I’m writing because I can’t find any definitive answer anywhere online or among people I’ve talked to.

Bourbon producers (or their brand ambassadors that I’ve talked to) swear up and down that nothing – caramel or whatever – positively nothing goes into bourbon aside from bourbon. NOTHING is added. They claim that this is a legal requirement to be called bourbon.

Problem is, I’ve been going over the statutes online and I can’t find anything that matches this claim. Nothing can be added to anything called STRAIGHT whiskey, but not all bourbons are straight bourbons.

Can you help me figure out where in the law it says that nothing can be added to bourbon – or correct me if this is mistaken? I’d be much obliged. Feel free to respond by email if it is more convenient. Cheers.

For the sake of ease, here is the link to the regs:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=f45b0281e8a3f372f96c2a93b462cc89;rgn=div5;view=text;node=27%3A1.0.1.1.3;idno=27;cc=ecfr#27:1.0.1.1.3.8.25.2

As far as the government is concerned that is all it has to be, whiskey made in Tennessee. There is no requirement that either the Lincoln County process or the sour mash process be applied.

As far as the industry, not the government, is concerned, the so-called Lincoln County process is characteristic of Tennessee whiskey, but the sour mash process is not. Virtually all American whiskey makers, all of the major ones anyway, use the sour mash process.

One question regarding Tennessee Whiskey: I heard that for a whiskey to be called Tennessee it
- must came from Tennessee and
- Lincoln County Process and Sour Mash Process MUST be applied

Is that correct?

ISBN 0-9758703-0-0

Click on my name to go to my blog, where you can order it from my web site, shipped to anywhere in the world. It’s also available on Amazon.

Great post, and incredibly cool of you to take time for some posting afterwards!

Do you know if your book is available in Europe? I can’t find it at my regular suppliers (do you maybe have and ISBN for me?)

Thanks!

The ‘detractors’ can believe whatever they want, but there has never been a ruling from the TTB to the effect that Lincoln County-processed whiskeys cannot be called bourbon. That’s a myth.

I’m discovering, in the course of addressing the EU regulation you mention, substantial and emotional response from some quarters that speaks with the sense of entitlement. As though the rules of Whiskey are Received Truth and there is but one source of that Truth.

Like so many other things, powered flight, the telephone, incandescent light bulbs, the development of whiskey (no matter how you spell it, thank you) is a shared international experience with regional variations that account for the recognized provenances. History records the Wrights were first; same applies for Edison’s “invention”. But other engineers and scientists in other parts of the World were developing these concepts and technologies at the same time. It is the same with whiskey. The Irish and Germans having arrived in America with distilling experience made rye whiskey in the New World when they arrived and called it whisky/whiskey, or whatever it was known as in their particular region of their particular dialect.

For the record, Chuck is correct; the HUDSON WHISKEY line, which was developed and continues to be produced by TUTHILLTOWN SPIRITS, has been acquired by W GRANT AND SON. We are very happy to be working with this venerable company and we will continue to produce HUDSON at Tuthilltown for years to come. The Tuthilltown crew thank all for the support and encouragement. Come visit, we’d love to show you all around.

A question : The bottles I’ve seen named Corn Whiskey looks like newmake, but according to the rules you mention it must have been on oak casks ? Is 10 minutes enough ?

Macdeffe