Opinion ID: 399265
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Varietal Labeling

Text: 20 We sustain the Bureau's varietal labeling rule. 46 The word misleading is no more self-defining than the word adequate 47 -or, for that matter, other statutory terms such as unfair or deceptive 48 and false and deceptive, 49 which are to be given meaning, at least in the first instance, by agency interpretation. 50 To be sure, the District Court's reading of the governing statutory language 51 is logical, and one that many would accept, but that does not necessarily mean that the agency's construction is irrational. There is ample support in the record for the Bureau's conclusion that varietal percentage listings 21 would add little by way of useful information to the consumer. Comments and testimony indicated that percentage requirements might mislead the consumer to believe that the higher the varietal percentage, the better the wine. Additionally requiring a percentage statement for this item would logically result in percentage and definitional statements being required for all other labeling designations. This would produce an extremely cluttered label, cause cost problems, and be of uncertain assistance to consumers. The Bureau believes that there has been an insufficient showing of a misleading effect on the public to justify requiring all these percentages and definitions to appear on the label. 52 22 Instead, a public information program planned by the agency seemed adequate for the time being. 53 Indeed, the statutory language itself indicates that no simple test of truth can be used to determine what is misleading, for the Secretary is directed to prohibit irrespective of falsity ... statements ... likely to mislead the consumer. 54 23 In the end, then, the Bureau settled on 75 percent minimum varietal content as the best of the available alternatives. 55 It explained: 24 Varietal labeling provides a more informative labeling designation than des ignations such as Chablis, Burgundy, or simply red table wine. Requiring 100 percent varietal content for these wines would discourage the use of these designations and not necessarily improve the product. Some varieties grown under certain soil and climatic conditions and with certain viticultural practices may make excellent wines at the 100-percent varietal requirement. However, more often some blending with other varieties is necessary to arrive at the best product. The amount of blending will vary among different varieties and different harvests. Because of these factors we believe a certain amount of flexibility is necessary. 25 We have determined, however, that the 51-percent requirement is too low for most varieties, and permits so much blending that the finished product may bear little or no resemblance to the grape variety used to designate the wine. Based upon all available evidence we have concluded that the 75-percent requirement allows sufficient opportunity for blending while maintaining the identity of the grape. 56 26 We thus perceive the Bureau's varietal labeling regulation as the product of a reasoned and amply elucidated process. That a different result may also be plausible does not make the administrative outcome arbitrary or irrational. We could uphold the District Court's decision to set the regulation aside only were we to substitute our assessment for the agency's judgment. That we are not at liberty to do.