1. Proposed Elements of the Colorado Quality Wine and Grape Industry Program (QWGIP) Summary by Stephen Menke Colorado State Enologist

2. CWIDB Background n 20 Year Quality plan for CO Wine and Grapes industry proposed by State Enologist in 2009 –CWIDB has since sponsored trials of voluntary system of Sensory Faults Training + commercial wines Sensory Evaluation Panels »59 panelists trained from CO, NE, and NM »3 joint evaluations of 275 commercial wines from CO, NE, and NM, with outside commercial standard and medaled wines included n CWIDB Quality committee drafted voluntary Colorado Quality Alliance (CQA) in 2014

3. CWIDB Background n Recent CWIDB Long-range Planning Committee identified sustained efforts for wine quality improvement as a key industry goal –Quality Management System (QMS) plan 1 st draft is being considered by CWIDB Quality Committee –Consolidation of QWGIP, CQA, and QMS being considered by Quality Committee

4. Overview of QWGIP n 20 Year proposed plan for Wine, Grapes, Sustainability –Short term, medium term, long term planning –Successive evolution of Standards of Quality (SOQ) n Envisions quality seal, wines of distinction, vineyards of distinction –Involves market validation of SOQ –Involves Quality Management System (QMS) business practices

5. Diagram of QWGIP Wine Faults SOQ Short Term Goals (Voluntary) Grape SOQ Wine Faults Panel Training Wine Evaluation Panels Grape Source Certificate Wine Technical Workshops Viticulture Technical Workshops QMS Workshops (Certificate) QMS Workshops (Certificate) Mid Term Goals CQA (Wineries) 20 Year Plan Identify Funding Mechanisms CQA (Vineyards) Fund Mechanism Selective Consumer Survey

6. Overview of QWGIP n Short term Goals n Establish SOQ for wine faults and train personnel to evaluate faults – Wine Aroma Sensory Faults Training n Establish evaluation panels for marketable wine quality – Commercial Wines Sensory Evaluation n Establish QMS for wineries and vineyards – Establish curriculum for QMS Workshops – Establish best practices projects for wineries and vineyards n Survey consumers on all wines sold vs SOQ wines n Establish grape delivery inspection SOQ

7. Current Progress on Short Term Goals n Wine Sensory Faults SOQ established –59 personnel trained from three states n Initial Wine Sensory Evaluations tested –Three multi-state wine evaluations carried out n Proposals for Colorado Wine Quality Alliance and for QMS training developed

8. Diagram of QWGIP 20 Year Plan Wine Quality Seal Mid Term Goals (Transition) Grape Quality Seal Wines of Quality Designation Quality Business Designation Grapes of Quality Designation Enology Technical Certificates Quality Business Designation Long Term Goals Viticulture Technical Certificates Comprehensive Consumer Surveys Increased Funding

9. Diagram of QWGIP 20 Year Plan Long Term Goals (Mandate/Voluntary) Wines of Distinction Designation Grapes of Quality Designation Wineries of Distinction Designation Vineyards of Quality Designation Industry Growth and Sustainability Self-Funded Reputation Consumer Surveys

10. Wine Sensory Faults Training for CO Wineries n Course material –Science of smell, taste, flavor –Aroma faults causes, prevention, and cures n Practical training on fault chemicals –Aroma identities of isolated fault chemicals »Identify range of precise concentrations of aroma fault chemicals in wines »Learn consumer response levels for each concentration

11. Wine Sensory Faults Training for CO Wineries n Successful trainees certified for service on Commercial Wine Sensory Evaluation Aroma Faults Panel –Faults Panel one of two panels evaluating wines –Faults panelists re-calibrated to aroma fault chemicals just prior to wine evaluation –Only smell wines for presence and degree of aroma faults –(Next Aroma Faults Training Sessions scheduled March 2016)

12. Wine Sensory Evaluations n Two panel system –Aroma Faults Panel => 12 point scale –Hedonistic Panel => 20 point scale n Both panels judge on perceived consumer acceptance n Scores recorded from each panel and from combined score from both panels n Combined score from both panels used to place wines on scale of perceived consumer acceptability

13. Scores on Wine Sensory Evaluations n n 32.0-29.5  Nearly Perfect wine by consumer value and expert opinion n n 29.5-27.0  great attributes and no flaws: Superior to Excellent value n n 27.0-24.5  good attributes and none to minor flaws: Excellent to Good value n n 24.5-22.0  attributes outweigh minor flaws: Good to Average value n n 22.0-19.5  attributes outweigh evident flaws: Average to Below Average value n n 19.5-17.0  attributes/flaws uncertain balance: Below Average to Uncertain value n n 17.0-15.5  flaws or faults dominate attributes: Uncertain to Doubtful value n n 15.5-13.0  attributes weak, faults dominate: Doubtful to Not Salable value n n 13.0-00.0  only strong faults evident : Unacceptable value n n (See handout on scheduled summer 2016 commercial Wine Sensory Evaluation)

14. Proposed QMS for CO Wineries n Used by majority of industries and businesses to ensure sustainable quality and market share –Training curriculum included n Comprehensive and systematic checklist of all parts of the business –Feedback analysis essential –First draft (see handout)

15. Proposed CQA for CO Wines & Grapes n Intended to improve wine quality and build CO brand reputation n Voluntary membership with mandated qualifications and mandated performance –Wine evaluations –Training curriculum n May lead to CDA Quality Seal in future

16. Proposed CQA for CO Wines & Grapes n Intended to improve wine quality and build CO brand reputation n Voluntary membership with mandated qualifications and mandated performance –Wine evaluations –Training curriculum n May lead to CDA Quality Seal in future n (See handout on proposed CQA)

17. Thank You! n Questions? n Contact for Information Stephen Menke, Dept. of HLA, CSU-WCRC-OM 3168 B1/2 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81504