[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 133 (Thursday, July 15, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37265-37270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15053]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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-proposed-rulemaking 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 grape-growing 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:
    <bullet> Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is 
nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;
    <bullet> An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of 
the proposed AVA;
    <bullet> 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;
    <bullet> The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS) 
map(s)

[[Page 37266]]

showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of the 
proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and
    <bullet> 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ U.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.
    \2\ U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and 
University of California Agriculture Experiment Station, General 
Soil Map: Eastern Stanislaus County, 1961.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Sbranti, 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.
    \4\ Sbranti, 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.
    \5\ Sbranti. 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.
    \6\ Sbranti, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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, mound-
intermound 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

[[Page 37267]]

(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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 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.

                                         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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Average
                                                              minimum
 Weather station location (direction from proposed AVA)     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

[[Page 37268]]

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, mound-     Average GDDs between      Pentz, Peters, Keyes, Raynor,
                                intermound relief;        4,201 and 5,204;          and Paulsell series and the
                                elevations between 140    average growing season    Peters-Pentz complex;
                                and 612 feet.             low temperatures          primarily formed from
                                                          between 54.8 and 57.9     volcanic tuff and alluvial
                                                          degrees; Annual           fans associated with
                                                          rainfall amounts          volcanic activity and severe
                                                          between 7.6 and 26.4      flooding.
                                                          degrees.
North........................  Floodplain of the         Not available...........  Honcut, Hanford, and Columbia
                                Stanislaus River;                                   series; alluvial sandy soils
                                elevations generally                                and tailings and dredge from
                                below 300 feet.                                     former mining operations.
East.........................  Sierra Nevada Mountains;  Similar to slightly       Amador, Auburn, Exchequer,
                                elevations up to          lower GDD                 and Hornitos series; derived
                                several thousand feet.    accumulations; higher     from tuffaceous sediments,
                                                          annual rainfall amounts.  metamorphic or sedimentary
                                                                                    parent material.
South........................  Modesto Reservoir.......  Lower GDD accumulations;  Hopeton clays, Montpellier
                                                          temperature; lower        coarse sandy loam, and
                                                          annual rainfall amounts.  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;       Lower GDD accumulations;  Similar to proposed AVA.
                                significantly flatter     lower average growing
                                terrain; elevations       season low temperature;
                                typically below 200       lower annual rainfall
                                feet.                     amounts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 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 Sec.  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

0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.

Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas

0
2. Add Sec.  9. ___ to read as follows:

[[Page 37270]]

Sec.  9. ___  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