102726 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

1Aug. 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. 

31, 2016, and beginning before January 

1, 2025. Paragraph (c)(5) of this section, 

as contained in 26 CFR part 1 edition 

revised as of April 1, 2024, applies to 

taxable years ending after December 31, 

2013, and beginning before January 1, 

2025. 

(4) Paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section 

applies to taxable years beginning on or 

after January 1, 2025. Paragraph (d)(1)(i) 

of § 1.36B–3, as contained in 26 CFR 

part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 

2016, applies to taxable years ending 

after December 31, 2013, and beginning 

before January 1, 2017. Paragraph 

(d)(1)(i) of § 1.36B–3, as contained in 26 

CFR part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 

2022, applies to taxable years beginning 

after December 31, 2016, and beginning 

before January 1, 2023. Paragraph 

(d)(1)(i) of § 1.36B–3, as contained in 26 

CFR part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 

2024, applies to taxable years beginning 

after December 31, 2022, and beginning 

before January 1, 2025. 

Douglas W. O’Donnell, 

Deputy Commissioner. 

Approved: December 5, 2024. 

Aviva R. Aron-Dine, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury 

(Tax Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2024–29651 Filed 12–17–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

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. 

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 

§ 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 § 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° 

proof from a fermented mash of not less 

than 51 percent malted barley and 

stored at not more than 125° 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° 

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,’’ 

§ 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, §§ 5.143(b) 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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° 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° 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° 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° 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 wellestablished 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. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
102728 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102729 

2William 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). 

3United States, Federal Alcohol Control 

Administration, Regulations relating to false 

advertising and misbranding of distilled spirits, 

United States Govt. Printing Office (1935). 

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° 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° 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° 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° proof, and 

limiting distillation proof to 160° could 

confuse consumers. Further, the 

commenter states that distilling at high 

proof (between 160° and 190° proof) 

provides for precision in creating their 

signature flavor profiles, and limiting 

proof to no higher than 160° 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° 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° proof. 

However, the majority of commenters 

specifically discussing this criterion 

supported it. For example, the ASMWC 

supports a distillation proof not 

exceeding 160° 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° 

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° proof. The Scotch Whisky 

Association similarly expressed support 

for the 160° 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° 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° 

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°. 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° to 160° [proof] known as ‘high 

wines,’ ’’ and that made from what was 

then referred to as ‘‘neutral spirits’’ 

distilled at a proof ‘‘varying from 160° 

to 188°.’’ 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° proof and less than 

190° proof’’ and ‘‘straight whisky . . . 

distilled at not exceeding 160° 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. 

Additionally, international standards 

allowing for certain single malt whiskies 

to be distilled up to 190° 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° proof, those standards also require 

the use of pot stills. TTB also notes the 

ASMWC’s assertion that the 160° 

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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
102730 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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 nonAmerican whisky would result in a nonAmerican 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 nonAmerican 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° 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° proof). TTB did not specifically 

include this criterion as part of the 

proposed American single malt whisky 

standard of identity in § 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° 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
102732 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

4Similarly, ‘‘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). 

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). 

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 twoyear 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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° 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° 

or less would inhibit market access and 

create a competitive disadvantage for 

American single malt whisky distillers 

vis-a`-vis those producing outside of the 

United States, would be anticompetitive, 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° 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
102734 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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° is anticompetitive. 

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° 

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° 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 fiveyear 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 

■ 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 

■ 2. Amend § 5.1 by revising the term 

‘‘Age’’ to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 18, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102735 

Subpart E—Mandatory Label 

Information 

■ 3. Amend § 5.66 by revising 

paragraphs (f)(1) introductory text and 

(f)(1)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 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 

§ 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; 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 5.72 by adding a sentence 

at the end of paragraph (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 5.74 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 5.74 Statements of age, storage, and 

percentage. 

(a) * * * 

(1) As defined in § 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 ‘‘ll 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 ll years 

in reused cooperage.’’ 

* * * * * 

Subpart I—Standards of Identity for 

Distilled Spirits 

■ 6. Amend § 5.143 by: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(16) 

through (18) in table 2 as paragraphs 

(c)(17) through (19); 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (c)(15) and (16) 

to table 1; and 

■ c. Adding paragraph (d). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 5.143 Whisky. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)—TYPES OF WHISKY AND PRODUCTION, STORAGE, AND PROCESSING STANDARDS

Type Source Distillation 

proof Storage 

Neutral 

spirits 

permitted 

Allowable coloring, 

flavoring, blending 

materials permitted 

*******

(15) American single 

malt whisky.

Fermented mash of 100 

percent malted barley, produced in the 

United States.

160 or less, distilled at 

the same distillery in 

the United States.

Used, charred new, or 

uncharred new oak 

barrels; 700-liter maximum capacity; stored 

only in the United 

States.

No ............ No, except for caramel 

coloring and only if 

disclosed on the 

label. 

(16) Straight American 

single malt whisky.

Fermented mash of 100 

percent malted barley, produced in the 

United States.

160 or less, distilled at 

the same distillery in 

the United States.

Used, charred new, or 

uncharred new oak 

barrels for a minimum 

of 2 years; 700-liter 

maximum capacity; 

stored only in the 

United States.

No ............ No, except for caramel 

coloring and only if 

disclosed on the 

label. 

* * * * * 

(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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Bureau of the Fiscal Service 

31 CFR Part 323 

[FISCAL–2023–0002] 

RIN 1530–AA28 

Disclosure of Records 

AGENCY: Bureau of the Fiscal Service, 

Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of the Fiscal 

Service (Fiscal Service) within the 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES