Growler Law Update

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

(Your opinion, not you, since I don't want this to sound like a personal attack.)

 

Like any law signed this legislative session, the law doesn't take effect until next year.

 

Fair enough. But even so, it's rather ironic that they're willing to take the publicity for the signing of the bill while not adjusting their policy for said bill.

 

Because every other place is prepared and ready to go with the changes? Yeah, with their HUGE operation and all that disposable cash, they should have been totally ready.

I was just pointing out the law had been passed. I thought it was cool he went to an actual brewery to sign it. I'm sure he just rolled up unannouced. It's like 3-4 miles from the Capitol. At least the Gov has good taste.

 

No, that's totally cool. Not trying to be a buzz kill, but it is pretty funny. As pointed out above the law won't go into effect for a while, but breweries have been able to fill blank growlers for a while now. This law is just more of a definite clarification to breweries about what they can do. But I don't buy that they need to be a big operation and have tons of cash to submit growler tag labels and fill blank growlers.

 

I made this $30 custom stamp for the front of a hang tag in 3 minutes.

Take another 3 minutes to create the address and legal verbiage requirements for another stamp.
http://www.thestampmaker.com/Products/Wood-Rubber-Stamp-L45-x-H25__WOOD_4-prd-5X2-5.aspx

Buy 1,000 Manilla #7 hang tags for $26
http://www.xpresstags.com/manila-tags

You can fill 1,000 blank growlers for <$100 and maybe an hour investment.

 

It's still up to the brewery's if they will honor the empty grower fill right? They don't have to fill other growlers. So as long as the bigger brewery's don't then whats the big deal?

 

The bill isn't really a big deal. It just means that breweries can't use the excuse that their existing policies, in which generic growlers are refused, are due to ABC guidelines.

 

Doesn't go into effect till next year? So it gives them a good few months to make up new excuses as to why their hands are tied on this.

 

And oh how they will.

 

When I spoke to Geoff and Ryan last year they were in board with a universal growler law. See what Dan said. I think you need to rethink your comment. Other local brewers who confirmed their support last year was knee deep, and American river.

There were probably others who supported this, but I did not talk to them. Keep in mind this bill was likely pushed by beer aficionados like yourself, not every brewery is 100% on board with this concept. It is a business and people are people who will fear change.

 

Read the bill. Hang tags are not allowed, the label must be permanently affixed to the growler (a sticker).

Also, a blank sticker will have to be approved by TTB at the federal level before it can be used as a label for a beer sold in the United States. They are currently closed for business and not approving any new labels.

This shit takes time and there are many bureaucratic hoops that must be jumped through for it to be legal. If Track7 would have filled a blank growler this week, they would have been breaking the law and risking their beer license.

 

If Track 7 are right now NOT providing some sort of tag with the name and ABV of the beer inside the growler, then they are currently breaking the law and risking their brewing license.

 

This is not to pick on track 7 per se, just to point out the lunacy that still goes on with this whole mess.

The bill was signed on their table, yet they are still figuring out the policy? It's a fairly simple bill, with fairly simple guidelines; the growler must have some sort of affixed labeling, and that it cannot be branded as another brewery. CCBA issued guidelines last week based on this bill RECOMMENDING hang tags, so I'm not sure where the statement is coming from that they aren't allowed; it certainly is not in the text of the bill. If any brewery is truly uncomfortable with the idea of a hangar, a sticker will definitely do the job.

I am glad track 7 and others locally supported the bill. Now I just hope to see them and others abide by it once it comes into effect.

 

-A hangtag zip-tied is perfectly acceptable.

-This law just rewords the old law, same procedures have applied forever. The ABC clarified to let brewers know they could fill blanks with stickers/tags back in February. They wouldn't be breaking any laws when the current law allows for blank fills.

 

Read this slowly and carefully, I have already posted it twice.

Bills signed in 2013 do not become law until January 1st, 2014.

 

Dude, we're aware. But the ABC made it clear breweries could fill blank growlers months ago. That's why it's funny.

 

What part of "once this comes into affect" makes you think that I don't know that this is not until 2014? Pardon my audacity of having a higher than 5th grade education, and understanding that a bill does not become a law immediately after it is signed.

You keep beating this drum, but like others have said: this bill should not come as a surprise to any brewery, given it's gestation time. The amusing part is the continued hemming and hawing over growler policies, when the legality now as of 1/1/14 (happy?) is pretty straightforward.

 

To reiterate, breweries don't need to wait for this law to go into effect. All they need to do is follow the steps outlined in the OP's link. The CCBA goes as far as to detail exactly which ABC requirements you're fulfilling as you move through each step of your label submission.

In fact, several large and reputable breweries are already doing this:
http://www.stonebrewing.com/visit/beer.asp

The Bruery
http://www.thebruery.com/growlers

So the irony that a lot of people are mentioning is that the law which was signed in order to fully remove ambiguity, was being signed at a brewery that was still behind the times.

The new law is not necessary for a brewery to adopt a non-branded or generic growler fill policy. What it will do is allow us to elevate the conversation of generic growler fills when the "I dont want to lose my liquor license" argument is thoroughly and with great victory refuted.

Thats what I'm looking forward to the most.