Addition of American Single Malt Whisky to the Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits, 102726-102735 [2024-29938]

Agencies

• Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
• DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 102726-102735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29938]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

27 CFR Part 5

[Docket No. TTB-2022-0007; T.D. TTB-199; Re: Notice No. 213]
RIN 1513-AC88


Addition of American Single Malt Whisky to the Standards of 
Identity for Distilled Spirits

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 
Bureau (TTB) regulations that set forth the standards of identity for 
distilled spirits to include ``American single malt whisky'' as a type 
of whisky that is produced in the United States and meets certain 
criteria. TTB proposed the new standard of identity in response to 
petitions and comments submitted by several distillers and the American 
Single Malt Whisky Commission. TTB is finalizing the amendments to the 
regulations to establish the standard of identity with some changes to 
reflect comments received.

DATES: This final rule is effective January 19, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Selina M. Ferguson, Regulations and 
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G 
Street NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; telephone 202-453-1039.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

TTB Authority

    The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers 
regulations regarding the labeling of distilled spirits, which include 
those setting forth ``standards of identity.'' The authority to 
establish these standards is based on section 105(e) of the Federal 
Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act),\1\ codified in the United States 
Code at 27 U.S.C. 205(e). That section authorizes the Secretary of the 
Treasury (the Secretary) to prescribe regulations relating to the 
``packaging, marking, branding, and labeling'' of alcohol beverage 
containers ``as will prohibit deception of the consumer with respect to 
such products'' and ``as will provide consumers with adequate 
information as to the identity and quality of the products.'' Section 
105(e) of the FAA Act also generally requires bottlers and importers of 
alcohol beverages to obtain approval of the product labels through 
certificates of label approval (COLAs) prior to bottling or importing 
alcohol beverages for sale in interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Aug. 29, 1935, ch. 814, title I, sec. 101 et seq., formerly 
sec. 1 et seq., 49 Stat. 977; renumbered title I, sec. 101 et seq., 
and amended Public Law 100-690, title VIII, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 
4517.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TTB administers these FAA Act provisions pursuant to section 
1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as codified at 6 U.S.C. 
531(d). In addition, the Secretary has delegated certain administrative 
and enforcement authorities to TTB through Treasury Department Order 
120-01.
    Part 5 of title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations (27 CFR part 
5) sets forth the regulations implementing those provisions of section 
105(e) of the FAA Act as they pertain to distilled spirits.

Classes and Types of Spirits

    The TTB regulations establish standards of identity for distilled 
spirits products and categorize these products according to various 
classes and types. See 27 CFR part 5, subpart I. As used in 27 CFR 
5.141(a), the term ``class'' refers to a general category of spirits. 
Subpart I sets forth the various classes of distilled spirits and their 
characteristics. Examples of classes of distilled spirits include 
``whisky,'' ``rum,'' ``gin,'' and ``brandy.'' As used in Sec.  
5.141(a), the term ``type'' refers to a subcategory within a class of 
spirits. These types generally have additional or more specific 
characteristics than the class. For example, ``Cognac'' is a type 
within the class of brandy, specifically grape brandy distilled 
exclusively in the Cognac region of France and meeting the laws and 
regulations of the French government for designation as Cognac. See 27 
CFR 5.145(c)(2).
    The TTB labeling regulations at 27 CFR 5.63(a)(2) require that the 
class and type of distilled spirits appear on the product's label. 
These regulations provide that the class and type must be stated in 
conformity with 27 CFR part 5, subpart I, of the TTB regulations.

Current Standards of Identity, Classification of Malt Whisky, and 
Treatment of Products Labeled as ``American Single Malt Whisky''

    Current TTB regulations at 27 CFR 5.143(a) set forth the standard 
of identity for the class whisky. In Sec.  5.143, paragraphs (c)(2) 
through (18) categorize the specific types of whisky, such as ``Bourbon 
whisky'' and ``malt whisky.'' The current regulations provide standards 
for identifying whisky as ``malt whisky,'' at paragraph (c)(2), and 
``whisky distilled from malt mash,'' at paragraph (c)(7), but do not 
further specify standards for ``single malt whisky.'' Malt whisky is 
described as whisky produced at not more than 160[deg] proof from a 
fermented mash of not less than 51 percent malted barley and stored at 
not more than 125[deg] proof in charred new oak barrels. Such whisky 
stored in charred new oak barrels for a period of 2 years or more may 
optionally be further designated as ``straight'' malt whisky. See 27 
CFR 5.143(c)(5). A ``whisky distilled from malt mash'' is whisky 
produced in the United States at not more than 160[deg] proof from a 
fermented mash of not less than 51 percent malted barley and stored in 
used oak barrels.
    With respect to geographical designators such as ``American,'' 
Sec.  5.154(a)(3) provides that geographical names that are not names 
for distinctive types of distilled spirits, and that have not become 
generic, may not be used unless the product is produced in the 
particular place or region indicated in the name. Accordingly, a 
product currently designated as ``American whisky'' must be produced in 
the United States. Additionally, Sec. Sec.  5.143(b)

[[Page 102727]]

and 5.154(b)(1) provide that a product designated as ``malt whisky'' or 
``American malt whisky'' must be produced in the United States.
    Products may currently bear the designation ``American Single Malt 
Whisky,'' and TTB has approved COLAs with that term, without any 
additional parameters other than those described above.

American Single Malt Whisky Petitions and Related Comments

    In October 2017, TTB received three petitions with similar content 
from XO Alambic, Remy Cointreau, and Westland Distillery. Each of these 
petitioners noted that they were filing their petition on behalf of, or 
with, the American Single Malt Whiskey Commission (ASMWC), an 
association of at least seventy-five producers of whisky in the United 
States. In their petitions, the distillers requested the establishment 
of a standard of identity to define the ``American single malt whisky'' 
category for producers and consumers alike. They noted that the 
American whisky category has been growing over the past decade and 
continues to expand, and that recognition of American single malt 
whisky is at an all-time high, with U.S. distillers winning 
international competitions with products in these categories. They 
stated that establishment of a standard of identity would benefit 
consumers, as it would provide a definition for the product, establish 
trust in the category, clarify label declarations, and equip consumers 
with the necessary information to make informed decisions so they can 
have confidence in the products they are choosing to buy in a similar 
way that Scotch whisky standards provide such information to American 
consumers. They also believe establishment of a standard of identity 
would strengthen the U.S. economy by increasing tax revenue related to 
the sale of American single malt whiskey, and by creating jobs related 
to producing, distributing, and selling such a product and the 
ingredients used in this product.
    In their petitions, the distillers requested the establishment of a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky, defined as a type 
of whisky that is mashed, matured, and distilled at a single United 
States distillery, distilled to a proof not exceeding 160[deg] proof 
from a fermented mash of 100 percent malted barley, stored in oak 
containers not exceeding a capacity of 700 liters, and bottled at not 
less than 80[deg] proof.
    In 2018, TTB published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (Notice No. 176, 83 FR 60562) proposing to amend its 
regulations governing the labeling and advertising of wine, distilled 
spirits, and malt beverages. Although TTB did not include a proposal 
for an American single malt whisky standard of identity in Notice No. 
176, TTB received over 200 comments in support of such a standard. One 
of these comments was from the ASMWC, who proposed a slightly different 
standard of identity from the one submitted in the three 2017 
petitions. ASMWC's comment to Notice No. 176 proposed that American 
single malt whisky should be distilled, mashed, and matured in the 
United States, but only distillation should be required to take place 
at a single United States distillery. All other aspects of the standard 
remained the same as those previously proposed in the petitions from XO 
Alambic, Remy Cointreau, and Westland Distillery. ASMWC's comment 
stated that this standard of identity was supported by more than 130 
producers of single malt whisky. In this document, this ASMWC proposal 
is referred to as the ``2018 ASMWC petition.''

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On July 29, 2022, TTB published in the Federal Register Notice No. 
213 (87 FR 45727), ``Proposed Addition of American Single Malt Whisky 
to the Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits,'' which provided 
notice and the opportunity to comment on the proposed addition of a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky to the TTB 
regulations. Notice No. 213 generally incorporated the standard of 
identity proposed in the petitions submitted to TTB and comments 
received on Notice No. 176. Specifically, TTB proposed to define 
American single malt whisky as a type of whisky that is mashed, 
distilled, and aged in the United States; is distilled entirely at one 
U.S. distillery; is distilled to a proof of 160[deg] or less; is 
distilled from a fermented mash of 100 percent malted barley; is stored 
in oak barrels (used, uncharred new, or charred new) not exceeding 700 
liters; and is bottled at not less than 80[deg] proof.

Comments Received

    The comment period for Notice No. 213 closed on September 27, 2022. 
TTB received 158 comments in response to Notice No. 213. Commenters 
included 16 U.S. and foreign trade associations, 44 industry members 
and related companies, and 98 individual members of the public (many of 
these individuals are part of the distilled spirits industry but 
submitted their comments only under their own name). Of the comments 
received, 73 were submitted separately to TTB but had identical or 
nearly identical content and are labeled as mass comments as posted on 
the rulemaking docket. These mass comments stated support for the 
creation of a standard of identity for American single malt whisky in 
line with the ASMWC petition.
    The vast majority of the comments received supported establishing a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky. In addition to 
the mass comments, 41 commenters expressed support for establishing the 
standard of identity as proposed in the NPRM, while twenty-five 
commenters supported establishing a standard of identity for American 
single malt whisky but with modifications to the proposed criteria. 
Three commenters did not support establishing a standard of identity. 
Those in support stated that establishing a standard of identity for 
American single malt whisky is beneficial for producers and consumers. 
Specifically, commenters stated that it will increase opportunities for 
American producers, allow for more innovation in this product category, 
and create trust in this category for consumers. Those opposed to 
establishing the proposed standard of identity for American single malt 
whisky generally did so in response to the proposed criteria and stated 
that the definition was too narrow, should allow grains other than 
barley, or that the definition was not restrictive enough. These 
comments are addressed in the discussion for each criterion below.

Discussion of Comments

    Below, TTB summarizes and responds to the comments received 
relating to the proposed criteria for American single malt whisky. TTB 
notes that many commenters compared the criteria for American single 
malt whisky to other whiskies frequently described as ``single malt,'' 
such as Scotch whisky or Irish whisky. While recognizing the well-
established reputation of such whiskies, TTB is also taking into 
consideration how best to reflect input from commenters that identified 
processes unique to the U.S. industry. In certain instances, TTB finds 
reason not to merely adopt the criteria applied elsewhere, but to 
recognize practices that may vary from those criteria, particularly 
where adhering to longstanding U.S. practices that would have shaped 
U.S. consumer expectations in identifying a U.S. product.

[[Page 102728]]

Mashed, Distilled, and Aged in the United States, and Distilled 
Entirely at One U.S. Distillery

    The proposed standard set forth in Notice No. 213 included a 
criterion that the whisky must be mashed (which would include 
fermentation of the mash), distilled, and aged in the United States, 
and it must be distilled entirely at one U.S. distillery. No commenters 
opposed requiring mashing, distillation, and aging to occur in the 
United States. Commenters also broadly supported further requiring 
distillation to occur at a single United States distillery but differed 
as to whether mashing and (to a lesser extent) aging should also be 
required to occur at a single distillery. While the 2017 petitions for 
the American single malt whisky standard would have required mashing, 
distilling, and aging to take place at a single U.S. distillery, the 
standard proposed in Notice No. 213 reflected the later 2018 ASMWC 
petition in allowing mashing and aging to take place at U.S. facilities 
other than the place of distillation.
Distillation
    All commenters discussing the requirement that distillation occur 
at a single U.S. distillery supported such a requirement. In its 
comment supporting the proposed criterion, the ASMWC stated that the 
term ``single'' in ``single malt whisky'' has been understood globally 
for generations to mean that the whisky was distilled at a single 
distillery. Two associated online whisky enthusiast communities that 
submitted a joint comment--the Whiskey Lodge and Reddit community ``/r/
AmericanSMW'' (Whiskey Lodge)--stated that the requirement to distill 
at a single distillery was ``[g]reat'' and the ``[b]are minimum for 
`single malt.''' The American Craft Spirits Association (ACSA) 
explained, ``[o]ther than the distillation taking place at a single 
distillery, the rest of the production process should take place in the 
United States for the whiskey to be called American Single Malt 
Whiskey.'' Similarly, the Distilled Spirits Counsel of the United 
States (DISCUS), the Kentucky Distillers Association, the Irish Whisky 
Association, the Japan Spirits and Liqueurs Makers Association, the 
National Association of Beverage Importers (NABI), the Scotch Whisky 
Association, SpiritsEUROPE, Sazerac, and Grand Teton Distillery all 
expressed support for requiring distillation in a single U.S. 
distillery.
Mashing and Fermentation
    Thirteen commenters also supported a standard more restrictive than 
the one proposed in Notice No. 213, requiring that mashing and 
fermentation in addition to distillation take place at a single 
distillery. These commenters included Sazerac, the Kentucky Distillers' 
Association, DISCUS, the Scotch Whisky Association, the Irish Whisky 
Association, spiritsEUROPE, the Japan Spirits & Liqueurs Makers 
Association, and NABI. The Irish Whisky Association and Scotch Whisky 
Association stated that not requiring mashing, fermentation, and 
distillation to take place at the same distillery would be inconsistent 
with international practice and would undermine and devalue the 
``single malt whisky'' category. DISCUS contended that requiring the 
mashing to take place at the same facility as the distillation would 
align with consumer understanding and place American single malt whisky 
on equal footing as other products in the global market, while allowing 
mashing to occur elsewhere would lose the connection between the use of 
the term ``single malt'' and its place of production. NABI added that 
without a requirement for mashing and distillation to occur at a single 
facility, ``a significant link is lost in the connection of the single 
malt whiskies representing the single efforts and quality controls of 
the same distillery.''
    Some commenters expressed that malting and fermentation should not 
be required to occur at the same single distillery required for 
distillation. Copperworks Distilling Co. and the ASMWC noted that many 
American whisky producers purchase their mash from domestic breweries, 
and allowing American single malt whisky to be produced with mash made 
at domestic facilities other than the distillery producing the final 
product recognizes this practice. The ASMWC noted that, while United 
Kingdom regulations require mashing and fermentation to happen at the 
same facility, no such requirement applies in European Union 
regulations nor in regulations of many other single malt whisky 
producing regions.
Aging
    Only a small number of commenters directly discussed location 
requirements for aging. Those that did (ACSA, NABI, Sazerac, and 
others) generally supported requiring aging to occur in the United 
States, but no commenter specifically expressed the view that it should 
also be required to take place at a single U.S. distillery. One 
individual commenter suggested requiring disclosure on the label if the 
whisky is distilled at one distillery but aged or bottled at a 
different distillery.
Definition of Distillery
    The American Distilled Spirits Alliance (ADSA) requested that TTB 
clarify the definition of ``distillery'' in the context of distillation 
occurring at ``one U.S. distillery,'' suggesting two possible 
approaches. First, ADSA suggested the term could apply to the ``DSP'' 
which TTB understands to mean the distilled spirits plant under the IRC 
and TTB regulations, reflected in the permit under those provisions. 
ADSA stated that an alternative option may be to follow the criteria 
for use of the term ``bottled-in-bond,'' which are set forth at 27 CFR 
5.88 and require that a distilled spirit labeled as ``bottled-in-bond'' 
comply with certain standards, including that the spirits are distilled 
by the same distiller and, relevant here, at the same distillery.
TTB Response
    TTB agrees with the consensus view of the commenters that the 
standard of identity should require that American Single Malt Whisky be 
mashed, fermented, distilled, and aged in the United States and that 
distillation take place at a single U.S. distillery. However, TTB is 
not incorporating the additional restrictions requiring mashing and 
fermentation to occur at a single distillery. TTB notes that these 
additional restrictions were requested by some commenters and opposed 
by others, and that such restrictions were not proposed in the 2018 
ASMWC petition or in Notice No. 213.
    As noted in the comments, TTB understands that it is common for 
U.S. distillers to partner with breweries to produce their mash and 
believes that the criterion should take into account and reflect the 
processes that have evolved in the American context as they reflect the 
expectations of American consumers and businesses for such domestic 
products. Moreover, this practice allows for innovation in this 
category by continuing partnerships with breweries. TTB believes this 
decision will not devalue the single malt whisky category more broadly, 
as some commenters suggest, because it is reasonable to expect that 
consumers will continue to have different expectations for products 
labeled as ``American single malt whisky'' compared with products 
labeled as single malt whisky from different countries with different 
standards.

[[Page 102729]]

    Regarding the concept of a single distillery or references to the 
``same distillery,'' TTB is amending the regulatory text to clarify 
that this term will be administered similarly to the ``same 
distillery'' requirement for the bottled-in-bond designation at 27 CFR 
5.88(a)(2), which generally means the area identified as the location 
of the bonded area on a distilled spirits plant's TTB permit or 
registration.
    TTB is not incorporating the requirement suggested by one commenter 
that the label disclose where aging and bottling occur if different 
than the distillery where distillation occurred. As noted above, no 
commenters expressed a view that the American single malt whisky 
standard of identity should require aging or bottling to take place at 
the same distillery as distillation. Accordingly, TTB does not believe 
the fact that aging or bottling occurs at a different distillery is 
sufficiently critical to the consumer to require that it be disclosed 
on the label. TTB notes that the information may be provided 
voluntarily.

Distilled to a Proof of 160[deg] or Less

    In Notice No. 210, the proposal included a criterion that, to meet 
the standard of identity for American single malt whisky, the alcohol 
content of the liquor must not exceed 160[deg] proof during 
distillation consistent with petitions TTB had received. It is also 
consistent with the current standards for many whisky type standards, 
including ``malt whisky'' and ``whisky distilled from malt mash.''
    Five commenters opposed a maximum 160[deg] distilling proof, 
including Loon Liquors LLC, Brother Justus Whisky Co., and Little Round 
Still. Loon Liquors LLC stated that consumer expectations have been 
shaped by single malt whiskies distilled in Scotland and elsewhere, 
which allow distillation at less than 190[deg] proof, and limiting 
distillation proof to 160[deg] could confuse consumers. Further, the 
commenter states that distilling at high proof (between 160[deg] and 
190[deg] proof) provides for precision in creating their signature 
flavor profiles, and limiting proof to no higher than 160[deg] proof 
prevents American distillers from innovating and competing with 
distilleries in other countries that do not have such a limitation. 
Brother Justus Whisky Co. similarly pointed out that other 
international single malt whisky standards allow distillation at up to 
190[deg] proof and stated that a lower limit would stifle innovation 
and market access by smaller producers. Little Round Still stated that 
American single malt whisky should have the same distillation proof 
limit as single malt whiskies elsewhere, that is, less than 190[deg] 
proof.
    However, the majority of commenters specifically discussing this 
criterion supported it. For example, the ASMWC supports a distillation 
proof not exceeding 160[deg] proof, stating that this is an important 
provision designed to ensure the flavor and character of the grain 
remains after distillation. The ASMWC points out that, while the Scotch 
whisky regulations for single malt allow for distillation of up to 
190[deg] proof, they also require the use of pot stills, which 
according to ASMWC, are intended to ensure that more grain flavor is 
retained in the final distillate. ASMWC asserts that the same result is 
achieved by providing a lower maximum distillation strength of up to 
160[deg] proof. The Scotch Whisky Association similarly expressed 
support for the 160[deg] proof distillation limit for American single 
malt whisky, stating it is consistent with single malt whiskies 
produced elsewhere. Other commenters, such as the Whiskey Lodge 
expressed support for a distillation proof not exceeding 160[deg] 
noting that the limit was in line with other American whiskies.
TTB Response
    With this final rule, TTB is incorporating a distillation proof of 
160[deg] or less for American single malt whisky, consistent with the 
proposal.
    As the Whiskey Lodge suggested above, the proposed criterion is 
consistent with the current standard for ``malt whisky'' under TTB 
regulations, as well as most other types of whisky. As with other 
criteria, one goal in setting forth a standard of identity for American 
single malt whisky is to recognize the importance of existing standards 
for single malt whiskies internationally while also reflecting unique 
aspects distinctive to American production. Except for light whisky and 
certain blended whiskies, all subcategories (i.e., types) of 
domestically-produced whisky recognized in the standards of identity 
have a maximum distillation proof of 160[deg]. See 27 CFR 5.143(c). As 
noted by some commenters, this maximum has deep historical roots. 
President Taft, in a presidential memorandum, noted the distinction 
between whisky made from distilling a product at a proof of from 
140[deg] to 160[deg] [proof] known as `high wines,' '' and that made 
from what was then referred to as ``neutral spirits'' distilled at a 
proof ``varying from 160[deg] to 188[deg].'' \2\ This delineation was 
carried forward following the repeal of prohibition into some of the 
earliest standards of identity for whisky published by TTB's 
predecessor agency, the Federal Alcohol Control Administration, which 
differentiated between ``neutral whisky . . . distilled at more than 
160[deg] proof and less than 190[deg] proof'' and ``straight whisky . . 
. distilled at not exceeding 160[deg] proof.'' \3\ This distinction has 
persisted in regulations issued under the FAA Act since then. See 27 
CFR 5.21(b) (1938 ed.). Maintaining this standard for American single 
malt whisky therefore reflects the American style of production that 
consumers and businesses have operated under since before prohibition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ William Howard Taft, Decision on the Meaning of the Term 
``Whisky'' Under the Pure Food Act and the Proper Regulations for 
Branding Various Kinds of Whisky Under the Internal Revenue Act, 
(1909) (published online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The 
American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/367051).
    \3\ United States, Federal Alcohol Control Administration, 
Regulations relating to false advertising and misbranding of 
distilled spirits, United States Govt. Printing Office (1935).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, international standards allowing for certain single 
malt whiskies to be distilled up to 190[deg] proof exist within the 
context of other standards. The ASMWC points out in its comment that, 
while for example Scotch whisky standards allow for distillation up to 
190[deg] proof, those standards also require the use of pot stills. TTB 
also notes the ASMWC's assertion that the 160[deg] distillation proof 
maximum accomplishes the same goal as the Scotch whisky pot still 
requirement in retaining the grain flavor in the distillate, which may 
be significant to consumers.

Distilled From a Fermented Mash of 100 Percent Malted Barley

    In Notice No. 213, the proposal included a criterion that, to meet 
the standard of identity for American single malt whisky, the product 
must be produced from a fermented mash of only malted barley.
    A majority of the commenters specifically addressing this issue 
expressed support for this criterion. The ASMWC (which the mass 
comments generally support) stated that the industry and consumers 
understand that ``malt'' specified on its own refers to malted barley 
exclusively, and that this meaning is consistent with longstanding TTB 
regulations. The Scotch Whisky Association noted ``[t]he use of malted 
barley only in ``Single Malt Whisky'' is tightly bound up in its 
reputation as a whisky category globally.'' Canyon Diablo Distillery 
explained, ``using less than 100% malted barley and mixing in

[[Page 102730]]

addition[al] different grains changes the character of the whisky and 
should change its identity,'' and the American Distilled Spirits 
Alliance added, ``[f]or [American single malt whisky] to maintain the 
characteristics consumers expect with the term ``single malt,'' it must 
be made from 100% malted barley.''
    However, not all commenters agreed with the criterion as proposed 
and suggested different alternatives. Some commenters expressed that 
the term ``malt'' should not be limited to malted barley, but instead 
reflect a broader view of the term since other grains, such as rye and 
wheat, can also be malted. For example, Chattanooga Whiskey suggested 
that only 51 percent malted barley be required in order to reflect a 
broader understanding of the term malt and allow for innovation 
explaining that, ``nearly every grain can now be malted, in our modern 
era . . . [m]any [mistakenly] believe that malt is always barley, and 
that barley is the only grain that contains the requisite enzymes.'' 
Similarly, Bainbridge Organic Distillers stated that this aspect of the 
definition limited single malt whisky to the concept as it is 
understood within the United Kingdom, and that prohibiting American 
distillers from using the term ``single malt'' when distilling other 
malted grains would limit innovation.
    Other commenters suggested adopting additional standards of 
identity that would specify the different grains. Canyon Diablo noted 
on this point that, ``[w]hile other grains can be malted and used they 
should have a different standard of identity and classification and be 
labeled as such.'' Similarly, the ADSA commented that, ``While some 
distillers will argue for the use of alternative grains as innovative 
or uniquely American, the use of a commonly accepted term--single 
malt--in naming of the product category requires preserving the base 
characteristics, which the consumer has already come to expect.'' 
``Single malt'' they explained is ``an indicator of 100% malted 
barley'' and ``an example of such a characteristic, because it forms 
the base flavor profile for the product.'' They concluded that, 
``[s]ome commenters may propose for the allowance of using rye or 
wheat, and that's fine if they are also asking for the creation of an 
additional category. . . .'' Sazerac suggested that allowances for the 
use of other grains could be incorporated into the terms of the 
proposed standard for American Single Malt Whisky, providing the 
example of ``a single malt rye made with 100 percent rye.''
TTB Response
    TTB agrees with the commenters that state that the term ``malt'' on 
its own refers to malted barley exclusively. This meaning is well 
established and reflects current regulations at 27 CFR 5.143(c)(2) 
providing that ``malt whisky'' refers to whisky made from at least 51 
percent ``malted barley,'' while whiskies made with 51 percent of other 
malted grains must name the grain. Changing this approach would require 
a more significant change beyond the scope of this rulemaking. 
Moreover, TTB agrees with the ADSA and other similar comments that 
allowing the use of other grains in addition to barley in ``American 
single malt whisky'' may cause consumer confusion.
    Although some commenters suggested that including other types of 
grain would foster innovation, TTB notes that whisky producers would 
still be able to innovate with other grains as long as the final 
product is appropriately labeled. For example, rye malt whisky (with a 
fermented mash of not less than 51 percent malted rye grain) would be 
allowed, provided it met the other relevant requirements.
    TTB would consider any future petitions from interested parties for 
the creation of additional standards of identity for other products 
made primarily or entirely from other malted grains, but TTB is not 
finalizing any such standards in the context of this rulemaking without 
an opportunity for public notice and comment to better understand 
consumer expectations and industry practices surrounding such products.

Stored in Oak Barrels Not Exceeding a Capacity of 700 Liters

    The proposed standard set forth in Notice No. 213 included a 
criterion that American single malt whisky be stored in oak barrels no 
larger than 700 liters during aging. Twenty commentors specifically 
expressed support for the 700-liter limit. In explaining their support 
for this criterion, commenters such as the Scotch Whisky Association, 
ASMWC, and an individual commenter indicated that it is necessary for 
the appropriate level of interaction between the whisky and wood of the 
barrel, and that the limitation would ensure larger barrels that would 
dilute the effect of the wood contact are not used.
    Nine commenters did not support the 700-liter size limit, including 
Sazerac, the Kentucky Distillers Association, and several individual 
commenters. Commenters generally highlighted that this limit is not in 
place for other types of whisky. One commenter, Brandy Library Lounge, 
LLC, also stated any limit would be more appropriately expressed in 
gallons for an American product. Also, one commenter stated a more 
restrictive limit might be needed but did not specify such a limit. 
Sazerac suggested a 60-gallon limit instead of a 700-liter limit, 
stating that a 53-gallon barrel is the industry standard. Two other 
commenters, an individual commenter and Canyon Diablo Distillery, 
generally opposed barrels size limitations but similarly suggested 
that, if such a limitation is imposed, a size closer to the industry 
standard 53-gallon barrel would be more appropriate.
TTB Response
    In this final rule, TTB is finalizing the proposed 700-liter size 
limit on barrels used for storage of American single malt whisky during 
aging. TTB is persuaded by the significant majority of commenters in 
favor of this criterion, in particular by those who raised the point 
that establishing a barrel size maximum would indicate characteristics 
related to interaction between the product and the wood in connection 
with any statements regarding aging. At the same time, TTB acknowledges 
the concerns raised by certain commenters about establishing a standard 
not required for or perhaps followed in the production of other whisky 
types. By establishing a 700-liter size limit, TTB believes consumers 
will have greater certainty of the degree to which the age of the 
product represents interaction with the barrel, but producers will 
still have flexibility to use most barrels typically used for the 
production of American whiskies. TTB is not finalizing a more 
restrictive standard, such as the 60-gallon limit suggested by one 
commenter, because TTB believes it would prevent the use of some 
barrels commonly used in American whisky production.
    In response to commenters who asked for the criterion to be 
expressed in gallons instead of liters, TTB will consider issuing 
public guidance clarifying the gallon equivalent to the 700-liter 
maximum included in the final rule.

The Use of Used, Uncharred New, or Charred New Oak Barrels

    The proposed standard set forth in Notice No. 213 included a 
criterion that allows producers to use oak barrels that are used, 
uncharred new, or charred new for the storage of American single malt 
whisky during aging. Twenty-two commenters specifically stated support 
for allowing the use of used, uncharred new, or charred new oak 
barrels. These commenters stated that this would allow for creativity, 
innovation, and

[[Page 102731]]

variety in the finished products. Commenters also stated that allowing 
used barrels would help address a potential low supply of new oak 
barrels.
    One commenter, Canyon Diablo Distillery, expressed the view that 
the use of non-American wood barrels or used barrels that contained 
non-American whisky would result in a non-American product. Two 
commenters suggested allowing storage in non-oak wood casks. 
Additionally, one commenter opposed the use of used barrels, suggesting 
that American single malt whisky should be stored only in new oak 
barrels to be consistent with the definition of malt whisky.
TTB Response
    TTB is incorporating this criterion as proposed and will allow 
American single malt whisky to be stored for aging in oak barrels that 
are used, uncharred new, or charred new.
    Currently, TTB regulations state that one criterion of all whisky 
is storage in oak barrels. This criterion is already widely accepted in 
the industry. Allowing storage in barrels made from wood other than oak 
would be a significant departure from all other types of whisky and 
could lead to consumer confusion about the characteristics of American 
single malt whisky. Additionally, finalizing a type standard that 
contradicts the class standard would have a broader impact than the 
proposal TTB initially notified. As such, the finalized standard of 
identity allows for storage only in oak barrels.
    While some commenters opposed allowing used oak barrels for 
storage, TTB believes that allowing American single malt whisky to be 
stored in used oak barrels recognizes the realities of American whisky-
making. As cited by commenters who supported this criterion as 
proposed, allowing used barrels will help alleviate the possible 
shortage of oak barrels and is consistent with single malt whiskies 
produced elsewhere. Moreover, different whisky types permit the use of 
different types of oak barrels, for example, light whisky and corn 
whisky can be aged in used or uncharred new oak barrels (27 CFR 
5.143(c)(3) and (5)), while bourbon can only be aged in charred new oak 
barrels (27 CFR 5.143(c)(2)). Allowing multiple barrel types is 
consistent with those standards.
    Finally, TTB believes that storage in a barrel that is not made of 
American wood, or that previously contained non-American whisky, does 
not make whisky produced in the United States ``non-American.'' Since 
mashing, distilling, and aging all occur in the United States, the 
product is an American product regardless of the source of the wood for 
the barrel.

Bottled at Not Less Than 80[deg] Proof

    The proposed standard set forth in Notice No. 213 included a 
criterion requiring American single malt whisky to be bottled with an 
alcohol by volume content of not less than 40 percent (or 80[deg] 
proof). TTB did not specifically include this criterion as part of the 
proposed American single malt whisky standard of identity in Sec.  
5.143(c)(15), as it flows directly from the general definition of the 
class ``whisky'' under current regulations. TTB received six comments 
supporting this criterion and is merely noting for clarity that 
American single malt whisky must be bottled at not less than 80[deg] 
proof, consistent with the class requirements.

Use of Geographical Designations Other Than American

    The proposal set forth in Notice No. 213 is unique among American 
whiskies in that the geographical designation ``American'' is expressly 
included in the type designation. This is different, for example, from 
the type designation ``bourbon whisky'' that must be made in the United 
States, but does not include the ``American'' reference in the type 
designation. The petition that provided the basis for Notice No. 213, 
and consequently the proposal in that notice, did not set forth a 
standard of identity for ``single malt whisky'' but rather a standard 
for a specific product to be identified as ``American single malt 
whisky.'' As a result, commenters requested clarification of the rules 
for including State and other geographic designations for such a 
standard.
    The ADSA asked that TTB clarify whether the regulations for 
American single malt whisky would ``preclude the usage of the name of 
the specific U.S. State or U.S. City of production in lieu of 
`American,' '' further proposing that ``[s]o long as the product being 
made complies with the Class and Type for [American single malt whisky] 
it should be allowed to use a furthering descriptor.'' ADSA provides 
the example of an industry member making a product in Montana that 
would comply with the American single malt whisky standard of identity, 
and asserts that they should be allowed to either include Montana as a 
geographic descriptor or to replace the word ``American'' with 
``Montana'' and use the term ``Montana single malt whisky'' because the 
``clear implication'' is that the product is not only an American 
single malt whisky but one from Montana. ADSA further states that at no 
time should such a product be allowed to be labeled with the State or 
similar descriptor without the term ``American,'' if it does not meet 
the American single malt whisky criteria.
    Whiskey Lodge similarly suggested that if a State or any 
designation more specific than ``American'' appeared in the 
designation, TTB allow the term ``American'' to not appear, for 
example, ``Texas single malt [w]hiskey'' and ``Rocky Mountain single 
malt whiskey.'' Relatedly, an individual commenter suggested that TTB 
also add American single malt whisky standards of identity for 
particular regions within the United States noting, ``A malt whiskey 
from the Pacific Northwest is very different from a whiskey made in the 
southern states and very different from a whiskey made in the 
Midwest.''
TTB Response
    The standard of identity TTB proposed in Notice No. 213 generally 
incorporated the proposal it had received from ASMWC, and TTB stated in 
that notice that, as proposed, the amendment to the regulations would 
affect any COLA that uses the term ``American single malt whisky'' as a 
designation, as products with those labels would be required to meet 
any new standard of identity. The proposal did not contemplate applying 
the standards more broadly to products labeled as ``single malt 
whisky'' with other place names. Additionally, the ASMWC stated in its 
comment that it was not aware of more than a handful of whiskies 
bottled, labeled, and sold as ``American single malt whisky'' that 
would not meet the requirements for the proposed American single malt 
whisky standard of identity, and so conveyed its understanding that the 
proposal was limited in scope to such products. Applying the criteria 
of the standard of identity beyond use of the term ``American single 
malt whisky'' would significantly expand the scope of what was 
originally proposed, potentially affecting labels for any malt whisky 
domestically produced and currently labeled with ``single malt 
whisky,'' not just those labeled using the term ``American single malt 
whisky.'' TTB would not be able to finalize such an expanded 
application without considering the effect on all stakeholders and 
providing additional notice and opportunity to comment. As a result, 
TTB is finalizing the standard of identity with the scope that was 
proposed, and only labels bearing the term ``American single malt 
whisky'' would be held to the criteria for that standard. Products 
produced in the United States that do not bear the full

[[Page 102732]]

term would not be required to meet the criteria for use of the term 
``American single malt whisky.'' TTB would consider proposing such a 
broader scope should it receive a petition to do so.

Comments on TTB's Request for Information

    In addition to the above criteria for American single malt whisky, 
TTB posed eight questions in Notice No. 213 that relate to the addition 
of American single malt whisky as a type of whisky and its 
implementation. The comment summary above includes responses to 
comments regarding two of the eight questions, related to size 
restrictions for barrels used to store American single malt whisky and 
the use of used and new oak barrels in the production of American 
single malt whisky. Below is a summary of the comments and TTB's 
responses on the remaining six questions.

Use of Coloring, Flavoring or Blending Materials

    TTB solicited feedback on whether to allow the use of coloring, 
flavoring, or blending materials in the production of American single 
malt whisky. The majority of commenters opposed their use, and thirty-
eight commenters noted that doing so could be misleading for consumers. 
Many commenters were concerned that the use of additives would 
undermine this category of spirits, which is currently considered 
prestigious.
    However, while many commenters expressed a general opposition to 
the use of coloring, flavoring, or blending materials in American 
single malt whisky, several of those in opposition made an exception 
for the use of caramel color. For example, DISCUS generally opposed 
allowing coloring, flavoring, or blending materials but expressed 
openness to the use of caramel color if disclosed on the label. 
Similarly, the ASMWC suggested prohibiting all coloring, flavoring, or 
blending materials but recognized that the addition of caramel color is 
``customarily employed'' in the production of American single malt 
whisky and other single malt whiskies. The Irish Whisky Association and 
Scotch Whisky Association both expressed support for the addition of 
caramel coloring, consistent with the respective standards of their 
country's single malt whiskies.
    Overall, 18 commenters supported some allowance for coloring 
materials, with the majority of those supporting only the use of 
caramel coloring. In general, commenters who supported the use of 
coloring materials also stated that there should be a requirement to 
disclose the use of coloring materials on the label. Additionally, two 
commenters stated they may possibly support coloring, flavoring, or 
blending materials if they were more clearly defined. No commenters 
specifically supported allowing the use of flavoring materials in 
American single malt whisky.
TTB Response
    In response to comments received, TTB is finalizing a standard of 
identity for American single malt whisky that allows the use of caramel 
coloring, provided that the use of such coloring material is disclosed 
on the label. Allowing caramel coloring aligns American single malt 
whisky with many other types of whisky, including other single malt 
whiskies produced internationally. Prohibiting all other coloring, 
flavoring, and blending materials would narrow the allowed additives as 
supported by commenters. While TTB's current regulations at 27 CFR 
5.72(c) generally do not require a statement of any type when caramel 
coloring is used in the types of whiskies that allow such coloring 
material (if used at not more than 2.5 percent by volume of the 
finished product), TTB agrees with commenters that any added caramel 
coloring should be disclosed on the label of American single malt 
whisky to ensure transparency regarding the product's readily-
observable characteristics.

Use of the Designation ``Straight''

    Notice No. 213 included a question on whether to allow the 
designation ``straight'' to be used with American single malt whisky. 
Under current regulations, the ``straight'' designation generally 
refers to an aging requirement of at least two years, which is the 
period of time the whisky has been stored in an oak barrel of the type 
otherwise required for the underlying standard of identity. For 
example, ``bourbon whisky'' may only be stored in charred new oak 
barrels, and ``straight bourbon whisky'' must be stored in a charred 
new oak barrel for a minimum of two years.\4\ See 27 CFR 5.143(c)(2) 
and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Similarly, ``corn whisky'' bearing an age statement must 
have been stored in used or uncharred new oak barrels, and 
``straight corn whisky'' must have been stored in used or uncharred 
new oak barrels for a minimum of two years. See 27 CFR 5.143(c)(3) 
and (6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ten commenters were in support of allowing the designation 
``straight'' to be used with American single malt whisky, including 
ACSA, ADSA, Whiskey Lodge, and several individual commenters and 
distilleries. These commenters were in general agreement that the term 
``straight'' should be allowed as long as the whisky has been aged for 
at least two years.
    Eight commenters opposed the use of the designation ``straight'' 
with American single malt whisky, including the National Association of 
Beverage Importers, Scotch Whisky Association, Irish Whisky 
Association, spiritsEUROPE, and several individual commenters and 
distilleries. These commenters indicated that the term ``straight'' 
would cause confusion in the global marketplace because the term is 
unique to American whisky. In general, these commenters suggested a 
minimum age requirement or including the product's age on the label 
instead of using the term ``straight.'' One commenter, New Riff 
Distilling LLC, stated the term ``straight'' should only be allowed to 
indicate the use of new charred oak barrels.
TTB Response
    TTB will allow the use of the designation ``straight'' with 
American single malt whisky as long as the two-year aging requirement 
is met. Allowing for this designation would be consistent with other 
product designations for whisky under TTB's regulations, where the 
``straight'' whisky must be stored for two years in the type of barrel 
associated with the underlying type of whisky. In other words, for 
American single malt whisky to be designated as ``straight American 
single malt whisky,'' the whisky must be stored for a minimum of two 
years in used, uncharred new, or charred new oak barrels. While 
commenters in opposition to the use of the term ``straight'' suggested 
that the term is not well-understood in the global market because it is 
only used on American whiskies, TTB agrees with an individual commenter 
in support who suggests that ``straight'' is a term that is unique to 
American whiskies, so it is therefore appropriate for use with American 
single malt whisky as an additional distinguishing factor.
    TTB is incorporating a new paragraph (c)(16) in table 1 of 27 CFR 
5.143 to account for ``straight American single malt whisky'' as 
described above. TTB is not incorporating any other minimum age 
requirement(s) in the American single malt whisky standard of identity. 
Commenters, including NABI, the Scotch Whisky Association, Sazerac, 
Japan Spirits and Liqueurs Makers Associations, spiritsEUROPE, the 
Irish Whisky Association, NIST on behalf of the UK, and the Kentucky 
Distillers' Association, suggested that American

[[Page 102733]]

single malt whisky should have a minimum age requirement ranging from 
two to four years. However, TTB believes this would unduly hinder 
innovation and notes that no other types within the class ``whisky'' 
have a minimum age requirement (other than the age requirement 
associated with the ``straight'' designator). Further, because TTB's 
regulations generally require that whiskies aged less than four years 
bear an age statement (see 27 CFR 5.74(b)), TTB believes there is 
sufficient transparency within the class regarding age.

``Blended'' American Single Malt Whisky

    TTB requested and received input on whether to allow for mixtures 
of American single malt whisky to be labeled as ``blended American 
single malt whisky,'' similar to how TTB regulations allow for blended 
Scotch whisky and blended Canadian whisky to be labeled, respectively, 
``blended Scotch whisky'' and ``blended Canadian whisky.'' Eight 
commenters support the use of the term ``blended American single malt 
whisky.'' These commenters, which include individuals and distilleries, 
noted that producers and consumers desire products composed of whisky 
from more than one distillery.
    Thirteen commenters oppose use of the term ``blended American 
single malt whisky'', asserting use of the term ``blended'' may cause 
consumer confusion because the term ``blended'' is typically not 
associated with the term ``single.'' These commenters included ACSA, 
DISCUS, Kentucky Distillers Association, Scotch Whisky Association, 
Irish Whisky Association, spiritsEUROPE, Japan Spirits and Liqueurs 
Makers Association, and individual commenters and distilleries. Some 
commenters (for example, ACSA, DISCUS) suggested modifying the name of 
this product category to replace the term ``single'' with ``blended,'' 
such as ``American Blended Malt Whisky.''
TTB Response
    TTB's finalized regulations for the American single malt whisky 
standard of identity do not allow blends of whiskies from multiple 
distilleries that would otherwise meet the American single malt whisky 
criteria to be labeled ``blended American single malt whisky.'' TTB 
agrees with the commenters in opposition that blending whiskies from 
multiple distilleries is fundamentally contradictory to the meaning of 
``single'' in the American single malt whisky standard of identity, 
even if the ``blended'' modifier is included. As such, producers 
blending whiskies from different distilleries may not classify them as 
American single malt whisky. With respect to commenters' suggestion to 
modify the name of the standard of identity to ``American Blended Malt 
Whisky'' for blends, TTB notes that a blend of whiskies produced in the 
United States and meeting the current standard of identity for ``malt 
whisky'' could already be labeled ``American Blended Malt Whisky.''

Impact on Trademark Owners and Producers of Malt Whisky

    In Notice No. 213, TTB sought comments on the impact that adding a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky may have on owners 
of U.S. trademarks and current producers of malt whisky. In general, 
commenters who support establishing this standard of identity stated 
that the definition of American single malt whisky in the standard of 
identity would be beneficial to producers and trademark owners, as it 
would lend credibility to their operations, bring potential for 
increased recognition globally, and foster innovation. They assert that 
it would help ensure a level playing field for producers of American 
single malt whisky and maintain the premium reputation of the category. 
Additionally, the ASMWC stated they are not aware of more than a 
handful of whiskies bottled, labeled, and sold as ``American single 
malt whisky'' that would not meet the requirements for the proposed 
American single malt whisky standard of identity.
    One commenter suggested that current producers who may face an 
economic hardship due to the new standard of identity should be able to 
continue to use their current products or processes. Another commenter 
asserted that its labels and trademarks would be negatively impacted by 
the rulemaking unless the standard of identity is modified to allow 
distillation at up to 190[deg] proof. The commenter further stated 
that, along with adversely impacting their business, requiring American 
single malt whisky distillers to limit their distillation proof to 
160[deg] or less would inhibit market access and create a competitive 
disadvantage for American single malt whisky distillers vis-[agrave]-
vis those producing outside of the United States, would be anti-
competitive, and would exclude innovative whiskies.
TTB Response
    As illustrated above, most commenters emphasized how establishing a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky would benefit U.S. 
producers. However, as also noted above, one commenter specifically 
stated that they, and the industry, would be negatively affected by the 
proposed standard of identity. Given that the current standard for 
production proof of malt whisky is consistent with the production proof 
of the standard of identity proposed for American single malt whisky, 
TTB is not aware of any widespread expectation in the industry that 
products meeting only the class standard of identity ``whisky,'' along 
with the other proposed criteria, would or should qualify for an 
American single malt whisky standard of identity. As discussed in the 
explanation of the maximum distillation proof criterion, the standards 
of identity for malt whisky and most other American whisky types within 
the general class (all except for light whisky and certain blended 
whiskies) allow distillation only up to a maximum of 160[deg] proof.
    In the event that there are current producers with approved labels 
that designate a product as ``American single malt whisky,'' producers 
may continue to use those labels but only on products that comply with 
the new requirements of TTB's regulations in 27 CFR part 5, subject to 
the transition period discussed below in this document. Producers of 
products that do not comply with the new standard of identity could 
continue to produce such products but would need to obtain approval of 
new labels indicating the applicable class and/or type.

Use-Up of Previously Approved Labels

    Commenters also provided feedback on whether, after establishment 
of the ``American single malt whisky'' standard of identity, TTB should 
allow producers to use up previously approved labels that do not comply 
with this standard, and for how long TTB should allow the use of these 
previously-approved labels before such labels would be revoked by 
operation of regulation. Commenters provided a wide range of answers, 
stating that after the establishment of the American single malt whisky 
standard of identity, producers should be afforded anywhere from 60 
days to 20 years to use up previously approved labels that do not 
comply with this standard. One commenter recommended that TTB allow 
producers to revise their current label instead of requiring the 
application for a new one. Additionally, another commenter implied that 
if obtaining a new label would pose an economic hardship, that TTB 
allow the continued use of already approved

[[Page 102734]]

labels on products not meeting the criteria.
TTB Response
    TTB is providing a five-year transition period, as discussed below 
in this document. This amount of time should allow any affected 
industry members to make label changes in conjunction with any routine 
label updates or change their processes to ensure their product 
conforms to the new standard of identity described in this rule.

Competition in the Alcohol Beverage Market

    Finally, commenters provided feedback on how the addition of a 
standard of identity for American single malt whisky would affect 
competition in the alcohol beverage market (see ``Effect on Currently-
Approved Labels''). Commenters generally provided feedback that the 
addition of this standard of identity would increase the 
competitiveness of American distillers and level the playing field 
among producers of American single malt whisky. As noted above, one 
commenter asserted that a standard that requires a distillation proof 
of 160[deg] is anti-competitive.
TTB Response
    TTB notes positively the feedback from commenters that the addition 
of this standard of identity would increase the competitiveness of 
American distillers and level the playing field among producers of 
American single malt whisky. TTB addresses these comments as well as 
the comment on the maximum distillation proof of 160[deg] further below 
in the sections ``Effect on Currently-Approved Labels'' and ``Impact on 
Trademark Owners and Producers of Malt Whisky.''

TTB Determination

    After careful consideration of the petitions received in response 
to this issue in Notice No. 176 and the comments received in response 
to Notice No. 213, TTB is finalizing a standard of identity for 
``American single malt whisky,'' with two changes from the standard 
proposed in Notice No. 213. As originally proposed, TTB is defining 
American single malt whisky as a type of whisky that is mashed, 
distilled, and aged in the United States; is distilled entirely at one 
U.S. distillery; is distilled to a proof of 160 or less; is distilled 
from a fermented mash of 100 percent malted barley; is stored in oak 
barrels (used, uncharred new, or charred new) with a maximum capacity 
of 700 liters; and is bottled at not less than 80[deg] proof.
    In the first change from the proposal in Notice No. 213, TTB is 
providing for the use of the designation ``straight'' with American 
single malt whisky that is aged for two years. The second change allows 
for the use of caramel coloring as long as it is disclosed on the 
label.
    This new standard of identity will be added to 27 CFR 5.143. TTB is 
also revising certain other sections in part 5 to include cross 
references to American single malt whisky.

Effect on Currently-Approved Labels

    TTB will allow a five-year transition period, as this amount of 
time should allow any affected industry members to make label changes 
in conjunction with any routine label updates, to use up existing 
labels, or to change their processes to ensure their product conforms 
to the new standard of identity. A label with the designation 
``American single malt whisky'' may be used for whisky that does not 
meet the new standard of identity if it is bottled within five years 
from the effective date of this final rule, provided that such label 
was approved before the effective date of this final rule and the 
whisky conforms to the standards set forth in 27 CFR 5.143 in effect 
prior to this final rule. All products bottled after this five-year 
transition period bearing an ``American single malt whisky'' 
designation must meet the standards for such designation. TTB may act 
to revoke COLAs covering non-compliant products and/or take other 
enforcement action against bottlers using such COLAs.

Regulatory Analysis and Notices

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. chapter 6), TTB certifies that this final rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The final rule amends the standards of identity for whisky in TTB's 
regulations at 27 CFR 5.143(c) and makes conforming edits in other 
sections of part 5. It does not impose or otherwise cause any new 
reporting, recordkeeping, or other administrative requirements. TTB 
does not believe this rulemaking will affect a significant number of 
existing labels for distilled spirits products but is providing a five-
year transition period to mitigate the effects on any affected industry 
member. (TTB specifically solicited comments on potential impacts on 
current producers and received only one comment from a producer 
indicating that their label(s) would be affected by the proposed 
regulations.) Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is 
required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collection of information in this rule has been previously 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the title 
``Labeling and Advertising Requirements Under the Federal Alcohol 
Administration Act,'' and assigned control number 1513-0087. This 
regulation would not result in a substantive or material change in the 
previously approved collection action, since the nature of the 
mandatory information that must appear on labels affixed to the 
container remains unchanged. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a 
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a valid control number.

Executive Order 12866

    This final rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined 
in Executive Order 12866, as amended. Therefore, a regulatory 
assessment is not required.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 5

    Advertising, Alcohol and alcoholic beverages, Consumer protection, 
Labeling, Liquors, Packaging and containers, and Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Amendments to the Regulations

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB amends 27 CFR part 5 
as follows:

PART 5--LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF DISTILLED SPIRITS

0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 26 U.S.C. 5301, 7805, 27 U.S.C. 205 and 207.

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Amend Sec.  5.1 by revising the term ``Age'' to read as follows:


Sec.  5.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Age. The length of time during which, after distillation and before 
bottling, the distilled spirits have been stored in oak barrels. 
``Age'' for bourbon whisky, rye whisky, wheat whisky, malt whisky, or 
rye malt whisky, and straight whiskies other than straight corn whisky 
and straight American single malt whisky, means the period the whisky 
has been stored in charred new oak barrels.
* * * * *

[[Page 102735]]

Subpart E--Mandatory Label Information

0
3. Amend Sec.  5.66 by revising paragraphs (f)(1) introductory text and 
(f)(1)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  5.66  Name and address for domestically bottled distilled spirits 
that were wholly made in the United States.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) The State of distillation, which is the State in which original 
distillation takes place, must appear on the label of any type of 
whisky defined in Sec.  5.143(c)(2) through (7), (15), and (16), which 
is distilled in the United States. The State of distillation may appear 
on any label and must be shown in at least one of the following ways:
    (i) By including a ``distilled by'' (or ``distilled and bottled 
by'' or any other phrase including the word ``distilled'') statement as 
part of the mandatory name and address statement, followed by a single 
location;
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  5.72 by adding a sentence at the end of paragraph (c) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  5.72  Coloring materials.

* * * * *
    (c) * * * Provided, if any amount of caramel color is used in 
American single malt whisky, or in straight American single malt 
whisky, a statement specifying the use of caramel color must appear on 
the label.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  5.74 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  5.74  Statements of age, storage, and percentage.

    (a) * * *
    (1) As defined in Sec.  5.1, age is the length of time during 
which, after distillation and before bottling, the distilled spirits 
have been stored in oak barrels. For bourbon whisky, rye whisky, wheat 
whisky, malt whisky, or rye malt whisky, and straight whiskies other 
than straight corn whisky and straight American single malt whisky, 
aging must occur in charred new oak barrels.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) In the case of whisky made in the United States and stored in 
reused oak barrels, other than corn whisky, light whisky, American 
single malt whisky, and straight American single malt whisky, in lieu 
of the words ``__ years old'' specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of 
this section, the period of storage in the reused oak barrels must 
appear on the label as follows: ``stored __ years in reused 
cooperage.''
* * * * *

Subpart I--Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits

0
6. Amend Sec.  5.143 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(16) through (18) in table 2 as 
paragraphs (c)(17) through (19);
0
b. Adding paragraphs (c)(15) and (16) to table 1; and
0
c. Adding paragraph (d).
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  5.143  Whisky.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

           Table 1 to Paragraph (c)--Types of Whisky and Production, Storage, and Processing Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Allowable
                                                                                                    coloring,
                                                  Distillation                       Neutral        flavoring,
             Type                   Source           proof           Storage         spirits         blending
                                                                                    permitted       materials
                                                                                                    permitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(15) American single malt      Fermented mash   160 or less,     Used, charred    No...........  No, except for
 whisky.                        of 100 percent   distilled at     new, or                         caramel
                                malted barley,   the same         uncharred new                   coloring and
                                produced in      distillery in    oak barrels;                    only if
                                the United       the United       700-liter                       disclosed on
                                States.          States.          maximum                         the label.
                                                                  capacity;
                                                                  stored only in
                                                                  the United
                                                                  States.
(16) Straight American single  Fermented mash   160 or less,     Used, charred    No...........  No, except for
 malt whisky.                   of 100 percent   distilled at     new, or                         caramel
                                malted barley,   the same         uncharred new                   coloring and
                                produced in      distillery in    oak barrels                     only if
                                the United       the United       for a minimum                   disclosed on
                                States.          States.          of 2 years;                     the label.
                                                                  700-liter
                                                                  maximum
                                                                  capacity;
                                                                  stored only in
                                                                  the United
                                                                  States.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (d) Transition period. A label with the designation ``American 
single malt whisky'' or ``straight American single malt whisky'' may be 
used on distilled spirits bottled before January 19, 2030, if the 
distilled spirits conform to the applicable standards set forth in this 
part in effect prior to January 19, 2025.

    Signed: December 12, 2024.
Mary G. Ryan,
Administrator.
    Approved: December 12, 2024.
Aviva R. Aron-Dine,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-29938 Filed 12-13-24; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P