[SRC-126] Component identity and barrel-entry context
[SRC-126] Component identity and barrel-entry context

[SRC-126] Component identity and barrel-entry context

Bibliography Entry

Livermore, Don. “Blending Canadian Whisky – A Review.” The Journal of Distilling Science 2, no. 1 (2023): 48–56. https://doi.org/10.61855/JDS0201.04. Printed issue label: Winter 2022; publisher date: March 1, 2023.

Chapters
Citation Category
Citation
Citation ID
2766
Citation Status
Ready
Citation Style
Custom
Citation Summary

Separate grain streams and different distillation and maturation treatments create distinguishable blending components; the review illustrates changing formulations and entry strengths.

Claims
Drafts
Footnote Text

Full Citation

Livermore, Don. “Blending Canadian Whisky – A Review.” The Journal of Distilling Science 2, no. 1 (2023): 48–56. https://doi.org/10.61855/JDS0201.04. Printed issue label: Winter 2022; publisher date: March 1, 2023. PDF 5–6, printed 52–53.

Locator End

PDF 6; printed 53

Locator Start

PDF 5; printed 52

Locator Type
Page
Sections
Short Citation

Livermore 2023, 52–53.

Source
No access
Source Section

Figures 7–8

Verification Notes

Source and locator verified. Company examples are not universal Canadian practice. Figure 7 includes a base of 100 plus additions, so its columns are not normalized percentage totals. The stated 9.09 percent explanation is historical regulatory interpretation, not an American blending permission.

No access / Blending Canadian Whisky: A Review — Full-Source Literature NoteBlending Canadian Whisky: A Review — Full-Source Literature Note

Source and locator

PDF 5–6; printed 52–53. Figures 7–8.

Evidence: [SRC-126] Component identity and barrel-entry context[SRC-126] Component identity and barrel-entry context.

Formatted outputs

Livermore, Don. “Blending Canadian Whisky – A Review.” The Journal of Distilling Science 2, no. 1 (2023): 48–56. https://doi.org/10.61855/JDS0201.04. Printed issue label: Winter 2022; publisher date: March 1, 2023.

Usage map

Company examples are not universal Canadian practice. Figure 7 includes a base of 100 plus additions, so its columns are not normalized percentage totals. The stated 9.09 percent explanation is historical regulatory interpretation, not an American blending permission.

Ready for this qualified source reference, not marked Used in a public draft.

Verification checklist

Canonical source, bibliographic identity and locator checked.
Evidence-level traceability and use restrictions retained.