Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2008/08/20/E8-19327/proposed-expansions-of-the-russian-river-valley-and-northern-sonoma-viticultural-areas-2008r-031p
Timestamp: 2015-10-13 08:57:16
Document Index: 3776679

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9']

Federal Register | Proposed Expansions of the Russian River Valley and Northern Sonoma Viticultural Areas (2008R-031P)
Dates: We must receive written comments on or before October 20, 2008.
Comments Close: 10/20/2008
-49131 (9 pages)
Document Number: E8-19327
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/E8-19327 Related Topics
Expansion of the Russian River Valley American Viticultural Area 5 actions from August 20th, 2008 to December 2011
You may view copies of this notice, selected supporting materials, and any comments we receive about this proposal at http://www.regulations.gov within Docket No. TTB-2008-0009. A link to that docket is posted on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 90. You also may view copies of this notice, all related petitions, maps or other supporting materials, and any comments we receive about this proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. Please call 202-927-2400 to make an appointment.
Russian River Valley Expansion Petition Back to Top
The petitioner submits a letter in which the RRWA asks the California Department of Transportation to place a sign marking the southern boundary of the Russian River watershed at a point on northbound Highway 101 near the City of Cotati in Sonoma County, California. This point is on the southeastern boundary of the proposed expansion area. The petitioner notes that the State has installed the requested sign and a sign at another point on the southern boundary of the proposed expansion area. Also submitted with the petition is 2002 water assessment data published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This data includes the expansion area in its assessment of the Russian River watershed. Finally, the petitioner includes a Russian River Valley area tourism map that encompasses the proposed expansion area (see “Russian River Map,” (http://russianrivertravel.com/)).
The petitioner provides a report showing the effect of the fog on the climate of the current viticultural area and proposed expansion area (see “Sonoma County Climatic Zones,” Paul Vossen, University of California Cooperative Extension Service, Sonoma County, 1986 (http://cesonoma.ucdavis.edu/)). The report describes the fog as passing through the Petaluma Gap and into the expansion area, as follows:
Additionally, the petitioner provides an online article delineating the presence of fog in the proposed expansion area (“Fog Noir,” by Rod Smith, September/October 2005 at http://www.privateclubs.com/Archives/2005-sept-oct/wine_fog-noir.htm. The article describes satellite images of fog moving through the Russian River Valley, as follows:
The petitioner concedes that the “Sonoma County Climate Zones” report cited above would place most of the proposed expansion area and part of the 2005 expansion area within the “marine” zone, instead of the warmer coastal cool zone. However, the petitioner argues that at the time of the 2005 expansion, TTB recognized that more current information had superseded the information in the 1986 report. Further, the petitioner argues that climate information included in the petition and presented below shows that the proposed expansion area actually has a coastal cool climate.
Average Growing Season 1983-2005 Back to Top
Osley West
2005 expansion.
1983 establishment.
Osley East
The petitioner states that the table shows that all seven vineyards, including the Two Rock Ranch in the proposed expansion area, fall within the coastal cool climate range of 2,000 to 2,800 annual degree days. The petitioner notes the consistency of the degree day data for the 1983 establishment of the viticultural area, the 2005 expansion, and the current proposed expansion. The petitioner states that the degree day data in the table shows that the proposed expansion area has the same climate as the current Russian River Valley viticultural area. Further, the petitioner provides a raster map showing that annual average degree days in the proposed expansion area are within the same range as much of the existing viticultural area (see “Growing Degree Days” for Sonoma County (1951-80 average), published by the Spatial Climate Analysis Service, Oregon State University (http://www.ocs.oregonstate.edu/index.html)).
The petitioner discusses the similarities between the soils of the proposed expansion area and those of the current viticultural area based on a soil association map (see “Soil Survey of Sonoma County, California,” online, issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/)). The soils on the Merced Hills included in the proposed expansion area formed mainly in sandstone rocks of the underlying Wilson Grove formation. This formation is characterized by low lying, rolling hills beginning just south of the Russian River near Forestville, arching southeast through Sebastopol, and ending at Penngrove. It formed 3 to 5 million years ago under a shallow sea. According to the petitioner, the soils underlain by this formation are well suited to growing grapes in vineyards.
The sandy loam soils of the apple-growing region of Gold Ridge-Sebastopol form as a direct result of breakdown of Wilson Grove rock. The low ridge running from Forestville to Sebastopol and south to Cotati is the classic terroir of this association, now being recognized as prime land and climate for Pinot Noir and Chardonnay. (“Diverse Geology/Soils Impact Wine Quality,” by Terry Wright, Professor of Geology, Sonoma State University, Practical Winery Vineyard, September/October 2001, Vol. XXIII, No. 2.)
2003-6 Average Brix for Some Winegrapes Grown on Ranches in the Current Viticultural Area and the Proposed Viticultural Area Back to Top
* Located in the proposed viticultural area.
Two Rock*
Opposition to the Proposed Expansion Back to Top
Northern Sonoma Expansion Back to Top
TTB also proposes in this document a southern and southeastern expansion of the Northern Sonoma viticultural area boundary line to encompass all of the Russian River Valley viticultural area, including the currently proposed expansion of the Russian River Valley viticultural area, so that all of the Russian River Valley viticultural area would again fall within the Northern Sonoma viticultural area, as was the case prior to the 2005 expansion. The Northern Sonoma viticultural area would increase in size by 44,244 acres to 394,088 acres, or by 9 percent. The following information is provided in support of this proposed expansion.
TTB Determinations Back to Top
See the narrative boundary descriptions of the petitioned-for expansion of the Russian River Valley viticultural area and the TTB-proposed expansion of the Northern Sonoma viticultural area in the proposed § 9.66 and § 9.70 regulatory text amendments published at the end of this notice.
The petitioner provided the required map to document the proposed expansion of the Russian River Valley viticultural area, and we list it below in the proposed § 9.66 regulatory text amendment. TTB relied on maps provided for the 2005 expansion of the Russian River Valley viticultural area and the map provided by the petitioner for the current expansion to document the boundary description for the proposed expansion of the Northern Sonoma viticultural area. A revised and expanded list of maps is included in the proposed § 9.70 regulatory text amendment.
We invite comments from interested members of the public on whether we should expand the Russian River Valley viticultural area as described above. We specifically request comment on the similarity of the proposed expansion area to the current Russian River Valley viticultural area. In particular, we would like comments on the climate of the proposed Russian River Valley viticultural area expansion area as compared to that of the current viticultural area and on the placement of the boundary lines for the proposed expansion.
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the online comment form posted with this notice within Docket No. TTB-2008-0009 on “Regulations.gov,” the Federal e-rulemaking portal, at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available under Notice No. 90 on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files may be attached to comments submitted via Regulations.gov. For complete instructions on how to use Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on “User Guide” under “How to Use this Site.”
We will post, and you may view, copies of this notice, selected supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments we receive about this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2008-0009 on the Federal e-rulemaking portal, Regulations.gov, at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 90. You may also reach the relevant docket through the Regulations.gov search page at http://www.regulations.gov. For instructions on how to use Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on “User Guide” under “How to Use this Site.”
§ 9.66 Russian River Valley.
§ 9.70 Northern Sonoma.
(18) The boundary follows U.S. Route 101 north 4.25 miles to the point where Santa Rosa Avenue exits U.S. Route 101 to the east (approximately 0.5 mile north of the Wilfred Avenue overpass) T6N, R8W.