The Lincoln county process

[Hedmans Brorsa]

I don´t know, this might very well rank amongst the most stupid questions ever asked on this forum but I have to ask anyway.

What if someone in, say Oklahoma, decided to produce whiskey using the Lincoln county process. What would that whiskey be called? Surely not bourbon, since the LCP is used to distinguish Tennessee from bourbon. To call it Tenneesse whiskey (or even Oklahoma Tennessee whiskey) would seem absurd.

Or is the Lincoln county process prohibited outside of Tennessee? That also sounds a bit far-fetched to me.

Best wishes,

H.B.

[TNbourbon]

The Lincoln County Process is simply the name for the charcoal mellowing that Jack Daniel's and George Dickel use in their whisk(e)y. It is not patented -- both companies use it -- so I can think of no reason it cannot be used elsewhere. (Moore County, where JD is located, was a part of neighboring Lincoln County when the practice was originated.)

However, Tennessee Whiskey is a designation ensconced in federal regulation/law, so IT cannot be produced outside Tennessee, at least under that name.

Bourbon, however, doesn't have to be -- and hasn't always been -- solely made in Kentucky, and a debate has taken place, at times, even in these forums, whether the Lincoln County Process mellowing negates the designation of bourbon. Prior to its presentation to the charcoal, JD and Dickel are, in fact, consistent with bourbon.

So, your hypothetical Oklahoma distiller might just try calling it bourbon, and see what results.

[ratcheer]

I'm not going to dredge it all up again, but I have cited Kentucky Straight Bourbon whiskies that proclaim themselves to be "Charcoal Mellowed" or some such similar phrases. One example that immediately comes to mind is the very cheap and very much not recommended Virgin Bourbon. But, I believe there are others.

This may or may not be identical to "the Lincoln County process", but I doubt there is enough difference to make a difference.

Tim

[angelshare]

I searched the site and turned up a couple of preceding exchanges on this subject. At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I am still left with the following questions:

1) When a bourbon is described as "charcoal mellowed" or something similar, I just assumed that was a dubious marketing term to describe the almost universal filtering to remove chill haze. Not so?

2) Is there a bourbon that is filtered with something other than activated charcoal, something more likely to impart a flavor?

I had never heard of Virgin Bourbon before (great name), but I got the impression in searching that it is bottled by Heaven Hill. If so, maybe Bettye Jo could tell us what "Charcoal Mellowed" means for that brand.

Once again, sorry if my search skills are lacking.

[Paradox]

1) When a bourbon is described as "charcoal mellowed" or something similar, I just assumed that was a dubious marketing term to describe the almost universal filtering to remove chill haze. Not so?

I thought they tried to sell off the process of "charcoal mellowing" as one that would remove impurities and make for a smoother more mellow flavored end product. I think it's just another gimmik that can be used to try and market ones product...

2) Is there a bourbon that is filtered with something other than activated charcoal, something more likely to impart a flavor?

I want to think that I remember seeing others, but I can't remember them now... The only one that did pop into my head right away is McKendricks 'Western Style' Whiskey. It says it is aged in new oak barrels and then mellowed in mesquite to add its unique taste and character. I've had it and let me tell you, the mesquite flavor stands out! I guess its a like it or hate it thing as I found it to be a bit too much for me.

I had never heard of Virgin Bourbon before (great name), but I got the impression in searching that it is bottled by Heaven Hill. If so, maybe Bettye Jo could tell us what "Charcoal Mellowed" means for that brand.

I've got the 21yo version of Virgin bourbon. There's a pic on my website and here it is:

They make other aged Virgin products as well. I know a 15, and I think a 10 or 7, maybe both. All are charcoal mellowed. This product is for export... Also, another charcoal filtered bourbon is Jim Beam Beam's Choice in the green label. Another charcoal filtered bourbon (which appears to be made by HH as well) is Military Special. I'll attatch some photos of these as well.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Thanks a lot for the info. I, too, assumed that "Charcoal mellowed" written on a bourbon label meant something that was done after the aging process - something like chill filtration.

Another phenomenon that has racked my brain several times is the proper definition of "straight". While straight almost always is used in conjunction with bourbon or rye it is wholly absent from (the admittedly few) Tennessee bottles in my collection. Does this imply something?

Another example is that odd Indiana bourbon which I eventually managed to lay my hands on earlier this year : Sam Cougar black. Again the word "straight" is absent - instead the label claims it somewhat confusingly to be "Authentic Kentucky style bourbon whiskey". What to make of this? Could it possibly be the low proof (74 %) that makes it non-straight?

Best wishes,

H.B.

[TNbourbon]

Tennessee whiskey -- Jack Daniel's and George Dickel -- are, indeed, 'straight' whiskeys. Why they don't say so on the bottles is a mystery.

Straight whiskey must be 1) distilled out at less than 80% (160 proof) abv; 2) aged a minimum of 2 years in new charred oak barrels, and carry an age statement if bottled at less than 4 years old; and 3) contain no added coloring or flavoring.

There are straight bourbons, straight Tennessee whiskeys, and straight ryes.

A note about the charcoal filtering noted on some bourbon brands: I believe, in the case of these bourbons -- and unlike Tennessee whiskey (except for Gentleman Jack, where it is a second filtration) -- the filtering is done after aging and before bottling. Conversely, all Tennessee whisk(e)y is (maple)-filtered before aging.

[angelshare]

Thanks for posting the pix!

Boy, the Miltary Special label certainly implies filtering before putting it in the barrel if you look at the sequence in the description.

I had forgotten about McKendrick's. I wasn't too keen on it, but it was different all right. Then again, at least it is not labelled "bourbon," right?

[Paradox]

No problem Dave. It must be a disease, but I like posting pics whenever possible to visually convey things as well as simple writing.

I didn't even think about it like that; The way in which they list the sequence of events on the side of the bottle...

Tonya and Ben said that they really like the McKendricks for cooking and bbq'ing if I recall. I haven't tried it in cooking yet, but after drinking a bit I can see how it would be great in aiding the marinading of steaks and such.

[cowdery]

JD and GD can't call themselves "straights" because the "straight" designation is only available to the specified named types, e.g., bourbon, rye, wheat, corn, etc.

"Tennessee Whiskey" is not defined in the Code of Federal Regulations. The only official recognition of the term is a letter solicited by then Jack Daniel's president Reagor Motlow from the Treasury Department, acknowledging that Tennessee Whiskey is distinct from bourbon.

I don't know of any distillery in the U.S. except the two in Tennessee that has the facilities to perform the "Lincoln County Process." The charcoal filtering performed in Kentucky is the type intended to eliminate chill haze or perhaps something using a bit more charcoal, but well short of what JD and GD use.

What is called the "Lincoln Country Process" is a common 19th century rectification technique, i.e., processing whiskey through large stands of charcoal to remove congeners prior to barreling. Bone dust was also used. The exclusive use of sugar maple wood appears to be the one unique feature of the Tennessee practice. I have often heard the term "leaching" used to distinguish this process from the filtering most producers do, but the people using that term have an axe to grind (i.e., they make bourbon).

Could a whiskey that meets all of the requirements for bourbon be called bourbon if it also is subjected to a leaching step such as described above? There is an argument to be made that the answer would be no, but my reading of the regulations says the correct answer is yes.

If you want to read the regs for yourself, follow the links to the ATF site from my links page.

[angelshare]

The charcoal filtering performed in Kentucky is the type intended to eliminate chill haze or perhaps something using a bit more charcoal, but well short of what JD and GD use.

Regarding Beam's Choice - does Beam use a unique "mellowing" pocess for that brand, or is it all part of the marketing?

As always, thanks for the wealth of info, Chuck. I can hardly wait for your book to take it's rightful place of prominence among our whiskey references. I wonder when that day will come....? (hint hint)

[Hedmans Brorsa]

I don't know of any distillery in the U.S. except the two in Tennessee that has the facilities to perform the "Lincoln County Process."

Exactly what I thought! Although I haven´t (yet) visited J.D. or Dickel you get a feeling that it is a relatively spacey process. Surely, any visitor to a bourbon distillery would have noticed such an operation?

JD and GD can't call themselves "straights" because the "straight" designation is only available to the specified named types, e.g., bourbon, rye, wheat, corn, etc.

Aren´t there, then, any obligations associated with the label "Tennesse whisk(e)y"? My very first thought was that "straight" was sort of in-built within the Tennessee definition - that is, a whiskey that didn´t live up to to the "straight" requirements couldn´t call itself Tennessee whiskey either.

What contradicts this, though, is that semi-legendary whiskey "Lem Motlow". Now, I have never seen this (and probably never will) but from labels found on the Internet you can clearly see that the label reads "Tennessee sour mash whiskey". If I have the correct information this whiskey was not older than one year. So the question remains : how do I know if a Tennesse whiskey is the real thing?

[cowdery]

I believe, but can't say for sure, that Beam realized there was charcoal in their processing and so they could truthfully say "charcoal mellowed" on their label, for whatever good it would do. They may actually perform a similar leaching process. I can't say for sure one way or the other, but if they do something similar to JD, I suspect it is on a smaller scale.

Start saving your pennies, kiddies. You could have "the book" inside the month. I'm trying to get it finished rather than talking about it, but I'll start talking about it very soon.

[cowdery]

The word "whiskey" has a legal meaning, but it is not very restrictive. Use of "Tennessee" is controlled only in the sense that a false advertising claim could be made against someone who manufactures "Tennessee Whiskey" somewhere else, but it might be an interesting case as someone would have to explain "Kentucky Fried Chicken" to make it. The words "sour mash" do not appear in the CFR. In other words, the only word on the JD or GD label that is regulated by the feds is "whiskey" and that covers a multitude of sins (e.g., Seagrams Seven Crown).

[bobbyc]

I have this document on my computer , but it is a file I can't attach. I have read all this about the Lincoln County Process etc. I didn't feel the need to add anything , one way or another. I decided to type this in, hope it helps.

184 Jack Daniels Legacy

Office of

Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Treasury Department

Washington

March 28,1941

Jack Daniel Distillery,

Lynchburg, Tennessee.

Sirs:

Reference is made to the Bureau ( Alcohol Tax Unit) letter of January 28, 1941,realtive to the labeling of your " Jack Daniels Old Time Distillery No.7 Brand"Whiskey and to the recent visit to the Bureau offices of your Mr.Reagor Motlow, at which time various samples of your products were submitted for analysis and an explanation of your distilling and leaching processes were presented.

The Bureau Laboratory has analyzed the samples submitted and has given careful consideration to the description of your manufacturing process. In view of the nature of this process and of the results of the analyses, it has been concluded that the whiskey in question has niether the characteristics of bourbon or rye whiskey but rather a distinctive product which may be labeled whiskey. Accordingly, no objection will be interposed to the continued use of the brand label which was the subject of the Bureau's letter of January 28,1941.

Respectfully,

Stewart Berkshire

Deputy Commissioner

In 1941, after resumption of production and distribution of whiskey by the Jack Daniel Distillery at Lynchburg, Tenn., the Federal Alcohol Tax Unit questioned the right of the distillery to use the simple brand name " Whiskey" without defining it as a bourbon, which the Unit officals believed it to be.The Jack Daniel Distillery claimed its unusual processes, especially the leaching through pulverized sugar maple charcoal, made it a whiskey that is individual, and not bourbon. This letter shows how the matter was finalized--with the federal officals approving the Jack Daniels label.

Read and enjoy , It's a page out of someones book,I don't have permission or the source. I'll delete this in a few days.

[bobbyc]

Is there a bourbon that is filtered with something other than activated charcoal, something more likely to impart a flavor?

4 roses single barrel is filtered thru a series of round filter pads that look like compressed felt. Don't know what it does to the flavor but there is a tendency to " Strip" color from the bourbon. Occasionally they will get a barrel that is a bit lighter in color than the others and they can run it thru at the end of the filter pads life and not lose color and still accomplish what they are looking for. The pads have a short life, if I recall correctly 3 or 4 barrels.

[tdelling]

> Read and enjoy , It's a page out of someones book,I don't have permission

> or the source. I'll delete this in a few days.

I Am Not A Lawyer, but...

I think you have the right to quote this letter and the commentary that

follows under the legal principle of "fair use". You are allowed to

re-print excerpts of copyrignted works, with absolutely no permission

required, for the purpose of commentary, criticism, parody, etc.

See, for instance,

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html

Additionally, the letter itself was written as part of US Government

business, and thus cannot be copyrighted.

Tim Dellinger

[bobbyc]

Alrrighty then, I'll leave it alone for now. Thanks!

[chasking]

I am very very happy to have found this thread, and finally an answer of sorts to the question, "What (legally) is 'Tennessee Whiskey'?" I tried researching that question through standard legal resources and couldn't come up with anything. It is good to finally see the letter posted above, which explains the source of the designation.

However, it raises at least one question, which is, was the regulatory framework regarding what was whiskey, and what was bourbon, back in 1941 the same as it is today? If not, the big question becomes, would the reasoning in that letter still apply today? While JD and GD are certainly distinctive, my personal feeling is that they still fall on a continuum with (acknowledged) bourbons. I note that in another thread here somewhere there is a quote from a modern draft trade treaty which defines Tennessee whiskey as bourbon produced in Tennessee.

If no one knows about the history of the regulations off the top of his or her head, I will try to do some digging on it. I think it is an interesting question.

[cowdery]

was the regulatory framework regarding what was whiskey, and what was bourbon, back in 1941 the same as it is today?

Yes. The identity standards have not changed significantly since they were first adopted after the repeal of Prohibition.

The letter reproduced by Bobby was lobbied for by the Jack Daniel's company. The letter stands on its own. I can't vouch for the commentary that follows it, though it is pretty consistent with my understanding of the history. However, I find it hard to believe the Alcohol Tax Unit was trying to force Daniel's to use the term "bourbon" when they didn't want to. There is an identity standard for "whiskey" and it is pretty loose. The purpose of the standards is to prevent someone from using the word "bourbon" to describe a product that does not qualify for that designation. I would have to read the standards a little more closely to see if there is any basis in the regulations for requiring a bourbon to call itself bourbon. I don't think there is, but check it out for yourself. The cite is 27cfr5.21.

What the Motlows wanted, and got, was some sort of official recognition of Tennessee Whiskey as a distinctive style. This allows Daniel's to say, as they do to this day, that Tennessee Whiskey is recognized by the federal government as a distinctive style of whiskey, different from bourbon, despite the fact that the words "Tennessee whiskey" do not appear in the federal regulations themselves.

I don't know what draft treaty you are referring to, but the distinctive national products clauses in NAFTA and our agreement with the EU on the subject both identify "bourbon whiskey" and "Tennessee whiskey" and recognize both as distictive products of the USA.

Many commentators have interpreted all this as the Lincoln Country Process disqualifying Tennessee Whiskey from the legal right to be called bourbon. I don't agree. Both Jack Daniel's and George Dickel meet all of the requirements for bourbon and I don't see any reason why the Lincoln County process would negate that. If for some strange and unlikely reason it became desirable for either brand to label itself as bourbon I believe they could.

There is, by the way, a detailed article by Lew Bryson about the process itself in the current issue of Malt Advocate, but it doesn't discuss any of these legal questions.

[boone]

If for some strange and unlikely reason it became desirable for either brand to label itself as bourbon I believe they could.

Right AGAIN, Chuck

A good while back, I had a very lengthy conversation with alot of folks "in the know" in this industry. I flat out asked them, is Jack Daniels, BOURBON?...The answer (straight up) <font color="red"> Yes, Jack Daniels is bourbon </font> The conversation then led to the statement, "If, Jack Daniels chose to put the word bourbon on their label...they could...but they choose not to".

Bettye Jo

[tdelling]

> There is, by the way, a detailed article by Lew Bryson about the process itself

> in the current issue of Malt Advocate, but it doesn't discuss any of these

> legal questions.

I was really pleasantly surprised by this article. There is Actual Technical

Detail in the article! I loved it! Such articles are usually unsatisfying

for the engineer/geek/technically minded... but this one was deliciously

detailed in terms of the process and what actually goes on. Bravo to Bryson!

Tim Dellinger

[chasking]

I don't know what draft treaty you are referring to...

I found it in Post #24218.

[cowdery]

Very interesting. Thanks. I missed that the first time around but, luckily, it supports my point.

[cowdery]

I had a similar reaction. Lew did what you have to do, which is go there and talk to the people who actually do the work. I agree. Good for him.

You would have loved the tour Jerry Summers gave us of Jim Beam. Thanks again to Bobby Cox for that.