Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules 67469

necessary for safety in air commerce. (e) Reason (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any This regulation is within the scope of This AD was prompted by a report that a service information referenced in EASA AD that authority because it addresses an welding quality issue has been identified in 2020–0169R1 that contains RC procedures unsafe condition that is likely to exist or the gimbal joint of the air bleed duct located and tests: Except as required by paragraph at each wing-to-pylon interface; the inner (j)(2) of this AD, RC procedures and tests develop on products identified in this must be done to comply with this AD; any rulemaking action. ring of a gimbal had deformed to an oval shape, which could lead to cracking caused procedures or tests that are not identified as Regulatory Findings by direct contact between metal parts. The RC are recommended. Those procedures and FAA is issuing this AD to address this tests that are not identified as RC may be The FAA determined that this condition, which could lead to hot bleed air deviated from using accepted methods in proposed AD would not have federalism leakage in the pylon area, and possibly result accordance with the operator’s maintenance implications under Executive Order in loss of the pneumatic system and exposure or inspection program without obtaining 13132. This proposed AD would not of the wing structure to high temperatures, approval of an AMOC, provided the have a substantial direct effect on the and lead to reduced structural integrity of the procedures and tests identified as RC can be States, on the relationship between the airplane. done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or national Government and the States, or (f) Compliance changes to procedures or tests identified as on the distribution of power and Comply with this AD within the RC require approval of an AMOC. responsibilities among the various compliance times specified, unless already (k) Related Information levels of government. done. For the reasons discussed above, I (1) For information about EASA AD 2020– certify this proposed regulation: (g) Requirements 0169R1, contact the EASA, Konrad- Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory telephone +49 221 8999 000; email ADs@ action’’ under Executive Order 12866, AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in easa.europa.eu; internet (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation accordance with, European Union Aviation www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this in Alaska, and Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020–0169R1, EASA AD on the EASA website at https:// (3) Will not have a significant dated August 19, 2020 (‘‘EASA AD 2020– ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this economic impact, positive or negative, 0169R1’’). material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 on a substantial number of small entities (h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020–0169R1 under the criteria of the Regulatory South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this Flexibility Act. (1) Where EASA AD 2020–0169R1 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. This List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 effective date of this AD. material may be found in the AD docket on (2) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD the internet at https://www.regulations.gov Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 2020–0169R1 does not apply to this AD. by searching for and locating Docket No. safety, Incorporation by reference, FAA–2020–0965. Safety. (i) No Reporting Requirement (2) For more information about this AD, Although the service information contact Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace The Proposed Amendment referenced in EASA AD 2020–0169R1 Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, Accordingly, under the authority specifies to submit certain information to the International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 manufacturer, this AD does not include that South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; delegated to me by the Administrator, requirement. telephone and fax 206–231–3218; the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part [email protected]. 39 as follows: (j) Other FAA AD Provisions The following provisions also apply to this Issued on October 15, 2020. PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS AD: Gaetano A. Sciortino, DIRECTIVES (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, (AMOCs): The Manager, Large Aircraft Compliance & Airworthiness Division, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 Section, International Validation Branch, Aircraft Certification Service. continues to read as follows: FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs [FR Doc. 2020–23235 Filed 10–22–20; 8:45 am] for this AD, if requested using the procedures BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with § 39.13 [Amended] 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY the following new airworthiness information directly to the Large Aircraft directive (AD): Section, International Validation Branch, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade send it to the attention of the person Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA–2020–0965; Bureau identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Project Identifier MCAI–2020–01068–T. Information may be emailed to: 9-AVS-AIR- 27 CFR Part 9 (a) Comments Due Date [email protected]. Before using any [Docket No. TTB–2020–0011; Notice No.196] The FAA must receive comments by approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal December 7, 2020. RIN 1513–AC63 inspector, the manager of the responsible (b) Affected ADs Flight Standards Office. Proposed Establishment of the Goose None. (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain instructions Gap Viticultural Area (c) Applicability from a manufacturer, the instructions must AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model be accomplished using a method approved Trade Bureau, Treasury. A350–941 and –1041 airplanes, certificated by the Manager, Large Aircraft Section, in any category. International Validation Branch, FAA; or ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. EASA; or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design (d) Subject Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Air Transport Association (ATA) of the DOA, the approval must include the and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to America Code 36, Pneumatic. DOA-authorized signature. establish the approximately 8,129-acre

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 67470 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules

‘‘Goose Gap’’ viticultural area in Benton definitive viticultural areas and regulate AVA that are consistent with the County, . The proposed the use of their names as appellations of existing AVA and explains how the viticultural area lies entirely within the origin on labels and in wine proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct established Yakima Valley and advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB from the existing AVA and therefore Columbia Valley viticultural areas. TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth appropriate for separate recognition; designates viticultural areas to allow standards for the preparation and and vintners to better describe the origin of submission of petitions for the • A detailed narrative description of their and to allow consumers to establishment or modification of the proposed AVA boundary based on better identify wines they may American viticultural areas (AVAs) and USGS map markings. purchase. TTB invites comments on this lists the approved AVAs. Goose Gap Petition proposed addition to its regulations. Definition TTB received a petition from Alan DATES: TTB must receive comments by Busacca, on behalf of the Goose Gap December 22, 2020. Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines Wine Grower’s Association, proposing ADDRESSES: You may electronically a viticultural area for American wine as the establishment of the ‘‘Goose Gap’’ submit comments to TTB on this a delimited grape-growing region having AVA. The proposed Goose Gap AVA is proposal, and view copies of this distinguishing features, as described in located in Benton County, Washington, document, its supporting materials, and part 9 of the regulations, and a name and lies entirely within the established any comments TTB receives on it within and a delineated boundary, as Yakima Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.69) and Docket No. TTB–2020–0011 as posted established in part 9 of the regulations. Columbia Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74). on Regulations.gov (https:// These designations allow vintners and The proposed Goose Gap AVA contains www.regulations.gov), the Federal consumers to attribute a given quality, approximately 8,129 acres and has 1 e-rulemaking portal. Please see the reputation, or other characteristic of a winery and 2 commercially-producing ‘‘Public Participation’’ section of this wine made from grapes grown in an area covering a total of more than document below for full details on how to the wine’s geographic origin. The 1,800 acres. The petition states that, in to comment on this proposal via establishment of AVAs allows vintners 2017, the two vineyards harvested more Regulations.gov or U.S. mail, and for to describe more accurately the origin of than 7,000 tons of grapes, and the full details on how to view or obtain their wines to consumers and helps winery produced about 50,000 cases of copies of this document, its supporting consumers to identify wines they may wine from those grapes. materials, and any comments related to purchase. Establishment of an AVA is According to the petition, the this proposal. neither an approval nor an endorsement distinguishing features of the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: by TTB of the wine produced in that Goose Gap AVA include its geology and Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and area. soils. The petition also included Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco information on the general climate of Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street Requirements the region near the proposed AVA. NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB However, the petition did not include phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175. regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines any actual climate data from within the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the procedure for proposing an AVA proposed Goose Gap AVA and instead and provides that any interested party provided climate data from the nearby Background on Viticultural Areas may petition TTB to establish a grape- established Red Mountain AVA (27 CFR TTB Authority growing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 9.167), which the petition asserts has a of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) similar climate. Because the petition did Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol prescribes the standards for petitions for not include evidence from within the Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 the establishment or modification of proposed AVA to support its climate U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA claims, TTB is unable to determine that of the Treasury to prescribe regulations must include the following: climate is a distinguishing feature of the for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, • Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA. Therefore, this proposed and malt beverages. The FAA Act proposed AVA boundary is nationally rule does not include a discussion of the provides that these regulations should, or locally known by the AVA name climate of the proposed AVA.1 TTB among other things, prohibit consumer specified in the petition; invites public comments that include deception and the use of misleading • An explanation of the basis for climate data from within the proposed statements on labels and ensure that defining the boundary of the proposed AVA and the surrounding regions. The labels provide the consumer with AVA; Bureau may determine climate to be a • adequate information as to the identity A narrative description of the distinguishing feature of this proposed and quality of the product. The Alcohol features of the proposed AVA that affect AVA if sufficient additional information and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau , such as climate, geology, is received. Unless otherwise noted, all (TTB) administers the FAA Act soils, physical features, and elevation, information and data pertaining to the pursuant to section 1111(d) of the that make the proposed AVA distinctive proposed AVA contained in this Homeland Security Act of 2002, and distinguish it from adjacent areas document are from the petition for the codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The outside the proposed AVA boundary; • proposed Goose Gap AVA and its Secretary has delegated the functions The appropriate United States supporting exhibits. and duties in the administration and Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) enforcement of these provisions to the showing the location of the proposed Name Evidence TTB Administrator through Treasury AVA, with the boundary of the The proposed Goose Gap AVA takes Order 120–01, dated December 10, 2013 proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; its name from the geological feature • (superseding Treasury Order 120–01, If the proposed AVA is to be known as ‘‘Goose Gap,’’ which is dated January 24, 2003). established within, or overlapping, an Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR existing AVA, an explanation that both 1 The climate data is included in Docket TTB– part 4) authorizes TTB to establish identifies the attributes of the proposed 2020–0011 at https://www.regulations.gov.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules 67471

located within the proposed AVA. 2016 newspaper article about wine concurrent with the boundary of the Goose Gap is described as a slightly grape growing in Washington states, established Candy Mountain AVA (27 rolling ‘‘saddle’’ or ‘‘gap’’ of land ‘‘The Monson family started out in CFR 9.272). This boundary separates the situated between Goose Hill, which is cattle and fruit before developing Goose proposed Goose Gap AVA from Candy also within the proposed AVA, and Ridge Vineyards, and has turned a Mountain, which is also a separate Candy Mountain and Badger Mountain, unique property in Goose Gap into geographic feature. The eastern which are located to the east and 2,200 acres of wine grapes.’’ 6 A review boundary follows a series of roads and southeast of the proposed AVA, of Washington wines describes a 2016 drainage lines to separate the proposed respectively. The gap is labeled ‘‘Goose rose´ from Goose Ridge Vineyards, which AVA from Badger Mountain. The Gap’’ on U.S.G.S. quadrangle maps is located within the proposed AVA, southern and western boundaries follow dating back to 1965, including the 1965 and mentions that the wine was made a railroad track and the 600-foot Badger Mountain quadrangle map and by ‘‘Goose Gap winemaker Andrew elevation contour to separate the the 1978 Richland quadrangle map, both Wilson.’’ 7 proposed AVA from Badger Coulee. of which were included as exhibits to Several other references to ‘‘Goose Distinguishing Features the petition. The gap is also labeled Gap’’ are found in a 2015 plan for a ‘‘Goose Gap’’ on the 2017 Badger project to develop water rights and drill The distinguishing features of the Mountain quadrangle map used to deep irrigation wells for row crops, proposed Goose Gap AVA are its create the boundary of the proposed orchards, and vineyards on lands owned geology and soils. AVA. by the Washington State Department of Geology Natural Resources (DNR) in the region The petition states that the name The proposed Goose Gap AVA is of the proposed AVA. First, the ‘‘Goose Gap’’ has been used to describe comprised of two geographic features development plan refers to the project the region of the proposed AVA in with similar viticultural conditions: as the ‘‘DNR Red Mountain Goose Gap newspaper articles and other historical Goose Gap and the adjoining Goose Hill. Project.’’ 8 The plan states that ‘‘DNR’s sources since at least 1904, when a According to the petition, Goose Gap Red Mountain Goose Gap Complex and reference appeared in the journal Forest and Goose Hill together form part of a associated leases represent one of DNR’s and Stream. The 1904 article describes single folded and faulted block of the larger agriculture projects with a goose hunting trip at ‘‘Goose Gap, underlying Basalt. through which the geese fly in reaching extensive acres of and orchard 9 Goose Gap is formed from a syncline, a the Horse Heaven feeding grounds after production and related infrastructure.’’ down-folded arch in the bedrock that they leave the sand bars of the Columbia Finally, a map of the DNR land parcels creates a saddle-like shape, whereas River.’’ 2 A 1913 article in the affected by the project notes, ‘‘Boundary Goose Hill is formed from an anticline, Kennewick Courier newspaper mentions between the Goose Gap and Red Mt. 10 an arch-like structure of basalt that was several local residents who participated Parcels are separate [sic] by I–82.’’ bent upwards to form a ridge and ‘‘in a goose hunt at ‘Goose Gap’ last TTB notes that runs just slopes. Sunday.’’ 3 A 1959 publication on the inside the northern boundary of the The proposed AVA is part of a series early history of Benton City, proposed Goose Gap AVA and separates of folded hills and valleys collectively Washington, which is located near the the proposed AVA from the established known as the , which proposed AVA, notes that ‘‘[a]round the Red Mountain AVA. runs from the Beezley Hills in the north lower valley at Goose Gap up the Boundary Evidence to the in the south. canyon * * * the wild geese come to According to the petition, all of the The proposed Goose Gap AVA feed in great flocks at certain seasons of ridges and hills in the region encompasses Goose Gap and Goose Hill. the year.’’ 4 surrounding the proposed Goose Gap The majority of the northern boundary AVA have a northwest-southeast The petition also included more is concurrent with the southern orientation, including Rattlesnake recent examples to demonstrate that the boundary of the established Red Ridge, Red Mountain, and Candy region of the proposed AVA is currently Mountain AVA and separates Goose Mountain. However, Goose Hill has an referred to as ‘‘Goose Gap.’’ A road Gap and Goose Hill from Red Mountain, east-west orientation, as does the running through the proposed AVA is which is a separate geographic feature. adjoining Goose Gap. Furthermore, the named Goose Gap Road. A local The northeastern boundary follows a south and southwest slopes within the pawpaw fruit orchard is named Goose series of highways and roads and is Gap Pawpaws. A 1972 draft proposed Goose Gap AVA are significantly steeper than the north and environmental statement on the to Interstate 80N in , page 1–8 (1972). See proposal to build Interstate 82, which Exhibit 1.16 of the petition. northeast slopes. As a result, vineyards runs through the proposed AVA, notes 6 Kevin Cole, Wine grapes continue to thrive, Tri- in the proposed AVA are planted on the that a portion of the road will ‘‘follow City Herald, Oct. 20, 2016, at pages 8–9. See Exhibit north and northeast slopes. According a passage * * * to Goose Gap at the 1.7 of the petition. to the petition, the other hills and slopes 7 Andy Perdue & Eric Degerman, Northwest wine: 5 in the Yakima Fold Belt, including the northwest end of Badger Mountain.’’ A Spring into action on the patio with Northwest rose´, Tri-City Herald, May 20, 2017, www.tri- neighboring Red Mountain and Candy 2 Portus Baxter, Washington Geese, Forest and cityherald.com/living/food-drink/wine/ Mountain, have plantable south and Stream, Vol. 63, page 26 (1904). See Exhibit 1.10 article149577139.html. (Last accessed December 12, southwest slopes, while the north and of the petition. 2017). See Exhibit 1.8 of the petition. northeast slopes are too steep for 3 Richland items, Kennewick Courier, Nov. 18, 8 Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1913 at page 4. See Exhibit 1.12 of the petition. Attachment 1—Determined Future Development vineyards. 4 History Committee of the Community Plan and Supporting Documentation—DNR Red The petition states that the unique Development Program of Benton City, 1959, History Mountain Goose Gap Project. (2015). See Exhibit 1.4 slope aspect of the proposed Goose Gap of Benton City Washington 1853–1959, pages 6, 8– of the petition. AVA has an effect on viticulture. 10, 19 (Benton City, Washington 1959). See Exhibit 9 Ibid at page 1. Vineyards on north- and northeast- 1.15 of the petition. 10 Washington Department of Natural Resources. 5 Oregon State Highway Division and Washington Attachment 1–1—Red Mountain/Goose Gap facing slopes, such as those in the State Department of Highways. Draft Environmental Complex History, page 6 (2015). See Exhibit 1.5 of proposed AVA, receive less solar Statement—Interstate 82/182 Prosser, Washington the petition. radiation than vineyards on south- and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 67472 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules

southwest-facing slopes. The petition hardpan, so the soils remain well Comparison of the Proposed Goose Gap further states that data from three drained and are desirable for vineyards. AVA to the Existing Yakima Valley AVA vineyard locations within the proposed The petition states that the soils of the T.D. ATF–128, which published in AVA show that the vineyards receive an surrounding regions differ from those of the Federal Register on April 4, 1983 average of 980,500 watt-hours per the proposed Goose Gap AVA in both (48 FR 14374), established the Yakima square meter per year. By contrast, data abundance and composition. The Valley AVA. T.D. ATF–128 states that from three vineyard locations in the petition compared the soils of the topography, climate, and soils neighboring Red Mountain AVA, which prepared AVA to those of the Red distinguish the Yakima Valley AVA are planted on south- and southwest- from the surrounding regions. The facing slopes, show that the vineyards Mountain AVA, to the northwest of the proposed AVA, the Yakima Valley AVA, Yakima Valley AVA is bounded on the receive an average of 1,025,867 watt- north and south by basaltic uplifts; on hours per square meter per year. The which encompasses the proposed AVA, and the Horse Heaven Hills AVA (27 the east by Rattlesnake Mountain, Red petition states that while a difference in Mountain, and Badger Mountain; and solar radiation of 5 percent may seem CFR 9.188), which is adjacent to the Yakima Valley AVA and to the on the west by the foothills of the small, it can affect how quickly grapes Cascade Mountains. The western southwest of the proposed AVA. ripen. For example, portion of the AVA is described as a Warden soils dominate the proposed grapes grown in the proposed AVA vast expanse of flat land, while the AVA, yet they comprise only 46 percent typically ripen a week to nine days later eastern portion is comprised of gently than the same of grapes grown of the soils in the Red Mountain AVA sloping land. The Yakima Valley AVA in the Red Mountain AVA. and approximately 25 percent of the contains at least 13 different soil soils in both the entire Yakima Valley Soils associations, the most common being AVA and the Horse Heaven Hills AVA. the Warden-Shano Association and the The proposed Goose Gap AVA has Scooteney soils make up approximately Scooteney-Starbuck Association. five main soil series: Warden, Shano, 11 percent of the soils of the Red The proposed Goose Gap AVA is Kiona, Hezel, and Prosser. Together, Mountain AVA yet are completely located in the southeastern portion of these soil series comprise almost 95 absent in the proposed Goose Gap AVA, the Yakima Valley AVA and shares percent of the soil within the proposed with which the Red Mountain AVA some of the same general features. For AVA. The most abundant soil is the shares a boundary. Ritzville soils instance, both the proposed AVA and Warden series, which makes up 65 constitute almost 30 percent of the soils the established AVA rest on Columbia percent of the proposed AVA. These of the Horse Heaven Hills AVA, but they River Basalt and have soils that are a soils consist of wind-blown loess over too are absent from the proposed AVA. combination of glacial-flood and wind- layered or stratified silts and fine sands borne soils, including the Warden soil from the ancient Missoula Floods. Summary of Distinguishing Features series. Warden soils have rooting depths of six In summary, the geology and soils of However, the proposed Goose Gap feet or more with no hardpans or other AVA has some characteristics that the proposed Goose Gap AVA root-restrictive layers, and as such, they distinguish it from the Yakima Valley distinguish it from the surrounding are prized soils for vineyards. Kiona AVA. For example, the proposed Goose regions. Although the proposed Goose soils comprise about 9 percent of the Gap AVA is unique among the hills of proposed AVA and are formed in loess Gap AVA is underlain with the same the Yakima Valley AVA in that it has an and rubble from fractured basalt. Columbia River Basalt as most of eastern east-west alignment and a north- According to the petition, these soils are Washington, the basalt in the proposed northeast plantable slope aspect. typically found on the south-facing AVA was folded in an entirely unique Additionally, although Warden and slopes of the proposed AVA, which are manner. As a result, Goose Hill and Shano soils occur in the Yakima Valley in most cases too steep for vineyards. Goose Gap, the two adjoining features AVA, they comprise a larger percentage Also within the proposed Goose Gap that comprise the proposed AVA, both of the proposed Goose Gap AVA soils. AVA are Shano and Hezel soils, which have an east-west alignment and north- By contrast, many vineyards in the each make up about 7 percent of the northeast facing plantable slopes. By Yakima Valley AVA are planted on the soils of the proposed AVA. Shano soils contrast, all of the other slopes and hills Scooteney-Starbuck soil association, but are formed in deep wind-blown loess that comprise the Yakima Fold Belt Scooteney soils are not found within the and are highly desirable for vineyards, have a northwest-southeast alignment proposed AVA and Starbuck soils in part because their low levels of and south-southwest facing plantable comprise less than 2 percent of the organic matter prevent overly vigorous slopes. Additionally, Warden soils proposed AVA soils. vine and leaf growth. Shano soils are comprise approximately 65 percent of Comparison of the Proposed Goose Gap also desirable for vineyards because the soils in the proposed AVA but make their low natural soil moisture allows AVA to the Existing Columbia Valley up significantly less of the soils in the AVA growers to control vine development via Yakima Valley AVA, which the timing and amount of water applied encompasses the proposed AVA. The Columbia Valley AVA was by drip irrigation during the growing established by T.D. ATF–190, which Warden soils also comprise significantly season. Hezel soils are made of wind- was published in the Federal Register less of the soils in the Red Mountain blown sand over stratified Missoula on November 13, 1984 (49 FR 44897). AVA to the immediate northwest of the Floods silts and sands. Finally, Prosser The Columbia Valley AVA covers soils comprise about 5 percent of the proposed AVA and the Horse Heaven approximately over 11 million acres in soils in the proposed AVA. These soils Hills AVA to the southwest of the Washington along the Columbia and formed in loess mixed with flood proposed AVA. Several soil series Snake Rivers. According to T.D. ATF– sediments that total only about 30 common in the surrounding regions, 190, the AVA is a large, treeless, broadly inches of soil thickness over basaltic including Scooteney and Ritzville, are undulating basin with elevations that bedrock. However, the underlying basalt completely absent from the proposed are generally below 2,000 feet. In is fractured and not plugged by a Goose Gap AVA. general, the growing season within the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules 67473

Columbia Valley AVA is over 150 days, § 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 Labels, TTB is particularly interested in and growing degree day accumulations CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details. comments regarding whether there will are generally over 2,000. If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, be a conflict between the proposed AVA The proposed Goose Gap AVA shares its name, ‘‘Goose Gap,’’ will be name and currently used brand names. some of the same general characteristics recognized as a name of viticultural If a commenter believes that a conflict as the Columbia Valley AVA. For significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the will arise, the comment should describe example, elevations within the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The the nature of that conflict, including any proposed AVA are below 2,000 feet. text of the proposed regulation clarifies anticipated negative economic impact However, due to its much smaller size, this point. Consequently, wine bottlers that approval of the proposed AVA will the proposed AVA has more uniform using the name ‘‘Goose Gap’’ in a brand have on an existing viticultural characteristics than the large, multi- name, including a trademark, or in enterprise. TTB is also interested in county Columbia Valley AVA. The another label reference as to the origin receiving suggestions for ways to avoid proposed AVA encompasses a single of the wine, would have to ensure that conflicts, for example, by adopting a folded and faulted block of Columbia the product is eligible to use the AVA modified or different name for the AVA. River Basalt, characterized by the Goose name as an appellation of origin if this Submitting Comments Gap syncline and the adjoining Goose proposed rule is adopted as a final rule. You may submit comments on this Hill anticline. The Columbia Valley The approval of the proposed Goose document by using one of the following AVA, by contrast, consists of multiple Gap AVA would not affect any existing AVA, and any bottlers using ‘‘Yakima methods: ridges, hills, and valleys within a single • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You broad basin. Valley’’ or ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as an appellation of origin or in a brand name may send comments via the online TTB Determination for wines made from grapes grown comment form posted with this document within Docket No. TTB– TTB concludes that the petition to within the Yakima Valley or Columbia Valley AVAs would not be affected by 2020–0011 on ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the establish the 8,129-acre Goose Gap AVA Federal e-rulemaking portal, at https:// merits consideration and public the establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of the proposed Goose www.regulations.gov. A direct link to comment, as invited in this notice of that docket is available under Notice proposed rulemaking. Gap AVA would allow vintners to use ‘‘Goose Gap,’’ ‘‘Yakima Valley,’’ and No. 196 on the TTB website at https:// Boundary Description ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as appellations of www.ttb.gov/wine/notices-of-proposed- rulemaking. Supplemental files may be See the narrative description of the origin for wines made from grapes grown within the proposed Goose Gap attached to comments submitted via boundary of the petitioned-for AVA in Regulations.gov. For complete the proposed regulatory text published AVA if the wines meet the eligibility requirements for the appellation. instructions on how to use at the end of this proposed rule. Regulations.gov, visit the site and click Maps Public Participation on the ‘‘Help’’ tab. • U.S. Mail: You may send comments Comments Invited The petitioner provided the required via postal mail to the Director, maps, and they are listed below in the TTB invites comments from interested Regulations and Rulings Division, proposed regulatory text. You may also members of the public on whether it Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade view the proposed Goose Gap AVA should establish the proposed Goose Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12, boundary on the AVA Map Explorer on Gap AVA. TTB is also interested in Washington, DC 20005. the TTB website, at https://www.ttb.gov/ receiving comments on the sufficiency Please submit your comments by the wine/ava-map-explorer. and accuracy of the name, boundary, closing date shown above in this Impact on Current Wine Labels soils, geology, and other required document. Your comments must information submitted in support of the reference Notice No. 196 and include Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits petition. In addition, given the proposed your name and mailing address. Your any label reference on a wine that Goose Gap AVA’s location within the comments also must be made in indicates or implies an origin other than existing Yakima Valley and Columbia English, be legible, and be written in the wine’s true place of origin. For a Valley AVAs, TTB is interested in language acceptable for public wine to be labeled with an AVA name, comments on whether the evidence disclosure. TTB does not acknowledge at least 85 percent of the wine must be submitted in the petition regarding the receipt of comments, and TTB considers derived from grapes grown within the distinguishing features of the proposed all comments as originals. area represented by that name, and the AVA sufficiently differentiates it from In your comment, please clearly state wine must meet the other conditions the existing established AVAs. TTB is if you are commenting for yourself or on listed in § 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB also interested in comments on whether behalf of an association, business, or regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). If the the geographic features of the proposed other entity. If you are commenting on wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA are so distinguishable from the behalf of an entity, your comment must AVA name and that name appears in the surrounding Yakima Valley and include the entity’s name, as well as brand name, then the label is not in Columbia Valley AVAs that the your name and position title. If you compliance and the bottler must change proposed Goose Gap AVA should no comment via Regulations.gov, please the brand name and obtain approval of longer be part of either AVA. Please enter the entity’s name in the a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name provide any available specific ‘‘Organization’’ blank of the online appears in another reference on the information in support of your comment form. If you comment via label in a misleading manner, the bottler comments. postal mail or hand delivery/courier, would have to obtain approval of a new Because of the potential impact of the please submit your entity’s comment on label. Different rules apply if a wine has establishment of the proposed Goose letterhead. a brand name containing an AVA name Gap AVA on wine labels that include You may also write to the that was used as a brand name on a the term ‘‘Goose Gap’’ as discussed Administrator before the comment label approved before July 7, 1986. See above under Impact on Current Wine closing date to ask for a public hearing.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 67474 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules

The Administrator reserves the right to Executive Order 12866 elevation contour and an unnamed determine whether to hold a public It has been determined that this intermittent stream in Section 16, T9N/ hearing. proposed rule is not a significant R27E; then Confidentiality regulatory action as defined by (4) Proceed southwesterly along the All submitted comments and Executive Order 12866 of September 30, unnamed intermittent stream to its attachments are part of the public record 1993. Therefore, no regulatory intersection with the 600-foot elevation and subject to disclosure. Do not assessment is required. contour in Section 20, T9N/R27E; then enclose any material in your comments Drafting Information (5) Proceed south, then southwesterly that you consider to be confidential or Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations along the 600-foot elevation contour, inappropriate for public disclosure. and Rulings Division drafted this notice crossing onto the Webber Canyon map, Public Disclosure of proposed rulemaking. for a total of approximately 3 miles to the intersection of the 600-foot elevation TTB will post, and you may view, List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 contour and the western boundary of copies of this document, selected Section 27, T9N/R27E; then supporting materials, and any online or Wine. mailed comments received about this Proposed Regulatory Amendment (6) Proceed south along the western proposal within Docket No. TTB–2020– boundary of Section 27 to its For the reasons discussed in the 0011 on the Federal e-rulemaking intersection with the railroad tracks; preamble, TTB proposes to amend title portal, Regulations.gov, at https:// then 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal www.regulations.gov. A direct link to Regulations, as follows: (7) Proceed southeasterly along the that docket is available on the TTB railroad tracks, crossing onto the Badger website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL Mountain map, and continuing along notices-of-proposed-rulemaking under AREAS the railroad tracks for a total of Notice No. 196. You may also reach the approximately 3 miles to the relevant docket through the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 9 intersection of the railroad tracks with Regulations.gov search page at https:// continues to read as follows: Dallas Road in Section 36, T9N/R27E; www.regulations.gov. For information Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. on how to use Regulations.gov, click on then the site’s ‘‘Help’’ tab. Subpart C—Approved American (8) Proceed east, then north along All posted comments will display the Viticultural Areas Dallas Road for approximately 2 miles commenter’s name, organization (if to its intersection with in any), city, and State, and, in the case of ■ 2. Subpart C is amended by adding Section 20, T9N/R28E; then §9.lll to read as follows: mailed comments, all address (9) Proceed west along Interstate 182 information, including email addresses. §9.lll Goose Gap. and onto the ramp to Interstate 82, and TTB may omit voluminous attachments continue northwesterly along Interstate or material that the Bureau considers (a) Name. The name of the viticultural 82, crossing over the southwestern unsuitable for posting. area described in this section is ‘‘Goose You may also obtain copies of this Gap’’. For purposes of part 4 of this corner of the Richland map and onto the proposed rule, all related petitions, chapter, ‘‘Goose Gap’’ is a term of Benton City map, to the intersection of maps and other supporting materials, viticultural significance. Interstate 82 and an intermittent stream and any electronic or mailed comments (b) Approved maps. The 4 United in Section 13, T9N/R27E; then that TTB receives about this proposal at States Geological Survey (USGS) (10) Proceed northwesterly along the 20 cents per 8.5 x 11-inch page. Please 1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to intermittent stream to its intersection note that TTB is unable to provide determine the boundary of the Goose with E. Kennedy Road NE in Section 13, copies of USGS maps or any similarly- Gap viticultural area are titled: T9N/R27E; then sized documents that may be included (1) Benton City, WA, 2017; (11) Proceed north in a straight line to as part of the AVA petition. Contact (2) Richland, WA, 2017; TTB’s Regulations and Rulings Division (3) Badger Mountain, WA, 2017; and the northern boundary of Section 13, by email using the web form at https:// (4) Webber Canyon, WA, 2017. T9N/R27E; then www.ttb.gov/contact-rrd, or by (c) Boundary. The Goose Gap (12) Proceed westerly along the telephone at 202–453–1039, ext. 175, to viticultural area is located in Benton northern boundaries of Sections 13 and request copies of comments or other County, Washington. The boundary of 14, returning to the beginning point. materials. the Goose Gap viticultural area is as described below: Signed: August 26, 2020. Regulatory Flexibility Act (1) The beginning point is on the Mary G. Ryan, TTB certifies that this proposed Benton City map at the intersection of Administrator. regulation, if adopted, would not have Sections 10, 11, 15, and 14, T9N/R27E. Approved: September 24, 2020. a significant economic impact on a From the beginning point, proceed Timothy E. Skud, substantial number of small entities. southwesterly in a straight line for Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and The proposed regulation imposes no approximately 250 feet to the 700-foot Tariff Policy). new reporting, recordkeeping, or other elevation contour in Section 15, T9N/ administrative requirement. Any benefit R27E; then [FR Doc. 2020–22925 Filed 10–22–20; 8:45 am] derived from the use of a viticultural (2) Proceed southwesterly along the BILLING CODE 4810–31–P area name would be the result of a 700-ft elevation contour to its proprietor’s efforts and consumer westernmost point in Section 15, T9N/ acceptance of wines from that area. R27E; then Therefore, no regulatory flexibility (3) Proceed southwesterly in a straight analysis is required. line to intersection of the 700-foot

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 22, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23OCP1.SGM 23OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS