Bourbon has some of the tightest regulations defining the category of any whiskey but this does not need to stop innovation within these regulations. The regulations state that Bourbon has to be 51% corn, distilled at no higher than 160 proof, go into a brand new charred oak container at no higher than 125 proof with nothing other than pure water used to adjust the proof, bottled at no lower than 80 proof and made in the United States. These regulations leave plenty of room for innovation and individual flavor profiles. Craft distillers wishing to make their mark in the market should consider some of the following ideas.
Starting with the corn – it has to be 51 % corn, but the distiller can could use white corn or some other variety than the yellow corn used in most Bourbon today. The distiller could use 100% corn and malt some of the corn, or use a mixture of corn varieties in the mix. There is also the possibility of playing around with the remaining 49% allowed in the grain recipe. How about a two grain mash bill with only malted barley and corn. Wheat and rye are not the only flavoring grains allowed so experiment with other flavoring grains such as oats or un-malted barley. There is a lot of room for innovation with the grains without breaking the Bourbon rules.
Next is distillation no higher than 160 proof. That distillation maximum allows for a lot of innovation and still leave flavor in the product. What about Bourbon that was distilled at a lower proof range. Distillation in different styles of stills is another possibility. The room for innovation is not as great as there is in the grain but there is room to play with this regulation as well the grain.
Bourbon has to be placed in a brand new charred oak container. There is no size restriction and a lot of craft distillers are using smaller barrels, but how about larger barrels. Since most craft distillers don’t have rick houses to store their barrels they could play around with larger barrels for aging. Another idea is to try going back in time and use the standard 48 gallon barrel that was used before WWII caused the distilleries to increase the size of their barrels to save wood for the war effort. The entry proof is another area that craft distiller should look to the past for inspiration. Entry proof in the 18th century was anywhere from 90 to 105 proof. Aging a Bourbon where the final barrel proof was close to the bottling proof would give the Bourbon more flavor since it is watered down less in bottling. As long as the proof does not drop below 80 proof they would be legal Bourbon. The one part of this regulation that does not have any leeway is that only pure water can be added to Bourbon.
The final two regulations are fairly clear in that it has to be bottled at 80 proof or more and a product of the United States. Most people agree that Bourbon should be at least 80 proof and many think Bourbon should have a lower limit of 90 proof. There are some in Kentucky that think it should only be made in Kentucky, but there have been fine Bourbons come from other states and that should not change.
There are a lot of ways to adjust the production of Bourbon within these regulations. There is no reason for craft distillers to complain about the regulations as a limiting factor. I have tried some products produced by craft distillers using some of these variations in grain, distillation proof and barrel size and proof and they have made excellent whiskey within the rules.
Photos Courtesy of Maggie Kimberl
February 15, 2016 at 9:00 pm
Nice overview but I think from an education perspective you might have included some examples. If you’re not already into a lot of craft distillers it can be hard to find something that fits a lot of the things you mentioned. Sure looking for balcones blue corn is easy but finding something matured in small casks or on a low height pot still could take a lot more research.
I would also point out that it can still be classified as bourbon if a barrel finish is applied giving another area of play in adding final flavors.
I would
February 15, 2016 at 9:39 pm
That is true for now that the government has let them to continue to call it Bourbon, but that may not last much longer. Those products should be classified as American Whiskey and not Bourbon.
March 12, 2016 at 12:53 pm
Mr. Veach- in your book, you conclude that the Whiskey Rebellion did not create the Kentucky distilling industry (pgs 14-15). You note that whiskey rebels fled south, not west. I acknowledge that people in modern day KY were distilling before the Whiskey Rebellion. But why the modern regulatory emphasis on corn? Isn’t the 51% corn requirement linked to westward expansion and a shift from rye to corn following the Whiskey Rebellion? Is there some other reason why bourbon must be corn-based (i.e. other than the fact that corn was abundant in Kentucky/the regulation is a reflection of that history)? Thanks for your time.
March 12, 2016 at 8:17 pm
I am not sure what your point is here. The distillers in Kentucky during the whiskey rebellion were using corn. The first mention of Bourbon in print is 1821, about 25 years after the whiskey rebellion.
March 12, 2016 at 8:45 pm
No sir, I’m not making a point, I am really trying to figure out the history of the 51% corn requirement. I’ve sort of figured that it was a result of the Whiskey Rebellion, in other words a recognition of farmer-distillers leaving places like MD and PA where they mostly used rye and arriving in KY where they mostly used corn. I see a connection between the Whiskey Rebellion and those who fled westward to KY (like Jacob Boehm or Daniel Weller) and have bought into the “myth.”
March 12, 2016 at 9:02 pm
Daniel Weller did not come to Kentucky because of the rebellion. He came because he and his brothers wanted land and purchased it in Kenticky.
March 12, 2016 at 9:09 pm
Acknowledged, and I know Boehm was in KY before 1794, so bad examples, but am I at least right in that corn whiskey and KY are definitively linked? And that the 51% corn requirement reflects the abundance of corn in KY (the grain that early Beams and Wellers used to make their whiskey)? Or is that a bad assumption? Thanks.
March 12, 2016 at 9:11 pm
And is it unreasonable to think Weller left MD for KY where tax collectors and judges were more sympathetic to farmer distillers?
March 12, 2016 at 9:24 pm
I’m overcomplicating it, sorry. What I’d like to know is why bourbon has to be 51% corn!
March 12, 2016 at 9:38 pm
I am working on a blog on that so stay tuned.
March 13, 2016 at 12:06 pm
I look forward to it. Thanks again
June 11, 2016 at 12:00 pm
Michael,
If you find yourself in Alabama, make time to come see us. Some of what you’re discussing is aging nicely in our rick house.
Regards
Seth Dettling
Big Escambia Spirits
October 16, 2016 at 1:03 pm
Do the regulations require the use of American Oak or are other species of oak being used for aging? I heard on Whisky Cast today that some Texas Distillery is doing some bourbon in European Oak – in my tours in Kentucky they told me it had to be American Oak.
October 16, 2016 at 2:00 pm
There is no requirement for American White Oak. The requirement is for oak. period. It can be any type of oak the distiller wishes and many have used French oak in the past and are using European oak now.