23156 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

the national government and the States, (e) Actions and Compliance DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY or on the distribution of power and Comply with this AD within the responsibilities among the various compliance times specified, unless already Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade levels of government. done. Bureau For the reasons discussed above, I (1) Prior to exceeding 880 operating hours certify this AD: since new on the adjusted HP/LP pump and 27 CFR Part 9 metering valve assembly or within 50 (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory [Docket No. TTB–2015–0005; T.D. TTB–136; action’’ under Executive Order 12866, operating hours after the effective date of this Ref: Notice Nos. 149 & 149A] AD, whichever occurs later: (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under (i) Remove from service the adjusted HP/ RIN 1513–AC14 the DOT Regulatory Policies and LP pump and metering valve assembly and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, replace with a part that is eligible for Establishment of the Lewis-Clark 1979), installation, and Valley Viticultural Area and (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation (ii) replace the constant delta-P diaphragm Realignment of the Columbia Valley in Alaska to the extent that it justifies of the fuel metering valve. Viticultural Area making a regulatory distinction, and (2) Reserved. AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and (4) Will not have a significant (f) Installation Prohibition economic impact, positive or negative, Trade Bureau, Treasury. After the effective date of this AD, do not on a substantial number of small entities ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. install into any engine any pre-TU 193 under the criteria of the Regulatory adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Flexibility Act. assembly, nor install onto any helicopter any and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 engine that has a pre-TU 193 adjusted HP/LP approximately 306,650-acre Lewis-Clark pump and metering valve assembly. Valley viticultural area in portions of Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Nez Perce, Lewis, Clearwater, and Latah safety, Incorporation by reference, (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance Counties in and Asotin, Garfield, Safety. (AMOCs) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, and Whitman Counties in Washington. Adoption of the Amendment FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use TTB is also modifying the boundary of the existing Columbia Valley Accordingly, under the authority the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to viticultural area to eliminate a partial delegated to me by the Administrator, make your request. You may email your overlap with the Lewis-Clark Valley the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as request to: [email protected]. viticultural area. The boundary follows: (h) Related Information modification will decrease the size of PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS (1) For more information about this AD, the approximately 11,370,320-acre contact Kyle Gustafson, Aerospace Engineer, DIRECTIVES Columbia Valley viticultural area by Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & approximately 57,020 acres. The Lewis- Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, ■ Clark Valley viticultural area is not 1. The authority citation for part 39 Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238– continues to read as follows: located within and does not overlap any 7183; fax: 781–238–7199; email: kyle. other viticultural area. TTB designates Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. [email protected]. viticultural areas to allow vintners to (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation better describe the origin of their § 39.13 [Amended] Safety Agency AD 2015–0213, dated October 16, 2015, for more information. You may and to allow consumers to better ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding identify wines they may purchase. the following new airworthiness examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the DATES: This final rule is effective May directive (AD): Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/ #!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-5539-0002. 20, 2016. 2016–08–16 Turbomeca S.A.: Amendment (3) Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 39–18493; Docket No. FAA–2015–5539; Bulletin No. 292 73 2193, Version A, dated Directorate Identifier 2015–NE–37–AD. Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and July 16, 2015, can be obtained from Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco (a) Effective Date Turbomeca S.A., using the contact Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street information in paragraph (h)(4) of this AD. This AD becomes effective May 25, 2016. NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; (4) For service information identified in phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175. (b) Affected ADs this AD, contact Turbomeca S.A., 40220 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None. Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. Background on Viticultural Areas (c) Applicability (5) You may view this service information This AD applies to all Turbomeca S.A. at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, TTB Authority Arriel 2E turboshaft engines that have a pre- 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For TU 193 adjusted high-pressure/low-pressure Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol information on the availability of this Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 (HP/LP) pump and metering valve assembly, material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. installed. U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary (i) Material Incorporated by Reference of the Treasury to prescribe regulations (d) Reason None. for the labeling of , distilled spirits, This AD was prompted by reports of fuel and malt beverages. The FAA Act flow non-conformities found during Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on provides that these regulations should, acceptance tests of Arriel 2E hydro- April 12, 2016. among other things, prohibit consumer mechanical metering units. We are issuing Ann C. Mollica, this AD to prevent failure of the constant deception and the use of misleading Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller delta-pressure (delta-P) diaphragm of the fuel statements on labels and ensure that Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. metering valve, which could result in an labels provide the consumer with uncommanded in-flight shutdown and [FR Doc. 2016–09121 Filed 4–19–16; 8:45 am] adequate information as to the identity damage to the helicopter. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P and quality of the product. The Alcohol

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 23157

and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau • An explanation of the basis for proposed AVA are the gently rolling (TTB) administers the FAA Act defining the boundary of the proposed hills of the Palouse high prairie, where pursuant to section 1111(d) of the AVA; the elevations can reach approximately Homeland Security Act of 2002, • A narrative description of the 2,800 feet. codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The features of the proposed AVA affecting Due to its lower elevations, the Secretary has delegated various , such as climate, geology, climate of the proposed Lewis-Clark authorities through Treasury soils, physical features, and elevation, Valley is generally warmer than that of Department Order 120–01 (dated that make the proposed AVA distinctive the surrounding regions and is suitable December 10, 2013, superseding and distinguish it from adjacent areas for growing a variety of grape , Treasury Order 120–01 (Revised), outside the proposed AVA boundary; including , • ‘‘Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade The appropriate United States , , and Cabernet Bureau,’’ dated January 24, 2003), to the Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) Franc. The warm temperatures of the TTB Administrator to perform the showing the location of the proposed proposed AVA have earned the region functions and duties in the AVA, with the boundary of the the nickname ‘‘banana belt of the Pacific administration and enforcement of these proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; Northwest.’’ Growing degree day (GDD) laws. and accumulations within the proposed • A detailed narrative description of Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR AVA range from 2,613 to 3,036. GDD the proposed AVA boundary based on part 4) authorizes TTB to establish accumulations in the surrounding USGS map markings. definitive viticultural areas and regulate regions are all below 2,000, which is too the use of their names as appellations of Lewis-Clark Valley Petition low for the consistent, successful ripening of most varietals of V. vinifera origin on wine labels and in wine TTB received a petition from Dr. Alan advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB grapes. Busacca, a licensed geologist and Low shrubs and perennial grasses that regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth founder of Vinitas Consultants, LLC, on have deep masses of fine roots standards for the preparation and behalf of the Palouse-Lewis Clark Valley constitute the native vegetation of the submission of petitions for the Wine Alliance and the Clearwater proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA. The establishment or modification of Economic Development Association. decomposition of these native grasses American viticultural areas (AVAs) and The petition proposed to establish the and their root mats has contributed to lists the approved AVAs. Lewis-Clark Valley AVA and modify the the formation of nutrient-rich soils Definition boundary of the existing Columbia within the proposed AVA. The soils are Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.74). There are 3 high in organic materials that promote Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB wineries and approximately 16 healthy vine growth. The majority of regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines commercially producing vineyards these soils are classified as Mollisols a viticultural area for American wine as covering more than 81 acres within the soils. The Palouse region to the north of a delimited grape-growing region having proposed AVA. According to the the proposed AVA has similar native distinguishing features, as described in petition, an additional 50 acres of grapes grasses, but most of the land is used for part 9 of the regulations, and a name are expected to be planted within the growing wheat, which is better suited to and a delineated boundary, as next few years. the cooler climate of the Palouse. To the established in part 9 of the regulations. The distinguishing features of the east, south, and west of the proposed These designations allow vintners and proposed Lewis-Clark AVA include its AVA, conifer trees comprise most of the consumers to attribute a given quality, topography, climate, native vegetation, native vegetation. The understories of reputation, or other characteristic of a and soils. The proposed AVA is located these forested regions are covered with wine made from grapes grown in an area at the confluence of the Snake and pine needle litter instead of perennial to the wine’s geographic origin. The Clearwater Rivers. The topography of grasses. The pine needle litter remains establishment of AVAs allows vintners the proposed AVA consists primarily of on the surface, so the organic material to describe more accurately the origin of deep, V-notched canyons, low plateaus, released by the decomposition of the their wines to consumers and helps and bench lands formed by the two needles does not mix as deeply into the consumers to identify wines they may rivers. Almost none of the proposed soil as the material released by decaying purchase. Establishment of an AVA is AVA consists of broad floodplains grass root mats. As a result, the soils of neither an approval nor an endorsement typically associated with valley floors, forested regions are not as high in by TTB of the wine produced in that which are susceptible to cold-air organic material and nutrients as the area. pooling that can damage new growth soils within the proposed AVA. Requirements and delay fruit maturation. Elevations Additionally, the soils to the east, south, within the proposed AVA are below 600 and west of the proposed AVA are Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB meters (approximately 1,970 feet). classified as Andisols soils, which are regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines According to the petition, within the comprised primarily of ash and other the procedure for proposing an AVA region of proposed AVA, elevations volcanic materials and contain only and provides that any interested party above 600 meters are generally too cold small amounts of organic material. may petition TTB to establish a grape- to support reliable ripening of the growing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 varietals of Vitis vinifera (V. vinifera) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) grapes that are grown within the Comments Received prescribes standards for petitions for the proposed AVA, and winter freezes can TTB published Notice No. 149 in the establishment or modification of AVAs. be hard enough to kill dormant vines. Federal Register on April 14, 2015 (80 Petitions to establish an AVA must By contrast, the regions surrounding the FR 19902), proposing to establish the include the following: proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA to Lewis-Clark Valley AVA. In the • Evidence that the area within the the east, south, southwest, and west are document, TTB summarized the proposed AVA boundary is nationally steep, rugged mountains with elevations evidence from the petition regarding the or locally known by the AVA name ranging from approximately 2,000 feet name, boundary, and distinguishing specified in the petition; to over 6,300 feet. To the north of the features for the proposed AVA. The

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 23158 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

document also compared the deposited through centuries of alluvial consider this [soil type] any less suitable distinguishing features of the proposed outwash. . . .’’ The third commenter for viticulture’’ than the Mollisols soils AVA to the surrounding areas. In Notice (comment 21) stated that the of the proposed AVA. No. 149, TTB solicited comments on the overlapping region and the proposed TTB has reviewed the commenter’s accuracy of the name, boundary, and AVA were ‘‘not ravaged by the Missoula claims and supporting evidence and has other required information submitted in Floods as was most of the Columbia decided not to include the proposed support of the petition. In addition, TTB Valley.’’ The fourth commenter expansion area within the proposed solicited comments on whether the (comment 36) stated that his experience AVA for two reasons. First, TTB notes information provided in the petition growing grapes in the proposed AVA that the commenter states that the sufficiently demonstrated that the supports the petition’s claims that the property owner is planning to plant a distinguishing features of the portion of climate of the proposed AVA has a vineyard, which does not indicate that the proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA longer growing season and different viticulture exists within the proposed that would overlap the established soils than the Columbia Valley AVA. expansion area. TTB regulations require Columbia Valley AVA are so different The commenter also agreed with the that viticulture be present within an from those of the established AVA that petition that the canyons of the area proposed to be added to an AVA. the overlapping region should be proposed AVA and the overlapping See 27 CFR 9.12(c). Therefore, the removed from the established AVA and region are ‘‘in stark contrast to the proposed expansion area cannot be placed entirely within the proposed shallow and wide basins created by the added to the proposed Lewis-Clark AVA. The comment period originally Columbia River in the Columbia Valley Valley AVA because no evidence has closed on June 15, 2015. AVA.’’ been provided to show that viticulture In response to Notice No. 149, TTB Proposed AVA Boundary Expansion currently takes place in the proposed received 37 comments during the expansion area. While supporting establishment of the original comment period, 36 of which Secondly, TTB has determined that proposed Lewis-Clark AVA, one unequivocally support the the proposed expansion area does not commenter proposed expanding its establishment of the proposed Lewis- share the same climate and soils as the Clark AVA, with several commenters boundary to include an area of higher proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA and citing its distinct topography, climate, elevations to the northeast of the would not be included in the proposed and soils. Many of the commenters also proposed AVA. This acreage is referred AVA even if viticulture was taking place stated their belief that the proposed to in this section of the final rule as the currently. With respect to climate AVA would encourage economic growth ‘‘proposed expansion area’’ for the conditions, the GDD accumulations in the Lewiston-Clarkston region. proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA. The provided by the commenter ranged from Commenters included local vineyard commenter states he plans to develop a 1,984 to 2,150, which is a significantly and winery owners; a member of the vineyard within the proposed expansion lower range from the 2,613–3,036 range Lewiston, Idaho City Council; Valley area at approximately 2,800 feet in found within the proposed AVA. Some Vision, a local non-profit economic elevation (see comment 34). The development corporation; proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA is grape varietals may grow successfully in representatives of the Clearwater limited to elevations of 600 meters regions that have the range of GDD Economic Development Association; (approximately 1,960 feet) and under. accumulations found in the proposed representatives of the Port of Lewiston Arguing that viticulture is feasible at the expansion area. However, because the and the Port of Clarkston, Washington; higher elevations of the Lewis-Clark GDD accumulations are significantly the Idaho Wine Commission; the Dean Valley, the commenter provided climate lower within the proposed expansion for Community Programs at Lewis-Clark data from a station within the proposed area, TTB believes that the grapes would State College; the Nez Perce County, expansion area for 2012–2014. While be growing under different climatic Idaho Planning and Building noting that the GDD accumulations conditions than are found within the Department; and a licensed geologist/ within his proposed expansion area are proposed AVA. Although the hydrologist. lower than those within the proposed commenter claims that climate research Eleven of the supporting comments AVA, the commenter stated they are and projections suggest that also specifically support removing the higher than those found in Moscow, temperatures within the proposed overlapping region of the proposed Idaho, which is located to the north of expansion area may eventually become Lewis-Clark Valley AVA from the the proposed AVA. Climate data from as warm as those within the proposed Columbia Valley AVA. However, only Moscow was included in the proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA, TTB’s four of these comments (comments 13, Lewis-Clark Valley AVA petition. The determinations concerning the 20, 21, and 36) offer specific reasons for commenter believes, therefore, that his establishment or expansion of AVAs are supporting the boundary modification. data shows the climate in his proposed based on currently available climate One commenter (comment 13) reiterated expansion area is more similar to the data. the petition’s claim that the different climate within the proposed Lewis- Regarding the soils of the proposed geology of the overlapping region Clark AVA than the climate of the expansion area, the commenter states created a topography of bench lands, nearby regions north of the proposed that they are Andisols soils, which are low plateaus, and steep canyon sides AVA, including Moscow, Idaho. composed largely of volcanic material. that are distinct from the plains of the The commenter also claimed that However, the proposed Lewis-Clark Columbia Valley AVA. Another precipitation amounts within the Valley AVA’s soils are primarily commenter (comment 20) stated that the proposed expansion area are similar to Mollisols soils formed from decaying climate of the overlapping region and those within the proposed Lewis-Clark grasses and their roots. Although the proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA Valley AVA, although he did not Andisols soils may be suitable for are both ‘‘more distinctly affected by the provide any non-anecdotal evidence to viticulture, the nutrients and minerals interior mountains on the eastern border support his claim. Finally, the found in volcanic soils differ from those of the proposed AVA and the soils are commenter states that although the soils found in Mollisols soils and thus would distinctly affected by the decomposed in the proposed expansion area are create different growing conditions for granites and basalt substrates that were Andisols soils, ‘‘there is no reason to grapevines.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 23159

Therefore, due to both a lack of substantive evidence to support the ‘‘when twice as much floodwater current viticulture and shared proposed realignment. entered the gap than could actually pass distinguishing features in the proposed Comment 39 was submitted by Dr. through. This hydraulic dam also expansion area, TTB has determined Wade Wolfe, who described himself as temporarily reversed the flow of the that it will not expand the proposed one of the contributors to the original Snake River to near Lewiston.’’ As a Lewis-Clark Valley AVA to include the Columbia Valley AVA petition. Dr. result of the build-up of water behind proposed expansion area described in Wolfe states that defining the original the Wallula Gap, ‘‘thick accumulations comment 34. ‘‘east boundary of the Columbia Valley of sediment were deposited toward the was especially problematic’’ due to that center of the backflooded Walla Walla Opposition to Proposed Columbia region’s cold temperatures, the lack of and Yakima Valleys,’’ within the current Valley AVA Boundary Realignment irrigation infrastructure for vineyards, Columbia Valley AVA. TTB received one comment that and the use of the herbicide 2,4–D in the The commenter also states that the supports the establishment of the wheat fields of the Palouse. All of these proposed realignment area was affected proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA but factors, Dr. Wolfe states, limit the future by the Bonneville Flood, which did not opposes the proposed realignment of the of viticulture in the far eastern portion extend farther into the Columbia Valley Columbia Valley AVA (comment 35). of the Columbia Valley AVA. In spite of AVA. The Bonneville Flood deposited The commenter, the owner of a vineyard these limiting factors, the decision was ‘‘sediments (soils) of a different within the proposed realignment area, made to end the Columbia Valley at the character and composition’’ into the stated that he believes his continued Washington-Idaho border. Dr. Wolfe region of the proposed Lewis-Clark inclusion in the Columbia Valley AVA states his belief that a more appropriate Valley AVA and the proposed would be beneficial to his business and, eastern boundary would have been ‘‘a realignment area, including soils therefore, he does not want his vineyard location near the Columbia and Garfield derived from eroded ‘‘older property to be removed from that AVA. County line about 30 miles west of sedimentary, metamorphic, and Instead, the commenter stated that TTB Pullman, WA.’’ At this point, the Snake plutonic rocks of the North American should allow the proposed Lewis-Clark River Valley narrows to very steep craton.’’ Finally, the commenter states Valley to partially overlap the Columbia slopes, and elevations rise to over 2,000 that due to the ‘‘higher relief of the Valley because ‘‘the geology, soils and feet, making commercial viticulture canyonlands within the Lewis-Clark climate of the proposed Lewis-Clark unlikely. Dr. Wolfe further stated that Valley,’’ the soils of the proposed AVA Valley AVA are quite similar to those of the narrow canyon continues along the and the proposed realignment area Snake River until the river ‘‘intersects the Columbia Valley and mostly lay contain a higher percentage of ‘‘talus with SR 12 just west of Clarkston,’’ within the elevations affected by the and slopewash shed off the steep where the river valley opens up again. Missoula floods.’’ The commenter did canyon walls.’’ The commenter claims This intersection is along the northern not provide any evidence to support his that these types of deposits are not border of the proposed realignment area. claim. common within the majority of the Dr. Wolfe asserts that the narrow Columbia Valley AVA, which contains Because the proposed realignment of portion of the Snake River creates a ‘‘broad, low-relief basins.’’ the Columbia Valley could potentially logical separation between the valley affect the business practices of wine system of the Columbia Valley AVA and Comment 41 is from a self-described industry members within the proposed the valley system of the proposed local wine consumer. The comment realignment area, TTB published Notice Lewis-Clark Valley AVA. largely summarizes the evidence No. 149A in the Federal Register on Dr. Wolfe also states that the valley provided in the petition to establish the October 27, 2015 (80 FR 65670) to system of the proposed Lewis-Clark proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA and reopen the comment period for an Valley AVA, including the proposed realign the boundary of the Columbia additional 30 days. In Notice No. 149A, realignment area, is further Valley AVA. The commenter states that TTB asked for comments on whether the differentiated from the valley system of the proposed realignment area should evidence provided in the petition to the Columbia Valley AVA by its be removed from the Columbia Valley establish the proposed Lewis-Clark separate rain shadow. Marine moisture AVA because ‘‘from a statistical Valley AVA and to modify the boundary is blocked from entering the Columbia perspective,’’ the vineyards within the of the Columbia Valley AVA adequately Valley AVA by the Cascade Mountains. proposed realignment area ‘‘would demonstrates that the characteristics of By contrast, the proposed Lewis-Clark represent an outlier.’’ He explains, ‘‘If the proposed realignment area are more Valley AVA is in the rain shadow of the one were to view the Columbia Valley similar to those of the rest of the Blue Mountains and extensions of the AVA as a map scatter diagram, the vast proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA than Rocky Mountains. This different rain majority of vineyards are located in the to the distinguishing features of the shadow, according to Dr. Wolfe, Interstate-82 corridor between Walla Columbia Valley AVA. The reopened ‘‘redefines the valley drainage of this Walla and Yakima, WA.’’ comment period closed November 27, section of the Snake River and when Approximately 100 miles separate the 2015. combined with the Clearwater River nearest Columbia Valley AVA vineyard from the nearest vineyard in the Comments Received During the drainage, justifies a separate valley AVA proposed realignment area, the Reopened Comment Period designation.’’ Comment 40 was submitted by a commenter claims. Based on the lack of During the reopened comment period, licensed geologist/hydrologist. The vineyards between Interstate 82 and the TTB received six additional comments commenter states that while the proposed realignment area, the on Notice No. 149. All six comments Columbia Valley AVA and the proposed commenter believes that the current supported the proposed realignment of realignment area were both affected by boundary of the Columbia Valley AVA the Columbia Valley AVA. Two of the repeated ‘‘Ice Age outbursts’’ from Lake extends too far east, and the comments supported the proposed Missoula, the effects of the floods were southeastern Columbia Valley AVA realignment but provided no additional significantly different in both regions. boundary should be modified to place evidence. The remaining four comments The commenter states that the floods the proposed realignment area solely in (comments 39, 40, 41, and 42) provided were backed up behind the Wallula Gap the proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 23160 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Comment 42 was submitted by Dr. Columbia Valley AVA, in portions of name ‘‘Lewis-Clark Valley’’ in a brand Alan Busacca, who submitted the Washington and Idaho. The realignment name, including a trademark, or in proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA is in accordance with TTB’s another label reference as to the origin petition. Dr. Busacca reiterated Dr. determination that the canyon-and- of the wine, must ensure that the Wolfe’s statement from comment 39 that bench topography and Mollisols soils of product is eligible to use the AVA name the point where the Snake River the realignment area are more similar to as an appellation of origin. narrows forms a logical division the features of the Lewis-Clark Valley Transition Period between the Columbia Valley AVA and AVA than to the broad, rolling the proposed Lewis-Clark Valley AVA. floodplains and Aridisols soils of the Once this final rule to establish the Dr. Busacca further reiterates that the Columbia Valley AVA. Therefore, TTB Lewis-Clark Valley AVA and to modify topography of the proposed realignment is removing the realignment area from the boundary of the Columbia Valley area and the proposed AVA, which is the Columbia Valley AVA and placing AVA becomes effective, a transition rule described as a ‘‘unique, almost bowl- it entirely within the Lewis-Clark Valley will apply to labels for wines produced like set of plateaus and benches,’’ is AVA, as described in Notice No. 149. from grapes grown in the portion of the distinctly different from the topography These determinations are made in Lewis-Clark Valley AVA that was of the Columbia Valley AVA. Dr. accordance with the authority of the formerly within the Columbia Valley Busacca also states that if the climate, FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the AVA. A label containing the words topography, and geology of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as well ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ in the brand name or proposed realignment area are similar to as parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations, as an appellation of origin may be used the Columbia Valley AVA, as the and are effective 30 days from the on such wine bottled for up to two years opposing commenter claims, then the publication date of this document. from the effective date of this final rule, soils would also be similar, since those provided that such label was approved three features affect the formation of Boundary Description prior to the effective date of this final soil. However, Dr. Busacca states that of See the narrative description of the rule and that the wine conforms to the the 80 soils found within both the boundary of the Lewis-Clark Valley standards for use of the label set forth proposed AVA and the proposed AVA and the modification of the in 27 CFR 4.25 or 4.39(i) in effect prior realignment area, fewer than 8 also boundary of the Columbia Valley AVA to the final rule. At the end of this two- occur in the main grape-growing regions in the regulatory text published at the year transition period, if a wine is no of the Columbia Valley AVA. Therefore, end of this final rule. longer eligible for labeling with the Columbia Valley name (e.g., less than 85 Dr. Busacca claims that the small Maps number of shared soils demonstrates percent of the wine is derived from that the proposed realignment area does The petitioner provided the required grapes grown in the Columbia Valley, as not share similar topographic, geologic, maps, and they are listed below in the modified in this final rule), then a label and climatic characteristics with the regulatory text. containing the words ‘‘Columbia Columbia Valley AVA. Impact on Current Wine Labels Valley’’ in the brand name or as an Finally, Dr. Busacca addresses the appellation of origin would not be opposing commenter’s statement that Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits permitted on the bottle. TTB believes the proposed realignment area and the any label reference on a wine that that the two-year period should provide Columbia Valley AVA were both indicates or implies an origin other than adequate time to use up any existing affected by the Missoula Floods. Dr. the wine’s true place of origin. For a labels. This transition period is Busacca says that while the floodwaters wine to be labeled with an AVA name described in the regulatory text for the did reach the proposed AVA, the waters or with a brand name that includes an Columbia Valley AVA published at the had travelled almost 100 miles upstream AVA name, at least 85 percent of the end of this final rule. In this final rule, along the Snake River, against the flow wine must be derived from grapes TTB has added regulatory text to clarify of the river. As a result, within the grown within the area represented by that wine eligible for labeling with the proposed AVA, the floods ‘‘caused that name, and the wine must meet the Columbia Valley name under the new almost no erosion, left little sediment other conditions listed in 27 CFR boundary of the Columbia Valley AVA behind, and thus did not today create 4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for will not be affected by the establishment more than a few tens of acres of unique labeling with an AVA name and that of the Lewis-Clark Valley AVA or by terroir on small patched [sic] of flat land name appears in the brand name, then this two-year transition period. just above river level.’’ By contrast, the label is not in compliance and the within the Columbia Valley AVA, the bottler must change the brand name and Regulatory Flexibility Act floods created the ‘‘scabland’’ regions obtain approval of a new label. TTB certifies that this regulation will and built up large deposits of ‘‘gravel, Similarly, if the AVA name appears in not have a significant economic impact sand and silt up to hundreds of feet another reference on the label in a on a substantial number of small deep.... A whisper and a whimper of misleading manner, the bottler must entities. The regulation imposes no new such effects totaling a hundred acres or obtain approval of a new label. Different reporting, recordkeeping, or other two are all that these floods caused in rules apply if a wine has a brand name administrative requirement. Any benefit the Lewiston-Clarkston area.’’ containing an AVA name that was used derived from the use of an AVA name as a brand name on a label approved would be the result of a proprietor’s TTB Determination before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR efforts and consumer acceptance of After careful review of the petition 4.39(i)(2) for details. wines from that area. Therefore, no and the 43 comments in total received With the establishment of this AVA, regulatory flexibility analysis is in response to Notices No. 149 and No. its name, ‘‘Lewis-Clark Valley,’’ is required. 149A, TTB finds that the evidence recognized as a name of viticultural provided by the petitioner and the significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the Executive Order 12866 commenters supports the establishment TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The It has been determined that this final of the Lewis-Clark Valley AVA and the text of the regulation clarifies this point. rule is not a significant regulatory action realignment of the boundary of the Consequently, wine bottlers using the as defined by Executive Order 12866 of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 23161

September 30, 1993. Therefore, no meter contour to the eastern boundary along the southern boundary line of regulatory assessment is required. of section 17, R. 45E./T. 11N.; then section 17, T11N/R45E, to the southeast south following the eastern boundary of corner of section 17; then Drafting Information section 17 to the southern boundary of (2) Proceed north along the eastern Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations section 17; and then west following the boundary line of section 17 to the 600- and Rulings Division drafted this final southern boundaries of sections 17 and meter elevation contour; then rule. 18 to the Asotin-Garfield county line in (3) Proceed generally east-northeast along the meandering 600-meter List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 section 19, R. 45E./T. 11N.; (39) Then south following the elevation contour, crossing into Idaho Wine. Garfield-Asotin county line to the 600- and onto the Orofino map, then The Regulatory Amendment meter elevation contour; then following continue to follow the elevation contour generally west and south in a in an overall clockwise direction, For the reasons discussed in the crossing back and forth between the preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter counterclockwise direction along the meandering 600-meter elevation contour Orofino and Clarkston maps and finally I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as onto the Potlatch map, and then follows: to Charley Creek in section 4, R. 44 E./ T. 9 N.; and then west following Charley continuing to follow the 600-meter PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL Creek on to the township line between elevation contour in a clockwise AREAS R. 42 E. and R. 43 E.; direction to the elevation contour’s (40) Then north following the intersection with the southern boundary ■ 1. The authority citation for part 9 township line between R. 42 E. and R. line of section 1, T37N/R1W, on the continues to read as follows: 43 E. on the 1:250,000 scale ‘‘Pullman, Potlatch map, north of the Nez Perce Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. Washington, Idaho’’ map to Washington Indian Reservation boundary and west Highway 128 at Peola; of the Dworshak Reservoir (North Fork Subpart C—Approved American * * * * * of the Clearwater River) in Clearwater Viticultural Areas (d) Transition period. A label County, Idaho; then (4) Cross the Dworshak Reservoir containing the words ‘‘Columbia ■ 2. Amend § 9.74 by revising (North Fork of the Clearwater River) by Valley’’ in the brand name or as an paragraphs (b) and (c)(38) through (40) proceeding east along the southern appellation of origin approved prior to and adding paragraph (d) to read as boundary line of section 1, T37N/R1E, May 20, 2016 may be used on wine follows: to the southeastern corner of section 1; bottled before May 21, 2018 if the wine then by proceeding north along the § 9.74 Columbia Valley. conforms to the standards for use of the eastern boundary line of section 1 to the label set forth in § 4.25 or § 4.39(i) of * * * * * southwest corner of section 6, T37N/ this chapter in effect prior to May 20, (b) Approved maps. The approved R2E; and then by proceeding east along 2016. maps for determining the boundary of the southern boundary line of section 6 the Columbia Valley viticultural area are ■ 3. Add § 9.256 to read as follows: to the 600-meter elevation contour; then nine 1:250,000 scale U.S.G.S. maps and § 9.256 Lewis-Clark Valley. (5) Proceed generally east initially, one 1:100,000 (metric) scale U.S.G.S. then generally south, and then generally map. They are entitled: (a) Name. The name of the viticultural southeast along the meandering 600- (1) Concrete, Washington, U.S.; area described in this section is ‘‘Lewis- meter elevation contour, crossing onto British Columbia, Canada, edition of Clark Valley’’. For purposes of part 4 of the Orofino map, and then continuing to 1955, limited revision 1963; this chapter, ‘‘Lewis-Clark Valley’’ is a follow the elevation contour in an (2) Okanogan, Washington, edition of term of viticultural significance. overall clockwise direction, crossing 1954, limited revision 1963; (b) Approved maps. The three United back and forth between the Orofino and (3) Pendleton, , Washington, States Geographical Survey (USGS) edition of 1954, revised 1973; Potlatch maps, to the eastern boundary 1:100,000 (metric) scale topographic of section 13, T35N/R2E, on the Orofino (4) Pullman, Washington, Idaho, maps used to determine the boundary of edition of 1953, revised 1974; map in Clearwater County, Idaho; then the Lewis-Clark Valley viticultural area (6) Proceed south along the eastern (5) Clarkston, Washington, Idaho, are titled: Oregon, 1:100,000 (metric) scale, edition boundary of section 13, T35N/R2E, to (1) Clarkston, Wash.-Idaho-Oregon, the southeastern corner of section 13, of 1981; 1981; (6) Ritzville, Washington, edition of T35N/R2E, northeast of Lolo Creek; then (2) Orofino, Idaho-Washington, 1981; (7) Proceed west along the southern 1953, limited revision 1965; and (7) The Dalles, Oregon, Washington, boundary line of section 13, T35N/R2E, (3) Potlatch, Idaho, 1981. edition of 1953, revised 1971; to the Clearwater-Idaho County line in (8) Walla Walla, Washington, Oregon, (c) Boundary. The Lewis-Clark Valley the middle of Lolo Creek; then edition of 1953, limited revision 1963; viticultural area is located in Nez Perce, (8) Proceed generally west-northwest (9) Wenatchee, Washington, edition of Lewis, Clearwater, and Latah Counties, along the Clearwater-Idaho County line 1957, revised 1971; and Idaho, and Asotin, Garfield, and (concurrent with Lolo Creek) to the (10) Yakima, Washington, edition of Whitman Counties, Washington. The Lewis County line at the confluence of 1958, revised 1971. boundary of the Lewis-Clark Valley Lolo Creek and the Clearwater River; (c) * * * viticultural area is as follows: then (38) Then south following the (1) The beginning point is located on (9) Proceed generally south along the Washington-Idaho State boundary on the Clarkston map in Washington State Lewis-Idaho County line (concurrent the 1:100,000 (metric) scale Clarkston, along the Garfield-Asotin County line at with the Clearwater River) to the Washington, Idaho, Oregon map to the the southwest corner of section 18, northern boundary line of section 23, 600-meter elevation contour along the T11N/R45E. From the beginning point, T35N/R2E; then eastern boundary of section 9, proceed east along the southern (10) Proceed west along the northern R. 46 E./T. 11 N.; and then generally boundary line of section 18, crossing boundary line of section 23, T35N/R2E, west following the meandering 600- over the Snake River, and continue to the 600-meter elevation contour; then

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES 23162 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

(11) Proceed generally northwest Signed: March 28, 2016. period. It also notifies the public that no along the meandering 600-meter John J. Manfreda, further consideration will be given to elevation contour, crossing onto the Administrator. previously submitted proposals but that Potlatch map and then back onto the Approved: April 15, 2016. such proposals may be resubmitted Orofino map and continuing generally Timothy E. Skud, under the revised regulations. The paragraph relating to proposals southwest along the 600-meter elevation Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and contour to the common T32N/T31N Tariff Policy). regarding the same subject and proposals for the sharing of funds township boundary line along the [FR Doc. 2016–09264 Filed 4–19–16; 8:45 am] southern boundary line of section 35, between two agencies is edited for BILLING CODE 4810–31–P clarity and moved to § 551.4, concerning T32N/R5W, south of Chimney Creek (a submission requirements and criteria, tributary of the Snake River) in Nez where it more appropriately belongs. Perce County, Idaho; then POSTAL SERVICE The revision of § 551.4 sharpens the (12) Proceed west along the common submission requirements and, among T32N/T31N township boundary line, 39 CFR Part 551 other things, makes Postal Service employees ineligible to submit crossing Chimney Creek, to the Idaho- Semipostal Stamp Program Washington State line (concurrent with proposals for semipostal stamps. the Nez Perce-Asotin County line) at the AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. The revision of § 551.5(a) removes center of the Snake River; then ACTION: Final rule. certain restrictions on the commencement date of the (13) Proceed generally southeast along SUMMARY: This final rule revises the discretionary Semipostal Stamp the Idaho-Washington State line in the provisions governing the Postal Program. Under current regulations, the Snake River to the northern boundary Service’s discretionary Semipostal 10-year period for the discretionary line of section 29, T31N/R5W; then Stamp Program to simplify and expedite semipostal stamp program would (14) Proceed west along the northern the process for selecting causes for commence on a date determined by the boundary line of section 29, T31N/R5W, semipostal stamps, and facilitate the Office of Stamp Services, but that date to the 600-meter elevation contour, issuance of five such stamps over a 10- must be after the sales period of the northeast of Lime Hill in Asotin County, year period. It also removes certain Breast Cancer Research stamp (BCRS) is Washington; then restrictions on the commencement date concluded. Most recently, Public Law 114–99 (December 11, 2015) extended (15) Proceed generally west and then for the Postal Service’s discretionary Semipostal Stamp Program, and clarifies that sales period to December 31, 2019. generally south-southwest along the how many semipostal stamps issued As revised, the 10-year period will meandering 600-meter elevation contour under that program may be on sale at commence on a date determined by the to the southern boundary line of section any one time. Office of Stamp Services, but the date 25, T7N/R46E; then need not be after the BCRS sale period DATES: This rule is effective on: May 20, (16) Proceed west along the southern 2016. concludes. boundary lines of section 25 and 26, The revision of § 551.5(b) clarifies that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori although only one semipostal stamp crossing onto the Clarkston map, and Mazzone, Manager, Stamp Products & continuing along the southern boundary under the discretionary Semipostal Exhibitions, 202–268–6711, Stamp Program under 39 U.S.C. 416 (a lines of section 26 to the 600-meter [email protected]. elevation contour west of Joseph Creek; ‘‘discretionary program semipostal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: stamp’’) will be offered for sale at any then Publication of Proposed Rule one time, other semipostal stamps (17) Proceed southeast along the required to be issued by Congress (such meandering 600-meter elevation contour The Semipostal Authorization Act, as the BCRS) may be on sale when a to the western boundary line of section Public Law 106–253, grants the Postal discretionary program semipostal stamp 34, T7N/R46E; then Service discretionary authority to issue is on sale. Current regulations state that (18) Proceed north along the western and sell semipostal stamps to advance the Postal Service will offer only one boundary lines of sections 34 and 27, such causes as it considers to be ‘‘in the semipostal stamp for sale at any given national public interest and T7N/R46E, crossing over the Grande time during the 10-year period (not appropriate.’’ See 39 U.S.C. 416(b). On Ronde River, to the 600-meter elevation specifying whether it is a discretionary March 3, 2016, the Postal Service contour; then program semipostal stamp or a published and requested comments semipostal stamp required by Congress). (19) Proceed generally northeast along concerning a detailed revision of the As revised, the one-at-a-time limitation the meandering 600-meter elevation rules concerning the discretionary on the sale of semipostal stamps applies contour and continue along the 600- Semipostal Stamp Program, as set forth only to discretionary program meter elevation contour in a clockwise in 39 CFR part 551 (81 FR 11164). As semipostal stamps. direction, crossing back and forth summarized below, these changes are To minimize confusion regarding between the Clarkston and Orofino designed to facilitate the smooth and applicable postage rates, the revision of maps, until, on the Clarkston map, the efficient operation of the discretionary § 551.6 specifies that for purposes of 600-meter elevation line intersects the Semipostal Stamp Program. calculating the price of a semipostal, the ® Garfield-Asotin County line for the third Revisions First-Class Mail single-piece stamped time along the western boundary of first-ounce rate of postage will be section 19, T11N/R45E; and then The revision of § 551.3 streamlines considered ‘‘the rate of postage that and simplifies the selection of causes to would otherwise regularly apply.’’ (20) Proceed north along the Garfield- receive funds raised through the sale of Asotin County line, returning to the semipostal stamps, and states the Postal Comments and Response beginning point. Service’s intention to issue five such The Postal Service received three stamps over the statutory ten-year comments in response to the proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:49 Apr 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM 20APR1 Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES