes both 

the established Russian River Valley 

viticultural area and the proposed 

expansion area. The Russian River 

watershed, unit #18010110, is depicted 

on the State of California Hydrology 

map, 1978. It extends from Lake 

Mendocino south to Sonoma Mountain, 

and from Mt. St. Helena west to Jenner, 

where the river meets the coastline of 

the Pacific Ocean. The 1983 Treasury 

Decision, ATF–159 states that the 

Russian River Valley viticultural area 

‘‘includes those areas through which 

flow the Russian River or some of its 

tributaries.’’

Boundary Description 

The 30,200-acre proposed expansion 

of the Russian River Valley viticultural 

area includes land east and south of the 

area’s originally established boundary. 

The proposed expanded boundary 

deviates from the established boundary 

at a point east of Highway 101 along 

Mark West Springs Road. From that 

point, the proposed expanded boundary 

line, in a clockwise direction, goes 

south to Todd Road in Santa Rosa. It 

then meanders west, with a southward 

bulge south of Sebastopol that 

incorporates the crossroads hamlet of 

Knowles Corners. Passing north of the 

town of Bloomfield, the proposed 

expanded boundary continues 

northwest of Freestone, where it rejoins 

4800 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

the area’s established boundary. This 

expansion would increase the Russian 

River Valley viticultural area by about 

31 percent, from 96,000 acres to 126,200 

acres. 

For a detailed description of the 

Russian River Valley’s proposed 

expanded boundary, see the narrative 

boundary description the proposed 

regulatory text published below in this 

notice. 

Maps 

The petitioner(s) provided the 

required maps to document the 

proposed boundary, and we list them in 

the proposed regulatory text. 

Public Participation 

Comments Invited 

We invite comments from interested 

members of the public on whether we 

should expand the Russian River Valley 

viticultural area as described above. We 

are especially interested in comments 

concerning the similarity of the 

proposed expansion area to the 

currently existing Russian River Valley 

viticultural area. Please support your 

comments with specific information 

about the proposed expansion area’s 

name, proposed boundaries, or 

distinguishing features. 

Submitting Comments 

Please submit your comments by the 

closing date shown above in this notice. 

Your comments must include this 

notice number and your name and 

mailing address. Your comments must 

be legible and written in language 

acceptable for public disclosure. We do 

not acknowledge receipt of comments, 

and we consider all comments as 

originals. You may submit comments in 

one of five ways:

• Mail: You may send written 

comments to TTB at the address listed 

in the ADDRESSES section. 

• Facsimile: You may submit 

comments by facsimile transmission to 

202–927–8525. Faxed comments must—

(1) Be on 8.5- by 11-inch paper; 

(2) Contain a legible, written 

signature; and 

(3) Be no more than five pages long. 

This limitation assures electronic access 

to our equipment. We will not accept 

faxed comments that exceed five pages. 

• E-mail: You may e-mail comments 

to nprm@ttb.gov. Comments transmitted 

by electronic mail must—

(1) Contain your e-mail address; 

(2) Reference this notice number on 

the subject line; and 

(3) Be legible when printed on 8.5- by 

11-inch paper. 

• Online form: We provide a 

comment form with the online copy of 

this notice on our Web site at http://

www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm.

Select the ‘‘Send comments via e-mail’’

link under this notice number. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: To 

submit comments to us via the Federal 

e-rulemaking portal, visit http://

www.regulations.gov and follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

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, in light of all circumstances, 

whether to hold a public hearing. 

Confidentiality 

All submitted material is part of the 

public record and subject to disclosure. 

Do not enclose any material in your 

comments that you consider 

confidential or inappropriate for public 

disclosure. 

Public Disclosure 

You may view copies of this notice, 

the petition, the appropriate maps, and 

any comments we receive by 

appointment at the TTB Library at 1310 

G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. 

You may also obtain copies at 20 cents 

per 8.5- x 11-inch page. Contact our 

librarian at the above address or 

telephone 202–927–2400 to schedule an 

appointment or to request copies of 

comments. 

For your convenience, we will post 

this notice and any comments we 

receive on this proposal on the TTB 

Web site. We may omit voluminous 

attachments or material that we 

consider unsuitable for posting. In all 

cases, the full comment will be available 

in the TTB Library. To access the online 

copy of this notice, visit http://

www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm.

Select the ‘‘View Comments’’ link under 

this notice number to view the posted 

comments. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

We certify that this proposed 

regulation, if adopted, would not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The proposed regulation imposes no 

new reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

administrative requirement. Any benefit 

derived from the use of a viticultural 

area name would be the result of a 

proprietor’s efforts and consumer 

acceptance of wines from that area. 

Therefore, no regulatory flexibility 

analysis is required. 

Executive Order 12866 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action as defined by 

Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735. 

Therefore, it requires no regulatory 

assessment. 

Drafting Information 

N.A. Sutton of the Regulations and 

Procedures Division drafted this notice.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 

Wine.

Proposed Regulatory Amendment 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, we propose to amend title 27, 

chapter 1, 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—American Viticultural 

Areas 

2. Amend § 9.66 by revising 

paragraphs (b) and (c)(8) through (c)(14), 

redesignating paragraphs (c)(15) through 

(c)(26) as (c)(23) through (c)(34), and 

adding new paragraphs (c)(15) through 

(c)(22) to read as follows:

§ 9.66 Russian River Valley.

* * * * *

(b) Approved maps. The appropriate 

maps for determining the boundary of 

the Russian River Valley viticultural 

area are 11 United States Geological 

Survey (USGS) 1:24,000 Scale 

topographic maps. They are titled: 

(1) Healdsburg, California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1993; 

(2) Guerneville, California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1993; 

(3) Cazadero, California Quadrangle—

Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute Series, edition 

of 1978; 

(4) Duncans Mills California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1979; 

(5) Camp Meeker, California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1995; 

(6) Valley Ford, California 

Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series, edition 

of 1954; photorevised 1971; 

(7) Two Rock, California Quadrangle, 

7.5 Minute Series, edition of 1954; 

photorevised 1971; 

(8) Sebastopol, California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1954; photorevised 

1980; 

(9) Santa Rosa, California 

Quadrangle—Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute 

Series, edition of 1954; and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 19 / Monday, January 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 4801

(10) Mark West Springs, California 

Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series, edition 

of 1998, and

(11) Jimtown, California Quadrangle—

Sonoma Co., 7.5 Minute Series, edition 

of 1993. 

(c) Boundaries. ***

* * * * *

(8) Proceed southeast along the 

Bohemian Highway, crossing over the 

Camp Meeker map, to the town of 

Freestone, where the Highway intersects 

at BM 214 with an unnamed mediumduty road (known locally as Bodega 

Road, section 12, T6N, R10W, on the 

Valley Ford map). 

(9) Proceed 0.9 mile northeast on 

Bodega Road to its intersection, at BM 

486, with Jonvive Road to the north and 

an unnamed light duty road to the 

south, (known locally as Barnett Valley 

Road, T6N, R9W, on the Camp Meeker 

map). 

(10) Proceed 2.2 miles south, followed 

by east, on Barnett Valley Road, crossing 

over the Valley Ford map, to its 

intersection with Burnside Road in 

section 17, T6N, R9W, on the Two Rock 

map. 

(11) Proceed 3.3 miles southeast on 

Burnside Road to its intersection with 

an unnamed medium duty road at BM 

375, T6N, R9W, on the Two Rock map. 

(12) Proceed 0.6 mile straight 

southeast to an unnamed 610-foot 

elevation peak, 1.5 miles southwest of 

Canfield School, T6N, R9W, on the Two 

Rock map. 

(13) Proceed 0.75 mile straight eastsoutheast to an unnamed 641-foot 

elevation peak, 1.4 miles southsouthwest of Canfield School, T6N, 

R9W, on the Two Rock map. 

(14) Proceed 0.85 mile straight 

northeast to the intersection with an 

unnamed intermittent stream and 

Canfield Road; continue 0.3 mile 

straight in the same northeast line of 

direction to its intersection with the 

common boundary of Ranges 8 and 9, 

just west of an unnamed unimproved 

dirt road, T6N, on the Two Rock map. 

(15) Proceed 1.8 miles straight north 

along the common Range 8 and 9 

boundary line to its intersection with 

Blucher Creek, T6N, on the Two Rock 

map. 

(16) Proceed 1.25 miles generally 

northeast along Blucher Creek to its 

intersection with Highway 116, also 

known as Gravenstein Highway, in 

section 18, T6N, R8W, on the Two Rock 

map. 

(17) Proceed 0.2 mile straight 

southeast along Highway 116 to its 

intersection with an unnamed light duty 

road to the north in section 18, T6N, 

R8W, on the Two Rock map. 

(18) Proceed 0.1 mile straight 

northwest along the unnamed light duty 

road to its intersection with an 

unnamed medium-duty road to the east, 

(known as Todd Road in Section 18, 

T6N, R8W, on the Two Rock map). 

(19) Proceed 4.8 miles east, north, and 

east again along Todd Road, a mediumduty road, crossing over the Sebastopol 

map and then passing over U.S. 

Highway 101 and continuing straight 

east 0.1 mile to Todd Road’s 

intersection with Santa Rosa Avenue, a 

primary road that is generally parallel to 

U.S. Highway 101, in section 2, T6N, 

R8W, on the Santa Rosa map. 

(20) Proceed 5.8 miles generally north 

along Santa Rosa Avenue, which 

becomes Mendocino Avenue, to its 

intersection with an unnamed 

secondary road, known locally as 

Bicentennial Way, 0.3 mile northnorthwest of BM 161 on Mendocino 

Avenue, section 11, T7N, R8W, on the 

Santa Rosa map. 

(21) Proceed 2.5 miles straight north, 

crossing over the 906-foot elevation 

peak in section 35 of the Santa Rosa 

map, to its intersection with Mark West 

Springs Road and the meandering 280-

foot elevation in section 26, T8N, R8W, 

of the Mark West Springs map. 

(22) Proceed 4.8 miles northnorthwest along Mark West Springs 

Road, which becomes Porter Creek 

Road, to its intersection with Franz 

Valley Road, a light-duty road to the 

north of Porter Creek Road, in section 

12, T8N, R8W, on the Mark West 

Springs map.

* * * * *

Signed: January 24, 2005. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 05–1667 Filed 1–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 3 

RIN 2900–AK97 

Time Limit for Requests for De Novo

Review

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In a document published in 

the Federal Register at 67 FR 10866 on 

March 11, 2002, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) proposed to 

amend its adjudication regulations 

concerning the time a claimant has in 

which to request a de novo review of a 

decision at the Veterans Service Center 

level after filing a Notice of 

Disagreement. This document 

withdraws that proposed rule.

DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn 

as of January 31, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maya Ferrandino, Consultant, Policy 

and Regulations Staff, Compensation 

and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits 

Administration, 810 Vermont Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20420, telephone 

(202) 273–7232.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Currently, 

a claimant who disagrees with a 

decision by a Veterans Service Center 

may appeal that decision by filing a 

notice of disagreement (NOD). Under 38 

CFR 3.2600, a claimant who has filed a 

timely NOD may also obtain de novo

review of the decision of the Veterans 

Service Center by requesting such 

review with the NOD or within 60 days 

after the date that VA mails notice of the 

availability of de novo review. We 

proposed reducing that 60-day period to 

15 days. However, we have determined 

that revision of the de novo review 

process is unnecessary at this time. 

Therefore, we are withdrawing the 

proposal.

Approved: December 17, 2004. 

Anthony J. Principi, 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

[FR Doc. 05–1704 Filed 1–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 36 

RIN 2900–AK76 

Loan Guaranty: Prepurchase 

Counseling Requirements

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) published a proposed rule 

in the Federal Register on October 11, 

2001 (66 FR 51893) to amend its loan 

guaranty regulations that set forth 

underwriting standards for VA 

guaranteed loans. We had proposed to 

require first-time homebuyers to 

complete homeownership counseling 

and to add a compensating factor for 

certain veterans who do not fully meet 

VA’s underwriting standards. However, 

the proposed rule and comments have 

been superseded by recently-adopted 

requirements established by the 

Department of Defense mandating such 

counseling for all enlistees and by VA’s 

decision to provide a link to the 

Government National Mortgage