Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 37265 

(8) Proceed northeast, then south, 

then easterly along the 1,400-foot 

elevation contour, crossing Knapp 

Coulee and onto the Chelan map, and 

continuing east along the 1,400-foot 

elevation contour to its intersection 

with the northern boundary of section 1, 

T26N/R22E; then 

(9) Proceed south-southeasterly in a 

straight line, crossing the Columbia 

River, to the intersection of the 1,600- 

foot elevation contour and the R22E/ 

R23E boundary; then 

(10) Proceed generally westerly along 

the 1,600-foot elevation contour, 

crossing over the southeastern corner of 

the Winesap map and onto the Entiat 

map, and continuing southwesterly 

along the 1,600-foot elevation contour to 

its intersection with an unnamed stream 

in section 35, T26N/R21E; then 

(11) Proceed westerly (downstream) 

along the unnamed stream for 0.45 mile 

to its intersection with the 1,200-foot 

elevation contour; then 

(12) Proceed southerly along the 

1,200-foot elevation contour, crossing 

over the Orondo map and onto the 

Wenatchee map to the intersection of 

the elevation contour with the southern 

boundary of section 14, T23N/R20E; 

then 

(13) Proceed west-northwest in a 

straight line for 1.47 miles, crossing the 

Columbia River, to the beginning point. 

Signed: June 21, 2021. 

Mary G. Ryan, 

Administrator. 

Approved: June 21 2021. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2021–15054 Filed 7–14–21; 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–2021–0005; Notice No. 

202] 

RIN: 1513–AC81 

Proposed Establishment of the 

Paulsell Valley 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 34,155-acre ‘‘Paulsell 

Valley’’ viticultural area in Stanislaus 

County, California. The proposed AVA 

is not located within, nor does it 

contain, any other 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. TTB invites comments on 

these proposals. 

DATES: TTB must receive your 

comments on or before September 13, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may electronically 

submit comments to TTB on this 

proposal using the comment form for 

this document as posted within Docket 

No. TTB–2021–0005 on the 

‘‘Regulations.gov’’ website at https://

www.regulations.gov. Within that 

docket, you also may view copies of this 

document, the related petition, 

supporting materials, and any 

comments TTB receives on this 

proposal. A direct link to that docket is 

available on the TTB website at https:// 

www.ttb.gov/wine/notices-of-proposedrulemaking under Notice No. 202. 

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 below 

for further information on the comments 

requested regarding 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 

pursuant to section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

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

Secretary has delegated the functions 

and duties in the administration and 

enforcement of these provisions to the 

TTB Administrator through Treasury 

Order 120–01, dated December 10, 2013 

(superseding Treasury Order 120–01, 

dated January 24, 2003). 

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 its 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. Section 9.12 

of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) 

prescribes standards for petitions for the 

establishment or modification of 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) 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37266 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil 

Conservation Service and University of California 

Experiment Station, Soil Survey: Eastern Stanislaus 

Area, Series 1957, No. 20, 1964, page 17. 

2U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil 

Conservation Service and University of California 

Agriculture Experiment Station, General Soil Map: 

Eastern Stanislaus County, 1961. 

3Sbranti, J.N., ‘‘Oakdale Irrigation District 

considers expanding water deliveries to farms and 

homes,’’ The Modesto Bee, May 6, 2014. Accessed 

online at https://www.modbee.com/latest-news/ 

article3164325.html. 4Sbranti, J.N., ‘‘OID water sales plan bashed by 

county advisory committee,’’ The Modesto Bee, 

November 19, 2014. Accessed online at https://

www.modbee.com/news/special-reports/ 

groundwater-crisis/article4025625.html. 5Sbranti. J.N., ‘‘OID rejects request to help fund 

Paulsell Valley expansion study,’’ The Modesto Bee, 

September 16, 2014. Accessed online at https://

www.modbee.com/news/local/article3172373.html. 6Sbranti, J.N., ‘‘OID to discuss selling water to 

outside agencies during closed-door meeting,’’ The 

Modesto Bee, November 4, 2014. Accessed online 

at https://www.modbee.com/news/local/oakdale/ 

article3546951.html. 

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. 

Petition To Establish the Paulsell Valley 

AVA 

TTB received a petition from Patrick 

Shabram, on behalf of Rock Ridge 

Ranch, proposing to establish the 

‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ AVA. The proposed 

AVA is located in Stanislaus County, 

California, and is not within any 

existing AVA. Within proposed AVA, 

there are 3 commercial vineyards which 

cover a total of approximately 826 acres. 

The petition also notes that a fourth 

vineyard is planned for the proposed 

AVA and would contain an additional 

700 acres of vines. The distinguishing 

features of the proposed Paulsell Valley 

AVA include its topography, climate, 

and soils. 

Proposed Paulsell Valley AVA 

Name Evidence 

The proposed Paulsell Valley AVA is 

located in a valley carved by Dry Creek 

in and around the unincorporated 

community of Paulsell, California. The 

petition notes that, although the name 

‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ is not currently 

identified by the USGS Board on 

Geographic Names or on USGS 

topographic maps, the name is 

nonetheless used to describe the region 

of the proposed AVA. For example, the 

1957 Soil Survey of Eastern Stanislaus 

County, created by the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Soil Conservation 

Service, describes the Paulsell series 

soil as being found ‘‘along Dry Creek in 

the Paulsell Valley.’’ 1 A 1961 soil 

association map from the same Federal 

agency further describes the Paulsell 

soil series as ‘‘deep, clay soils on 

lacustrine deposits in Paulsell Valley.’’ 2

The name ‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ has also 

been used extensively in articles in the 

local newspaper relating to the Oakdale 

Irrigation District’s (OID) proposal to 

expand water delivery into the region of 

the proposed AVA. For example, one 

article states, ‘‘Additional farmers in the 

Paulsell Valley east of Modesto are also 

interested in tapping into OID’s water 

supply * * *.’’ 3 Another article 

describes ‘‘options for OID to deliver 

water to the Paulsell Valley in eastern 

Stanislaus * * *.’’ 4 A third article 

carries the headline, ‘‘OID rejects 

request to help fund Paulsell Valley 

expansion study.’’ 5 Finally, an article 

describes the efforts of Stanislaus 

County farmers ‘‘such as those in the 

Paulsell Valley southeast of Oakdale’’ to 

purchase water from the OID.6

Boundary Evidence 

The proposed Paulsell Valley AVA is 

located on the lowest foothills of the 

Sierra Nevada Mountains, above the San 

Joaquin Valley floor. The proposed 

northern boundary follows a series of 

roads and straight lines between points 

to separate the proposed AVA from the 

fluvial valley of the Stanislaus River. 

The proposed eastern boundary largely 

follows a series of roads to separate the 

proposed AVA from the higher foothills 

and mountains within the Sierra 

Nevada. The proposed southern 

boundary is largely formed by the 

shoreline of the Modesto Reservoir and 

the Modesto Main Canal. The proposed 

western boundary follows a series of 

roads and straight lines between points 

to separate the proposed AVA from the 

lower elevations of the San Joaquin 

Valley. 

Distinguishing Features 

According to the petition, the 

distinguishing features of the proposed 

Paulsell Valley AVA are its topography, 

climate, and soils. The petition also 

proposed geology as a distinguishing 

feature of the proposed AVA. However, 

based on the petition’s descriptions, 

geology appears to be too integral to the 

region’s soils to be considered 

separately from that feature. Therefore, 

TTB does not consider geology to be a 

separate distinguishing feature of the 

proposed AVA. 

Topography 

According to the petition, the 

landscape of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA is dominated by rolling 

hills marked by cut arroyos, but also 

interspersed with steep, isolated hills. 

This topography is referred to as 

‘‘mound-intermound relief.’’ Because of 

the mound-intermound topography, the 

petition states that the fluvial valley 

known as ‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ can be 

difficult to define in areas, as the 

isolated hills do not form the typical 

drainage divides common to many other 

fluvial valleys. Elevations within the 

proposed AVA are between 140 and 612 

feet, with most of the proposed AVA in 

the 180–400 foot range. 

The topography of the proposed 

Paulsell Valley AVA affects viticulture. 

According to the petition, the gentle 

slopes within the proposed AVA ensure 

good drainage for vineyards. The 

isolated nature of higher mounds within 

the proposed AVA decreases shadows 

on the valley floor, allowing most 

vineyards to receive long hours of solar 

radiation. Furthermore, soils eroding off 

the higher slopes to the east settle in the 

lower elevations of the proposed AVA 

and help ensure that the soils are not 

leached of nutrients. 

To the north of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA is the floodplain of the 

Stanislaus River, which is described as 

a ‘‘more traditional’’ valley carved by 

the Stanislaus River. Along the 

floodplain are alluvial terraces and fans 

that differ from the mound-intermound 

topography of the proposed AVA. 

Elevations to the north of the proposed 

AVA are generally below 300 feet. To 

the east of the proposed AVA, the 

landscape transitions to the Sierra 

Nevada Mountains, which can rise to 

several thousand feet. South of the 

proposed AVA is the Modesto 

Reservoir. To the southwest and 

southeast of the proposed AVA, moundintermound relief similar to that of the 

proposed AVA is also present, but it 

becomes less pronounced because the 

upper depositional layers have been 

weathered and eroded away. Although 

the hills in these regions are lower than 

those within the proposed AVA, the 

petition states that they occur in greater 

frequency. West of the proposed AVA, 

the terrain transitions to the San Joaquin 

Valley floor, which has significantly 

flatter topography and elevations that 

are typically below 200 feet. 

Climate 

According to the petition, the climate 

of the proposed Paulsell Valley AVA 

distinguishes it from the regions to the 

east, west, and southwest. Climate data 

was not available from the regions to the 

immediate north and immediate south 

of the proposed AVA. The petition first 

describes the growing degree day 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 37267 

7See Albert J. Winkler, General Viticulture 

(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2nd Ed. 

1974), pages 61–64. 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 that a day’s 

mean temperature is above 50 degrees F, the 

minimum temperature required for grapevine 

growth. 

(GDD) 7 accumulations of the proposed 

AVA and the surrounding regions. The 

petition also included GDD data from a 

weather station within the Blue Oak 

Vineyard to the southwest of the 

proposed AVA. However, because data 

was only available from this station 

from 2016 and 2017, and more complete 

data from the southwest region was also 

provided, TTB did not include the Blue 

Oak Vineyard data in the following 

table. 

TABLE 1—2017 GDD ACCUMULATIONS

Weather station location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 

Rock Ridge Ranch (within) ...................................................................... 4,607 4,758 5,204 5,015 4,846 4,952 

Rock Creek Vineyard (within) .................................................................. N/A N/A 4,922 4,756 4,461 4,455 

Warnerville (within) .................................................................................. N/A 4,268 4,534 4,389 4,201 4,330 

Oakdale (west) ......................................................................................... 3,780 4,035 4,250 4,165 4,212 4,308 

Denair (southwest) ................................................................................... 3,934 4,131 4,338 4,437 4,142 4,120 

Green Springs (east) ............................................................................... 4,624 4,586 N/A 4,702 4,601 4,711 

The GDD accumulations for the 

proposed Paulsell Valley are higher than 

those to the west of the proposed AVA 

within the San Joaquin Valley, and 

similar to slightly higher than those of 

the region to the east. The petition 

suggests that the differences between 

GDD accumulations in the San Joaquin 

Valley and Paulsell Valley and the 

region to the east are more the result of 

lower minimum temperatures on the 

San Joaquin Valley floor rather than 

lower maximum temperatures. As 

evidence, the petition provided data 

from within the proposed AVA and the 

San Joaquin Valley on the average 

growing season low temperatures for the 

same time period as the GDD 

accumulations data. Once again, 

because only two years of data was 

available from the Blue Oak Vineyard, 

TTB did not include that information in 

the following table. 

TABLE 2—AVERAGE GROWING SEASON LOW TEMPERATURES

Weather station location 

(direction from proposed AVA) 

Average 

minimum 

temperature 

(degrees 

Fahrenheit) 

Rock Ridge Ranch (within) .................................................................................................................................................................. 57.9 

Rock Creek Vineyard (within) .............................................................................................................................................................. 55.4 

Warnerville (within) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 54.8 

Oakdale (west) ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 53.9 

According to the petition, in the 

region of the proposed AVA, a general 

pattern exists of precipitation increasing 

from west to east. The petition included 

information on average precipitation 

amounts from 2012–2017, which is 

summarized in the following table. 

TABLE 3—ANNUAL PRECIPITATION IN INCHES

Weather station location (direction from proposed AVA) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 

Rock Ridge Ranch (within) ...................................................................... N/A 8.3 N/A 9.6 17.9 24.0 

Rock Creek Vineyard (within) .................................................................. N/A N/A 7.6 9.2 17.8 25.4 

Warnerville (within) .................................................................................. 18.2 10.6 8.8 10.6 20.5 26.4 

Oakdale (west) ......................................................................................... 8.6 9.7 6.6 11.4 15.9 N/A 

Denair (southwest) ................................................................................... 7.7 6.8 6.6 8.9 14.7 19.6 

Green Springs (east) ............................................................................... N/A N/A N/A N/A 30.5 37.6 

The data supports the claim that 

precipitation amounts generally 

increase from west to east. The 

precipitation amounts for Oakdale, 

within the San Joaquin Valley, are 

generally lower than those of the 

proposed AVA. Although data from the 

Green Springs weather station was only 

available from 2016 and 2017, the 

rainfall amounts for those two years is 

significantly higher than those for the 

proposed AVA and the San Joaquin 

Valley, as would be expected for an 

eastern location. Therefore, TTB 

included the data in the table. 

The climate of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA has an effect on viticulture. 

According to the petition, temperatures 

impact the timing of bud break, grape 

development and sugar accumulations, 

and harvest dates. Hence, grapes grown 

within the proposed AVA experience 

different bud break, flowering, veraison, 

and harvest dates than the regions to the 

south and west which have lower GDD 

accumulations. Precipitation amounts in 

the proposed AVA offer more soil 

moisture than regions in the San 

Joaquin Valley, thus reducing the need 

for irrigation. Additionally, the level of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37268 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

precipitation in the proposed AVA may 

partly help to alleviate some of the 

concerns related to certain diseases and 

the accumulation of excess juice that 

can dilute grape flavors, which may 

impact viticulture in the wetter regions 

to the east. 

Soils 

According to the petition, the region 

of the proposed AVA was heavily 

deposited by ancient volcanic activity 

that was primarily pyroclastic in nature 

(i.e., lacking lava flow). Layers of 

volcanic tuff, which is rock created from 

the deposition of volcanic ash instead of 

from direct lava flow, form the parent 

material for the most common soil 

types. Additionally, alluvial fans 

associated with volcanic activity and 

significant flooding events provide an 

additional source for soils within the 

proposed AVA. The most common soils 

within the proposed AVA are the Pentz 

series soils, ranging from Pentz cobbly 

loam to Pentz sandy loam. These soils 

are described as shallow, well-drained 

soils that formed in material weathered 

from tuffaceous sediments and are 

frequently found on hilly terrain. Pentz 

soils account from 23 percent of the 

soils within the proposed AVA. 

Associated with the Pentz soils and 

common to the proposed AVA are the 

Peters series soils, which account for 11 

percent of the soils within the proposed 

AVA. These soils are very similar to the 

Pentz soils, but occur on nearly-level to 

steep terrain. The Peters-Pentz complex 

is also present within the proposed 

AVA. The petition defines a complex as 

similar soil types mixed at such a scale 

that they are not defined as one type or 

the other. The Peters-Pentz complex 

makes up a little more than 22 percent 

of the soils within the proposed AVA. 

Other soil series of note within the 

proposed AVA are the Keyes, Raynor, 

and Paulsell series. Keyes soils 

comprise 10 percent of the soils within 

the proposed AVA, while Raynor and 

Paulsell soils make up 8 and 7 percent, 

respectively. Keyes soils are formed on 

material weathered from basic andesitic 

sediment and are found on alluvial fans 

and terraces or in mound-intermound 

relief. Raynor clay is formed from 

andesitic mudstone, while Paulsell clay 

is an alluvial soil formed from former 

lake sediment. 

The petition notes that Peters, Pentz, 

and Keyes soils are all found in the 

regions to the west and southeast of the 

proposed AVA, as tuffaceous and fluvial 

deposits are not limited to the proposed 

AVA. Raynor and Paulsell soils are also 

found elsewhere. However, the petition 

states that sharp contrasts in soils exist 

to the north, northeast, and south of the 

proposed Paulsell Valley AVA. To the 

northeast, the Amador and Auburn 

series are more common. These soils are 

formed from tuffaceous sediments, 

similar to the Peters and Pentz soils. 

The Auburn soil, however, has 

metamorphic parent material, 

specifically amphibolite schist. Other 

soils in the regions to the northeast of 

the proposed AVA are derived from 

metamorphosed igneous rock, such as 

the Exchequer soils, or sedimentary 

rock, such as the Hornitos soils. 

The petition states that to the south of 

the proposed AVA, Hopeton clays, 

Montpellier coarse sandy loam, and 

Whitney sandy loams are more 

common. These soils are formed from 

deposited sediments usually of granitic 

origin, or weakly consolidated 

sandstone of weathered ingenuous 

materials, and lack volcanic tuff 

material. Additionally, the petition 

states that to the north of the proposed 

AVA, alluvial sandy soils are found in 

deposits along the Stanislaus River 

floodplain, including Honcut, Hanford, 

and Columbia series soil. Tailings and 

dredge from former mining operations 

are also abundant along the river 

floodplain. 

According to the petition, the soils of 

a region can affect overall grape 

characteristics. Holding capacity 

impacts how much moisture can be 

utilized by the vine from rainfall. Good 

drainage helps prevent soil-borne 

pathogens that can harm vines. The 

mineral content of the soil is often 

credited with creating subtle distinction 

in flavor. Hence, the petition asserts that 

soils of the Paulsell Valley, which are 

derived of ash and fluvial fans mixed 

with ash, have a different mineral 

content and holding capacity than the 

soils of the surrounding regions, and 

have the potential to produce subtle 

flavor characteristics to grapes grown in 

these soils. 

Summary of Distinguishing Features 

The following table summarizes the 

characteristics of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA and the surrounding 

regions. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF DISTINGUISHING FEATURES

Location Topography Climate Soils 

Proposed 

Paulsell Valley 

AVA.

Rolling hills, moundintermound relief; elevations between 140 

and 612 feet.

Average GDDs between 4,201 and 

5,204; average growing season low 

temperatures between 54.8 and 57.9 

degrees; Annual rainfall amounts between 7.6 and 26.4 degrees.

Pentz, Peters, Keyes, Raynor, and Paulsell series 

and the Peters-Pentz complex; primarily formed 

from volcanic tuff and alluvial fans associated with 

volcanic activity and severe flooding. 

North .................. Floodplain of the 

Stanislaus River; elevations generally below 

300 feet.

Not available .......................................... Honcut, Hanford, and Columbia series; alluvial sandy 

soils and tailings and dredge from former mining 

operations. 

East .................... Sierra Nevada Mountains; 

elevations up to several 

thousand feet.

Similar to slightly lower GDD accumulations; higher annual rainfall amounts.Amador, Auburn, Exchequer, and Hornitos series; 

derived from tuffaceous sediments, metamorphic or 

sedimentary parent material. 

South ................. Modesto Reservoir ........... Lower GDD accumulations; temperature; lower annual rainfall amounts.Hopeton clays, Montpellier coarse sandy loam, and 

Whitney sandy loams; formed from deposited sediments of granitic origin or weakly consolidated 

sandstone of weathered ingenuous materials; lack 

volcanic tuff. 

West ................... San Joaquin Valley; significantly flatter terrain; 

elevations typically 

below 200 feet.

Lower GDD accumulations; lower average growing season low temperature; 

lower annual rainfall amounts.

Similar to proposed AVA. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 37269 

TTB Determination 

TTB concludes that the petition to 

establish the 34,155-acre ‘‘Paulsell 

Valley’’ 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 Paulsell Valley 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, ‘‘Paulsell Valley,’’ 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 ‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ 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 as an 

appellation of origin if this proposed 

rule is adopted as a final rule. 

The approval of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA would not affect any 

existing AVA. If approved, the 

establishment of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA would allow vintners to use 

‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ as an appellation 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 Paulsell 

Valley AVA. TTB is interested in 

receiving comments on the sufficiency 

and accuracy of the name, boundary, 

topography, climate, soils, and other 

required information submitted in 

support of the AVA petition. Please 

provide any available specific 

information in support of your 

comments. 

Because of the potential impact of the 

establishment of the proposed Paulsell 

Valley AVA on wine labels that include 

the term ‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ 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. 202 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 

submit a comment requesting 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, 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 

regarding comments on this proposal or 

to request copies of this document, its 

supporting materials, or the comments 

received. 

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 

It has been determined that this 

proposed 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 

Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations 

and Rulings Division drafted this 

document. 

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: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37270 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 133 / Thursday, July 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

§ 9. lll Paulsell Valley. 

(a) Name. The name of the viticultural 

area described in this section is 

‘‘Paulsell Valley’’. For purposes of part 

4 of this chapter, ‘‘Paulsell Valley’’ is a 

term of viticultural significance. 

(b) Approved maps. The four United 

States Geological Survey (USGS) 

1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to 

determine the boundary of the 

viticultural area are titled: 

(1) Knights Ferry, California, 2015; 

(2) Keystone, California, 2015; 

(3) Cooperstown, California, 2015; 

and 

(4) Paulsell, California, 2015. 

(c) Boundary. The Paulsell Valley 

viticultural area is located in Stanislaus 

County, California. The boundary of the 

Paulsell Valley viticultural area is as 

described in paragraphs (c)(1) through 

(20) of this section: 

(1) The beginning point is on the 

Knights Ferry map at the intersection of 

Willms Road, Kennedy Road/Sonora 

Road, and State Highway 108/State 

Highway 120. From the beginning point, 

proceed southeasterly along Willms 

Road for 7.2 miles, crossing over the 

Keystone map and onto the 

Cooperstown map, to the intersection of 

Willms Road and Warnerville Road at 

the Warnerville Cemetery; then 

(2) Proceed west, then south along 

Warnerville Road for a total of 0.5 mile 

to its intersection with Crabtree Road at 

the railroad tracks west of the town of 

Warnerville; then 

(3) Proceed in a southerly direction 

along Crabtree Road for 6.7 miles to its 

intersection with the canal known 

locally as the Modesto Main Canal; then 

(4) Proceed westerly along the canal, 

crossing onto the Paulsell map, and 

continuing along the canal for a total of 

1.6 miles to the Modesto Reservoir; then 

(5) Proceed along the eastern shore, 

then northern shore, of the Modesto 

Reservoir for 12.9 miles to the fifth 

intersection of the shore with an 

unnamed, intermittent creek at the 

northernmost point of the reservoir; 

then 

(6) Proceed southwesterly in a straight 

line to the northern terminus of 

Reservoir Road; then 

(7) Proceed south-southwest along 

Reservoir Road for 2.2 miles to its 

intersection with the 200-foot elevation 

contour; then 

(8) Proceed northwest in a straight 

line for 1.2 miles to the intersection of 

Hazeldean Road and Tim Bell Road; 

then 

(9) Proceed north along Tim Bell Road 

for 3.1 miles to its intersection with 

Claribel Road south of the town of 

Paulsell; then 

(10) Proceed west along Claribel Road 

for 2.4 miles, crossing Cashman Creek, 

to the intersection of the road with the 

260-foot elevation contour; then 

(11) Proceed north in a straight line 

for 2 miles to the intersection of 

Warnerville Road and the 300-foot 

elevation contour east of Cashman 

Creek; then 

(12) Proceed northeast in a straight 

line, crossing onto the Knights Ferry 

map and continuing for a total of 1.1 

miles to the intersection of Fogarty Road 

and a railroad track; then 

(13) Proceed east in a straight line for 

0.9 mile to Paulsell Lateral; then 

(14) Proceed northerly along Paulsell 

Lateral for 2.4 miles to its intersection 

with Cashman Creek; then 

(15) Proceed northwest in a straight 

line for 1.3 miles to State Highway 108/ 

State Highway 120; then 

(16) Proceed northeast in a straight 

line for 2.4 miles to the third 

intersection of State Highway 108/State 

Highway 120 with the 300-foot 

elevation contour; then 

(17) Proceed southeast along State 

Highway 108/State Highway 120 for 1 

mile to its intersection with the 260-foot 

elevation contour; then 

(18) Proceed northeasterly along the 

260-elevation contour for 1.4 miles to its 

intersection with Sonora Road southeast 

of Knights Ferry; then 

(19) Proceed southeast along Sonora 

Road for 0.1 mile to its intersection with 

Kennedy Road; then 

(20) Proceed northeast, then east, then 

south along Kennedy Road/Sonora Road 

for 0.4 mile, returning to the beginning 

point. 

Signed: June 21, 2021. 

Mary G. Ryan, 

Administrator. 

Approved: June 21, 2021. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2021–15053 Filed 7–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket Number USCG–2021–0505] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation; Chesapeake 

Bay, Between Sandy Point and Kent 

Island, MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to establish special local regulations for 

certain waters of the Chesapeake Bay. 

This action is necessary to provide for 

the safety of life on these navigable 

waters located between Sandy Point, 

Anne Arundel County, MD, and Kent 

Island, Queen Anne’s County, MD, 

during a paddling event on September 

26, 2021. This proposed rulemaking 

would prohibit persons and vessels 

from entering the regulated area unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Maryland-National Capital Region or the 

Coast Guard Patrol Commander. We 

invite your comments on this proposed 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 16, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2021–0505 using the Federal Decision 

Making Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ron 

Houck, Sector Maryland-National 

Capital Region Waterways Management 

Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 

410–576–2674, email D05-DGSectorMD-NCR-MarineEvents@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COTP Captain of the Port 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

PATCOM Coast Guard Patrol Commander 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

ABC Events, Inc. of Arnold, MD, has 

notified the Coast Guard that it will be 

conducting the Bay Bridge Paddle from 

8 a.m. to noon on September 26, 2021. 

The annual canoe, kayak and stand up 

paddle board event for elite and 

intermediate paddlers includes up to 

400 paddlers in two classes operating on 

two race courses in the Chesapeake Bay, 

under and between the north and south 

bridges that consist of the William P. 

Lane, Jr. (US–50/301) Memorial Bridges, 

located between Sandy Point, Anne 

Arundel County, MD, and Kent Island, 

Queen Anne’s County, MD. The first 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS