Then at Argyle, the group experienced a variety of Oregon wines ranging from 2001 Extended Tirage to the 25th Anniversary silver series. Ending at Grand Cru, the group toured the winery’s solar power installation and other eco-friendly features.

The Washington State Liquor Control Board is proposing additional code amendments to further implement Ballot Initiative 1183. The WSLCB encourages public input and requests that initial comments be received by June 27, 2012. A public hearing will be held on the draft code amendments Wednesday, June 27, 2012 at 10 am. The changes, among other things, add language to address the sale of spirits and identify the sources from which retail licensees may purchase beer, wine and spirits. The rules also add new language requiring wine distributors to sell and deliver product from their licensed premises and clarify that wine importers cannot sell to retailers.

As you may recall, WSLCB adopted emergency rules on December 7, 2011 and April 4, 2012, and adopted permanent rules on May 30, 2012 (copies can be found here). A group representing retailers has filed a petition for judicial review of these rules, arguing that WSLCB acted outside its authority in adopting these rules.

The justification for the bill is to, supposedly, put New York on equal footing with other states that require “at rest” periods. The “at rest” period requirement would only be triggered if the out-of-state shipper was from a state that also had an “at rest” requirement. However, the proposal has small distributors crying foul and the industry concerned that this change could, among other possibilities, decrease the volume of wine sold in New York, impact the availability of smaller producers’ wines, and increase the price of wine.

Thanks Heater Allen for a great visit!

Topics and panels include start-ups, trademark registration, employment, privatization of OLCC liquor sales, land use and a panel discussion on alternating premises (wine/beer/spirits). This seminar is complimentary to all industry members. Topics will apply to wineries, breweries and distilleries.

For agenda and registration visit: http://www.stoel.com/showevent.aspx?Show=9155

The State of Idaho is most infamously know for the potato but the recently reenergized Idaho Wine Commission, vintners, and wineries across the state hope to soon add Idaho Wines to the Gem State's reputation.

Idaho wines regularly net honors in regional and national competitions, and the media are increasingly taking notice. "They want something new to write about, and that's us," says Executive Director of the Idaho Wine Commission, Moya Shatz. The October issue of Sunset magazine sports a feature story headlined: "Discover new wine country: In Idaho's low-key Snake River Valley, the wine is getting seriously good."

Idaho is steadily earning a reputation for growing and producing vinifera wine grape varieties such as syrah and viognier, as well as classic varieties including merlot, cabernet sauvignon, chardonnay and riesling.

The Snake River Valley Appellation is the first registered AVA (American Viticultural Area) for the state, officially designated in April 2007. The AVA covers an area of 8000 square miles throughout Southern Idaho and has comparable latitudes to many famous wine regions of the world.

In Canyon County (about twenty miles outside of Boise) there are eight wineries within just 10 miles— making ideal a leisurely two day wine trip of the area.

Although Idaho’s wine industry is currently ranked 22nd in Wine Business Monthly’s most recent ranking of “Number of Wineries,” Idaho has been steadily expanding since the Great Recession.

An economic impact study conducted by Boise State University in 2008 found that Idaho’s wine industry contributed about $73 million to the state’s economy and 625 jobs. Although Shatz doesn’t expect to commission another such study until around 2015, she expects those numbers have already increased.

One of Idaho’s prime wine business assets is its two viticulture programs: one at the University of Idaho’s Parma research center (where the U.S. Department of Agriculture has funded 2 of 28 wine grape researchers in the U.S.) and the second at Treasure Valley Community College in Caldwell.

In celebration of Idaho’s winery growth- Stoel Rives is proud to release “The Law of Wine in Idaho: a Guide to Business and Legal Issues” at the Inaugural Idaho Wine, Beer and Distiller’s Law Seminar in Boise Idaho on March 1st, 2012, presenting Moya Shatz as the Special Guest Speaker. Please click here for more information regarding the event and for information on how to obtain a copy of the Law of Wine in Idaho.

Recently food cart owners have been exploring the possibility of serving alcoholic beverages to complement your burrito, panuchos, grilled peanut butter and jelly sandwich, falafel, or whatever else you may be enjoying. A limited few are already serving up beer and wine. For example, Pizza Depokos at North Station has a limited on-premises license to serve beer and wine, and Captured by Porches Brewing Co. appears to be serving beer out of a mobile bus under its existing brewery license, as described in an OregonLive.com article.  However, whether we will see more food carts serving up beer or wine depends on whether a cart owner can convince the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) that it qualifies for a license under the current regulatory scheme. 

The first, and probably biggest, hurdle a food cart owner has is the issue of defining the licensed premises. State law prohibits the OLCC from issuing a license to a location that does not have defined boundaries. While a licensed premises does not need to be enclosed by a wall, fence or other structure, it must have defined boundaries that are discernable. Further, state law prohibits the OLCC from licensing premises that are “mobile” unless the premises is a licensed public passenger carrier (like an airline, a railroad, or a tour boat operator). What constitutes “mobile” is up for interpretation at this point and may likely be the subject of the OLCC’s upcoming request to the Oregon Attorney General for an opinion.

Other likely licensing issues include, but of course are not limited to, minor posting, premises control, and local endorsement. These issues exist whether a food cart owner pursues a limited on-premises license, a temporary sales license, or some other privilege like a second or temporary location under another license type (i.e., brewery or winery license). In addition to these license-specific issues that an applicant must address, food cart owners must also be aware of the potential for increased site liability as well as increased regulatory scrutiny through the local endorsement process, which will trigger a compliance review of all applicable zoning, building, and health codes.

The USDA has authority over domestic and imported agricultural products to be sold, labeled, or represented, as organically produced.  Under OFPA, the USDA has established the National Organic Program (NOP).  Agricultural products that are sold or labeled as organically produced must be produced and handled in accordance with NOP.  Any use of the term "organic" on a wine label or in adverting of wine must comply with the USDA's NOP regulations.  Now, with the adoption of the MOU, it is clear that TTB has the regulatory authority to determine whether proposed labels are consistent with NOP. 

The Advertising Labeling and Formulation Division (ALFD) of the TTB has guidance for organic labeling applicants.  The guidelines provide a step-by-step process of what is required to obtain label approval, including the need for proof of USDA-accredited certifying agent (ACA) preview, a certification statement, a sulfite statement, an ingredient statement, the USDA seal, and so on.  The guidelines also contain an organic label quick reference sheet that explains the requirements for the various organic claims, like "100 percent organic," "organic," or "made with organic (specify ingredient)."   Additional TTB guidelines on variations of "organic" labeling are available at www.ttb.gov/pdf/wine.pdf. 

For fun, I looked at four different bottles of wine that made some claims for "green production."  The first was a NSA Organic, USDA certified wine from the Columbia Valley.  The bottle was blazed with the "organic" nature of the wine, from the foil marked with "NSA Organic" to the "certified organic vineyard" on the "back" label.  The USDA Organic stamp was also featured.  Comparatively, an Oregon pinot from Eola-Amity Hills was simply marked with a small "made with organic grapes" statement and certified organic by Oregon Tilth.  Then there was another wine from Columbia Valley that, while not having any "organic" claim, was described as a "wine of sustainable and environmentally friendly farming."  Finally, the fourth was an Austrian wine certified "Demeter,"  a biodynamics certification.  However, notably many wines that are known to value biodynamic or sustainable farming practices do not make such claims on their labels.  Recognizably, this allows for more flexibility and avoids the extra steps of having to prove organic label claims.