[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 5, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70472-70476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20504]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 70472]]



DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

27 CFR Part 9

[Notice No. 70]
RIN 1513-AB21


Proposed Expansion of the San Francisco Bay Viticultural Area 
(2005R-413P)

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to 
expand the San Francisco Bay viticultural area in northern California. 
The proposed expansion would add 88 square miles to the viticultural 
area to its north in Solano County, California. We designate 
viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of 
their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may 
purchase. We invite comments on this proposed viticultural area 
expansion.

DATES: We must receive written comments on or before February 5, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments to any of the following addresses:
     Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 70, P.O. Box 14412, 
Washington, DC 20044-4412.
     202-927-8525 (facsimile).
     [email protected] (e-mail).
     http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml. An online 
comment form is posted with this notice on our Web site.
     http://www.regulations.gov (Federal e-rulemaking portal; 
follow instructions for submitting comments).
    You may view copies of this notice, the petition, the appropriate 
maps, and any comments we receive about this proposal by appointment at 
the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20220. To make an appointment, call 202-927-2400. You may also access 
copies of the notice and comments online at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml.
    See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific 
instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for 
information on how to request a public hearing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N.A. Sutton, Regulations and Rulings 
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., 
No. 158, Petaluma, California 94952; telephone 415-271-1254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Background on Viticultural Areas

TTB Authority

    Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act), 
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe 
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt 
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among 
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading 
statements on labels, and ensure that labels provide the consumer with 
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The 
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the 
regulations promulgated under the FAA Act.
    Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the 
establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their 
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine 
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains 
the list of approved viticultural areas.

Definition

    Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) 
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region distinguishable by geographical features, the boundaries 
of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations. 
These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given 
quality, reputation, or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes 
grown in an area to its geographical origin. The establishment of 
viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the 
origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify 
wines they may purchase. Establishment of a viticultural area is 
neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in 
that area.

Requirements

    Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations outlines the procedure 
for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any 
interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region 
as a viticultural area. Petitioners may use the same procedure to 
request changes involving existing viticultural areas. Section 9.3(b) 
of the TTB regulations requires the petition to include--
     Evidence that the proposed viticultural area is locally 
and/or nationally known by the name specified in the petition;
     Historical or current evidence that supports setting the 
boundary of the proposed viticultural area as the petition specifies;
     Evidence relating to the geographical features, such as 
climate, soils, elevation, and physical features, that distinguish the 
proposed viticultural area from surrounding areas;
     A description of the specific boundary of the proposed 
viticultural area, based on features found on United States Geological 
Survey (USGS) maps; and
     A copy of the appropriate USGS map(s) with the proposed 
viticultural area's boundary prominently marked.

San Francisco Bay and Central Coast Expansion Petition

    Hestan Vineyards, LLC, of Vallejo, California, represented by 
Holland and Knight LLP of San Francisco, California, submitted a 
petition for an 88-square-mile boundary expansion that includes 
portions of Solano County to the north of the Carquinez Strait, and 
would apply to both the established San Francisco Bay viticultural area 
(27 CFR 9.157) and the established Central Coast viticultural area (27 
CFR 9.75). After reviewing the petition, TTB determined that the 
evidence submitted in support of the proposed expansion of the San 
Francisco Bay viticultural area merits rulemaking action. On the other 
hand, for the reasons outlined below, TTB also determined that there 
was not sufficient documentation to proceed with

[[Page 70473]]

rulemaking for the proposed Central Coast viticultural area expansion. 
Accordingly, TTB notified the petitioner of these determinations, and 
the petitioner agreed to proceed with only the San Francisco Bay 
viticultural area expansion portion of the petition.

Central Coast Viticultural Area Expansion

    The petitioner stated in the petition: ``Since the Central Coast 
AVA now includes the San Francisco Bay AVA, it would stand to reason 
that a county in the San Francisco Bay Area that encompasses all of the 
attributes of the other counties included in the San Francisco Bay AVA 
(i.e., coastal climate, geology, etc.), should also be included in the 
Central Coast AVA.'' (TTB notes that the petitioner's use of the ``San 
Francisco Bay Area'' name reflects a larger geographical region than 
that included in the established San Francisco Bay viticultural area.) 
The expansive geographical boundaries of the established Central Coast 
viticultural area include a large region of California between the 
Pacific Ocean coastline to the west, the foothill elevations of the 
Coast Range to the east, Point Conception to the south, and the 
Carquinez Strait to the north.
    TTB identified several concerns related to the lack of name 
association and the geographical boundaries between the San Francisco 
Bay area and Central Coast viticultural areas, as discussed below.
    The petition lacked adequate name documentation to identify the 
proposed expansion area as part of the Central Coast viticultural area. 
The petitioner relied on the Central Coast viticultural area boundary 
line encumbrance of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area, without 
providing adequate, independent documentation to substantiate the 
``Central Coast'' name usage in the proposed Solano County expansion 
area.
    Consumer confusion could result if the Central Coast viticultural 
area boundary line were expanded to include an area north of the San 
Francisco and San Pablo Bays. The North Coast viticultural area (27 CFR 
9.30) includes a portion of the San Pablo Bay west and north shoreline. 
Based on petition information and USGS maps, San Pablo Bay, which 
adjoins San Francisco Bay to its south, provides a geographically 
defining landmark between the established viticultural areas known as 
``Central Coast,'' to the east and south, and ``North Coast,'' to the 
north and west.

San Francisco Bay Expansion Petition Evidence

    The petitioner submitted the following information in support of 
the expansion of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area.
    The San Francisco Bay area is a loosely bound region that includes 
other bodies of water, including San Pablo Bay, the Carquinez Strait, 
and Suisun Bay, the petition explains. USGS maps of the region show 
that San Francisco Bay joins San Pablo Bay to its north. Also, the 
Carquinez Strait connects the San Pablo Bay on the west with Suisun Bay 
on the east.
    The petition states that the proposed expansion of the San 
Francisco Bay viticultural area, which is located adjacent to the north 
shores of San Pablo Bay and the Carquinez Strait, is an area 
historically, economically, and socially considered to be a part of the 
San Francisco Bay region. With the exception of the 4,480 acres, or 7 
square miles, of the Carquinez Strait waterway, the petition explains, 
the entire proposed expansion area is on land in western Solano County.
    A previous expansion of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area was 
published in the Federal Register on June 15, 2006, at 71 FR 34522. 
That expansion, effective July 17, increased the viticultural area by 
about 20,000 acres to the east in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.
Name Evidence
    A number of Government agencies and interest groups provide 
services to the nine counties in the recognized San Francisco Bay area, 
including the proposed expansion area in Solano County, as documented 
in the petition. Also, the Bay Area Council's Web site as of April 12, 
2005, lists its nine counties, which include Solano, San Francisco, San 
Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa, Sonoma, and Marin, 
according to the petition. Other government agencies and interest 
groups using the same nine-county San Francisco Bay area parameter 
include the Association of Bay Area Governments, Bay Area Water Transit 
Authority, Bay Area Marketing Partnership, and Bay Area Economic Forum. 
Evidence of this usage was submitted with the petition.
    The City of Vallejo, in southwest Solano County and within the 
proposed San Francisco Bay expansion boundary, serves as a key ferry 
transportation hub into the City of San Francisco, the petition 
documents. The Vallejo ferry system, as explained on the Bay Area Water 
Transit authority Web site, carries thousands of passengers each week 
from Solano County to the City of San Francisco and back.
    In 1987, the State of California legislature passed a bill 
establishing the ``San Francisco Bay Trail,'' as noted on page 160 of 
San Francisco Bay: Portrait of an Estuary, by John Hart, and published 
by the University of California Press in 2003. Mr. Hart states that 
this trail system includes the Vallejo area of Solano County, which the 
petition notes is a part of the proposed San Francisco Bay viticultural 
area expansion.
Boundary Evidence
    The proposed San Francisco Bay viticultural area expansion area 
comprises an 88-square-mile area that lies northeast of the City of San 
Francisco and San Francisco Bay, the petition explains. The proposed 
boundary line of the expansion area includes portions of San Pablo 
Bay's shoreline, the Solano and Napa Counties boundary line, a railroad 
track, and an interstate highway.
    The proposed expansion area's northern boundary line follows the 
dividing line between Napa and Solano Counties and the Southern Pacific 
railroad track between Creston and Cordelia, as found on the USGS 
Cuttings Wharf and Cordelia maps. (TTB notes that the proposed 
expansion area boundary line coincides with various portions of the 
established boundaries for the North Coast, Napa Valley (27 CFR 9.23), 
and Solano County Green Valley (27 CFR 9.44) viticultural areas.)

Distinguishing Features

    David G. Howell, PhD, Geologist at Stanford University in Palo 
Alto, California, Deborah Harden, PhD, Geologist at San Jose State 
University, San Jose, California, and Robert Bornstein, PhD, 
Meteorologist at San Jose State University, San Jose, California, 
combined efforts to provide petition evidence and documentation 
substantiating the northerly expansion of the San Francisco Bay 
viticultural area. The petition addresses the commonality of 
distinguishing features shared by the established San Francisco Bay 
viticultural area and the proposed northern expansion area.
Geology
    The petition explains the similarity of geology, as a 
distinguishing feature, between the northern portion of the San 
Francisco Bay viticultural area and the proposed viticultural area 
expansion into Solano County. The Franklin Ridge landform of Contra 
Costa County, located in the northmost portion of the

[[Page 70474]]

established San Francisco Bay viticultural area, according to the 
petition, continues northward into the proposed expansion area of 
Solano County. Franklin Ridge becomes known as Sulphur Mountain Ridge 
in Solano County, with the two ridges geologically joining beneath the 
Carquinez Strait, the petition states.
    The north-south linkage between the established and proposed 
portions of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area relies on the 
continuity of the underlying geology, the petition states. The bedrock 
formations, earthquake faults, landforms, and soils of northern San 
Francisco Bay viticultural area, according to the petition, continue 
north into the proposed expansion area of Solano County.
    The petition identifies the geological bedrock core of the proposed 
expansion area as Cretaceous sandstone and shale. This body of rock, 
the petition explains, extends northward from the Mount Diablo region 
in Contra Costa County into the proposed expansion area that includes 
parts of Solano County.
Soil
    The two general categories of soils in the proposed expansion area 
are those formed in salt marshes and those formed in sandstone over 
shale bedrock on uplands, as described in the Soil Survey of Solano 
County, California, issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 
1977.
    The Solano County general soil map documents that soils in salt 
marshes predominate in areas at a low elevation south of Vallejo. Also, 
the map shows that some of the soils in the predominant Joice, Reyes, 
Suisun, and Tamba soil series are mucks or peaty mucks.
    The soils on uplands in Solano County are common to other parts of 
the San Francisco Bay viticultural area, including areas of Alameda and 
Santa Clara Counties, the petition explains. The most prevalent soils 
on uplands are in the Dibble and Los Osos series, and are moderately 
deep soils formed in weathered sandstone and shale under climatic 
conditions of seasonal soil moisture. The Altamont, Gaviota, and 
Millsholm series are also on uplands, according to the petitioner; the 
Rincon series are on alluvial fans.
Climate
    The eastward and inland movement of marine air through the Golden 
Gate Gap, the petition explains, dominates the climate of the land 
areas adjacent to San Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay and within the 
established viticultural area boundaries. Carquinez Strait joins San 
Pablo Bay at the bay's southeast corner, according to USGS maps, and 
receives the same marine air that cools the San Francisco and San Pablo 
Bays, the petitioner explains.
    The Carquinez Strait funnels the marine air to both the north and 
south sides of its shoreline, according to the petition. (TTB notes 
that the current San Francisco Bay viticultural area's northern 
boundary line extends along the south shoreline of the Carquinez 
Strait, following the Contra Costa County northern boundary line to BM 
15 on the Honker Bay USGS map.) The proposed expansion area extends 
northward to include all the Carquinez Strait and portions of Solano 
County, according to the written boundary description and maps provided 
with the petition.
    The current expansion petition provides evidence and documentation 
of the marine airflow, and its cooling effect, traveling north and east 
from the Golden Gate, through the San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, and 
Carquinez Strait, into the proposed inland expansion area. Although the 
proposed expansion area was not included in the original San Francisco 
Bay AVA petition, since the filing of the original petition, additional 
observation sites have become available that provide a more detailed 
analysis of the air flow patterns in and around the Carquinez Strait. 
Figures obtained from a new observation site that show the typical 
summer afternoon flow pattern on both sides of the Carquinez Strait 
clearly show that the Carquinez Strait is not the northern boundary of 
the influence of the marine air that has entered through the Golden 
Gate Gap.
    The California Air Resources Board maps, submitted with the 
petition, show that the marine influence extends both north and south 
of the Carquinez Strait. A San Francisco Bay Air Quality Management 
District map shows air flow through the Carquinez Strait on July 31, 
2000, a typical summer day. The airflow pattern through the Carquinez 
Strait brings the marine influence to the north, east, and south of the 
waterway, according to the map. Another computerized map of the air 
flow, also documented on July 31, 2000, shows the marine air entering 
San Francisco Bay through the Golden Gate Gap, then traveling through 
San Pablo Bay, and continuing east through the Carquinez Strait, north 
into Suisun Bay, and south into the Livermore Valley.
    The information submitted with the petition concludes that the 
Carquinez Strait should not be considered the northernmost boundary of 
the San Francisco Bay viticultural area. Marine air, which is a 
significant distinguishing climatic characteristic of the San Francisco 
Bay viticultural area and region, is also significant in the proposed 
expansion area, according to the petition.

Boundary Description

    See the narrative boundary description of the petitioned-for 
viticultural area expansion in the proposed regulatory text amendment 
published at the end of this notice.

Maps

    The petitioner provided the required maps, which are listed below 
in the proposed regulatory text amendment.

Impact on Current Wine Labels

    The proposed expansion of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area 
will not affect currently approved wine labels. The approval of this 
proposed expansion may allow additional vintners to use ``San Francisco 
Bay'' as an appellation of origin on their wine labels. Part 4 of the 
TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a wine that indicates 
or implies an origin other than the wine's true place of origin. For a 
wine to be labeled with a viticultural area name or with a brand name 
that includes a viticultural area name or other term identified as 
viticulturally significant in part 9 of the TTB regulations, at least 
85 percent of the wine must be derived from grapes grown within the 
area represented by that name or other term, and the wine must meet the 
other conditions listed in 27 CFR 4.25(e)(3). Different rules apply if 
a wine has a brand name containing a viticultural area name or other 
viticulturally significant term that was used as a brand name on a 
label approved before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.

Public Participation

Comments Invited

    We invite comments from interested members of the public on whether 
we should expand the established San Francisco Bay viticultural area as 
proposed.
    The currently proposed expansion area, TTB notes and petition-
provided USGS maps confirm, lies in an area of southern Solano County, 
outside of the North Coast viticultural area boundary line. The 
proposed expansion area lies between the boundary lines of the North 
Coast and Central Coast viticultural areas.
    In addition to receiving comments on the issues described above, we 
are interested in comments on the sufficiency and accuracy of the name,

[[Page 70475]]

boundary, and other required information submitted in support of the 
petition.
    Please provide any available specific information in support of 
your comments.

Submitting Comments

    Submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this 
notice. Your comments must include this notice number and your name and 
mailing address. Your comments must be legible and written in language 
acceptable for public disclosure. We do not acknowledge receipt of 
comments, and we consider all comments as originals. You may submit 
comments in one of five ways:
     Mail: You may send written comments to TTB at the address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
     Facsimile: You may submit comments by facsimile 
transmission to 202-927-8525. Faxed comments must--
    (1) Be on 8.5- by 11-inch paper;
    (2) Contain a legible, written signature; and
    (3) Be no more than five pages long. This limitation assures 
electronic access to our equipment. We will not accept faxed comments 
that exceed five pages.
     E-mail: You may e-mail comments to [email protected]. Comments 
transmitted by electronic mail must--
    (1) Contain your e-mail address;
    (2) Reference this notice number on the subject line; and
    (3) Be legible when printed on 8.5- by 11-inch paper.
     Online form: We provide a comment form with the online 
copy of this notice on our Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml. Select the ``Send comments via e-mail'' link under 
this notice number.
     Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: To submit comments to us via 
the Federal e-rulemaking portal, visit http://www.regulations.gov and 
follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    You may also write to the Administrator before the comment closing 
date to ask for a public hearing. The Administrator reserves the right 
to determine whether to hold a public hearing.

Confidentiality

    All submitted material is part of the public record and subject to 
disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your comments that you 
consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

Public Disclosure

    You may view copies of this notice, the petition, the appropriate 
maps, and any comments we receive by appointment at the TTB Information 
Resource Center at 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. You may 
also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5- x 11-inch page. Contact our 
information specialist at the above address or by telephone at 202-927-
2400 to schedule an appointment or to request copies of comments.
    We will post this notice and any comments we receive on this 
proposal on the TTB Web site. All name and address information 
submitted with comments will be posted, including e-mail addresses. We 
may omit voluminous attachments or material that we consider unsuitable 
for posting. In all cases, the full comment will be available in the 
TTB Information Resource Center. To access the online copy of this 
notice and the submitted comments, visit http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine_rulemaking.shtml. Select the ``View Comments'' link under this notice 
number to view the posted comments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We certify that this proposed regulatory amendment, if adopted, 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The proposed amendment imposes no new reporting, 
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived 
from the use of a viticultural area name would be the result of a 
proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area. 
Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.

Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as 
defined by Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735. Therefore, it requires 
no regulatory assessment.

Drafting Information

    N.A. Sutton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted this 
notice.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9

    Wine.

Proposed Regulatory Amendment

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we propose to amend 27 
CFR, chapter 1, part 9, as follows:

PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS

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

    Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.

Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas

    2. Section 9.157 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
paragraph (b), removing the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph 
(b)(42), replacing the period with a semicolon at the end of paragraph 
(b)(43), adding new paragraphs (b)(44) through (b)(47), revising the 
introductory text of paragraph (c) and paragraph (c)(24), redesignating 
paragraphs (c)(25) through (c)(38) as (c)(31) through (c)(44), and 
adding new paragraphs (c)(25) through (c)(30), to read as follows:


Sec.  9.157  San Francisco Bay.

* * * * *
    (b) Approved Maps. The appropriate maps for determining the 
boundary of the San Francisco Bay viticultural area are 47 1:24,000 
Scale USGS topographic maps. They are titled:
* * * * *
    (44) Cuttings Wharf, Calif.; 1949; Photorevised 1981;
    (45) Sears Point, Calif.; 1951; Photorevised 1968;
    (46) Cordelia, Calif.; 1951; Photorevised 1980; and
    (47) Fairfield South, Calif., 1949; Photorevised 1980.
    (c) Boundary. The San Francisco Bay viticultural area is located 
mainly within five counties, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, 
Alameda, and Contra Costa, which border the San Francisco Bay. The area 
also includes portions of three other counties, Solano, Santa Cruz, and 
San Benito, which are in the general vicinity of the greater San 
Francisco Bay metropolitan area. The boundary of the San Francisco Bay 
viticultural area is as described below.
* * * * *
    (24) Then proceed west-southwest along the south shoreline of the 
Suisun Bay and the Carquinez Strait to its intersection with Interstate 
680 at the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and BM 66, T3N/R2W, on the Vine Hill 
Quadrangle.
    (25) Then proceed generally north following Interstate 680, 
crossing over and back on the Benicia Quadrangle map and continuing 
over the Fairfield South Quadrangle map, to its intersection with the 
Southern Pacific railroad track at Cordelia, Section 12, T4N/R3W, on 
the Cordelia Quadrangle map.
    (26) Then proceed generally west along the Southern Pacific 
railroad track to its intersection with the Napa and Solano Counties 
boundary line in Jameson Canyon at Creston, Section 9, T4N/R3W, on the 
Cordelia Quadrangle map.

[[Page 70476]]

    (27) Then proceed generally south-southeast, followed by straight 
west along the Napa and Solano Counties boundary line; continue 
straight west, crossing over the Cuttings Wharf Quadrangle map, to its 
intersection with the east shoreline of Sonoma Creek slough, which 
coincides with the Highway 37 bridge on the Solano County side of the 
creek, T4N/R5W, on the Sears Point Quadrangle.
    (28) Then proceed generally southeast along the north and east 
shorelines of San Pablo Bay, also known as the San Pablo Bay National 
Wildlife Refuge, crossing over the Cuttings Wharf Quadrangle map, to 
its intersection with the Breakwater line, located within the Vallejo 
City boundaries and 0.7 mile west-southwest of the beacon, T3N/R4W, on 
the Mare Island Quadrangle.
    (29) Then proceed 1.2 miles straight south-southwest to its 
intersection with the San Pablo Bay shoreline at BM 14, west of Davis 
Point, T3N/R4W, on the Mare Island Quadrangle.
    (30) Then proceed generally south along the contiguous eastern 
shorelines of San Pablo Bay and San Francisco Bay, crossing over the 
Richmond and San Quentin Quadrangle maps, to its intersection with the 
San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge on the Oakland West Quadrangle.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 28, 2006.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E6-20504 Filed 12-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P