Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 96623 

hearing scheduled for December 6, 

2024, at 10 a.m. ET is cancelled. 

Regina L. Johnson, 

Federal Register Liaison, Publications and 

Regulations Section, Associate Chief Counsel 

(Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2024–28462 Filed 12–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2024–0007; Notice No. 

235] 

RIN 1513–AD08 

Proposed Establishment of the 

Columbia Hills 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 

establish the 29,387-acre ‘‘Columbia 

Hills’’ American viticultural area (AVA) 

in Klickitat County, Washington. The 

proposed AVA is located entirely within 

the boundaries of the existing Columbia 

Valley AVA. 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 these proposals. 

DATES: TTB must receive your 

comments on or before February 3, 

2025. 

ADDRESSES: You may electronically 

submit comments to TTB on this 

proposal, and view copies of this 

document, its supporting materials, and 

any comments TTB receives on it within 

Docket No. TTB–2024–0007 as posted 

on Regulations.gov (https://

www.regulations.gov), the Federal erulemaking portal. 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 

provisions pursuant to section 1111(d) 

of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

as codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). In 

addition, the Secretary of the Treasury 

has delegated certain administrative and 

enforcement authorities to TTB 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 grapegrowing 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 an AVA must include the 

following: 

• Evidence that the area within the 

proposed AVA boundary is nationally 

or locally known by the AVA name 

specified in the petition; 

• An explanation of the basis for 

defining the boundary of the proposed 

AVA; 

• A narrative description of the 

features of the proposed AVA that affect 

viticulture, such as climate, geology, 

soils, physical features, and elevation, 

that make the proposed AVA distinctive 

and distinguish it from adjacent areas 

outside the proposed AVA boundary; 

• The appropriate United States 

Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) 

showing the location of the proposed 

AVA, with the boundary of the 

proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; 

and 

• A detailed narrative description of 

the proposed AVA boundary based on 

USGS map markings. 

If the proposed AVA is to be 

established within, or overlapping, an 

existing AVA, an explanation that both 

identifies the attributes of the proposed 

AVA that are consistent with the 

existing AVA and explains how the 

proposed AVA is sufficiently distinct 

from the existing AVA, and therefore 

appropriate for separate recognition. 

Petition To Establish the Columbia Hills 

AVA 

TTB received a petition from Dr. 

Kevin R. Pogue, a geology professor, 

proposing to establish the ‘‘Columbia 

Hills’’ AVA. Dr. Pogue submitted the 

petition on behalf of Robert Lorkowski, 

owner of Cascade Cliffs Vineyard and 

Winery, which is located within the 

boundaries of the proposed AVA. The 

proposed AVA is located in Klickitat 

County, Washington, and is entirely 

within the established Columbia Valley 

AVA (27 CFR 9.74). There are 

approximately 338 acres of vineyards, 

owned by 19 different property owners, 

within the proposed AVA, as well as 

four wineries. The distinguishing 

features of the proposed Columbia Hills 

AVA are its topography, soils, and 

climate. 

Proposed Columbia Hills AVA 

Name Evidence 

The proposed AVA takes its name 

from the Columbia Hills, a 35-mile-long 

ridgeline that parallels the north side of 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
96624 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1https://www.columbiagorgenews.com/archive/ 

video-mt-hood-cycling-classic-columbia-hills-roadrace/article_6a1c4211-11cc-5868-9202- 

18e06888c2a3.html. Accessed October 28, 2024. 

the Columbia River between Rowena 

Gap and the mouth of Rock Creek, in 

Klickitat County, Washington. The 

proposed AVA is situated on the 

southern slopes of the Columbia Hills. 

The name ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ is marked 

over the ridgeline on a copy of the 

U.S.G.S. 1:250,000-scale topographic 

map for the region of the proposed 

AVA, which was included in the 

petition. 

The petition includes additional 

evidence of use of the name ‘‘Columbia 

Hills’’ within the region of the proposed 

AVA. For example, the Columbia Hills 

Historical State Park and the Columbia 

Hills Natural Area Preserve are both 

located in the proposed AVA. A 2011 

item on a local newspaper’s website is 

titled ‘‘Mt. Hood Cycling Classic 

Columbia Hills Road Race.’’ 1 Finally, a 

recreational vehicle campground in 

Dallesport, Washington, which is within 

the proposed AVA, is named ‘‘Columbia 

Hills RV.’’ 

Boundary Evidence 

The proposed Columbia Hills AVA 

encompasses 29,387 acres along the 

predominantly south-facing slopes of 

the Columbia Hills. The proposed 

southern boundary follows the 

Columbia River, which marks the 

southern edge of the hills. The proposed 

western boundary follows the 300-meter 

elevation contour along a feature known 

as Rowena Gap, which marks a 

pronounced change in topography 

between the proposed AVA and the 

region to the west. The proposed 

northern boundary generally follows the 

320-meter elevation contour to separate 

the proposed AVA from higher 

elevations that were not inundated by 

ice age floods. The proposed eastern 

boundary follows Rock Creek to 

separate the proposed AVA from the 

established The Burn of Columbia 

Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.276), which is a 

broad, relatively flat plateau that is a 

separate geographic feature from the 

Columbia Hills that form the proposed 

AVA. 

Distinguishing Features 

According to the petition, the 

distinguishing features of the proposed 

Columbia Hills AVA are its topography, 

soils, and climate. 

Topography 

According to the petition, features 

created by depositional and erosional 

processes associated with catastrophic 

ice age flooding dominate the 

topography of the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA. Erosion by the floodwaters 

of the generally flat-lying layers of 

bedrock created a series of stepped 

terraces within the proposed AVA. The 

petition states that these gently-sloped 

terraces provide excellent locations for 

vineyards within the otherwise steeplysloped valley of the Columbia River. 

Large, gently-sloped gravel bars 

deposited by ice-age floods also provide 

level terrain for planting vineyards 

within the proposed AVA. According to 

the petition, the ice-age flooding along 

the Columbia River generally did not 

exceed 320 meters. Therefore, elevations 

within the proposed Columbia Hills 

AVA are limited to those at or below 

320 meters to exclude regions without 

the flood-related topographic features. 

To the north of the proposed AVA, 

the topography is much steeper and less 

impacted by ice-age flooding. Elevations 

within the higher elevations of the 

Columbia Hills that are not included in 

the proposed AVA reach 800 meters, as 

shown on the 1980 version of the 

Goldendale, Washington-Oregon 

U.S.G.S. map included with the 

petition. The same map also shows that 

within the Simcoe Mountains, farther 

north of the proposed AVA, elevations 

exceed 1,400 meters. East of the 

proposed AVA, within the established 

The Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, 

elevations reach as high as 445 meters. 

The petition states that ice-age flooding 

never inundated approximately 33 

percent of the land within the 

established The Burn of Columbia 

Valley AVA. West of the proposed AVA 

is the established Columbia Gorge AVA 

(27 CFR 9.178), which has a diverse 

topography and elevations that reach 

793 meters. According to the petition, 

ice-age floods only covered 26 percent 

of the land within the established 

Columbia Gorge AVA. 

Slopes within the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA have a uniformly southerly 

aspect. The petition states that a 

southerly aspect is the preferred 

direction for viticulture in the higher 

latitudes in the northern hemisphere 

because the slopes receive the greatest 

exposure to the sun’s rays. As a result, 

south-facing slopes have higher soil 

temperatures than slopes that face 

north. According to the petition, warmer 

soils encourage vine growth and speed 

ripening of the fruit. By contrast, the 

established The Burn of Columbia 

Valley AVA, which is east of the 

proposed AVA, consists of relatively flat 

topography with varying aspects. The 

petition states that west of the proposed 

AVA, within the established Columbia 

Gorge AVA, the aspect distribution is 

also varied and essentially random. The 

region to the north has a dominantly 

southern aspect similar to that of the 

proposed Columbia Hills AVA, but it is 

above the maximum elevation of the iceage floods. Low-lying areas south of the 

proposed AVA, in Oregon, have a 

dominantly northern aspect. 

Soils 

The soils of the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA are divided into two main 

soil map units. Most of the area within 

the proposed AVA features soils 

mapped as the Cheviot-HorseflatRockly-Kiona unit, which are described 

as ‘‘well-drained soils that formed in 

colluvium and residuum derived from 

basalt mixed with loess.’’ In the western 

portion of the proposed AVA, the soils 

belong to the Ewall-Dallesport-Rock 

Outcrop unit. These soils consist of 

wind-deposited sand that was draped 

over the bedrock and gravel bars that 

were left behind when the ice-age floods 

ceased. The soils of the proposed AVA 

are typically much coarser than the 

loess-based soils that are common 

elsewhere in the Columbia River basin 

and are well drained to excessively well 

drained. The petition states that the 

coarse soils warm more quickly than 

finer soils, which encourages vines to 

root deeply. Furthermore, the petition 

states that in many areas of the 

proposed AVA, the soils are shallow, 

which allows roots to encounter the 

underlying basalt bedrock or gravel 

substrate, which is uncommon in the 

deep loess-derived soils found 

elsewhere in the Columbia River basin, 

and which become exposed to the 

minerals and nutritive elements in those 

rocks. 

To the east of the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA, soils of the Van NosternMorrow-Bakeoven soil unit cover 

approximately 50 percent of the area 

within the established The Burn of 

Columbia Valley AVA. These soils 

occur largely above the maximum limit 

of the ice-age floods and were not 

subjected to flood erosion. These soils 

contain large amounts of winddeposited loess. West of the proposed 

AVA, the soils of the established 

Columbia Gorge AVA are highly diverse 

due to the large variations in bedrock, 

slope angle, slope aspect, precipitation 

amounts, and elevation. North and 

south of the proposed AVA, the soils are 

generally deep and derived from loess 

over bedrock. 

Climate 

Eighty percent of the land within the 

proposed Columbia Hills AVA is within 

a mile of the Columbia River. According 

to the petition, the river acts as a 

thermal reservoir, moderating the 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 96625 

2 Defined in the petition as the period from April 

1 to October 31. 

3See Albert J. Winkler et al., General Viticulture 

(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2nd ed.), 

pages 61–64 (1974). In the Winkler climate 

classification system, annual heat accumulation 

during the growing season, measured in annual 

GDDs, defines climatic regions. One GDD 

accumulates for each degree Fahrenheit (F) that a 

day’s mean temperature is above 50 degrees F, the 

minimum temperature required for grapevine 

growth. 

climate near its shores. Due to its 

proximity to the river, the proposed 

AVA generally has warmer growing 

season temperatures, particularly during 

the early morning hours, than the 

surrounding regions. The petition states 

that the warm climate of the proposed 

AVA aids and accelerates the ripening 

of grapes and allows for the cultivation 

of warmer climate grape varietals such 

as Grenache and Mourvedre. 

The petition includes information on 

the average growing season 

temperatures,2 growing degree day 3

(GDD) accumulations, annual number of 

frost-free days, and average growing 

season maximum and minimum 

temperatures from within the proposed 

Columbia Hills AVA and each of the 

surrounding regions except the region to 

the east. Unless otherwise noted, all 

climate data was collected from 2017 to 

2021. The data, included in the petition 

as tables 2 and 3, is shown in the 

following tables and suggests that the 

proposed AVA has a warmer climate 

than each of the surrounding regions. 

TABLE 1—AVERAGE GROWING SEASON TEMPERATURES IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

Location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 

The Dalles (within) ....................................................................................................... 65.9 66.2 64 65.3 67.7 

Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................ 65.1 65.3 63.9 65.2 66.6 

Goldendale (north) ....................................................................................................... 58.7 58.3 57 58.5 59.5 

Moro (south) ................................................................................................................. N/A 59.7 58 58.7 59.2 

Underwood (west) ........................................................................................................ 61.1 61.4 59.6 60.9 62 

Husum (west) ............................................................................................................... 59.7 60.2 58.7 59.9 60.2 

TABLE 2—GROWING DEGREE DAY ACCUMULATIONS

Location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 

The Dalles (within) ....................................................................................................... 3,431 3,483 3,097 3,348 3,802 

Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................ 3,275 3,309 3,091 3,338 3,588 

Goldendale (north) ....................................................................................................... 2,205 2,012 1,834 2,112 2,309 

Moro (south) ................................................................................................................. N/A 2,255 2,006 2,128 2,229 

Underwood (west) ........................................................................................................ 2,530 2,537 2,258 2,472 2,647 

Husum (west) ............................................................................................................... 2,287 2,284 2,107 2,249 2,345 

TABLE 3—FROST-FREE DAYS

Location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 

The Dalles (within) ....................................................................................................... 254 239 223 194 220 

Maryhill (within) ............................................................................................................ 253 220 208 220 246 

Goldendale (north) ....................................................................................................... 142 148 148 164 158 

Moro (south) ................................................................................................................. N/A 173 163 174 168 

TABLE 4—AVERAGE GROWING SEASON MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

Location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 

Max Min. Max Min. Max Min. Max Min. Max Min. 

The Dalles (within) ....................... 78.2 53.5 78.6 53.7 74.9 53 77.5 53 80.2 55.3 

Maryhill (within) ............................ 76.8 53.9 76.8 54.4 74.5 54 76.5 54.4 78.3 55.3 

Goldendale (north) ....................... 75 43 75 42 72 43 75 42 77 42 

Moro (south) ................................. N/A 75 44 70 46 73 45 75 46 

The petition also includes a brief 

discussion of annual precipitation 

amounts in the proposed Columbia Hills 

AVA. The petition notes that the 

proposed AVA is approximately 20 

miles east of the only low elevation gap 

in the Cascade Mountains where moist 

marine air can enter the Columbia River 

basin and influence its climate. The 

marine influence rapidly diminishes as 

one moves eastward from this gap. As 

a result, the proposed Columbia Hills 

AVA only receives about 10 to 20 inches 

of rainfall annually. Due to the low 

rainfall amounts, vineyards in the 

proposed AVA require irrigation. 

Farther east, within the established The 

Burn of Columbia Valley AVA, annual 

precipitation rates drop below 10 

inches. By contrast, the established 

Columbia Gorge AVA, which is west of 

the proposed AVA and situated much 

closer to the gap, receives over 30 

inches of rainfall annually. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
96626 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Comparison of the Proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA to the Existing Columbia 

Valley AVA 

T.D. ATF–190, published in the 

Federal Register on November 13, 1984 

(49 FR 44895), established the Columbia 

Valley AVA. That decision describes the 

AVA as a ‘‘large, treeless basin 

surrounding the Yakima, Snake, and 

Columbia Rivers in Washington and 

Oregon.’’ The Columbia Valley AVA has 

a broadly undulating or rolling 

topography cut by rivers. With respect 

to the climate of the AVA, the growing 

season is over 150 days, annual rainfall 

is 15 inches or less, and GDD 

accumulations are typically over 2,000. 

The proposed Columbia Hills AVA 

shares several of the same 

characteristics as the larger Columbia 

Valley AVA, including a growing season 

length of over 150 days, limited annual 

rainfall, and GDD accumulations that 

are over 2,000. Unlike the surrounding 

Columbia Valley AVA, however, the 

proposed Columbia Hills AVA is not a 

large basin. It is instead a region of 

hillslopes and flood-carved terraces 

within a deeply incised river valley. 

TTB Determination 

TTB concludes that the petition to 

establish the 29,387-acre ‘‘Columbia 

Hills’’ AVA merits consideration and 

public comment, as invited in this 

document. 

Boundary Description 

See the narrative boundary 

descriptions of the petitioned-for AVA 

in the proposed regulatory text 

published at the end of this document. 

Maps 

The petitioner provided the required 

maps, and they are listed below in the 

proposed regulatory text. You may also 

view the proposed Columbia Hills 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 

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 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 

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

If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, 

its name, ‘‘Columbia Hills,’’ will be 

recognized as a name of viticultural 

significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the 

TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The 

text of the proposed regulation clarifies 

this point. Consequently, wine bottlers 

using ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ in a brand 

name, including a trademark, or in 

another label reference as to the origin 

of the wine, would have to ensure that 

the product is eligible to use the 

viticultural area’s name ‘‘Columbia 

Hills.’’ The approval of the proposed 

Columbia Hills AVA would not affect 

any existing AVA, and any bottlers 

using ‘‘Columbia Valley’’ as an 

appellation of origin or in a brand name 

for wines made from grapes grown 

within the Columbia Hills AVA would 

not be affected by the establishment of 

this new AVA. If approved, the 

establishment of the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA would allow vintners to use 

‘‘Columbia Hills,’’ ‘‘Columbia Valley,’’ 

or both, as appellations of origin for 

wines made from grapes grown within 

the proposed AVA, 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 TTB 

should establish the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA. TTB is interested in 

receiving comments on the sufficiency 

and accuracy of the name, boundary, 

and other required information 

submitted in support of the AVA 

petition. In addition, because the 

proposed AVA would be within the 

existing Columbia Valley AVA, TTB is 

interested in comments on whether the 

evidence submitted in the petition 

regarding the distinguishing features of 

the proposed AVA sufficiently 

differentiates it from the existing AVA. 

TTB is also interested in comments on 

whether the geographic features of the 

proposed AVA are so distinguishable 

from the Columbia Valley AVA that the 

proposed Columbia Hills AVA should 

not be part of the established AVA. 

Please provide any available specific 

information in support of your 

comments. 

Because of the potential impact of the 

establishment of the proposed Columbia 

Hills AVA on wine labels that include 

the term ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ as discussed 

above under Impact on Current Wine 

Labels, TTB is particularly interested in 

comments regarding whether there will 

be a conflict between the proposed area 

names and currently used brand names. 

If a commenter believes that a conflict 

will arise, the comment should describe 

the nature of that conflict, including any 

anticipated negative economic impact 

that approval of the proposed AVA will 

have on an existing viticultural 

enterprise. TTB is also interested in 

receiving suggestions for ways to avoid 

conflicts, for example, by adopting a 

modified or different name for the 

proposed AVA. 

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. 235 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. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 96627 

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 a viticultural 

area 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 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action as defined by 

Executive Order 12866, as amended. 

Therefore, it requires no regulatory 

assessment. 

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 

Wine. 

Proposed Regulatory Amendment 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, we propose to amend 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. Add § 9.lll to read as follows: 

§ 9.lll Columbia Hills. 

(a) Name. The name of the viticultural 

area described in this section is 

‘‘Columbia Hills’’. For purposes of part 

4 of this chapter, ‘‘Columbia Hills’’ is a 

term of viticultural significance. 

(b) Approved maps. The two United 

States Geological Survey (USGS) 

1:100,000 scale topographic maps used 

to determine the boundary of the 

viticultural area are as follows: 

(1) Hood River OR–WA, 1982; and 

(2) Goldendale, WA–OR, 1980. 

(c) Boundary. The Columbia Hills 

viticultural area is located in Klickitat 

County, Washington. The boundary of 

the Columbia Hills viticultural area is as 

described as follows: 

(1) The beginning point is on the 

Hood River map at the intersection of 

the northern shoreline of the Columbia 

River and an unnamed creek due east of 

the marked ‘‘Cold Spring.’’ From the 

beginning point, proceed northerly 

along the unnamed creek to its 

intersection with the 300-meter 

elevation contour; then 

(2) Proceed east along the 300-meter 

elevation contour to the eastern 

boundary of the Hood River map; then 

(3) Proceed north along the map 

boundary for approximately 400 feet; 

then 

(4) Proceed east onto 320-meter 

elevation contour on the Goldendale 

map and continue east along the 320- 

meter elevation contour to its 

intersection with the boundary between 

Range 18 East and Range 19 East, south 

of Sand Spring Canyon; then 

(5) Proceed southeast in a straight line 

for 9,000 feet (1.7 miles) to the 

intersection of the boundary between 

sections 31 and 32, T3N/R19E and the 

northern shoreline of the Columbia 

River; then 

(6) Proceed west along the northern 

shoreline of the Columbia River, 

returning to the beginning point. 

Signed: November 26, 2024. 

Mary G. Ryan, 

Administrator. 

Approved: November 27, 2024. 

Aviva R. Aron-Dine, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2024–28438 Filed 12–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 9 

RIN 2900–AR67 

Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance 

and Veterans’ Group Life Insurance— 

Accelerated Benefit Option Regulation 

Update 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

regulations governing Servicemembers’ 

Group Life Insurance (SGLI), Family 

SGLI (FSGLI), and Veterans’ Group Life 

Insurance (VGLI) to allow an alternate 

applicant to apply for an Accelerated 

Benefit when a member is terminally ill 

and mentally incapacitated or when a 

member’s insured spouse is terminally 

ill and the member is mentally 

incapacitated. VA also proposes to 

define key terms to assist in 

adjudicating FSGLI dependent child 

and Accelerated Benefit claims, and to 

remove addresses, telephone numbers, 

and the reproduction of the Accelerated 

Benefit application form from the text of 

the regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 3, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

submitted through www.regulations.gov. 

Except as provided below, comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period will be available at 

www.regulations.gov for public viewing, 

inspection, or copying, including any 

personally identifiable or confidential 

business information that is included in 

a comment. We post the comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period on 

www.regulations.gov as soon as possible 

after they have been received. VA will 

not post on Regulations.gov public 

comments that make threats to 

individuals or institutions or suggest 

that the commenter will take actions to 

harm an individual. VA encourages 

individuals not to submit duplicative 

comments; however, we will post 

comments from multiple unique 

commenters even if the content is 

identical or nearly identical to other 

comments. Any public comment 

received after the comment period’s 

closing date is considered late and will 

not be considered in the final 

rulemaking. In accordance with the 

Providing Accountability Through 

Transparency Act of 2023, a PlainLanguage Summary (not more than 100 

words in length) of this proposed rule 

is available at Regulations.gov, under 

RIN 2900–AR67. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Samantha Yerdon, Management and 

Program Analyst, Department of 

Veterans Affairs, Insurance Service 

(310/290B); 5000 Wissahickon Avenue, 

Philadelphia, PA 19144; (215) 842– 

2000, ext. 5494 (this is not a toll-free 

number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

1980 of title 38, United States Code, 

authorizes the payment of accelerated 

death benefits to terminally ill members 

in the SGLI, FSGLI, and VGLI programs. 

Consistent with the statute, current 38 

CFR 9.14 allows terminally ill members 

to receive up to 50 percent of the face 

value of their insurance coverage before 

they die if they have 9 months or less 

to live. 

Current § 9.14(c) only allows the 

terminally ill member to apply for an 

Accelerated Benefit, which is often used 

to pay his or her medical bills or make 

other financial arrangements before 

death. During Policy Years 2020 through 

2023 (July 1, 2019, through June 30, 

2023), 223 terminally ill members 

applied for and received such benefits. 

Considering that terminally ill members 

often have severe medical conditions 

that render them unable to apply for the 

Accelerated Benefit, VA proposes to 

amend § 9.14(c) to allow an alternate 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS