64272 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

requirements, unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As noted 

above in this preamble, this rule is a 

deregulatory action taken by HUD that 

will alleviate the economic costs borne 

by participants in the FHA single family 

mortgage insurance programs. As 

discussed in this preamble, removal of 

the requirement for a 10-year protection 

plan would ease burdens on lenders and 

homebuilders and does not preclude 

borrowers from purchasing such plans. 

HUD is removing this requirement 

because it has deemed they are no 

longer necessary. Therefore, the 

undersigned certifies that this rule will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Environmental Impact 

This rule does not direct, provide for 

assistance or loan and mortgage 

insurance for, or otherwise govern or 

regulate, real property acquisition, 

disposition, leasing, rehabilitation, 

alteration, demolition, or new 

construction, or establish, revise, or 

provide for standards for construction or 

construction materials, manufactured 

housing, or occupancy. In addition, part 

of this rule changes a statutorily 

required and/or discretionary 

establishment and review of loan limits. 

Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1) 

and (c)(6), this rule is categorically 

excluded from environmental review 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from 

publishing any rule that has federalism 

implications if the rule either imposes 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

State and local governments or is not 

required by statute, or the rule preempts 

State law, unless the agency meets the 

consultation and funding requirements 

of section 6 of the Executive Order. This 

rule will not have federalism 

implications and would not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

State and local governments or preempt 

State law within the meaning of the 

Executive Order. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements 

for federal agencies to assess the effects 

of their regulatory actions on State, 

local, and tribal governments, and on 

the private sector. This rule does not 

impose any federal mandates on any 

State, local, or tribal governments, or on 

the private sector, within the meaning of 

UMRA. 

Catalogue of Federal Domestic 

Assistance 

The Catalogue of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Number for the principal 

FHA single-family mortgage insurance 

program is 14.117. 

List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 203 

Hawaiian Natives, Home 

improvement, Indians–lands, Loan 

programs—housing and community 

development, Mortgage insurance, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Solar energy. 

Accordingly, for the reasons 

discussed in the preamble, HUD amends 

24 CFR part 203 to read as follows: 

PART 203—SINGLE FAMILY 

MORTGAGE INSURANCE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 203 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1709, 1710, 1715b, 

1715z–16, and 1715u; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). 

§ 203.18 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 203.18, remove paragraph (a)(3) 

and redesignate paragraph (a)(4) as 

paragraph (a)(3). 

■ 3. In § 203.50, revise paragraph (f)(1) 

to read as follows: 

§ 203.50 Eligibility of rehabilitation loans. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1)(i) The limits prescribed in 

§ 203.18(a)(1) (in the case of a dwelling 

to be occupied as a principal residence, 

as defined in § 203.18(f)(1)); 

(ii) The limits prescribed in 

§ 203.18(a)(1) and (3) (in the case of a 

dwelling to be occupied as a secondary 

residence, as defined in § 203.18(f)(2)); 

(iii) 85 percent of the limits 

prescribed in § 203.18(c), or such higher 

limit, not to exceed the limits set forth 

in § 203.18(a)(1), as Commissioner may 

prescribe (in the case of an eligible nonoccupant mortgagor as defined in 

§ 203.18(f)(3)); 

(iv) The limits prescribed in 

§ 203.18a, based upon the sum of the 

estimated cost of rehabilitation and the 

Commissioner’s estimate of the value of 

the property before rehabilitation; or 

* * * * * 

§§ 203.200 through 203.209 [Removed] 

■ 4. Remove the undesignated center 

heading ‘‘Insured Ten-Year Protection 

Plans (Plan)’’ and §§ 203.200 through 

203.209. 

Dated: December 3, 2018. 

Brian D. Montgomery, 

Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal 

Housing Commissioner. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27116 Filed 12–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2018–0004; T.D. TTB–154; 

Ref: Notice No. 173] 

RIN 1513–AC37 

Expansion of the Monticello 

Viticultural Area 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) is expanding 

the approximately 1,320-square mile 

‘‘Monticello’’ viticultural area in 

Albemarle, Greene, Nelson, and Orange 

Counties, in Virginia, by approximately 

166 square miles, into Fluvanna County, 

Virginia. The established viticultural 

area and the expansion area are not 

located within any other established 

viticultural area. 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. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

January 14, 2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Trevar D. Kolodny, Regulations and 

Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street 

NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; 

phone 202–559–6222. 

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 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 64273 

pursuant to section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The 

Secretary has delegated various 

authorities through Treasury 

Department Order 120–01, dated 

December 10, 2013 (superseding 

Treasury Order 120–01, dated January 

24, 2003), to the TTB Administrator to 

perform the functions and duties in the 

administration and enforcement of this 

law. 

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 a name 

and a delineated boundary, as 

established 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 provides that any interested party 

may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as an AVA. Petitioners 

may use the same process to request 

changes involving established AVAs. 

Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 

CFR 9.12) prescribes standards for 

petitions for modifying established 

AVAs. Petitions to expand an 

established AVA must include the 

following: 

• Evidence that the area within the 

proposed expansion area boundary 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 

that affect viticulture, such as 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 Monticello AVA 

TTB received a petition from George 

Cushnie, co-owner of Thistle Gate 

Vineyard, submitted on behalf of 

himself and a second vineyard owner, 

proposing to expand the established 

Monticello AVA. The Monticello AVA 

(27 CFR 9.48) was established by T.D. 

ATF–164, which was published in the 

Federal Register on January 23, 1984 

(49 FR 2758). The Monticello AVA 

covers approximately 1,320 square 

miles in Albemarle, Greene, Nelson, and 

Orange Counties in Virginia. The 

Monticello AVA and the proposed 

expansion area do not overlap any other 

established or proposed AVAs. 

The proposed expansion area extends 

beyond the Albemarle County line, 

which currently serves as the 

southeastern border of the established 

AVA, to encompass approximately 166 

square miles of Fluvanna County, 

between the James and Rivanna Rivers. 

The petition included a letter from the 

President of the Jeffersonian Wine Grape 

Growers Society, an association of over 

30 wineries within the existing 

Monticello AVA, supporting the 

proposed expansion. 

When the petition was filed, there 

were two commercially-producing 

vineyards covering a total of 

approximately 15 acres within the 

proposed expansion area. Since the 

petition was filed, an additional 

vineyard has been established in the 

proposed expansion area, covering 

approximately 6.5 acres. 

According to the petition, the soils 

and climate of the proposed expansion 

area are similar to those of the 

established Monticello AVA. The soils 

in Fluvanna County consist of the 

Nason, Manteo, Tatum, and Louisburg 

types, which are also the main soil types 

found in Albemarle County, which 

forms the heart of the existing AVA, and 

Orange County, which forms the 

northeast portion of the existing AVA. 

The petition further notes that the 

Nelson and Manteo soils are Virginia 

soils particularly well-suited to 

viticulture, given that they are silty 

loams, characterized by moderate levels 

of nutritious organic content and good 

drainage conditions. 

The climate of the proposed 

expansion is similar to the climate of 

the existing AVA. Gaps in the Blue 

Ridge Mountains to the east cause 

‘‘rivers of cold air’’ to flow through 

corridors that converge east of the 

Monticello AVA and the new expansion 

area. As a result, temperatures in the 

Monticello AVA and the proposed 

expansion area are 4–5 °F warmer than 

the climate in the surrounding areas 

outside the Monticello AVA. This 

warmer weather allows for a longer 

growing season and protection from 

frosts, which can be fatal to ripening 

grapes. This warmer weather was an 

important factor in establishing the 

Monticello AVA in 1982, and is a point 

of similarity that the proposed 

expansion area shares with the existing 

AVA, in contrast to surrounding areas. 

The growing season of the proposed 

expansion area is typically a minimum 

of 190 or even 200 days, which is 

similar to the 190–200 day average of 

the Orange County portion of the 

Monticello AVA. By contrast, the lands 

further east and south of the proposed 

expansion area average 150 days and 

less. 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and 

Comments Received 

TTB published Notice No. 173 in the 

Federal Register on April 6, 2018 (83 FR 

14787), proposing to expand the 

Monticello AVA. In the notice, TTB 

summarized the evidence from the 

petition regarding the name, boundary, 

and distinguishing features for the 

proposed expansion area. For a detailed 

description of the evidence relating to 

the name, boundary, and distinguishing 

features of the proposed expansion area, 

and for a comparison of the 

distinguishing features of the proposed 

expansion area to the surrounding areas 

and to the established Monticello AVA, 

see Notice No. 173. 

Comments Received 

In Notice No. 173, TTB solicited 

comments on the accuracy of the name, 

boundary, climatic, and other required 

information submitted in support of the 

petition. The comment period closed on 

June 5, 2018. 

In response to Notice No. 173, TTB 

received one comment from Will and 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
64274 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

Leah Wentz, who have established a 

vineyard in the proposed expansion 

area, and who supported the proposed 

expansion of the Monticello AVA. They 

claim that they selected their vineyard 

site in Fluvanna County based on the 

various viticultural attributes of the 

area, especially including its climate 

and soils, which they said were 

accurately described in the initial 

petition. TTB did not receive any 

comments objecting to the proposed 

AVA expansion. 

TTB Determination 

After careful review of the petition, 

TTB finds that the evidence provided by 

the petitioner sufficiently demonstrates 

that the proposed expansion area shares 

the characteristics of the established 

Monticello AVA and should also be 

recognized as part of that AVA. 

Accordingly, under the authority of the 

FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, and 

parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations, 

TTB expands the 1,320 square mile 

‘‘Monticello’’ AVA to include the 

approximately 166 square mile 

expansion area as described in Notice 

No. 173, effective 30 days from the 

publication date of this document. 

Boundary Description 

See the narrative description of the 

boundary of the AVA expansion in the 

regulatory text published at the end of 

this final rule. 

Maps 

The petitioner provided the required 

maps, and they are codified in the 

regulatory text. 

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 

or with a brand name that includes 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 § 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 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 

§ 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 

CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details. 

The expansion of the Monticello AVA 

will not affect any other existing AVA, 

and bottlers using ‘‘Monticello’’ as an 

appellation of origin or in a brand name 

for wines made from grapes within the 

‘‘Monticello’’ AVA will not be affected 

by this expansion of the Monticello 

AVA. The expansion of the Monticello 

AVA will allow vintners to use 

‘‘Monticello’’ as an appellation of origin 

for wines made primarily from grapes 

grown within the expansion area if the 

wines meet the eligibility requirements 

for the appellation. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

TTB certifies that this regulation will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The 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 rule 

is not a significant regulatory action as 

defined by Executive Order 12866 of 

September 30, 1993. Therefore, no 

regulatory assessment is required. 

Drafting Information 

Trevar D. Kolodny of the Regulations 

and Rulings Division drafted this final 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 

Wine. 

The Regulatory Amendment 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter 

I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, 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 9.48 is amended by revising 

paragraph (c)(16), redesignating 

paragraph (c)(17) as (c)(19), and adding 

new paragraph (c)(17) and paragraph 

(c)(18) to read as follows: 

§ 9.48 Monticello. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(16) Then continuing southwest along 

the county line to its intersection with 

the Rivanna River; 

(17) Then southeast along the Rivanna 

River to its confluence with the James 

River, near the Fluvanna-Goochland 

County line; 

(18) Then southwest, then northwest 

along the James River to its intersection 

with the Albemarle County line; 

* * * * * 

Signed: September 5, 2018. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

Approved: December 4, 2018. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2018–27125 Filed 12–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2018–0003; T.D. TTB–153; 

Ref: Notice No. 172] 

RIN 1513–AC36 

Expansion of the Arroyo Seco 

Viticultural Area 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) is expanding 

the approximately 18,240-acre ‘‘Arroyo 

Seco’’ viticultural area in Monterey 

County, California, by approximately 90 

acres. The established Arroyo Seco 

viticultural area and the expansion area 

both lie within the established Monterey 

viticultural area and the larger, multicounty Central Coast viticultural area. 

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. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

January 14, 2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Forster-Smith, Alcohol and 

Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 

Regulations and Rulings Division, 1310 

G Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 

20005; phone 202–453–1039, ext. 150. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES