BOTM 7/10: Rittenhouse Rye BIB

Our friends at Heaven Hill would like everyone to know that they have been distilling all of their rye whiskey at Bernheim for almost two years now, which means that for the next two years or so Rittenhouse Rye will be Brown-Forman's distillate but after that it will be all Bernheim.

Heaven Hill has always aged it, but Brown-Forman distilled it. Bernheim didn't have enough capacity. They fixed that.

Currently they are mashing rye one day a month. That may not sound like much, but not long ago it was three or four days a year, so twelve days a year is a huge production bump.

They are aware that Rittenhouse Rye BIB is in very short supply but are happy to report that nearly 1,000 barrels of the stuff will come of age in October, so it should be much easier to find after that.

In that case, I would like nothing better than to get ahold of some rittenhouse here in a couple of years and run a re-barreling experiment on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cowdery

Our friends at Heaven Hill would like everyone to know that they have been distilling all of their rye whiskey at Bernheim for almost two years now, which means that for the next two years or so Rittenhouse Rye will be Brown-Forman's distillate but after that it will be all Bernheim.

---

That is very interesting. So around 2012 the Rittenhouse made at Early Times becomes a "dusty". I know a bunch of people are saying to themselves -save an older bottle to compare.

Well the month is nearly over so I'll put in my two cents worth. I like it. It's great for mixing - I'm having it right now in a tall glass of ginger ale. And at under $20, there's no reason not to keep a bottle on hand at all times.

The back label says, "Distilled by D.S.P. KY 354 and bottled by Continental Distilling Co. Bardstown, KY." I know that 354 is Brown-Forman's in Louisville. Why no DSP number for the bottling location? I thought that was required for BIBs, as per section 5.36, paragraph (a)(5):

Quote:

---

(5) In addition to the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this paragraph, the labels of bottled in bond spirits shall bear the real name of the distillery or the trade name under which the distillery produced and warehoused the spirits, the number of the plant in which produced and the number of the plant in which bottled.

---

Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matthew0715

...Why no DSP number for the bottling location? I thought that was required for BIBs...

---

We've found many instances where producers would "use up old labels" after the info was no longer completely correct. Also, in this age of computer inventory control (no longer the "key man") listing DSPs is a pretty quaint mannerism that matters a lot more to enthusiasts than to producers or the TTB.

It was brought to the attention of Heaven Hill (posts 50-56) that HH shouldn't be using the DSP 31 on the back label once it was being filled with Early Times juice. Once alerted, they changed the "31" to "354." I imagine it didn't occur to anyone to add more text about the bottling location having a different DSP than the distillation site at that time.

Ironically, if Mike Veach's reading of the regulations concerning DSPs is correct, it may have never needed changing to 354. I believe he maintains that a producer may opt to call out the "produced at" DSP as the site where the barrels were either filled or stored, not necessarily where the still was located. Perhaps he'll elaborate further.

Roger

PS - One fuzzy half-memory I have is that the last bonded version of Old Forester before going to the non-bonded "Signature" version didn't list any DSPs. Could someone check their bottle to verify/disprove?

The issue is that the rules say, "produced and warehoused," and don't say what happens if the spirits are distilled and warehoused under two different DSPs. One interpretation would be that the producer may use either DSP.

I give Heaven Hill credit for using DSP-354 on the Rittenhouse labels instead of trying to squeeze through a bureaucratic loophole. To the extent the consumer understands the BIB rules, they expect the label to tell them where distilled. Actually, for enthusia

Unlike almost every other BOTM (ROTM?) I managed to drink this one in July, albeit as part of a batch of Sazeracs (that I made in front of my wife's friend before learning her husband was a bartender -- perhaps not as impressive after all...)

I still have 2 open bottles -- a delicious one from 2005 and Pine-Sol from 2008, both DSP-354. Not likely to reload again until the Bernheim comes online.

The issue is that the rules say, "produced and warehoused," and don't say what happens if the spirits are distilled and warehoused under two different DSPs. One interpretation would be that the producer may use either DSP.

I give Heaven Hill credit for using DSP-354 on the Rittenhouse labels instead of trying to squeeze through a bureaucratic loophole. To the extent the consumer understands the BIB rules they expect the label to tell them where the spirit was distilled. Actually, for enthusiasts the useful information would be where distilled and, if different, where warehoused. We don't care where it was bottled.

The original reason for this requirement was probably so that all the agency needed was a bottle to know who bore responsibility for the product inside it. Modern look-up capabilities make this, as Roger says, quaint.

And there's no operating distillery at Heaven Hill in Bardstown; there's just a still-pretty burned out brick Art Deco building, so calling it DSP-KY 31 could be tricky.

I'm still disappointed that Beam can use the same DSP number for both the Claremont and Boston plants.

The DSP number doesn't just apply to distilleries. Non-distiller producers have licensed premises too. For Heaven Hill, DSP-31 covers the warehouses, bottling house, and cistern room in Bardstown.