Puget Sound Viticultural Area (94F-019P)

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