[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5397-5399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1874]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

27 CFR Part 9

[Notice No. 31; Re: ATF Notice Nos. 960 and 966; TTB Notice No. 6]
RIN: 1513-AA39


Proposed Red Hill Douglas County, OR Viticultural Area (2001R-
88P)

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau reopens the 
comment period for Notice No. 960, a notice of proposed rulemaking 
published in the Federal Register to add ``Red Hill (Oregon)'' as an 
approved American viticultural area. We are re-opening the comment 
period for 30 days to solicit comments on a new proposed name, ``Red 
Hill Douglas County, Oregon.'' The petitioner suggested the new name 
because the originally proposed name could be confused with similar 
names of other geographical areas and with brand names used on wines 
from those other areas.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 4, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to any of the following addresses:
    <bullet> Chief, Regulations and Procedures Division, Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 31, P.O. Box 14412, 
Washington, DC 20044-4412.
    <bullet> 202-927-8525 (facsimile).
    <bullet> <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#016f71736c417575632f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4f213f3d220f3b3b2d61282039">[email protected]</span></a> (e-mail).
    <bullet> http://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm. An online 
comment form is posted with this notice on our Web site.
    <bullet> http://www.regulations.gov (Federal e-rulemaking portal; 
follow instructions for submitting comments).
    You may view copies of this notice, the original petition, the 
appropriate maps, and any comments we receive about this notice 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 this notice and comments online at http://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/rules/index.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Sutton, Regulations and 
Procedures Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925 
Lakeville St., No. 158, Petaluma, California 94952; telephone (415) 
271-1254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On October 30, 2002, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 
the predecessor agency to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 
(TTB), published in the Federal Register as Notice No. 960 (67 FR 
66079) a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the establishment of 
the Red Hill (Oregon) viticultural area. The notice requested comments 
by December 30, 2002, from all interested persons.
    Notice No. 960 included a discussion of the name evidence for Red 
Hill. As noted in Notice No. 960, the Red Hill name has been used in 
Douglas County, Oregon, for over 100 years. Historically, the Applegate 
and the Scott families settled at the foot of Red Hill in the mid-19th 
century. By 1879, settlers established a school district in the Red 
Hill area, and built a schoolhouse on Red Hill Road (identified in the 
southeast corner of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Drain, 
Oregon, map in section 26, T23S/R5W. The school district operated until 
1943 when it merged with the Pleasant Valley District. ``Douglas County 
Schools, A History Outline,'' by Larry Moulton, October 2000, includes 
a hand-drawn map and directions to the ``Red Hill School Site.'' The 
Red Hill School now stands abandoned.
    The USGS Drain, Oregon, map labels ``Red Hill'' in sections 35, 26 
and 23, T23S/R5W. The map also identifies a light duty road meandering 
through the region as ``Red Hill Road.'' Interstate 5 signage at exit 
number 150 in northern Douglas County, Oregon, includes the ``Red 
Hill'' name and directional information to the area. The USGS 
Geographical Names Information System identifies ``Red Hill'' as an 
area in Douglas County, Oregon. Douglas County is located in southwest 
Oregon, as noted the Oregon-Washington American Automobile Association 
State Series map, published February 2003, and on page 92, ``Oregon,'' 
of the American Map 2002 Road Atlas.
    After publication of Notice No. 960, TTB twice re-opened the 
comment period for additional public comments on the entire petition. 
Notice No. 966 (68 FR 2262), published on January 16, 2003, requested 
comments by March 17, 2003. TTB Notice No. 6 (68 FR 20090), published 
on April 24, 2003, requested comments by May 27, 2004.
    In response to these notices, TTB received a total of 32 comments, 
with 16 supporting and 12 opposing the petition, 1 requesting an 
extension of the comment period, and 3 requesting a public hearing.

[[Page 5398]]

    Supporting commenters focused on the distinctive features of the 
proposed area and the locally known Red Hill name. Opposing commenters 
expressed concern about the potential name confusion with other 
geographical areas, the similarity of the proposed name to other wine 
brand names, and the geographical and climatic evidence submitted for 
the proposed area.
    After reviewing the comments, TTB suggested that the petitioner 
provide an alternative name for the proposed viticultural area because 
its originally proposed name could be confused with similar names of 
other geographical areas and with brand names used on wines from those 
other areas. The petitioner, after some consideration, withdrew the 
original ``Red Hill (Oregon)'' name and proposed in its place the name 
``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon.'' TTB believes the Red Hill Douglas 
County, Oregon name is appropriate for the area and will not create any 
confusion with other geographical areas or wine brand names that 
contain the words ``Red Hill.''
    Accordingly, we are reopening the comment period for Notice No. 960 
for the specific purpose of eliciting comments on the new name for the 
proposed viticultural area. We are also modifying the proposed part 9 
regulatory text by adding a second sentence to paragraph (a) to define 
the viticultural significance of the new proposed name. We explain the 
impact of the adoption of this viticultural area name and its relevance 
to this comment solicitation in more detail below.

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. If we establish this proposed viticultural area, its 
name, ``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon,'' will be recognized as a name 
of viticultural significance. Consequently, wine bottlers using ``Red 
Hill Douglas County, Oregon'' 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 viticultural area's 
name as an appellation of origin. On the other hand, we do not believe 
that any single part of the proposed viticultural name standing alone, 
such as ``Red Hill,'' would have viticultural significance if the new 
area is established. Accordingly, the proposed part 9 regulatory text 
set forth in this document specifies only the full ``Red Hill Douglas 
County, Oregon'' name as a term of viticultural significance for 
purposes of part 4 of the TTB regulations.
    For a wine to be eligible to use as an appellation of origin the 
name of a viticultural area specified in part 9 of the TTB regulations, 
at least 85 percent of the grapes used to make the wine must have been 
grown within the area represented by that name. If the wine is not 
eligible to use the viticultural area name as an appellation of origin 
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 viticultural area name 
appears in another reference on the label in a misleading manner, the 
bottler would have to obtain approval of a new label. Accordingly, if a 
new label or a previously approved label uses the name ``Red Hill 
Douglas County, Oregon'' for a wine that does not meet the 85 percent 
standard, the new label will not be approved, and the previously 
approved label will be subject to revocation, upon the effective date 
of the approval of the Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon viticultural 
area.
    Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing a 
viticultural area 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.

Changes to Proposed Boundary Description

    In addition to the name change discussed above, the proposed 
regulatory text set forth in this notice includes a redraft of the 
boundary description for the petitioned-for viticultural area. We took 
this action to ensure ease of understanding and to describe the 
boundary line in a clockwise rotation. The redrafted description makes 
no change to the location of the boundary as set forth in Notice No. 
960.

Public Participation

Comments Invited

    We invite comments from interested members of the public on the new 
proposed ``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon'' viticultural area name and 
on the redrafted boundary description. Please provide any available 
specific information in support of your comments. We will not consider 
comments on other aspects of Notice No. 960 that are not addresses in 
this notice.
    Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the 
proposed Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon viticultural area on brand 
labels that include the words ``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon'' as 
discussed above under ``Impact on Current Wine Labels,'' we are 
particularly interested in comments regarding whether there will be a 
conflict between the proposed area name and currently used brand names. 
If a commenter believes that a conflict will arise, the comment should 
describe the nature of that conflict, including any negative economic 
impact that approval of the proposed viticultural area will have on an 
existing viticultural enterprise. We are also interested in receiving 
suggestions for ways to avoid any conflicts, for example by adopting a 
modified or different name for the viticultural area.
    Although TTB believes that only the full name ``Red Hill Douglas 
County, Oregon'' should be considered to have viticultural significance 
upon establishment of the proposed new viticultural area, we also 
invite comments from those who believe that other parts of the name, 
standing alone, would have viticultural significance upon establishment 
of the area. Comments in this regard should include documentation or 
other information supporting the conclusion that use of a part of the 
name, standing alone, on a wine label could cause consumers and 
vintners to attribute to the wine in question the quality, reputation, 
or other characteristic of wine made from grapes grown in the proposed 
Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon viticultural area.

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.

Submitting Comments

    Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this 
notice. All comments must include this notice number and your name and 
mailing address. Your comment 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:
    <bullet> Mail: You may send written comments to TTB at the address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    <bullet> 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

[[Page 5399]]

    (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.
    <bullet> E-mail: You may e-mail comments to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e38d93918ea3979781cd848c95"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c8a6b8baa588bcbcaae6afa7be">[email protected]</span></a>. 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.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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.

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- by 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 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.

Drafting Information

    Nancy Sutton of the Regulations and Procedures Division, Alcohol 
and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, drafted this notice.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9

    Wine.

Proposed Regulatory Amendment

    Notice No. 960 was issued under the authority of 27 U.S.C. 205. For 
the reasons discussed in the preambles of Notice No. 960 and this 
notice, we propose to amend 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 Sec.  9.175 to read as follows:


Sec.  9.175  Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon.

    (a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this 
section is ``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon''. For purposes of part 4 
of this chapter, ``Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon'' is a term of 
viticultural significance.
    (b) Approved Maps. The appropriate maps for determining the 
boundary of the Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon viticultural area are 
three United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1:24,000 scale topographic 
maps. They are:
    (1) Sutherlin, OR (Provisional Edition 1988);
    (2) Scotts Valley, OR (Provisional Edition 1987); and
    (3) Yoncalla, OR (Provisional Edition 1987).
    (c) Boundary. The Red Hill Douglas County, Oregon viticultural area 
is located in Douglas County, Oregon, east of Interstate 5 near the 
hamlet of Rice Hill, between the villages of Yoncalla and Oakland.
    (1) Beginning on the Yoncalla map along the southern boundary of 
section 35, T23S/R5W, at the point where a pipeline crosses the T23S/
T24S township line, proceed due west 0.8 mile along the T23S/24S 
township line to its intersection with the 800-foot contour line just 
west of Pollock Creek in section 34, T23S/R5W (Yoncalla Quadrangle); 
then
    (2) Proceed southerly along the meandering 800-foot contour line, 
cross onto the Sutherlin map in section 10, T24S/R5W, and continue 
westerly along the 800-foot contour line to its first intersection with 
the eastern boundary of section 8, T24S/R5W (Sutherlin Quadrangle); 
then
    (3) Proceed northerly along the meandering 800-foot contour line, 
return to the Yoncalla map in section 9, T23S/R5W, and continue 
northerly along the 800-foot contour line to its intersection with the 
T23S/T24S township line very near the northwest corner of section 4, 
T24S/R5W (Yoncalla Quadrangle); then
    (4) Proceed northeasterly along the 800-foot contour line, cross 
Wilson Creek in the northern portion of section 23, T23S/R5W, pass onto 
the Scotts Valley map in section 14, T23S/R5W, and continue 
northeasterly along the 800-foot contour line to its intersection with 
the R4W/R5W range line, which at that point is also the eastern 
boundary of section 1, T23S/R5W (Scotts Valley Quadrangle); then
    (5) Proceed southwesterly along the 800-foot contour line, re-cross 
the R4W/R5W range line, and continue to the second intersection of the 
800-foot contour line and the pipeline in section 1, T23S/R5W, (Scotts 
Valley Quadrangle); then
    (6) Proceed 5.75 miles southwesterly along the pipeline, cross 
Wilson Creek in section 24, T23S/R5W, return to the Yoncalla map in 
section 26, T23S/R5W, and continue southwesterly along the pipeline to 
the point of beginning at the intersection of the pipeline and the 
T23S/T24S township line in section 35, T23S/R5W (Yoncalla Quadrangle).

    Signed: January 26, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-1874 Filed 2-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>