Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 01/19/2016 in all areas

  1. Good idea bull, I'll post a few. I'll preface the pics with a very brief backstory behind our brand. Being located in Washington, PA, we're at the center of many of the events of the Whiskey Rebellion (I could hit the restored home and now national historic site of David Bradford, the leader of the rebellion, with a 9 iron from my front door). We went with a very colonial theme in our tasting room including a colonial fireplace back bar, the portrait of Alexander Hamilton (hanging upside down) above the fireplace, 1790's themed lighting fixtures, tables we made out of reclaimed barn wood and a separate dining room for private tastings and events.
    5 likes
  2. "Most customers aren't easily deceived for long don't care in an open market place." There, fixed it for you.
    5 likes
  3. Introduction Over the last decade I have had the opportunity to help dozens and dozens of craft distillers with developing and designing their gins. I want to use this thread to help lay out some of the basic guidelines I learned, that make the production of great gin quite easy and straight forward. Over the coming days (and depending on comments and my time in the factory) or weeks, I want to get most of the information (if not all) that we give on our gin making courses across. Now, gin making has a wide set of variables. And a lot of people adhere to certain approaches. If ever you feel my approaches or opinions to be contrary to yours, let's turn this thread into a discussion, not a battle ground. I for one will not. Just sharing info, not trying to convince anyone. Use the info or not. It's here (or it will be) and I will share it so you can use it. A few things on gin. Basically, let's dive into procedures, herbs bills, distillation techniques. But I want to start with a general outline on taste. Just to make or introduce a starting point. When I make whiskey, I find the late heads, smearing into hearts, to be fruity. Front of mouth oriented. You taste them first and you taste them on your lips and the front of your tongue. The body, the grain, comes over after that. Hearts. Middle mouth feeling. Early tails, that smear into the last portion of hearts, have a nutty, root-like taste (if you give them time to develop) and are tasted at the back of your mouth towards the throat. Now, in my experience, the same holds true for a gin: it's the fruity bits that come over first, then the body, then the root-like, nutty flavors. So if you want to make a floral gin ... don't add root-like, nutty things to your gin recipe. And cut a bit earlier. If you want a full-bodied gin that lingers in your mouth and can be consumed neat ... do add those nutty, root-like components. And cut a bit later, since these tastes come over during the last part of the run. Okay, that was the introductionary post. More on herbs bills and aging gin and procedures in future posts! Regards, Odin.
    4 likes
  4. Hi there, Here's a little booklet I wrote a few months ago on taste rich distilling. With a few typo's. Sorry for that. Not of native English tongue. Let me know what you think of it and if I should write a few more. Like on gin making, whiskey making, still design and operation, or whatever. As long as you can think of a few questions, me and my team can probably dive in. Regards, Odin. 33 Questions On Taste Rich Distilling.pdf
    4 likes
  5. We have a forklift. Cant imagine life with out it. We move barrels with it. And smoke cigarettes at the same time, and run with scissors.
    4 likes
  6. Taste Development during the Run So, let's follow up on the first post. Taste, in a gin, pretty much follows in the footsteps of making brandy, whiskey or rum. Fruity notes at the beginning, body in the middle, root-like, nutty tastes at the end of the run. Weird, because we normally work with GNS, when making gin, so there shouldn't be "real" heads and tails, right? Right, but the molecules, associated with certain tastes, still follow the same rules. Fruity at the beginning, root-like at the end. Lime, lemon, orange peel come over early. Rooty and nutty herbs come over near the end. And if you want multi-dimensionality, a complex gin, you need both. It even gets more funny. Or interesting. Not only does the gin develop in taste as a whiskey or rum or brandy would ... even though you may use GNS to make your gin, you still need cuts. Cuts on a gin? Yes! A sorta Fores/Heads cut and a sorta Tails cut. Tails cut is easy. It is when you stop the run, because the later parts of the run just bring too much root-like tastes over (and they easily overpower the fruitiness of the beginning of the run). But a "Fores/Heads cut"? Yes, you need it. A small one. Only like 0.5 liters on a 250 liter charge. Maybe a liter in a 500 liter boiler charge of gin. The first (half a) liter. Why? This contains the very oily, excessive and harsh first juniper oils. You want to cut them out. I'll try to find a picture and add it to this thread. So you can see how these first juniper oils, that you want to cut out, look like. Really remarkable. A bubble of haze in a pint of alcohol. Not nice. Toss it. I can't find pics right now, but I'll dive in later. Important that you see it, so you can recognize it. All right, so how can we use cuts to perfect our gin? Well, if you are not satisfied with the amount of back of throat taste / root-like tastes ... you could cut a bit later, allowing for more nutty flavors to come over. Or if you feel you need a little less fruity notes ... well, you can dial the amount of fruit peel back ... or you can take a slightly larger "Fores/Heads cut". I am not saying one solution is better than the other, I am just informing you that by "gin cutting" you have an additional tool to perfect your gin runs. Something else you can use. If you make rum or brandy or whiskey, you can do a swift stripping run. Fast, low alcohol purity, lots of tastes blending in all over the place. Just so you get the picture: faster strips make for dirtier smearing of heads and tails into hearts. Same technique you can use with gin making. You don't strip, but you can vary power inputs on your distilling machine. If you go for higher energy inputs and higher output figures per liter, you will increase vapor speeds inside your column. High vapor speeds translate to more of the Tails oriented tastes to come over earlier. And they may be overpowering. The solution? Just throttle down and you will find the outcome less root-like, less nutty oriented. More florals coming over. Play with it: power settings. If you go too fast, taste becomes flat, one dimensional. Tune it down (by power management) and within just a few seconds, you may find the taste appealing again. Multi-faceted, interesting, complex. Playing with energy input, speed of run, and vapor speeds does not only allow you to make better tasting gin (lower speeds for better gin), it also allows you to go deeper into the Tails oriented department without the associated tastes becoming too overpowering. In other words: you can use more of the GNS to actually make more great tasting gin. End temperature based on gas temperature entering the column? Between 94.5 and 96 degrees C. The slower you go, on the last part of the run, the deeper you can go, without compromising on overal taste. Next? Lets dive into louched gins in the next post. Are they a failure ... or maybe a sign of actual distilling success? I'll try to find some time and dive in tomorrow or the day after. For after the weekend? A take on boiler vs. vapor infused gins! I know there's lots of opinions. I won't try to take sides, I will try to explain the pro's and con's. Regards, Odin
    4 likes
  7. Aging White Gin I think there are two topics here. First, the making, diluting, and bottling of gin, does that require any aging? Secondly, there is a big move towards barrel aged gin. I will start with the first question first ... and I will leave "barrel aged gin" for another post. White gin requires aging. Not much, but you can't just dilute it and bottle it and sell it. Well, you can, but you won't create the best tasting gin that way. A gin that's bottled right after it's been diluted to bottling strength has two issues: 1. It tickles on the tongue; 2. Taste is not integrated. The tickling of the tongue is a very good indication that a gin is not yet aged out. The tickling is caused by alcohol sucking water up water. Since alcohol is highly hydrofile or hygroscopic, that makes sense ... if you didn't give your gin enough time after diluting it to bottling strength. If you add water to your gin to bring it down from (for example) 70% to 45%, a process starts that I call "the marriage between water and alcohol". It is not an instant process. It is not a gentle process either. It is a process where some of the water gets dissolved into the alcohol. A process that creates heat (some), slightly lowers the total volume (total volume is lower than the volume of the original alcohol and water), and raises the proof a bit. All because water dissolves - over time - in alcohol. So here's the first trick in letting your gin age out: dilute it, then give it like five weeks for the marriage to take place. After this period, when you taste the gin, the tickle on your tongue is gone. The five week period also helps the different oils and tastes settle out. Please try it. Make your gin, dilute it, fill one bottle, open the cap on that bottle like every day, and taste is: - On day one (not coherent, tickly, is this the gin I wanted to make?); - After three days (nice, its moving in a good direction, wow, this is different shit!); - After five weeks (when you'll have reached your final taste profile). This test will teach you that you will achieve around 2/3rds of the final taste profile already after the first three days. It will also teach you that giving it more time really pays of. I know that waiting for five weeks can be a pain. You need more time to market, and you need more storage space. But in the end, if you want to make the best product, there is no escaping it. There are, however, a few tricks you can use to speed up the process. Here they are: 1. Use an ultrasonic cleaner (50 Watt per liter minimum and at 40 kHz) and give your gin like three ten minute treatments. It won't skip the five week rest period completely, but it will get you closer sooner. The process of especially water marrying to alcohol is sped up. And if you look in your ultrasonic cleaner, while doing it, you'll see for yourself that this process is not a gentle one: the liquids turn grey during the first part of the ultrasonification. 2. Use corks instead of caps on your bottles. A cork may allow for slight air movements in and out. If you allow for that, the process of water dissolving into alcohol can take place in the bottle. But if you have a hard capped bottle, the process of water dissolving in alcohol cannot take place, because its a process that shrinks total volume. A relative vacuum developing in the air pocket would prevent the water to dissolve properly. So ... with hard capped gin bottles, you may want to skip the white gin aging process a bit with ultrasonic treatments, or not and you wait five weeks before you bottle. The good news is: it will improve your drink hugely. And the fun thing is that if you did the tests I proposed, you'll recognize other gins as having had the appropriate amount of aging or not. Aging white gin is not completely straight forward in the sense that five weeks will do it. Time and again, I learn that the vapor speeds and how deep we go towards tails / the end part of the run influence the aging curve. See the first post on that please. The concise? If you run your rig harder (higher vapor speeds) more aging is needed. If you run longer, more aging is needed. If you run your rig slower and cut a bit earlier, for a more floral gin, the marriage may just take as much as only three weeks to take place. Next post in this thread will be about barrel aging gin. After that? Lets dive into herbs bills! Regards, Odin.
    3 likes
  8. Generally speaking, you need about 1,000 BTU/hr / US gallon on the output side of the boiler to heat it up in one hour. That makes a number of assumptions but it's reasonable for budgeting purposes. If you're on a tight budget, look for an old new-stock residential boiler. But beware, in terms of the entire heating plant the boiler will be the a small fraction of the total. You'll need feed tanks, condensate return, steam trap, lots of piping, water softener, etc, etc, etc. If you have well water I'd seriously consider using that for cooling. All that being said, if you're on that tight of a budget I'd take a long hard look at your business plan and make damn sure you want to get into this business.
    3 likes
  9. To Louch or not to Louch, that's the question! Thanks tbagnulo! Onwards with louched gins! I visited a distillery once that had a wide array of products. Most of them bottled at 40%. Only their gin was bottled at higher strength. I asked the master distiller why? He said - and taking a look I could see it - that even at the higher ABV of 45%, his gin was on the verge of becoming cloudy (or "louchy" as the word seems to be). Would he go any lower in ABV, the gin would turn almost white. I asked him what he thought the solution was. He told me that he had talked to two gin experts. One advised him to cut his herbs bill in half. Use like only 50% of the total herbs bill he had used before. The second one told him to buy a chill filter and filter the haze out. The second solution I really don't like, because it takes away essential oils AKA taste. And anyone who tells you that chill filtering doesn't ... well, let them chill filter their whiskey for 10 times only to find out it starts to taste pretty much like a vodka! The first solution of using less herbs, isn't good either. It relies on the assumption that a louched gin is bad. I feel it isn't. A louched gin is a great indication you got over huge amounts of tasty oils. And that was the goal right? To create a big tasting gin. So how do we solve the louch? Easy, dilute some neutral / gns to the same percentage as the louched gin, and add a portion. There will be a moment (75:25, 66:34, 50:50, etc.) when all of a sudden the louch lifts. In a second, maybe two. You now have the gin with the most taste possible. And if you think it is too big in taste? Dilute it. Bottom line? A louched gin gives you a balpark. A starting point that makes it easy to create great tasting gin with the same flavor profile over and over again. And you can always dilute a big taste gin to a lighter one, but not the other way around. Next post: on boiler vs. vapor infused gins. Regards, Odin. PS: Here's a movie on me making gin. With lots of info on how to do it! Here it is:
    3 likes
  10. I've professionally used home-built 55-gal drum electric stills, 3 different simple pot stills (800L, 1500L, 2500L) built by inexperienced US fabricators, a steam-heated CARL with brandy & vodka columns, and a 4-plate electric water-bath KOTHE. While it is possible to make good spirits on all of them, the carl and kothe both dramatically expand the options of the types of things you can distill and the different methods you can do it by. They are also significantly safer, faster to heat, and easier to clean. Knowing what you plan to produce is the biggest factor in what type of still you should look for. If you plan to make gin from redistilled GNS, you don't need much. If you want to make pear brandy from whole fruit, you need either something more sophisticated or the hands-on experience you'll only gain from ruining a batch I've heard of several people finding deals on used german stills, both in the US as people outgrow them or go out of business (how we got the CARL) and abroad as the brandy market continues to shrivel. That is the path I would take, as I think there will be a pretty regular clip of closures in the next few years.
    3 likes
  11. Ingredients, fermentation, still operation and aging all go hand in hand. I think anyone currently making a great drink would still make a great drink if you gave him a beer keg on a gas burner for a still. Better equipment may ease or speed production, but better equipment will not necessarily produce a better drink.
    3 likes
  12. 3 likes
  13. You are killing your malt/enzymes by adding it over 150. Also, you can't use a refractometer on your beer, once it has alcohol in it. Fine for the initial info, but worthless once the fermentation starts.
    3 likes
  14. No one has a license to dictate how the word "craft" is used. "Craft" connotes more than it denotes. That means that craft is what you say it is, not what some "they" say it is. Various organizations, ADI included, want to give private definition of the term, but they have no ability to enforce their notion of what "craft" should be. That statement is not meant as a value judgment; it is a statement of fact as I see it. Here are my value judgments. You talk about buying bulk spirits to make infusions. When you infuse, you alter the character of the base product. Arguably, and I'm ready to take the flack on this from the craft community, neutral spirits produced in large, industrial stills and then used to produce small lot gins by distillation or maceration, are probably better to use as a gin base than neutral spirits produced by small distillers in stills that strain to make 190 proof. A neutral pallet on which to paint provides you the opportunity to create an imaginative products by, say, multiple fractional distillations, that take time and attention, and to blend those products in imaginative and even "artistic" ways, which requires a sensory pallet. Those with good sensory pallets can certainly "craft" better products than a those, like me, who have no taste at all. Speaking of pallet, let me argue by analogy, which is always dangerous, because analogies always will fail in some regard. But, does anyone worry about whether Picasso or Cezanne or Monet or .... whoever, you name the artist ....made their own paints and wove their own canvases. Of course not. It is how they applied the paint to the canvas that matters. It is their vision, their skill, their ingenuity, their energy that add up to "genius." Their work transcends that of producers of craft art, and a person who blends or infuses spirits or wine skillfully, can transcend craft distillers and winemakers who do so with a heavy hand. So why worry about tags. . Worry about what gets into the bottle. Consumers can then decide if you are an artist that transcends or a small distiller calls itself craft, for no other reason than it is small. Just be honest in the story you tell. And, for the record, as far as US regulation is concerned, you will be making liqueurs only if the product you put into the bottle meets the US standard of identity for liqueurs. they are " products obtained by mixing or redistilling distilled spirits with or over fruits, flowers, plants, or pure juices therefrom, or other natural flavoring materials, or with extracts derived from infusions, percolation, or maceration of such materials, and containing sugar, dextrose, or levulose, or a combination thereof, in an amount not less than 21/2percent by weight of the finished product." That definition matters, but it does not change the quality of the product either.
    3 likes
  15. The guy below tweeted about my distillery recently Benjamin‏@Bynjammin Apr 9 It's not the perfect equipment that makes good #whiskey, but execution of good concepts. @BelgroveWhisky He was commenting on a story about my distillery that appeared on BBC website. The story was about some recent Gold I had achieved from my distillery that was built from re-purposed / re-cycled equipment. Starting from my malting equipment, it is a slightly modified industrial clothes dryer, cost me zero. 95% of the energy used in the distillery is from burning used fryer oil, cost zero The still is direct flame heated, much cheaper to build (by me) because no steam jacket and no steam boiler The burner under the still is a modified diesel burner, initial cost zero but about $20 of parts to modify. The burner needed a variable speed motor to adjust the oil feed, cost $15, it is a cake mixer from local tip shop. My mash tun is an old milk vat that I swapped for a day's work Most of my fermenters are HDPE totes, zero to $50 each. ( a recent source for these is trucking companies. Anti pollution liquid called Add Blue comes in them. That is high quality urea, a fertilizer/nitrogen source. Traces left in tote would probably aid fermentation) A stainless fermenter cost me a whopping $400, cheap because it had a big dent in one side. Plate heat exchanger is an old dairy milk cooler, cost zero. Shell in tube heat exchangers $200 from scrap yard, re-cycled surplus from chocolate factory upgrade. 6 stainless 2inch butterfly valves from above yard, numerous brass taps, elbows, copper pipes, etc etc, at most $100 Single head Enolmatic bottler $200 on E-bay Barrel racks are second hand wood 2 X 4's Unfortunately in US you can't re-use barrels, these cost me from $50 for 100 liters to $120 for 220 liters The bar that I take to promotions is made from re-cycled timber and oil drums that I collect the fryer oil in. Plastic buckets from restaurants are free if you ask nicely after you dine there. I will stop there, I think I have made my point. I was at ADI in San Diego a few weeks ago and saw all those magnificent looking column stills. They really are beautiful pieces of engineering, but $$$$$ My still is a basic alembic pot, no column or plates. Very much cheaper to build. (An alembic pot is inefficient at separating ethanol, I exploit that inefficiency to produce flavor, I treat ethanol as a by-product.)
    3 likes
  16. It all looks big, until you try to turn the forklift around.
    3 likes
  17. Re: a 20-day approval. Miracles do happen, but don’t expect them. To understand the unlikelihood of your application being approved in 20 days, you must understand the way in which TTB processes applications. The system makes it all but impossible. That is why 20 days to approval is miraculous. When you submit the application, it is assigned, within a day, to a specialist. TTB used to use a triage system, but it appears to have abandoned that. The assignment to the specialist appears to now be made before anyone looks at it. The assignment to the specialist is made like dealing a deck of cards. The applications that come in each day are dealt round robin to the specialists. Who gets it is a lottery. The specialist who gets the application doesn’t look at it when she or he (I’ll chose she) receives it. It comes dealt face down and remains face down. She doesn’t look at it to say, oh, this one is great or lousy. It’s simply inserted into the bottom of the stack of applications she already has pending in her pile. She works this stack from top to bottom. This is a matter of “fair play.” One application is not favored over another. Since the specialists carry an “inventory” of 150 plus pending applications – I’ve heard figures as high as 250 - it takes a while for new ones to rise to the top, no matter how well prepared, to become the old ones at which they take a first look. This first look often does not occur for 180 days or so, although the October average time to approval was 180 days, so the average first look probably came at closer to five months after receipt rather than to six, for those applications, but that varies too, since in September the average was 206 days to approval. Now, is it possible that any particular application can bore through the pile to make it to the top in 20 days? Sure, anything is possible. But it would be an anomaly that would fall more than several standard deviations from the expected. But, let’s assume, for purpose of argument, that such a miraculous event does occur. What then? TTB says 75% of applications require correction notices. That was a 2015 figure. My experience says it probably is now a higher number than that. Some of that is because of real errors or omissions, but a lot is not. I submit quite a few conscientiously and competently prepared applications. I have found that what one specialist wants may not be what another specialist wants, so an entry that generates a “correction request” from one specialist, will not from another. Worse yet, the “corrections” that one specialist might require might be entries that are anathema to another, i.e., precisely the entries that would generate a correction request from the second specialist. In short, there is no “right” way to make entries when the specialists, or their immediate supervisors, are free to invent their own rules about what is required and the form in which it should appear. [Note, in fairness, I do make errors, from time to time, that generate needed requests for correction, so not all such requests are nonsense, but in my opinion many are]. In this situation, I proceed as follows. I read what the instructions ask for, provide that, and do so in a form that most specialists accept most of the time. I then handle any correction request, nonsense or not, in a couple of days. But I can’t prevent it. And I can’t get an approval in 20 days or 40 days or 60 days or 80 days. That is my reality. I can’t perform miracles. Next, let’s assume, for purposes of further argument, that the specialist who has reviewed the application within the miraculous 20 days, finds no fault with it and sends it off for “management disposition,” which is yet another hurdle that the applications must clear before it crosses the finish line. While it is possible to get management to dispose of the application quickly, if one has been expressing legitimate concerns about how long it has been pending, getting expedited service is not likely. The manager’s review serves as a “quality control” check. The managers return the application to the specialists if they find any problem and “gig” the specialist for the error, be it real or imagined. But that is not the problem. The problem is that the “gig” system is a Machiavellian management style that has the specialists working in fear of even the tiniest error and managers, who are also subject to gigs, working in fear that they will miss an error the specialist also missed. The absurd consequences that result from working in fear of errors, a nitpicking, excruciatingly slow review, do not matter in TTB's present mileau. Specialists and managers, in turn, look at each application in detail to find reasons the application should not be approved, not to find reasons that it should. Next, like the specialists, the managers have stacks of applications on their desks. Yes, if you guess that the most recent ones go to the bottom of the pile, you are correct. Unless someone is complaining about how much the processing time for their application has exceeded the average time, i.e. 180 days, not something less than 20 for others, things do not get expedited by merit. So, absent legitimate concerns about how long the processes has already taken, again in the sense of fair play, the managers take up the applications in the order received. My experience says that the times in which the manager acts in less than 20 days from the date the manager received the application are not common, unless, again, there are extenuating circumstances. So, management disposition alone general takes as much or more time than the 20-day application took from its conception to its approval. While the 20-day approval suggests that the application may have been immaculately prepared, in the manner of which the submitter justifiably is proud, the care with which it was prepared does not account for TTB not carrying it full term. The application was in fact "blessed." Unless your application is similarly blessed, by whom or what I cannot suggest, your application will not receive such favored treatment. I can all but guarantee it. As I said, I can’t get an approval in 20 days or 40 days or 60 days or even 80 days, because they do not even look at the applications until well after such time frames are in the rear-view mirror.
    2 likes
  18. Mail merges are a dying art. Only the Nigerians seem to make the effort anymore.
    2 likes
  19. Alcohol Strength A little more on alcohol strength. While distilling and while bottling. Let's start with the ABV of you vodka/neutral/GNS in the boiler ... The first question, related to alcohol strength is of course: how does it influence taste? Luckily, the answer is pretty straight forward: if you distill your gin at a higher proof, it will get dryer in taste. That's why London Dry Gin is called "Dry". It is distilled at no less than 70% / 140 proof, that's a quite high percentage ... so "High" equals "Dry". And if you want to get an understanding at what "Dry" means in a gin ... maybe buy a bottle of Gordon's or Beefeater's. If "High" is "Dry", what happens if we distill with lower proof in the boiler, in order to get the distilate to come over below 70%? Well, in that case the gin becomes less dry and more mellow in style. All right. Now, for example's sake, let's assume you want to make a more mellow gin. How to achieve it? By putting a less strong GNS in your boiler. But here comes the interesting challenge: below 30% not all herbs give up their taste oils. Now, if you choose to vapor infuse that's not a problem. The rising gases are stronger than 30%. Even on a 20% boiler charge. But vapor infusion brings over less taste. So how do we deal with boiler infused gin? Bigger taste, but since the boiler charge needs to be 30% for oils extraction ... does this mean we cannot make anything else - when boiler infusing - than a dry style gin? No, it doesn't. And here's the solution I like to work with. What I do, when I make a gin (and I am more of a big taste - so boiler infused - and mellow - so below 70% kinda guy), is this: I prepare my gin run the night before. I fill (example) a 500 liter boiler with 200 liters of 60%. I put the berries in and I put the herbs in. I let them steep over night. Next morning I top of with warm water to bring the ABV down and to preheat the boiler contents (to get to the production phase sooner). Best of both worlds. Works like a charm. Please see the video posted above for more explanation. Now, onwards to bottling strength. Many commercial gins are bottled at 40%. You'd need a very forward cut or light and floral gin to be able to dilute it to 40% without louching. Or you need to chill filter, of which I am not a fan, because it takes away taste. I personally feel 43 to 45% is great. Sometimes 47% is wonderful. My advice: play with ABV. I have helped develop a beautiful gin for customers from Ireland, where we wanted a neat sipper and a gin for in the gin tonic. We used the same herbs bill, the same distilling procedure, and the same cut points. The only thing we changed is how far we diluted down. The neat sipper stayed at 47%, the gin for gin tonic went down to 43%. Amazing taste differences are to be found, just playing with your bottling strength. So what's next? I could talk a bit more on gin aging. Some misconceptions there we can dive into. And/or you tell me what you want me to cover in the next post and I'll try to dive into your questions. Just let me know. Regards, Odin.
    2 likes
  20. If I go lower in pH, it is because I want to create a little bit more taste. Lower pH enhances the formation of taste molecules (Esterification). So I do it on rum and whiskey, but not on vodka recipes. When I make (or help develop) taste rich products, like rum or whiskey, I use (or advice to use) backset. It is sour and will sour up mashing and fermentation, enhancing esterification. Since you now add backset, instead of water, to the next mash/ferment/distillation cycle, you also increase taste, you don't need (so much) yeast nutrients, and it helps you stabilize on taste output (repeatability). In general, I aim for a much lower pH, especially while fermenting (where most taste is formed). It does not only help create more taste (and a more interesting whiskey or rum), it also helps against bacterial infections, when pH is below pH 4.8. Low pH is good against all bacterial infections ... safe lactic bacteria infection, unfortunately. I usually aim for a starting pH, while fermenting, of pH 4.8 and will see it go down to pH 3.8, depending on wash type (malts having more buffering capacity than grains having more buffering capacity than molasses). If it goes below pH 3.5, I know that next time I have to add a bit of lime to start with, so it does not get more sour than pH 3.8. I don't like it lower than that because (again, depending on sugar source) ferments tend to stall below that. Regards, Odin.
    2 likes
  21. I had posted a diagram in this thread: But it appears the image I posted was lost in one of the forum upgrades. After some searching, I think I have found it once more, although it appears this is actually for a triple-distilled Scotch.
    2 likes
  22. Random Packings, SPP, Dixon rings, Raschig rings, Mesh, Saddles, Pro Pak, Balls (I won't say marbles), stainless, copper, glass, ceramic...they can all be great applied appropriately. But SPP still has the lowest HETP (more plates per height). It's also the most expensive to acquire. But in Stainless Steel it is a permanent solution. There are even columns using rocks... For neutral, these packing's are more efficient than bubble caps or sieve plates, size and energy required. A lot of that efficiency comes from the mass of the Steel versions transferring heat so well. The petro industry regularly uses Structured Packing...another story.
    2 likes
  23. 2 likes
  24. I'll raise you. Clostridium, Propionibacterium, and Lactobacillus. In ... or out? Yeast are soooo boring compared to bacteria.
    2 likes
  25. We had similar problems when we proofed our white rye whiskey down to 80 proof. I found some older threads in this forum that talked about fatty acids that are soluble at high proof start to come out of solution as you proof down below 92. We ended up running our 80 proof whiskey through a 1 micron filter to remove the haze. We ended up with a perfectly clear spirit in the bottle.
    2 likes
  26. Side note: There is no need to take stock in awards. Most brands have won awards and gotten gold medals. In general, the more awards a brand wins simply proves how many competitions they enter - not how good the product is. The entire tasting competition industry feeds off of distillers' insecurities and desire to be recognized. It's all not too dissimilar from how kindergarten teachers give all their students a gold star at some point throughout the school year.
    2 likes
  27. 2 likes
  28. Whiskey Systems, Dehner's thoughts.... My personal thought is it is way over priced. I was going to put this on there post but I went out on my own. Being the super awesome nice guy I am. We move ALOT of volume, and I still can't see spending $350 a month on a program like that. Heck that could buy me a nice new truck, or equipment around the distillery, or a NICE NEW TRUCK. Thats one thing I love about the country we are in.... Competition! On there blog or website they claim to have 50 people signed up, great. Thats $17,500 per month, or $210,000 a year. Seems like a great gig. Seems like I am in the wrong part of the business. Create a program and sit back and watch cat videos on You-Tube while drinking a chocolate milk straight from the container. WERE DO I SIGN UP? I have a bother in-law thats a computer programer TD Bank, And I am thinking of asking him about creating a better, but very similar functioning program. Even if I was half price thats still $105,000 a year, plus think how much more people I could sign up because of the cheaper price. And get this...... 1 month free trial......maybe even 2....... WoW... Mind equals BLOWN!! Here is another crazy idea.... It called a pen and paper and about 25-30 a month... BOOM Done... Set up a good system up, and stick to it.. I really am just dumb founded why it cost so much money. Kinda like when people &!tch about the price of gas while holding a $7 coffee. To each there own but .........Thats my rant...... Now I am not looking to have a typing contest on here because I do have a very BIG KEY STROKE, but just venting and sound boarding the idea of a distillery program competition. Take care: Dehner out.
    2 likes
  29. Yes. But... We must always guard against the danger of getting lost in the romanticism of nostalgia. We can respect the old ways and be thankful that we have the ability to stand on the shoulders of giants, but that doesn't mean that we should not push the limits, leveraging new technologies and new techniques, to create new, unique, and better products than our elders had before us. Just because they are the old ways, do not mean that they are the best ways. Don't mistake my words, I'm not saying that a new way is better because it's new, or that an old way isn't the best way. Just like our elders had the responsibility of growing and enriching their craft, so do we. If it means an old way must go, it must go. I believe the old artisans would approve. I'm sure I'm not the only one who reads this article as being condescending. I'm sure it wasn't written to come off as condescending, but it is nonetheless. I admit, it's nice to look back on the good old days. Everything was better back then, wasn't it? Men were men, honesty was a virtue, and someone's word actually meant something. Having studied neuroscience and cognitive psychology for many years, with a focus on emotion, memory, and cognitive bias, I can't help but read these kinds of nostalgic pieces and imagine how much of that retrospection was clouded by biases and flaws (or omissions) in our memories. There is a well known cognitive bias called Rosy Retrospection. Despite the cute name, it's the basis for those feelings of romantic nostalgia we have for the past. However, it also means that perhaps the past was not how we remember. I still remember the taste of the champagne that I sipped after toasting with my wife at our wedding reception, or the taste of that whiskey me and the boys sipped when getting the news that there was a little one on the way, god it was so good. The reality of it is, the good old days weren't. I'm not complaining that our brains have a propensity to fade unpleasant memories, and retain (and even embellish) the good ones. Life would be awful otherwise, wouldn't it? But, the old stories come together, and history is written with these biases. So when we look back, we need to understand that the negatives were probably omitted, and the positives are certainly more positive than they were. So, now we get to the truth, let's be realistic here. Commercial producers, even small ones, have been producing awful spirits for as long as people have been drinking them. You would be remiss to simply assume just because some producer produced something seventy five years ago, it was absolutely fantastic, magical, unparalleled in quality and without compare. Because, you know what, most of it was probably pretty bad. Craft was probably the last thing in many of their minds. Losing a batch to a raging bacterial infection meant your kids going hungry, so they produced it anyway. I've tasted lots of very old product, you know, the kind with fancy scores and reviews, when people fawn over names, and was amazed that after dozens of years your could still taste the fact that they didn't bother to take much of a heads cut, hell, any cut at all. The raw distillate was probably so god awful that it needed 25 years on oak just to be remotely drinkable. What I don't understand is, why make these overly broad, sweeping assumptions about the new breed of craft producers? Yet at the same time paying some kind of religious homage to those who came before? Frankly, neither deserve it.
    2 likes
  30. Let's begin, again. A-use the hydrometer, and you don't need a college degree or computer to figure out the deviations. B- add your enzymes below 150 (except for a small amounts to keep the mash thin) C- add your non corn items after the corn has rested at 180+, and those items will help to bring your mash temp down so you can get to (B) in an orderly and timely fashion without wasting to much energy.
    2 likes
  31. Bluestar is correct about the legal designations. But the term "rectifier," or its variants, now appears only in the Federal Alcohol Administration Act regulations, parts 1 (permits) and 5 (labeling). It does not appear in part 19, the distilled spirits plant regulations. It was banished, so to say, when congress eliminated the separate excise tax on rectification. If I recall, correctly, that was in the early 1980's. And prior to that, distillers could also be rectifiers. Small players who only rectified and/or bottled were commonly called "bottling houses." Few of them professed to craft. Most made well products that sold on the bottom shelves in liquor stores. In part 19, "rectification" has become "processing," which also includes bottling, etc. TTB approves the registration required by part 19 for distillers, warehousemen and processors. Although it will approve a registration as a distiller or warehouseman only, a processor must also be either a distiller or a warehouseman. So, in the United States, if you do not distill, but do conduct processing operations, then you must also register as a warehouseman. This terminology has not yet found its way into the permit and labeling regulations of parts 1 and 5. The permit provisions 27 CFR 1.21, provide that "no persons, except pursuant to a basic permit ... shall ... engage in the business of distilling distilled spirits ... or rectifying or blending distilled spirits, or bottling or warehousing distilled spirits." If this were rewritten in the language of part 19, it would say that except pursuant to a basic permit, no person shall engage in the business of distilling, warehousing or processing distilled spirits. Part 5, the labeling regulations, make repeated references to "rectification," or variants thereof (the terms occur 11 times), but the regulation does not define what the term means, either within the definitions section, 5.11, or in the definitions section of part 1, section 1.10. The regulations rely on the meaning of the IRC regulations at the time the FAA regulations were written. So, if you are qualified to do business, as a distilled spirits plant, in the United States, you may be dubbed either a processor or rectifier, depending on which regulation you are reading, but the bottom line is that there are no longer any operations conducted on bonded premises that are identified as "rectification." It is all processing. In my early years in college, we had a sophomoric expression, "It's all semantics." In this case, that is true. To further confuse, the mandatory statements of name and address allow for different statements depending on the operations you conduct. The bottler must state that they are the bottler. The bottler also may state that it is the distiller if it distilled the spirits, either by original distillation or by redistillation in the processing account. If the bottler is also the "rectifier" of the spirits, it may state in addition to the mandatory bottled by statement, that it blend, made, prepared, manufactured or produced the spirits, depending, as the regulation states, on whichever term may be appropriate to the act of rectification involved. By regulation, "rectified by" is not among the optional terms. I do not know what TTB does in practice (who does?), but rectify is not among the optional terms listed in the beverage alcohol manual either. I'll leave it to you to determine the differences between manufacturing, producing, making, and preparing, and what specific operations make one more appropriate than the other. I think TTB does not care. I think if you conduct a processing operation, as defined in part 19, then you could claim the right to use any of them. But this is all very far removed from the character of the spirit that is in the bottle. It is intended to inform the consumer. Long explanationslike this speak volumes, I think, to whether it actually does so. It takes a wonk, i.e, someone who takes an excessive interest in minor details of policy, to even try to get this straight. I take that interest because as a consultant, if I do the wonky work, I free others to do the real work without fear of getting crosswise with TTB. Finally, let me ask a few questions? Who in the public knows the difference between 'produced by" and "distilled by?" Would the number who know be even 1% of the purchasers? And among those who do know, what percentage would make the purchasing choice based on the distinction? You may want to point this out as a part of your marketing, but I think you market to a small percentage of buyers, in most cases probably to those who come to your tasting room or find you on social media, i.e., those who are inclined to participate in your story to begin with. You don't have advertising budgets that allow you to sway public opinion. This leads to a final observation. I'm not sure that casting aspersions at small companies that hold forth as craft players, whatever the circumstances, is good for the craft market you are trying to build. But about that I'm over my head. I'm a regulations wonk, not a marketing wonk. .
    2 likes
  32. The term for this in the USA is a "rectifier", which applies to anyone that purchases spirits and then further processes it to make a liquor, by redistilling, blending, or flavoring, and then bottling it. If redistilling, you could still label the product as "distilled by", and call yourself a "craft distiller". But if you are not distilling, the "craft distiller" moniker technically should not apply. You could call yourself a "craft spirit producer", for example. The distinction is actually a legal one in the US Basic Permit: "PROCESSING (RECTIFYING) DISTILLED SPIRITS AND WINE" is one of the three things you can apply to do with the permit, the others being distilling or warehousing. Most of us check all three boxes, and our permit covers all three. But the distinction of being a "distiller" or not would only show up in the approval of a label, with regards to the "distilled by" versus "produced by" on the label. Gin and absinthe are typical examples of products that could be produced by a rectifier by redistilling spirits with botanicals, and hence could use the "craft distiller" moniker honestly. But if you are making infusions that are not redistilled, you would use the "produced and bottled by" on the label, and really should use something other than "craft distiller" as a moniker. I like "craft spirit maker" myself.
    2 likes
  33. Tell them that the still is an open system and therefore not a pressure vessel of any sort and therefore the still itself does not need an ASME stamp or listing. However, you really should have the proper pressure relief valve on the still as well as a vacuum relief valve. If you went to your local hardware store and purchased a pressure relief valve for a water heater, then you need to remove it and take it back because it is definitely not the correct one for your 160 gallon still. You need a 5 psi pressure relief valve for steam that will discharge at least 200lbs of steam per hr. The pressure relief valve should be on top of the still boiler or on the line arm above the column and it should be plumbed to the outside of your building. The vacuum relief valve should have a bore size of at least 3/4" The electrical system is a different story. If the complete electrical system is not UL listed, then all of the individual electrical system components will need to be UL listed. Also the control panel will need to have the voltage, phase and amp draw listed on it. The cheap CE listed Chinese panels and CE listed Chinese parts will not pass most inspections here in the US. CE is for Europe and parts of Asia and is not good for the US. Your heating elements will certainly need to be UL listed. The US made ones like Camco and Chromalox always are and the Chinese ones typically are not. Here is something else. Your electrical system should be rated at least NEMA4X which means that the everything is liquid and vapor tight. Always remember safety first.
    2 likes
  34. 150 Gallon Jacketed Standard Series Still with 8” Bubble Plate Column We have these units in stock! This 150 gallon still is great for Bourbon, Whiskey, Brandy, Grappa, Rum and many others. It will distill between 120 and 190 proof depending on which configuration that you decide upon. The still in the picture above has 8 plates. The pricing below is for the same unit with 4 plates in stainless. If you would like more plates or if you would like a copper columns just email paul@distillery-equipment.com for a quote. This Still has a beautiful 8" Diameter Stainless & Copper Bubble Plate Column with four 4" diameter sight glasses, Gatling Gun (Tube & Shell) Dephlagmator on top of the Column and a 4" Gatling Gun (Tube & Shell) Condenser on the side of the column. The column can be ran in Pot Still Mode to make Whiskey and Moonshine or it can be ran in reflux mode to make high proof light Whiskey or Rum. The boiler has six 2" Tri Clamp ports, with Tri Clamps and Cover Plates. The port can be used to install electric elements with controller (please see the heating system option listed below). The best thing about this 150 gallon still is that it is jacketed. Cooking oil or water can be ran in the jacket. This gives you the ability to run grain in mashes and other mashes such as potato mashes, grappa mashes and fruit mashes with the solids left in, without the worry of scorching. We have options below for agitators etc 150 Gallon Operating Capacity 170 Gallon Total Capacity 30 Gallon Jacket Operating Capacity 37 Gallon Total Capacity in the Jacket 2" Sanitary Butterfly Drain valve for Mash 8" tri clamp column connection 16” Diameter Manway ½” 5 psi Pressure Relief Valve on the jacket ½” 5 psi Pressure Relief Valves on the inner boiler 8” Diameter Stainless 4 plate Bubble Plate Column with all copper internal parts The column is completely modular with Sanitary Tri Clamp Connections throughout It is very simple easy and fast to disassemble the Column for Cleaning Plates can be added or removed from the column to run different proofs The Column can be Set up to Run as a Pot Still Head in a Matter of 5 to 10 Minutes Top quality construction with beautifully rounded curves. Built from heavy gauge 304 food grade stainless steel Polished to a mirror finish inside and out. Thermowell and Commercial grade thermometer with a 3" face. This item comes with a 1 year warranty which covers manufacturing defects and leaks Price with everything listed above = $8,040.14 Please see the options listed below: Stainless 8” Gin Basket $656.00 1hp explosion proof electric agitator single speed 45 RPM 3 phase 240VAC $1,655.00 Variable speed WEG VFD drive for 1 hp agitator to be mounted on the wall. This VFD is Rated NEMA 4x for hazardous environments can be washed down. Price is $695.00 This VFD can be wired 3 phase or single phase input, to supply power to the 3 phase agitator Manual proportional control 33,000 watt heating system = $2,400.00 Not NEMA4X 33,000 watt heating system with digital programmable heating control. Control panel and element enclosures are NEMA4X. Price = $4,169.00 Approx. 90 min heat up time with the 33,000 watt controller The still below has one of our older proportional controllers. The same controllers look much more professional now.
    2 likes
  35. I'm curious as to why you don't just have the vendor pick them up. They sent the wrong item, why do you have to deal with it?
    2 likes
  36. Yeah, +3 on this tour size breakdown. Big tours suck, and dont even get me started about biker types that want to make you a poker run stop or some such bullshit. Our SOP is that if you have a group of more than 6, somebody's paying for our time and samples. The exception: classic car clubs that use your place as their meet-up destination. Just the other week we had 60-70 guests and everyone bought at least one bottle.
    2 likes
  37. Lauter first and ferment off the grain. With proper sparging you should be able to achieve good yield
    2 likes
  38. If that is directed at me, sorry you feel that why. My reply was both serious and meant to be informational, and pretty much common wisdom among those of us that have actually tried to do what you are talking about (as I have). I tried to share what I learned from my experience as a craft distiller that makes a vodka (among other things). If you are a small craft producer, and you want to make vodka, then making it from an interesting source material, and distilling so that it has a mouth feel and a trace of flavor that the customer finds pleasant or intriguing, can be the features that make your product worth consideration to buy over mass-produced high-purity products that you can't compete with on quality or price (e.g., Absolut or Smirnoff). In that case, avoid turbo yeast, because it will generate poor flavor. And if you are just trying to make something without flavor by getting to highest purity, then it would be far cheaper to redistill bulk NGS. Again, no need for turbo yeast. You asked for people's advise, I gave you my advise (no turbo yeast) and why. If you don't want people's advise, don't come on this forum and ask for it. And there is no need to be rude when they give it to you. Honestly, my comments don't benefit me in any way, they were meant to benefit either you or others who might read the thread. This is not a private thread, so neither should you be trying to censor me or others for answering your public question. I suggest if you can not remain civil, you not use this site.
    2 likes
  39. I built my own still and it worked out pretty well. I would say that if you feel like you need to take a class to have someone else teach you how to build your own still, then you probably dont have the knowledge and/or skills needed to pull it off. If you feel confident you can pull it off with the knowledge and skills you have then you *probably* can. If you realize you dont have the knowledge but still want to do it I would suggest you take a month and read every thread that has been posted here: http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=18&sid=6ea5175a3c86538597a4b340c21d3e3d Once your done reading all that then build yourself a small still and see if you enjoy the process and decide then if you want to proceed with a production size still.
    2 likes
  40. Oh thank goodness. I've been having trouble locating overpriced imported vodka. Currently I buy Costco vodka and just pour it into bottles and write $70 on them. Impresses the ladies but it would be nice to have a back up.
    2 likes
  41. 1 pound per 50 gal @100 proof is a good rough approximation. The key is to pass the spirits through the carbon slowly. I like to setup a slow recirculation system where you go from holding tank to carbon filter to pump and back to holding tank at a slow rate.
    2 likes
  42. and there we go, the first PM trying to sell me monthly cost software comes in promising a 'big discount'... when it is a $9.95 app (ok, a $99.95 app) with no recurring charges, let me know...
    2 likes
  43. You can, but you're stripping the first layer of flavor from the interior of the barrel. Just lay them out a few days before you fill them and spray them down like they're a garden. Soak on the outside thoroughly and then leave some water sitting on the head. Flip, soak again and leave some water on the other head for a few hours. I've done this with cold water from the spigot. You get the rare minor leak that you can seal with a cooper kit easily and you don't lose any flavor.
    2 likes
  44. We have to join DISCUS to read a document that they prepared to be used by OSHA to investigate us ? Or did I read that wrong ?
    2 likes
  45. Careful, one distiller recently died and the other horribly burned from a poorly made, poorly designed still. I am a master welder and could have made one, but chose a professionally designed and built equipment.
    2 likes
  46. I'm building. I wouldn't discount the option, to be honest. SBA 504 is only 10-15% your money, and you'll probably drop that in retrofit anyway. You'll have exactly what you want and the payment will probably be lower than rent.
    2 likes
  47. I am interested in this as the only reason why I want to get into this is because where I want to set up, Mendoza Argentina, there is no other craft whiskey distillery around. There are 3 other small distilleries making brandy and other sorts of things but no-one making whiskey and the place has 1,5million wine tourists a year. There are some whiskey producers in Argentina but they are the beer companies who take left over NGS and add colouring and flavouring and its horse piss. So I am going to start small and market the place like crazy in the peak months, which are Jan through to March. In those months there are 450,000 tourists a month. If I can sell via the cellar door 250 bottles I am breaking even. I think I may end up selling a lot more but I have to make the stuff first. I really appreciate all the comments and guidelines here. I was wondering if in fact the craft distillery industry in the US was becoming over supplied. I know in South America there are 6 Craft distilleries in Brazil, 1 in Argentina, but way in the south, none in Chile none in Peru and none in Colombia. I am going to do one in Mendoza because of the amount of tourists it gets and if it wasnt for that I wouldnt risk the money. The truth is my day job pays pretty well so I can float the business for a while but I want it to make good money and make happy customers. I really appreciate the comment about getting your second sale. That was great. Anyway great comments and thank you very much gentlemen.
    2 likes
  48. Agree with most of what is said above. The big issue I see killing many distilleries now is simply the sheer number of us out there. Differentiating is tough when there are so many "craft" options now. The problem is compounded as I think the new players coming in are much better capitalized than the early adopters who bootstrapped to success. I think the days of the successful bootstrap distillery have passed. My DSP completed in August 2012. I worked at my business plan for a good two years before that, and had to start a farm to grow cane concurrently. We are only now approaching a positive cash flow. Marketing is also much more important than most startups know. I said to myself when I started that my marketing budget should be at least 5x my capital expenses in the first 3 years. Looking back, I would say that is accurate on the low end. It is so easy to buy shiny machines and cool equipment, but most distilleries have a "if I build it, they will come" mentality and those days are just over, in my opinion. Make something awesome and market the heck out of it. Put in the crazy hours, and forgo any salary for the foreseeable future. Only quit your day job if you can do this with no income. That is another big killer to distilleries. On a positive note, I truly believe all the work that went into starting my business will pay off well. If I had it to do over again, I would still do it, but I would do it much differently. I would say I started both undercapitalized and over-expensed. Don't do it that way
    2 likes
  49. It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about, but I finally got it, and that definitely helps. For everyone else, I've summarized a few things and included some links below: TTB F 5110.11 – Monthly Report of Storage Operations (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511011.pdf) Completed using proof gallons – Monthly, due by the 15th of the following month. http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/f511011/f511011_tutorial.html The purpose of completing TTB Form 5110.11 is to report storage account activity for a Beverage or Industrial Distilled Spirits Plant. This report is to be filed if the operation of warehouseman is shown on your permit and registration. If there is no activity during the month, you are required to file the report showing zeros. Send to: TTB National Revenue Center (Form 5110.11) 550 Main Street, Room 8002 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 TTB F 5100.28 – Monthly Report of Processing Operations (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511028.pdf) Completed using proof gallons - Monthly, due by the 15th of the following month. http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/f511028/f511028_tutorial.html Form 5110.28 must be filed if your plant conducts processing (rectifying), bottling, packaging or denaturing operations. You are required to file this report each month. If there is no activity during any months, you are required to file the report showing zeros. Send to: TTB National Revenue Center (Form 5110.28) 550 Main Street, Room 8002 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 TTB F 5110.40 – Monthly Report of Production Operations (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511040.pdf) Completed using proof gallons - Monthly, due by the 15th of the following month. http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/f511040/f511040_tutorial.html Form 5110.40 must be filed if distilling/production operations are shown on permit and on registration. You are required to file this report each month. If there is no activity during the month, you are required to file the report showing zeros. Send to: Director, National Revenue Center (Form 5110.40) 550 Main Street, Room 8002 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 TTB F 5110.43 – Monthly Report of Processing (Denaturing) Operations (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511043.pdf) Completed in wine gallons (regular US liquid gallons) - Monthly, due by the 15th of the following month. http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/f511043/f511043_tutorial.html Report in this section recovered denatured spirits and/or recovered articles users return to you for restoration or redenaturation. You may also report any denatured spirits or articles that you recover and/or either restore or redenatured. Send to: Director, National Revenue Center (Form 5110.43) 550 Main Street, Ste. 8002 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202-5215 TTB F 5000.24 – (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f500024.pdf) Completed for US$ amounts – Semi-Monthly returns are normally due no later than the 14th day after the last day of the return period. Except for the September periods the 16th-26th shall be filed no later than Sept. 29th. The period 27th-30thshall be filed no later than October 14th. (3 returns due in September) http://www.ttb.gov/forms/helpful_hints500024.shtml http://www.ttb.gov/forms/smartform-user-guide500024.pdf http://www.ttb.gov/expo/presentations-black/s10-bw.pdf Send to: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Excise Tax (F 5000.24) P O Box 790353 St. Louis, MO 63179-0353
    2 likes
  50. The advice above is good, get an engineer which will cost you some $ upfront but will save you $$$ later when your local Fire/Building Department evaluates your project. They won't be arguing with your engineer but they will with you. Buy the codes and read them. This is an overview and not all inclusive. An F1 occupancy allows for production of beverage grade alcohol of more than 18%. IFC table 307.1(1) limits a non-sprinklered F1 to 120 gallons of class IB-IC flammable liquids and class II combustible liquids at 120 gallons. Per table 2703.8.3.2 this limit is per control area. A control area is defined as a room with a 2hour fire rated wall and you can have multiple control areas per floor depending on construction and building type. Sprinklers increase the hour rating in a room/building and double this capacity limit, thus the 240 gallon. The barrel exemption per IFC chapter 27 - 2701.1-9 and IFC chapter 34 3402.1-10 is just that, so the rest of the chapter does not apply including height limitations, etc. Most spirits are bottled as Class II combustible liquids. Spirits stored in containers less than 1.3 gallons (5L) in storage are excluded from the volume limits per IFC chapter 27 - 2701.1-1 and IFC chapter 34 3402.1-2. Once packaged, the individual bottles should be stored in cases and placed on pallets by product type.
    2 likes