bluestar

His final reply makes sense. Only if you take the gin product and distill it again is it a redistillation. How many times you distill to get a GNS as a source material should not matter.

You can also do a variation on this for really lower COGS, that I have seen employed by wineries: print off a large quantity of a colorful quality base label, and then use a black and white printer (lower ink cost, as well as cheaper machine) to print individual label with name, variety, vintage, etc. For some you can get black and white inks with a tint (sepia, for example) at little additional cost.

Cheaper, but only for short runs might be the Primera LX400 (there is also a cheaper B&W version LX200). About $1K from Amazon and many others.

I may be interested, what kind of still?

Could you provide us with an update on how you resolved you septic concerns?

Victor, can you let us know if the item was sold, and if not, would you be flexible on price?

What you heard from TTB is our understanding as well, except: we assumed we would be making a "distilled" gin, the only variation is that if we start from a GNS, that counts as the single source run, and we don't have to know how it was produced. It only becomes a "re-distilled" gin if we run the three distillations. Since GNS can come from various sources, including continuous operation, but that it is "pure" ethanol, we avoid the formulation issue. Can someone else confirm?

We are finishing up our business plan just now for southwest Michigan. I'll drop you an email and can share experience.

I note that the TTB Limited Ingredients list under Flavoring Substances and Adjuvants lists a number of additives where there are limits on specific chemicals. Specifically, I note that many items list they must be thujone free or safrole free. I was surprised, since I thought that the use of Wormwood for absinthe, for example, was allowed with a limited thujone content of 10mg/kg, I guess as effectively thujone free, but I can't find the reference for that. Specifically, I wonder if there is an equivalent reference for what constitutes safrole free, since I am interested in using sassafras leaves. Interestingly, the FDA specifically prohibits the inclusion of sassafras for the intended purpose of providing safrole or derivatives (they give the example of sassafras tea), but not for other purposes. I know that ground sassafras leaf is allowed by the FDA as file for gumbo thickening agent, but again can find no de minimus limit for safrole in that case either. Update: I did find the TTB industry circular 2007-5 that indicates the 10mg/kg for thujone is based on the current recognized limit of detectability of the FDA approved analytical method. Hence, if they ever change the method to allow greater sensitivity, the limit would be reduced. Industry circular 61-2 prohibits use of safrole, oil of sassafras, etc., but has no de minimus and does not specifically prevent use of sassafras leaf, for example. The best info I found was Compliance Matters 94-2, where it indicates these plant materials can be used, but the result must be safrole free, again no indication of sensitivity limit as is done for thujole. So, if anyone out there has gone forward to the extent of actually determining how the TTB handles the issue of safrole verus thujole, please let us know what you have learned.

First of all, the 3 foot clearance should not really be a problem, because you should have a 3 foot clearance around distilling apparatus anyway for general safety (egress, avoid confined space) and maintenance. By the way, you did not say which code. It doesn't sound like the electrical code, but the fire code. And the requirements may often be tied to other boundary conditions, such as the existence or lack of sprinklers, etc. If it is fire code, and you have potential issues, get an expert to assist you to determine the most practical and economical way to address the issue.

Premises, not building. Hence, the use of "secured" fences or walls to delineate the bar and/or brewery and/or winery premises from the distillery premises. The TTB will have to evaluate your method of separation of premises in a common building to determine if it meets the requirement. You show you have both physical barriers and administrative rules that maintain this separation. They can inspect you at any time to determine if you continue to meet the requirement. An example of administrative rules would be how you handle tax issues as product moves from the premises of the distillery to the premises of the brewery.

Who drinks a Vesper with Tanqueray? Not Bond. Panel idea is fine, it should just have been balanced: included both corporate large distillers AND artisan distillers.

It would not be unreasonable to have part of the forum public and part private, but is there a need to distinguish between a "private" part for those who are full ADI members versus those who meet the professional criteria previously mentioned, but not ADI members?

David, who certifies a distillery as organic?

Look in BAM, Vol. 2 page 4-7. Grappa appears to simply be categorized as a Pomace or Marc Brandy made from grapes. Pomace or Marc Brandy is described as "Brandy distilled from the skin and pulp of sound, ripe fruit after the withdrawal of the juice or wine". Note that if the fruit is NOT grape, you have to indicate the fruit for a Pomace or Marc Brandy. Hence, the terms Pomace Brandy, Marc Brandy, Grappa, and Grappa Brandy all appear to mean the same thing in BAM. Two other relevant categories perhaps are Lees Brandy and Residue Brandy. None of them really address the idea of adding back juice or mixing juice to pomace, lees, or residue--they all appear to refer only to material from which juice has been removed. Interestingly, the category of Brandy limits how much lees, pomace, or residue or its brandy may be added to the product to still be called only Brandy. This leaves us with the question, what do you call something that has a higher mixture of pomace, lees, or residues? Does that move it into the Pomace, Lees, Residues Brandy category, and hence suggests that these can be diluted to the same limits? Or is it a no-mans land?

Two of our potential sites have similar issue, although one was a food processing site and had an enlarged septic system for the purpose. I know permits are required (we are in MI) based on your specific projected output. Would be very interested in what you learn; perhaps you can forward what is not posted here. Thanks.

Which unit do you end up getting?

Thanks, that is all helpful to know. In fact, my objective would be to make a vodka. I would assume it would be straightforward if made from beet sugar, but I was wondering if it made any sense to distill from some intermediate product directly instead of from the fully refined sugar, more to control or reduce cost and total energy consumption.

For the former, I was unsure if there was any limitation on the mash type, and for the latter if the source distillate had any limitations. But agreed, I don't see anything in the BAM that indicates the source of the mash or distilled spirits, unless you do a "compounded gin", and that is probably the source of my confusion.

I think if you want to call it a gin, you have to start with a neutral spirit (vodka), as well as have the predominant juniper flavoring. Check the definition with the TTB. Of course, you can always make a flavored spirit with the character of gin from any spirit, such as an eau du vie. If the neutral spirit is required, you won't be able to do that with a 3 plate system. But you could get neutral spirit from another source, and redistill in your facility to produce the gin. Someone correct me if I am wrong (in part because we are specifically also trying to set up our facility to do both eau du vie and gin, along the lines I have described).

Has any one distilled from the fermentation of sugars converted from sugar beets? If so, we would very much be interested to learn about your experience.

Mike, if you are using the Vendome for grappa production, please get in touch with me about your experience. We are planning distillation from pomace, and are considering Vendome in addition to Carl and Kothe. We will work with local wineries for pomace, if we can work out logistics of transfer, etc. Best for the New Year, Derrick (Blue Star).

I agree, take a course, and I would also recommend the MSU course.

Luke, congratulations on making the start! We are still scouting location and finishing business plan. Agree the MSU course was very good. Did you take this past spring? If so, then I think we may have met. I am a Cornell Engineering Physics grad too (BS '78)! Very interested in how you are getting along. We are going to start with a gin and a grappa, but are generally interested in eau du vie, and have talked with a local orchard about co-branding and working with them on an apple spirit. Did you end up getting the 30 gallon Vendromme? Good luck!!! Derrick.