Silk City Distillers

Second vote for just splash filling.

I would imagine your local government would be more concerned about 50 feet than the TTB would, especially if the residential properties exist on separate legal parcels of land.  The TTB would have absolutely nothing to say about sprinklers.  We are on the edge of an industrial zone, backing a residential street (houses are across the street from the rear of the property) and directly adjacent to a residential home.  There might be 5 or 6 residential properties that are in the 50 foot radius from the edge of the property.

Very cold condenser feed water amplifies the situation that @PeteB mentioned.

Wonder if some of these not-typically-fermented fruits can be processed in a different manner.

First - steam distillation of the fruit pulp to extract the volatile flavor components - or solvent extraction with ethanol/vacuum distillation.

Second - fermentation of the remaining fruit pulp and a second distillation to yield alcohol.

Combine.

In my own trials, it almost seems like the fermentation process "blows-off" a lot of the characteristic volatile of the fruit, especially the more delicate aromas.

Pineapple aroma is significantly more complex than ethyl butyrate.  In fact, there are many more butyric acid esters that create the pineapple aroma, Ethyl Butyrate alone is at best, "similar to pineapple".  Problem is, I suspect most of these will stack up in the heads.  Post-fermentation, you have a significant number of negative volatiles that make it impossible to remove the esters you want.

So why not strip them off first?

I mention because I got hit with that once too - there was some water main break and after it was repaired they really went crazy with the chlorine.  I didn't notice it mashing, but filling up a coffee pot.  Was so bad I couldn't even make the coffee, that was a bad day.

The key is to accept their concern as valid, and communicate this, but show how it would not apply given your scale.

To wholesale dismiss a concern as not real, that's asking for a problem.

Find the ethanol loss estimates of the big rickhouses where this is a problem, and compare that to what your annual production is.  People are smart, they'll see the amount of ethanol loss to create a problem is orders of magnitude greater than is being discussed.

Average gas station would probably spill more E85 fuel than you would lose distillate in a year.  If it's not a problem around gas stations, I fail to see why it would be a problem at your facility.

The amount of ethanol lost to evaporation in the massive rickhouses is probably more than you will sell as product in a year.

Slight tweak - bring your wash to a boil after conversion, and ferment in your mash-tun.  It should be relatively sterile from the boil (or near boil).  This will eliminate any unnecessary contact with potential infection sources.

But, I still think that there is some external issue at play here.

What's your water situation like?  Normally, it wouldn't come up, but in this case, you've appeared to exhaust every option.

I suspect that infection is secondary here, it's not the primary issue.  It's opportunistic infection because the yeast are not fermenting quick enough.  You changed the yeast, the fermentation stock, the nutrients.  So what else, but the water?

The fact that you are going 3 days to get to 50% attenuation is the key here.  Infections aren't going to impact that unless we're talking about low nutrient sugar washes.  An all grain wash isn't going to stall at the halfway point due to infection.

An easy way to rule out microbiological impact from your water is to boil your wash after conversion.  Yeah, I know it's a headache.  But what do you have to lose?  At the same time, you might want to send your water out for testing.

Something like fungicide, high iron, high temporary chlorine might cause major issues for yeast, causing them to stall and be out-competed by opportunistic microbes.

I mean, I purposely infect batches with high loads of lactobacillus with zero issues achieving final gravities below 1.000 and no impact to fermentation time.  Yeast still have nearly zero issues competing.  Talking about dumping in 5 gallon starters of bacteria here, not just allowing some bacteria to settle in from the air.

I don't buy it, the infection is a symptom, not the cause.

Angelica and Bergamot (in higher quantities) are used as well.

Bergamot is especially interesting, because citrus aromas tend to be fleeting, but bergamot can act as a fixative (other citrus do not).  It's likely the reason that Bergamot is used in lieu of other citrus in many aromatic products.  Think Earl Grey Tea.

Fixatives

Ironically, White Labs recommends 71B, which according to the Scott Labs piece, has one of the worst fructose utilizations...

https://www.whitelabs.com/sites/default/files/Tequila_Trifol_chart.pdf

Maybe it's splitting hairs, but EC1118 should have a slight edge over V1116 based on this:

http://www.scottlab.com/uploads/documents/The Fermentation of Fructose in Winemaking.pdf

Distillamax LS is EC1118 - same thing.

1.5 grams/liter of sugar is (roughly) the lower limit of perceptible sweetness.  The type of sugar, mind you, will impact this - fructose being "sweeter" than glucose.  Even at 1.5g/l, there is a significant difference in perception of smoothness and mouthfeel.  I think @paulNL is spot on, you are being compared against vodkas that contain sugar.

 There is a very interesting thread on rum and sugar on one of the Rum enthusiast forums:

http://rumproject.com/rumforum/viewtopic.php?t=1134&sid=edd5d97794d404680b226b919ea9b950

Also, fast proofing will negatively impact mouthfeel and flavor and it will take a few weeks to recover.  This last part is entirely subjective.  But try it yourself, proof down a small amount by pouring the two quantities together in a glass (use cold water to amplify this), mix for a minute or two, and sip.  Result is thinner and sharp.  Cover it, let it sit for a few days, try it again.  I could be making this all up, since there isn't much in the journal literature on this.

And in the photographs (from Distillery Trail), you can clearly see the steam gear on the left side here - steam feed, trap, etc.  So given a liquid feed, and active heating, while you might think it works like a thumper, it doesn't.  (The comments in the article about the doubler being 500g are incorrect, it appears to be 250 gallons or so, and the prints confirm that).

I've seen similar Vendome continuous schematics with the doubler.

For anyone with deep batch distillation experience, it's incredibly confusing, because at first glance, your impression should be that it couldn't work at all.  I too saw these and thought to myself that they had to be running the doubler as a batch still.

There's actually one schematic that's floated around a while, from Michters.  It can't possibly be running the doubler as continuous, as there would be absolutely no mechanism for a cut to be drawn.

Talk to Journeyman, their Silver Cross whiskey has a charitable aspect to it.

I mean, if I ran a well known charity, and someone went rogue to do this (essentially attempting to ride the marketing coattails of my charity), I would have them served with a cease and desist immediately, probably follow it up with an IP lawsuit, and force a recall.  If I was having a really bad day, I might even tell the press I think you are stealing the money.

If I was in your situation, I would ink an agreement with the charity.  It would be a mutual agreement whereby they provide you with approval to use their logos, , trademarks, or otherwise, on your labels in exchange for the donation.   The agreement should lay out the business terms both sides agree to, what is permitted or not permitted, what the termination clauses are for both sides, the term of the agreement, the actual label to be used, the mechanism to validate the accuracy of the contribution, etc etc.

Not that you would, but you shouldn't just use their logos and execute the program without their approval.

Empty ones?  Sure.

The basis for the question is serving cocktails in the tasting room.  How does one make a Manhattan, if you can only sell your own products?

At first you might go down the path of making a vermouth-like spirit, like @bluestar mentions, or perhaps just skip that entirely and bottle the cocktail, for sale in the tasting room.

What are the US TTB implications of this?  

Technically this would not be considered distillation, correct?

In case it's not obvious, the siphon needs to be installed vertically pointing upwards.  The tubing is primed with water before you mount the gauge.  The water acts as a buffer between the steam and the gauge, preventing hot steam from hitting the gauge.  Instead, the steam pushes on the water, and the water pushes on the air pocket above the water.

If you want to maintain your back mount gauge and come straight out, you need a coil siphon like this.  This one is installed horizontally.

With any steam gauge, it's good practice to use a steam siphon (pigtail) to protect the gauge from high temperature.  It's cheap insurance.

However, if you are center back, you may need something like a 270 degree pigtail, and instead use a bottom input gauge.

Primarily the table in the BAM, Chapter 7.

HCFBM Allowed - Yes, May Exceed 2.5%, as well as the Qualification notes.