[Federal Register: January 20, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 12)]

[Rules and Regulations]               

[Page 3015-3026]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr20ja99-8]



=======================================================================

-----------------------------------------------------------------------



DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY



Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms



27 CFR Part 9



RIN 1512-AA07

[T.D. ATF-407; Ref Notice No. 856]



 

Establishment of the San Francisco Bay Viticultural Area and the 

Realignment of the Boundary of the Central Coast Viticultural Area (97-

242)



ACTION: Treasury decision, final rule.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



SUMMARY: This Treasury decision establishes a viticultural area in the 

State of California to be known as ``San Francisco Bay,'' under 27 CFR 

part 9. The viticultural area is located mainly within five counties 

which border the San Francisco Bay and partly within two other 

counties. These counties are: San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, 

Alameda, Contra Costa, and partly in Santa Cruz and San Benito 

Counties. The ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area encompasses 

approximately 2,448 square miles total and contains nearly 5,800 acres 

planted to grapes and over 39 wineries. In conjunction with 

establishing the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area, ATF is 

amending the boundaries of the Central Coast viticultural area to 

include the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. The previous 

boundaries of the Central Coast viticultural area already encompassed 

part of the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. Approximately 639 

square miles is added to Central Coast with an additional 2,827 acres 

planted to grapes.



EFFECTIVE DATE: March 22, 1999.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Brokaw, Regulations Division, 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Washington, DC 20226, 650 

Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC., 20226, (202) 927-8199.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:



Background



    On August 23, 1978, ATF published Treasury Decision ATF-53 (43 FR 

37672, 54624) revising regulations in 27 CFR Part 4. These regulations 

allow the establishment of definitive viticultural areas. The 

regulations allow the name of an approved viticultural area to be used 

as an appellation of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements. 

On October 2, 1979, ATF published Treasury Decision ATF-60 (44 FR 

56692) which added a new Part 9 to 27 CFR, for the listing of approved 

American viticultural areas, the names of which may be used as 

appellations of origin.

    Section 4.25a(e)(1), title 27, CFR, defines an American 

viticultural area as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable 

by geographic features, the boundaries of which have been delineated in 

Subpart C of Part 9.

    Section 4.25a(e)(2) outlines the procedure for proposing an 

American viticultural area. Any interested person may petition ATF to 

establish a grape-growing region as a viticultural area. The petition 

should include:

    (a) Evidence that the name of the proposed viticultural area is 

locally and/or nationally known as referring to the area specified in 

the petition;

    (b) Historical or current evidence that the boundaries of the 

viticultural area are as specified in the petition;

    (c) Evidence relating to the geographical characteristics (climate, 

soil, elevation, physical features, etc.) which distinguish the 

viticultural features of the proposed area from surrounding areas;

    (d) A description of the specific boundaries of the viticultural 

area,



[[Page 3016]]



based on features which can be found on United States Geological Survey 

(U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable scale; and

    (e) A copy (or copies) of the appropriate U.S.G.S. map(s) with the 

boundaries prominently marked.



Petition for the San Francisco Bay Viticultural Area



    A consortium of nearly 75 growers and vintners led by Wente Bros., 

petitioned ATF to establish a new viticultural area in Northern 

California known as ``San Francisco Bay,'' that will be included within 

the Central Coast viticultural area. The ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area is located mainly within five counties which border 

the San Francisco Bay and partly within two other counties. These 

counties are: San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra 

Costa, and partly in Santa Cruz and San Benito Counties. Santa Cruz 

County, although it has no Bay shoreline, has traditionally been 

associated with the place name ``San Francisco Bay.'' The portion of 

the Santa Clara Valley located in San Benito County has been included. 

The viticultural area encompasses approximately 2,448 square miles 

total containing nearly 5,800 acres planted to grapes and over 39 

wineries.

    ATF has determined that the area is distinguished by a marine 

climate which is heavily influenced by the proximity of the San 

Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Specifically, the San Francisco 

Bay and the local geographical features surrounding it permit the 

cooling influence of the Pacific Ocean to reach farther into the 

interior of California in the Bay Area than elsewhere along the 

California coast.

    The waters of the San Francisco Bay as well as urban areas, 

particularly the City of San Francisco, have purposely been included 

since San Francisco Bay is the source of the viticultural area's 

weather and the focal point of its history. Although it is not a likely 

vineyard site, the city has long been a wine industry hub.



Comments



    On October 20, 1997, ATF published a notice of proposed rulemaking, 

Notice No. 856, in the Federal Register soliciting comments on the 

proposed viticultural area. Given the scope of the proposals and the 

wide range of interests that were likely to be affected by the 

establishment of a San Francisco Bay viticultural area, ATF solicited 

specific public comment with respect to certain questions raised by the 

petition. ATF asked the following questions in Notice No. 856:

    (1) Is there sufficient evidence that the name, ``San Francisco 

Bay,'' can be associated with regions south and east of the bay such as 

Santa Clara Valley and Livermore? Do these regions have climatic or 

geographic differences with other regions of the proposed area to such 

a degree that they cannot be considered as one viticultural area?

    (2) Does the evidence support exclusion from the proposed 

viticultural area of the regions north of the Bay, i.e., Marin, Napa, 

Solano, and Sonoma Counties?

    (3) Can the regions where grapes cannot be grown in the proposed 

viticultural area, such as the dense urban settings and the Bay itself, 

be easily segregated from the rest of the proposed area? Does it 

undermine the notion of a viticultural area to keep them included?

    ATF received 49 comments in response to Notice No. 856. Basically, 

the comments fall into five categories. These categories are as 

follows: those in support (9), those in support for expanding the ``San 

Francisco Bay'' area (1), those that oppose ``San Francisco Bay'' but 

support the Central Coast expansion (3), those that oppose being 

associated with another viticultural area (33), and those that oppose 

the creation of ``San Francisco Bay'' (3).

    Those in support felt that the appellation clearly defines a unique 

area influenced by San Francisco Bay weather patterns. Among the 

favorable comments were statements indicating that approval of the area 

would align the boundaries between coastal appellations, would 

recognize a historic wine growing region, would reinforce the economic 

impact of wine growing in the area, and would be of benefit in 

educating the wine consumer.

    One respondent, the Allied Grape Growers, disagreed that the 

coastal climatic influences stop at the crest of the hills of Altamont. 

This respondent felt that the Brentwood-Byron area is now considered by 

most independent observers as a part of the ``San Francisco Bay'' area. 

While this respondent believed that Brentwood-Byron corridor should be 

included, no specific evidence was provided.

    Three respondents opposed the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural 

area but supported the expansion of the Central Coast viticultural 

area. Among these respondents was the Sonoma County Grape Growers 

Association. The Association claimed that the petitioners have taken 

reference works out of context with ``preposterous'' results. The 

Association cited dramatic differences in climatic conditions (San 

Francisco and Livermore), conflicting definitions of the area 

(disagreement over what constitutes the Bay area), the fact that the 

climate of San Francisco cannot sustain winegrape growing, and that the 

proposal was for marketing purposes only. The Association believed that 

it is not a meaningful viticultural area and will undermine the 

integrity of the American viticultural area system. On the other hand, 

the Association believed that there seems to be no reason to oppose 

expanding the Central Coast viticultural area. The remaining two 

respondents in this category generally felt that it is too broad an 

appellation to have climatic integrity and seemed to have been proposed 

for marketing and convenience considerations. One of the respondents 

felt that the Central Coast appellation needs to be reexamined while 

the other respondent felt that the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural 

area should be included in the Central Coast viticultural area.

    Thirty-three respondents opposed being associated with either the 

``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area or the expansion of the Central 

Coast viticultural area. These respondents were from the Santa Cruz 

Mountains viticultural area. They felt that they have worked hard to 

establish the distinctiveness of their wines and inclusion in either 

the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area or the expanded central 

coast viticultural area will do them ``incalculable damage.'' These 

respondents claimed that the soils, rainfall, climate, and physical 

features of Livermore differ completely from those of the Santa Cruz 

Mountains viticultural area. They stated that their vineyards are, for 

the most part, above the fogs. The average temperatures are in the 2140 

to 2880 degree-day zone while Livermore is 3400. Rainfall for Livermore 

is listed in the petition at 18 inches. These respondents stated that 

the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area averages more than double 

that amount of rainfall at a minimum of 36 to 40 inches. Further, the 

Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area shares virtually none of the 

soil types of Livermore with the soils producing average yields 

dramatically smaller than the average yields in Livermore, resulting in 

a different style of wine entirely. These respondents claimed that the 

excluded areas in the ``North Bay'' and ``East Bay'' share far more 

geographical and climatic features with Livermore than does the Santa 

Cruz Mountains viticultural area. In addition, these respondents felt 

that it would



[[Page 3017]]



undermine the meaning of American viticultural areas by including 

large, dissimilar areas where grapes cannot be grown. Specifically, 

these areas include the northern half of the San Francisco Peninsula 

which is too cold to grow grapes, the heavy urban populations of 

Oakland and the East Bay, and the Bay itself, which is not an inland 

lake but a large bay of the Pacific Ocean. These respondents also felt 

that including areas like southern Santa Clara County, and parts of San 

Benito County would mislead the American public since residents of 

these areas, as well as Santa Cruz County, historically have not been 

considered and do not consider themselves to be living in the San 

Francisco Bay area. Similarly, these respondents opposed the inclusion 

of the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area in the expanded Central 

Coast viticultural area since the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural 

area does not share the same soils, climate or geographical 

characteristics. These respondents also felt that the Central coast is 

a recent construct having only limited validity from Monterey Bay 

south.

    Three respondents generally opposed the creation of the 

viticultural area. One of these respondents, Mr. William Drake, claimed 

that anyone who has spent any time at all in the Bay Area is well aware 

that there are extreme differences in the various climates between the 

areas included in the petition. In addition, Mr. Drake claimed that the 

topography of this nearly two million acre proposed area differs 

dramatically as one travels from the eastern portion westward to, and 

over the coastal mountains. Mr. Drake also believed that while there 

may be a Bay Area, that area is understood to include a number of 

distinctly different areas, some of which are even outside of the Bay 

Area, let alone the ``San Francisco Bay Area.'' Another respondent in 

opposition was the Association of California North Coast Grape Growers. 

Regarding the name evidence, the Association stated that Santa Clara, 

Santa Cruz, and San Benito are nowhere near the San Francisco Bay. If 

anything, Santa Cruz is associated with Monterey Bay. The Association 

further stated that the petitioner provided no supporting evidence that 

the San Benito area is locally or nationally known to be affiliated 

with San Francisco. Regarding the exclusion of areas north of the Bay, 

i.e., Marin, Napa, Solano, and Sonoma Counties, the Association felt 

that there was not supporting evidence, on the one hand to exclude 

these areas, while, on the other hand, there was not supporting 

evidence that the ``San Francisco Bay'' area should be included with 

regions north of the bay. The Association felt that the most important 

question revolves around the purpose of appellation names, i.e., to 

identify and distinguish grape growing regions which are unique from 

other growing regions based on geographic, altitude, climate, and soil 

conditions. The Association believed that the fact that the City of San 

Francisco is ``not a feasible vineyard site'' seemed to be a prima 

facie case for immediate disqualification of the appellation name. The 

Association also believed that the fact that the ``San Francisco Bay is 

a locally, nationally or internationally recognized place name'' is 

completely irrelevant to the issue of whether that place is known for 

growing wine grapes. The City of San Francisco, and certainly its bay, 

are not viticultural areas, according to the Association. The 

Association went on to state that the petitioner might do just as well 

calling the viticultural area ``Golden Gate Region'' if name 

recognition is to be the litmus test for approving an appellation 

petition. The Association further believed that if this area is 

approved, it would set a precedent that would allow specific city or 

location names to be used to describe very large geographic areas. 

According to the Association, the North Coast appellation could be 

renamed ``Napa Area,'' Central Coast could be called ``Santa Barbara,'' 

and the Central Valley might be named ``Yosemite.'' The Association 

felt that should the petitioned area be found to be unique, and a 

qualified appellation area, the name of the region should be more 

generalized (i.e., Central Bay Area) as opposed to the specific city 

name of San Francisco. The Association claimed that misstatements and 

irrelevant evidence was provided by the petitioner. As examples, 

excerpts from Hugh Johnson's book The World Atlas of Wine and Robert 

Lawrence Balzer's Vineyards and Wineries: Bay Area and Central Coast 

Counties were cited to illustrate that the ``Bay Area'' is not accepted 

by these authors and industry experts as a viticultural region as 

claimed by the petitioners. The Association further claimed that the 

petitioners have provided extraneous historical and current evidence. 

The Association cited the use of grape pricing districts as setting a 

bad precedent to be used as a determinant for appellation designation 

approval. The Association pointed out that San Benito is clearly not 

listed as a part of the Grape Pricing District which includes San 

Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, Alameda and Contra 

Costa.



ATF Analysis of Comments



    ATF has reviewed both the comments and the petitioner's response to 

them and has concluded that, with one exception, the petitioner has 

demonstrated that the proposed area represents a continuum of coastal 

climate that is moderated and altered by San Francisco Bay creating a 

distinct and recognizable area known as ``San Francisco Bay.'' The 

exception is the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area. According to 

the comments from members of the Santa Cruz Mountains Winegrowers 

Association, the Santa Cruz Mountains vineyards, in the vast majority, 

are located above the coastal fogs. The Santa Cruz vintners believe 

that the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area is based primarily on 

altitude and is not affected by the climates below. They also point out 

that their viticultural area does not share the soils, climate, or 

geographical characteristics of other viticultural areas in the State. 

The Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area is characterized by a 

climate which is greatly influenced in the western portion by the 

Pacific Ocean breezes and fog movements, and in the eastern portion by 

the moderating influences of the San Francisco Bay. These two 

influences tend to produce weather which is generally cool during the 

growing season. Temperatures in the slopes of the hillsides where most 

of the vineyards are located appear to vary from that at the lower 

elevations. This is caused by the marine influence coming off the 

Pacific Ocean which cools the mountains at night much more than the 

valley floor. ATF has concluded that the Santa Cruz Mountains 

viticultural area exhibits features and characteristics unique to its 

boundaries when compared to the surrounding areas and should not be 

included within the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. 

Accordingly, The Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area has been 

excluded from the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area.

    ATF further believes that there is no significant or substantive 

evidence at this time that would warrant holding hearings on this issue 

as requested in some of the comments from the Santa Cruz Mountains 

vintners.

    Finally, ATF is not including the Brentwood--Byron area as 

requested by the Allied Grape Growers. While this respondent believed 

that the coastal climatic influences extended into the Brentwood--Byron 

corridor, no specific evidence was provided to support this request.



[[Page 3018]]



Evidence That the Name of the Area Is Locally or Nationally Known



    ``San Francisco Bay'' is a locally, nationally and internationally 

recognized place name. ATF has concluded that ``San Francisco Bay'' is 

the appropriate name for the area. San Francisco Bay is widely 

recognized as the well-known body of water by that name and, by 

inference, the land areas that surround it.

    The counties of San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara 

and San Mateo--within which the area is located--border the San 

Francisco Bay. Santa Cruz County, although it has no Bay shoreline, has 

traditionally been associated with the place name ``San Francisco 

Bay.'' Also included is the portion of the Santa Clara Valley located 

in San Benito County.

    The names ``San Francisco Bay area'' or ``San Francisco Bay 

region'' sometimes refer to an area that is different than the area 

discussed in the petition. Although sources differ in how broadly they 

define the San Francisco Bay region, the various definitions--without 

exception--include the counties mentioned above. The following sources 

were cited by the petitioner as being representative of the consensus 

among experts that the petitioned area is widely known by the name San 

Francisco Bay.

    The name San Francisco Bay is more frequently and more strongly 

associated with the counties lying south and east of the San Francisco 

Bay than with nearby counties to the north. For example, the 1967 Time 

Life book entitled The Pacific States, describes the San Francisco Bay 

Area as a megalopolis with the city [of San Francisco] as the center, 

stretching 40 miles south to San Jose and from the Pacific to Oakland 

and beyond.

    The weather expert Harold Gilliam, in his book Weather of the San 

Francisco Bay Region, discusses an area including San Francisco, San 

Mateo, Alameda, Contra Costa, and Santa Cruz Counties. James E. Vance, 

Jr., Professor of Geography at the University of California, Berkeley, 

studied the same area in his book entitled Geography and Urban 

Evolution in the San Francisco Bay Area. Also, climatologist Clyde 

Patton studied the same region in his definitive work Climatology of 

Summer Fogs in the San Francisco Bay Area. Mr. Vance's and Mr. Patton's 

maps of ``Bay Area Place Names'' were included with the petition.

    A final source is Lawrence Kinnaird, University of California 

Professor of History, who wrote a History of the Greater San Francisco 

Bay Region. Mr. Kinnaird's book also covers the counties of San 

Francisco, Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa 

Cruz.



Historical or Current Evidence That the Boundaries of the 

Viticultural Area Are as Specified in the Petition



    Within the grape growing and winemaking community, the name San 

Francisco Bay has always been identified with the ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area. Several references reflect the industry's perception 

of this place name.

    For example, wine writer Hugh Johnson, in his book The World Atlas 

of Wine, devotes a separate section (``South of the Bay'') to the 

winegrowing areas of the San Francisco Bay and Central Coast. Mr. 

Johnson describes the traditional centers of wine-growing in this area 

as concentrated in the Livermore Valley east of the Bay; the western 

foot-hills of the Diablo range; the towns south of the Bay, and along 

the slopes of the Santa Cruz mountains down to a cluster of family 

wineries round the Hecker Pass. Mr. Johnson repeatedly distinguishes 

the winegrowing region south and east of the Bay from areas to the 

north of the Bay. A statement in Mr. Johnson's book points out that the 

area just south and east of San Francisco Bay is wine country as old as 

the Napa Valley.

    Another writer, Robert Lawrence Balzer devotes a chapter to 

``Vineyards and Wineries: Bay Area and Central Coast Counties'' in his 

book Wines of California. This chapter and the accompanying map include 

wineries and vineyards in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Santa 

Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties. Throughout his book, Mr. Balzer makes 

it clear that he differentiates the San Francisco Bay area grape 

growing areas from those north of San Francisco Bay and south of 

Monterey Bay. In support of this claim are several quotes from the 

book. For example, Mr. Balzer states that, ``Logic, as well as 

geography, dictates our division into these unofficial groups of 

counties: North Coast, Bay Area and Central Coast, South Central Coast, 

Central Valley, and Southern California. The vineyard domain south of 

San Francisco is as rich and colorful in its vintage history as the 

more celebrated regions north of the Bay Area.'' This author does not 

consider Napa and Sonoma Counties as part of the Bay Area. The 

following statement is evidence of this. ``Alameda County does not have 

the scenic charm of * * * Napa and Sonoma.* * * '' The same book 

contains a photograph showing the Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco 

Bay with the caption, ``San Francisco Bay divides the North Coast from 

the other wine areas of California.''

    Another source in support of the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural 

area boundaries is ``Grape Intelligence,'' a reporting service for 

California winegrape industry statistics. Grape Intelligence issues a 

yearly report for grape varieties in the San Francisco Bay Area. 

Reports for this region cover San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, 

Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.

    As historical evidence, the San Francisco Viticultural District, 

defined by the State Viticultural Commissioners at the end of the last 

century, comprised the counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, Alameda, 

Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey--but no areas north 

of the Bay.

    The California Department of Food and Agriculture currently 

considers the area as a single unit. The Grape Pricing Districts 

established by the State of California reflect the joined perception of 

the six San Francisco Bay counties, by grouping San Francisco, San 

Mateo, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa together in 

District 6.

    A list of ``Largest Bay Area Wineries'' from a chart which appeared 

in the San Francisco Business Times of November 21, 1988, includes 21 

wineries in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, and San Mateo 

Counties. No wineries from the North Coast counties of Sonoma, Napa, 

Mendocino, or Lake are included.



Evidence Relating to the Geographical Features (Climate, Soil, 

Elevation, Physical Features, Etc.) Which Distinguish Viticultural 

Features of the Area From Surrounding Areas



Climate



    The unifying and distinguishing feature of the coastal climate of 

the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area is the influence of both 

the Pacific Ocean and the San Francisco Bay. Coastal areas north of the 

appellation area are influenced by the Pacific Ocean and by the San 

Pablo and Richardson Bays, while areas south of the appellation area 

are influenced by the Pacific Ocean and by Monterey Bay. In addition, 

the ocean influence enters each region through different routes--

through the Estero Gap in the North Coast, through the Golden Gate in 

the San Francisco Bay region, and through Monterey Bay in the southerly 

portion of Central Coast.

    West to east flowing winds named the westerlies, which bring 

weather systems in California onshore from the ocean, prevail in the 

``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. Directly affecting the



[[Page 3019]]



weather in the area is the Pacific high pressure system, centered a 

thousand miles off the Pacific Coast. During winter months, its 

location south of San Francisco allows the passage of westward moving, 

rain producing, low pressure storms through the area.

    During the summer months the high is located closer to the latitude 

of San Francisco. It then deflects rain, producing storms to the north, 

producing a dry summer climate in the San Francisco area. The winds 

from the high (which flow onshore from the northwest to the southeast) 

produce a cold southward flowing surface water current (called the 

California Current) off the California coast by a process called 

upwelling, in which cold deep water is brought to the surface. When 

moist marine air from the Pacific High flows onshore over this cold 

water, it cools, producing fog and/or stratus cloud areas which are 

transported inland by wind.



Climatic Affect and Boundaries



    From a meteorological perspective, the northwesterly windflow 

through the Estero Gap (near Petaluma in Sonoma County) into the 

Petaluma Valley, provides the major source of marine influence for 

areas north of the Golden Gate. Airflow inland from San Pablo Bay also 

affects the climate of southern Napa and Sonoma Counties. San Francisco 

Bay has little impact on the weather in the region to its north. The 

onshore prevailing northwesterly flow direction, in combination with 

the coastal range topographic features of counties north of the Bay and 

the pressure differential of the Central Valley, minimize a northward 

influence from the air that enters the Golden Gate. The higher 

humidity, lower temperatures, and wind flow that enter the Golden Gate 

gap do not flow north of the San Francisco Bay.

    As a result of the different air mass sources, grape-growing sites 

immediately north of the Bay are cooler than corresponding sites in the 

Bay Area. As an example, General Viticulture lists Napa with 2880 

degree-days, while Martinez (directly south of Napa on the Carquinez 

Strait) has 3500 degree-days. Calistoga is listed as 3150 degree-days, 

while Livermore (approximately equidistant from the Carquinez Strait, 

but to the south) has 3400. The degree-day concept was developed by UC 

Davis Professors Amerine and Winkler as a measure of climate support 

for vine growth and grape ripening; large degree-day values indicate 

warmer climates.

    The ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area is also distinguished 

from the counties north of the San Francisco Bay by annual rainfall 

amounts. Most winter storms that hit the Central California coast 

originate in the Gulf of Alaska. Thus, locations in the North Coast 

viticultural area generally receive more rain than sites in the ``San 

Francisco Bay'' viticultural area.

    This effect is illustrated by Hamilton Air Force Base on the 

northwest shore of the San Pablo Bay in Marin County. The base gets 25 

percent more rain in a season than does San Mateo, which has a 

corresponding bayshore location 34 miles to the south. San Francisco 

gets an average of 21 inches of rain annually, but nine miles north of 

the Golden Gate, Kentfield gets 46 inches--more than double the amount 

of rain. Average rainfall over the entire south bay wine producing area 

is only 18 inches, while the City of Napa averages 25 inches, Sonoma 

County (average of 5 sites) averages 35 inches, and Mendocino County 

averages 40 inches.

    It should be noted that the California North Coast Grape Growers 

advanced a position that is consistent with the petitioner's current 

position. In a letter to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 

dated September 14, 1979, they asked that the term North Coast Counties 

be applied only to Napa, Sonoma and Mendocino Counties. Part of their 

reasoning was the observations of Professor Crowley of the Geography 

Department at Sonoma State University who said that the counties north 

of the San Francisco Bay have different climates from the counties 

south of the bay.

    Thus, the main determinants of the northern boundary of the 

viticultural area include the: (1) natural geographic/topographic 

barriers, (2) lack of direct San Francisco Bay influence in areas to 

its north, and (3) different predominant coastal influences in the 

northern area. These factors lead to significant wind flow, 

temperature, and precipitation differences between the areas north and 

south of San Francisco Bay. Thus, it is logical to draw the northern 

boundary of the proposed area at the point where the Golden Gate Bridge 

and San Francisco Bay separate the northern counties, i.e., Marin, 

Napa, Solano, and Sonoma of the North Coast viticultural area from the 

counties of San Francisco and Contra Costa.

    The eastern boundary of the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area 

matches the existing boundary of the Central Coast viticultural area 

and is located at the inland boundary of significant coastal influence, 

i.e., along the hills and mountains of the Diablo Range that form a 

topographical barrier to the intrusion of marine air.

    East of the Diablo Range lies the Central Valley, distinguished 

from the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area by its higher 

temperature, lower humidity, and decreased rainfall. The Central Valley 

has a completely continental climate, i.e., much hotter in summer and 

cooler in winter. Amerine & Winkler categorize the grape growing areas 

in the Central Valley (Modesto, Oakdale, Stockton, Fresno) as Region V 

(over 4000 degree-days), while sites in the ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area range from Region I to III. This is illustrated on a 

``Degree Day Map'' provided by the petitioner.

    North of Altamont, the viticultural area boundary continues to 

follow the inland boundary of coastal influence. (This portion of the 

boundary matches the boundary extension for the Central Coast 

Viticultural area.) Like the existing eastern boundary of the Central 

Coast, this extension excludes the innermost range of coastal 

mountains. The eastern boundary includes Martinez and Concord, but 

excludes Antioch, and the eastern portion of Contra Costa County.

    The average precipitation in the Central Valley is lower than in 

the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. Following are thirty year 

average rainfall statistics in inches for locations in the Central 

Valley: Modesto 10.75, Fresno 10.32, Los Banos 7.98, Lodi 12.74, 

Antioch 12.97.

    Thus, the main determinants of the eastern boundary of the 

viticultural area include the (1) historic existing eastern boundary of 

the Central Coast viticultural area, (2) natural geographic/topographic 

climatic barrier created by the Diablo Range, and (3) the inland 

boundary of the coastal marine influence. These factors lead to 

significant temperature, humidity and precipitation differences between 

the areas east and west of the eastern boundary.

    The southern boundary matches those of the Santa Cruz and Santa 

Clara viticultural areas. As discussed in the section on climate, the 

San Francisco Bay influence is diminished and the Monterey Bay 

influence is felt south of the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area. 

The regional northwestern prevailing wind flow direction generally 

prevents the Monterey Bay influence from affecting the climate in the 

viticultural area.

    Monterey Bay has a very broad mouth with high mountain ranges to 

both the north and south. Fog and ocean air traveling along the Pajaro 

River do on rare occasions reach the south end of the Santa Clara 

Valley to the north, but most of the Monterey Bay influence



[[Page 3020]]



travels to the east and south (borne by the prevailing northwest wind) 

into the Salinas Valley and up against the eastern coastal hills.

    Coast climate thus gradually warms with increased distance from the 

San Francisco Bay, as air traveling over land areas south of the bay 

accumulates heat and dries out. The warming trend reverses, however, at 

the point where the south end of the Santa Clara Valley meets the 

Pajaro River. Here wind and fog from the Monterey Bay, flowing westward 

through the Pajaro River gap, begins to assert a cooling influence.

    The decrease of San Francisco Bay influence, and the concurrent 

increase of Monterey Bay influence, is demonstrated by the difference 

in heat summation between Gilroy and Hollister. Central Coast sites 

warm with increasing distance from the San Francisco Bay, but this 

pattern reverses at the southern boundary of the Santa Clara Valley 

viticultural area, between Gilroy and Hollister, as the influence of 

the Monterey Bay becomes dominant. This produces significantly cooler 

temperatures in Hollister than in Gilroy, even though Hollister is 

farther from San Francisco Bay.

    Petition Table 2 ``Decrease in San Francisco Bay Influence,'' 

indicates a gradual warming trend as one travels southward from the San 

Francisco Bay. Past Gilroy to Hollister, however, a new cooling trend 

is observed due to the influence of the Monterey Bay.

    Hollister is significantly cooler than Gilroy even though its 

location is sheltered by hills from the full influence of Monterey Bay. 

The weather station near coastal Monterey shows the strongest cooling 

from the Monterey Bay. Continuing south in the Salinas Valley, the 

climate again grows warmer with increasing distance from Monterey Bay.

    In summary, the southern boundary of the ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area has been defined to match the southern boundary of 

the Santa Clara Valley and Santa Cruz viticultural areas because this 

is the location of the transition from a climate dominated by flow from 

the San Francisco Bay to one dominated by flow from Monterey Bay.

    The western boundary of the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area 

follows the Pacific coastline from San Francisco south to just north of 

the City of Santa Cruz. This area is greatly influenced by Pacific 

Ocean breezes and fog. The western hills of the Santa Cruz Mountains 

are exposed to the strong prevailing northwest winds. The climate of 

the eastern portion of these hills is affected by the moderating 

influences of the San Francisco Bay.

    Just north of the City of Santa Cruz, the western boundary turns 

east excluding a small portion of Santa Cruz County from the 

viticultural area, as it was from the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural 

area. The Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area has been excluded from 

the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area as discussed above. The 

area around Santa Cruz and Watsonville is close to sea level, and is 

sheltered from the prevailing northwesterly Pacific Ocean winds by the 

Santa Cruz mountains. Therefore, fog and bay breezes from Monterey Bay 

impact the area, while the San Francisco Bay does not influence the 

area.

    Thus, the main determinant of the western boundary of the proposed 

viticultural area includes the (1) natural geography of the coastline, 

(2) Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay influence, and (3) historical 

identity as part of the San Francisco Bay Area.



Topography



    The weather in the bay region is a product of the modification of 

the onshore marine air masses described above by the topography of the 

coast ranges, a double chain of mountains running north-northwest to 

south-southeast. Each chain divides into two or more smaller chains, 

creating a patchwork of valleys.

    As the elevation of the western chain of the coastal ridge is 

generally higher than the altitude of the inversion base, the inversion 

acts as a lid to prevent the cool onshore flowing marine air and fog 

from rising over the mountains and flowing inland. Because of this, 

successive inland valleys generally have less of a damp, seacoast 

climate and more of a dry, continental climate.

    This pattern is modified by a few gaps and passes in the mountain 

ranges that allow marine influences to spread farther inland without 

obstruction. These inland areas are, however, somewhat protected from 

the Pacific fogs, which are evaporated as the flow is warmed by passage 

over the warmer land surfaces.

    The three largest sea level gaps in the central California coastal 

range mountainous barrier are (north to south): Estero Lowland in 

Sonoma, Golden Gate into San Francisco Bay, and Monterey Bay. Several 

smaller mountain pass gaps (San Bruno and Crystal Springs) sometimes 

also allow for the inland spread of coastal climate in the Bay Area 

when the elevated inversion base is high enough.

    The Bay Area climate is greatly modified by San Francisco Bay, 

whose influence is similar to that of the ocean, i.e., it cools summer 

high temperatures and warms winter low temperatures. The narrowness of 

the Golden Gate limits the exchange of bay and ocean waters, and thus 

Bay waters are not quite as cold as the coastal ocean currents during 

the summer.

    Marine air exits the San Francisco Bay (without having experienced 

the normal drying and heating effects associated with over-land travel) 

in several directions. The predominant outflow is carried by the 

onshore northwesterly winds toward the south through the Santa Clara 

Valley to Morgan Hill and to the east via the Hayward Pass and Niles 

Canyon.

    Temperatures at given locations in the Bay Area are thus dependent 

on streamline distance (actual distance traveled) from the ocean, 

rather than its ``as the crow flies'' distance from the ocean. 

Livermore Valley temperatures show this phenomenon. Ocean air flows 

across San Francisco Bay, through the Hayward Pass and Niles Canyon, 

and into the Livermore Valley, causing a cooling effect in summer and a 

warming effect in winter.

    In summary, because of the interaction of topography with the 

prevailing winds in the Bay Area, the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco 

Bay are the major climatic influences in the ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area. This interaction has two principal effects: (1) to 

allow the coastal influence of the Pacific Ocean to extend farther east 

than otherwise possible, and (2) to modify that coastal influence 

because of the moderating effects of Bay waters on surrounding weather.



Boundaries



    In the original proposal, a small part of the east end of the 

Livermore Valley was omitted. This newly described area most accurately 

completes the description and designation of the climatic and 

geographic zones for Livermore Valley and has been added to the new 

``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area by ATF. This area adds less 

than three square miles to the viticultural area and approximately 350 

acres of wine grapes.



Amendment of the Boundaries of the Central Coast Viticultural Area



    In conjunction with establishing the ``San Francisco Bay'' 

viticultural area, ATF is amending the boundaries of the Central Coast 

viticultural area to encompass the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural 

area as proposed by the petitioners and discussed in Notice No. 856.

    An examination of the three large viticultural areas on the 

California coast reveals a gap between Monterey and



[[Page 3021]]



Marin, where many acres of existing and potential vineyards are not 

represented by any viticultural area. The revised Central Coast 

viticultural area continues the logical pattern already established in 

the organization of viticultural areas on the California coast. The 

expanded Central Coast viticultural area is a larger area that ties 

together several smaller sub-appellations (Santa Clara Valley, Ben 

Lomond Mountain, Livermore Valley, San Ysidro District, Pacheco Pass, 

San Benito, Cienega Valley, Mount Harlan, Paicines, Lime Kiln Valley, 

Monterey, Carmel Valley, Chalone, Arroyo Seco, Paso Robles, York 

Mountain, Edna Valley, Arroyo Grande Valley, Santa Maria Valley, Santa 

Ynez Valley, and the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area), all of 

which are dominated by the same geographic and general marine 

influences that create their climate. The evidence presented in the 

petition establishes that the well-known Central Coast name and the 

general marine climate extend north and northwest beyond the previous 

Central Coast boundaries.



The Name, Central Coast, as Referring to the Counties Surrounding 

San Francisco Bay



    The name Central Coast, as used by wine writers and the state 

legislature, extends north and west into Santa Cruz County and five 

counties that surround the San Francisco Bay, beyond the area 

previously recognized as the Central Coast viticultural area. In 

support of this, are the following references.

    Patrick W. Fegan's book Vineyards and Wineries of America, contains 

a map of ``Central Coastal Counties'' designating Contra Costa, 

Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Benito, San 

Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara.

    Another example is Central Coast Wine Tour, published by Vintage 

Image in 1977 and 1980, which covers the area from San Francisco to 

Santa Barbara and specifically describes past and present wineries in 

San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Mateo and Santa 

Cruz Counties.

    The Connoisseurs' Handbook of California Wines defines ``Central 

Coast'' in the section entitled ``Wine Geography'' as: ``The territory 

lying south of San Francisco and north of the city of Santa Barbara--

San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Benito, Monterey, San Luis 

Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties.''

    Bob Thompson and Hugh Johnson, in their book The California Wine 

Book, describe the ``Central Coast'' as an indeterminate area between 

San Francisco and Santa Barbara, including San Francisco, Contra Costa, 

Alameda, Monterey, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties.

    In Wines of California, by Robert Balzer, the wine producing areas 

on the California coast are categorized into three groups: North Coast 

counties, Bay Area and Central Coast counties, and South Central Coast 

counties. The section on ``Bay Area and Central Coast'' features a map, 

included with the petition, illustrating the counties surrounding San 

Francisco Bay. Finally, a vineyard and winery map published by Sally 

Taylor and Friends in the 1980's includes Santa Cruz County on the map 

entitled ``North Central Coast.''

    In addition to the numerous viticultural writings, government and 

scholarly studies on the climate and geography of the California 

Central Coast also include the counties around the San Francisco Bay in 

the area.

    The historic San Francisco Viticultural District in 1880 grouped 

the counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, Alameda, Santa Clara, Santa 

Cruz and Contra Costa together. The 1930 University of California 

monograph ``Summer Sea Fogs of the Central California Coast'' by Horace 

R. Byers focuses on an area ``from Point Sur to the entrance of Tomales 

Bay, including San Francisco and Monterey Bays: Santa Clara, San Ramon, 

Livermore, San Benito, and Salinas valleys.* * * '' These valleys are 

located in Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Benito and Monterey 

Counties, respectively.

    Section 25236 of the 1955 California Alcoholic Beverage Control Act 

allowed the use of the description ``central coastal counties dry 

wine'' on wine originating in several counties including Santa Clara, 

Santa Cruz, Alameda, Contra Costa, Monterey, San Luis Obispo Counties. 

While ``central coastal counties'' is not a recognized viticultural 

area under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, this law is 

mentioned solely to support the fact that the counties surrounding San 

Francisco Bay have been accepted in California as belonging within the 

place name ``Central Coast.''

    The California Division of Forestry's ``Sea Breeze Effects on 

Forest Fire Behavior in Central Coastal California'' summarizes the 

results of several fireclimate surveys conducted in the 1960's in 

several counties surrounding San Francisco Bay. Currently, the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Climatic Data Center 

publishes monthly summaries of climatological data grouped into 

geographical divisions. The ``Central Coast Drainage'' division 

includes locations in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, 

Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties.

    The sources discussed above demonstrate that the counties included 

in the revised Central Coast boundaries are commonly and historically 

known as being within the place-name ``Central Coast.''

    The Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area has been excluded from 

the revised Central Coast viticultural area for the same reasons cited 

above for excluding it from the ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural 

area.



Evidence Relating to the Geographical Features (Climate, Soil, 

Elevation, Physical Features, etc.) Which Distinguish the 

Viticultural Features of the Area From Surrounding Areas



Coastal Climate and Marine Influence



    The coastal climate of the Central Coast viticultural area is the 

principal feature which unifies the area and distinguishes it from 

surrounding areas. An indication of the ``coastal climate'' effect on 

the area is the difference between July and September temperatures. 

September (fall) is usually warmer than July (summer) in coastal areas, 

while the reverse is true in continental areas. This unique coastal 

characteristic results from two factors: fogs and air flows. Fogs keep 

summer coastal temperatures low while the interior regions absorb all 

of the sun's summer energy. These fogs diminish in strength and 

frequency in the fall allowing more coastal solar gain and the 

resultant temperature rise, while interior temperatures begin their 

relative decline. This seasonal fluctuation comes about when, (1) the 

pressure differential between the Pacific high and the Central Valley 

is reduced which eliminates the inversion cap over the coast ranges, 

and (2) the temperature of the Pacific Ocean reaches its highest level 

in the fall which reduces the cooling of onshore air flows. These air 

flows from the Pacific Ocean invade the land mass through gaps in the 

coast range. Thus, a location's climate is dictated primarily by its 

position relative to the windstream distance from the Pacific--the 

greater the windstream distance the greater the July/October 

temperature differential and the greater the degree day accumulation as 

the windstream will be increasingly warmed by the ground it passes 

over.

    Table 1 in the petition lists California cities in windstream 

groups from the most coastal (initiation) to the most continental 

(terminus). This table lists the difference (in degrees) between the 

average July and September



[[Page 3022]]



temperatures in each city, which constitutes the measure of ``coastal'' 

character. Continental cities (Antioch to Madera), which are outside 

the previous and revised boundaries of the Central Coast, exhibit the 

highest July temperatures and the greatest difference in temperature 

from July to September. Also, included are accumulated degree-days for 

April through October following Winkler's system. This chart 

demonstrates that within the coastal region--north and south--there is 

a continuum of coastal influence and the ensuing heat gradient during 

the growing season (degree-days).

    Within the extension, the climate acts in an identical manner to 

the area in the previous Central Coast viticultural area. This claim is 

supported by Table I, demonstrating that locations within the revision 

to the Central Coast viticultural area (San Francisco, Richmond, 

Oakland, Berkeley, Half Moon Bay, Martinez, San Jose, Ben Lomond, Palo 

Alto) share the same coastal character (i.e., (1) higher September 

temperatures, and (2) an airstream continuum of degree-day temperatures 

correlated with the airstream distance from the Pacific Ocean) as found 

at the current Central Coast cities (Monterey, Salinas, Hollister, King 

City, Livermore, Gilroy). A Coastal Character Map showing this data was 

attached to the petition. Accordingly, the data presented above 

establishes that the Central Coast boundary should be revised to 

accurately reflect the extent of the Central Coast climate.

    The ``San Francisco Bay'' viticultural area and the Central Coast 

viticultural area lie within the same botanic zone according to the 

Sunset Western Garden Book published for 55 years by the editors of 

Sunset Magazine. This comprehensive western plant encyclopedia has 

become a leading authority regarding gardening in the western United 

States. The Western Garden Book divides the region from the Pacific 

Coast to the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains into twenty-four 

climate zones. The Central Coast viticultural area lies within Zones 7, 

14, 15, 16, and 17.

    The climate zones established by Sunset Magazine demonstrate that 

the main distinguishing feature of Central Coast--the coastal climate--

extends west to the Santa Cruz coastline and north to the Golden Gate. 

The revision to the Central Coast viticultural area also lies within 

these zones.

    The characteristic cool Mediterranean climate of the Central Coast 

viticultural area extends north and west of the current boundaries. 

This coastal Mediterranean climate is cool in the summer and the marine 

fog which penetrates inland makes the coast very oceanic, with little 

difference in temperature between mild winters and cool summers. The 

Mediterranean climate classification is so called because the lands of 

the Mediterranean Basin exhibit the archetypical temperature and 

rainfall regimes that define the class. The Climatic Regions Map from 

Atlas of California supports the Mediterranean climate claim. This map 

is based on the Koeppen classification, which divides the world into 

climate regions based on temperature, the seasonal variation of 

drought, and the relationship of rainfall to potential evaporation. The 

Koeppen system uses letters based on German words having no direct 

English equivalents. The Climatic Regions Map depicts the extent of 

cool Mediterranean climate both north and west of the current Central 

Coast boundary and within it.

    The map shows that Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Mateo, 

and Santa Cruz Counties in the revision to the Central Coast 

viticultural area, like Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, and 

Santa Barbara Counties in the current Central Coast viticultural area, 

are mostly classified as Csb Mediterranean climates (average of warmest 

month is less than 22 C), with partial Csbn climate (more than thirty 

days of fog) along the coast.

    It is due to this coastal climate (mainly fog and wind), that the 

degree of marine influence in the revised Central Coast viticultural 

area is similar to the degree of marine influence found at other places 

inside the previous boundaries of the Central Coast viticultural area. 

A map of central California, submitted with the petition, shows the 

extent of marine fog in the area. This map shows that the fog pattern 

in the revised viticultural area is similar to other areas included in 

Central Coast. The fog extends inland to approximately the same extent 

throughout the revised viticultural area. The ``Retreat of Fog'' map 

submitted with the petition also shows the similarity in the duration 

of fog in the previous and revised Central Coast viticultural area. The 

similar fog pattern is most evident along the coastal areas of Big Sur, 

Monterey Bay and San Francisco.



Topography



    Santa Cruz and the other San Francisco Bay Counties share the 

Central Coast's terrain. One of the major California coast range gaps 

which produces the climate within the previous Central Coast boundaries 

lies within the revision to the Central Coast. The three largest sea 

level gaps in the central California coastal range mountainous barrier 

are (north to south): Estero Lowland in Sonoma County, Golden Gate into 

San Francisco Bay, and Monterey Bay. The Golden Gate and Monterey Bay 

allow the ocean influence to enter into the previous Central Coast 

viticultural area creating its coastal climate which is the unifying 

and distinguishing feature of the area. The main gap in the previous 

Central Coast viticultural area, the Monterey Bay allows marine air and 

fog from the Pacific Ocean to travel south and inland, into the Salinas 

Valley. This feature creates the grape-growing climate that exists in 

the Salinas Valley, but from a meteorological perspective, it has 

comparatively little influence on the portion of Central Coast 

viticultural area lying north of it. The on-shore prevailing North-

Westerly flow direction, combined with the coastal range topographical 

features north of the Bay's mouth, minimize northward influence from 

the air that enters the Monterey Bay. The Golden Gate gap introduces a 

cooling marine influence and the San Francisco Bay allows marine air 

and fog to travel much further inland and south through the Santa Clara 

and Livermore Valleys and provides most of the coastal influence 

affecting the northern portion of the Central Coast viticultural area.

    Although the Golden Gate and San Francisco Bay are primary 

influences on the previous Central Coast climate, neither shoreline was 

included in the previous Central Coast boundary. The revision to the 

Central Coast viticultural area logically extends the previous Central 

Coast boundaries to include the shores of the Golden Gate and San 

Francisco Bay.



Boundaries



    The extension of the Central Coast viticultural area would include 

the currently excluded portions of five counties which border the San 

Francisco Bay. These counties are San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa 

Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, and all of Santa Cruz County with the 

exception of the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area. The ``San 

Francisco Bay'' viticultural area adds approximately 639 square miles 

to Central Coast. This area contains 2,827 acres planted to grapes. In 

the original proposal, a small part of the east end of the Livermore 

Valley was omitted. This newly described area most accurately completes 

the description and designation of the climatic and geographic zones 

for Livermore Valley and has been added to the revised



[[Page 3023]]



Central Coast viticultural area. This area adds less than three square 

miles to the viticultural area and approximately 350 acres of wine 

grapes.

    The revision to the Central Coast boundary follows the Pacific 

coastlines of Santa Cruz, San Mateo, and San Francisco Counties, 

crosses San Francisco Bay, follows the northern boundary of Contra 

Costa County to Concord, and then follows the inland boundary of 

coastal influence along straight lines between landmarks in the Diablo 

Mountain Range to the current Central Coast boundary.

    The southern boundary of the Central Coast viticultural area 

remains unchanged. The changes to the western boundary, the California 

coastline, consists of extending the boundary north to the Golden Gate. 

The eastern boundary is extended to include the area northwest of 

Livermore up to the San Pablo Bay. From Altamont (just east of 

Livermore) south, the eastern boundary follows the previous boundary of 

the Central Coast viticultural area. North of Altamont, the boundary 

extension excludes the easternmost range of coastal mountains. The 

eastern boundary includes Martinez and Concord, but excludes Antioch, 

and the eastern portion of Contra Costa County.



Paperwork Reduction Act



    The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35, and its implementing regulations, 5 C.F.R. Part 1320, do 

not apply to this final rule because there is no requirement to collect 

information.



Regulatory Flexibility Act



    It is hereby certified that this regulation will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 

establishment of a viticultural area is neither an endorsement nor 

approval by ATF of the quality of wine produced in the area, but rather 

an identification of an area that is distinct from surrounding areas. 

ATF believes that the establishment of viticultural areas merely allows 

wineries to more accurately describe the origin of their wines to 

consumers, and helps consumers identify the wines they purchase. Thus, 

any benefit derived from the use of a viticultural area name is the 

result of the proprietor's own efforts and consumer acceptance of wines 

from that region.

    No new requirements are proposed. Accordingly, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required.



Executive Order 12866



    It has been determined that this regulation is not a significant 

regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

this final rule is not subject to the analysis required by this 

Executive Order.



Drafting Information



    The principal author of this document is David W. Brokaw, 

Regulations Division, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.



List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9



    Administrative practice and procedure, Consumer protection, 

Viticultural areas, and Wine.



Authority and Issuance



    Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, part 9, American 

Viticultural Areas, is amended as follows:



PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS



    Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as 

follows:



    Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.



Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas



    Par. 2. Section 9.75 is amended by removing the word ``and'' from 

paragraph (b)(17), by adding paragraphs (b)(19) through (b)(41), by 

revising the introductory text of paragraph (c), by removing paragraphs 

(c)(2) through (c)(13) and adding new paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(16) 

and, redesignating existing paragraphs (c)(14) through (c)(40) as 

paragraphs (c)(17) through (c)(43).





Sec. 9.75  Central Coast.



* * * * *

    (b) Approved maps. * * *

    (19) Diablo, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, Photorevised 

1980;

    (20) Clayton, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, Photorevised 

1980;

    (21) Honker Bay, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (22) Vine Hill, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (23) Benicia, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, Photorevised 

1980;

    (24) Mare Island, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (25) Richmond, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, Photorevised 

1980;

    (26) San Quentin, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (27) Oakland West, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (28) San Francisco North, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1968 and 1973;

    (29) San Francisco South, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (30) Montara Mountain, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (31) Half Moon Bay, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1968 and 1973;

    (32) San Gregorio, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1968;

    (33) Pigeon Point, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (34) Franklin Point, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (35) Ano Nuevo, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (36) Davenport, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (37) Santa Cruz, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, 

Photorevised 1981;

    (38) Felton, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, Photorevised 

1980;

    (39) Laurel, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, Photoinspected 

1978, Photorevised 1968;

    (40) Soquel, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, Photorevised 

1980; and

    (41) Watsonville West, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, 

Photorevised 1980.

    (c) Boundary. The Central Coast viticultural area is located in the 

following California counties: Monterey, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, 

Alameda, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, San Francisco, San 

Mateo, and Contra Costa. The Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area is 

excluded. (The boundaries of the Santa Cruz Mountains viticultural area 

are described in 27 CFR Sec. 9.31.)

* * * * *

    (2) The boundary follows north along the shoreline of the Pacific 

Ocean (across the Watsonville West, Soquel, Santa Cruz, Davenport, Ano 

Nuevo, Franklin Point, Pigeon Point, San Gregorio, Half Moon Bay, 

Montara Mountain and San Francisco South maps) to the San Francisco/

Oakland Bay Bridge. (San Francisco North Quadrangle)



[[Page 3024]]



    (3) From this point, the boundary proceeds east on the San 

Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge to the Alameda County shoreline. (Oakland 

West Quadrangle)

    (4) From this point, the boundary proceeds east along the shoreline 

of Alameda County and Contra Costa County across the Richmond, San 

Quentin, Mare Island, and Benicia maps to a point marked BM 15 on the 

shoreline of Contra Costa County. (Vine Hill Quadrangle)

    (5) From this point, the boundary proceeds in a southeasterly 

direction in a straight line across the Honker Bay map to Mulligan Hill 

elevation 1,438. (Clayton Quadrangle)

    (6) The boundary proceeds in southeasterly direction in a straight 

line to Mt. Diablo elevation 3,849. (Clayton Quadrangle)

    (7) The boundary proceeds in a southeasterly direction in a 

straight line across the Diablo and Tassajara maps to Brushy Peak 

elevation 1,702. (Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle)

    (8) The boundary proceeds due south, approximately 400 feet, to the 

northern boundaries of Section 13, Township 2 South, Range 2 East. 

(Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle)

    (9) The boundary proceeds due east along the northern boundaries of 

Section 13 and Section 18, Township 2 South, Range 3 East, to the 

northeast corner of Section 18. (Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle)

    (10) Then proceed south along the eastern boundaries of Sections 

18, 19, 30, and 31 in Township 2 South, Range 3 East to the southeast 

corner of Section 31. (Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle)

    (11) Then proceed east along the southern border of Section 32, 

Township 2 South, Range 3 East to the northwest corner of Section 4. 

(Altamont Quadrangle)

    (12) Then proceed south along the western border of Sections 4 and 

9. (Altamont Quadrangle)

    (13) Then proceed south along the western border of Section 16 

approximately 4275 feet to the point where the 1100 meter elevation 

contour intersects the western border of Section 16. (Altamont 

Quadrangle)

    (14) Then proceed in a southeasterly direction along the 1100 meter 

elevation contour to the intersection of the southern border of Section 

21 with the 1100 meter elevation contour. (Altamont Quadrangle)

    (15) Then proceed west to the southwest corner of Section 20. 

(Altamont Quadrangle)

    (16) Then proceed south along the western boundaries of Sections 29 

and 32, Township 3 South, Range 3 East and then south along the western 

boundaries of Sections 5, 8, 17, 20, Township 4 South, Range 3 East to 

the southwest corner of Section 20. (Mendenhall Springs Quadrangle)

* * * * *

    Par. 3. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.157 to read as 

follows:





Sec. 9.157  San Francisco Bay.



    (a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this 

section is ``San Francisco Bay.''

    (b) Approved maps. The appropriate maps for determining the 

boundary of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area are forty-two 

U.S.G.S. Quadrangle 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic) maps and one 

U.S.G.S. Quadrangle 5 x 11 Minute (Topographic) map. They are titled:

    (1) Pacheco Peak, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1971;

    (2) Gilroy Hot Springs, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1971

    (3) Mt. Sizer, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1971

    (4) Morgan Hill, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1980

    (5) Lick Observatory, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photoinspected 1973, Photorevised 1968

    (6) San Jose East, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (7) Calaveras Reservoir, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (8) La Costa Valley, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1960, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (9) Mendenhall Springs, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1971;

    (10) Altamont, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, Photorevised 

1981;

    (11) Byron Hot Springs, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (12) Tassajara, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, 

Photoinspected 1974, Photorevised 1968;

    (13) Diablo, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, Photorevised 

1980;

    (14) Clayton, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, Photorevised 

1980;

    (15) Honker Bay, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1953, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (16) Vine Hill, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (17) Benicia, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, Photorevised 

1980;

    (18) Mare Island, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (19) Richmond, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, Photorevised 

1980;

    (20) San Quentin, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (21) Oakland West, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1959, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (22) San Francisco North, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1968 and 1973;

    (23) San Francisco South, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (24) Montara Mountain, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1956, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (25) Half Moon Bay, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1968 and 1973;

    (26) San Gregorio, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1961, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1968;

    (27) Pigeon Point, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (28) Franklin Point, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (29) Ano Nuevo, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (30) Davenport, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1968;

    (31) Santa Cruz, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, 

Photorevised 1981;

    (32) Felton, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, Photorevised 

1980;

    (33) Laurel, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, Photoinspected 

1978, Photorevised 1968;

    (34) Soquel, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, Photorevised 

1980;

    (35) Watsonville West, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (36) Loma Prieta, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1968;

    (37) Watsonville East, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (38) Mt. Madonna, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (39) Gilroy, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, Photorevised 

1981;

    (40) Chittenden, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1980;

    (41) San Felipe, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1955, 

Photorevised 1971; and



[[Page 3025]]



    (42) Three Sisters, California, scale 1:24,000, dated 1954, 

Photoinspected 1978, Photorevised 1971.

    (c) Boundary. The San Francisco Bay viticultural area is located 

mainly within five counties which border the San Francisco Bay and 

partly within two other counties in the State of California. These 

counties are: San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra 

Costa and partly in Santa Cruz and San Benito Counties. The Santa Cruz 

Mountains viticultural area is excluded (see 27 CFR 9.31.) The 

boundaries of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area, using landmarks 

and points of reference found on appropriate U.S.G.S. maps, are as 

follows:

    (1) Beginning at the intersection of the 37 degree 00' North 

latitude parallel with State Route 152 on the Pacheco Peak Quadrangle.

    (2) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line to 

the intersection of Coyote Creek with the township line dividing 

Township 9 South from Township 10 South on the Gilroy Hot Springs 

Quadrangle.

    (3) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line to 

the intersection of the township line dividing Township 8 South from 

Township 9 South with the range line dividing Range 3 East from Range 4 

East on the Mt. Sizer Quadrangle.

    (4) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line 

(across the Morgan Hill Quadrangle) to the intersection of the township 

line dividing Township 7 South from Township 8 South with the range 

line dividing Range 2 East from Range 3 East on the Lick Observatory 

Quadrangle.

    (5) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line to 

the intersection of State Route 130 with the township line dividing 

Township 6 South from Township 7 South on the San Jose East Quadrangle.

    (6) Then proceed in a northeasterly direction following State Route 

130 to its intersection with the range line dividing Range 1 East from 

Range 2 East on the Calaveras Reservoir Quadrangle.

    (7) Then proceed north following this range line to its 

intersection with the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct on the La Costa Valley 

Quadrangle.

    (8) Then proceed in a northeasterly direction in a straight line 

following the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct to the western boundary of Section 

14 in Township 4 South, Range 2 East on the Mendenhall Springs 

Quadrangle.

    (9) Then proceed south along the western boundary of Section 14 in 

Township 4 South, Range 2 East to the southwest corner of Section 14 on 

the Mendenhall Springs Quadrangle.

    (10) Then proceed east along the southern boundary of Section 14 in 

Township 4 South, Range 2 East to the southeast corner of Section 14 on 

the Mendenhall Springs Quadrangle.

    (11) Then proceed south along the western boundary of Section 24 in 

Township 4 South, Range 2 East to the southwest corner of Section 24 on 

the Mendenhall Springs Quadrangle.

    (12) Then proceed east along the southern boundary of Section 24 in 

Township 4 South, Range 2 East and Section 19 in Township 4 South, 

Range 3 East to the southeast corner of Section 19 on the Mendenhall 

Springs Quadrangle.

    (13) Then proceed north along the western boundaries of Sections 

20, 17, 8, and 5 on the Mendenhall Springs Quadrangle in Township 4 

South, Range 3 East, north (across the Altamont Quadrangle) along the 

western boundaries of Sections 32, 29, to the southwest corner of 

Section 20, in Township 3 South, Range 3 East.

    (14) Then east along the southern boundary of Sections 20, and 21, 

in Township 3 South, Range 3 East on the Altamont Quadrangle to the 

1100 meter elevation contour.

    (15) Then, along the 1100 meter contour in a northwesterly 

direction to the intersection with the western boundary of Section 16, 

Township 3 South, Range 3 East on the Altamont Quadrangle.

    (16) Then north along the eastern boundary of Sections 17, 8, and 5 

in Township 3 South, Range 3 East to the northeast corner of Section 5.

    (17) Then proceed west along the northern border of Section 5 to 

the northwest corner of Section 5.

    (18) Then north along the eastern boundaries of Sections 31, 30, 

19, and 18 in Township 2 South, Range 3 East to the northeast corner of 

Section 18 on the Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle.

    (19) Then proceed due west along the northern boundaries of Section 

18 and Section 13 (Township 2 South, Range 2 East) to a point 

approximately 400 feet due south of Brushy Peak on the Byron Hot 

Springs Quadrangle.

    (20) Then proceed due north to Brushy Peak (elevation 1,702) on the 

Byron Hot Springs Quadrangle.

    (21) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line 

(across the Tassajara and Diablo Quadrangles) to Mt. Diablo (elevation 

3,849) on the Clayton Quadrangle.

    (22) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line 

to Mulligan Hill (elevation 1,438) on the Clayton Quadrangle.

    (23) Then proceed in a northwesterly direction in a straight line 

(across the Honker Bay Quadrangle) to a point marked BM 15 on the 

shoreline of Contra Costa County on the Vine Hill Quadrangle.

    (24) Then proceed west along the shoreline of Contra Costa County 

and Alameda County (across the Quadrangles of Benicia, Mare Island, 

Richmond, and San Quentin) to the San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge on 

the Oakland West Quadrangle.

    (25) Then proceed west on the San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge to 

the San Francisco County shoreline on the San Francisco North 

Quadrangle.

    (26) Then proceed along the San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa 

Cruz County shoreline (across the Quadrangles of San Francisco South, 

Montara Mountain, Half Moon Bay, San Gregorio, Pigeon Point, Franklin 

Point, Ano Nuevo and Davenport) to the place where Majors Creek flows 

into the Pacific Ocean on the Santa Cruz Quadrangle.

    (27) Then proceed northeasterly along Majors Creek to its 

intersection with the 400 foot contour line on the Felton Quadrangle.

    (28) Then proceed along the 400 foot contour line in a generally 

easterly/northeasterly direction to its intersection with Bull Creek on 

the Felton Quadrangle.

    (29) Then proceed along Bull Creek to its intersection with Highway 

9 on the Felton Quadrangle.

    (30) Then proceed along Highway 9 in a northerly direction to its 

intersection with Felton Empire Road.

    (31) Then proceed along Felton Empire Road in a westerly direction 

to its intersection with the 400 foot contour line on the Felton 

Quadrangle.

    (32) Then proceed along the 400 foot contour line (across the 

Laurel, Soquel, Watsonville West and Loma Prieta Quadrangles) to its 

intersection with Highway 152 on the Watsonville East Quadrangle.

    (33) Then proceed along Highway 152 in a northeasterly direction to 

its intersection with the 600 foot contour line just west of Bodfish 

Creek on the Watsonville East Quadrangle.

    (34) Then proceed in a generally east/southeasterly direction along 

the 600 foot contour line (across the Mt. Madonna and Gilroy 

Quadrangles), approximately 7.3 miles, to the first intersection of the 

western section line of Section 30, Township 11 South, Range 4 East on 

the Chittenden Quadrangle.

    (35) Then proceed south along the section line approximately 1.9 

miles to the south township line at Section 31, Township 11 South, 

Range 4 East on the Chittenden Quadrangle.



[[Page 3026]]



    (36) Then proceed in an easterly direction along the township line 

(across the San Felipe Quadrangle), approximately 12.4 miles to the 

intersection of Township 11 South and Township 12 South and Range 5 

East and Range 6 East on the Three Sisters Quadrangle.

    (37) Then proceed north along the Range 5 East and Range 6 East 

range line approximately 5.5 miles to Pacheco Creek on the Pacheco 

Creek Quadrangle.

    (38) Then proceed northeast along Pacheco Creek approximately .5 

mile to the beginning point.



    Signed: November 19, 1998.

John W. Magaw,

Director.

    Approved: December 24, 1998.

John P. Simpson,

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Regulatory, Tariff and Trade Enforcement).

[FR Doc. 99-1209 Filed 1-19-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-31-P