Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

the public. Of the eight comments received, six comments generally supported the establishment of the proposed AVA due to the unique quality and characteristics of the wine produced in the area. Additionally, commenters were supportive of the potential of the AVA designation to provide economic benefits and raise consumer and industry awareness of the local area.
TTB received one comment that supported the establishment of the proposed AVA, but the commenter suggested conducting an environmental and cultural evaluation to assess the impact of the proposed AVA on the surrounding area and its inhabitants.
TTBs authority does not encompass evaluating the cultural impact of a proposed AVA on the surrounding regions and its inhabitants.
Further, an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act NEPA is generally not required for regulations of a strictly administrative nature such as this rule establishing the Verde Valley AVA, as such actions normally do not have a significant effect on the human environment.1 In evaluating this final rule, TTB found no extraordinary circumstances that could lead to any reasonably foreseeable significant environmental effects with a reasonably close causal relationship to TTBs establishment of the Verde Valley AVA.2 Potential changes to the local ecosystem such as those concerning the commenter would arise only in attenuated circumstances that are not reasonably foreseeable based on this rulemaking.
Another commenter did not oppose the establishment of the proposed AVA, but voiced concern that it would be difficult to grow grapes in an area prone to prolonged droughts. TTB recognizes the challenges posed by the unique characteristics of the proposed Verde Valley AVA. However, the petition provided evidence that commercial winegrape production does take place within the proposed AVA, which satisfies TTBs requirement for evidence of grape-growing in a proposed AVA.
Additionally, the petition states that vineyard owners compensate for the low rainfall amounts by using waterconserving irrigation methods.
1 See
Treasury Directive 7502, Department of the Treasury National Environmental Policy Act NEPA Program May 6, 2015, Appendix I, Categorical Exclusions, at CEA3a, available at https home.treasury.gov/about/generalinformation/orders-and-directives/td75-02 site last visited on June 24, 2021.
2 See 40 CFR 1508.1g Council on Environmental Quality regulatory definition of effects or impacts under NEPA.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:55 Nov 09, 2021

Jkt 256001

TTB Determination After careful review of the petition and the comments received in response to Notice No. 187, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the petitioner supports the establishment of the Verde Valley AVA. Accordingly, under the authority of the FAA Act, section 1111d of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and parts 4 and 9 of the TTB
regulations, TTB establishes the Verde Valley AVA in Yavapai County, Arizona, effective 30 days from the publication date of this document.
Boundary Description See the narrative description of the boundary of the Verde Valley 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 Verde Valley AVA
boundary may also be viewed on the AVA Map Explorer on the TTB website, at https www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-mapexplorer.
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 wines 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
4.25e3. 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 4.39i2 for details.
With the establishment of the Verde Valley AVA, its name, Verde Valley, will be recognized as a name of viticultural significance under 4.39i3 of the TTB regulations 27
CFR 4.39i3. The text of the regulations clarifies this point.
Consequently, wine bottlers using the name Verde Valley in a brand name, including a trademark, or in another label reference to the origin of the wine, will have to ensure that the product is
PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

62477

eligible to use the AVA name as an appellation of origin.
The establishment of the Verde Valley AVA will not affect any existing AVA.
The establishment of the Verde Valley AVA will allow vintners to use Verde Valley as an appellation of origin for wines made primarily from grapes grown within the Verde Valley AVA if the wines meet the eligibility requirements for the appellation.
Bottlers who wish to label their wines with Verde Valley as an appellation of origin must obtain a new Certificate of Label Approval COLA for the label, even if the currently approved label already contains another appellation of origin. Please do not submit COLA
requests to TTB before the date shown in the DATES section of this document, or your request will be rejected.
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 proprietors 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. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information Selina M. Ferguson 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 9AMERICAN VITICULTURAL
AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.

Subpart CApproved American Viticultural Areas 2. Subpart C is amended by adding 9.280 to read as follows:

E:FRFM10NOR1.SGM

10NOR1