[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 227 (Monday, November 28, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72937-72941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25270]



[[Page 72937]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

27 CFR Part 9

[Docket No. TTB-2022-0012; Notice No. 217]
RIN 1513-AC82


Proposed Expansion of the Red Hills Lake County Viticultural Area

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to 
expand the ``Red Hills Lake County'' viticultural area by approximately 
679 acres. The Red Hills Lake County viticultural area and the proposed 
expansion area are both located in Lake County, California, and are 
located within the established Clear Lake and North Coast viticultural 
areas. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow vintners to better 
describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better 
identify wines they may purchase. TTB invites comments on this proposed 
amendment to its regulations.

DATES: TTB must receive your comments by January 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may electronically submit comments to TTB on this 
proposal using the comment form for this document posted within Docket 
No. TTB-2022-0012 on the Regulations.gov website at https://www.regulations.gov. At the same location, you also may view copies of 
this document, the related petition and selected supporting materials, 
and any comments TTB receives on this proposal. A direct link to that 
docket is available on the TTB website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/notices-of-proposed-rulemaking under Notice No. 217. Alternatively, you 
may submit comments via postal mail to the Director, Regulations and 
Ruling Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G 
Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005. Please see the Public 
Participation section of this document for further information on the 
comments requested on this proposal and on the submission, 
confidentiality, and public disclosure of comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and 
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G 
Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background on Viticultural Areas

TTB Authority

    Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act), 
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe 
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt 
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among 
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading 
statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with 
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The 
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act 
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, 
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary has delegated the functions 
and duties in the administration and enforcement of these provisions to 
the TTB Administrator through Treasury Order 120-01.
    Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to 
establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate the use of their 
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine 
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets 
forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the 
establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and 
lists the approved AVAs.

Definition

    Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) 
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region having distinguishing features as described in part 9 of 
the regulations and, once approved, a name and a delineated boundary 
codified in part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow 
vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or 
other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to the 
wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to 
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and 
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of 
an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine 
produced in that area.

Requirements

    Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) 
outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and allows any interested 
party to petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region as an AVA. 
Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes standards 
for petitions to establish or modify AVAs. Petitions to establish or 
expand an AVA must include the following:
     Evidence that the region within the proposed expansion 
area is nationally or locally known by the name of the established AVA;
     An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of 
the proposed expansion area;
     A narrative description of the features of the proposed 
expansion area affecting viticulture, including climate, geology, 
soils, physical features, and elevation, that make the proposed 
expansion area similar to the established AVA and distinguish it from 
adjacent areas outside the established AVA boundary;
     The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS) 
map(s) showing the location of the proposed expansion area, with the 
boundary of the proposed expansion area clearly drawn thereon; and
     A detailed narrative description of the proposed expansion 
area boundary based on USGS map markings.

Petition To Expand the Red Hills Lake County AVA

    TTB received a petition from Terry Dereniuk of Terry Dereniuk 
Consulting, submitted on behalf of local vineyard owners, proposing to 
expand the established Red Hills Lake County AVA. T.D. TTB-15, which 
published in the Federal Register on July 12, 2004 (69 FR 41754), 
established the Red Hills Lake County AVA (27 CFR 9.169). The Red Hills 
Lake County AVA is located in Lake County, California, and is within 
the established Clear Lake (27 CFR 9.99) and North Coast AVAs (27 CFR 
9.30). Although the proposed expansion area is also within the 
established Clear Lake and North Coast AVAs, the proposed expansion 
would not affect the boundaries of those AVAs.
    The proposed expansion area is adjacent to the western portion of 
the established Red Hills Lake County AVA and covers approximately 679 
acres. The petition states that the proposed expansion area consists of 
three separately-owned parcels of land. One of the parcels, owned by 
Jim and Diane Fore, is currently planted with vines. The second parcel, 
owned by Prince Vineyard, LLC, is planned for planting in the near 
future. The third parcel, owned by Roland and Nell Shaul, is adjacent 
to the Prince Vineyard property. The Shaul parcel does not have any 
vineyards planted or planned for the near future but does contain a 
number of sites that are suitable for

[[Page 72938]]

viticultural activity, so the petitioner requests its inclusion in the 
proposed expansion area. Unless otherwise noted, all information and 
data pertaining to the proposed expansion area contained in this 
document come from the petition and its supporting exhibits.

Name Evidence

    The expansion petition notes that the original petition to 
establish the Red Hills Lake County AVA contained the following quote: 
``The proposed Red Hills [sic] AVA takes its name from a road, 
contained entirely within the proposed viticultural area, which runs 
through the heart of the area. * * * Red Hills Road was itself named 
for the most striking and unifying features of the area-its prevalent 
red soils and gently hilly terrain.'' The expansion petition goes on to 
state that T.D. TTB-15, which established the Red Hills Lake County 
AVA, describes the AVA's boundary as being based on ``a combination of 
geography, terrain, soil, and climate factors[.]''
    According to the proposed expansion petition, the description of 
the Red Hills Lake County AVA boundary in T.D. TTB-15 suggests that the 
AVA is defined by ``this combination of features rather than an 
officially named geographic feature.'' The proposed expansion petition 
asserts that, due to the lack of a defined geographic feature known as 
``Red Hills,'' adjacent regions that share the red volcanic soils and 
hilly terrain that are characteristic of the Red Hills Lake County AVA 
could also reasonably be referred to as the ``Red Hills.'' The petition 
states that the proposed expansion area shares the same red volcanic 
soils and hilly terrain of the established AVA. As a result, the 
petition believes that the name ``Red Hills'' is as applicable to the 
proposed expansion area as it is to the established Red Hills Lake 
County AVA.

Boundary Evidence

    The established Red Hills Lake County AVA is located just south of 
Clear Lake, at the base of Mount Konocti. According to T.D. TTB-15, the 
northern boundary of the AVA excludes elevations on Mt. Konocti above 
2,600 feet. The eastern boundary follows a series of ridgelines to 
exclude regions with different soils, including Anderson Flat and the 
town of Lower Lake, as well as a steep ridge. The AVA's southern 
boundary generally coincides with the Clear Lake AVA's southern 
boundary and separates both AVAs from the Mayacamas Mountains, whose 
elevations are generally unsuitable for commercial viticulture. The Red 
Hills Lake County AVA's southwestern corner skirts Boggs Lake, while 
the western boundary excludes Camel Back Ridge and some lower 
elevations south and southeast of Kelseyville.
    The proposed expansion area is adjacent to Bottle Rock Road, which 
forms a portion of the southwestern boundary of the Red Hills Lake 
County AVA. The proposed boundary expansion would begin on the current 
boundary at the intersection of Bottle Rock Road and Harrington Road. 
Instead of continuing north-northwesterly along Bottle Rock Road to its 
intersection with Cole Creek Road, as the current boundary does, the 
proposed boundary expansion would proceed south along Bottle Rock Road 
for a short distance before proceeding west to the 2,800-foot elevation 
contour. The boundary would then follow the elevation contour north-
northeasterly before rejoining the current AVA boundary at Bottle Rock 
Road. This portion of the proposed expansion area would encompass the 
parcel of land with the vineyard owned by Jim and Diane Fore. The 
proposed expansion boundary would then follow the current AVA boundary 
north along Bottle Rock Road to its intersection with an unnamed trail. 
At that point, the proposed expansion would divert from the current 
boundary and proceed west and north in a series of straight lines along 
the low, eastern slopes of Camel Back Ridge. This boundary modification 
would encompass the parcels of land owned by Prince Vineyard LLC and 
Roland and Nell Shaul. The proposed expansion boundary would then 
proceed east and rejoin the current AVA boundary at the point where the 
2,000-foot elevation contour intersects Bottle Rock Road.

Distinguishing Features

    The expansion petition states that the topography, soils, and 
climate of the proposed expansion area are similar to those of the 
established Red Hills Lake County AVA.
Topography
    The original petition to establish the Red Hills Lake County AVA 
described the topography as ``an area of gently sloping, rolling 
terrain, contained entirely within the Clear Lake volcanic field.'' The 
original petition noted that within the Red Hills Lake County AVA, 
slopes range from 0 to greater than 30 percent, but that ``[n]o one 
group clearly predominates.'' When describing the region west of Bottle 
Rock Road, which is the location of the proposed expansion area, the 
original petition stated, ``almost all of the terrain shown has slopes 
of 15% and above.''
    The expansion petition includes a section of a map of the Clear 
Lake volcanic field (Figure 1).\1\ The image shows not only that the 
region of the proposed expansion area is within the Clear Lake volcanic 
field but also that it shares the same underlying geology as the 
established Red Hills Lake County AVA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All figures of the petition are included in Docket TTB-2022-
0012 at https://www.regulations.gov. You may view a digital version 
of the same map in Figure 1 at https://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/2362/i2362_sheet1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The expansion petition also includes an image of a slope and 
terrain map of the proposed expansion area and the adjacent portion of 
the Red Hills Lake County AVA (Figure 2).\2\ The expansion petition 
notes that, while the original AVA petition was correct that a large 
part of the region to the west of Bottle Rock Road does contain steep 
slopes, it also contains areas with gentler slopes. Figure 2 indicates 
that the proposed expansion area contains regions with slopes from 0 to 
20 percent, as well as slopes from 20 to over 30 percent. Additionally, 
the expansion petition includes a wider view of the slope and terrain 
map (Figure 6). Both figures show that the slope angles of the proposed 
expansion area are similar to those within the Red Hills Lake County 
AVA, as described in T.D. TTB-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ You may view a digital version of the same map in Figure 2 
at gispublic.co.lake.ca.us/portal/home.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the expansion petition includes an image of the slope and 
terrain of the Benson Ridge region of Lake County (Figure 7), which was 
not within the original Red Hills Lake County AVA boundary. The 
expansion petition notes that during the public comment period for 
Notice No. 961, which proposed the Red Hills Lake County AVA, a 
vineyard owner provided evidence to include the Benson Ridge region in 
the AVA. TTB determined that the evidence supported the region's 
inclusion and modified the final Red Hills Lake County AVA boundary in 
T.D. TTB-15. The expansion petition notes that the topography of the 
proposed expansion area is similar to that of the Benson Ridge region, 
which has regions with slope angles ranging from 0 to 10 percent, as 
well as regions with slope angles over 30 percent.
Soils
    The original Red Hills Lake County petition stated that the AVA 
``encompasses the largest contiguous body of red volcanic soils in Lake 
County.'' The major soil groups within the AVA are Glenview-Bottlerock-
Arrowhead, Konocti-Benridge, and

[[Page 72939]]

Collayomi-Aiken-Whispering. The original petition described these soils 
as containing ``a high content of rock fragments or gravel in their 
structure.'' The original petition excluded the region west of Bottle 
Rock Road from the AVA because the soils ``developed from parent 
materials of the Franciscan assemblage, which result in poorly drained 
and often steep soil conditions.'' The original petition also noted 
that soils west of the AVA contain high levels of serpentine, which 
offers ``poor soil quality and nutrition.''
    The proposed boundary expansion petition states that, while the 
original petition's description of the soils west of Bottle Rock Road 
is generally true, the original petition's use of a man-made feature to 
define the boundary resulted in the omission of acreage that had 
similar soil characteristics to the Red Hills Lake County AVA. The 
expansion petition claims that 90 percent of the acreage within the 
proposed expansion area contains soils of the same soil units described 
in the original petition and which are of volcanic origin. According to 
Figure 12 of the expansion petition, the most prominent soil unit in 
the proposed expansion area is the Glenview-Bottlerock-Arrowhead unit, 
which comprises approximately 401 acres of the 679-acre proposed 
expansion area. The Konocti-Benridge, Collayomi, and Collayomi-Aiken-
Whispering soil series cover an additional 211 acres of the proposed 
expansion area. The expansion petition includes an image of a soil map 
of the proposed expansion area and the adjacent region within the Red 
Hills Lake County AVA (Figure 13) which shows that, while serpentine 
soils are found west of Bottle Rock Road as the original petition 
stated, they are not found within the proposed expansion area.
    Finally, the expansion petition includes several photographs of the 
soils within the proposed expansion area (Figures 8-10) showing 
pebbles, gravel, and cobbles within the soil, including large 
quantities of obsidian, a naturally-occurring volcanic glass. The 
photographs suggest that the proposed expansion area's soils have a 
rocky, gravelly nature similar to the soils of the Red Hills Lake 
County AVA.
Climate
    According to the brief description of the Red Hills Lake County 
AVA's climate provided in T.D. TTB-15, the AVA has a climate that is 
more influenced by Clear Lake than by the Pacific Ocean. The 
temperature contrasts between the lake and the land create winds that 
are credited for reducing the risk of frost within the AVA. T.D. TTB-15 
states that, by contrast, ``other Lake County viticultural areas 
require frost protection measures.''
    The proposed expansion petition explains that, today, some growers 
within the Red Hills Lake County AVA have frost protection measures in 
place, although those may not be needed every year. For example, the 
expansion petition states that vineyard owner Gregory Graham, whose 
vineyards are in the lower elevations of the northeastern portion of 
the AVA, has frost curtains and a movable wind machine. The Fore's 
vineyard, within the proposed expansion area, also has two wind 
machines as well as vineyard heaters, but only uses them ``about 2 out 
of every 5 years.'' By contrast, the expansion petition states that 
vineyards within the Big Valley District-Lake County AVA (27 CFR 
9.232), which is to the northwest of both the Red Hills Lake County AVA 
and the proposed expansion area, require frost protection every year. 
TTB notes that Notice No. 134, which proposed the Big Valley District-
Lake County AVA, described the low number of frost-free days as a 
distinguishing feature of the AVA.
    The proposed expansion petition also compares the harvest dates 
within the proposed expansion area to those within the Red Hills Lake 
County AVA. T.D. TTB-115 did not consider harvest dates as a 
distinguishing feature of the AVA; however the expansion petition notes 
that several articles submitted during the public comment period for 
Notice No. 961 discuss harvest dates as an example of how the climate 
of the AVA affects viticulture. For example, one article quotes a 
vineyard manager for Kendall-Jackson as saying they never harvest their 
Red Hills Lake County AVA vineyards before the first of October.\3\ 
Another article states that within the Red Hills Lake County AVA, 
``[g]rowers there don't usually begin harvest before October.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Ferguson, Scott. ``Lake County Bears Fruit: California's 
Lesser-Known North Coast County Gets Respect.'' Wine Business 
Monthly. May 2000, Vol. VII, No. 5. This article was included in 
Comment 12 to Notice No. 961, which you may view in TTB's online AVA 
Reading Room at https://www.ttb.gov/images/pdfs/Red_Hills_Lake_County_comments.pdf.
    \4\ Ferguson, Scott. ``More vineyards, four new wineries slated 
for Lake County.'' St. Helena Star, July 5, 2001. This article was 
also included in Comment 12 to Notice No. 961.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The expansion petition states that cabernet sauvignon has become 
the ``signature'' winegrape for the Red Hills Lake County AVA, which it 
also notes is grown within the proposed expansion area. The expansion 
petition provides harvest dates from 2005-2018 for this grape varietal 
grown within the proposed expansion area. During that timeframe, 
harvest dates within the proposed expansion area occurred before 
October 1 only three times, suggesting a similar climate to that 
described for the Red Hills Lake County AVA.
    Finally, T.D. TTB-15 also stated that rainfall amounts within the 
Red Hills Lake County AVA average between 25 and 40 inches a year. The 
expansion petition documents rainfall amounts from a weather station in 
the proposed expansion area. However, because the petitioner collected 
that data for less than a year, TTB is unable to determine if the 
rainfall amounts within the proposed expansion area are similar to 
those of the Red Hills Lake County AVA.

TTB Determination

    TTB concludes that the petition to expand the boundaries of the 
established Red Hills Lake County AVA merits consideration and public 
comment, as invited in this notice of proposed rulemaking.

Boundary Description

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

Maps

    The proposed boundary change to the Red Hills Lake County AVA would 
affect the portion of the current AVA boundary shown on the 1:24,000 
scale Kelseyville quadrangle map in the list of maps in the regulatory 
text of 27 CFR 9.169. The petitioner included a copy of this map in the 
expansion petition. You also may view a map of the proposed expansion 
of the Red Hills Lake County AVA boundary on the AVA Map Explorer on 
the TTB website, at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ava-map-explorer.

Impact on Current Wine Labels

    Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a 
wine that indicates or implies an origin other than the wine's true 
place of origin. For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name, at least 85 
percent of the wine must be derived from grapes grown within the area 
represented by that name, and the wine must meet the other conditions 
listed in Sec.  4.25(e)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). 
If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA name and that name 
appears in the brand name, then the label is not in compliance and the 
bottler must change the brand name and obtain approval of

[[Page 72940]]

a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name appears in another reference on 
the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have to obtain 
approval of a new label. Different rules apply if a wine has a brand 
name containing an AVA name that was used as a brand name on a label 
approved before July 7, 1986. See Sec.  4.39(i)(2) of the TTB 
regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details.
    The approval of the proposed expansion of the Red Hills Lake County 
AVA would not affect any other existing viticultural area. The proposed 
expansion of the Red Hills Lake County AVA would allow vintners to use 
``Red Hills Lake County,'' ``Clear Lake,'' and ``North Coast'' as 
appellations of origin for wines made primarily from grapes grown 
within the proposed expansion area if the wines meet the eligibility 
requirements for the appellation.

Public Participation

Comments Invited

    TTB invites comments from interested members of the public on 
whether it should expand the Red Hills Lake County AVA as proposed. TTB 
is specifically interested in receiving comments on the similarity of 
the proposed expansion area to the established Red Hills Lake County 
AVA, as well as the differences between the proposed expansion area and 
the areas outside the established AVA. Please provide specific 
information in support of your comments.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit comments on this proposal as an individual or on 
behalf of a business or other organization via the Regulations.gov 
website or via postal mail, as described in the ADDRESSES section of 
this document. Your comment must reference Notice No. 217 and must be 
submitted or postmarked by the closing date shown in the DATES section 
of this document. You may upload or include attachments with your 
comment. You also may request a public hearing on this proposal. The 
TTB Administrator reserves the right to determine whether to hold a 
public hearing.

Confidentiality and Disclosure of Comments

    All submitted comments and attachments are part of the rulemaking 
record and are subject to public disclosure. Do not enclose any 
material in your comments that you consider confidential or that is 
inappropriate for disclosure.
    TTB will post, and you may view, copies of this document, the 
related petition and selected supporting materials, and any comments 
TTB receives about this proposal within the related Regulations.gov 
docket. In general, TTB will post comments as submitted, and it will 
not redact any identifying or contact information from the body of a 
comment or attachment.
    Please contact TTB's Regulations and Rulings division by email 
using the web form available at https://www.ttb.gov/contact-rrd, or by 
telephone at 202-453-2265, if you have any questions about commenting 
on this proposal or to request copies of this document, the related 
petition and its supporting materials, or any comments received.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

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

Executive Order 12866

    It has been determined that this proposed rule is not a significant 
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 
1993. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9

    Wine.

Proposed Regulatory Amendment

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB proposes to amend 
title 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  27 U.S.C. 205.

Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas

0
2. Section 9.169 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(14);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(15) through (22) as paragraphs (c)(31) 
through (38); and
0
c. Adding new paragraphs (c)(15) through (22) and paragraphs (c)(23) 
through (30).
    The revision and additions read as follows:


Sec.  9.169   Red Hills Lake County.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (14) Proceed about 0.4 mile northwesterly along Harrington Flat 
Road to its intersection with Bottle Rock Road in section 18, T21N, 
R8W; then
    (15) Proceed southerly along Bottle Rock Road approximately 2,500 
feet to its intersection with an unnamed, unimproved dirt road near the 
marked 2,928-foot elevation; then
    (16) Proceed west along the unimproved dirt road to its 
intersection with the 2,800-foot elevation contour; then
    (17) Proceed northwesterly, then northerly along the meandering 
2,800-foot elevation contour to its intersection with the northern 
boundary of section 18, T12N, R8W; then
    (18) Proceed easterly along the northern boundary of section 18 to 
its intersection with Bottle Rock Road; then
    (19) Proceed north along Bottle Rock Road to its intersection with 
an unnamed trail in section 7, T12N, R8W; then
    (20) Proceed west in a straight line to the western boundary of 
section 7, T12N, R8W; then
    (21) Proceed north along the western boundary of section 7 to the 
southeastern corner of section 1, T12N, R9W; then
    (22) Proceed west along the southern boundary of section 1 to its 
intersection with the 2,600-foor elevation contour; then
    (23) Proceed north in a straight line to the intersection with an 
unnamed, unimproved dirt road known locally as Helen Road; then
    (24) Proceed west in a straight line to the fourth intersection 
with the 2,560-foot elevation contour in section 1, T12N, R9W; then
    (25) Proceed south in a straight line to the southern boundary of 
section 1; then
    (26) Proceed west along the southern boundary of section 1 to its 
intersection with the western boundary of section 1; then
    (27) Proceed north along the western boundary of section 1 to its 
intersection with the northern boundary of section 1; then
    (28) Proceed east along the northern boundary of section 1 to its 
intersection with the 2,000-foot elevation contour; then
    (29) Proceed southeasterly along the 2,000-foot elevation contour 
to its intersection with Bottle Rock Road; then
    (30) Proceed northwesterly along Bottle Rock Road to its 
intersection with Cole Creek Road to the west and an

[[Page 72941]]

unnamed, unimproved road to the east in section 25, T13N, R9W; then
* * * * *

    Signed: November 15, 2022.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
    Approved: November 16, 2022.
Thomas C. West, Jr.,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2022-25270 Filed 11-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P