TTB Failure

[wadewood]

Ran across of another incidence where the TTB seems to not even understand the laws they are their to enforce.

http://redwhiteandbourbon.com/2014/02/17/montanas-whistling-andy-bourbon/

Whistling Andy is a craft distilled grain to glass straight bourbon made in Montana. It's 3 years old, but under 4. They submitted and a label was approved by the TTB to be labeled as a Straight bourbon with no age statement.

27 CFR 5 rules are very clear that to be called Straight Bourbon and under 4 years old, one must include age statement.

Edited February 25, 2014 by wadewood

[TunnelTiger]

Unfortunately it is the federal government and enforcing or not enforcing anything vary from year to year and from dept to dept

"it is what it is"

[suntour]

oh my god do not let the NDPs see this.

[393foureyedfox]

3 year old 80 proof for $38?

that usually falls into the sub $10 category around here.

[sutton]

Wow. If the TTB can't even get something this simple right, what good is something like the Bottled-in-Bond Act? If they aren't even doing the basics in consumer protection, are we just a couple of steps away from going back to the days of the rectifiers and additives? I know most don't read the label, but that isn't the point. If no one thinks Uncle Sam is watching beyond just getting his tax revenue, what's to stop anyone from putting anything they want in the bottle again?

If they majors self-comply out of good business practice, then I have a budget reduction suggestion for the U.S. Gov't ....

[Richnimrod]

Wow. If the TTB can't even get something this simple right, what good is something like the Bottled-in-Bond Act? If they aren't even doing the basics in consumer protection, are we just a couple of steps away from going back to the days of the rectifiers and additives? I know most don't read the label, but that isn't the point. If no one thinks Uncle Sam is watching beyond just getting his tax revenue, what's to stop anyone from putting anything they want in the bottle again?

If they majors self-comply out of good business practice, then I have a budget reduction suggestion for the U.S. Gov't ....

[Harry in WashDC]

Hhhhm. I just went to ttb.gov and pulled up the Whistling Andy label application (TTB ID 13203001000518). It was filed 7/22/2013 and approved 9/03/2013. The "TYPE" of application is marked as "CERTIFICATE OF LABEL APPROVAL". No place on the form requires the applicant to state, certify, or otherwise prove that whatever is going in the bottle meets statutory or regulatory req'ts applicable to the spirit "CLASS/TYPE DESCRIPTION" appearing on the label.

In other words, I'm wondering if the office approving this app is only approving the artwork, so to speak, meaning that some other Dpt. of Treas/Internal Rev/ATF is supposed to make sure that what goes in meets the definition of the spirit on the label.

I'm curious enough to keep poking - used to do this kind of poking for a living. Let's see if I can still poke. I'll let you know what I find.

[suntour]

I was thinking the same thing Harry. Label approval and enforcing regulations don't seem to be the same thing in this case. At least we can hope.

[jburlowski]

I smell BS.

Despite what the blogger says, there's nothing on the label application that states the age of the product that will actually go into the bottle. I doubt if the TTB employee who actually approved the label had any such communication from the producer.

Additionally, the label application includes the following (emphasis added):

Under the penalties of perjury, I declare; that all statements appearing on this application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; and, that the representations on the labels attached to this form, including supplemental documents, truly and correctly represent the content of the containers to which these labels will be applied. I also certify that I have read, understood and complied with the conditions and instructions which are attached to an original TTB F 5100.31, Certificate/Exemption of Label/Bottle Approval.

The problem here is with the distiller and not the TTB.

[squire]

Of course that decision can be reviewed if anyone registers a complaint. I'm not, but I believe anyone can.

[GaryT]

I also support asking Uncle Sam for a refund (or certainly a reduction of taxes on liquor) if they aren't going to do their jobs. I'd prefer that than they just get rid of the labeling laws (since I DO want to know the age, and make sure they don't pass off 80% NGS with a "hint of whiskey" as bourbon). I mean, I know the volume of labels they are getting has increased, but gee whiz - a college intern could work the process without too much trouble.

So what is the penalty if the laws aren't followed, or is this one of those "Well, since TTB accepted their label request, they can only ask that they correct future batches - no actual penalty/fine to the submitter"?

[Harry in WashDC]

I'm still poking - here's what I found so far.

As jburl posted above, this may be a blogger getting imprecise info re: age. OR, it could be a producer not quite complying with current label req'ts. OR, there may be some other innocent explanation. OR, not so innocent.

A perusal of the ttb.gov website has turned up some interesting info (close to 100 pgs of law & guidance so far). It seems that ttb conducts annual audits of beer, wine, and spirits to ensure, among other things, that labels and contents match. They cannot check every producer every year but, based on the audit reports posted on the website, they do look at 300 or more per year. Check out "Labeling Resources" and "Labeling Fact Review Methods" for more info including the audit reports and info on how audits are conducted and about reviews of required reports and chem lab testing of stuff in bottles.

ALSO, the website lists the penalties for noncompliance which mislabeling would be. (For example, see 26 USC 5602 for tax fraud and 5687 for miscellaneous noncompliance.) Penalties range from $1000 & up to 1 yr in jail to $10,000 per & 5yrs. Additional tax penalties an late payment fees would apply, too, in some cases. There may be more - I picked those as typical. I also did NOT check the federal criminal code to see what other crimes might arise (false statement on federal form, etc.).

I'm not done poking (since I'm learning a lot) but since I found info that addresses some of the concerns raised above, I thought I'd share what I found so far.

[Richnimrod]

Thanx for doing the 'poking', Harry. Interesting and informative stuff.

[TunnelTiger]

I second that. Thanks Harry!!

[GaryT]

Third! The motion carries! Thanks Harry!

[smokinjoe]

Came across this article in an industry trade, today. Not entirely germane to this discussion exactly, but it had enough things in it that were at least in the ballpark, that maybe it exposes a trailhead or two to our researchers...

http://www.packagingdigest.com/regulatory/make-sure-alternative-wine-packaging-complies-federal-requirements?cid=nl.pkg04

[Tony Santana]

Yeah, I don't have the time to do the "poking" myself, but it's an interesting situation and I appreciate the info obtained thus far.

[Harry in WashDC]

Greetings. I have attached a pdf document (mainly because I couldn't figure out how to cut&paste a WORDor plain text doc into a "Go advanced/Reply to thread" post. It contains what I found (or didn't find) re: WA's 3 yr old SB without an age statement on the bottle. Maybe the doc's too long. Whatever, I didn't want to retype it because I always have trouble with the SB editor - delete key sometimes doesn't work, ltters don't appear ometimes, etc.

SO, if one of the moderators wants to PM me on how to do a C&P, I'll do it. OR, if one wants to just C&P for me, go ahead.

[EDIT - Added the following sentences after I made sure the attachment worked: The bottom line is: Section 5.40 of Title 27 o f the Code of Federal Regulations explicitly requires a statement of age on the label of a straight bourbon whisky that is less than 4 years old. The TTB website has multiple resources restating this requirement. I could find nothing on the TTB website indicating that the TTB had ever affirmatively authorized an exception to this requirement.]

Happy reading.

TTB Age stmt issue pdf.pdf

Edited March 4, 2014 by Harry in WashDC

[wadewood]

If we thought a 3 year old labeled as Straight Bourbon with NAS was bad, how about a 70 proof root beer flavored whiskey listed as Bottled in Bond? (Steve Ury found this one) - https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicFormDisplay&ttbid=14006001000453

[Harry in WashDC]

If we thought a 3 year old labeled as Straight Bourbon with NAS was bad, how about a 70 proof root beer flavored whiskey listed as Bottled in Bond? (Steve Ury found this one) - https://www.ttbonline.gov/colasonline/viewColaDetails.do?action=publicFormDisplay&ttbid=14006001000453

WhatWhat? I have an excuse to go learn more about BIB req'ts and flavored whisky rules? Boy, howdy, what great day this will be - snowed in with just my PC and a handle of BT at my side. :searching: And no baseball to distract me.

[393foureyedfox]

sic 'em. Harry!!

[smokinjoe]

Came across this item today in a trade journal. Start registering your complaints!

http://www.packagingdigest.com/labeling/false-labeling-complaint-center-launches-national-initiative?cid=nl.pkg01

[TunnelTiger]

Nice find Joe! Who will be first to submit?

[Harry in WashDC]

Joe's 'Packaging Digest' article link a couple posts above references the False Labeling Complaint Center which is located on upper Connecticut Ave NW, Washington DC (roughly halfway between Circle Liquor and Calvert-Woodley Liquor so I know about where it is). Its website is www.falselabelingcomplaintcenter.com (not .org). The website says it's been around for 10 years but has little information on who actually runs it or where it gets its funds. It does get good press locally.

The TTB itself has a complaint place, too. www.ttb.gov/consumer/filing_complaint.shtml (that's filing_complaint) and the webpage has additional info on complaining. Be advised, however, that the federal Privacy Act might prevent the agency from keeping a complainant informed on the progress or even the existence or result of any inquiry or investigation unless, at the end, it is press released OR somebody asks how it turned out. [ASIDE: I've never worked for or with TTB just in case you wondered.]

For those of you still interested in sku's find, posted above several days ago, linking to the TTB's APPROVAL on 28 Feb 2014 of the COLA for Levecke Corp (of Mira Loma, California) for the label for Uncle Bob's Bottled-in-Bond DSP-CA-131 Root Beer Flavored Whisky @ 70 proof -- please be advised:

My 20 page essay on UBBIBRBFW70 shall be completed shortly (fact checking to avoid libel claims :shithappens: is chilling). I'll try to do a one-page executive summary so the moderators don't go crazy. In the meantime, I thought you'd like to know that the NDP Levecke makes, according to the third party website sourmashed.com, 4 Corners Whiskey, Bourbon Supreme, American Pride Rye Whiskey, and private labels and other kinds of spirits and exotic cordials. Indeed, is "rectifier" considered a nonperjorative term?

[DaveOfAtl]

I thought you'd like to know that the NDP Levecke makes, according to the third party website sourmashed.com, 4 Corners Whiskey, Bourbon Supreme, American Pride Rye Whiskey, and private labels and other kinds of spirits and exotic cordials. Indeed, is "rectifier" considered a nonperjorative term?

Bourbon Supreme! This explains everything.