Blending Bourbon From Different DSP's

[Wes Henderson]

Looking for some guidance on blending of Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey from more than one DSP...

Is this permissable, and still be called KSBW, or must there be some reference to a blend? All of the bourbon is produced in Kentucky.

Lincoln seems to think that there is some sort of regulatory hurdle with this, but neither of us can find any prohibition in the regulations, and I am in the camp that thinks you can still call the product KSBW as long as it ALL comes from DSP's located in KY.

Would appreciate some help! Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

Wes

[will]

Presuming you're using 2yo or older, you're in the "straight" group.

From 5.22( b )(1)(iii) '"Straight whisky" includes mixtures of straight whiskies of the same type produced in the same State.'

My ship to address will be available as soon as your product is available ;o)

Good luck,

Will

[Wes Henderson]

Presuming you're using 2yo or older, you're in the "straight" group.

From 5.22( b )(1)(iii) '"Straight whisky" includes mixtures of straight whiskies of the same type produced in the same State.'

My ship to address will be available as soon as your product is available ;o)

Good luck,

Will

Thanks for your input Will. I am working on an additional expression of Angel's Envy, and have come across some barrels I want to use, but will need to do some blending. Both are 4+ year Kentucky Straight Bourbon's from different DSP's, owned by different companies.

People are all over the place on this question....

wh

[Paul Tomaszewski]

For reference only, I would suggest that you and anyone in a similar case be sure to take into account any state regs (especially when we're talking about KY) that may affect your situation. In your case, you should have no issues. However, just for reference that KY requires that any whiskey (other than corn whiskey) made within the state be aged AT LEAST one year and one day in order to use the reference "Kentucky" or any other insinuation of Kentucky origin UNLESS the statement is contained within the federal production statement (ie distilled & bottled by xyz distillery, Louisville, KY). If you want to check any of this out, just lookup "Kentucky revised statutes" online and go to the alcohol chapters (240 and on).

[Wes Henderson]

Presuming you're using 2yo or older, you're in the "straight" group.

From 5.22( b )(1)(iii) '"Straight whisky" includes mixtures of straight whiskies of the same type produced in the same State.'

My ship to address will be available as soon as your product is available ;o)

Good luck,

Will

BTW, I love your avatar picture. Saw Jeff Dunham in Louisville a few months ago, and Walter was by far the funniest.

wh

[Denver Distiller]

Looking for some guidance on blending of Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey from more than one DSP...

Is this permissable, and still be called KSBW, or must there be some reference to a blend? All of the bourbon is produced in Kentucky.

Lincoln seems to think that there is some sort of regulatory hurdle with this, but neither of us can find any prohibition in the regulations, and I am in the camp that thinks you can still call the product KSBW as long as it ALL comes from DSP's located in KY.

Would appreciate some help! Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

Wes

No, you don't have to reference a blend. You can reference a blend if you choose to do so. The functional phrase for the SOI for Bourbon Whiskey ends "and also includes mixtures of such whiskies of the same type." So long as the Bourbons conform to the SOI for Bourbon Whiskey, you're good. You don't even need to submit a formula. A Formula (TTB F 5110.38 ) will clear the decks, and ensure legality if you don't mind waiting 30 days before submitting your label.

I've noticed that even among the big whiskey producers, there's quite a bit of misinformation regarding whiskey labeling and specifically age statements. Half of what people quote as gospel simply doesn't appear in the CFR's anywhere.

A very Happy Thanksgiving to you, too!

[will]

No, you don't have to reference a blend. You can reference a blend if you choose to do so. The functional phrase for the SOI for Bourbon Whiskey ends "and also includes mixtures of such whiskies of the same type." So long as the Bourbons conform to the SOI for Bourbon Whiskey, you're good. You don't even need to submit a formula. A Formula (TTB F 5110.38 ) will clear the decks, and ensure legality if you don't mind waiting 30 days before submitting your label.

I've noticed that even among the big whiskey producers, there's quite a bit of misinformation regarding whiskey labeling and specifically age statements. Half of what people quote as gospel simply doesn't appear in the CFR's anywhere.

A very Happy Thanksgiving to you, too!

IMHO, it is not permissible to name a product a lesser type when it conforms to a greater type. I would stop right here on a normal day, but this is not a normal day...so permit me to burn the candle and argue my case.

When we see the words "shall be" the thing proclaimed is not optional. ...shall be designated as "straight" 5.22(b )(1)(iii)

In 5.22(b )(4) we see ...not less than 51 percent...shall be further designated...

because we see "shall be" we know that it is not optional to elevate the naming to the greater specificity of "blended ___ whisky" even though the product also meets the definition of the lesser "blended whisky."

(5) covers straight blends and it's very clear in all three sections that this type is available only to blends that do not conform to the SoI for straight whisky, i.e. different states, mixed types, one or more components from a mash not 51% of one type...

Check (5)(iii) more carefully. The second half is especially interesting: a blend of a single type (rye) which is from a single state can not be called "blended straight rye" because it already meets the definition for "straight rye" - you can call it "blended straight rye" but only if it includes harmless CFB...

Okay, now it's time for a drink containing caffeine and alcohol...

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Will

[will]

BTW, I love your avatar picture. Saw Jeff Dunham in Louisville a few months ago, and Walter was by far the funniest.

wh

Have you noticed that Walter is the spittin' image of our current Vice President? Beady little eyes and all. That cracks me up!

Tell your dad I said HI, and that we'll raise a glass to the two of you tomorrow as we give thanks for our good friends.

[Wes Henderson]

Have you noticed that Walter is the spittin' image of our current Vice President? Beady little eyes and all. That cracks me up!

Tell your dad I said HI, and that we'll raise a glass to the two of you tomorrow as we give thanks for our good friends.

Thanks....and Cheers!

[Denver Distiller]

IMHO, it is not permissible to name a product a lesser type when it conforms to a greater type. I would stop right here on a normal day, but this is not a normal day...so permit me to burn the candle and argue my case.

Good stuff, Will. I should have been more clear. When I said "you can reference a blend if you choose to do so", I meant that you can discuss it on the label or card, without listing it as the Class or Type. This is how they allow you to use the word Absinthe on a label, without Absinthe being a spirits type in the SOI. If you try and put the word "Absinthe" in the "Class or Type" section, the COLA will be rejected. Doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense, but there it is. I've found over a decade plus of screwing around with COLA's that they rarely keep you from telling the consumer what's in the bottle (the only exception I've ever come across is the description of the coloring herbs I use for my absinthe). So if Mr. Henderson wishes to state that his Straight Kentucky Bourbon was produced by blending several Straight KY Bourbons together, I doubt that they'll deny the COLA. This is my opinion, and take it for what that's worth.

And respectfully, I have COLAs for a couple of whiskies, and the formulas that the COLA's link to are for are single barrels that are between 6 months and 4 years of age in new char. The TTB didn't require the use of the word Straight or BIB, or require me to limit the age to under 2 years. I registered the formulas to ensure legality.

Have a Happy Turkey day, Will!

[delaware_phoenix]

Now this is interesting.

My limited experience says that TTB seems to be a little flexible in their interpretation of the SOI so long as the identify of the spirit isn't compromised. In the old days, no one (a distiller) would want to name their spirit generic Whiskey when they could call it by a more specific name, e.g. Rye whiskey, if that was appropriate.

According to 27 CFR 5.C §5.22 to be identified as whiskey it has to touch oak. But there's a number of so-called white whiskies now on the market and I feel confident that these have never seen oak in their short life between the still head and the bottle. I have an approved formula that specifically says it's class an type is "Whiskey" and it'll be stored in stainless steel containers.

Todd, I don't know how I did it, but I listed the seven herbs used in my absinthe right on the front of the bottle. There wasn't a problem with that. But I did have to battle (well educate really) AFLD over whether that should be labelled artificially colored.

I'm sure you have really good reasons for your whiskey identity Todd, but by simply stating the whiskey is anywhere from 6 months to 4 years less one day old, the citizen purchasing your product won't know from one time to another what they're getting, except they know it's "young" relative to the more aged products from the large producers. I hope that works for you, though maybe I misunderstand what you're doing.

[Denver Distiller]

Todd, I don't know how I did it, but I listed the seven herbs used in my absinthe right on the front of the bottle. There wasn't a problem with that. But I did have to battle (well educate really) AFLD over whether that should be labelled artificially colored.

I'm sure you have really good reasons for your whiskey identity Todd, but by simply stating the whiskey is anywhere from 6 months to 4 years less one day old, the citizen purchasing your product won't know from one time to another what they're getting, except they know it's "young" relative to the more aged products from the large producers. I hope that works for you, though maybe I misunderstand what you're doing.

With my Absinthe, I think that the issue was that the TTB specialist was kicking the approval up to some of the TTB brass as we started the process the within a short time of hearing it was legal. I think that they were oversensitive in that time frame. We all need to remember that we're going to get different answers from different specialists. There's a heck of a lot of leeway in those CFR's.

The reason that I sent in Formulas and COLA's that had approval for such a wide swath of time in the barrel was that I wanted to cover my bases. I wasn't sure as to when I'd bottle the whiskies since I was doing some new things (no humidification here in the dry Denver climate, low entry proof, etc.), and I wasn't sure at the time that I sent in the Formulas as to exactly when I'd be bottling the whiskies. Now that I know, I will be bottling each label after sitting in the barrel for, relatively speaking, about the same time. Make sense? I won't be bottling a 8 month and a 3 year under the same label. They'll all be around a year old for one of the whiskies. Sometimes more, sometimes less. And they're all single barrel expressions, so blending isn't an option. Happy Thanksgiving, Cheryl!

[Wes Henderson]

Great information, and as always, I am appreciative of my ADI friends.

[delaware_phoenix]

Thanks for the info Todd. I wasn't a producer when absinthe's status was clarified but remember that it seemed like a lot of COLAs were submitted but not much being approved. I think TTB was waiting for the mass hallucinations and decadence. When that didn't happen, then they could lighten up.

[cowdery]

This thread has drifted way off subject but back to the original question posed by Wes, it seems clear and unambiguous that a mixture of several different whiskeys of the same type is not a blend, as the SOI is explicit that the definition of 'Straight Whiskey' includes "mixtures of straight whiskies of the same type produced in the same State." (Emphasis mine.) That being the case and the state being Kentucky, a mixture of made-in-Kentucky straight bourbons made by different companies at different distilleries is still "Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey."