New rye whiskeys

[cowdery]

What you have described in your first paragraph is exactly what Heaven Hill is doing with Rittenhouse but they are interpreting "produced" to mean "distilled," are using the word "distilled" on their label, and are identifying DSP 354 -- the distillery -- as the point of production. Looking at how someone actually does something is often a pretty good way of getting a feel for what the regulators are requiring.

The thing is, there are so few BIBs that it seldom comes up.

We have no examples of the alternate interpretation you describe. Regulations are always subject to different interpretations. The word "vegetable" can be interpreted as describing catsup (famous Reagan-era ruling). But all the evidence we have says we're supposed to expect a bottled-in-bond label to tell us the DSP of the plant where the whiskey was distilled, not where it was entered into barrels.

[Gillman]

I think you are probably right and perhaps the subsisting cases you have mentioned stating a DSP which is not apparently the distilling entity can be explained by using up of old label stock, a practice which may have been approved administratively by the regulator. However Mike mentioned that case some years ago he was familar with where an apparent purchase of bulk goods entered and aged at a distillery's warehouse was considered DSP goods of the receiving distillery. I think in other words what may have happened is it was - and still is - possible to argue the full validity of this alternate reading but perhaps under guidance from regulators or because of an emerging industry consensus people will move to a uniform way of doing it. It doesn't mean the apparent non-conforming labels and this older practice are non-conforming, there is an argument I think that they were and are valid but perhaps to avoid an issue being raised the companies are moving to identify the actual distilling entity on the label where the goods were produced under contract or bought in bulk.

Gary

[shoshani]

What you have described in your first paragraph is exactly what Heaven Hill is doing with Rittenhouse but they are interpreting "produced" to mean "distilled," are using the word "distilled" on their label, and are identifying DSP 354 -- the distillery -- as the point of production. Looking at how someone actually does something is often a pretty good way of getting a feel for what the regulators are requiring.

See, that's the wording on my bottle of now-perhaps-erroneously-labeled Rittenhouse...it says "distilled" by DSP31, not produced. (The code on the back label is L1615 - if anyone knows HH's coding system, it would tell me when it was bottled, which should be four and no more than six years after distillation, which would then make it clear whether it was made in Bardstown or at Early Times.)

By contrast, I've seen BIB Old Taylor bottlings from around 1980 that state on the back of the bottle "Distlled by The Old Taylor Distillery Company DSP Ky. 19 / Distributed by National Distillers Products Co. / Bottled at DSP Ky. 14". I'm assuming that DSP 14 was either Crow or Grand-Dad.

[barturtle]

See, that's the wording on my bottle of now-perhaps-erroneously-labeled Rittenhouse...it says "distilled" by DSP31, not produced. (The code on the back label is L1615 - if anyone knows HH's coding system, it would tell me when it was bottled, which should be four and no more than six years after distillation, which would then make it clear whether it was made in Bardstown or at Early Times.)

June 9, 2005.

[boone]

June 9, 2005.

Not necessarily so...

It could be 1995. You have to compare the bottom bottle date with the julian. Another good indicator of a older experssion would be the label...it's different.

[cowdery]

However Mike mentioned that case some years ago he was familar with where an apparent purchase of bulk goods entered and aged at a distillery's warehouse was considered DSP goods of the receiving distillery.

No reference was made in Mike's account to labeling for BIB purposes.

[Gillman]

That is what I thought he meant or implied since he indicated in a thread called "What Is Bonded Exactly?" that bulk whiskey tanked to a distillery for entering and aging would be given the DSP number of the receiving distillery or plant. If it was given that number, I thought he was saying he understood that number could therefore appear on bottles of its bonded whiskey as being the plant or registered distillery where it was produced. Maybe I misread him, Mike, can you clarify?

Gary

[barturtle]

Not necessarily so...

It could be 1995. You have to compare the bottom bottle date with the julian. Another good indicator of a older experssion would be the label...it's different.

This is true, I used your own code breaker to give this date. I simply assumed he had the current-style front label.

[shoshani]

This is true, I used your own code breaker to give this date. I simply assumed he had the current-style front label.

I'm almost positive that I do. Dark brown label, "Rittenhouse" is in a straight line in serif type; the R and E are larger and the tail of the R connects to the bottom line of the E by a wavy line that also hits the bottom of N, H, and O. A barrel on its side has "Straight RYE Whisky" on its end, with Rye in huge cursive script while "straight" and "whisky" (no e, by the way) in sans-serif caps.

I assume that's enough detail to pinpoint the label. However, the code on the bottom of the bottle (thanks, Bettye Jo, I didn't think to check THAT) is

03 11 091 5 2337

At this point I'm basically trying to determine when the contents were distilled, which at a 2005 bottling I would assume would be 2001. (For reasons way too complex to get into here, but I'll be asked about anyway , I avoid HH products distilled before 1996 or so. Don't take it personally, blame my religion...)