Rule2024-19578
Establishment of the San Luis Rey Viticultural Area
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
August 30, 2024
Effective
September 30, 2024
Issuing agencies
Treasury DepartmentAlcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Abstract
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the approximately 97,733-acre "San Luis Rey" American viticultural area (AVA) in San Diego County, California. The San Luis Rey viticultural area lies entirely within the established South Coast viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 169 (Friday, August 30, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 169 (Friday, August 30, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70487-70490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-19578]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2023-0007; T.D. TTB-195; Re: Notice No. 225]
RIN 1513-AD03
Establishment of the San Luis Rey Viticultural Area
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes
the approximately 97,733-acre ``San Luis Rey'' American viticultural
area (AVA) in San Diego County, California. The San Luis Rey
viticultural area lies entirely within the established South Coast
viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow vintners
to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to
better identify wines they may purchase.
DATES: This final rule is effective September 30, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act),
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). In addition, the Secretary has delegated
the functions and duties in the administration and enforcement of these
provisions to the TTB Administrator through Treasury Order 120-01.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to
establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate the use of their
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets
forth standards for the preparation and submission to TTB of petitions
for the establishment or modification of American viticultural areas
(AVAs) and lists the approved AVAs.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i))
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region having distinguishing features as described in part 9 of
the regulations and, once approved, a name and a delineated boundary
codified in part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow
vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or
other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to the
wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of
an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2))
outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and allows any interested
party to petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region as an AVA.
Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes standards
for petitions to establish or modify AVAs. Petitions to establish an
AVA must include the following:
<bullet> Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is
nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;
<bullet> An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of
the proposed AVA;
<bullet> A narrative description of the features of the proposed
AVA affecting viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical
features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and
distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed AVA boundary;
<bullet> The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS)
map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of
the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon;
<bullet> If the proposed AVA is to be established within, or
overlapping, an existing AVA, an explanation that both identities the
attributes of the proposed AVA that are consistent with the existing
AVA and explains how the proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct from the
existing AVA and therefore appropriate for separate recognition; and
<bullet> A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
San Luis Rey Petition
TTB received a petition from Rebecca Wood, managing member of
Premium Vintners, LLC on behalf of Fallbrook Winery and other local
vineyard owners and winemakers proposing the establishment of the ``San
Luis Rey'' AVA in San Diego County, California. Premium Vintners, LLC,
operates Fallbrook Winery and farms several vineyards within the
proposed AVA. The proposed San Luis Rey AVA is located entirely within
the established South Coast AVA (27 CFR 9.104) and covers approximately
97,733 acres. There are 44 commercially-producing vineyards covering a
total of approximately 256 acres, along with 29 acres of planned
vineyards. There are also 23 wineries within the proposed AVA.
According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the
proposed San Luis Rey AVA are its topography, climate, and soils. The
proposed AVA has low elevations that allow cool marine air from the
Pacific Ocean to flow through the region, moderating temperatures. The
mean elevation within the proposed AVA is 563 feet, and the average
slope angle is 10 degrees. The low elevations and a terrain of gently
rolling hills that are open to marine air almost eliminate the spring
frosts that can affect vine growth at the beginning of the growing
season. The petition also notes that afternoon breezes help to prevent
fungal diseases resulting from the morning's low cloud cover.
In the region north of the proposed San Luis Rey AVA, elevations
are higher and slope angles are similar to those in the proposed AVA.
In the region to the south, average elevations are lower and
[[Page 70488]]
slope angles are shallower than within the proposed AVA. Also, in the
area to the southeast, elevations are higher with steeper slope angles
than the proposed AVA. The petition did not provide elevation ranges
for the area east of the proposed AVA but did include a graphic
indicating higher elevations to the east of the proposed AVA. The
Pacific Ocean is west of the proposed AVA, so the petition did not
provide distinguishing feature information for this area.
The petition provided climate data, specifically the average annual
mean temperature, average annual maximum temperature, average peak
ripening and harvest season maximum temperature, and growing degree day
\1\ (GDD) accumulations for the proposed AVA and surrounding regions.
According to the petition, the proposed AVA generally has mild winters
and summers with lower maximum temperatures than regions farther inland
due to the proposed AVA's proximity to the Pacific Ocean. The petition
notes that the proposed AVA has lower average annual mean and maximum
temperatures and fewer GDDs than the regions to the north and south.
The proposed AVA has a greater number of mean GDDs but lower minimum
GDDs and a lower average annual maximum temperature than the area to
the southeast. Additionally, the proposed San Luis Rey AVA has lower
annual precipitation amounts than the regions to the north and
southeast and slightly higher amounts than the region to the south.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Albert J. Winkler, General Viticulture (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1974), pages 61-64. In the Winkler
climate classification system, annual heat accumulation during the
growing season, measured in annual GDDs, defines climatic regions.
One GDD accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit that a day's mean
temperature is above 50 degrees F, the minimum temperature required
for grapevine growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition notes that nearly 50 percent of the soils in the
proposed San Luis Rey AVA are Alfisols soils with high concentrations
of essential plant nutrients. Approximately 69 percent of the soils in
the proposed AVA are sandy loams that can hold water while draining and
aerating well and prevent overly vigorous growth. Soils to the north
are 48 percent Alfisols and also contain more Entisols and Mollisols
soils than the proposed AVA. To the south, soils are primarily Alfisols
but in lower amounts than the proposed AVA. This area also has more
Entisols and Mollisols soils than the proposed AVA. To the southeast,
soils are 46 percent Alfisols, but contain more Entisols than are found
in the proposed AVA.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
TTB published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (Notice No.
225) in the Federal Register on August 30, 2023 (88 FR 59820),
proposing to establish the San Luis Rey AVA. In the NPRM, TTB
summarized the evidence from the petition regarding the name, boundary,
and distinguishing features for the proposed AVA. The NPRM also
compared the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA to the
surrounding areas. For a detailed description of the evidence relating
to the name, boundary, and distinguishing features of the proposed AVA,
and for a detailed comparison of the distinguishing features of the
proposed AVA to the surrounding areas, see the NPRM.
In the NRPM, TTB solicited comments on the accuracy of the name,
boundary, and other required information submitted in support of the
petition. In addition, given the proposed San Luis Rey AVA's location
within the South Coast AVA, TTB solicited comments on whether the
evidence submitted in the petition regarding the distinguishing
features of the proposed AVA sufficiently differentiates it from the
South Coast AVA. Finally, TTB requested comments on whether the
geographic features of the proposed AVA are so distinguishable from the
South Coast AVA that the proposed San Luis Rey AVA should no longer be
part of the established AVA. The comment period closed October 30,
2023.
In response to the NPRM, TTB received one comment. The commenter is
a wine reviewer who supported the establishment of the proposed San
Luis Rey AVA, stating that its proposed boundaries encompass a
subregion with soils compositions, temperature patterns, and acidity
profiles that set the proposed AVA apart from neighboring AVAs. The
commenter also stated that significant coastal influence on acidity
profiles, in particular, invites the planting of grape varieties not
otherwise found in the South Coast AVA.
TTB did not receive any comments in response to its question of
whether the proposed San Luis Rey AVA is so distinguishable from the
established South Coast AVA that the proposed AVA should not be part of
the established AVA.
TTB Determination
After careful review of the petition and the comment received in
response to the NPRM, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the
petitioner supports the establishment of the San Luis Rey AVA.
Accordingly, under the authority of the FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, and parts 4 and 9 of the TTB
regulations, TTB establishes the ``San Luis Rey'' AVA in San Diego
County, California, effective 30 days from the publication date of this
document.
TTB has also determined that the San Luis Rey AVA will remain part
of the established South Coast AVA. As discussed in the NPRM, the
proposed AVA shares the marine-influenced climate of the larger South
Coast AVA. However, in general, the proposed San Luis Rey AVA has a
lower mean elevation and more consistent terrain than the South Coast
AVA. Additionally, the three most common soil series in the proposed
AVA make up 34.9 percent of the total soils in the proposed AVA, but
only comprise 20.3 percent of the total South Coast AVA soils.
Boundary Description
See the narrative description of the boundary of the San Luis Rey
AVA in the regulatory text published at the end of this final rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the regulatory text. The San Luis Rey AVA boundary may also be
viewed on the AVA Map Explorer on the TTB website, at <a href="https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer">https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer</a>.
Impact on Current Wine Labels
Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a
wine that indicates or implies an origin other than the wine's true
place of origin. For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name or with a
brand name that includes an AVA name, at least 85 percent of the wine
must be derived from grapes grown within the area represented by that
name, and the wine must meet the other conditions listed in 27 CFR
4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA name
and that name appears in the brand name, then the label is not in
compliance and the bottler must change the brand name and obtain
approval of a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name appears in another
reference on the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have
to obtain approval of a new label. Different rules apply if a wine has
a brand name containing an AVA name that was used as a brand name on a
label approved before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
With the establishment of the San Luis Rey AVA, its name, ``San
Luis Rey,'' will be recognized as a name of
[[Page 70489]]
viticultural significance under Sec. 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations
(27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the regulation clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the name ``San Luis Rey'' in a brand
name, including a trademark, or in another label reference as to the
origin of the wine, will have to ensure that the product is eligible to
use the AVA name as an appellation of origin.
The establishment of the San Luis Rey AVA will not affect any
existing AVA, and any bottlers using ``South Coast AVA'' as an
appellation of origin or in a brand name for wines made from grapes
grown within the South Coast AVA will not be affected by the
establishment of this new AVA. The establishment of the San Luis Rey
AVA will allow vintners to use ``San Luis Rey'' and ``South Coast AVA''
as appellations of origin for wines made primarily from grapes grown
within the San Luis Rey AVA if the wines meet the eligibility
requirements for these appellations.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
regulation imposes no new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
administrative requirement. Any benefit derived from the use of an AVA
name would be the result of a proprietor's efforts and consumer
acceptance of wines from that area. Therefore, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30,
1993, as amended. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Vonzella C. Johnson of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted
this final rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
The Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB amends title 27,
chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas
0
2. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.295 to read as follows:
Sec. 9.295 San Luis Rey AVA.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``San Luis Rey''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``San Luis Rey'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The eight United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the
viticultural area are as follows:
(1) Oceanside, CA, 2018;
(2) San Luis Rey, CA, 2018;
(3) San Marcos, CA, 2018;
(4) Valley Center, CA, 2018;
(5) Bonsall, CA, 2018;
(6) Temecula, CA, 2018;
(7) Fallbrook, CA, 2018; and
(8) Morro Hill, CA, 2018.
(c) Boundary. The San Luis Rey viticultural area is located in San
Diego County, California. The boundary of the San Luis Rey viticultural
area is described as follows:
(1) The beginning point is on the Oceanside map at the intersection
of Interstate 5 and the Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton
boundary. From the beginning point, proceed northeast for a total of
11.21 miles along the MCB Camp Pendleton boundary, crossing over the
San Luis Rey map and onto the Morro Hill map, and continuing along the
MCB Camp Pendleton boundary to its intersection with the Naval Weapons
Station (NWS) Seal Beach Fallbrook California boundary; then
(2) Proceed east along the NWS Seal Beach Fallbrook California
boundary for a total of 6.85 miles, crossing onto the Bonsall map and
continuing north, then west along the boundary, and crossing back onto
the Morro Hill map and continuing northerly along the boundary,
crossing onto the Fallbrook map, and continuing along the boundary as
it becomes concurrent with the MCB Camp Pendleton boundary, and
continuing along the boundary to its intersection with De Luz Road;
then
(3) Proceed east along De Luz Road for 0.38 mile to its
intersection with Sandia Creek Drive; then
(4) Proceed northerly along Sandia Creek Drive for a total of 3.98
miles, crossing onto the Temecula map and continuing along Sandia Creek
Drive to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Rock
Mountain Road; then
(5) Proceed east along Rock Mountain Road for 0.21 mile to its
intersection with the San Diego County line; then
(6) Proceed south then east along the San Diego County line for
6.72 miles to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as
Old Highway 395; then
(7) Proceed south along Old Highway 395 for a total of 14.9 miles,
crossing onto the Bonsall map and continuing south along Old Highway
395 to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as Old
Castle Road; then
(8) Proceed east on Old Castle Road for a total of 0.59 mile,
crossing onto the San Marcos map and continuing east along Old Castle
Road to its intersection with Gordon Hill Road; then
(9) Proceed southeasterly along Gordon Hill Road for 0.92 mile to
its intersection with the 800-foot elevation contour; then
(10) Proceed east along the 800-foot elevation contour for a total
of 2.5 miles, crossing onto the Valley Center map and continuing east
along the 800-foot elevation contour to its intersection with Canyon
Country Lane; then
(11) Proceed northwest and then south along Canyon Country Lane for
0.83 mile to its intersection with the 1,240-foot elevation contour;
then
(12) Proceed east along the 1,240-foot elevation contour for 2.90
miles to its intersection with Cougar Pass Road; then
(13) Proceed west then south along Cougar Pass Road for 0.4 mile to
its intersection with Meadow Glen Way East; then
(14) Proceed south along Meadow Glen Way East for 0.46 mile to its
intersection with Hidden Meadows Road; then
(15) Proceed southwest along Hidden Meadows Road for 0.73 mile to
its intersection with Mountain Meadow Road; then
(16) Proceed southwest along Mountain Meadow Road for a total of
1.44 miles, crossing onto the San Marcos map and continuing along
Mountain Meadow Road to the point where Mountain Meadow Road becomes
known as Deer Springs Road just west of Interstate 15; then
(17) Proceed southwest along Deer Springs Road for 2.42 miles to
its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as North Twin Oaks
Valley Road; then
(18) Proceed south along North Twin Oaks Valley Road for 3.01 miles
to its intersection with an unnamed road known locally as West Mission
Road; then
(19) Proceed northwest along West Mission Road (which becomes South
[[Page 70490]]
Santa Fe Avenue) for a total of 3.9 miles to its intersection with
Robelini Drive; then
(20) Proceed southwest along Robelini Drive (which becomes Sycamore
Avenue) for a total of 0.55 mile to its intersection with State Highway
78; then
(21) Proceed northwest, then westerly along State Highway 78 for a
total of 9.09 miles, crossing onto the San Luis Rey map and continuing
westerly along State Highway 78 to its intersection with Interstate 5;
then
(22) Proceed northwest along Interstate 5 for a total of 3.14
miles, crossing onto the Oceanside map and returning to the beginning
point.
Signed: August 19, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
Approved: August 20, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Acting Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2024-19578 Filed 8-29-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 30, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.