Charles@AEppelTreow

I got rid of all my glass in favor of SS kegs. Cornelious and Sankey. After having a 15 gal demijohn of pyment turn itself into shards while I was moving it. As a safety practice, sharing near misses is a good thing.

Yes, that is the product I'm referring to.

Visitors welcome. We are both a weekend and a seasonal operation. May-December. Appointments can be had Jan-April depending on schedule and weather. We are mostly a cidery. Fermentations in fall, bottling in spring are the busy times. Distilling is less scheduled. I answer questions that don't take too much time - my wife thinks I give away too much knowledge :-) Also, she's our distillatrix. I handle fermentation and paperwork.

I think you're expecting more consistency from the TTB than they can deliver. Bad approvals get through on a routine basis. But not so routine you can count on it. And complaining about other people's bad labels rarely gets anywhere unless you have a big enough voice - AND connections. Chuck Cowdery comes to mind. And even his success is limited. (Limited being infinitely greater than zero.) My current pet peeve is the 'Tennessee Cider' label. That uses a wine class and type (look it up in the Wine volume of the Beverage Alcohol Manual) on a non-wine product. You can't put Class/Type terms in a fanciful name - let alone across complete product types.

A bushel is 8 dry gallons. About 269 cu. in. vs. 231 cu in for a US wine gallon. The weight/bushel varies by commodity. The accepted values for apples even varies from US State to State based on tables for crop insurance. The range is 40-48 pounds avoirdupois, but 42 is common, and is close enough for this discussion. Don't get hung up on trying to estimate to precisely. For your interest, the USDA number for pears is 60#/bu. Cidermakers ferment without filtering all the time. It just takes nutrition management. Sulfide (mostly) comes from stressed yeast, not decomposing sediment. Some French and UK traditionalists, along with some white wine makers ferment ezymatically clarified must. But it's clarified by exploiting pectin chemistry along with flotation, centrifugation and just plain racking. Not filtration. And the purpose is to further deplete YAN (as asparagine) and niacin to try to stretch primary ferment to months duration, rather than days. Distillers tend to avoid the technique because it deliberately generates methanol. Copper sulfate is added in bad sulfide cases. Cupper sulfide precipitates out and settles to the bottom. But H2SO4 is generated, which oxides the cider.

3.78L/13 pounds of fruit is about 4 gal/bushel. Which is high yeild for a press, but not unheard of. I think it unlikely that pulp would make the fermenation stick, or make reduced sulfur. Depending on the source, apple juice can be down around 40-50 ppm YAN. Well below the 200ppm recommended by Scott labs for wine fermentations, let alone whatever is required by the yeast and temperature you happen to be using.

In cider, I find that following sparklloid with silica (keiselsol) gets it to settle a lot more compactly. I think the sparklloid's charge tends to keep it 'fluffy' and the silica cancels it out. That would be somewhat pH dependent.

No, I meant 80% = pg of all hearts / pg cider fermented. Collected over 5-10 runs. Less the last proof gallon or so in the tails that sit and wait for the next batch of cider. I've seen higher than 80%. (up to 95%) Rarely lower than 80%. I've checked the ABV of the stillage, since I assume that's where the loss is. But only with a quick ABV = f(SG, Brix) estimation. It's consistent - but not definitive. We collect tails down to 30-40 proof, indicated. Hearts are usually 140-145 pf. Tails are 70-90 pf, depending on just how far we let it run out.

I'm filing the production/strage/processing reports once a month. I only fill in values for line 5110.40.17b at the end of the quarter - to go with the inventory that's once a quarter. I leave it blank the other months. Maybe some day I'll get spanked for it - but it makes sense to me. I'm so small that I qualify for filing the excise tax quarterly. In the comments section I just note the removals for the three months of the quarter and tally them up. The winery is slightly simpler, in that I qualify for quarterly filing both Ops and Excise. So there is symmetry. I seem to recall from somewhere that when the TTB rolled out the quarterly filing for small wineries and breweries, that they said they'd like to offer it to the DSPs, too - but that the monthly ops reporting was written explicitly into the underlying law, and they didn't have the legal flexibility to change it.

Ethylene is an issue for apple storage. So is patulin - but the fermentation will sort that out. 1-methylcyclopropane will block the ethylene receptors and extend cold storage lifetimes - with several caveats. Likely not worth it for juice grade fruit. I press everything in season and send juice in 330 gal IBCs to a nearby commercial freezer. It's close enough to make it cheaper than renting a freezer-trailer, and means we don't have to make the mill winter-operable.

Nat, with regards to apples specifically, fermentation is going to consume most of the fresh fruit aroma. Cider aroma is driven largely (not entirely) by acetylation of fusel oils and certain apple derived higher alcohols (1,3 octanediol, to be specific). Most of the fresh apple aromas turn out to be butyl alcohols and ketones - and I _think_ (but haven't the evidence or research) that those are pretty much yeast-edible. This is in contrast to grapes, where a lot of the varietal character is in terpenes, which I don't believe the yeast metabolize outright. You can get yeast selections that are known to release glucose bound terpene storage molecules, for example. If you really wanted to goose the fresh aroma profile, I'd consider macerating the low wines in juice/pomace. My still was selected by budget contraints - not to try to perfectly match process and design to one product (out of about 5 that I make). Luckily, I like the end result.

I typically get an 80% (of potential alcohol) hearts yield, not counting the last tails collection that doesn't get recovered until the next batch.

Not quite accurate. Modern concentrates are done with a thin film evaporation technique. Quite cool. It's not supposed to carmelize - it certainly ferments below 1.000. But it does undergo Mallaird reactions. Those reduce the YAN - already low in apple. And they affect the color of the fermented cider - it's more yellow than using raw juice. But that's not important on the distilling side. It _can_ be lacking in volatiles. It's not _supposed_ to be. The volatiles are condensed out of the vapor stream and are supposed to be added back to the concentrate. But since those same volatiles are also available separately ('natural apple flavor') obviously it doesn't all make it back in. In the UK, concentration is used to time-shift demand for fermentation space and the big cider companies do pressing, concentration and fermentation in a combined facility. Then another feature of concentrate must be dealt with - it can be infected with osmotic pressure tolerant, sorbate resistant yeasts. Zygosaccharamyces - but pardon my spelling, since I'm doing this from memory. That means a 'hard' cider maker's is left with only thermal, in-bottle pasteurization as a stabilization option. Doesn't matter to distilling. Concentrate is cheaper than juice because it's coming from places where the price for raw juice is even lower than the $2-3/gal you can find here. But the days of $8/gal for 70 brix concentrate (considered 7x) from China (5 gal pail) are over. China has acquired a taste for apple juice, and it's raising the price of commodity apples. Not so high that the US can compete yet, of course. But the AJC you find these days is often from South Africa, rather than China. I haven't been able to source USA AJC in the last 10 years - the brokers I use can't/won't source it. Angry Orchard is pulling concentrate from Italy and Eastern Europe - and talking it up. <eye roll\> Marketing. <\eye roll> Other reasons to consider 'chaptalizing' with AJC to make an apple wine, rather than distilling a simple cider (or not) : fermenting into 12%+ ABV range shifts the solubilities in the wine phase. You get a different aromatic profile. And you _can_ keep aromas at high ABV - in fact you can get more due to those changing solubilities - but you have to mind which yeast you are using and watch temp and fermentation rate, lest you blow them all out of the tank via CO2 bubble stripping. Secondly, if you have a simple pot still, or very low rectification hybrid still, it may simply function (separate hearts from tails) better with a higher ABV. At least in the first pass.

A good rack and cloth press should bring that 15#/gal down to around 12#/gal. Maybe even 10#/gal, depending on the apples. The trade off is labor - rack and cloth is a bit higher pressing cost. And the $/lb for juice grade sort outs is a lot lower. As low as $0.07/lb. Up to about $0.25/lb for locally grown, small orchard, heirloom cultivars.

Grain Neutral Spirits aren't allowed in wine.

And yes - wineries have it easier. No prescribed forms (those I have seen hints of old, obsolete ones in the regs and other spots) Just document in 'commercial records' (like invoices) and sum up on the operations report. You are supposed to have a numer of material operations and inventory reports available, too - but it's all invoice backed, not TTB forms.

As long as you mean Grape Neutral Spirits :-) My take on the whole process would be: BW (lbs or wine gallons) Fruit received on 5120.17 IV.2 Fruit used on 5120.17 IV.5 Estimated wine in Fermenter at end of period on 5120.17 V II.1 Bulk Wine Produced on 5120.17 1A.2 Bulk Wine transferred in bond on 5120.17 1A.15 (wine gallons!) (alternate - bulk wine dumped to distilling material 5120.17 1A.16, DM gain on 5120.17 V I.2, DM transfer on 5120.17 V I.6 - i would do this if I were adding materials that are allowed for DM, but not wine, or were sending watered lees) (wine gallons!) DSP Wine received in DSP storage on 5110.11.2 (proof gallons - probably you should gauge it yourself) Wine dumped to production on 5110.11.18 (pg) Wine received for distilling on 5110.40 VI.9 (back to wine gallons, just to be confusing, and there's no on hand, or used, just received)) Spirits in production at end of quarter on 5110.40 I.17b (I use this just like 5120.17 V II.1) Spirits entered into storage on 5110.40 I.11 (With matching summaries in section IV) (I think you could transfer in bond from here - but I gauge into and out of the storage account, so I do it from there) (pg) Spirited received in storage on 5110.11.2 Spirits transferred to BW on 5110.11.14 BW Spirits received by BW on 5120.17 III.2 Spirits used for wine on 5120.17 III.5 Wine used for spirit addition on 5120.17 IA.19 (must already be in the 1A inventory, or have a matching line 2 production and priot V II In-fermentor) Wine produced by spirit addition on 5120.17 1A.4 Which takes you from fruit to bulk 14-21% wine. My way. But I have a database that does all the sums by line number, tax class and type, if needed.

Again, insert the 'I'm fallible' caveat here, but no DSP has ever sent me a 5100.16 - or its equivalent - for a transfer in bond of wine spirits. I don't send one from my DSP to my 'adjacent' BW, nor to the 1-2 other BW I've worked with. St. Julian always sent a 'Certificate of...' well, I can't remember what the last word was, but it had the type of spirits and their gauge. Other DSPs did not. I put the equivalent wording on the return invoice and initial it. I think it's easier than you are expecting it to be.

It really should be bulk, in bond both ways. (to the best of my knowledge) A DSP can't accept taxpaid bottled wine to distilled, and a BW can't use bottled, taxpaid wine for fortification. I think the lower and upper proof limits for wine spirits are set in the USC. They sure aren't obvious in the CFR - but I have seen them. The BW is also -supposed- to have the storage (including segregation and security) and use of wine spirits for fortification documented as part of their BW registration BEFORE they receive and use them. AND they need to have bond coverage for what's kept in storage - at the spirit rate. Not there is any way to remove them once they've been received other than use and destruction. That I can tell. i don't think they can sell them on and do another bonded transfer. I -believe- you can also transfer aldehyde containing spirits (I read that as heads) to a BW and thoise can be added to wine for re-fermentation. Yeast can eat the aldehydes. Haven't tried it myself. Brian - I report the volumes on the BW operation reports and the DSP storage and production reports. I do all the rest as 'commercial' records - invoices/BOL. I require the BW to include biz name, address, registration number, a statement that the wine is suitable for distilling into wine spirits (no disqualifying additions, records exist to support type/varietal or other claims, etc), volume and alcohol, package identifying marks, description of seals and an initial at each end that the seals are intact. I keep the records - but I don't -think- that the 5100.16 DSP-DSP transfer is applicable or required. I send the equivalent in reverse.

I transfer in bond both directions. Even when I've doing the transfer within corp. (eg BW-WI-66 to DSP-WI-15000 and back) BW Bulk wine (1A) to DSP storage to DSP production to DSP storage to BW wine spirits.

I wonder if that is more or less stable in an earthquake.

We had an FDA inspection earlier this year. Our first. This is in addition to the annual Dept. of Ag (& Trade & Consumer Protection in WI) inspection, which usually doubles up as a contracted FDA inspection. The inspectors all have personal peeves they concentrate on, and often there are special topic issues they seem to get orders to look for that change every year. The FDA inspection was a non-issue for us. I'd already prepped a recall plan using the state approved template (which I added to, as i thought it was incomplete - but the state insists on a certain structure). I officially have a complaints log in one of the site logbooks - never used. And have a general SIPOC (Sources, inputs, Processes, Outputs, Customers) flowchart that includes contact info for primary sources and customers - handy for the recall plan. I had also written up our material traceability and batch labeling procedures ahead of time. We do have wood in part of our fermentation area - it's always been a 'watch' issue. It could become a concern, but for now we'll just watch it (for mold growth). 'For now' is up to twelve years. The FDA inspector we had told me that previously they prioritized inspections by potential risk, which put wineries and distilleries at the bottom of the pile - and they never got to them. But the recent food safety 'improvement' laws mandate that they get out to EVERYONE - overriding their internal priorities. She said the biggest thing they are finding is that about half the businesses in their database are simply gone. No longer in operation.

Nat, I have a sneeking suspicion that high acid varieties are used for grapes to make the wine more stable in the time between when it becomes wine and when the distiller can get around to it. Calvados would be less heady if it were from a low pH cider. Look carefully at the esters being discussed. I think you'll find a lot of ethyl esters. I'm pretty sure that those can develop from suitable higher order alcohols and free fatty acids in the presense of ethyl alcohol - and that it is acid catalyzed. But recall that none of the fruit acid is going to make it into the distillate. You also get esterification from Acyl-CoA floating around during fermentation (if slow enough) and from pyruvate - also during fermentation. I've just started looking into fresh apple aroma chemistry. It is butyl alcohol and ketone dominated - other than some specific cultivar notes. I think - but am not sure yet - that yeast find those 'aromas' imminently edible. I think building a blend with aromatic apples is a good idea. You can always 'adjust' the pH with malic acid if you need some shelf life during distillation. The bigger hurdle is getting apple cultivar aroma through fermentation. I find that a higher alcohol level either helps stabilize it, or helps solublize it. If you've got a winery/distillery pair, it's right in the regs that you can transfer heads back to the winery and add them to fermentations. The yeast mop up a lot of aldehydes and acetates. It's a thought. (By the way Bartlett pear aroma looks like the ethyl ester of a mid-weight unsaturated free fatty acid to me. A lot of grape varietal characters are terpenes - which seem to be rare in apples.)

Hardy and southern might be antonyms. You could try the classic middle-colonial ones. Virginia-originated. Harrison. Hewes. Albemarle Pippin. Parmar. VA Winesap. I'd check with the folks at Vintage Virginia Apples about low-chill varieties.

There's little technical grade cider material out there, before you have to start reading academic papers. Don't quote the tittles on these - I'm pulling them from fallible memory. For some base material that's good, but not oriented to scale: Cider Hard and Sweet by Ben Watson, and there's a new cider book out by Claude Jolicoeur. I don't recall the title. Claude is a very good cidermaker - but I haven't read the book, so I don't know how his approach might scale. I _suspect_ it's not meant for an in-industry audience. For current science on cidermaking, Andrew Lea's chapter in Fermented Beverage Production (edited by Lea) is the top. The chapter on fermentation basics is really good, too. The chapter on sensory? Not as good. Another common text in the cidermaker's library is Techniques in Cidermaking by Warcollier, translated by Charley. It's dated, but is interesting reading. There are older classic texts out of Victorian England - but they provide more perspective than data. On the sensory side, I found Margalit's Concepts in Wine Chemistry to be very good. And Margalit's Winery Operations and Technology sits on the shelf at AEppelTreow. I think you'll find that cider is fundamentally wine - but at the margins in a number of ways. Nutritionally. Aroma diversity. It's basic parameters as a habitat for yeast. Managing yeast to get the most 'cideriness' out of apple juice takes an approach that UC Davis influenced winemakers are not used to thinking about.