Distinctive container? Box 18c of this approval says it is.
Kodiak Imports, of San Diego, California, has several TTB approvals for spirits products packed in containers that look quite a bit like fire extinguishers. If you stop and think about it, the brand name doesn’t exactly suggest that it puts out fires, and the back label points out that “This is not a fire extinguisher.” Then again, it does look a lot like exactly that. The website says “The multi award winning packaging looks like a fire extinguisher, complete with a locking pin, lever, and a nozzle through which Firestarter Vodka is poured.” Thank goodness it’s only 80 proof.
Search Results for: ttb
Happy Ten Ten
We have not seen wine products with added beer or hops. But here, just in time for epic Ten Ten Ten festivities, is beer with added wine or something very closely akin to it.
Vertical Epic is made by Stone Brewing of Escondido, California. It is classified as Ale Brewed with Muscat, Gewurztraminer and Sauvignon Blanc Grapes and Chamomile. We find it interesting that TTB could have, but apparently chose not to, say something like, please remove the grape names as they tend to misleadingly suggest that this is wine. The back label has some good information, such as pointing out that this is the ninth in a series, beginning with a 2/2/2002 beer and so on, “Each one released one year, one month and one day from the previous year’s edition.” The back label also has a helpful link to “a detailed home-brewing recipe.”
Stone’s blog, with lots of videos, further explains:
Initiated in 2002—when the notion that Stone might still be around in 2012 was more hope than certainty— the Stone Vertical Epic Ale series has given Stone brewers an avenue for creative expression while helping spread the good word about the benefits of cellaring beer.
Stone Head Brewer Mitch Steele, who studied enology at UC Davis and spent 8 years toiling as a vintner in his early days, made the trek up to South Coast to watch the grapes that would become 10.10.10 go from vine to juice.
Beer + Hemp
Until about 10 years ago, there were quite a few beers made with hemp available in the US. Then TTB/ATF put out a policy and also said:
On April 6, 2000, ATF issued a policy on the use of hemp or hemp components in alcohol beverages and on the use of the term “hemp” or depictions of the hemp plant on labels for alcohol beverages. The policy does not ban the use of hemp in alcohol beverages, but was created to assure that beverage alcohol products do not contain a controlled substance (tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)). ATF also determined that the appearance of the word “hemp” or depictions of hemp plants on labels was likely to create a misleading impression as to the true identity or quality of the product. As of this writing, there are no approved certificates of label approval for products containing hemp.
Slowly but surely, however, in recent months various beers with hemp are starting to re-emerge and three of them are highlighted in this post. For the uninitiated, hemp happens to be a member of the cannabaceae family, a cousin of hops and close kin of marijuana (or cannabis). Above is O’Fallon’s Hemp Hop Rye, an amber ale brewed with hemp seeds and approved earlier this year. The label mentions the hemp, and has a little picture of the hops and rye — but the hemp or hemp seed imagery seemed to be missing (until we added it to the image above). According to a St. Louis Riverfront Times review the product “contains three kinds of malted barley, two types of rye, three varieties of hops and toasted hemp seed.”
TTB applied several hemp-specific qualifications to this and the other hemp approvals. TTB said:
- This label may not be used on a product that contains a controlled substance.
- Hemp component(s) must be tested in the U.S. for the presence of controlled substance(s) each time component is imported and results must be maintained on your premises for inspection.
- A detailed description of the method of analysis used by the U.S. lab to test for controlled substance must be maintained on your premise for inspection.
A second example is Humboldt Brown Ale Brewed with Hemp. It is brewed by Firestone Walker of Paso Robles, California. This approval also happens to add “This malt beverage may not have been produced with adjuncts (additives) except those that do not remain in the finished product.”
Our third example is Rogue Epoch Days Ale Brewed with Hemp Seeds. It is brewed in Newport, Oregon and happens to include a highly detailed ingredient list of a sort that is fairly rare on alcohol beverage labels.
The Prominence of Vodka, Part 2
How big is your vodka?
On this label, VODKA appears to be 2-4 times more prominent than RASPBERRY FLAVORED VODKA. This disparity was apparently too much, and tipped the scales toward the surrender of this and many other Rokk brand flavored vodka labels recently. For quite some time, TTB has been concerned about the relative prominence of this coveted term (vodka) — especially on products that are not technically “vodka.” The federal standard for vodka is quite restrictive and surely allows for nothing like raspberry flavor. In fact, only a bit of sugar and citric acid are allowed in true “vodka,” nothing more. If anything more is added, the product jumps over to what TTB views as an entirely different category such as a flavored vodka or vodka specialty.
This approval (issued February 17, 2010) shows Diageo surrendering one of many Rokk labels. This use-up approval (issued September 2, 2010) shows what TTB wants Diageo to change. The most relevant TTB qualifications, toward the center of the approval, say:
(When new labels are printed the class and type designation Raspberry Flavored Vodka must appear conspicuous on the label and the reference to Vodka of Sweden standing alone must be deleted.)
(The reference to Rokk Raspberry Vodka and Rokk Vodka in the text on the back label must be further qualified to include the word Flavored with the designation.)
TTB has been quite concerned about word proximity, especially on spirits labels, in recent months. For example, certain terms must be near “absinthe.” In other instances (under the current interpretation), the type (such as Tequila) must be “separate and apart” from the brand name (such as Jose Cuervo), and all of it must be apart from other data.
TTB apparently explained all this to Diageo’s satisfaction but perhaps TTB should explain this evolving standard to other affected parties before they get surprised by their own rejections and surrenders.
(Lots More) Nutrition Information Coming Soon
TTB had a fascinating tidbit in the September 3, 2010 TTB Newsletter. It tends to say that nutrition information will be attaching to beer, wine and spirits a lot sooner than most people expected. Not so much on labels (yet), but on menus, wine lists and similar postings at on-premise retailers. This seems like a huge and important development, courtesy of President Obama, Congress and FDA (rather than TTB). It therefore seems odd that there is not much outcry; the submitted comments do not show much awareness from the alcohol beverage industry. The Washington Post suggests that the connection among the health care legislation, menu labeling and alcohol beverages caught most people by surprise.
TTB summarized the initiative succinctly:
On March 23, 2010, the President signed the health care reform legislation into law. Section 4205 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 requires restaurants and similar retail food establishments with 20 or more locations to list calorie content information for standard menu items on restaurant menus and menu boards, including drive-through menu boards. Other nutrient information – total calories, fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sodium, total carbohydrates, sugars, fiber and total protein – would have to be made available in writing upon request.
The FDA Questions and Answers in B, Covered Food, Question 2, provides: “Are meat and poultry dishes and alcoholic beverages that are served in a covered restaurant or SRFE subject to the requirements in section 4205? Yes. Meat and poultry dishes and alcoholic beverages are considered food as defined in the FFDCA (see Question B.1). Therefore, the nutrition disclosure requirements in section 4205 apply in cases where these foods are listed on a menu or menu board or are otherwise covered under section 4205, even though they may be regulated by other agencies in other circumstances.”
The FDA is required by law to issue proposed regulations to carry out these provisions by March 23, 2011.
The FDA notice is here. FDA’s Guidance explains that alcohol beverages are covered every bit as much as a McMuffin. The Womble Carlyle law firm explains that this initiative is on a very fast track, with some elements (such as calorie disclosure) already binding as of enactment of the law six months ago, well before the regulations get written or finalized. It’s a good time to be in the calorie measurement business.
Not Grandpa Ernest's Gallo Label
This Bear Flag label looks to be a big departure from the staid Gallo labels of decades past. The design of this “dark red wine” label does not seem to have a whole lot in common with, for example, this Carlo Rossi label from a few years back.
The newer, more whimsical labels are apparently designed by Eduardo Bertone. There is not a lot of information about this designer or this brand on the web. Even at Bertone’s site, there seems to be a whole lot of whimsy and not much information.
To the extent the Bear Flag labels raise a good legal issue, it is fun to imagine Mr. Bertone poring over the CFR to make sure the Warning is perfect. Or, TTB evaluating each and every image and suggestion and flight of fancy (what is the bear drinking, does it contain tomatoes, please explain why a bear would have a cow bell). As of last week, Gallo had about 11 Bear Flag COLAs, from May 2009 to April 2010.