Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 72731 

extending the date for filing reply 

comments at the request of the Interstate 

Natural Gas Association. 

DATES: Reply comments are due on or 

before December 9, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Reply comments may be 

filed electronically via the eFiling link 

on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.ferc.gov. Commenters 

unable to file comments electronically 

must send an original and 14 copies of 

their comments to: Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. Refer to the 

Comment Procedures section of the 

preamble for additional information on 

how to file comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

R. Kroeger, Office of Market Oversight 

and Investigations, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

(202) 502–8177. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice of Extension of Time 

On November 29, 2005, the Interstate 

Natural Gas Association of America 

(INGAA) filed a motion for an extension 

of time to file reply comments in 

response to the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking issued October 

20, 2005, in the above-docketed 

proceeding. Procedures for Disposition 

of Contested Audit Matters, 113 FERC 

¶ 61,069 (2005). The motion states that 

because of the extensive and substantial 

initial comments that were filed in this 

proceeding, the intervening 

Thanksgiving holiday and the press of 

the significant Commission proceedings 

in which INGAA is participating, 

INGAA requires additional time to 

consult with its members and prepare 

well-developed and responsive reply 

comments. 

Upon consideration, notice is hereby 

given that an extension of time for filing 

reply comments in this proceeding is 

granted to and including December 9, 

2005, as requested by INGAA. 

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 05–23728 Filed 12–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Parts 4, 5, and 7 

[Notice No. 53] 

RIN 1513—AB16 

Use of the Word ‘‘Pure’’ or Its Variants 

on Labels or in Advertisements of 

Alcohol Beverage Products; Request 

for Public Comment 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau is considering 

amending the regulations concerning 

the use of the word ‘‘pure’’ on labels or 

in advertisements of alcohol beverage 

products. We wish to gather information 

by inviting comments from the public 

and industry as to whether the existing 

regulations should be revised. 

DATES: We must receive written 

comments on or before February 6, 

2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to 

any one of the following addresses: 

• Director, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 53, 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 advance 

notice and any comments we receive on 

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 the advance 

notice and comments online at http:// 

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

See Section VI of this notice for 

specific instructions and requirements 

for submitting comments and for 

information on how to request a public 

hearing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

M. Gesser, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 128, Morganza, 

MD 20660; (301) 290–1460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Authority to Prescribe Alcohol 

Beverage Labeling and Advertising 

Regulations 

Sections 105(e) and 105(f) of the 

Federal Alcohol Administration Act 

(FAA Act), codified in the United States 

Code at 27 U.S.C. 205(e) and 205(f), set 

forth standards for the regulation of the 

labeling and advertising of distilled 

spirits, wine (at least 7 percent alcohol 

by volume), and malt beverages, 

generally referred to as ‘‘alcohol 

beverage products’’ throughout this 

document. These sections give the 

Secretary of the Treasury the authority 

to issue regulations to prevent deception 

of the consumer, to provide the 

consumer with ‘‘adequate information’’

as to the identity and quality of the 

product, and to prohibit false or 

misleading statements on product labels 

and in advertisements. Additionally, 

these FAA Act provisions give the 

Secretary the authority to prohibit, 

irrespective of falsity, statements 

relating to age, manufacturing processes, 

analyses, guarantees, and scientific or 

irrelevant matters which are likely to 

mislead the consumer. In the case of 

malt beverages, the labeling and 

advertising provisions of the FAA Act 

apply only if the laws of the State into 

which the malt beverages are to be 

shipped impose similar requirements. 

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau (TTB) is responsible for 

the administration of the FAA Act and 

the regulations promulgated under it. 

The labeling and adverting regulations 

for wine, distilled spirits, and malt 

beverages are codified in title 27 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), parts 

4, 5, and 7, respectively. 

II. Current Regulatory Standards 

Sections 5.42(b)(5) and 5.65(a)(8) of 

the TTB regulations (27 CFR 5.42(b)(5) 

and 5.65(a)(8)), hereinafter referred to 

collectively as the ‘‘pure regulations,’’

currently state that the word ‘‘pure’’

may not be used on distilled spirits 

labels or in advertisements unless: 

• It refers to a particular ingredient 

used in the production of the distilled 

spirits, and is a truthful representation 

about the ingredient; or 

• It is part of the bona fide name of 

a permittee or retailer for whom the 

distilled spirits are bottled; or 

• It is part of the bona fide name of 

the permittee who bottled the distilled 

spirits. 

TTB considers variants of the word 

‘‘pure’’ such as ‘‘purest,’’ ‘‘purity,’’ and 

‘‘pureness’’ to fall within the purview of 

these regulations. These prohibitions 

apply only to distilled spirits. There are 

no similar prohibitions on the use of the 

72732 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

word ‘‘pure’’ in the labeling or 

advertising of wine or malt beverages. 

III. Regulatory History Concerning the 

Use of ‘‘Pure’’ on Distilled Spirits 

Labels and in Advertisements 

TTB and its predecessor agencies 

have had a regulation in force 

concerning the word ‘‘pure’’ since the 

1930s. The original regulation was first 

published on April 2, 1936 (1 FR 92), 

and provided that labels and 

advertisements of distilled spirits shall 

not contain the word ‘‘pure’’ except as 

part of the bona fide name of a permittee 

or a retailer for whom the distilled 

spirits are bottled. This regulation, as 

well as additional regulations governing 

the labeling and advertising of distilled 

spirits, was codified into 27 CFR part 5. 

On April 22, 1936, the Treasury 

Department published a notice of 

hearing with reference to proposed 

amendments to the distilled spirits 

regulations. Included among the 

proposed amendments were possible 

amendments to the regulations 

prohibiting the word ‘‘pure’’ on distilled 

spirits labels and in advertisements. On 

May 15, 1936, the Treasury Department 

conducted the hearings. During the 

hearings, Treasury’s Assistant General 

Counsel, John E. O’Neill, stated that the 

‘‘ordinary man’’ regarded the word 

‘‘pure’’ as denoting that the product is 

wholesome, free from adulterants, free 

from harmful ingredients, and not 

deleterious to a person’s health. O’Neill 

further argued that if a product were 

permitted to be called ‘‘pure’’

consumers would regard it as meeting 

that definition. Others testified against 

the prohibition of the word ‘‘pure’’ with 

respect to its use to describe certain 

types of whisky. One individual 

testified that while he was satisfied with 

the regulations prohibiting the word 

‘‘pure’’ on labels and in advertisements, 

he did not believe that the word ‘‘pure’’

described a healthful commodity. 

Rather, he believed the word ‘‘pure’’

would refer to whether the product had 

been adulterated with some other 

material. Another testified that to the 

average person the word ‘‘pure’’ denotes 

quality and that those seeking to use it 

have the desire to distinguish between 

the quality of one product over another. 

Upon the conclusion of the hearings 

concerning the regulations in part 5, the 

prohibition of the word ‘‘pure’’

remained unchanged. 

The prohibition of the word ‘‘pure’’

on distilled spirits labels and in 

advertisements was raised for 

reconsideration on November 21, 1978, 

when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 

and Firearms (ATF), TTB’s predecessor 

agency, published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking, Notice No. 313, in 

the Federal Register (43 FR 54266). The 

purpose of Notice No. 313 was to obtain 

input from industry members and the 

general public concerning the 

advertising provisions of the FAA Act, 

and it suggested specific topics within 

27 CFR parts 4, 5, and 7, which ATF 

was considering changing. Among these 

topics, ATF considered changing the 

total prohibition of the use of the term 

‘‘pure.’’ Of those that commented 

directly on the pure regulations, 

fourteen commenters were equally 

divided on whether to allow the term 

‘‘pure’’ to be used or not. Two other 

commenters favored its use on straight 

whiskeys only, while one commenter 

favored deleting the particular sections 

prohibiting its use (§ 5.42(b)(5) and 

§ 5.65(a)(8)) and, instead, prohibiting its 

use under false or misleading statements 

(§ 5.42(a)(1) and § 5.65(a)(1)). Three 

commenters stated that alcohol 

beverages were not pure, and that the 

use of the word ‘‘pure’’ as applied to 

alcohol beverages was misleading. 

Various regulatory definitions for 

‘‘pure’’ suggested by commenters were 

viewed by ATF as too broad or vague to 

be of any assistance. 

On December 19, 1980, ATF 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking, Notice No. 362 (45 FR 

83530), proposing to lift the total 

restriction against the use of the term 

‘‘pure,’’ among other proposals. The 

notice stated: 

Historically, the Bureau has prohibited the 

use of pure when it refers to a distilled spirits 

product. However, with current consumer 

awareness and understanding, the Bureau 

believes that its present restrictive position is 

unnecessary when such terms used are 

truthful and not misleading. Therefore, the 

Bureau is proposing to lift the total 

restriction against the use of the term ‘‘pure.’’

For example, the Bureau will allow its use 

when referring to the water used in 

producing the distilled spirits. However, the 

Bureau is particularly interested in 

comments on this issue. 

Sixteen commenters responded 

concerning this issue, with 12 

supporting ATF’s proposal. Two 

commenters who supported the use of 

‘‘pure’’ stated that it should refer to 

particular ingredients only, not the 

finished distilled spirits product. 

On August 8, 1984, ATF issued TD–

180 (49 FR 31667), which, among other 

changes, amended the distilled spirits 

labeling and advertising regulations to 

modify the pure regulation to reflect its 

present content. The language in the 

preamble to the regulatory amendments 

explains the reasoning for the relaxation 

of the prohibition of the word ‘‘pure:’’

ATF believes that when the word ‘‘pure’’

reflects a truthful statement about a 

particular ingredient, such as ‘‘pure water,’’

it should be allowed to be stated. However, 

the word ‘‘pure’’ may not be used to describe 

the finished product, such as ‘‘pure gin.’’

Therefore, ATF is amending the regulations 

to allow for such statements and claims on 

labels and in advertisements of distilled 

spirits. Further, the present use of ‘‘pure’’

when it is part of the bona fide name of a 

permittee or retailer for whom the distilled 

spirits are bottled is retained. One 

commenter suggested that the word ‘‘pure’’

should be allowed to appear in the name of 

the permittee who bottles the distilled spirits. 

ATF has no objection to this and is amending 

the regulation accordingly. 

IV. Recent Enforcement Activities and 

Challenges to the Pure Regulations 

After receiving a complaint 

concerning advertisements of distilled 

spirits products boasting purity claims, 

TTB undertook a project to identify and 

contact distilled spirits industry 

members that were using the word 

‘‘pure’’ or its variants in their 

advertising. TTB has found that the use 

of pure terminology in advertising (and 

in some labeling) appears to be confined 

exclusively to clear spirits such as 

vodka and gin. Within that sector, TTB 

has found that its use is widespread. 

TTB has sent letters stating the Bureau’s 

policy to over 20 different distilled 

spirits industry members regarding their 

website advertising of 26 different 

distilled spirits products. 

As a result of the letters, some 

industry members raised questions 

about the pure regulations as well as 

TTB’s policy that extends the 

regulations to include variants of the 

word ‘‘pure.’’ The following summarizes 

the principal arguments we received: 

• The plain language of the regulation 

at 27 CFR 5.65(a)(8) prohibits the use of 

the word ‘‘pure’’ only, and does not 

extend to variations on the word ‘‘pure’’

such as ‘‘purest’’ or ‘‘purity.’’ Other 

sections in the distilled spirits 

advertising regulations that prohibit 

certain words and variations of the 

prohibited words do so by using phrases 

such as ‘‘synonymous terms’’ or 

‘‘similar terms.’’ The lack of such terms 

in the pure regulation evidences the 

intent to limit the regulation to the word 

‘‘pure’’ only. 

• Certain vodkas are pure in the 

general sense of the term and therefore 

the statements are not misleading and 

are protected by the First Amendment to 

the U.S. Constitution. 

• Even though distilled spirits 

contain some impurities, other 

commodities, such as beer and wine, 

also contain impurities and TTB 

regulations do not prohibit use of the 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 72733 

term ‘‘pure’’ as it relates to those 

commodities. 

V. Request for Comments 

TTB is considering whether to amend 

the regulations concerning the use of the 

word ‘‘pure’’ or its variants in the 

labeling and advertising of alcohol 

beverage products. To assist TTB in 

identifying and implementing the best 

course of action, we wish to gather 

information by inviting comments from 

the public and industry as to how, if at 

all, the existing regulations should be 

amended. In addition to general 

comments on the issue, we are seeking 

comments on the following specific 

questions. 

A. What does the general public 

consider the word ‘‘pure’’ to mean when 

used on labels and in advertisements of 

alcohol beverage products? Does its use 

convey information to the consumer 

about the identity and quality of the 

product? Does its use convey 

information about the alcohol content of 

a product? 

B. TTB considers variants of the word 

‘‘pure’’ such as ‘‘pureness,’’ ‘‘purest,’’

and ‘‘purity’’ to fall within the purview 

of the pure regulations. Are these 

variants misleading and, if so, should 

TTB amend the regulations to prohibit 

their use? Should TTB limit the scope 

of the pure regulations to the word 

‘‘pure’’ only? 

C. Would the use of terms or claims 

such as ‘‘pure vodka,’’ ‘‘pure whisky,’’

‘‘vodka with exceptional purity’’ on 

distilled spirits labels and in 

advertisements mislead consumers? 

Would the use of similar terms or claims 

on wine and malt beverage products 

mislead consumers? 

D. Should TTB amend the pure 

regulations to allow the use of the word 

‘‘pure’’ and its variants on distilled 

spirits labels and in advertisements if 

the statements are truthful? How can 

TTB substantiate the truthfulness of 

such claims? How should pure be 

defined? 

E. Should TTB permit the use of the 

word ‘‘pure’’ or its variants on distilled 

spirits product labels and in 

advertisements if those products meet a 

certain standard? If so, what should that 

standard be? 

F. What would be the impact of 

allowing the use of these terms? 

G. Should TTB prohibit the use of the 

word ‘‘pure’’ and its variants on labels 

and in advertisements for malt 

beverages and wine products? Why or 

why not? 

VI. 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 advance 

notice, the petitions, 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 advance 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. 

VII. Drafting Information 

Lisa M. Gesser and Joanne C. Brady of 

the Regulations and Procedures Division 

drafted this advance notice. 

Signed: September 29, 2005. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

Approved: November 3, 2005. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 05–23680 Filed 12–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Notice No. 54] 

RIN 1513–AA89 

Proposed Establishment of Tracy Hills 

Viticultural Area (2003R–508P) 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau proposes to establish 

the 39,200-acre Tracy Hills viticultural 

area in San Joaquin and Stanislaus 

Counties, California, approximately 55 

miles east-southeast of San Francisco. 

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 addition to our regulations. 

DATES: We must receive written 

comments on or before February 6, 

2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to 

any of the following addresses: 

• Director, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 54, P.O. 

Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044–

4412. 

• 202–927–8525 (facsimile). 

• nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail).