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). 

72734 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

• 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 

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 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 

requirements for submitting comments, 

and for information on how to request 

a public hearing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N. 

A. Sutton, Regulations and Rulings 

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 consumers with 

adequate information regarding product 

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, 

soils, elevation, and physical features, 

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. 

Tracy Hills Petition 

TTB has received a petition from Sara 

Schorske of Compliance Service of 

America, Inc., filed on behalf of the 

Brown family, owners of a vineyard 

near Tracy, California. The petitioner 

proposes to establish the 39,200-acre 

‘‘Tracy Hills’’ viticultural area south and 

southwest of the city of Tracy, 

California, in southern San Joaquin and 

northern Stanislaus Counties. Located 

approximately 55 miles east-southeast 

of San Francisco, the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area currently 

encompasses 1,005 acres of vineyards. 

The proposed area is not within, nor 

does it include, any other proposed or 

established viticultural area. The 

distinguishing climatic features of the 

proposed viticultural area, the petition 

states, include the area’s limited rainfall 

and consistent winds, along with its 

sparse fog, frost, and dew. 

Originally, the petitioner proposed 

the name ‘‘Mt. Oso’’ for this viticultural 

area. However, after a careful evaluation 

of the original petition, TTB concluded, 

and advised the petitioner, that the 

submitted evidence did not 

demonstrate, as required by section 

9.3(b)(1) of the TTB regulations, that the 

proposed viticultural area is locally or 

nationally known as Mt. Oso. In 

response, the petitioner amended the 

petition to propose use of the name 

‘‘Tracy Hills’’ for the proposed 

viticultural area. The petitioner also has 

revised the proposed viticultural area’s 

western boundary and submitted 

additional evidence to support the 

amended petition. We summarize below 

the information submitted in support of 

the petition. 

Name Evidence 

The petitioner states that the name 

‘‘Tracy,’’ which is used to identify the 

city of Tracy, California, and its 

surrounding agricultural land, together 

with the geographical modifier ‘‘Hills,’’

accurately describes and names the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area. 

Stating that the name ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ is 

‘‘locally and nationally associated with 

the proposed area,’’ the petition 

discusses the rationale for the Tracy 

Hills name and offers examples of its 

use for the land within the proposed 

viticultural area. 

The petition included copies of eight 

newspaper articles from the Tracy Press 

featuring petitioner Jeff Brown’s Mt. Oso 

Vineyards or wines made from its 

grapes. The articles list the vineyard’s 

location as Tracy, demonstrating, 

according to the petition, the close 

association between the proposed area’s 

vineyards and the ‘‘Tracy’’ name. 

However, the petition states that the 

use of ‘‘Tracy’’ alone for the proposed 

viticultural area does not accurately 

describe the area and would mislead 

consumers about the specific location of 

the area. The proposed viticultural area 

includes only a small part of the land 

within the Tracy city limits, and it does 

not include all the land surrounding the 

city of Tracy. Due to differences in 

climate, soil, water table levels, and 

slope, the land to the north, east, and 

southeast of Tracy is excluded from the 

proposed viticultural area. 

Therefore, the petitioner emphasizes 

that it would be misleading and 

inaccurate to name the proposed 

viticultural area ‘‘Tracy,’’ without the 

addition of the ‘‘Hills’’ modifier. In 

support of this usage, the petitioner 

cites the use of ‘‘Valley’’ as a modifier 

in the names of the Napa Valley 

viticultural area (27 CFR 9.23), which 

surrounds the city of Napa, and the 

Temecula Valley viticultural area (27 

CFR 9.50), which lies outside the city of 

Temecula in southern California. 

To further support the use of the 

proposed ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ name, the 

petitioner notes that the Coast Range 

foothills southwest of the city of Tracy, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 72735 

the lower elevations of which are 

included within the proposed 

viticultural area, are informally called 

‘‘the Tracy Hills,’’ and the petitioner 

provides examples of the name’s 

association with the proposed area. 

The petition states that ‘‘Tracy Hills’’

is the name of a large real estate 

development located on the southwest 

side of the city of Tracy along either 

side of Interstate Highway 580 (I–580). 

Part of the Tracy Hills development, the 

petition notes, is within the northern 

portion of the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area. In 1998, the city of 

Tracy annexed the development, 

according to a July 7, 2004, Stockton 

Record newspaper article, ‘‘Council 

Delays Tracy Hills Vote,’’ included in 

the revised petition. The revised 

petition also included copies of, or 

statements from, Federal government 

environmental reports from the early 

1990s, a 1999 Sierra Club newsletter, 

and newspaper articles from the 

Sacramento Bee and the Tracy Press that 

discuss the Tracy Hills real estate 

development and its location, growth, 

and impact on local water resources. 

In addition, the petition included 

evidence of other references to the Tracy 

Hills name. For example, the petition 

includes a map of the proposed 

Northern California Passenger Rail 

Network. This map shows a future highspeed rail line running through 

Altamont Pass and, east of the pass, a 

‘‘Tracy Hills’’ station within the Tracy 

Hills development. The petition also 

includes information about the ‘‘Tracy 

Hills Ride,’’ sponsored by the San 

Joaquin Valley Rangers horse 

enthusiasts club (www.sjvr.org). This 

horseback ride begins and ends within 

the proposed area along State Highway 

132 (Bird Road), according to club 

information included in the petition. A 

1995 NASCAR publication, the petition 

states, places the reopened Altamont 

Raceway ‘‘in the Tracy hills,’’ while a 

September 29, 2003, East Bay Business 

Times article titled ‘‘Sutter, Kaiser Build 

Up Valley Presence,’’ notes that a donor 

gave 20 acres ‘‘in the Tracy hills’’ for a 

hospital. 

Boundary Evidence 

Located south and southwest of the 

city of Tracy in southern San Joaquin 

and northern Stanislaus Counties, 

California, the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area largely lies between 

State Route 33 to the east and Interstate 

580 to the west, with a portion of the 

area reaching west of the Interstate into 

the foothills of the Diablo Mountains. 

The proposed area is about 15 miles 

long northwest to southeast, and about 

5 miles wide east to west. 

The portion of the Tracy Hills real 

estate development appropriate for 

viticulture, the petitioner explains, is 

included in the northern region of the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area. 

Other parts of the proposed viticultural 

area lie within the rural, San Joaquin 

Valley agricultural lands to the 

southwest and south of the city of 

Tracy, according to the provided USGS 

maps and the California State 

Automobile Association Central 

California map of May 2001. 

The boundary of the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area, according to the 

petitioner, encompasses viticultural 

features that distinguish the proposed 

area from the regions north, east and 

southeast of the city of Tracy. According 

to the petitioner, these distinguishing 

features include the proposed area’s 

microclimate, soils, and slope. 

The proposed Tracy Hills viticultural 

area, which is nestled between the 

lower elevations of the San Joaquin 

River valley floor to the east and the 

steeper terrain of the Diablo Range to 

the west, has east-sloping terrain, as 

shown on the provided USGS maps. 

The proposed viticultural area boundary 

encompasses a 400-foot change in 

elevation and includes streams and eastsloping alluvial fans and plains, 

according to the petitioner and the 

provided USGS maps. 

The petitioner notes that the 100-foot 

to 500-foot elevation within the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area is 

distinct from the surrounding areas. To 

the west of the proposed boundary line 

are the significantly higher elevations 

and steep terrain of the Diablo Range, as 

noted on USGS maps of the area. To the 

north and east are the nearly sea level 

flood plains of the San Joaquin River. 

The proposed southern boundary line, 

according to the petitioner, is the 

dividing point between two alluvial 

fans. 

The petitioner states that the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area 

soils are predominantly of alluvial 

origin from the higher Diablo Range 

elevations, beyond the proposed 

boundary. While similar to the soils 

found to the south, the petitioner 

explains that the alluvial soils of the 

proposed area are distinct from the 

mountainous sedimentary soils to the 

west, the organic peat soils to the north, 

and the heavy clay soils to the east. 

The petitioner also states that the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area 

has a distinctive microclimate, which 

contrasts with the climate found in the 

surrounding region. The proposed area, 

the petition states, is located within the 

rain shadow created by Mt. Oso, which 

is located to the proposed area’s 

southwest in the Diablo Mountains. 

This rain shadow effect gives the 

proposed viticultural area a drier 

climate with less fog, dew, frost, and 

hail. Beyond the proposed boundary to 

the west, north, and south, the 

distinctive differences in geography and 

proximity to the Altamont Pass create a 

wetter, windier climate, according to the 

petition. 

Distinguishing Features 

Topography 

The western portion of the proposed 

Tracy Hills viticultural area lies in the 

eastern foothills of the Diablo Range, 

while the remainder of the proposed 

area slopes to the east towards the lower 

elevations of the San Joaquin River 

valley, according to the provided USGS 

maps. This transitional terrain, between 

500 feet and 100 feet in elevation, 

creates a 400-foot drop within a 3 to 3.7 

mile west-to-east span, giving the 

proposed area a 2 percent to 2.5 percent 

slope, as noted in the petition. 

Three intermittent streams, Corral 

Hollow, Lone Tree, and Hospital Creeks, 

flow east through the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area, to the San 

Joaquin Valley flood plain, the 

petitioner explains. Flowing down from 

the higher Diablo Range elevations, 

these streams created the alluvial fans 

and deposits found within the proposed 

Tracy Hills viticultural area. 

Climate 

The petitioner emphasizes that the 

unique climate of the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area is its most 

distinctive characteristic. The sheltering 

effect of Mt. Oso and the Diablo Range, 

the marine winds coming through the 

Altamont Pass, and the cold air drainage 

from the higher mountain elevations, 

the petitioner explains, create a 

microclimate in the proposed Tracy 

Hills area with the lowest annual 

rainfall in the Tracy region. The 

petitioner adds that these climatic 

elements combine to produce a 

microclimate with less rain, fog, dew, 

and frost than the surrounding areas. 

Rainfall 

As noted above, the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area is located on the 

west side of the San Joaquin Valley area 

and, therefore, according to the 

petitioner, is in the rain shadow of Mt. 

Oso in the Diablo Range. This rain 

shadow creates an environment with 

less precipitation than the surrounding 

areas, the petitioner adds. Based on its 

proximity to the 3,347-foot sheltering 

Mt. Oso peak, the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area has 8 to 9 inches of 

72736 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

annual rain, the petitioner explains, 

which is the lowest in the region. 

According to the provided San Joaquin 

County Soil Survey map, the average 

annual precipitation, in inches, in the 

surrounding regions of San Joaquin 

County is at least 10 inches. Also, at the 

higher mountain elevations, about 9 

miles west of the proposed boundary 

line, the rainfall map shows about 18 

inches, or twice the rainfall of the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area. 

To the north, along the San Joaquin 

Valley floor, the precipitation increases 

correspond to the longer distances from 

the rain shadow, with Stockton at about 

13 inches of rain and Lodi at 16 inches 

of rain annually, according to the 

provided rainfall map. 

Temperature 

The temperatures found in the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area 

vary from the surrounding areas, 

according to the petitioner. A statistical 

table (compiled by Stan Grant of 

Progressive Viticulture, Turlock, 

California) shows the average annual 

heat accumulation at various weather 

stations in the greater Tracy region 

during the 1990s as measured in degree 

days. (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.) 

These 10-year averages reflect lower and 

upper threshold temperatures of 50 to 

115 degrees F, respectively. All mileages 

are according to California State 

Automobile Association’s Central 

California map of May 2001. 

1990–1999 DEGREE DAY AVERAGES

Weather station Degree days County 

Direction/ 

distance from 

the proposed 

Tracy Hills 

viticultural area 

Tracy-Carbona ....................................................................................................................... 4,033 San Joaquin ..... On site. 

Brentwood .............................................................................................................................. 3,776 Contra Costa .... West 23 miles. 

Manteca ................................................................................................................................. 3,726 San Joaquin ..... North 10 miles. 

Modesto ................................................................................................................................. 4,446 Stanislaus ......... East 14 miles. 

Newman ................................................................................................................................. 4,498 Stanislaus ......... South 22 miles. 

Brentwood is closer to the cooling 

maritime influences of San Francisco 

Bay and the Carquinez Strait, according 

to the petitioner, while Manteca is 

directly in the path of the cooling 

marine winds blowing through the 

Altamont Pass. The proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area is located a short 

distance south of Altamont Pass, while 

Modesto is about 25 miles south of the 

pass. Newman, the warmest region, is 

40 miles south of the pass and its 

cooling marine winds, the petitioner 

states. 

Wind 

The petitioner explains that the 

degree day measurement of heat 

accumulation referred to above does not 

indicate seasonal vine growth and 

development as accurately when fog, 

clouds, and a prevailing wind affect the 

proposed viticultural area. The 

significance of wind is noted in a 1943 

USDA Soil Survey of the Tracy area: 

Aside from the soil and moisture 

conditions, which have the most important 

bearing on crops that can be grown in this 

area, another factor that has a definite 

influence is wind. The wind during certain 

seasons is very strong, blowing from the 

northwest along the western side of the San 

Joaquin Valley. 

The constant wind of the Altamont 

Pass has a cooling effect on vineyards 

within the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area through evaporation of 

moisture on grapevine leaves, according 

to the petitioner. The earth-warmed 

marine air and winds of the Livermore 

Valley blow west-to-east through the 

Pass, into the San Joaquin Valley, and 

then south, passing directly over the 

proposed viticultural area, the petitioner 

explains. Also, the down-slope winds 

from the Diablo Range have a cooling 

climatic influence on the area’s 

agriculture. 

Frost and Fog 

The petitioner states that residents 

and workers in the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area have observed certain 

distinctive climatic characteristics 

within the area. Frost is ‘‘unknown,’’ the 

petitioner explains, although it occurs 

beyond the proposed viticultural area 

boundary. Ground fog forms to the 

south of the proposed Tracy Hills 

viticultural area and gradually extends 

north, according to the petitioner. If the 

fog does invade the proposed area at all, 

the petitioner notes that it is usually 

short-lived. 

Soil 

As noted in the soil maps submitted 

with the petition, the soils in the 

proposed Tracy Hills viticultural area 

are recent alluvial deposits from the 

intermittent streams flowing down from 

the upper elevations of the Diablo Range 

to the San Joaquin Valley floor. The 

geologic fans and fan terraces found 

along the Corral Hollow, Hospital and 

Lonetree Creeks meld into one vast 

alluvial plain, according to the San 

Joaquin County Soil Survey. 

The soils found on this alluvial plain 

are very deep, well-drained to 

moderately well-drained, and have 

water tables deeper than six feet. Silty 

and clay soils are found at the lower 

elevations of this alluvial plain, while at 

its higher elevations, soils are generally 

gravelly and the alluvial deposits are 

eroded with deep drainage cuts. The 

principal soils are listed in the table 

below. 

SOIL TYPES IN PROPOSED TRACY HILLS VITICULTURAL AREA

Soil type Location Elevation 

(in feet) 

Carbona clay loam ....................................................................... Uplifted, dissected terraces .......................................................... 500–130 

Zacharias gravelly clay loam ........................................................ Alluvial fans, low stream terraces ................................................ 300–50 

Stomar clay loam .......................................................................... Alluvial fans .................................................................................. 300–40 

El Solyo clay loam ........................................................................ Alluvial fans .................................................................................. 300–60 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 72737 

SOIL TYPES IN PROPOSED TRACY HILLS VITICULTURAL AREA—Continued 

Soil type Location Elevation 

(in feet) 

Vernalis clay loam ........................................................................ Alluvial fans .................................................................................. 300–25 

Vernalis-Zacharias complex ......................................................... Alluvial fans .................................................................................. 250–25 

Capay clay .................................................................................... Interfan basins .............................................................................. 200–30 

Capay clay, wet ............................................................................ Interfan basins .............................................................................. 140–25 

Beyond the boundary of the proposed 

Tracy Hills viticultural area, the soils 

and their origins differ, according to the 

petitioner. To the north are the lowelevation organic peat soils of the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. 

To the east, and generally below the 

100-foot elevation, are heavy clay soils 

with higher water tables created by 

irrigation and proximity to the San 

Joaquin River. To the south, the soils 

and terrain are similar to the proposed 

Tracy Hills viticultural area, with the 

proposed boundary line primarily 

defining the border between the alluvial 

fans of Hospital Creek, which is within 

the proposed viticultural area, and 

Ingram Creek, which is further to the 

south. To the west, and above the 500- 

foot elevation in the upper foothills of 

the Diablo Range, the soils are primarily 

gravelly, older alluvial deposits. Also to 

the west, the soils are rolling to very 

steep and situated on terrain of uplifted, 

dissected terraces and mountains, 

developed on bedrock. 

Boundary Description 

See the narrative boundary 

description of the petitioned-for 

viticultural area in the proposed 

regulatory text published at the end of 

this notice. 

Maps 

The petitioner provided the required 

maps, and we list them below in the 

proposed regulatory text. 

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, ‘‘Tracy Hills,’’ will be 

recognized as a name of viticultural 

significance. Consequently, wine 

bottlers using ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ 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 area name standing alone, 

such as ‘‘Tracy,’’ would have 

viticultural significance if the new 

viticultural area were to be established. 

Accordingly, the proposed part 9 

regulatory text set forth in this 

document specifies only the full ‘‘Tracy 

Hills’’ 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, and the wine 

must meet the other requirements of 27 

CFR 4.25(e)(3). 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 ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ 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 Tracy Hills 

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. 

Public Participation 

Comments Invited 

We invite comments from interested 

members of the public on whether we 

should establish the proposed 

viticultural area. We are also interested 

in receiving comments on the 

sufficiency and accuracy of the name, 

climatic, boundary, and other required 

information submitted in support of the 

petition. In particular, we are concerned 

about the adequacy of the petition’s 

name evidence. Accordingly, we are 

seeking information in this regard from 

persons familiar with the area as to 

whether the ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ name 

reasonably applies to the entire region 

encompassed within the boundary of 

the proposed viticultural area, and, if 

not, whether any suitable alternative 

names exist for the proposed area. 

Please provide any available specific 

information in support of your 

comments. 

Because of the potential impact of the 

establishment of the proposed Tracy 

Hills viticultural area on brand labels 

that include the words ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ as 

discussed above under Impact on 

Current Wine Labels, we also 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 ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ should be 

considered to have viticultural 

significance upon establishment of the 

proposed viticultural area, we also 

invite comments from those who believe 

that ‘‘Tracy’’ standing alone would have 

viticultural significance. Comments in 

this regard should include 

documentation or other information 

supporting the conclusion that use of 

‘‘Tracy’’ 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 Tracy Hills viticultural area. 

Submitting Comments 

Please submit your comments by the 

closing date shown above in the 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 regard all comments as 

originals. 

72738 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

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 by 

telephone at 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 and the submitted 

comments, 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 

Rulings 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 27 CFR, 

chapter 1, part 9, 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. 

2. Amend subpart C by adding 

§ 9.ll to read as follows: 

Subpart C—Approved American 

Viticultural Areas 

§ 9.ll Tracy Hills 

(a) Tracy Hills. The name of the 

viticultural area described in this 

section is ‘‘Tracy Hills’’. For purposes of 

part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘Tracy Hills’’ is 

a term of viticultural significance. 

(b) Approved Maps. The appropriate 

maps for determining the boundary of 

the Tracy Hills viticultural area are five 

United States Geological Survey 

1:24,000 scale topographic maps. They 

are titled: 

(1) Tracy, Calif., 1954, photorevised 

1981; 

(2) Vernalis, Calif., 1991; 

(3) Solyo, Calif., 1953, photorevised 

1971, photoinspected 1978; 

(4) Lone Tree Creek, Calif., 1955, 

photorevised 1971; and 

(5) Midway Calif., 1953, photorevised 

1980. 

(c) Boundary. The Tracy Hills 

viticultural area is located in 

southwestern San Joaquin County and 

northwestern Stanislaus County. The 

boundary of the Tracy Hills viticultural 

area is defined as follows—

(1) The point of beginning is on the 

Tracy map at the intersection of the 

Delta-Mendota Canal and Lammers 

Ferry Road, along the western boundary 

line of section 6, T3S/R5E. From that 

point, proceed 0.4 mile generally 

southeast along the Delta-Mendota 

Canal to its intersection with the 

Western Pacific railway line along the 

southern boundary line of section 6, 

T3S, R5E (Tracy map); then 

(2) Proceed 5.6 miles straight east 

along the Western Pacific railway line 

and then along Linne Road to the 

intersection of Linne Road and Lehman 

Road, along the northern boundary line 

of section 12, T3S, R5E (Vernalis map); 

then 

(3) Proceed 1.5 miles straight south 

and then east along Lehman Road to its 

intersection with Bird Road at the 

southeast corner of section 12, T3S, R5E 

(Vernalis map); then 

(4) Proceed 1 mile straight south along 

Bird Road to its intersection with 

Durham Ferry Road at the southeast 

corner of section 13, T3S, R5E (Vernalis 

map); then 

(5) Proceed 1.9 miles straight east 

along Durham Ferry Road to its 

intersection with State Highway 33 

along the northern boundary line of 

section 20, T3S, R6E (Vernalis map); 

then 

(6) Proceed 5.1 miles straight 

southeast along State Highway 33, 

passing the hamlet of Vernalis, to the 

highway’s intersection with McCracken 

Road along the eastern boundary of 

section 2, T4S, R6E (Solyo map); then 

(7) Proceed 3.4 miles straight south 

along McCracken Road to its 

intersection with Hamilton Road at the 

southeast corner of section 23, T4S, R6E 

(Solyo map); then 

(8) Proceed 2.4 miles straight west 

along the southern boundary lines of 

sections 23, 22 and 21, T4S, R6E, 

crossing the Delta-Mendota Canal and 

the California Aqueduct, to the junction 

of the southern boundary of section 21, 

the 500-foot elevation line, and the 

western-most transmission line, (Solyo 

map); then 

(9) Proceed 4.2 miles generally 

northwest along the meandering 500- 

foot elevation line to section 18, T4S, 

R6E, where the 500-foot elevation line 

crosses all of the transmission lines and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 72739 

then continues northwest a short 

distance to the eastern-most 

transmission line in the northwest 

quadrant of section 18, T4S, R6E, (Solyo 

map); then 

(10) Proceed 8.45 miles straight 

northwest along the eastern-most 

transmission line, crossing from the 

Solyo map, over the Lone Tree Creek 

map, to the Tracy map, and continue to 

the transmission line’s intersection with 

the western boundary of section 19, 

T3S, R5W, about 0.7 mile northnortheast of Black Butte (Tracy map); 

then 

(11) Proceed in a straight line 2 miles 

northwest to the line’s intersection with 

the 500-foot elevation line, immediately 

north of an unimproved road, at about 

the mid-point of the western boundary 

line of section 12, T3S, R4E (Tracy 

map); then 

(12) Proceed 0.65 mile straight north 

along with western boundaries of 

section 12 and section 3 to the section 

line’s intersection with Interstate 580, 

section 3, T3S, R4E (Tracy map); then 

(13) Proceed 0.8 mile straight 

northwest along Interstate 580 highway 

to its intersection with the Western 

Pacific railway in section 2, T3S, R4E 

(Midway map); then 

(14) Proceed easterly 0.7 mile along 

the Western Pacific railway to its 

intersection with the eastern boundary 

line of section 2, T3S, R4E (Tracy map); 

and 

(15) Proceed east for 1 mile in a 

straight line, returning to the point of 

beginning at the intersection of DeltaMendota Canal and Lammers Ferry 

Road (Tracy map). 

Signed: November 3, 2005. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 05–23681 Filed 12–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

31 CFR Part 1 

Privacy Act; Proposed Implementation 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 

as amended, the Department of the 

Treasury gives notice of a proposed 

amendment to this part to exempt a new 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) system of 

records entitled ‘‘IRS 50.222 Tax 

Exempt/Government Entities (TE/GE) 

Case Management Records’’ from certain 

provisions of the Privacy Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received no 

later than January 6, 2006. You may also 

submit comments through the Federal 

rulemaking portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov (follow the 

instructions for submitting comments). 

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments to 

the Office of Governmental Liaison and 

Disclosure, 1111 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20224. Comments 

will be made available for inspection at 

the IRS Freedom of Information Reading 

Room (Room 1621), at the above 

address. The telephone number for the 

Reading Room is (202) 622–5164. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Telephonic inquiries should be directed 

to Marianne Davis, Program Analyst, 

Internal Revenue Service, Tax Exempt/ 

Government Entities Division (TE/GE), 

at telephone number (949) 389–4304. 

Written inquiries should be directed to 

Robert Brenneman, TE/GE Reporting 

and Electronic Examination System 

(TREES) Project Manager, at Internal 

Revenue Service, TE/GE Business 

Systems Planning (SE:T:BSP), 1111 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Attn: PE–

6M4, Washington, DC 20224. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 5 

U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), the head of an agency 

may promulgate rules to exempt a 

system of records from certain 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a if the system 

contains investigatory material 

compiled for law enforcement purposes. 

The IRS is hereby giving notice of a 

proposed rule to exempt ‘‘IRS 50.222 

Tax Exempt/Government Entities (TE/ 

GE) Case Management Records’’ from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 

1974, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). 

The proposed exemption is from 

provisions 552a(c)(3), (d) (1), (2), (3) and 

(4), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), 

and (f) because the system contains 

investigatory material compiled for law 

enforcement purposes. A proposed 

notice to establish the Privacy Act 

system of records will be published 

separately in the Federal Register. 

The following are the reasons why 

this system of records maintained by the 

IRS is exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(2) of the Privacy Act of 1974: 

(1) 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3). These 

provisions of the Privacy Act provide 

for the release of the disclosure 

accounting required by 5 U.S.C. 

552a(c)(1) and (2) to the individual 

named in the record at his/her request. 

The reasons for exempting this system 

of records from the foregoing provisions 

are: 

(i) The release of disclosure 

accounting would put the tax exempt or 

government entity subject to 

investigation, or individuals connected 

with those entities, on notice that an 

investigation exists and that such 

person is the subject of that 

investigation. 

(ii) Such release would provide the 

tax exempt or government entity subject 

to investigation, or individuals 

connected with those entities, with an 

accurate accounting of the date, nature, 

and purpose of each disclosure and the 

name and address of the person or 

agency to which disclosure was made. 

The release of such information to the 

individual covered by the system would 

provide the individual or entity subject 

to investigation with significant 

information concerning the nature of the 

investigation and could result in the 

altering or destruction of documentary 

evidence, the improper influencing of 

witnesses, and other activities that 

could impede or compromise the 

investigation. In the case of a delinquent 

account, such release might enable the 

subject of the investigation to dissipate 

assets before levy. 

(iii) Release to the individual of the 

disclosure accounting would alert the 

individual as to which agencies were 

investigating the tax exempt or 

government entity subject to 

investigation, would provide 

information concerning the scope of the 

investigation, and could aid the 

individual in impeding or 

compromising investigations by those 

agencies. 

(2) 5 U.S.C. 552a (d) (1), (2), (3) and 

(4), (e) (4) (G), (e) (4) (H), and (f). These 

provisions of the Privacy Act relate to 

an individual’s right to be notified of: 

The existence of records pertaining to 

such individual; requirements for 

identifying an individual who requested 

access to records; the agency procedures 

relating to access to records; the content 

of the information contained in such 

records; and the civil remedies available 

to the individual in the event of adverse 

determinations by an agency concerning 

access to or amendment of information 

contained in record systems. 

The reasons for exempting this system 

of records from the foregoing provisions 

are as follows: 

Notifying an individual (at the 

individual’s request) of the existence of 

an investigative file pertaining to such 

individual or granting access to an 

investigative file pertaining to such 

individual could: Interfere with 

investigative and enforcement 

proceedings; deprive co-defendants of a 

right to a fair trial or an impartial 

adjudication; constitute an unwarranted 

invasion of the personal privacy of 

others; disclose the identity of 

confidential sources and reveal 

confidential information supplied by