[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27060-27064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12410]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No. 8121]
RIN 1512-AA07
Puget Sound Viticultural Area (94F-019P)
AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), has
received a petition for the establishment of a viticultural area in the
State of Washington to be known as ``Puget Sound.'' This proposal is
the result of a petition submitted by Gerard and Jo Ann Bentryn,
Owners-Winemakers of Bainbridge Island Vineyards.
DATES: Written comments must be received by July 6, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Chief, Wine, Beer and Spirits
Regulations Branch, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, P.O. Box
50221, Washington, DC 20091-0221 (Attn: Notice No. 812). Copies of the
petition, [[Page 27061]] the proposed regulations, the appropriate
maps, and written comments will be available for public inspection
during normal business hours at: ATF Public Reading Room, Office of
Public Affairs and Disclosure, Room 6480, 650 Massachusetts Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David W. Brokaw, Wine, Beer and Spirits Regulations Branch, Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20226, (202) 927-8230.
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 56692]
which added a new Part 9 to 27 CFR, providing 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), Title 27, CFR, 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, based on features which can be found on United States Geological
Survey (US.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
proposed boundaries prominently marked.
Petition
ATF has received a petition from Gerard and Jo Ann Bentryn of
Bainbridge Island Vineyards & Winery in Bainbridge Island, Washington,
proposing to establish a new viticultural area within the State of
Washington to be known as ``Puget Sound.'' Puget Sound (or the
``Sound'') is an inlet of the Pacific Ocean in northwestern Washington,
extending about 100 miles south from Admiralty Inlet and Juan de Fuca
Strait to Olympia. The proposed viticultural area lies within the land
basin surrounding the Sound. Eight letters of support from wineries and
vineyards located within the proposed area were included with the
petition. These letters of support were from: Mount Baker Vineyards,
Whidbey Island Winery, Lopez Island Vineyards Inc., E.B. Foote Winery,
Blue Apple Vineyard, Molly's Vineyard, Coolen Wine Cellar, and Johnson
Creek Winery/Alice's Restaurant.
The proposed Puget Sound viticultural area is located in the
northwestern portion of Washington State. The entire Puget Sound
watershed contains 13,100 square miles of land, 150 square miles of
fresh water, and 2,500 square miles of saltwater. The proposed Puget
Sound viticultural area contains approximately 55% of the watershed's
land area and water or 7,150 square miles of land and 1,500 square
miles of water for a total area of 8,650 square miles. It has a maximum
length of 190 miles from north to south and 60 miles from east to west,
although it is most often less than 45 miles wide.
Evidence That the Name of the Area is Locally or Nationally Known
The name ``Puget Sound'' was established in 1791 by Captain George
Vancouver when he named, explored, and mapped the area while in service
to the British Admiralty. His maps and those of subsequent explorers,
settlers and government agencies show the Puget Sound area with the
countryside drained by rivers flowing into Puget Sound. Numerous
references exist indicating the general use of the name ``Puget Sound''
to refer to the petitioned area. The petitioners included copies of
title pages of various publications, guide and tour book references,
public telephone book listings, and Federal and State agency maps, to
illustrate the use of the name. They also submitted an excerpt from,
``Touring the Washington Wine Country,'' 1993, published by the
Washington Wine Commission. This publication discusses grape growing in
western Washington and states that, ``[t]he expansive Puget Sound basin
offers a temperate climate that rarely suffers from prolonged freezing
weather in the winter and quite often enjoys a long and warm summer
growing season.''
Historical or Current Evidence That the Boundaries of the Viticultural
Area Are as Specified in the Petition
The proposed viticultural area is located on the land mass
surrounding Puget Sound and know as the Puget Sound basin. The
petitioners explained that there are no exacting and commonly
understood boundaries for the basin. The basin boundaries, for example,
can extend up to the crests of the Olympic and Cascade mountain ranges
to include the entire watershed. However, individuals in western
Washington State commonly refer to the lowland areas surrounding the
Sound as the Puget Sound basin. It is these lowland areas that the
petitioners feel are suited for viticulture.
The petitioners stated that, ``Puget Sound has boulders determined
absolutely by the forces of nature, and recognized by common cultural
use. We merely used those public roads that most closely fit within
those natural boundaries of terminal moraine [accumulation of
boundaries, stones, or other debris carried and deposited at the edges
of the farthest reaches of a glacier's advance], rainfall lines
(isohyets), and temperature to draw enforceable borders.'' [definition
added] The petitioners also state that, ``[t]he proposed viticultural
area is smaller than the basin because not all of the basin is suitable
for viticulture. Areas with elevations greater than 600 feet are
generally too wet or too cold in this region so they have been
excluded.''
Evidence Relating to the Geographical Features (Climate, Soil,
Elevation, Physical Features, etc.) Which Distinguish Viticultural
Features of the Proposed Area From Surrounding Areas
Climate
The climate of Puget Sound is well differentiated from that of
surrounding areas. The Olympic Mountains to the west and the Cascade
Mountains to the east protect the region from the cool wet influence of
the Pacific Ocean and the extreme summer and winter temperatures of
eastern Washington. The Strait of Juan de Fuca and associated waterways
separate Puget Sound from the cooler summer areas to the north.
Foothills to the south of the proposed Puget Sound viticultural area
are the limit of the area influenced by the moderating effect of the
waters of the Sound. Both summer and winter [[Page 27062]] temperatures
are significantly cooler in the hills and mountains to the west, south,
and east.
The western, eastern and southern boundaries of the proposed Puget
Sound viticultural area closely follow the line formed by a growing
season of 180 days and the 60 inch isohyet of annual precipitation. All
areas within the proposed viticultural area below 600 feet in elevation
have a 180 day or longer growing season with 60 inches or less of
annual rainfall, and 15 inches or less of rainfall in the months of
April to October (inclusive).
Areas outside of, but adjacent to, the proposed viticultural area
to the west, south, and east have a growing season of generally less
than 180 days, with more than 60 inches of annual rainfall, and more
than 15 inches of rainfall in the months of April to October
(inclusive). Examples of weather recording stations surrounding the
Puget Sound region are as follows: To the west is Forks, with a growing
season of 175 days and an annual precipitation of 118 inches (38 inches
April to October). To the southeast is Paradise Ranger Station (Mount
Rainier National Park), with a growing season of 50 days and an annual
precipitation of 106 inches (39 inches April to October). To the east
is Diablo Dam with a growing season of 170 days and an annual
precipitation of 72 inches (23 inches from April to October). To the
northeast is Heather Meadows Recreational Area (Mt. Baker National
Forest) with a growing season of 150 days and an annual precipitation
of 110 inches (44 inches from April to October).
The northerly border of the proposed viticultural area closely
conforms to the temperature boundary of areas experiencing a mean high
temperature in the warmest month (July) of 72 degrees Fahrenheit or
greater. Cool air from the Pacific Ocean moves east through the Strait
of Juan de Fuca during the growing season limiting the reliable
ripening of winegrapes in the areas west of the Elwha River and outside
the line formed by the western boundaries of Clallam, San Juan, and
Whatcom Counties and the northern boundary of Whatcom County.
Example of areas to the northwest of the proposed viticultural area
with mean high temperatures in the warmest month which are lower than
72 degrees Fahrenheit are: Forks, Washington, 71 degrees F; Clallum
Bay, Washington, 67 degrees F; Victoria, British Columbia, 68 degrees
F; and Sidney, British Columbia, 67 degrees F.
Degree Days
Total degree days as measured by the scale developed by Winkler and
Amerine of the University of California (Davis) range between 1300 at
the northern border, to 2200 in the south. Typical readings are: Friday
Harbor 1380, Blaine 1480, Sequim 1310, Port Townsend 1480, Mt. Vernon
1530, Coupeville 1360, Monroe 1820, Bothell 1520, Kent 1940, Seattle (U
of W) 2160, Bremerton 1810, Vashon 1730, Grapeview 2010, Puyallup 1770,
Tacoma 1940, and Olympia 2160. There is a significant temperature
variation from north to south. According to the petitioner, this
temperature variation is within a range that will allow the same types
of grapes to be grown throughout the proposed area.
Rainfall
Rainfall in the proposed Puget Sound viticultural area is
substantially less than in surrounding areas. It ranges from 17 inches
annually in the north to 60 inches in the south. Typical amounts are:
Friday Harbor 28'', Blaine 35'', Sequim 17'', Port Townsend 18'', Mt.
Vernon 32'', Coupeville 18'', Monroe 47'', Bothell 40'', Kent 38'',
Seattle (U of W) 35'', Bremerton 39'', Vashon 47'', Grapeview 53'',
Puyallup 41'', Tacoma 37'', and Olympia 52''. Growing season rainfall
ranges from 8 inches in the north to 15 inches in the south. Outside of
the proposed boundaries, the rainfall ranges from 70 to 220 inches
annually.
Overall, the proposed Puget Sound viticultural area can be
characterized as having a growing season of over 180 days, annual
degree day averages between 1300 and 2200, and annual rainfall of 60
inches or less.
Soils
Soils in the proposed Puget Sound viticultural area are completely
unlike those of the surrounding upland areas in that they are the
result of the advance and withdrawal of the Vashon glaciation. This
most recent glaciation (10,000 years ago) coincided at its limits with
the eastern, southern, and southwestern boundaries of the proposed
viticultural area. The resultant soils are primarily silty to sandy
topsoils with scattered small to moderate rounded stones. This is
typical of post glacial soils in lowland areas. Areas outside the
proposed viticultural area to the west, south and east, were not
covered by ice during the Vashon glaciation. Consequently, soils in
surrounding areas have entirely different origins and genesis. The
primary impact on viticultural conditions by the glaciation of the
proposed Puget Sound viticultural area was the development of a semi-
permeable cemented subsoil at depths generally from one to ten feet.
This subsoil was created by the pressure of one to three thousand feet
of overlying ice. The subsoil acts as a storage vehicle for winter
rains and allows deep rooted vines to survive the late-summer soil
water deficit without irrigation. The surrounding areas which were not
glaciated do not share this comparative advantage. The semi-permeable
cemented subsoil is the most significant soil factor relative to
viticulture in the area.
Topography and Geographical Features
The Puget Sound basin is a large lowland surrounding bodies of salt
water called in government reports ``Puget Sound'' or ``Puget Sound and
Adjacent Waters.'' These waters comprise Puget Sound, a long, wide
ocean inlet. The basin is cut by many rivers flowing into the Sound.
Low rolling hills formed by the deposit and erosion of advancing and
retreating glaciers are cut by ravines and stream channels. The
dominating natural features are the sound itself and the surrounding
mountains. The Olympic mountain range forms the western boundary of the
Puget Sound basin. These mountains intercept moist maritime Pacific air
and account for the relatively low annual precipitation. The Cascade
mountain range forms the eastern boundary of the Puget Sound basin.
These mountains protect the basin from the extremely cold winters and
hot summers of eastern Washington. Elevations in the basin are
primarily between sea-level and 1,000 feet. Isolated hills of up to
4,000 feet occur primarily in the northeast but none of the existing
vineyards is above 600 feet in elevation.
Viticulture
The petitioners state that neither vinifera nor labrusca vines are
native to the area; however, they are now grown throughout the basin.
In 1872, Lambert Evans established a vineyard on Stretch Island in
southern Puget Sound. He sold the fruit in Seattle. In the 1890's a
viticulturalist from the east coast named Adam Eckert brought new grape
varieties and planted more vineyards on the island. The first bonded
winery in Washington State was established there in 1933 by Charles
Somers. Known as the St. Charles Winery, it reached a capacity of
100,000 gallons. Viticulture spread throughout the Puget Sound basin as
evidenced by the annual reports of the Washington State Department of
Agriculture. These [[Page 27063]] primarily labrusca plantings were
gradually supplanted in most of the basin by vinifera plantings from
the 1950's to the present. The Washington State Department of
Agriculture report entitled, ``Washington Agriculture,'' 1960, reported
2 small areas of grape cultivation outside of Yakima Valley; one of
them being ``in western Washington in Kitsap county. There along the
shores of Puget Sound, grapes have grown satisfactorily for many
years.'' The 1993 publication, ``Touring the Washington Wine Country,''
which is published by the Washington Wine Commission states that,
``Small vineyards flourish on Puget Sound's islands . . .'' There are
now over 50 acres of vineyards in the basin and 25 bonded wineries.
Proposed Boundaries
The boundaries of the proposed Puget Sound viticultural area may be
found on four 1:250,000 scale U.S.G.S. maps titled: Hoquiam, Washington
(1974); Seattle, Washington (1974); Wenatchee, Washington (1971);
Victoria, B.C., Can., Wash., U.S. (1974); one 1:25,000 scale map
titled: Auburn, Washington (1983); and three 1:24,000 scale maps
titled: Buckley, Washington (1993); Cumberland, Washington (1993); and
Enumclaw, Washington (1993).
Public Participation--Written Comments
ATF requests comments from all interested persons. Comments
received on or before the closing date will be carefully considered.
Comments received after that date will be given the same consideration
if it is practical to do so. However, assurance of consideration can
only be given to comments received on or before the closing date.
ATF will not recognize any submitted material as confidential and
comments may be disclosed to the public. Any material which the
commenter considers to be confidential or inappropriate for disclosure
to the public should not be included in the comments. The name of the
person submitting a comment is not exempt from disclosure.
Comments may be submitted by facsimile transmission to (202) 927-
8602, provided the comments: (1) are legible; (2) are 8\1/2\'' x 11''
in size, (3) contain a written signature, and (4) are three pages or
less in length. This limitation is necessary to assure reasonable
access to the equipment. Comments sent by FAX in excess of three pages
will not be accepted. Receipt of FAX transmittals will not be
acknowledged. Facsimile transmitted comments will be treated as
originals.
Any person who desires an opportunity to comment orally at a public
hearing on the proposed regulation should submit his or her request, in
writing, to the Director within the 45-day comment period. The
Director, however, reserves the right to determine, in light of all
circumstances, whether a public hearing will be held.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub. L. 96-
511, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, and its implementing regulations, 5 C.F.R.
Part 1320, do not apply to this notice because no requirement to
collect information is proposed.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
It is hereby certified that this proposed 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.
Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required
because the proposal, if promulgated as a final rule, is not expected
(1) to have significant secondary, or incidental effects on a
substantial number of small entities; or (2) to impose, or otherwise
cause a significant increase in the reporting, recordkeeping, or other
compliance burdens on a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this proposed regulation is not a
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, this proposal is not subject to the analysis required by
this executive order.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this document is David W. Brokaw, Wine,
Beer, and Spirits Regulations Branch, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Administrative practices and procedures, Consumer protection,
Viticultural areas, and Wine
Authority and Issuance
Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 9, American
Viticultural Areas, is proposed to be 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. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.151 to read as
follows:
Sec. 9.151 Puget Sound.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Puget Sound.''
(b) Approved maps. The appropriate maps for determining the
boundary of the Puget Sound viticultural area are four 1:250,000 scale
U.S.G.S. topographical maps, one 1:25,000 scale topographic map, and
three 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. They are titled:
(1) Hoquiam, Washington, 1958 revised 1974 (1:250,000).
(2) Seattle, Washington, 1958 revised 1974 (1:250,000).
(3) Wenatchee, Washington, 1957 revised 1971 (1:250,000).
(4) Victoria, B.C., Can., Wash., U.S., 1957 revised 1974
(1:250,000).
(5) Auburn, Washington, 1983 (1:25,000).
(6) Buckley, Washington, 1993 (1:24,000).
(7) Cumberland, Washington, 1993 (1:24,000).
(8) Enumclaw, Washington, 1993 (1:24,000).
(c) Boundary. The Puget Sound viticultural area is located in the
State of Washington. The boundaries of the Puget Sound viticultural
area, using landmarks and points of reference found on appropriate
U.S.G.S. maps, follow.
(1) Beginning where the Whatcom county line comes closest to an
unnamed secondary road (referred to in the petition as Silver Lake
Road) on the U.S.G.S. map ``Victoria,'' T41N/R6E;
(2) Then south along Silver Lake Road approximately 5.5 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 542, T39N/R5E;
(3) Then west and then southwest along State Highway 542
approximately 11 miles to its intersection with State Highway 9, T38N/
R5E;
[[Page 27064]]
(4) Then south along State Highway 9 approximately 44 miles to its
intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as Burn Road) at the town of Arlington, T31N/R5E;
(5) Then south, southeast along Burn Road approximately 11 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 92, T30N/R6E;
(6) Then south along State Highway 92 approximately 3 miles to its
intersection with an unnamed light duty road (referred to in the
petition as Machias Hartford Road), T29N/R6E;
(7) Then south along Machias Hartford Road approximately 4 miles to
its intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as Lake Roesiger Road), on the U.S.G.S. map ``Wenatchee,''
T29N/R7E;
(8) Then east along Lake Roesiger Road approximately 3.5 miles to
its intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as Woods Creek Road), T29N/R7E;
(9) Then south along Woods Creek Road approximately 10.5 miles to
its intersection with U.S. Highway 2 in the town of Monroe, T27N/R7E;
(10) Then west along U.S. Highway 2 approximately \1/2\ mile to its
intersection with State Highway 203, T27N/R6E;
(11) Then south along State Highway 203 approximately 24 miles to
its intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as Preston-Fall City Road), at the town of Fall City, T24N/
R7E;
(12) Then southwest along Preston-Fall City Road approximately 4
miles to its intersection with Interstate Highway 90 at the town of
Preston, T24N/R7E;
(13) Then east along Interstate Highway 90 approximately 3 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 18, T23N/R7E;
(14) Then southwest along State Highway 18 approximately 7 miles to
its intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as 276th Avenue SE), T23N/R6E;
(15) Then south along 276th Avenue SE approximately 5 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 516 at the town of Georgetown, T22N/
R6E;
(16) Then west along State Highway 516 approximately 2 miles to its
intersection with State Highway 169 at the town of Summit on the
U.S.G.S. map, ``Seattle,'' (shown in greater detail on the U.S.G.S.
map, ``Auburn''), T22N/R6E;
(17) Then south along State Highway 169 approximately 11.5 miles to
its intersection with State Highway 410 at the town of Enumclaw on the
U.S.G.S. map, ``Wenatchee,'' (shown in greater detail on the U.S.G.S.
map, ``Enumclaw''), T20N/R6E;
(18) Then southwest approximately 5 miles along State Highway 410
until its intersection with State Highway 165 on the U.S.G.S. map,
``Seattle,'' (shown in greater detail on the U.S.G.S. map,
``Buckley''), T19N/R6E;
(19) Then southwest on State Highway 165 until its intersection
with State Highway 162 at the town of Cascade Junction on the U.S.G.S.
map, ``Seattle'' (shown in greater detail on the U.S.G.S. Map,
``Buckley''), T19N/R6E;
(20) Then southwest along State Highway 162 approximately 8 miles
to its intersection with an unnamed secondary road (referred to in the
petition as Orville Road E.), T19N/R5E;
(21) Then south along Orville Road E., approximately 8 miles to its
intersection with the CMSTP&P railroad at the town of Kapowsin, on the
U.S.G.S. map, ``Hoquiam,'' T17N/R5E;
(22) Then south along the CMSTP&P railroad approximately 17 miles
to where it crosses the Pierce County line at the town of Elbe, T15N/
R5E;
(23) Then west along the Pierce County line approximately 1 mile to
the eastern tip of Thurston County, T15N/R5E;
(24) Then west along the Thurston County line approximately 38
miles to where it crosses Interstate Highway 5, T15N/R2W;
(25) Then north along Interstate Highway 5 approximately 18 miles
to its intersection with U.S. Highway 101 at the town of Tumwater on
the U.S.G.S. map ``Seattle,'' T18N/R2W;
(26) Then northwest along U.S. Highway 101 approximately 18 miles
to its intersection with State Highway 3 at the town of Shelton, T20N/
R3W;
(27) Then northeast along State Highway 3 approximately 24 miles to
where it crosses the Kitsap County line, T23N/R1W;
(28) Then north along the Kitsap County line approximately 3 miles
to the point where it turns west, T23N/R1W;
(29) Then west along the Kitsap County line approximately 11 miles
to the point where it turns north, T23N/R3W;
(30) Then continuing west across Hood Canal approximately 1 mile to
join with U.S. Highway 101 just south of the mouth of an unnamed creek
(referred to in the petition as Jorsted Creek), T23N/R3W;
(31) Then north along U.S. Highway 101 approximately 40 miles to
the point where it turns west at the town of Gardiner on the U.S.G.S.
map ``Victoria,'' T30N/R2W;
(32) Then west along U.S. Highway 101 approximately 32 miles to
where it crosses the Elwha River, T30N/R7W;
(33) Then north along the Elwha River approximately 6 miles to its
mouth, T31N/R7W;
(34) Then continuing north across the Strait of Juan de Fuca
approximately 5 miles to the Clallam County line, T32N/R7W;
(35) Then northeast along the Clallam County line approximately 14
miles to the southwestern tip of San Juan County, T32N/R4W;
(36) Then northeast along the San Juan County line approximately 51
miles to the northern tip of San Juan County, T38N/R3W;
(37) Then northwest along the Whatcom County line approximately 19
miles to the western tip of Whatcom County, T41N/R5W;
(38) Then east along the Whatcom County line approximately 58 miles
to the beginning.
Signed: May 3, 1995.
Daniel R. Black,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 95-12410 Filed 5-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-M