Whiskey is stored in barrels. The old Federal regulations say very little about what type of barrel could be used. In fact, before 1938 there were no regulations on barrels. Distillers made Bourbon and other whiskey using the barrels they had on hand or requested to be used by their customer. In the 19th century the barrel was the primary package for sales from the distillery. A customer – whiskey merchant or saloon, would purchase the whiskey from the distillery and the consumer would purchase the whiskey straight from the barrel in the store or saloon. Different customers had different needs and many purchased “half barrels” – barrels of about 24 gallon capacity. The standard full sized barrel until World War II was 48 gallons. Distilleries also utilized previous used cooperage to age their Bourbon and Rye whiskeys. This was not common since the barrel was the primary package for sales, when the distiller shipped the whiskey to the customer they were not likely to get the barrel back when empty, so they ordered more barrels from the cooperage. Cooperages would get empty barrels that were available locally and refurbish them to sell to the distilleries, but that would be a small percentage of the total number of barrels the distillery would need.
The Taft Decision of 1909 discusses the fact that whiskey is aged in wood but makes no mention of whether it is new or used. The first regulation on the barrel takes effect on March 1st, 1938 when the government required straight whiskey to be made in brand new charred barrels. This was a jobs bill written by Wilbur Mills of Arkansas because of the number of cooperages and oak forests in Arkansas but it only made official what the distillers new already and that is that the best Bourbon and Rye whiskeys are made in new charred oak barrels. There was no requirement for size and the standard size of a barrel was increased during the World War II to save wood for the war effort. There was no requirement to keep the 53 gallon size after the war ended but the distilleries saw no need to go back to the 48 gallon size. Half barrels had pretty much disappeared after Prohibition since whiskey was bottled at the distilleries so there was no customer demand for half barrels.
The 1964 Act making Bourbon a product of the United States made no mention of barrel size and neither did the 1984 deregulation of the industry under President Reagan. The industry decline shrunk the number of distilleries and the survivors were all pretty large producers. They had no wish to deal with barrel size. It was not until the late 20th and early 21st centuries that small, artisan distillers started to use small barrels again.
The new regulations proposed in Washington D.C. include a requirement for barrels to be “50+ gallons in size”. This is something new and it will hurt the small artisan distillers who lack the room for a large warehouse to store full sized barrels. Frankly, I don’t think small barrels make good whiskey. I have tasted several decent brands aged in 30 gallon barrels and I do thin Delaware Pheonix Bourbon made in 10 gallon barrels was pretty good, but most of the other small barrel products were nothing but bitter tannins in my opinion.
For small distillers, there are reasons to use small barrels. They take less space to store while aging. They are easier to handle when moving. Many people believe that they age the whiskey faster, but this is not true. It does give you more contact with the wood and the whiskey does pick up color and wood tannins. My favorite quote from Lincoln Henderson is that “You get a lot of flavors in the whiskey in the first few months in the barrel and then you spend the next four years trying to get rid of those flavors.” In other words the initial flavors need to age, oxidize and change from bitter and harsh flavors to pleasant and mellow flavors. Small barrels do not speed up this process.
I do believe that there should not be any regulation on barrel size. In the long run the marketplace will determine the size used by the distiller. As they grow, most distillers move toward full sized 53 gallon barrels. That is good. However I do think the artisan distillers should have the right to use the small barrels to make their whiskies.

Photos Courtesy of Rosemary Miller
December 24, 2018 at 9:17 am
I’d agree there should be no regulations on barrel size.
On a purely consumer point of view the range, style & diversity of barrels used to age the spirit in increases the possible taste options of the resultant whiskey.
A restriction in barrel size reduces the taste options.
On a cynical point of view it could also be seen as ‘big’ whiskey raising the bar making it more difficult for ‘craft’ whiskey to flourish.
And finally on a personal point of view, I actually really enjoy a spot of drying tannin influence in my whiskey.
Slàinte.
December 24, 2018 at 4:50 pm
I don’t mind “a spot of drying tannins” either, as long as that is not the dominating taste. Small barrels -.i.e.. those less than 30 gallons don’t often have a good balance of wood flavors.
December 24, 2018 at 11:53 am
Thank you for this blog. It settles some contention with my fellow tour guide friends.
December 24, 2018 at 4:52 pm
I am glad you liked it. Barrel size should not be limited by anything other than market preference.
December 24, 2018 at 3:15 pm
This is really a great source of information. It’s much appreciated. I also enjoy the Facebook posts by Rosemary. Happy Holidays to you both.
December 25, 2018 at 4:55 pm
Hi Michael! Great article, as always. I’m wondering if there may be a geographical aspect to this story? I talked to a guy from the industry in Texas – and he explained that they actually had a problem with the wood/liquid ratio as it is, because of the very hot summers. He was arguing that even larger barrels than 50 gallons would potentially be good in the southern states, allowing whiskey to be stored longer with out picking up too much oak. As an example, Balcones Texas Blue Corn is super dark after only two years and definitely do not need more oak. So maybe the same could be said about the states that are neighbors to Canada: Could they actually benefit from smaller barrels? Either way, freedom of choice may the in the best interest of the consumer here.
December 25, 2018 at 6:26 pm
That is a possibility. I also think they may be over charring small barrels. Maybe a number 1 or 2 char should be what they use with barrels under 30 gallon in size. If I were doing a 10 gallon barrel I would heavily toast it and then put a number one char so as to lessen the tannins and increase the vanilla flavors in the whiskey.
December 25, 2018 at 7:44 pm
Good point!
December 25, 2018 at 11:32 pm
I think it can be done. Cheryl Linns made some good Bourbon in 10 gallon barrels at her distillery so it can be done. It just takes some forethought and effort.
December 27, 2018 at 3:18 pm
I have learned, by a separate string by friends, that there is a legal matter open on this that will purportedly be resolved by an Administrative Law Judge, which is a judge that rules on US regulatory matters.
Do you have a “cite” to the court or “where” this matter is? Do you know the names of any of the lawyers involved?
The reason I ask is that I have resolved matters around the world and would love to volunteer my time in search of a “reasonable” resolution. (That is a hint of the legal standard that applies to Regulations promulgated by Agencies empowered to do so. The standard has been down a long path of definition by litigation (my term) and way too much to attempt to set out.)
I see a path and would love to share it with someone involved in the case, especially if it is one of the smaller distillers, who have the most at stake. If you can guide me in the right direction, it would be a adventure for me.
(I am an old lawyer who has done a lot of things, in courts in the US and conference rooms around the world.)
December 27, 2018 at 4:15 pm
I don’t know the lawyers involved. I suspect the KDA and Discus are the driving forces in this matter. Contact them and I am sure they can help you with the information you seek.
December 27, 2018 at 3:50 pm
Great article.
As a nano distillery owner, I believe there needs to be a place for the small barrel in our growing industry. I am fortunate enough to have two 450 gallon stills. I charge them with 300 gallons of mash and they yeald one 53 gallon barrel per run. That is a huge benefit for me. Now I have a local distillery that is running a 26 gallon still and it would be absolutely unfair for him to fill a 53 gallon barrel. It would take him half a month to fill a “standard” 53 gallon barrel….
I believe that just like the craft brewery industry, small batch is where the real craft comes from. I think removing the ability to use barrels less than 53 gallons is critical in the persuit of fine hand made spirits…..
Cheers to you!!
December 27, 2018 at 4:18 pm
I agree that there is a place for small barrels.
March 31, 2019 at 10:03 pm
As a consumer I’d prefer labeling as the solution. I also love to see real age statements, not the “less than 4 years” baloney.
As a distiller, I will never use small barrels. Even with full size barrels there is a huge variation in wood seasoning across the industry. I’ve switched to minimum two year air seasoning for the barrel staves, and can’t believe the difference! Well seasoned oak in the proper ratio for the spirit will in my opinion always have the advantage.
Excellent article and topic!
April 1, 2019 at 10:50 pm
Interesting ideas. I am a traditionalist and think the 100 proof should stay the standard. That way all bonded bourbon has that in common