81 FR 86980 - Proposed Establishment of the Dahlonega Plateau Viticultural Area
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 232 (December 2, 2016)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 232 (December 2, 2016)
| Page Range | 86980-86987 | |
| FR Document | 2016-28839 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 86980-86987] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-28839] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 27 CFR Part 9 [Docket No. TTB-2016-0012; Notice No. 166] RIN 1513-AC33 Proposed Establishment of the Dahlonega Plateau Viticultural Area AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to [[Page 86981]] establish the 133-square mile ``Dahlonega Plateau'' viticultural area in portions of Lumpkin and White Counties, Georgia. The proposed viticultural area does not lie within or contain any established viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase. TTB invites comments on this proposed addition to its regulations. DATES: Comments must be received by January 31, 2017. ADDRESSES: Please send your comments on this notice to one of the following addresses:Internet: http://www.regulations.gov (via the online comment form for this notice as posted within Docket No. TTB-2016-0012 at ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal); U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; or Hand delivery/courier in lieu of mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. 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 or view or obtain copies of the petition and supporting materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G St. NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background on Viticultural Areas TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary has delegated various authorities through Treasury Department Order 120-01, dated December 10, 2013, (superseding Treasury Order 120-01, dated January 24, 2003), to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions and duties in the administration and enforcement of these provisions. Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate 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) sets forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and lists the approved AVAs. 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 having distinguishing features, as described in part 9 of the regulations, and a name and a delineated boundary, as established 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 the wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of an AVA 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 (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and provides that any interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes the standards for petitions for the establishment or modification of AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA must include the following: Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is nationally or locally known by the viticultural area name specified in the petition; An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of the proposed AVA; A narrative description of the features of the proposed AVA affecting viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed boundary; The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA boundary based on USGS map markings. Dahlonega Plateau Petition TTB received a petition from Amy Booker, President of the Dahlonega-Lumpkin Chamber & Visitors Bureau, on behalf of local vineyard and winery owners, proposing to establish the ``Dahlonega Plateau'' AVA. The proposed AVA is located in portions of Lumpkin and White Counties, in Georgia. The proposed AVA encompasses approximately 133 square miles. Seven wineries and 8 commercial vineyards covering a total of approximately 110 acres are distributed throughout the proposed AVA. The petition notes that there are an additional 12 acres of vineyards planned for planting within the proposed AVA in the next few years. According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA are its topography and climate. Unless otherwise noted, all information and data pertaining to the proposed AVA contained in this document are from the petition for the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and its supporting exhibits. Name Evidence The proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA derives its name from a long, narrow, northeast-southwest trending plateau in the northern foothills of the Georgia Piedmont known as the Dahlonega Plateau. The plateau covers most of Lumpkin, Dawson, White, Pickens, and Cherokee Counties. However, the proposed AVA is limited to the northeastern portion of the plateau, in Lumpkin and White Counties, due to a lack of viticulture in the southwestern region of the plateau, as well topographical and climatic differences. The town of Dahlonega, which is located within the proposed AVA, derived its name from the Cherokee word ``dalonige,'' which means ``yellow'' or ``golden,'' due to the presence of gold in the region. The town was named in 1837, and the geological feature derives its name, in part, from the name of the town. The petition states that the first written reference to the plateau was in a 1911 scientific paper by geologist L.C. Glenn, who [[Page 86982]] noted, ``In the Chestatee basin about [the town of] Dahlonega the upland is an old, well-dissected plateau * * *.'' \1\ The petition lists several other professional papers and books, both historical and contemporary, which describe a geological feature known as the ``Dahlonega Plateau.'' These sources are listed in the ``References'' section of the petition. Additionally, an excerpt from a contemporary travel guide describes the region of the proposed AVA as follows: ``In the northeastern section of the Piedmont lies the Dahlonega Plateau, a deeply eroded region of steep, forested hills and narrow valleys * * *.'' \2\ An online travel site states, ``A broad, high plain shadowed by some of Georgia's highest mountains, the Dahlonega Plateau offers near perfect growing conditions [for wine grapes].'' \3\ Finally, the petition includes a 1976 map of the physiographic regions of Georgia, from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, which includes a region titled ``Dahlonega Uplands/Dahlonega Plateau.'' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Glenn, L.C., 1911, Denudation and Erosion in the Southern Appalachian Region and in the Monongahela Basin: U.S. Geological Survey, Prof. Paper 72. \2\ Howard, Blair. Georgia Travel Adventures. West Palm Beach, FL: Hunter Publishing, Inc., 2011. \3\ http://www.offbeattravel.com/dahlonega-georgia.html. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Boundary Evidence The northern and northeastern boundaries of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA follow the 1,800-foot elevation contour and separate the proposed AVA from the higher, steeper slopes of the Blue Ridge Mountains. The proposed eastern and southeastern boundaries follow a series of straight lines drawn between roads and elevation points marked on the USGS maps which separate the proposed AVA from the physiographic features known as the Hightower Ridges and the Central Uplands. The proposed southwestern and western boundaries also follow a series of straight lines drawn between roads and elevation points on the USGS maps in order to separate the proposed AVA from the southwestern portion of the plateau, which has a different topography and climate. Distinguishing Features The distinguishing features of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA are its topography and climate. Topography The topography of the proposed AVA is characterized by broad, rounded hilltops separated by wide valleys. According to the petition, the distinctive topography is due to the underlying geology of the proposed AVA, which is comprised of layers of rocks that weather uniformly and are moderately resistant to erosion. Over time, wind and water have gradually worn down the underlying rocks and formed a gently rolling landscape with moderate elevations that are lower than the elevations to the north and east and higher than the elevations to the south and west. By contrast, the geology of Blue Ridge Mountains to the north and northeast of the proposed AVA is comprised of rocks that are structurally higher and more erosion-resistant than those of the proposed AVA. Because the rocks do not erode as easily, the Blue Ridge Mountains generally have higher elevations than are found within the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA. Additionally, the peaks within the Blue Ridge Mountains are more rugged and the slopes are steeper because the surfaces have not been as softened or rounded by erosion as the hilltops of the proposed AVA. To the immediate east and southeast of the proposed AVA are the Hightower Ridges. The geology of these ridges is characterized by strongly-layered, alternating zones of weak rocks and more resistant rocks. These alternating zones have a strong northeast-southwest orientation. Because these layers erode at different rates, the resulting topography has a ``washboard'' appearance, with steep, parallel ridges (formed from the more resistant layers) separated by narrow valleys (formed from the less resistant layers). Compared to the proposed AVA, the valleys generally have lower minimum elevations and the ridges generally have higher maximum elevations. Farther south and running parallel to the Hightower Ridges is the Central Uplands region. The topography of this region is similar to that of the proposed AVA, with broad valleys and rolling hills, but with a wider range of elevations. To the west and southwest of the proposed AVA, in the southwestern portion of the geological feature known as the Dahlonega Plateau, the underlying geology is comprised of rocks that are less erosion- resistant and structurally lower than the rocks in the northeastern portion of the plateau, which are within the proposed AVA. Because the rocks are more susceptible to erosion, the topography of the southwestern portion of the plateau is generally flatter and lower than within the proposed AVA. The following table shows the minimum, maximum, and mean elevations for the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and the surrounding areas, which were described in the petition.\4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Figure 7 of the petition shows the location of the comparison regions in relation to the proposed AVA. Table 1--Elevations \5\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elevations (in feet) Region (direction) ----------------------------------------------- Minimum Maximum Mean ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed AVA.................................................... 1,141.7 2,345.8 1,554.2 Blue Ridge Mountains (north).................................... 1,651.7 4,460.2 2,455.4 Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast)................................ 1,441.1 4,418.8 2,449.6 Hightower Ridges (east)......................................... 1,317.1 2,386.4 1,565.2 Central Uplands (east).......................................... 1,088.2 3,164.5 1,446.5 Hightower Ridges (southeast).................................... 1,053.3 2,180.8 1,315.0 Central Uplands (southeast)..................................... 1,069.5 2,584.4 1,256.8 Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau (west)........................... 858.6 2,033.2 1,386.3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The topography of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and the surrounding regions has an effect on viticulture. Because the hills within the proposed AVA are gently sloped and have moderate elevations, the floors of [[Page 86983]] the intervening valleys are not highly shadowed and receive adequate sunlight for vineyards. The hillsides within the proposed AVA are also suitable for vineyards because they are not so steep as to make mechanical cultivation difficult or dangerous. The petition also states that the proposed AVA's location between higher and lower elevations allows cool nighttime air draining from the higher elevations of the Blue Ridge Mountains to flow through the proposed AVA and into the lower elevations to the south and west. As a result, vineyards within the proposed AVA benefit from cool nighttime temperatures but do not have a high risk of frost because the cool air does not settle. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ This information is also presented as a map in Figure 8 of the petition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- By contrast, the petition states that the topography of the regions surrounding the proposed AVA is less suitable for vineyards. Within the Blue Ridge Mountains and Hightower Ridges to the north, east, and southeast of the proposed AVA, the narrow valleys are often shadowed by the surrounding steep, high slopes, meaning less light would reach any vineyard planted on the valley floors. The steepness of the slopes would also make mechanical cultivation of any vineyard planted on the sides of the mountains impractical. In the lower elevations of the regions to the south and west of the proposed AVA, cool air draining from higher elevations eventually settles and pools and would increase the risk of frost damage in any vineyard planted there. Climate Topography, and more specifically elevation, also affects the climate of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and the surrounding regions. The petition included information on the length of the growing season, growing degree day accumulations, and precipitation amounts within the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions. According to the petition, the proposed AVA's location between higher elevations to the north, east, and southeast and lower elevations to the southwest and west create climatic conditions that are ideal for growing grape varietals such as Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay, and Merlot. Length of Growing Season: The petition states that the length of the growing season within the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA provides ample time for most Vitis vinifera (V. vinifera) varietals of grapes to ripen. The petition included the average minimum, maximum, and mean length of the growing season within the proposed AVA and the surrounding areas. Because the growing season length within a given region may fluctuate based on the range of elevations within that region, the petition also listed the percentage of terrain within each region that is within a given range of growing season length. The growing season data is shown in the following tables. Table 2--Length of Growing Season (Days) 1981-2010 \6\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Region (direction) Minimum Maximum Mean ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed AVA.................................................... 167 209 195 Blue Ridge Mountains (north).................................... 94 192 164 Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast)................................ 95 199 164 Hightower Ridges (east)......................................... 166 203 195 Central Uplands (east).......................................... 139 211 199 Hightower Ridges (southeast).................................... 173 212 203 Central Uplands (southeast)..................................... 159 211 205 Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau (west)........................... 178 219 201 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 3--Percentage of Terrain Within Given Range of Growing Season Length \7\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Growing season length Region (direction) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <160 days 160-170 days 170-180 days 180-190 days 190-200 days >200 days -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed AVA............................................ .............. 0.02 0.33 19.40 60.82 19.43 Blue Ridge Mountains (north)............................ 39.86 21.45 23.96 14.69 0.04 .............. Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast)........................ 44.04 16.90 14.32 16.39 8.35 .............. Hightower Ridges (east)................................. .............. 0.05 1.00 11.79 76.50 10.66 Central Uplands (east).................................. 0.25 0.40 1.07 5.02 44.62 48.63 Hightower Ridges (southeast)............................ .............. .............. 0.04 0.45 22.91 76.60 Central Uplands (southeast)............................. .............. 0.07 0.49 1.40 9.84 88.19 Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau (west)................... .............. .............. 0.01 6.80 42.74 50.45 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The data in Table 2 shows that the mean growing season length is shorter in regions with high elevations and longer in regions with lower elevations. The proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA, with its moderate elevations, has a mean growing season length that is longer than the regions to the north and northeast, which have higher elevations, and is shorter than the regions to the south and west, which have lower elevations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Growing season length calculated using 1981-2010 climate normals. Locations of weather stations are shown in Figure 15 of the petition. ``Growing season'' is defined as the number of days between the last 28 degree F day of the spring and the first occurrence of that temperature in the fall. Plant tissue freezes at 28 degrees F. This information is also presented as a map in Figure 17 of the petition. \7\ This information is also presented as a map in Figure 17 of the petition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 3 shows that over 60 percent of the terrain within the proposed AVA has a growing season length of 190 to 200 days, which is a higher percentage of terrain with that length of a growing season than any of the surrounding regions except the Hightower Ridges region to the east. The petition states that guidelines for selecting vineyard sites based on growing season lengths, published by the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Cornell University in conjunction with the Institute for the Application of Geospatial Technology,\8\ do not recommend planting vineyards in regions with growing seasons shorter [[Page 86984]] than 160 days because most grape varietals will not have time to ripen fully. Sites with growing seasons of between 180 and 190 days are described as ``good,'' while sites with growing seasons between 190 and 200 days are ``not limited by growing season.'' Sites with growing seasons of over 200 days are considered suitable for growing varietals that need a long time to mature. Based on this guidance, vineyard owners can plant many different grape varietals in the majority of the proposed AVA without the fear of having too short of a growing season for the grapes to ripen. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ http://arcserver2.iagt.org/vll/downloads/BasicSiteEvaluation-2015.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Growing Degree Days: The petition notes that although growing season length is important because it reflects the number of frost-free days, the temperatures that are reached during that frost-free period are just as important to viticulture. The petition states that grape vines do not grow and fruit does not mature when temperatures are below 50 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Therefore, a region that has a 180-day frost-free growing season would still be unsuitable for viticulture if temperatures seldom or never rise above 50 degrees F. Growing degree day (GDD) accumulations are a way of describing the frequency that temperatures within a region exceed 50 degrees F during the growing season.\9\ The Winkler zone scale ranges from the very cool Zone I, for regions accumulating 2,500 or fewer GDDs in a growing season, to the very warm Zone V, for regions accumulating over 4,000 GDDs. The petition included the information in the following table which shows the percentage of the proposed AVA and the surrounding areas that can be categorized into each of the five Winkler zones.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ In the Winkler climate classification system, annual heat accumulation during the growing season, measured in annual GDDs, defines climatic regions. One GDD accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit that a day's mean temperature is above 50 degrees F, the minimum temperature required for grapevine growth. See Albert J. Winkler, General Viticulture (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), pages 61-64. \10\ The growing degree day data for the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions was calculated using the PRISM Climate Group's 1981-2010 climate normals. The Parameter Elevation Regression on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM) climate data mapping system combined climate normals gathered from weather stations, along with other factors such as elevation, longitude, slope angles, and solar aspect to estimate the general climate patterns for the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions. Climate normals are only calculated every 10 years, using 30 years of data, and at the time the petition was submitted, the most recent climate normals available were from the period of 1981-2010. (PRISM Climate Group, Oregon State University, http://prism.oregonstate.edu, created 4 February 2004). Table 4--Percentage of Terrain Within Each Winkler Zone \11\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Region (direction) Zone I Zone II Zone III Zone IV Zone V ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cooler to warmer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed AVA.................... .............. .............. 0.16 98.84 .............. Blue Ridge Mountains (north).... .............. 0.76 90.91 8.33 .............. Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast) 0.20 5.83 83.94 10.03 .............. Hightower Ridges (east)......... .............. .............. 9.02 90.98 .............. Central Uplands (east).......... .............. .............. 2.35 97.65 .............. South: Hightower Ridges (southeast) .............. .............. 0.05 90.12 9.83 Central Uplands (southeast). .............. .............. 0.50 41.46 58.04 Southwestern Dahlonega .............. .............. .............. 68.39 31.61 Plateau (west)............. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The data in the table shows that all of the terrain within the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA is classified in the intermediate ranges of the Winkler scale (Zones III and IV). The proposed AVA has a higher percentage of terrain within Zone IV than any of the surrounding regions and lacks any terrain in the very cool Zone I, the cool Zone II, or the very warm Zone V. According to the petition, regions classified as Zones III or IV, such as the proposed AVA, are suitable for growing a diverse range of late-ripening varietals of V. vinifera, including Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot. Regions that are categorized as Zones I and II have temperatures that are too low to ripen the varietals grown within the proposed AVA and are more suitable for growing cold-hardy French-American hybrid varietals and early ripening V. vinifera varietals such as Riesling and Pinot Noir. Finally, the petition states that regions categorized as the very warm Zone V are best suited for growing long-season varietals of wine grapes that tolerate the high heat, such as Muscadine, and for growing table grapes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ This information is also presented as a map in Figure 19 of the petition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Precipitation: According to the petition, the rising elevations of the proposed AVA and the regions to the north and east cause the moisture-laden winds travelling inland from the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean to drop their rain. Areas with higher elevations typically receive more annual rainfall than regions with lower elevations. The petition included information on the mean annual, growing season, and winter precipitation amounts for the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and the surrounding regions. The following table is derived from information included in the petition. All data was gathered from 1981-2010 climate normals. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ This information is also presented as a map in Figure 20 of the petition. Table 5--Mean Precipitation Amounts [In inches] \12\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Annual Growing season (April-October) Winter (December-February) Region (direction) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed AVA....................... 60.36 69.94 62.34 34.42 38.40 34.09 16.39 19.65 17.40 Blue Ridge Mountains (north)....... 59.48 80.73 68.10 32.19 44.52 37.59 15.63 22.43 18.80 [[Page 86985]] Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast)... 65.31 79.74 70.00 36.41 46.53 39.81 16.92 20.04 18.53 Hightower Ridges (east)............ 61.86 68.96 64.97 34.07 38.86 36.29 17.10 18.30 17.52 Central Uplands (east)............. 57.03 68.25 60.78 31.52 38.45 33.74 15.50 18.23 16.54 Hightower Ridges (southeast)....... 56.81 62.66 59.59 31.06 34.61 32.46 15.70 17.35 16.65 Central Uplands (southeast)........ 53.87 62.85 67.14 29.39 34.73 31.30 14.91 17.35 15.86 Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau 52.91 65.08 58.77 28.93 35.87 32.20 14.49 18.00 16.27 (west)............................ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The data in the table shows that annual rainfall amounts within the proposed AVA are in the intermediate range. The regions to the north and east generally receive more rainfall annually than the proposed AVA, and the regions to the south and west generally receive less. The petition states that vineyard irrigation within the proposed AVA is seldom necessary because the average annual amount of rainfall within the proposed AVA is sufficient for the adequate hydration of grapevines. Finally, the petition states that the amount of rainfall a region receives during the winter months has an effect on viticulture. Excessive precipitation during the winter months can delay bud break and/or pruning in vineyards, which can lead to a late harvest and a higher probability of fruit remaining on the vine when damaging fall frosts occur. Delayed bud break is less likely within the proposed AVA than in the higher elevations to the north and east because the proposed AVA has lower winter rainfall amounts. However, the possibility of delayed bud break within the proposed AVA is higher than within the lower elevations of the regions to the south and west, because those regions typically receive less winter precipitation. Summary of Distinguishing Features In summary, the evidence provided in the petition indicates that the viticulturally significant geographic features of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA distinguish it from the surrounding regions in each direction. With respect to topography, the proposed AVA is characterized by broad, rounded hilltops, wide valleys, gentle slopes, and moderate elevations. By contrast, the regions to the north and northeast of the proposed AVA, within the Blue Ridge Mountains, feature high elevations and steep, rugged slopes. To the east and southeast of the proposed AVA, within the Hightower Ridges, the topography has a ``washboard'' appearance, with high, steep ridges separated by narrow valleys. To the west and southwest of the proposed AVA, the topography is generally flatter and elevations are lower. Temperatures within the proposed Dahlonega Plateau are suitable for growing most V. vinifera varietals of grapes. The mean growing season length within the proposed AVA is longer than within the regions to the north and northeast and shorter than within the regions to the south and west. With respect to GDDs, the proposed AVA is classified in the intermediate Winkler Zones III and IV, with the majority of the proposed AVA classified as Zone IV. The regions to the north and northeast of the proposed AVA are primarily classified as Zone III and also contain areas classified as Zones I and II. The regions to the southeast and west have areas that are classified as the very warm Zone V. Finally, precipitation amounts within the proposed AVA provide sufficient hydration for grapevines, making irrigation seldom necessary. The regions to the north and east of the proposed AVA generally receive more rainfall, and regions to the south and west generally receive less. TTB Determination TTB concludes that the petition to establish the Dahlonega Plateau viticultural area merits consideration and public comment, as invited in this notice of proposed rulemaking. Boundary Description See the narrative description of the boundary of the petitioned-for viticultural area in the proposed regulatory text published at the end of this proposed rule. Maps The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed 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. For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name, at least 85 percent of the wine must be derived from grapes grown within the area represented by that name, and the wine must meet the other conditions listed in Sec. 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA name 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 AVA name appears in another reference on the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have to obtain approval of a new label. Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing an AVA name that was used as a brand name on a label approved before July 7, 1986. See Sec. 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details. If TTB establishes this proposed viticultural area, its name, ``Dahlonega Plateau,'' will be recognized as a name of viticultural significance under Sec. 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the proposed regulation clarifies this point. Consequently, wine bottlers using the name ``Dahlonega Plateau'' in a brand name, including a trademark, or in another label reference as to the origin of the wine, would have to ensure that the product is eligible to use the viticultural name as an appellation of origin if this proposed rule is adopted as a final rule. TTB is not proposing to designate the term ``Dahlonega,'' standing alone, as a term of viticultural significance if the AVA is established, in order to avoid potentially affecting a current label holder. Public Participation Comments Invited TTB invites comments from interested members of the public on whether it should establish the proposed viticultural area. TTB is also interested in receiving comments on the [[Page 86986]] sufficiency and accuracy of the name, boundary, soils, climate, and other required information submitted in support of the petition. Please provide any available specific information in support of your comments. Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA on wine labels that include the term ``Dahlonega Plateau'' as discussed above under Impact on Current Wine Labels, TTB is 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 anticipated negative economic impact that approval of the proposed viticultural area will have on an existing viticultural enterprise. TTB is also interested in receiving suggestions for ways to avoid conflicts, for example, by adopting a modified or different name for the viticultural area. Submitting Comments You may submit comments on this notice by using one of the following three methods: Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the online comment form posted with this notice within Docket No. TTB-2016- 0012 on ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal, at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available under Notice No. 166 on the TTB Web site at https://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 the ``Help'' tab. U.S. Mail: You may send comments via postal mail to the Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005. Hand Delivery/Courier: You may hand-carry your comments or have them hand-carried to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this notice. Your comments must reference Notice No. 166 and include your name and mailing address. Your comments also must be made in English, be legible, and be written in language acceptable for public disclosure. TTB does not acknowledge receipt of comments, and TTB considers all comments as originals. In your comment, please clearly indicate if you are commenting on your own behalf or on behalf of an association, business, or other entity. If you are commenting on behalf of an entity, your comment must include the entity's name, as well as your name and position title. If you comment via Regulations.gov, please enter the entity's name in the ``Organization'' blank of the online comment form. If you comment via postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please submit your entity's comment on letterhead. 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 whether to hold a public hearing. Confidentiality All submitted comments and attachments are part of the public record and subject to disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your comments that you consider to be confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure. Public Disclosure TTB will post, and you may view, copies of this notice, selected supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments received about this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2016-0012 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 https://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 166. You may also reach the relevant docket through the Regulations.gov search page at http://www.regulations.gov. For information on how to use Regulations.gov, click on the site's ``Help'' tab. All posted comments will display the commenter's name, organization (if any), city, and State, and, in the case of mailed comments, all address information, including email addresses. TTB may omit voluminous attachments or material that the Bureau considers unsuitable for posting. You may also view copies of this notice, all related petitions, maps and other supporting materials, and any electronic or mailed comments that TTB receives about this proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20005. You may also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5- x 11-inch page. Please note that TTB is unable to provide copies of USGS maps or other similarly-sized documents that may be included as part of the AVA petition. Contact TTB's information specialist at the above address or by telephone at 202-453-2265 to schedule an appointment or to request copies of comments or other materials. Regulatory Flexibility Act TTB certifies 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 It has been determined that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required. Drafting Information Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 Wine. Proposed Regulatory Amendment For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB proposes to amend title 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS 0 1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows: Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas 0 2. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.__ to read as follows: Sec. 9.__ Dahlonega Plateau. (a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this section is ``Dahlonega Plateau''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter, ``Dahlonega Plateau'' is a term of viticultural significance. (b) Approved maps. The 9 United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the Dahlonega Plateau viticultural area are titled: [[Page 86987]] (1) Dawsonville, GA, 1997; (2) Campbell Mountain, GA, 2014; (3) Nimblewill, GA, 1997; (4) Noontootla, GA, 1988; (5) Suches, GA, 1988; (6) Neels Gap, GA, 1988; (7) Dahlonega, GA, 1951; (8) Cowrock, GA, 1988; and (9) Cleveland, GA, 1951; photorevised 1973; photoinspected 1981. (c) Boundary. The Dahlonega Plateau viticultural area is located in Lumpkin and White Counties, Georgia. The boundary of the Dahlonega Plateau viticultural area is as described below: (1) The beginning point is found on the Dawsonville map at the marked 1,412-foot elevation point at the intersection of an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Castleberry Bridge Road and an unimproved road known locally as McDuffie River Road. (2) From the beginning point, proceed north-northeast in a straight line approximately 0.89 mile to the marked 1,453-foot elevation point; then (3) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 1.94 miles, crossing onto the Campbell Mountain map, to the intersection of Arrendale Road and Windy Oaks Road; then (4) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 0.77 mile to the intersection of the 1,400-foot elevation contour and Dennson Branch; then (5) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 0.79 mile to the intersection of the 1,360-foot elevation contour and Mill Creek; then (6) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 0.48 mile to the intersection of the 1,500-foot elevation contour and Sheep Wallow Road; then (7) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 1.74 miles to the intersection of State Route 52 and the Chattahoochee National Forest boundary; then (8) Proceed northwest in a straight line approximately 1.89 miles, crossing onto the Nimblewill map and then crossing over the marked 1,749-foot elevation point along an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Nimblewill Church Road, to the line's intersection with the 1,800-foot elevation contour; then (9) Proceed generally east-northeast along the 1,800-foot elevation contour approximately 170.72 miles (straight-line distance between points is approximately 20.43 miles), crossing over the Noontootla, Suches, Neels Gap, and Dahlonega maps and onto the Cowrock map, to the intersection of the 1,800-foot elevation contour with Tom White Branch; then (10) Proceed southeast along Tom White Branch approximately 0.73 mile to the 1,600-foot elevation contour; then (11) Proceed southeast in a straight line approximately 1.10 miles to the intersection of Cathey Creek and the secondary highway marked Alt. 75; then (12) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 3.77 miles, crossing onto the Cleveland map, to the intersection of two unnamed light-duty roads known locally as Dockery Road and Town Creek Road; then (13) Proceed south in a straight line approximately 0.58 mile to the marked 1,774-foot elevation point; then (14) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 0.60 mile to the 1,623-foot benchmark (BM); then (15) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 2.73 miles, crossing onto the Dahlonega map, to the 1,562-foot benchmark; then (16) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 3.46 miles to the marked 1,480-foot elevation point near the Mt. Sinai Church; then (17) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 2.13 miles to the summit of Crown Mountain; then (18) Proceed west in a straight line approximately 1.28 miles, crossing onto the Campbell Mountain map, to the intersection of the 1,160-foot elevation contour and Cane Creek; then (19) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 1.61 miles to the intersection of the 1,300-foot elevation contour and Camp Creek; then (20) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 2.02 miles, crossing onto the Dawsonville map, to the intersection of the 1,200- foot elevation contour with the Etowah River; then (21) Proceed southwest in a straight line approximately 1.29 miles to the beginning point. November 22, 2016. John J. Manfreda, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2016-28839 Filed 12-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
![86980 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Opportunity process. As a result of For example: Paperwork Reduction Act
implementing those policies and • Would more, but shorter, sections This proposed rule does not create
procedures, we propose establishing the be better? any new or affect any existing
Anti-Harassment system to manage • Are the requirements in the rule collections and, therefore, do not
information regarding allegations of clearly stated? require Office of Management and
workplace harassment filed by SSA • Have we organized the material to
Budget approval under the Paperwork
employees and SSA contractors alleging suit your needs?
Reduction Act.
harassment by another SSA employee, • Could we improve clarity by adding
as well as allegations of workplace tables, lists, or diagrams? List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 401
harassment filed by SSA employees • What else could we do to make the Privacy and disclosure of official
alleging harassment by an SSA rule easier to understand? records and information.
contractor. • Does the rule contain technical
We propose establishing the Anti- language or jargon that is not clear? Carolyn W. Colvin,
Harassment system as part of our • Would a different format make the Acting Commissioner of Social Security.
compliance efforts under Title VII of the rule easier to understand, e.g. grouping For the reasons stated in the
Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Age and order of sections, use of headings, preamble, we are proposing to amend
Discrimination in Employment Act of paragraphing? subpart B of part 401 of title 20 of the
1967; the Americans with Disabilities Code of Federal Regulations as set forth
Act of 1990 (ADA); the ADA Regulatory Procedures
below:
Amendments Act of 2008; the SSA will publish a final rule
Notification and Federal Employee responding to any comments received PART 401—PRIVACY AND
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act and, if appropriate, will amend DISCLOSURE OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
of 2002 (No FEAR Act); and the Genetic provisions of the rule. AND INFORMATION
Information Nondiscrimination Act of
Executive Order 12866, as
2008 (GINA); and Executive Orders Subpart B—[Amended]
Supplemented by Executive Order
11478, 11246, 13152, and 13087. These
13563 ■ 1. The authority citation for subpart B
legal authorities prohibit
discrimination, including harassment, We consulted with the Office of of part 401 continues to read as follows:
based on sex, race, color, religion, Management and Budget (OMB) and Authority: Secs. 205, 702(a)(5), 1106, and
national origin, age, disability, genetic determined that this proposed rule does 1141 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
information, or other protected basis. not meet the criteria for a significant 405, 902(a)(5), 1306, and 1320b–11); 5 U.S.C.
The Anti-Harassment System will regulatory action under Executive Order 552 and 552a; 8 U.S.C. 1360; 26 U.S.C. 6103;
capture and house information 12866, as supplemented by Executive 30 U.S.C. 923.
regarding allegations of workplace Order 13563. Therefore, OMB did not ■ 2. Amend § 401.85, by adding
harassment filed by SSA employees and review it. paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(F) to read as follows:
SSA contractors alleging harassment by We also determined that this
another SSA employee, and any proposed rule meets the plain language § 401.85 Exempt Systems.
investigation, or response, we take requirement of Executive Order 12866. * * * * *
because of the allegation. Due to the (b) * * *
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) (2) * * *
investigatory nature of information that
will be maintained in this system of This proposed rule was analyzed in (ii) * * *
records, this proposed rule would add accordance with the principles and (F) Anti-Harassment & Hostile Work
the Anti-Harassment System to the list criteria established by Executive Order Environment Case Tracking and Records
of SSA systems that are exempt from 13132, and SSA determined that the System, SSA.
specific provisions of the Privacy Act proposed rule will not have sufficient
* * * * *
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). Federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism assessment. [FR Doc. 2016–28919 Filed 12–1–16; 8:45 am]
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices SSA also determined that this proposed BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
All comments received on or before rule will not preempt any State law or
the close of business on the comment State regulation or affect the States’
closing date indicated above will be abilities to discharge traditional State DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
considered and will be available for governmental functions.
examination in the docket at the above Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Executive Order 12372 Bureau
address. Comments received after the
(Intergovernmental Review)
comment closing date will be filed in
the docket and will be considered to the The regulations effectuating Executive 27 CFR Part 9
extent practicable. A final rule may be Order 12372 regarding [Docket No. TTB–2016–0012; Notice No.
published at any time after close of the intergovernmental consultation on 166]
comment period. Federal programs and activities apply to
this proposed rule. RIN 1513–AC33
Clarity of This Rule
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Flexibility Act Proposed Establishment of the
Executive Order 12866, as
Dahlonega Plateau Viticultural Area
supplemented by Executive Order We certify that this proposed rule will
13563, requires each agency to write all not have a significant economic impact AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
rules in plain language. In addition to on a substantial number of small entities Trade Bureau, Treasury.
your substantive comments on this because it affects individuals only. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
proposed rule, we invite your comments Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility
on how to make the rule easier to Act, as amended, does not require us to SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
understand. prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:02 Dec 01, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02DEP1.SGM 02DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_87212/page/1.svg)
![86982 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 / Proposed Rules
noted, ‘‘In the Chestatee basin about [the series of straight lines drawn between To the immediate east and southeast
town of] Dahlonega the upland is an roads and elevation points on the USGS of the proposed AVA are the Hightower
old, well-dissected plateau * * *.’’ 1 maps in order to separate the proposed Ridges. The geology of these ridges is
The petition lists several other AVA from the southwestern portion of characterized by strongly-layered,
professional papers and books, both the plateau, which has a different alternating zones of weak rocks and
historical and contemporary, which topography and climate. more resistant rocks. These alternating
describe a geological feature known as zones have a strong northeast-southwest
the ‘‘Dahlonega Plateau.’’ These sources Distinguishing Features
orientation. Because these layers erode
are listed in the ‘‘References’’ section of The distinguishing features of the at different rates, the resulting
the petition. Additionally, an excerpt proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA are its topography has a ‘‘washboard’’
from a contemporary travel guide topography and climate. appearance, with steep, parallel ridges
describes the region of the proposed Topography (formed from the more resistant layers)
AVA as follows: ‘‘In the northeastern separated by narrow valleys (formed
section of the Piedmont lies the The topography of the proposed AVA from the less resistant layers). Compared
Dahlonega Plateau, a deeply eroded is characterized by broad, rounded to the proposed AVA, the valleys
region of steep, forested hills and hilltops separated by wide valleys. generally have lower minimum
narrow valleys * * *.’’ 2 An online According to the petition, the elevations and the ridges generally have
travel site states, ‘‘A broad, high plain distinctive topography is due to the higher maximum elevations. Farther
shadowed by some of Georgia’s highest underlying geology of the proposed south and running parallel to the
mountains, the Dahlonega Plateau offers AVA, which is comprised of layers of Hightower Ridges is the Central
near perfect growing conditions [for rocks that weather uniformly and are Uplands region. The topography of this
wine grapes].’’ 3 Finally, the petition moderately resistant to erosion. Over region is similar to that of the proposed
includes a 1976 map of the time, wind and water have gradually AVA, with broad valleys and rolling
physiographic regions of Georgia, from worn down the underlying rocks and hills, but with a wider range of
the Georgia Department of Natural formed a gently rolling landscape with elevations.
Resources, which includes a region moderate elevations that are lower than
the elevations to the north and east and To the west and southwest of the
titled ‘‘Dahlonega Uplands/Dahlonega
higher than the elevations to the south proposed AVA, in the southwestern
Plateau.’’
and west. portion of the geological feature known
Boundary Evidence By contrast, the geology of Blue Ridge as the Dahlonega Plateau, the
The northern and northeastern Mountains to the north and northeast of underlying geology is comprised of
boundaries of the proposed Dahlonega the proposed AVA is comprised of rocks rocks that are less erosion-resistant and
Plateau AVA follow the 1,800-foot that are structurally higher and more structurally lower than the rocks in the
elevation contour and separate the erosion-resistant than those of the northeastern portion of the plateau,
proposed AVA from the higher, steeper proposed AVA. Because the rocks do which are within the proposed AVA.
slopes of the Blue Ridge Mountains. The not erode as easily, the Blue Ridge Because the rocks are more susceptible
proposed eastern and southeastern Mountains generally have higher to erosion, the topography of the
boundaries follow a series of straight elevations than are found within the southwestern portion of the plateau is
lines drawn between roads and proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA. generally flatter and lower than within
elevation points marked on the USGS Additionally, the peaks within the Blue the proposed AVA.
maps which separate the proposed AVA Ridge Mountains are more rugged and The following table shows the
from the physiographic features known the slopes are steeper because the minimum, maximum, and mean
as the Hightower Ridges and the Central surfaces have not been as softened or elevations for the proposed Dahlonega
Uplands. The proposed southwestern rounded by erosion as the hilltops of the Plateau AVA and the surrounding areas,
and western boundaries also follow a proposed AVA. which were described in the petition.4
TABLE 1—ELEVATIONS 5
Elevations
Region (in feet)
(direction)
Minimum Maximum Mean
Proposed AVA ............................................................................................................................. 1,141.7 2,345.8 1,554.2
Blue Ridge Mountains (north) ...................................................................................................... 1,651.7 4,460.2 2,455.4
Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast) ............................................................................................... 1,441.1 4,418.8 2,449.6
Hightower Ridges (east) .............................................................................................................. 1,317.1 2,386.4 1,565.2
Central Uplands (east) ................................................................................................................. 1,088.2 3,164.5 1,446.5
Hightower Ridges (southeast) ..................................................................................................... 1,053.3 2,180.8 1,315.0
Central Uplands (southeast) ........................................................................................................ 1,069.5 2,584.4 1,256.8
Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau (west) .................................................................................... 858.6 2,033.2 1,386.3
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The topography of the proposed surrounding regions has an effect on proposed AVA are gently sloped and
Dahlonega Plateau AVA and the viticulture. Because the hills within the have moderate elevations, the floors of
1 Glenn, L.C., 1911, Denudation and Erosion in 2 Howard, Blair. Georgia Travel Adventures. West 4 Figure 7 of the petition shows the location of the
the Southern Appalachian Region and in the Palm Beach, FL: Hunter Publishing, Inc., 2011. comparison regions in relation to the proposed
Monongahela Basin: U.S. Geological Survey, Prof. 3 http://www.offbeattravel.com/dahlonega- AVA.
5 This information is also presented as a map in
Paper 72. georgia.html.
Figure 8 of the petition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:02 Dec 01, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02DEP1.SGM 02DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_87212/page/3.svg)
![86984 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 / Proposed Rules
than 160 days because most grape Growing Degree Days: The petition Growing degree day (GDD)
varietals will not have time to ripen notes that although growing season accumulations are a way of describing
fully. Sites with growing seasons of length is important because it reflects the frequency that temperatures within
between 180 and 190 days are described the number of frost-free days, the a region exceed 50 degrees F during the
as ‘‘good,’’ while sites with growing temperatures that are reached during growing season.9 The Winkler zone
seasons between 190 and 200 days are that frost-free period are just as scale ranges from the very cool Zone I,
‘‘not limited by growing season.’’ Sites important to viticulture. The petition for regions accumulating 2,500 or fewer
with growing seasons of over 200 days states that grape vines do not grow and GDDs in a growing season, to the very
are considered suitable for growing fruit does not mature when warm Zone V, for regions accumulating
varietals that need a long time to temperatures are below 50 degrees over 4,000 GDDs. The petition included
mature. Based on this guidance, Fahrenheit (F). Therefore, a region that the information in the following table
vineyard owners can plant many has a 180-day frost-free growing season which shows the percentage of the
different grape varietals in the majority
would still be unsuitable for viticulture proposed AVA and the surrounding
of the proposed AVA without the fear of
if temperatures seldom or never rise areas that can be categorized into each
having too short of a growing season for
the grapes to ripen. above 50 degrees F. of the five Winkler zones.10
TABLE 4—PERCENTAGE OF TERRAIN WITHIN EACH WINKLER ZONE 11
Region Zone I Zone II Zone III Zone IV Zone V
(direction)
Cooler to warmer
Proposed AVA ..................................................................... ........................ ........................ 0.16 98.84 ........................
Blue Ridge Mountains (north) .............................................. ........................ 0.76 90.91 8.33 ........................
Blue Ridge Mountains (northeast) ....................................... 0.20 5.83 83.94 10.03 ........................
Hightower Ridges (east) ...................................................... ........................ ........................ 9.02 90.98 ........................
Central Uplands (east) ......................................................... ........................ ........................ 2.35 97.65 ........................
South:
Hightower Ridges (southeast) ...................................... ........................ ........................ 0.05 90.12 9.83
Central Uplands (southeast) ......................................... ........................ ........................ 0.50 41.46 58.04
Southwestern Dahlonega Plateau (west) ..................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 68.39 31.61
The data in the table shows that all of categorized as Zones I and II have proposed AVA and the regions to the
the terrain within the proposed temperatures that are too low to ripen north and east cause the moisture-laden
Dahlonega Plateau AVA is classified in the varietals grown within the proposed winds travelling inland from the Gulf of
the intermediate ranges of the Winkler AVA and are more suitable for growing Mexico and Atlantic Ocean to drop their
scale (Zones III and IV). The proposed cold-hardy French–American hybrid rain. Areas with higher elevations
AVA has a higher percentage of terrain varietals and early ripening V. vinifera typically receive more annual rainfall
within Zone IV than any of the varietals such as Riesling and Pinot than regions with lower elevations. The
surrounding regions and lacks any Noir. Finally, the petition states that petition included information on the
terrain in the very cool Zone I, the cool regions categorized as the very warm mean annual, growing season, and
Zone II, or the very warm Zone V. Zone V are best suited for growing long- winter precipitation amounts for the
According to the petition, regions season varietals of wine grapes that proposed Dahlonega Plateau AVA and
classified as Zones III or IV, such as the tolerate the high heat, such as the surrounding regions. The following
proposed AVA, are suitable for growing Muscadine, and for growing table table is derived from information
a diverse range of late-ripening varietals grapes. included in the petition. All data was
of V. vinifera, including Cabernet Precipitation: According to the gathered from 1981–2010 climate
Sauvignon and Merlot. Regions that are petition, the rising elevations of the normals.
TABLE 5—MEAN PRECIPITATION AMOUNTS
[In inches] 12
Annual Growing season Winter
Region (April–October) (December–February)
(direction) Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean
Proposed AVA ........................... 60.36 69.94 62.34 34.42 38.40 34.09 16.39 19.65 17.40
Blue Ridge Mountains (north) ... 59.48 80.73 68.10 32.19 44.52 37.59 15.63 22.43 18.80
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9 In the Winkler climate classification system, 10 The growing degree day data for the proposed calculated every 10 years, using 30 years of data,
annual heat accumulation during the growing AVA and the surrounding regions was calculated and at the time the petition was submitted, the most
season, measured in annual GDDs, defines climatic using the PRISM Climate Group’s 1981–2010 recent climate normals available were from the
regions. One GDD accumulates for each degree climate normals. The Parameter Elevation period of 1981–2010. (PRISM Climate Group,
Regression on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM) Oregon State University, http://
Fahrenheit that a day’s mean temperature is above
climate data mapping system combined climate prism.oregonstate.edu, created 4 February 2004).
50 degrees F, the minimum temperature required normals gathered from weather stations, along with 11 This information is also presented as a map in
for grapevine growth. See Albert J. Winkler, General other factors such as elevation, longitude, slope
Viticulture (Berkeley: University of California Press, angles, and solar aspect to estimate the general Figure 19 of the petition.
1974), pages 61–64. 12 This information is also presented as a map in
climate patterns for the proposed AVA and the
surrounding regions. Climate normals are only Figure 20 of the petition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:02 Dec 01, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02DEP1.SGM 02DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_87212/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 / Proposed Rules 86985
TABLE 5—MEAN PRECIPITATION AMOUNTS—Continued
[In inches] 12
Annual Growing season Winter
Region (April–October) (December–February)
(direction) Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean
Blue Ridge Mountains (north-
east) ....................................... 65.31 79.74 70.00 36.41 46.53 39.81 16.92 20.04 18.53
Hightower Ridges (east) ........... 61.86 68.96 64.97 34.07 38.86 36.29 17.10 18.30 17.52
Central Uplands (east) .............. 57.03 68.25 60.78 31.52 38.45 33.74 15.50 18.23 16.54
Hightower Ridges (southeast) ... 56.81 62.66 59.59 31.06 34.61 32.46 15.70 17.35 16.65
Central Uplands (southeast) ..... 53.87 62.85 67.14 29.39 34.73 31.30 14.91 17.35 15.86
Southwestern Dahlonega Pla-
teau (west) ............................. 52.91 65.08 58.77 28.93 35.87 32.20 14.49 18.00 16.27
The data in the table shows that separated by narrow valleys. To the indicates or implies an origin other than
annual rainfall amounts within the west and southwest of the proposed the wine’s true place of origin. For a
proposed AVA are in the intermediate AVA, the topography is generally flatter wine to be labeled with an AVA name,
range. The regions to the north and east and elevations are lower. at least 85 percent of the wine must be
generally receive more rainfall annually Temperatures within the proposed derived from grapes grown within the
than the proposed AVA, and the regions Dahlonega Plateau are suitable for area represented by that name, and the
to the south and west generally receive growing most V. vinifera varietals of wine must meet the other conditions
less. The petition states that vineyard grapes. The mean growing season length listed in § 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB
irrigation within the proposed AVA is within the proposed AVA is longer than regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). If the
seldom necessary because the average within the regions to the north and wine is not eligible for labeling with an
annual amount of rainfall within the northeast and shorter than within the AVA name and that name appears in the
proposed AVA is sufficient for the regions to the south and west. With brand name, then the label is not in
adequate hydration of grapevines. respect to GDDs, the proposed AVA is compliance and the bottler must change
Finally, the petition states that the classified in the intermediate Winkler the brand name and obtain approval of
amount of rainfall a region receives Zones III and IV, with the majority of a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name
during the winter months has an effect the proposed AVA classified as Zone IV. appears in another reference on the
on viticulture. Excessive precipitation The regions to the north and northeast label in a misleading manner, the bottler
during the winter months can delay bud of the proposed AVA are primarily would have to obtain approval of a new
break and/or pruning in vineyards, classified as Zone III and also contain label. Different rules apply if a wine has
which can lead to a late harvest and a areas classified as Zones I and II. The a brand name containing an AVA name
higher probability of fruit remaining on regions to the southeast and west have that was used as a brand name on a
the vine when damaging fall frosts areas that are classified as the very label approved before July 7, 1986. See
occur. Delayed bud break is less likely warm Zone V. § 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27
within the proposed AVA than in the Finally, precipitation amounts within CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details.
higher elevations to the north and east the proposed AVA provide sufficient If TTB establishes this proposed
because the proposed AVA has lower hydration for grapevines, making viticultural area, its name, ‘‘Dahlonega
winter rainfall amounts. However, the irrigation seldom necessary. The regions Plateau,’’ will be recognized as a name
possibility of delayed bud break within to the north and east of the proposed of viticultural significance under
the proposed AVA is higher than within AVA generally receive more rainfall, § 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27
the lower elevations of the regions to the and regions to the south and west CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the proposed
south and west, because those regions generally receive less. regulation clarifies this point.
typically receive less winter Consequently, wine bottlers using the
TTB Determination name ‘‘Dahlonega Plateau’’ in a brand
precipitation.
TTB concludes that the petition to name, including a trademark, or in
Summary of Distinguishing Features establish the Dahlonega Plateau another label reference as to the origin
In summary, the evidence provided in viticultural area merits consideration of the wine, would have to ensure that
the petition indicates that the and public comment, as invited in this the product is eligible to use the
viticulturally significant geographic notice of proposed rulemaking. viticultural name as an appellation of
features of the proposed Dahlonega Boundary Description origin if this proposed rule is adopted
Plateau AVA distinguish it from the as a final rule. TTB is not proposing to
See the narrative description of the designate the term ‘‘Dahlonega,’’
surrounding regions in each direction. boundary of the petitioned-for
With respect to topography, the standing alone, as a term of viticultural
viticultural area in the proposed significance if the AVA is established,
proposed AVA is characterized by regulatory text published at the end of
broad, rounded hilltops, wide valleys, in order to avoid potentially affecting a
this proposed rule. current label holder.
gentle slopes, and moderate elevations.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
By contrast, the regions to the north and Maps Public Participation
northeast of the proposed AVA, within The petitioner provided the required
the Blue Ridge Mountains, feature high Comments Invited
maps, and they are listed below in the
elevations and steep, rugged slopes. To proposed regulatory text. TTB invites comments from interested
the east and southeast of the proposed members of the public on whether it
AVA, within the Hightower Ridges, the Impact on Current Wine Labels should establish the proposed
topography has a ‘‘washboard’’ Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits viticultural area. TTB is also interested
appearance, with high, steep ridges any label reference on a wine that in receiving comments on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:02 Dec 01, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02DEP1.SGM 02DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_87212/page/6.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 / Proposed Rules 86987
(1) Dawsonville, GA, 1997; (11) Proceed southeast in a straight SUMMARY: On October 4, 2016, OSHA
(2) Campbell Mountain, GA, 2014; line approximately 1.10 miles to the published a Notice of Proposed
(3) Nimblewill, GA, 1997; intersection of Cathey Creek and the Rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Standards
(4) Noontootla, GA, 1988; secondary highway marked Alt. 75; then Improvement Project-Phase IV.’’ The
(5) Suches, GA, 1988; (12) Proceed southwest in a straight period for submitting comments is being
(6) Neels Gap, GA, 1988; line approximately 3.77 miles, crossing extended 30 days to allow parties
(7) Dahlonega, GA, 1951; onto the Cleveland map, to the
(8) Cowrock, GA, 1988; and affected by the rule more time to review
intersection of two unnamed light-duty the proposed rule and collect
(9) Cleveland, GA, 1951; photorevised
roads known locally as Dockery Road information and data necessary for
1973; photoinspected 1981.
(c) Boundary. The Dahlonega Plateau and Town Creek Road; then comments.
(13) Proceed south in a straight line
viticultural area is located in Lumpkin DATES: Comments must be submitted by
approximately 0.58 mile to the marked
and White Counties, Georgia. The January 4, 2017. All submissions must
1,774-foot elevation point; then
boundary of the Dahlonega Plateau (14) Proceed southwest in a straight bear a postmark or provide other
viticultural area is as described below: line approximately 0.60 mile to the evidence of the submission date.
(1) The beginning point is found on ADDRESSES: Submit comments and
1,623-foot benchmark (BM); then
the Dawsonville map at the marked (15) Proceed southwest in a straight additional material using any of the
1,412-foot elevation point at the line approximately 2.73 miles, crossing following methods:
intersection of an unnamed light-duty onto the Dahlonega map, to the 1,562- Electronic. Submit comments and
road known locally as Castleberry foot benchmark; then attachments electronically via the
Bridge Road and an unimproved road (16) Proceed southwest in a straight Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://
known locally as McDuffie River Road. line approximately 3.46 miles to the www.regulations.gov. Follow the
(2) From the beginning point, proceed marked 1,480-foot elevation point near instructions online for making
north-northeast in a straight line the Mt. Sinai Church; then electronic submissions.
approximately 0.89 mile to the marked (17) Proceed southwest in a straight Facsimile. Commenters may fax
1,453-foot elevation point; then line approximately 2.13 miles to the submissions, including any attachments
(3) Proceed northwest in a straight summit of Crown Mountain; then that are no longer than 10 pages in
line approximately 1.94 miles, crossing (18) Proceed west in a straight line length to the OSHA Docket Office at
onto the Campbell Mountain map, to the approximately 1.28 miles, crossing onto (202) 693–1648; OSHA does not require
intersection of Arrendale Road and the Campbell Mountain map, to the hard copies of these documents.
Windy Oaks Road; then intersection of the 1,160-foot elevation Commenters must submit lengthy
(4) Proceed northwest in a straight contour and Cane Creek; then
line approximately 0.77 mile to the attachments that supplement these
(19) Proceed southwest in a straight documents (e.g., studies, journal
intersection of the 1,400-foot elevation line approximately 1.61 miles to the
contour and Dennson Branch; then articles) to the OSHA Docket Office,
intersection of the 1,300-foot elevation Technical Data Center, Room N3653,
(5) Proceed northwest in a straight contour and Camp Creek; then
line approximately 0.79 mile to the U.S. Department of Labor, 200
(20) Proceed southwest in a straight Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
intersection of the 1,360-foot elevation line approximately 2.02 miles, crossing
contour and Mill Creek; then 20210. These attachments must clearly
onto the Dawsonville map, to the identify the commenter’s name, date,
(6) Proceed northwest in a straight
intersection of the 1,200-foot elevation subject, and docket number (OSHA–
line approximately 0.48 mile to the
contour with the Etowah River; then 2012–0007) so the Agency can attach
intersection of the 1,500-foot elevation (21) Proceed southwest in a straight
contour and Sheep Wallow Road; then them to the appropriate comments.
line approximately 1.29 miles to the Regular mail, express mail, hand
(7) Proceed northwest in a straight
beginning point. (courier) delivery, or messenger service.
line approximately 1.74 miles to the
intersection of State Route 52 and the November 22, 2016. Submit a copy of comments and any
Chattahoochee National Forest John J. Manfreda, additional material (e.g., studies, journal
boundary; then Administrator. articles) to the OSHA Docket Office,
(8) Proceed northwest in a straight [FR Doc. 2016–28839 Filed 12–1–16; 8:45 am] Docket No. OSHA–2012–0007,
line approximately 1.89 miles, crossing BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
Technical Data Center, Room N3653,
onto the Nimblewill map and then U.S. Department of Labor, 200
crossing over the marked 1,749-foot Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
elevation point along an unnamed light- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–2350
duty road known locally as Nimblewill (TDY number: (877) 889–5627). Note
Church Road, to the line’s intersection Occupational Safety and Health that security procedures may result in
with the 1,800-foot elevation contour; Administration significant delays in receiving
then comments and other written materials
(9) Proceed generally east-northeast 29 CFR Parts 1904, 1910, 1915 and by regular mail. Contact the OSHA
along the 1,800-foot elevation contour 1926 Docket Office for information about
approximately 170.72 miles (straight- security procedures concerning delivery
[Docket No. OSHA–2012–0007]
line distance between points is of materials by express mail, hand
approximately 20.43 miles), crossing RIN 1218–AC67 delivery, or messenger service. The
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
over the Noontootla, Suches, Neels Gap, hours of operation for the OSHA Docket
and Dahlonega maps and onto the Standards Improvement Project-Phase Office are 10:00 a.m.–3:00 p.m., e.t.
Cowrock map, to the intersection of the IV Instructions. All submissions received
1,800-foot elevation contour with Tom AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health must include the Agency name and the
White Branch; then Administration (OSHA), Labor. docket number for this rulemaking
(10) Proceed southeast along Tom (OSHA–2012–0007). OSHA places all
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
White Branch approximately 0.73 mile submissions, including any personal
extension of written comment period.
to the 1,600-foot elevation contour; then information provided, in the public
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:02 Dec 01, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02DEP1.SGM 02DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_87212/page/8.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-14 09:02:02
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 09:02:02
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments must be received by January 31, 2017. | |
| Contact | Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G St. NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 86980 | |
| RIN Number | 1513-AC33 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR